Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
'Amid the opposition from Rochester, the Hochul administration may now have to redo its deal with the Seneca Nation, this time with the Legislature involved.
If the news of the Rochester casino had not leaked Friday night, the entire dynamic might be different.'
'Amid the opposition from Rochester, the Hochul administration may now have to redo its deal with the Seneca Nation, this time with the Legislature involved.
If the news of the Rochester casino had not leaked Friday night, the entire dynamic might be different.'
So, stay tuned. The situation is still in flux
Exactly, and if I correctly understood what was "leaked" on Friday, the situation was that nobody in Rochester, where the casino is planned for, was consulted about it's construction. Either Kathy Hochul, or someone acting on her authority, felt that somewhere in downtown Rochester was a good place to build a casino, and independently began negotiations with the Seneca nation......
What is interesting is that the Senecas have been looking into putting a casino in the area. So, did they just go above local officials in terms of discussing the possibility of build a casino in the area?
What is interesting is that the Senecas have been looking into putting a casino in the area. So, did they just go above local officials in terms of discussing the possibility of build a casino in the area?
Read the article that you yourself posted. Rochester-area politicians (presumably both state legislators as well as people like the mayor, who opined on the issue...now that I re-read the article, the Rochester City Council also sent a letter to Hochul on Monday expressing their opposition to a downtown Rochester casino) were kinda taken aback by the leaked report that the Senecas were targeting a downtown ROC site, and the reason for the secrecy was:
'In the Seneca negotiation, the Hochul administration sought to gain the Legislature’s approval to strike a deal without notifying Rochester officials of the casino proposed for the area.
That was because of the non-disclosure agreement, which according to a person with knowledge of the matter, was the result of the icy relationship between the Seneca Nation and Hochul administration, and meant to ensure details of the negotiations were not leaked. But it also meant that on Friday, Hochul officials felt unable to inform Rochester lawmakers of the new planned casino.'
The idea reported in that article is that the Senecas wouldn't have to share as much slot machine revenue with the state (on a percentage basis) if the Rochester casino does not materialize:
'If the Nation were not allowed the fourth casino in Rochester, its leadership would likely be unwilling to pay a roughly 20% revenue share to the state, as currently negotiated. Instead, it would likely seek a much lower rate.'
So it would make sense for both the state and the Senecas to desire this Rochester casino, from a revenue perspective.
I've run out of free Buffalo News dot com articles to read, so I'll have to consult old issues of the print version of the paper when I get home tonight, but amidst all this negotiating between Hochul's aides and the Senecas, Buffalo state senator Tim Kennedy introduced a bill in the state senate (which I believe was the same bill that was mentioned in this article as having passed 62-1) which basically (from my understanding) gave the Hochul administration carte blanche to negotiate the new agreement with the Senecas. I don't follow state-level politics closely enough to know if this sort of move is extremely abnormal or not, the legislative branch basically voting to cede power to the executive branch. The Assembly refused to pass the bill once word of the potential Rochester casino had spread, though, so the legislative session has now ended without legislative approval of the new compact.
Here's a question...when does the legislature reconvene? Google's not being too helpful there. This session ended at the end of this past week, and the article states:
'The Senate ended its work for the 2023 legislative session early Saturday morning. The Assembly adjourned Saturday afternoon without passing the bill authorizing a new compact, but may well return in the coming weeks.'
So is the Senate done until January 2024? And saying that the Assembly 'may well return in the coming weeks' raises some obvious questions.
Allll of that being said, to actually get to your question, I assume that even if the state were to finalize this deal, Rochester could successfully fight the casino at the local level. But if it isn't obvious I'm not a lawyer by now and that I'd still have to research the local versus state dynamic...politics is f*cking complicated.
If Rochester gets a casino, this will be the final nail in the coffin for the struggling Del Lago casino in Waterloo. Why would you drive 45 minutes to Waterloo when there a casino in Rochester, 10 to 15 minutes away?
Would the casino be located on state land sold or given to the Seneca in that area or nearby?
Also, with del Lago, it gets some of the Syracuse and immediate Finger Lakes markets, but due to Turning Stone in Verona, the Syracuse market is split. So, what becomes of del Lago, if Rochester gets a casino? Especially since the state, I believe, played a part in its coming to fruition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del_La...ort_and_Casino (Look at history)
After looking at the video link, while I think that the park is a "cute" idea, I think a hydro electric plant would be more practical. And also, I think that people within a "5 hour drive" would be drawn to this park, as stated in the article, is way overly optimistic. Maybe they'd drive once, but after many people saw the place, then what??
Something mentioned in today's D&C......Senator Pam Helming spoke against the proposed casino, saying that it would most likely negatively impact the "racino" already in operation, at the Finger Lakes horse race track.
I'm not to fond of the casino idea other than the jobs it will create, but I was wondering if they would need any ones approval to put a casino on a riverboat?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
