Dan Haar: Tribes start East Windsor demolition but casino could be eight years away
EAST WINDSOR — It’s fun when bulldozers tear down useless buildings, and that’s what the Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan tribes started doing up in East Windsor on Monday as they plan a casino at the site of movie theater that never should have been built.
Too bad they’re not blowing up the old Showcase Cinemas; that would have made better pictures.
When will the casino open? The chairmen of the tribes said it will happen in 24 months. In fact, it could take eight years to slog through two federal lawsuits, financing and actual construction.
Consider: Monday was also the day the state and the tribes were due to file briefs in a federal lawsuit against the Department of the Interior in their effort to win final approval of changes to the state’s 25-year-old compact with the tribes. That case is a reminder that the tribes — operating jointly as MMCT Venture — are nowhere near being able to build the casino along I-91.
The eight-year figure is based on a realistic timeline if the lawsuits dragging on, which is exactly what MGM Resorts International wants to see as the Las Vegas company opens its MGM Springfield Casino this fall. We don’t know what the gaming landscape will even look like in six or eight years.
Why so long? First, we’re talking about the tribes and the state suing a Trump administration that seems opposed to the change, although the tribes, the governor and Connecticut’s U.S. senators all say the change is legally sound.
Then we’re looking at MGM re-filing its 2015 lawsuit claiming the state violated its constitutional right to bid on the proposal.
Recall, the U.S. Court of Appeals in New York threw out that lawsuit, saying MGM didn’t have standing because Connecticut hadn’t granted MMCT a license. Well, now MMCT has that license and MGM most likely has standing and can file the lawsuit — after the current federal squabble over approval ends, perhaps in 2019 or 2020.
That MGM lawsuit could easily take three years. Then MMCT, if it wins or settles favorably, could line up financing to build East Windsor. And that $300 million project could take a couple of years to open just from that point.
The mood was bright under a partly sunny sky at the site on Monday, as a crowd of union workers and politicians watched the bulldozers take their bites.
Kevin Brown and Rodney Butler, the tribal chairmen of the Mohegan Tribe and the Mashantucket Tribal Nation, respectively, not only declared a two-year timeline to actually open — based on the tribes moving ahead despuite the lawsuits — but also promised they will hire at least 350 people from Hartford, 150 from East Hartford and 175 from surrounding towns.
Jobs are the calling card. Later this week, lawmakers in the General Assembly will hear comments on a new bill that would revoke the East Windsor license and open casino development to bids — from MMCT, MGM, Wynn, Caesar’s or you and me.
MGM hopes that will lead to approval of its $675 million plan for Bridgeport, a sensible place to build a casino considering proximity to New York. But the open-bidding bill, a.k.a. the MGM bill, has a low chance of passing as long as it revokes the East Windsor casino license. They’re asking a majority of the House and Senate to undo what they did last year in a bitterly fought bill in which MMCT promised jobs and revenue for Connecticut. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Norwalk Zoning Commission demands cleanup before granting Highpointe extension
Kimberly Glassman
NORWALK — A developer has 30 days to clean up zoning violations caused by a local contractor or he’ll lose his city approvals to build 278 apartments along High Street in central Norwalk.
Highpointe Holding, LLC, an affiliate of Waypointe developer Belpointe Capital, requested a one-year extension to build Highpointe East and Highpointe West, but city zoning commissioners this month responded by saying fix the violations first or no dice.
Commissioner Louis Schulman distinguished between Vona Masonry, the property owner, and Highpointe Holding, the developer and contracted buyer, before withholding his support of the requested extension.
“I’m concerned that when people violate the regulations there needs to be a price to pay for that, that we sometimes make it too easy for people who don’t follow the rules — and I’m not saying in this case it’s necessarily the developer,” Schulman said. “So I am not willing today to approve this request, as it currently stands, that is a one-year extension.”
At issue is the storage of trucks and earth fill by Vona Masonry on the former VFW property at 48 High St. as well as unapproved modifications to a garage structure on the west side of High Street, according to the Norwalk Department of Planning and Zoning.
Schulman said he wants to see “substantial good faith” by the developer, working with the property owner. He said he’s willing to approve the one-year extension provided all remediation is completed within 30 days. “And if not, then it will not be approved and you’ll have to start the process over again,” he added.
Jacqueline Kaufman, the attorney representing Highpointe Holding before the commission at City Hall on Thursday evening, described the condition as “fair” and said the attorney representing Vona had spoken with his client and is “committed to a 30-day period.”
“At your next meeting,” Kaufman said, “I’m happy to appear to submit a letter that will confirm that improvements that have been made between now and, I believe, your next meeting is March 21.” Thomas Vetter, the Norwalk attorney representing Vona Masonry, said Monday that he was working with the zoning department and doesn’t foresee a problem in resolving the violations within the 30-day period.
Zoning approvals are valid for one year, and developers frequently seek extensions when they’re unable to break ground in the first year. The Highpointe extension, if granted, would mark the second one-year extension since the plan was approved two years ago.
“We are still in process of working with the city for certain overlay zones and grants that will enable the financing for this project,” Kaufman said.
In February 2016, zoning commissioners approved plans for Highpointe East and Highpointe West — 278 apartments in six-story buildings with street-level retail space along High Street, Main Street and Route 1. Belpointe Capital partner Paxton Kinol expressed hope that demolition would begin in the first half of 2017 followed by new construction that summer.
Kinol on Monday presented the approved development as a permanent resolution of zoning violations. “There were numerous zoning violations on the site for many years and a long history of back and forth with the city before we came along. We offered a solution which was to approve a new development on the land and incentivize the land owners to sell rather than continue the conflict,” Kinol said in an email. “I believe the current approvals will do that. I also believe that extending the approvals, to allow time for the closing to happen and construction to start, is in everyone's best interests.”
Withholding an extension of the approval, Kinol continued, would “put us and the city right back where we were a few years ago before this process began.”
PLAs good for construction industry
On Feb. 12, an op-ed in the HBJ ("State must end project labor agreements") by the Connecticut chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors presented an over-simplified and inaccurate description of project labor agreements.
A project labor agreement, or PLA, is a pre-hire agreement that sets construction project employment terms. They're often used on complex projects that require the services of multiple contractors and subcontractors over a sustained period of time. PLAs are a common procurement method for the state of Connecticut, municipalities and private developers.
The Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) likes to tout their membership numbers. However, they represent only 1 percent of construction companies in the United States. According to the National Labor College, a meager 22,260 apprentices were enrolled in ABC programs, compared to over 420,000 apprentices enrolled in union-funded programs.
Though we appreciate ABC's attempt to paint the use of PLAs as a partisan issue by invoking Gov. Malloy's decision to utilize the agreements, they fail to disclose other elected leaders' use of them. Republican Mayor Mark Boughton recently signed a PLA for Danbury High School. Former Republican Mayor John Harkins signed PLAs for both the Victoria Soto Elementary School and Stratford High School. And former Gov. John Rowland signed a historic PLA on Adriaen's Landing in Hartford.
There is nothing that precludes non-union contractors from bidding on a PLA project. Federal law prohibits employers from discriminating against employees based on union membership. Rather than offer a weak argument for outlawing PLAs as a procurement method, we should ask why ABC and non-union contractors don't compete for those projects.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2006 Survey, only 21 percent of workers in the non-union sector of the U.S. construction market were receiving retirement benefits. That's abysmal.
Under a PLA, all contractors are required to abide by collective bargaining agreements to meet the needs of a specific project. Those agreements dictate wages and benefits, like health insurance and retirement plans. Other important aspects might include provisions for utilizing apprentices, local hiring goals, set-aside goals for minority and women-owned businesses, and a commitment to utilize returning veterans through programs like "Helmets to Hardhats."
PLAs in Hartford and New Haven have provided secure job opportunities for local residents. Absent these agreements, residents are often overlooked for employment on projects being built in their own community. The local hiring goals specified in PLAs have contributed to millions of dollars being recycled into Connecticut's economy.
ABC argues that PLAs raise the cost of construction. Yet studies by UCLA, Cornell and other leading institutions have concluded that there is simply no evidence to back up this claim. UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education published a study in 2017 that found that PLA projects have more bidders and lower bids than non-PLA projects.
If PLAs raised the cost of construction, then profit-oriented corporations wouldn't consistently use them. Corvus Capital Partners LLC just signed a PLA on the Bridgeport Cherry Street Lofts and the Bridgeport Landing Development LLC signed a PLA for the Steel Pointe Harbor project.
ABC referenced an erroneous 2009 study published by right-wing think tank Beacon Hill Institute (BHI) at Suffolk University. It's worth noting that BHI and Suffolk University severed ties in 2016. In 2015, The Guardian reported that BHI is associated with ultra-conservative groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the Koch Brothers.
To call for the repeal of an entire procurement method simply on the grounds that an infinitesimal segment of non-union contractors don't like having to pay area standard wages and into benefit funds is disingenuousness.
Kimberly Glassman is the director of the Foundation for Fair Contracting of Connecticut.