Centre County’s proposed mini-casino could receive state OK this month — but delays still loom
After more than two years of questions, delays and debates, the proposed mini-casino in Centre County could finally receive approval from the state later this month — but, even then, other delays could be looming.
The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board will hear from the applicant of the Nittany Mall mini-casino — SC Gaming Op Co, LLC and owner Ira Lubert — in Harrisburg on Jan. 25. The board can choose to vote on approving the license then, or it could defer taking action while requesting more information.
If the board chooses to defer, there is no timetable for when it must ultimately issue a decision. “A vote occurs when the board is prepared to do so,” PGCB spokesperson Doug Harbach said.
But, even if the board does vote and approves the license, that still doesn’t guarantee construction starts in a timely manner.
Although the gaming control board can approve the license, it cannot issue the license until any appeals over the decision are settled. In other words, a competing casino operator that will be present Jan. 25 — Stadium Casino RE, LLC, which runs Live! Casino & Hotel Philadelphia — could choose to appeal an approval and, if it does, SC Gaming will be forced to wait a little longer.
It’s unknown how long the appeals process might take.
Another potential delay involves Stadium Casino’s pending lawsuit in Commonwealth Court against SC Gaming because it alleges the winner of the September 2020 casino license auction had ineligible partners. (Lubert, a Penn State alum, won that bid for $10,000,101. Stadium Casino was the losing bidder.) Attorneys for both SC Gaming and Stadium Casino filed their written arguments in March 2022, but they’re still awaiting a ruling.
While that shouldn’t have a direct bearing on the PGCB’s decision, it’s unknown what the court might rule and how that could impact Lubert’s plans. It’s possible — even if SC Gaming receives a license — that Lubert and Co. might choose to wait until that lawsuit is resolved before moving forward with the casino.
What’s the lawsuit about?
Four months after Lubert’s winning bid, Bally’s Corporation — which has no casinos in the Keystone State — announced it was partnering with Lubert to bring the $120 million mini-casino to the Nittany Mall.
Stadium Casino’s attorneys argued Lubert violated the gaming control board’s rules by partnering with Bally’s and others who would not be eligible to bid on the casino.
“The problem is not what happened at the bid,” Stadium Casino’s attorney said last month. “The problem is what happened after the bid, before the application.”
Lubert, who was eligible to bid, has denied the allegations. He paid for the bid from his personal bank account and his attorneys wrote in a filing that he is the sole owner.
SC Gaming’s attorney, Stephen J. Kastenberg, told the board that Stadium Casino’s legal challenges amounted to “sour grapes.” Stadium Casino’s attorney, Mark Aronchick, intimated it could take the courts two years to decide the case.
Bally’s announced in January 2021 that construction was expected to begin later that year and would take about one year to complete. Instead, construction has not yet started — and Bally’s has declined multiple requests for comment.
What’s going to happen Jan. 25?
The final agenda will not be released until Jan. 20 or Jan. 23. But, as it stands, three parties are set to speak — the applicant (SC Gaming), the PGCB’s Office of Enforcement Council and the intervenor (Stadium Casino).
This has no bearing on the lawsuit.
Stadium Casino’s request for discovery was rejected last month, so it cannot call witnesses and will be limited to 15 minutes to state its case on why SC Gaming’s application should be rejected.
There will be no public comment, as the comment period was open for 11 months and ended June 12 of last year.
“There will be an agenda item for a license vote consistent with the past practice of the board so that they are in a position to vote if they are comfortable doing so,” Harbach added. “However, simply because the final licensing hearing and a vote is on the agenda does not guarantee a vote taken.”
What would the casino look like?
The 94,000-square-foot anchor space at the mall — which Macy’s once occupied — would have up to 750 slot machines, 30 table games, a sports betting area, restaurant and bar.
According to officials, the casino would be expected to employ between 350 and 400 full-time equivalent positions. And, according to a consultant, College Township would likely stand to receive about $1.6 million during the casino’s first year of operation. (For comparison’s sake, the township’s annual General Fund Budget is about $10.5 million.)
A PGCB spokesperson previously told the CDT that the host municipality receives 2% of gross revenue from slot machines and 1% of table games. The same goes for the county. However, sports wagering revenue does not specifically go to a municipality or county.
Supporters of the proposed casino point to the economic benefits and the potential revitalization of the Nittany Mall, while more than 1,4000 have signed an online petition opposing the casino. Critics point to the potential for crime, strain on services, gambling issues for the vulnerable (e.g. Penn State students) and a community’s overall well-being.
The PGCB has so far denied only one mini-casino license, in Beaver County, and that came only after the winning bidder acknowledged it couldn’t finance the project.
CDT reporter Bret Pallotto contributed to this report
This story was originally published January 15, 2023 at 7:00 AM.
