Reopening the process would only lead to further delay, resulting in the loss to the commonwealth and its taxpayers of hundreds of millions of dollars. Additionally, the city's five-year plan anticipates the receipt of gaming revenues, which would clearly not be achievable if the process was reopened.

The suggestion that these projects can simply be moved to another site fails to take into account the reality that hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent in acquisition, development, licensing and planning costs based on the good-faith reliance that the city and state would do what the current legislation requires them to do. What message do the city and the commonwealth send to prospective businesses when rules are changed in the middle of the game?

This proposed bill also ignores the Supreme Court's ruling that supports Foxwoods Casino's right to build and move the project forward.

The editorial wrongly accuses Foxwoods of not contributing to police costs associated with our resort. Under the Gaming Act, the $15 million Foxwoods would pay annually in host fees are intended to address the costs of added police. Foxwoods also negotiated for more than a year with the city on a development agreement that will, among other things, provide additional funds for policing. The city took additional police costs into consideration as it negotiated the agreement.

It's time to end the resiting discussion and begin another: When can Philadelphia and its residents start benefiting from its waterfront casinos?

James L. Dougherty
General manager
Foxwoods Casino Philadelphia