With key public hearings on casino expansion just days away, MGM Resorts International got a jump Monday by releasing some of its arguments for opening up the process to more competitors than just the operators of Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun.

MGM, the developer of a $950 million casino and entertainment complex in Springfield, has pushed for allowing more competitors to submit proposals to determine what would best benefit the state and bring in the most revenue.

"The numbers are clear and compelling, and they work," said Uri Clinton, senior vice president and legal counsel. "Connecticut, by establishing a competitive process and best practices, can expand the pie rather than merely re-slicing a shrinking pie."

A joint venture of the Mashantucket Pequots and Mohegans, the tribal operators of the state's two casinos in southeastern Connecticut, last week selected East Windsor as their preferred site for a satellite casino.

Supporters say the casino would respond to the competitive threat of MGM. It would help, they say, preserve Connecticut jobs tied directly and indirectly to the state's gaming industry and slow further erosion in the state's share of slot revenue.

The legislature still must approve the expansion of casino gaming off reservation lands, setting up the state's first commercial casino. On Thursday, the General Assembly's public safety and security committee will hold hearings on two bills: one that would allow the tribal joint venture to establish the third casino and the other that would open up the process to more competitors.

MGM said Monday a third casino should be at least $500 million, compared with the $200 million to $300 million the tribes say they will spend in East Windsor.

There also should be a $50 million nonrefundable license fee given to the state, plus a $15 million payment after a local referendum. Neither is contemplated currently, MGM said.

MGM also said the state could benefit financially from a competitive process. The bill that would allow the Mashantucket Pequots and Mohegans to establish the casino would require 25 percent of slot and all other gaming revenue to be paid to the state.

MGM says the state could do better. In Massachusetts, a casino similar to what is envisioned for East Windsor pays 49 percent of gaming revenue. MGM said it believes a larger casino in the southwestern corner of Connecticut could reap 27 percent to 35 percent of gaming revenue.

MGM said those percentages would offset any losses to state coffers if expansion of casino gaming jeopardized the monthly payments Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun make to the state. Those payments are made as part of an agreement in exchange for exclusive right to operate casinos in Connecticut.

MGM has said southwestern Connecticut would be a better location than north-central Connecticut and has expressed an interest in the area.

Critics say MGM has made that argument because it would place the casino the farthest possible from Springfield. MGM also cannot operate a competing casino within 50 miles of Springfield, a condition of its gaming license with Massachusetts.

MGM also is challenging in court the 2015 law that allowed the Mashantucket Pequots and Mohegans to search for a location in the Hartford area, arguing it excluded other potential casino operators. A federal court in Connecticut sided with the state, but MGM is appealing

Andrew Doba, a spokeman for the tribal joint venture, dubbed the bill that would open up the process to more competitors as the "MGM bill."

"The MGM bill is designed to protect MGM's interests, period," Doba said. "Any attempt to argue that they are somehow looking out for Connecticut is just laughable."