Share
Whether the Nassau Coliseum will ever be home to a casino is very uncertain. Although developments seem to be on track to give the Las Vegas Sands Corp. a lease to operate the facility, that may prove to be mostly academic in developing a casino on the property.
The surrounding community seems divided at best over the idea of a casino. A lack of adamant local support might be sufficient to deprive Sands of a gaming license.
County government advances coliseum-related measures
On July 22, the Nassau County Legislature Rules Committee voted to recommend two measures related to the operation of the Nassau Coliseum. Both votes were positive developments1 for Sands’ interest in the facility.
The first was an ordinance commissioning an environmental study on the property. That passed unanimously.
The second item was a proposal to transfer the current operational lease for the Coliseum to Sands. That advanced by a 5-1 vote.
During the meeting, committee members stressed that neither proposal gives Sands the right to develop or redevelop the property. Regardless, the casino issue dominated the discourse from members of the public in attendance according to Heather Fletcher of Bonus.com2.
With these votes and earlier approvals from the Nassau Legislature Planning Commission3, the proposals advanced to the full legislature. A vote on those matters is expected on Aug. 5.
Should the full legislature follow the recommendations of the committees and approve them, Sands would take over operation of the coliseum for the term of the lease. That is far from a guarantee that a casino in the space is imminent, however.
Business with local government continues
Should Sands take over the lease for the Coliseum, that would be a better outcome for its already publicized plans to open a casino at the site than if the Nassau Legislature rejects that premise. It’s far from game over for people who don’t want a casino in their neighborhood, though.
Sands would still have to get approval for its development plans from local officials. For example, Sands would still need the town of Hempstead to approve zoning changes.
Opponents of the casino proposal might argue that in light of the legislature’s acquiescence to Sands’ wishes thus far, those further approvals might be a mere formality. As a demonstration of that opposition, the Say No to the Casino Civic Association released a statement after Monday’s votes.
“The Rules Committee, in a 5-1 vote, together with company managers of the predatory gambling company Las Vegas Sands (LVS), tried to gaslight County residents today into believing that their approval of a 42-year ‘operating lease’ is in no way linked to LVS’ plans to build a massive 4-million sq ft casino complex in place of the Nassau Coliseum. We thank Legislator DeRIggi-Whitton for the sole no vote today. We vehemently object to LVS being given control of this land and urge the full Legislature to follow DeRiggi-Whitton’s lead and vote no on August 5. This lease is based on a lie.
“We find it darkly satirical that our government would expect us to believe that a company whose sole focus is generating revenue from gambling losses, would have any interest whatsoever in operating a listless suburban arena. We demand that our legislators actually put the work in and solicit competing proposals. By carelessly giving LVS a lease, the County will allow LVS to not only tie up this land indefinitely, but also better position themselves for a casino license. We could not think of a worse fate for our community than as host of the country’s second largest casino.
“We send our empathy to the coliseum employees who spoke today in favor of this operating lease in hopes of keeping their jobs. The lease states multiple times that LVS can ‘go dark’ after two years and shut the coliseum down, along with their jobs.
“We are proud that we’ve helped build genuine, overwhelming, grassroots momentum against the casino. We note that of the public comments the County posted online today, 344 of them expressed opposition to the casino, only 3 submissions were in support. We ask the free press to provide more scrutiny into those individuals and organizations who say they are pro-casino, so the public can understand how much work LVS is putting into creating the appearance of support.
“LVS’ only goal is to fleece all of us of $2b/yr in gambling losses. They see our community as a tank they can plug into and pump out our cash. They’ll use whatever means necessary to get that land. Our Legislature is complicit in this scheme and it is disgraceful.”
Amid the organized opposition, there is also litigation pending regarding Sands’ future in Nassau. For Sands, the whole may prove greater than the sum of the parts.
Local opposition could complicate casino licensing
To date, Sands has not applied for a gaming license with the state of New York. Technically, Sands has until June 27, 2025 to submit its plans to the New York State Gaming Facility Location Board.
The current lack of a lease to operate the facility and the lack of requisite approval for its development plans might be factors in that absence. Sands might prefer to wait until those matters are concluded in its favor, should they be.
There is also the related matter of a review by a Community Advisory Committee, and that’s where the community clamor could matter most for Sands. That six-person committee includes local and state lawmakers.
Even favorable votes from the Hampstead City Council and Nassau Legislature are no guarantee that the New York Assembly and New York Senate members will support Sands’ bid. Moreover, there’s the matter of competition.
State law gives the New York State Gaming Commission (NYSGC) the right to issue up to three gaming licenses for the downstate region of New York. Two of those are presumptively spoken for in terms of existing facilities that offer limited gaming.
Sands is just one of nine parties to express interest in the remaining license, which should create fierce competition for selection.
That’s where just the perception of significant local opposition, much less tangible opposition, could prove the difference between getting that license and not getting it. Without a license, there isn’t much point to moving forward with casino development plans.
On the current timeline, the NYSGC won’t award licenses until December 2025. If opposition to Sands’ plans continues to build or any one of the necessary votes go awry for Sands’ interest, that announcement from the NYSGC could be disappointing for Sands.
