New bidder for a Nassau casino expected soon

Daily Point

Sands negotiating with new company to take over license bid

This isn’t over yet.

Las Vegas Sands is in discussions with another company that could assume the bid for a downstate casino on the land surrounding Nassau Coliseum, sources close to the project told The Point.

An announcement is expected within the next few weeks, the sources confirmed.

That development came just hours after Las Vegas Sands announced on an investor call Wednesday that it would not be bidding for a New York casino license, even as it said it believed the Coliseum site "should be highly competitive in the New York casino licensing process."

The unidentified third party would be the entity that would take over the Sands process, apply for a casino license, and navigate the state’s bidding process. If it were to win, there’d be an agreement by which it could ultimately assume control of the Nassau Hub site.

There is always the possibility the effort to revive the casino proposal collapses. And it's clear the opposition won’t go away. Hofstra University and community groups who mobilized against a casino in the Uniondale location are expected to continue their efforts to stop the project.

For now, however, Sands continues to hold its 42-year lease on the Hub, the sources said, adding that Sands’ control of the property likely would remain in place until a new company wins a casino license. Sands has spent more than $300 million so far on its efforts to lease the Coliseum property and prepare for a bid, and remains responsible for the Coliseum, which continues to lose money every year.

In its statement, Sands emphasized its concern over the potential legalization of online gaming as a factor in its decision not to bid. Bringing in an entity that could handle both a brick-and-mortar casino and the future of iGaming could be significant to ultimately winning the bid, sources said.

"There are a lot of companies that have digital assets and digital footprints but Sands is not one of them. Some other operators — and there are many in the space that have experience in the iGaming space, too — would be better poised in this market," one source told The Point. "From the state’s perspective, if they’re looking at this in a sustainable way, they’d need to ensure whomever they issue a license to could do both."

Another source familiar with the state gaming process noted that among the potential companies that could make a deal with Sands are those now focused on online gaming — or casino companies that have been associated with other bids but might want to switch gears.

"Possible New York City entities struggling to win over their communities for a casino or nontraditional gaming companies could work out an arrangement with Sands," that source said.

But even if such an agreement is reached, Sands will continue to be responsible for making sure the Coliseum has programming, maintaining Coliseum employees’ jobs, and making its lease payments, sources said. All of the financial and other commitments that have been made to the surrounding communities, local groups and organizations, and others will continue to be in effect as well, sources said

Sands also will continue to navigate the ongoing environmental review process, come to a new lease agreement with Nassau County that would allow for development rights and permit a casino as a potential use, and work with the Town of Hempstead to obtain zoning approvals. The new company could be at the table for some of those efforts, but the lease will remain under Sands’ control.

Such a plan is possible under the state’s request for applications, which says only that the applicant must "own or acquire, within sixty days after a license has been awarded, the land where the gaming facility is proposed to be constructed ..."

If the Nassau Coliseum site is not chosen as one of the winning bids, however, Sands would continue to control the site. Under that scenario, sources confirmed, Sands would still be committed to an alternative development plan. Any future non-casino development of the site, however, will be easier after Sands in 2023 paid $241 million to former leaseholder Nick Mastroianni II, which got rid of the long-standing debt that had been hanging over the arena.

Sands’ statement Wednesday reflected that commitment to developing the site even without a third party winning a casino bid.

"If the company is unable to secure an agreement that would allow for a third party to bid for a casino license on the Nassau Coliseum site, it will work with Nassau County and other parties to attempt to ensure it is developed consistent with Nassau County’s long-term vision for the site," Sands said. 

— Randi F. Marshall randi.marshall@newsday.com

Pencil Point

Burned

For more cartoons, visit www.newsday.com/aprilnationalcartoons

Reference Point

A road much traveled

Editorial boards typically offer definitive opinions on the topics of the day, stances reflected in the headlines of those editorials. But every so often, boards choose to pose a question, as Newsday’s panel did back in 1941 when it asked: "Are You a Safe Driver?"

The question reverberates today, with the focus at Newsday on our unsafe roads and their too-many unsafe drivers.

On April 24, 1941, the board engaged on the topic by writing about Nassau County police safety officers who were speaking to civic groups and schools about auto safety. Despite their efforts, the board said "there are going to be some accidents."

"People have a way of getting thoughtless when they’re in a hurry, or they get four times as aggressive when they’re behind a wheel, or they forget all courtesy, or maybe they are just victims of an unfortunate combination of circumstances," the board wrote.

By 1941, some 88% of American households owned at least one vehicle; the figure was only slightly higher at 91.7% in 2022. Long Island’s road network was still being built out back then and there were fewer households than today, so fewer overall cars. Seat belts were not even optional until the ‘50s. And back then there was at least one other quaint quirk about driving: Drivers used hand signals when making turns and stopping.

As Newsday’s board advised: "Recognized hand signals call for your arm to be straight out for a left turn; raised for a right turn and down with palm back when you intend to stop."

The board offered a series of tips for staying out of accidents, warning readers: "You probably think you’re a pretty expert driver right now, but it’s a safe bet that some professional truck or bus driver could give you pointers you’ve never heard of."

Among the tips: Don’t stare into the headlights of an approaching car, turn your wheels into a skid, keep the driver’s seat straight back, watch the roadway closely for gravel and oil patches, use the rearview mirror, and, perhaps above all, anticipate what other drivers are going to do.

The board summed all that up with a timeless aphorism: "By and large, the responsibility of keeping out of an accident rests upon you."

Driving in 1941, in other words, was risky business as it is now. The board’s conclusion 84 years ago unfortunately could be written today:

"All in all, driving a car is a pretty complicated and highly skilled job. Look at the number of deaths and injuries caused by ignorant motorists, if you think it isn’t."

— Michael Dobie michael.dobie@newsday.com

Subscribe to The Point here and browse past editions of The Point here.