The Ameristar official said the city would improve its chances for winning a casino if it could send multiple proposals to the gaming commission.
A leader of a Las Vegas-based casino company is disputing the Springfield mayor’s plan to select only one casino proposal to put before voters, saying the decision amounts to an “extreme amount of power” for local officials and takes important authority away from state gaming regulators.
“It has kind of given us a little bit of a pause,” said Troy Stremming, a senior vice president for Ameristar Casinos, which purchased land in East Springfield for a casino resort. “It doesn't appear the city has the ability to select just one applicant.”
Domenic J. Sarno
Ameristar Casinos paid $16 million for 41 acres off Interstate 291 and Page Boulevard for a planned casino resort, unveiling the deal in November, shortly before Gov. Deval L. Patrick signed the state’s casino law. Ameristar has the only formal casino proposal for Springfield, but as many as three other companies -- Seminole Hard Rock Entertainment, MGM Resorts and Penn National Gaming – may be planning casinos for the city’s downtown.
Ameristar lacks the social, political and business connections of a possible couple of competitors for a casino in Springfield, Peter A. Picknelly, chairman and CEO of Peter Pan Buslines, who is planning a casino for the North End of the downtown and is involved in seeking an option to buy property of The Republican, and his brother Paul C. Picknelly, a hotel owner who is apparently working with MGM Resorts for a possible casino in the downtown’s South End.
“Time will tell,” Stremming said. “I have no reason to think we would not get a fair chance but I'm also an extreme optimist.”
In an interview in his office at City Hall on Thursday, Springfield Mayor Domenic J. Sarno said that the city offers a level playing field for all companies proposing a casino for Springfield.
Sarno and the city’s chief development officer, Kevin E. Kennedy, said there are no favorites and there will be complete objectivity in considering proposals.
“Of course, I will be objective,” Sarno said. “It is all about what is the best, most viable economic development proposal and location for the city. That is the horse we will ride to the Gaming Commission after we put it to the people, to the ballot.”
In a separate development, George Arwady, publisher and CEO of The Republican, said the newspaper has reached “the framework” of an agreement involving an option to buy The Republican’s Main Street building and property, but there is no signed agreement and details still need to be resolved. An actual sale would hinge on the whether the potential buyer receives a license to build a casino, he said. Arwady declined to identify the casino company involved with seeking the option.
“We're still very much going back and forth on the details and trying to put it in legalese,” the publisher said, adding The Republican might sell its properties but would not be involved in the casino business.
Stremming said Ameristar remains “100 percent” committed to Springfield and the state. He said the company intends to eventually submit $400,000 non refundable application fee for a casino license to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. But before Ameristar pays the non refundable fee, Stremming said, the company will wait for more clarity about whether the city can pick just one casino plan and send only that one plan to the gaming commission if approved by voters. The gaming commission is in charge of awarding licenses for casinos.
“It totally takes the decision making power away from the commission and places it in the hands of the mayor or the city,” Stremming said. “That does not seem to be consistent with the spirit of the legislation.”
Stremming said the city would improve its chances for winning a casino if it could send multiple proposals to the gaming commission.
"Would you rather have one ticket in the lottery or would you rather have three, four or five?" he asked.
In the interview at City Hall, Kennedy scoffed at the idea that Ameristar is pausing on filing a $400,000 non-refundable application with the state.
“They've got 16 million reasons to put their $400,000 down,” Kennedy said, referring to the price Ameristar paid for its land in East Springfield.
Sarno and Kennedy said they currently favor signing the best deal offered by a company and bringing that proposal to the ballot, but they have not ruled out changing their minds. And it is too soon to say if another proposal would be forwarded if one fails at the ballot, they said.
The casino law says that companies will need agreements with communities where casinos would locate and with "surrounding" communities. Once that agreement is reached, people in the so-called “host community” would vote in a referendum on a proposed casino deal before a company applies for a state license.
Sarno said he will make a series of announcements on Aug. 27 about the process for selecting a casino. He said he will be meeting on that date with all four casino operators known to be interested in Springfield as a possible location.
Kennedy said the process will be open and transparent. Kennedy said he and Sarno will be dealing with casino operators, not the local developers.
Ameristar’s land – cleared and prime for development -- is also about four of five miles from the downtown. The location raises questions about whether a casino on the site would help much in reviving the downtown.
Stremming said it would be easy for Ameristar to connect the planned casino with the downtown. He said the company could cross market and work in partnership with attractions such as City Stage, Symphony Hall, the MassMutual Center and the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame.
Sarno’s decision to sign only one deal is backed by two Western Massachusetts legislators who helped write the casino law. A member of the state Gaming Commission also appeared to support Sarno’s plan.
Sen. Stanley C. Rosenberg, an Amherst Democrat, said a municipality effectively controls when and how many casino proposals go to the ballot.
“The Legislature’s intention was to ensure communities didn't get rolled over by potential licensees,” Rosenberg said.
According to Rep. Joseph F. Wagner, a Chicopee Democrat and key author of the state’s expanded gambling law, the law gives a mayor a choice on the issue.
“The mayor is not obligated to do a deal with each operator,” said Wagner, who is co-chairman of the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. “He can move on multiple fronts, but he is not required to.”
However Springfield proceeds, the city is attempting to position itself strategically to compete against Palmer or other possible proposals, according to Wagner.
“They've got to determine what process makes the most sense in order that Springfield has the best opportunity,” Wagner said.
An Ameristar official has said that if the company fails to win a casino license, it would likely sell its property in Springfield, formerly the site of a Westinghouse Electric Corp. manufacturing business.
“I was stunned when the did the deal to buy Westinghouse,” said Chicopee Mayor Michael D. Bissonnette. “Who would own it before you have no deal?”
Stremming said an option would have been the way to go if the owner agreed. Stremming said Ameristar did not believe municipal leaders in Springfield would narrow the pool of applicants that would be sent to the gaming commission.
In the only other formal proposal for Western Massachusetts, the company that owns the Mohegan Sun in Uncasville, Conn. is planning a casino resort for Palmer near Exit 8 of the Massachusetts Turnpike.
The state’s casino law authorizes up to three casino resorts in different regions. It also authorizes a slot parlor that could be anywhere in the state.
James F. McHugh, a retired Massachusetts Appeals Court judge and commission member, said the law says the commission must take a proposal that includes a city vote in favor and that municipal authorities decide on the vote.
“I assume that the municipal authorities will decide on what the vote is going to be and send us the results,” McHugh said.
Reached by phone on Wednesday, Paul Picknelly said he would not comment on any casino matter. Peter Picknelly was unavailable for comment, said Robert Schwarz, executive vice president of OPAL Real Estate Group, which is owned by Peter Picknelly.
Springfield City Council President James J. Ferrera III, a member of the city’s 15-member Casino Site Committee, said the selection process for a casino must be devoid of politics.
“The integrity of the process can't be questioned at any point in time,” he said.
Stremming, Ameristar vice president Matthew Block and director of government relations Jonathan Little are set to discuss the company’s casino plan during a meeting of the site committee at 5 p.m. Monday in the council chambers at City Hall. The public will be allowed to speak at the start of the meeting.
While the mayor would be in charge of negotiating a casino agreement, the city council would need to ratify any agreement, Ferrera said.
Kennedy said he is concerned that it could be confusing to place more than one casino plan on the ballot.
Sarno said it makes sense to require casino operators to compete, “sharpen their pencils,” and present the strongest proposal.
“We are not ruling anything out,” Sarno said. “Everybody has an equal opportunity here. Whether it is Ameristar, or MGM, or Penn National, or Hard Rock, we're all ears.”
Stremming said Ameristar is confident it is offering the premier site and the best proposal for a casino in Massachusetts. He said the company will remain focused on demonstrating that its site will generate the most jobs and the most tax dollars for the state and the city.
“All we are asking for is a level playing field that allows us to prove ourselves and to prove the location,” he said.
Staff writer Peter Goonan contributed to this report.