With two successful casino projects up and running, and a third permanent facility in development, the Seneca Nation of Indians will lend its gaming expertise to a Massachusetts tribe looking to get in the casino business.
The Senecas and the Aquinnah Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head announced a partnership to pursue one of three gambling licenses proposed for Massachusetts. Seneca Nation President Maurice A. John Sr. joined with Aquinnah Wampanoag Chairman Donald A. Widdiss in Boston to announce the casino development effort.
"We have a proven track record of bringing casino projects to completion in neighboring New York," John said at the media event. "Our casinos are beautifully designed, and faithful to the cultural traditions of Native Americans."
Seneca Gaming spokesman Phil Pantano said John and Seneca gaming executives have been in discussions with the Aquinnah Wampanoags for months. Principals of the development group, including the Seneca president and Rajat Shah, Seneca Gaming's senior vice president for corporate development, already have met with some key Massachusetts legislators regarding the Aquinnah Wampanoags' casino interests.
Earlier this month, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick introduced a measure to authorize up to three destination resort casinos, with preference going to federally authorized Native American tribes. The Aquinnah Wampanoags were the first Massachusetts tribe to gain official authorization.
As legislation works its way through the Massachusetts legislature, the Senecas will assist the Aquinnah Wampanoags with market analysis, financing and lobbying
efforts, according to Pantano.
"If they are selected, Seneca Gaming would continue to lend its expertise in site selection and casino development," Pantano said. "The partnership agreement does not talk about any sort of operational relationship at this time. If that were to happen, there would be no ownership stake on our part."
The casino development partnership between the Senecas and the Martha's Vineyardbased tribe follows last week's announcement that the nation is vying for the rights to run a video lottery terminal casino at Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens. Pantano said both opportunities open the door to greater exposure for its Western New York operations.
"Not only can we expand our expertise, and help out another tribe, but we can increase awareness of who we are and what we do," Pantano said.
He said in the case of Aqueduct, the nation's involvement will generate more revenue for New York State by cross-marketing upstate and downstate operations.
The Aqueduct gaming license will be awarded before the end of the year.
It is unlikely any casino will open in Massachusetts for at least three years.
In announcing the partnership, Widdiss, the Aquinnah Wampanoag chairman, noted the Senecas' fast-paced success in developing Seneca Niagara Casino in Niagara Falls, Seneca Allegany Casino in Salamanca and a temporary Seneca Buffalo Creek Casino in Buffalo. In less than five years, the Senecas have invested more than $750 million in their projects.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Kids, Smoking And Casinos Don't Mix
Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun are the largest and best-known tourist attractions in the state. They provide a service that the public demands and the state is able to pull in beneficial extra cash through taxes. As any casino executive will tell you, casinos are a form of adult entertainment, as gambling and drinking are involved. However, anyone who has visited any of the Connecticut casinos recently can attest to one small problem: there are hundreds of chilfred, from newborns to toddlers to elementary school students, that are walking around these gambling Meccas.
This is because parents are eager to visit the casinos and gamble, despite having no one to care for the children. The casinos have done everything they can to accommodate childrenby building arcades, 3-D amusement rides and other kid-friendly activities. It is in their best interest financially because by providing child-friendly activities, they will be able to have more patrons (parents) come to gamble. The idea of bringing one's children to the casino is troublesome at best. Is watching adult role-models lose their money and drink excessive amounts of alcohol really the best example of good behavior? Is leaving a seven-year-old unattended in the arcade for six hours really responsible parenting?
The situation is greatly complicated when one factors in the amount of smoking that occurs in casinos, and the public is aware of how harmful secondhand smoking is. Unfortunately, the law that bans smoking in Connecticut's restaurants and bars does not apply to the casinos. This means that the casino patrons are allowed to smoke everywhere, including restaurants where children eat, as well as hallways and other common areas that cannot be avoided by children and families. This is wholly unacceptable because it exposes children to toxins that they should not be breathing in. Why is it that casinos are allowed to get away with this, but restaurants are not?
The casinos, to their credit, do not allow smoking in the arcades where kids are playing. Unfortunately, this is where the casinos' protection of children's health ends. Kids are being unfairly exposed to ubiquitous cigarette and cigar smoke, which is about the last thing that young, healthy lungs need. Since the casinos are not going to turn away business in the form of parents or tell their other patrons they cannot smoke, the state must step up to the plate and make a decision. Either ban smoking in the parts of casinos like restaurants and hallways where children are walking around, or ban children from the entire casino. If adults want to make the decision to expose themselves to smoke, it is their right to do so, but children don't have any choice in the matter. They deserve better than that.
This is because parents are eager to visit the casinos and gamble, despite having no one to care for the children. The casinos have done everything they can to accommodate childrenby building arcades, 3-D amusement rides and other kid-friendly activities. It is in their best interest financially because by providing child-friendly activities, they will be able to have more patrons (parents) come to gamble. The idea of bringing one's children to the casino is troublesome at best. Is watching adult role-models lose their money and drink excessive amounts of alcohol really the best example of good behavior? Is leaving a seven-year-old unattended in the arcade for six hours really responsible parenting?
The situation is greatly complicated when one factors in the amount of smoking that occurs in casinos, and the public is aware of how harmful secondhand smoking is. Unfortunately, the law that bans smoking in Connecticut's restaurants and bars does not apply to the casinos. This means that the casino patrons are allowed to smoke everywhere, including restaurants where children eat, as well as hallways and other common areas that cannot be avoided by children and families. This is wholly unacceptable because it exposes children to toxins that they should not be breathing in. Why is it that casinos are allowed to get away with this, but restaurants are not?
The casinos, to their credit, do not allow smoking in the arcades where kids are playing. Unfortunately, this is where the casinos' protection of children's health ends. Kids are being unfairly exposed to ubiquitous cigarette and cigar smoke, which is about the last thing that young, healthy lungs need. Since the casinos are not going to turn away business in the form of parents or tell their other patrons they cannot smoke, the state must step up to the plate and make a decision. Either ban smoking in the parts of casinos like restaurants and hallways where children are walking around, or ban children from the entire casino. If adults want to make the decision to expose themselves to smoke, it is their right to do so, but children don't have any choice in the matter. They deserve better than that.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Ads promoting Choctaw casino are offensive
Television commercials promoting the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians' effort to put a casino in Jackson County are offensive.
As opponents of the Choctaw casino, we would hardly be expected to agree with the tribe's methods to sway voters in a non-binding referendum to be held on Nov. 6. But the televised ads we have seen this week are not just disagreeable, they are insulting to South Mississippians in general, and Jackson Countians in particular.
Opening with scenes of devastation supposedly caused by Hurricane Katrina, the ads go on to suggest that unless Jackson Countians vote in favor of a monopoly casino franchise for the Choctaws, such scenes of ruin will remain in the county.
What utter nonsense.
Jackson County is no miserable disaster area.
From Ocean Springs to Moss Point and from St. Martin to Gautier, the resilience of residents and businesses has been remarkable. As has been the commitment to masterfully plan even better communities.
As for the mood of Jackson County, it can be downright delightful -- as was seen at the recent mullet festival in Gautier, or as can be seen at the county fair now being held in Pascagoula or as will be seen at the upcoming Peter Anderson festival in Ocean Springs.
Such celebrations shatter the pitiful picture of Jackson County put forward by the Choctaws.
For the Choctaws to employ such painful images in pursuit of profit undermines the efforts by the tourism and hospitality industries to showcase the area's comeback. It exemplifies the tribal leadership's conspicuously bad judgment, and raises serious questions about their understanding of this region, its people and their attitudes.
In inexcusably poor taste is the Choctaws' commercial use of children as cheerleaders for their proposed casino. At one point the Choctaws show kids giving a boisterous "thumbs up" to gambling.
If this is the best bet that the Choctaws can make, then Jackson County voters should call their bluff.
As opponents of the Choctaw casino, we would hardly be expected to agree with the tribe's methods to sway voters in a non-binding referendum to be held on Nov. 6. But the televised ads we have seen this week are not just disagreeable, they are insulting to South Mississippians in general, and Jackson Countians in particular.
Opening with scenes of devastation supposedly caused by Hurricane Katrina, the ads go on to suggest that unless Jackson Countians vote in favor of a monopoly casino franchise for the Choctaws, such scenes of ruin will remain in the county.
What utter nonsense.
Jackson County is no miserable disaster area.
From Ocean Springs to Moss Point and from St. Martin to Gautier, the resilience of residents and businesses has been remarkable. As has been the commitment to masterfully plan even better communities.
As for the mood of Jackson County, it can be downright delightful -- as was seen at the recent mullet festival in Gautier, or as can be seen at the county fair now being held in Pascagoula or as will be seen at the upcoming Peter Anderson festival in Ocean Springs.
Such celebrations shatter the pitiful picture of Jackson County put forward by the Choctaws.
For the Choctaws to employ such painful images in pursuit of profit undermines the efforts by the tourism and hospitality industries to showcase the area's comeback. It exemplifies the tribal leadership's conspicuously bad judgment, and raises serious questions about their understanding of this region, its people and their attitudes.
In inexcusably poor taste is the Choctaws' commercial use of children as cheerleaders for their proposed casino. At one point the Choctaws show kids giving a boisterous "thumbs up" to gambling.
If this is the best bet that the Choctaws can make, then Jackson County voters should call their bluff.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Illinois hopes to sell debt-ridden Collinsville hotel
The beleaguered Collinsville Holiday Inn, a sore point in a decades-old political debacle, could be sold within a year, said state officials who only last week foreclosed on the debt-ridden property.
Built with millions of dollars of unpaid state loans, the hotel has been mired in decline and debt. This year, state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias moved to formally reclaim the property.
The loans, to politically connected developers in 1982, were part of a statewide economic development program. But the local developers never made good and now owe a total of $32 million.
Monday, Giannoulias toured the hotel and said the foreclosure, which concluded Thursday in Madison County Court, marked the start of a turnaround for the hotel. The state plans renovations and a resale in hopes of salvaging something from its investment.
Officials are in talks with the Holiday Inn franchise about repairs that need to be made and hope the property will be a hot item at a national auction.
"I am proud to say that last week marked the start of a new beginning for this hotel," Giannoulias said. "This hotel should serve as an economic engine for the Metro East, not as a burden for the state."
Giannoulias, however, did not sugarcoat the issue. He declined to speculate on a final sale price but said clearly that the state would ultimately take a loss.
"Let's not kid ourselves. This hotel was built on false promises," said Giannoulias, calling the loans to developers Gary Fears and B.C. Gitcho a "sweetheart deal that never should have been made."
Though the original debt stood at $13.4 million, the project fell behind almost immediately. Fears and Gitcho continued to renegotiate their financing and eventually won provisions that required them to pay only if they made a profit.
Their last payment was made in 1998, according to state records. Officials have said they believe that poor, and perhaps criminal, management led to the ballooning debt.
Gitcho declined last week to comment to the Post-Dispatch and has previously described the hotel as a failing venture.
The hotel would seem to have sure-fire potential, sitting adjacent to the Gateway Center, one of the bistate region's largest convention sites, and only about 10 minutes from downtown St. Louis. Local officials hope that a turnaround of the hotel's fortunes could also be a boon for the area.
"The city (of Collinsville) and the Gateway Center have a huge stake in this," said Paul Mann, Collinsville's community development director. "We've lost a lot of business here because of this facility being degraded so much."
Built with millions of dollars of unpaid state loans, the hotel has been mired in decline and debt. This year, state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias moved to formally reclaim the property.
The loans, to politically connected developers in 1982, were part of a statewide economic development program. But the local developers never made good and now owe a total of $32 million.
Monday, Giannoulias toured the hotel and said the foreclosure, which concluded Thursday in Madison County Court, marked the start of a turnaround for the hotel. The state plans renovations and a resale in hopes of salvaging something from its investment.
Officials are in talks with the Holiday Inn franchise about repairs that need to be made and hope the property will be a hot item at a national auction.
"I am proud to say that last week marked the start of a new beginning for this hotel," Giannoulias said. "This hotel should serve as an economic engine for the Metro East, not as a burden for the state."
Giannoulias, however, did not sugarcoat the issue. He declined to speculate on a final sale price but said clearly that the state would ultimately take a loss.
"Let's not kid ourselves. This hotel was built on false promises," said Giannoulias, calling the loans to developers Gary Fears and B.C. Gitcho a "sweetheart deal that never should have been made."
Though the original debt stood at $13.4 million, the project fell behind almost immediately. Fears and Gitcho continued to renegotiate their financing and eventually won provisions that required them to pay only if they made a profit.
Their last payment was made in 1998, according to state records. Officials have said they believe that poor, and perhaps criminal, management led to the ballooning debt.
Gitcho declined last week to comment to the Post-Dispatch and has previously described the hotel as a failing venture.
The hotel would seem to have sure-fire potential, sitting adjacent to the Gateway Center, one of the bistate region's largest convention sites, and only about 10 minutes from downtown St. Louis. Local officials hope that a turnaround of the hotel's fortunes could also be a boon for the area.
"The city (of Collinsville) and the Gateway Center have a huge stake in this," said Paul Mann, Collinsville's community development director. "We've lost a lot of business here because of this facility being degraded so much."
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
$4 tea bag makes our 'Hotel Hall of Shame'
Here's a report from my colleague Jayne Clark, who's just back from San Antonio and couldn't believe the tab for two cups of tea:
"'That’ll be $8.65.'
"I stared at the two paper cups of hot water, the two packaged tea bags and told the waitress in the lobby bar at the Hyatt Regency San Antonio that there must have been a mistake, since all I’d ordered was two cups of tea. 'It’s $8.65,' she repeated.
"I handed her $20 and asked if anyone else had balked at the price. She assured me they had not.
"The hotel may cater to guests traveling on expense accounts. But really. Paying $4 for a cup of hot water and a tea bag is outrageous, no matter who's footing the bill. "
OK, readers, we think that's a definite nominee for the Hotel Hall of Shame when it comes to high prices. It's right up there with 10% staff gratuities that aren't announced till the end of a stay or $6 quarts of bottled water on the nightstand.
So what are your Hall of Shame nominees in the pricing category. Fire away!!!!
"'That’ll be $8.65.'
"I stared at the two paper cups of hot water, the two packaged tea bags and told the waitress in the lobby bar at the Hyatt Regency San Antonio that there must have been a mistake, since all I’d ordered was two cups of tea. 'It’s $8.65,' she repeated.
"I handed her $20 and asked if anyone else had balked at the price. She assured me they had not.
"The hotel may cater to guests traveling on expense accounts. But really. Paying $4 for a cup of hot water and a tea bag is outrageous, no matter who's footing the bill. "
OK, readers, we think that's a definite nominee for the Hotel Hall of Shame when it comes to high prices. It's right up there with 10% staff gratuities that aren't announced till the end of a stay or $6 quarts of bottled water on the nightstand.
So what are your Hall of Shame nominees in the pricing category. Fire away!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)