MGM renews fight against Connecticut airport casino project with new online ad

MGM Resorts International has fired another shot in the border war to block development of a casino in Connecticut that would be a direct competitor to the $950 million casino the company is building in Springfield, Massachusetts.

A new ad released online this week attacks the Connecticut Airport Authority for a proposed casino at Bradley International Airport, just 20 miles from downtown Springfield.

The ad asserts the airport casino is a " bad deal" that will " scam" taxpayers.

MGM obtained the airport casino proposal earlier this month through a freedom of information request. The airport authority said the plan to develop a casino along with a $250 million transportation center was abandoned in June, but said other airport casino locations could still be in play.

The operators of Connecticut’s two casinos in the southeastern part of the state, the Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan tribes, have joined forces to pursue a possible satellite casino in the Hartford area. No site has been selected.

Before a third casino could be built, the tribes need approvals from the Connecticut legislature and governor.

“

“

The attack ad is MGM’s latest effort to derail possible competition. The Las Vegas-based entertainment giant has waged a legal fight in federal court and lobbied at the Connecticut State Capitol and in the halls of Congress

”

Clyde Barrow, Chairman of the Political Science Department at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, who is a casino industry expert, said it is not surprising the lengths to which MGM has gone to thwart would-be competition to the Springfield casino.

"In (MGM's) application to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, their business plan relies on capturing $ 200-$300 million a year in gross gaming revenue from the state of Connecticut, so anything less than that makes the current business plan untenable," said Barrow.

Earlier this year, MGM won approval from city officials and state casino regulators for a cost-cutting redesign of the Springfield project. Further downsizing is unlikely to win regulatory approvals, so MGM has to go all out to halt a third Connecticut casino, according to Barrow.

"They are sort of in a bind. There is only so much (MGM) can do to make this project financially feasible," said Barrow.

Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods casinos have both seen revenues shrink substantially as casino competition has increased in the Northeast. A third casino would help stave off more losses.

MGM has mostly cleared a 14-acre site in downtown Springfield and has begun to pour concrete foundations for a parking garage and a hotel that will be part of the casino complex. The casino is scheduled to open in September 2018.

Watch the complet ad:

FOI Commission says negotiations to remain confidential

Meanwhile, the state's Freedom of Information Commission on Wednesday adopted its hearing officer's recommendation that negotiations about a possible casino at Bradley International Airport correctly took place in executive session.

MGM Resorts International filed two complaints with the commission challenging the Connecticut Airport Authority's use of executive sessions in February and April to discuss potential casino development and negotiating strategy."

The authority was among those that submitted proposals last fall for a casino in the Hartford area being pursued by MMCT, a joint venture of the tribal operators of Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun, aimed at diluting the competitive effect of MGM Springfield on the Connecticut economy.

Lisa Fein Siegel, the commission's hearing officer, wrote in her July 26 recommendation that the authority's board of directors discussed "financial provisions of the lease they would enter into with MMCT, how the lease would be structured, and concerns about the new or restructured leases with third-party planners in the gaming facility operation."

“

“

Siegel's analysis found that having such information in the public domain during the competitive process would reveal (the authority's) negotiating strategy and would harm (the authority's) ability to maintain optimal rental terms and conditions

”

At Wednesday's meeting, MGM continued to press its argument that the potential for a casino at Bradley and its effect on the region was so significant that negotiations should not take place in "secret meetings" behind closed doors.

"Commonsense says more than the terms of the lease were discussed in the executive session," said James K. Robertson, Jr., an attorney for MGM.

Although lease discussions may be exempt under the state's right-to-know laws, the authority was trying to "squeeze too much public information into one narrow exemption," Robertson said. "That's a terrible, terrible precedent.'

Paul K. Pernerewski, Jr., general counsel for the airport authority, said the factors discussed in the executive session would have all affected the leases involved in any potential deal with MMCT.

After the meeting, Pernerewski said the authority would use the word "lease" on its agenda to justify why it was going into executive session.

"We thought of it that way," Perenewski said. "It might have been better to put it that way."

Robertson said after the meeting that he would recommend that MGM appeal the commission's decision. An appeal would be taken up in Superior Court.

MGM did score a victory Wednesday in another freedom-of-information complaint against the authority, which sought records about the Bradley casino proposal submitted to MMCT. The commission backed Siegel's recommendation that the documents were not exempt from disclosure.

The discussions about a potential casino at Bradley are likely to continue. In June, the airport authority withdrew the option of a casino at a new transportation center, and two weeks ago, the authority's executive director, Kevin Dillon, confirmed that a casino in a new planned terminal also was no longer on the table.

The authority is still open to a casino at the airport and has other options it can explore. One is along Route 75 and another is on property adjacent to an off-track betting parlor. Sportech Venues, which operates the betting parlor in the same building as Bobby V's Restaurant and Sports Bar, also submitted a proposal for the casino, but conceded its site was too small and would have to be combined with another property.

For a casino to go forward at the airport, the town of Windsor Locks has said it first must pass a referendum. The legislature also needs to approve the location selected by the tribes. East Hartford and Hartford are also being considered.