Use caution in casino deals Sunday June 3, 2007 Poughkeepsie Journal

Gov. Eliot Spitzer favors allowing casinos in the Catskills, but he should be far more concerned about the repercussions of these gaming facilities.
Yes, the state stands to benefit financially - perhaps as much as $100 million annually from each casino built and successfully operated. But there are drawbacks. Localities hosting casinos could be overwhelmed and would need state support in improving roads, providing emergency services and making other infrastructure upgrades to handle thousands of new workers and millions of tourists. More importantly, casinos can make it too easy for problem gamblers to spend what little thay have, sometimes resulting in the need for government services and/or counseling.

The state should go at this more gradually, getting one casino up and running in the Catskills and monitoring the situation before turning the spigots on full force.
While Spitzer hasn't specified a number, the state Legislature did authorize up to three casinos in the Catskills in 2001, following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks when it was searching for any way to offset massive revenue losses. Former Gov. George Pataki ran into a number of legal roadblocks in trying to get casinos constructed in the Catskills. But now Spitzer is cutting deals to pave the way for casinos to be built.

The Spitzer administration and the St. Regis Mohawks announced one deal this year, in which the American Indian tribe would construct a casino next to Monticello Gaming and Raceway in Sullivan County. That certainly seems like a reasonable place for a casino, one right off Route 17, which serves the New York City market and already has some forms of betting nearby.

But now the Spitzer administration has put together a second deal - this one involves the Cayuga Indian Nation ending its land-claim lawsuit in the Finger Lakes in exchange for the ability to build a casino in Catskills. While that is good news for people in that area, the governor shouldn't rush these matters when it comes to the Catskills. Ample time should be given to let one Catskills casino operate first so the effects can be truly assessed.

While Orange and Ulster counties have correctly expressed concerns a bout the ramifications of multiple casinos - on roads, on schools and on law enforcement agencies - they, too, haven't ruled out allowing the gaming facilities in their area. They do, however, want the state to make sure counties, towns, villages and cities have given their approval before a casino could be built within their borders. That is a reasonable request. As is, it's conceivable the state could allow the construction of up to three casinos without approval from the host county or municipality
.
New York would be better served by getting one casino up and running and keeping this in mind: Any plans for future gaming facilities must have plenty of local input - and a plan to ensure revenues return to local coffers.

home page <--------------------------> casino page