Whose casino vision is it anyway?

Daily Point

When a consensus isn’t a consensus

It was no surprise when Hofstra University president Susan Poser told the Nassau County Legislature Monday that she opposed a casino resort at the Nassau Hub.

But then Poser surprisingly cited other organizations she seemed to say aligned with her view.

“Placing a luxury casino development on one of the largest tracts of public land in Long Island is not the kind of economic development that Nassau County or Long Island has envisioned, planned for, or needs,” Poser said. “And we already have business and community consensus on this. I sit on the boards of the Long Island Association, the Long Island Regional Economic Development Council and Accelerate Long Island, all of which strive to enhance economic development on Long Island.”

Poser then proceeded to read excerpts of each organization’s mission statements or goals.

“Nowhere in any of these goals or the more detailed visioning, grant making, incentivizing and communicating that each of these outstanding economic development organizations does on a daily basis is there a mention of casinos as smart economic development that our county needs,” Poser said.

But Poser’s suggestion that a lack of mention in a mission statement equated to a “consensus” against a casino may not be quite right. In fact, none of the three organizations Poser cited has taken a definitive position on Las Vegas Sands’ proposal for a casino resort at the Nassau Hub — one way or another. None has said it’s “not the kind of economic development” that the county or the Island needs. And there’s evidence that the organizations — or some of their board members — might not agree with Poser’s claims.

In an interview with The Point Tuesday, Poser clarified that she wasn’t suggesting the organizations had taken a definitive position on the casino plan, but instead noted that they had not raised the idea of a casino when discussing economic development themes and ideas in the past. She said she was referring to the organizations’ historical perspectives, gleaned from their websites and other material she has gathered.

“I was really making a very broad point, that if we think about what economic development we need on Long Island, here is a massive piece of public land that could be used, and the organizations that spend their time thinking about this have never said this is what we need,” Poser told The Point. “I wasn’t commenting on whether the LIA, for instance, should or should not endorse the casino. I obviously have an opinion on that but I wasn’t weighing in on that. I was making a different point, saying: Let’s measure it against what we thought we needed.”

But some organizations or their leaders have indeed raised the idea of a casino in the months since the state’s plan to award casino licenses came closer to becoming a reality.

The Long Island Association, for instance, has listed among its 2023 policy priorities: “Explore the economic benefits that a destination resort and casino would create on Long Island.”

And LIA chief executive Matt Cohen joined the Long Island Federation of Labor’s John Durso to write an op-ed in Long Island Business News last July, advocating for Long Island to compete for one of the three available downstate casino licenses.

“Let’s work with a respected reputable and experienced casino operator to develop a world-class destination resort, entertainment, and gaming experience that we are proud to say is on Long Island and compete for a once in a lifetime economic boon for our region,” Cohen and Durso wrote.

Accelerate Long Island, meanwhile, hasn’t taken a position on the casino project, and likely wouldn’t, since its focus is on the commercialization of research. But Accelerate program director Dan Lloyd also heads Minority Millennials, which has partnered with Sands on procurement and job opportunities related to the casino proposal.

“It’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for our organization,” Lloyd told The Point, speaking of Minority Millennials.

As for Accelerate, Lloyd said: “Accelerate Long Island does not take positions on policy issues; our focus is on helping entrepreneurs and startups.”

The Long Island Regional Economic Development Council, meanwhile, hasn’t said a word about the Sands proposal — and likely wouldn’t, unless Sands sought funds from the state — which Sands has said it won’t do.

But Durso, who also serves on the LIREDC and the LIA boards, made his take quite clear during Monday’s hearing.

“We cannot afford to allow this project to die on the vine,” Durso said. “We have heard all kinds of rhetoric and innuendoes and mistruths spoken here.”

Durso referred back to Poser’s comments, without mentioning her by name, adding: “None of those organizations have come down one way or the other on this project.”

Then, he made a not-so-explicit reference to Poser, who joined Hofstra in 2021 after previously working in Illinois and Nebraska.

“I know, I sit on [the boards], too. And I welcome all the fairly new people that have joined our organization,” Durso said. “Those of us who have been lifelong Long Islanders, we take great pride in this Island and what it brings and the future for our children and our grandchildren. We get what we deserve … We have an opportunity to move this Island forward.”

— Randi F. Marshall @RandiMarshall

Pencil Point

Supreme rule

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

Final Point

D’Esposito second on early ‘vulnerable’ list

Roll Call, the Washington-based publication, has unsurprisingly posted the famously fraudulent Rep. George Santos as No. 1 on its initial list of House members most vulnerable to being unseated next year.

“He’s a Republican who represents a district President Joe Biden won by 8 percentage points,” Roll Call says of Santos in its narrative of the list. “He’s been accused of lying about everything from his resume to his religion, and even members of his own party have called on him to step down.”

More surprisingly, the second name on Roll Call’s “vulnerable” list is Rep. Anthony D’Esposito, also a first-termer, who represents the 4th Congressional District, adjacent to Santos’ CD3.

Notably, D’Esposito has been vociferous in calling for Santos’ expulsion from Congress and even sponsors legislation that would prevent him from receiving “compensation for biographies, media appearances or expressive or creative works.”

But Roll Call states: “The fundamentals of D’Esposito’s district make this a tough seat for Republicans to defend.” The incumbent succeeded Democrat Kathleen Rice, who did not seek reelection, and next year is a presidential contest which often helps down-ballot Democrats in New York. It’s unclear who will oppose him.

First-termers of both parties always tend to be considered vulnerable across the board. No. 5 on the list is Republican Mike Lawler from the Hudson Valley who beat Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Sean Patrick Maloney in the region’s red wave last November. On Tuesday, Liz Whitmer Gereghty, the sister of Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, announced her bid to unseat Lawler.

— Dan Janison @Danjanison