Six Things to Know About the Expansion of Casino Gambling In New York

Thursday, June 05, 2014

(Ilya Marritz/WNYC)

New York already has some slots-only casinos as well as Indian casinos in the northern part of the state. But last fall, New York voters approved a major expansion of casino gambling. Officials in Albany are now beginning a review of nearly two dozen proposals for just four gaming licenses. Two of those licenses could be issued to developers in the Catskills/Hudson Valley region, close to New York City.



Here are six things to know about the process:

1. Casinos divide people. In every town under consideration, there are debates about the environment, the economy, and the character of the community.

2. The next casino could be really close to the city. There are proposals for Woodbury, South Blooming Grove, New Windsor, and Newburgh – all within 60 miles of Manhattan.

3. Every town gets a say in this. To even be considered for a gaming license, applicants need a letter of support from the host community.

4.  If a town close to the New York City gets a casino, casino developers in the Catksills will lose out. For years, gambling has been seen as a possible solution to economic stagnation in the Catskills.

5. This decision will be made in Albany. It’s up to a five-member board to review all the applications once they’re handed in at the end of the month.

6. This will move very quickly. From the moment gaming licenses are awarded – it’s supposed to happen in the fall – the winning developers will have exactly two years to open the doors on a new casino, or face a penalty of $50 million.



Malaysia's Genting Group is proposing a casino at the Tuxedo Ridge Ski Center.



This driving range in South Blooming Grove is another possible casino site.



Grossinger's Resort closed in the 1980s, but could be redeveloped if the site's owner receives a gaming license.



In Liberty, NY, Foxwoods has opened a center for information about its plans to develop a casino nearby.


More in:

Comments [2]

Challace from Tuxedo (Sterling Forest)

I agree with Alex (previous poster) and thus oppose the proposal. What bothers me is the lack of critical thinking surrounding the promises of job growth, increased business revenue for the Town of Tuxedo and a 15b interchange to 87. First off, creating an interchange will do nothing to divert traffic to or through the Town of Tuxedo. Secondly, promises are just that - promises. People of the town and surrounding communities should ask "next step" questions such as what other approvals are necessary in order to bring this interchange to fruition? Can those approvals be obtained? Because if not, one of the biggest persuasive arguments in favor of the “resort” is nullified. And lastly, although Ilya notes that the "towns have a say," I'm not so sure that's true in spirit. The town hall meeting I went to was clearly divided with opposers in the majority, yet the town approved the proposal...I say if the Catskills really does want this opportunity then they should by all means be given it.

Jun. 05 2014 09:32 AM
Alex from Warwick

This would be a nightmare for residents of Tuxedo and the surrounding communities. Genting is doing everything in their power to pay off the right people in Tuxedo, including the school board. Once it happens, if it happens, the area's beautiful rural scenery (including a lot of NYC apple-picking, Renaissance Faire, skiing, etc.), will never be the same again. Not to mention the lives of tens of thousands of commuters! NO CASINO IN TUXEDO!!

Jun. 05 2014 07:28 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.


Latest Newscast




WNYC is supported by the Charles H. Revson Foundation: Because a great city needs an informed and engaged public


Supported by