Published on: September 12, 2024, 07:42h.
Last revised on: September 12, 2024, 07:42h.
Las Vegas Sands’ proposal to transform Nassau Coliseum into a casino resort is facing criticism from organizations and some local inhabitants who believe the project could harm the environment.
This week, opponents and proponents of the Long Island casino scheme voiced their opinions to the Nassau County Legislature. Public input is crucial as some opposing factions previously accused the county and the gaming company of conducting secretive dealings. Last year, the New York State Supreme Court determined that the lease transfer arrangement for the coliseum between the county and Sands violated state open meeting laws.
Although Nassau County is offering more opportunities for residents to support or express concerns about the casino project, certain groups argue that the construction of an integrated resort might violate New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA).
“The plethora of detrimental impacts of this extensive casino are evidently irreparable and should have guided any decisions on land management,” stated Say No To The Casino, a civic group that has long opposed the project, in a press release. “The SEQRA process should have not only been completed before entering into any lease with Las Vegas Sands, but also encompassed the effects of the $4B NYU Langone proposal at Nassau Community College.”
The organization additionally mentioned that a recent study highlighted the threat to Long Island’s drinking water supply posed by climate change and excessive pumping — scenarios that would be exacerbated by the construction of a large-scale casino resort.
Environmental Evaluation of Sands Long Island Casino Plan
The ongoing environmental assessment is critical to Sands’ Long Island casino aspirations on various fronts, including the fact that, under New York law, the lease transfer for Nassau Coliseum between the county and the gaming company cannot be finalized until the review is finished.
Swift completion of the evaluation is crucial for another reason. If the process is not concluded before the state opens the bidding process for the three downstate casino licenses, LVS may be excluded from that process until the review is completed.
Furthermore, if the evaluation reveals issues and vulnerabilities, the county and Sands could collaborate to address those concerns provided the process is expedited.
Regarding time constraints, Nassau County and Sands may benefit from having time on their side because it seems increasingly probable that there will be no action on opening the bidding process for the three downstate licenses until at least mid-2025.
Allegations of ‘Environmental Racism’
Climate and environmental considerations are inherent in new casino resort projects, and this holds true regardless of the location.
It is common for groups opposing such projects to utilize environmental concerns to reinforce their arguments. Say No To The Casino may be employing this tactic and is bringing attention to risks to minority communities arising from the casino plan.
“We find it ironic that the same politicians who claim to want to ‘Save Our Suburbs’ are among the most vociferous advocates for imposing the country’s second-largest casino, and the countless long-term adverse environmental, economic, and social consequences, on our community,” as per the group. “The vulnerable minority communities surrounding the HUB would bear the brunt of the impact. Erecting this casino would be nothing short of environmental racism.”