Chicago Casino Bidders Dragged Over The Coals In Selection Process

The protracted journey towards allocating a Chicago casino license attracted more drama on Monday, as local stakeholders scrutinized the three proposals still left standing. Aldermen, individuals empowered to represent local citizens throughout the bidding programme, highlighted a number of issues, and presented these on a Special Committee call on Monday.

Lawmakers in Illinois’ most populous city are hoping the establishment of a casino venue will provide much-needed funding to the state’s ailing pension purse. However, a series of challenges put forward by Chicagoans threatens to undermine progress, with nearby residents citing crime, traffic, and safety problems as primal concerns. Furthermore, local unionists have weighed in on the matter, expressing fear that certain proposals will bypass a labour peace agreement when creating workplace conditions. Jennie Bennett, the state’s chief financial advisor, has assured that all bidding concessionaries have been requested to consider labour organizations in their plans.

The process has also been subjected to a level of internal controversy, with operators alleging that Bally’s Corp has received preferential treatment throughout. This notion was supplemented by news of the company paying the $300k application fee required for each bid on just one occasion, despite submitting presentations for two, separate venues. This issue was further compounded when local firm Rush Street Gaming was told to pay two $300k sums, for their Rivers 78 and Rivers Farpoint bids.

The final sees Bally’s, Rivers (subsidiary of Rush Street Gaming), and Hard Rock battle it out, with Bally’s seemingly currently in pole position. Their pledge of a colossal upfront payment, the rapid establishment of a temporary venue to plug the construction time vacuum, and an ‘independence of operations’ from any other Bally’s site, may swing the vote in their favour.

Chairman of the group, the maverick Soo Kim, suggested that Bally’s bid was hailed as a potential leading contender on merit, and refuted any claims of preferential treatment given the company’s traditional operational base.

Kim stated, ‘’This is not our town. I think that every bidder has had a chance to put out what their best bid was, and I think we’ve taken advantage of it’’.