PG County Casino Question: Does the Location Really Matter? (College Park: attorney, homes)

[UrbanScholar]

Another article came out related to location and bidder incentives. It discusses what Parx proposed at the meeting. I think it would be something to consider IF they didn't require the state to pay them back the cost of interchange construction over 100M. Especially something that benefits them more than the state/county and would not be completed prior to the phased casino opening.

Don’t worry too much for Greenwood, however. The company’s offer contains a provision that it recoup any costs above $100 million via the assignment of local impact grant funding designated for Indian Head Highway improvements. Essentially, a percentage of the proceeds generated by Parx casino slots would be returned to Greenwood to cover the costs of the interchanges.

Parx also claims that by paying for construction they would be making the largest investment but that is not true if the state has to pay them back. It like hearing a pitch from a car salesman....I hate those types of pitches. Another point that is being underplayed is that is being underplayed is the fact that theirs is a phased opening instead of a single phase like MGM and Penn. That means that they will build the casino first with any other amenities like the event venue, hotel, restaurants (they are not proposing retail), until after road construction is done (potentially after 2020). Something I am not in favor of.

That said, with $200 million, the company argues that Parx Maryland now offers the highest level of capital investment ($965 million to MGM’s $925 million), the highest gaming tax rate, the highest license fee, the most slot machines (4,750 at full buildout) and the most tax revenue to the state.

Parx ups ante on Prince George's County casino bid with MGM seen as frontrunner - Washington Business Journal

[justtitans]

That definitely is important if they have to pay back that money or not. I heard different versions of what was supposed to be the case of them helping. I agree that MGM seems like they make the most sense, just started wondering if there was a chance the state would consider the other choices by any shot. I do have concerns about the amount of money that will still have to be brought up to accommodate the MGM location as well as getting money to fix 210.

[UrbanScholar]

Originally Posted by pgtvatitans

That definitely is important if they have to pay back that money or not. I heard different versions of what was supposed to be the case of them helping. I agree that MGM seems like they make the most sense, just started wondering if there was a chance the state wnould consider the other choices by any shot. I do have concerns about the amount of money that will still have to be brought up to accommodate the MGM location as well as getting money to fix 210.

Definitely,if they were truly doing a good will gesture, repayment wouldn't be a part of the equation and the impact funds could be used to complete the remaining interchanges. Aside from other factors, the one thing I can appreciate about MGM's proposal(from what I have read/heard) is that its pretty detailed and addresses pretty thorough based on the information available.

The others have stated that they would provide these incentives but they don't provide a concrete plan as to how that would work. That level of ambiguity makes me uncomfortable given that the license wouldn't be renewed for 15 years.

In regards to Parx last minute assertion, I am not surprised that you heard another version since they said the repayment part under their breath (so to speak).

[UrbanScholar]

As a point of reference, below you will find a breakdown of what they are supposed to consider when evaluating a license. This has been my reference as well. What I find interesting is that the incentives that Penn National and Parx propose only impact the lessor weighted categories. Even if they ace their respective impacted criteria (not likely given the other factors in those categories), they would have to be the lead bidder in the B&M Factors Category. As of right now they would not be according to the draft studies presented last week.

Category and Evaluation Criteria Weight

BUSINESS & MARKETING FACTORS 70%

(i) The highest potential benefit and potential prospective revenue …
to be derived by the State;

(ii) The potential revenues from a proposed location based on a market
analysis;

(iii) The extent to which the proposed location encourages Maryland
gaming participants to remain in the State;

(iv) The extent to which the proposed location demonstrates that the
facility will be a substantial regional and national tourist destination;

(v) The proposed facility capital construction plans and competitiveness
of the proposed facility;

(vi) The amount of gross revenues to be allocated to the video lottery
operator over the term of the license;

(vii) The percent of ownership by entities meeting the definition of
minority business enterprise under title 14, Subtitle 3 of the State
Finance and Procurement Article;

(viii) The extent to which the proposed location will preserve existing
Maryland jobs and the number of new jobs to be created; and

(ix) The contents of the licensee's plan to achieve minority business
participation goals in accordance with the requirements described
under § 9-1A-10(a)(1) and (2) of this subtitle.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FACTORS 15%

(i) The anticipated wages and benefits for new jobs to be created;

(ii) Any additional economic development planned in the area of the
proposed facility.

LOCATION SITING FACTORS 15%

(i) The existing transportation infrastructure surrounding the proposed
facility location;

(ii) The negative impact, if any, of a proposed facility location on the
surrounding residential community; and

(iii) The need for additional public infrastructure expenditures at the
proposed facility.


Source: MLC

[adelphi_sky]

MGM has the better brand recognition, the best location, and those two factors are the reason it will produce more revenue. If MD chose Parx, they will be choosing second best for improved intersections that would benefit Parx anyway. MGM will get the bid.

[justtitans]

Okay so let's assume adelphi is right (which I am sure most agree that MGM gets this). What do you all think will realistically be done with the surrounding infrastructure near the site and what do you think will happen to the losing sites?

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by pgtvatitans

Okay so let's assume adelphi is right (which I am sure most agree that MGM gets this). What do you all think will realistically be done with the surrounding infrastructure near the site and what do you think will happen to the losing sites?

Nothing. Oxon HIll RD may get some improvements. But like the study said, for MGM, most of the infrastructure is there. They practically wouldn't have to lift a finger in that regard.

As far as the other sites, nothing is keeping Penn National from creating a more luxurious track facility with restaurants, hotel, etc. Nobody said they couldn't creat a resort oriented to those who love horses. Parx will leave their property empty of course and sell it to some developer who may try to turn it into a cute shopping center.

[UrbanScholar]

Originally Posted by pgtvatitans

Okay so let's assume adelphi is right (which I am sure most agree that MGM gets this). What do you all think will realistically be done with the surrounding infrastructure near the site and what do you think will happen to the losing sites?

Well, as mentioned indirectly, there is a impact fund that will receive a percentage of the revenues from the casino that will support road improvements to the area within a 5 mile radius of the site. Although MGM stated that changes to the existing roadways would be minimum, they have said that they would be willing to fund roadway improvements directly related to the project. What they have already agreed to do is the reconfigure Harborview and National Drive (roads adjacent to the subject property) into a circular drive.

What this means that individuals entering from 495/295 would enter onto Harborview road and take a loop to exit back out the same way. Individuals entering from Oxon Hill Road (which is calculated at about 10%) would enter the property from National Drive. Effectively National Drive and Harborview would become one way streets which would increase the number of roads for each to four lanes. My assumption is that two would be for local access into the casino and the other two would be for people continuing on to Tanger Blvd/Oxon Hill Road. There is also an entrance ramp to 210 going north (?) called "E3" i believe that will provide access to 210. I don't know of or think it woould be possible/practical to further reconfigure Oxon Hill Road. I also don't think adding another rampe to 495 or 295 would add value or ease congestion to the proposed casino.

As for what will happen to the properties of the losing bidders? Penn National has threatened on several occassions that they would close if they don't get the license. I think that eventually they would sell the property and it will become some type of mixed use development (with or without the racetrack as an anchor). The Parx propoerty has so many limitations that I don't see it immediately becoming something else. I do eventually see it becoming some type of residential or mixed use. I think if a developer was smart, they would acquire that land, Livingston Square, the undeveloped land on the corner of livingston and oxon hill and the strip mall next to it (with the dominos) and create some type of mixed use development with retail, residents, and some office space to become a downtown district for Fort Washington.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

Since this thread is related to the evaluation of the proposed applicants I decided to post this update here. Below is the number for the second meeting that will be held via teleconference on Thursday. It will be listen-only for the public and the applicants but may answer some of the questions left from their first meeting. I know that the applicants were supposed to provide some revisions or additional explanations for parts of their proposal so we will see how that goes.


December 12: Public Conference Call with Consultants and Applicants

The conference call will begin at 3:30 p.m. EST
Call-in number is 855-274-6187 (Conference ID number is 22966984)

This will be an opportunity for Commissioners to ask for additional research from the consultants or ask additional questions of the applicants.


December 20: Discussion and Decision Meeting

10:00 a.m., First Floor Auditorium, 1800 Washington Blvd, Baltimore, MD

Follow up presentations from consultants/applicants
Commission discussion and decision

Reminder. Conference call is today.

[UrbanScholar]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Reminder. Conference call is today.

Already have it in my calendar and block meeting requests for that time LOL.