The future of downstate New York's entertainment landscape is on the precipice of significant transformation. The recent strategic decisions and political maneuvers surrounding the introduction of three new casino facilities have set the stage for what could be a monumental shift. The New York State Gaming Facility Location Board has established June 27, 2025, as the new deadline for casino bids. However, legislative twists could upend this timeline.
Political Maneuvering
A critical bill, S9673A authored by Senator Joe Addabbo, has already gained momentum by passing both the house and senate in early June. This bill awaits Governor Kathy Hochul’s signature, with an ambitious deadline of August 31, 2024. If signed, this legislation would override the board’s decision, demanding that all proposals be submitted by summer’s end next year.
“Politicians may want a quicker deadline, but that would be impractical,” remarked Vicki Been, reflecting the board’s concerns about the feasibility of the expedited timeline proposed in the bill.
Concerns Over Zoning and Environmental Hurdles
The board has voiced significant reservations about the accelerated timeline, primarily due to the myriad of prerequisites that must be addressed before any bids can even be reviewed. Environmental impact studies and zoning entitlements form the cornerstone of these preconditions, with rezoning being a particularly pressing issue. For instance, projects like the Bally’s Bronx proposal and Steve Cohen’s Queens proposal currently require zoning changes to transition from their current parkland designations to casino facilities.
“Because bids cannot be reviewed until all ‘entitlements and zoning’ are approved, the board views the current deadline as unreasonable,” the New York State Gaming Facility Location Board stated, underscoring the logistical hurdles.
The Players in the Game
A total of 11 bidders have thrown their hats into the ring, aiming to establish casinos in prime locations ranging from Times Square to Brooklyn. Each proposal boasts not only gaming facilities but also integrates broader development plans, including resorts, housing units, and neighborhood enhancements. The range of bids spans both commercial and tribal operators, promising a diverse array of offerings.
The competing proposals include:
- Avenir: Silverstein Properties and Greenwood Gaming in Manhattan.
- Bally’s Links at Ferry Point: Bally’s Corporation in The Bronx.
- Caesars Palace Times Square: Caesars Entertainment, SL Green, and Roc Nation in Manhattan.
- Coney Project: Thor Equities, Legends Entertainment, the Chickasaw Nation, Saratoga Casino Holdings in Brooklyn.
- Freedom Plaza: Soloviev Group and Mohegan Gaming in Manhattan.
- Metropolitan Park: Steven Cohen and Hard Rock International in Queens.
- MGM Empire City: MGM Resorts International in Yonkers.
- Resorts World New York City: Genting Group in Queens.
- Sands New York: Las Vegas Sands in Nassau County, Long Island.
- Saks Fifth Avenue: Hudson’s Bay Company, with the operator to be determined, in Manhattan.
- Wynn New York City: Related Companies, Oxford Properties Group, and Wynn Resorts in Manhattan.
The Stakes
The board, while recognizing the potential conflict between their deadline and the stipulations of S9673A, remains hopeful that the governor will consider the practical implications of their timeline. “The hope would be that our reasoning will be helpful to the governor,” Vicki Been added, emphasizing their position.
Amidst the political and procedural wrangling, the high stakes for downstate New York cannot be overstated. Successfully navigating the approvals and meeting the deadlines could dramatically reshape the region's entertainment and economic landscape. Iconic areas stand to benefit from the introduction of these expansive gaming and development projects, promising to bring not just casinos but comprehensive community enhancements.
The upcoming months will be pivotal as stakeholders across the board work to align their objectives and navigate the complex terrain of regulations and approvals. It remains to be seen if the accelerated legislative timeline will hold or whether the more measured approach advised by the board will prevail.