It happens to be that we think Connecticut is a terrific market. But there is a process in place that doesn't allow us to participate.

It is in no-one's interest to see that harmed. MGM has also backed a second lawsuit by the Schaghticoke Tribe in Kent, who would also like to be allowed to bid.Įxecutive Vice President Alan Feldman told the committee, 'Connecticut jobs absolutely matter. The gaming company has filed a lawsuit against the state, claiming it should open the potential casino development to outside bids.

MGM is also in favor of more study of the Connecticut proposal, despite having commissioned its own report.

Some lawmakers questioned the potential social costs of expanded gaming in Connecticut, noting that the existing studies commissioned by the gaming giants don't touch on what the state may have to spend to mitigate problem gambling, crime and other issues. My bottom line is that I actually think that the small casino idea not only may fail, in terms of either job preservation or revenues to the state, it may in fact become a zombie.'īy which he means it will end up cannibalizing revenues from the two existing casinos, while the state continues to lose gaming customers to facilities in Massachusetts. 'We don't know what the implications are. 'We have not had any kind of an exhaustive study,' he said. He said that while he recognizes the positive impact the existing casinos have had on the state's economy, he has grave concerns about the third casino plan. 'They're essentially talking about replicating Mohegan Sun, an analysis based on an assumption that's four times bigger than what's being proposed,' Barrow said.īut not everyone agreed that there’s enough information already out there.įred Carstensen, an economist at UConn is in favor of a new study. The data for Oxford's recommended outcome, a Bridgeport-area casino, is based on a $1.1 billion facility.

Connecticut casino public hearing