With casino operators lobbying state lawmakers in private and the Capitol rumor mill churning, state Rep. Joe Verrengia, a West Hartford Democrat who co-chairs the legislature’s Public Safety and Security Committee, thought it would be wise to hold a forum on gambling before any bill authorizing commercial gaming in the state is drafted.

That’s just what the committee will do Thursday in Room 2E of the Legislative Office Building in Hartford, where the forum’s set to start at 11 a.m.

“In the interest of transparency, it’s an opportunity to see what the lay of the landscape is,” Verrengia said Monday. “I think we would be abdicating our responsibility if we were not to do this. Whatever we do with respect to the expansion of gaming, the state should look out for what’s in the best interest of the state and what’s the best deal out there.”

The forum’s scheduling comes with the Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan tribes close to choosing a site for a third Connecticut casino they hope to locate north of Hartford, where it would be expected to stem the migration of Connecticut gamblers to MGM Springfield, the $950 million resort casino being built in Massachusetts.

Representatives of the tribes, MGM and other “stakeholders” have been invited to the forum, Verrengia said. It’s intended for the benefit of lawmakers, not the public at large. If the committee ultimately proposes a bill, it would then conduct a public hearing.

About a half-dozen casino-related proposals have been referred to the committee since the legislative session began.

A spokesman for the tribes’ partnership, MMCT Venture, said tribal leaders plan to attend Thursday’s forum.

“We have tremendous respect for the legislative process and look forward to talking to the committee about our project,” Andrew Doba said.

He said MMCT hopes to announce its proposed third-casino site "in the near future." During a protracted selection process, the tribes narrowed a field of candidates to East Windsor and Windsor Locks, having weeks ago eliminated East Hartford, Hartford and South Windsor.

“How do we know if these are the best sites unless we hear from other people?” Verrengia said. “I’m not sure putting a casino in a tobacco field out in Windsor Locks is in the best interest of the state — in the best interest of the tribes maybe, but not the state. How are we to know as lawmakers unless we have this discussion?”

He said that while he’s open to the prospect of expanded gambling in the state, “What’s not lost on me is the fact that the Mohegans competed for a casino in Massachusetts.”

Both tribes unsuccessfully sought Massachusetts casino licenses.

The Mashantuckets and the Mohegans, respective owners of Foxwoods Resort Casino and Mohegan Sun, have long had the exclusive right to operate casinos in Connecticut in exchange for forwarding 25 percent of their slot-machine revenues to the state. Their casinos — considered tribal rather than commercial — are located on their reservations.

Should the state allow an operator other than the tribes to open a commercial casino elsewhere in Connecticut, the tribes would surely stop sharing their slots revenues.

“I’m solidly behind protecting our compacts with the tribes,” said Sen. Tim Larson, an East Hartford Democrat who also co-chairs the Public Safety and Security Committee.

He said he’s happy to listen to those who think the state ought to throw open its doors to commercial gaming interests but strongly supports the idea that only the Mashantuckets and the Mohegans should be allowed to pursue a third Connecticut casino.

“I for one am convinced that this is a great opportunity to protect our Connecticut jobs,” he said of the tribes’ joint effort.

MGM Resorts International, the Las Vegas-based gaming giant behind the Springfield project, issued a statement in which it embraced the upcoming forum.

“Legislators closely examining the full range of critical issues is an important step in the right direction,” said Alan Feldman, an MGM executive vice president. “At a time when Connecticut’s economy is still struggling to recover and with the state facing a massive budget deficit, it would seem prudent to want to maximize the number of jobs this project could create, as well as maximizing the amount of revenue for the state. It is equally important to carefully consider any other impacts to the state, such as added infrastructure and public safety costs, and all of those issues should also be investigated.

“… We look forward to contributing to this important conversation, and providing information that can be helpful to state legislators.”

A developer involved with the East Hartford casino pitch that the tribes eliminated from consideration is urging the committee to impose heftier taxes on the third casino than those levied on Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun.

Tony Ravosa, managing member of Silver Lane Partners, believes a 35 percent tax on a third casino’s slots revenue and a 15 percent tax on its table-games revenue would generate tens of millions of dollars a year that could help fund economic development projects in the Hartford area.

b.hallenbeck@theday.com