Peoria Council Deadlocks on Casino Redevelopment Deal
Peoria Council Rejects Casino Upgrade Agreement
The Peoria City Council has refused to approve a proposed agreement that would have resolved the city’s opposition to a significant redevelopment of the Par-A-Dice casino in East Peoria. This decision has set the stage for a potential legal battle between the city and the casino owner.
Even Split Vote Blocks Casino Redevelopment Settlement
During a special session on Monday, the council was evenly divided with a 5-5 vote, and one member absent, which prevented the approval of a deal with Boyd Gaming, the Las Vegas-based company owning the Par-A-Dice Hotel Casino. The agreement aimed to allocate a portion of revenue from Boyd’s $160 million casino and hotel renovation to Peoria, an arrangement reported by local media.
The proposal would have awarded Peoria approximately 2.25% of the adjusted gross revenue from the upgraded casino, potentially earning the city around $1.8 million. This would be in addition to the existing revenue-sharing framework where Peoria and East Peoria split local gaming taxes.
Historical Agreement Fuels Dispute Over Casino Classification
The controversy centers on a 1991 agreement between Peoria and East Peoria that designates East Peoria for riverboat casinos, while Peoria is entitled to any permanent, land-based gambling establishments. Boyd Gaming plans to replace the riverboat casino with a new land-based facility adjacent to the current location. Although the company refers to the project as an “updated riverboat,” the design includes a small artificial pool beneath part of the building, raising questions about whether it still qualifies as a riverboat under the agreement.
Legal Battle Looms After Deal Collapse
Council members who opposed the deal argued that Boyd Gaming acquired the Par-A-Dice property fully aware of the existing agreement and should comply with its terms. They believe Peoria has a solid legal position and suggested that rejecting the current offer might prompt Boyd to propose improved terms later.
Conversely, proponents of the agreement, including Mayor Rita Ali, highlighted the potential financial risks of prolonged litigation. City attorneys cautioned that contesting approval from the Illinois Gaming Board could drag on for years and incur legal costs exceeding $1 million if the case reaches the state’s highest court. They also noted that even a favorable court ruling would not guarantee Boyd Gaming would relocate the casino to Peoria or proceed with reconstruction.
Supporters viewed the proposed payments as a pragmatic compromise, arguing that receiving guaranteed revenue now was preferable to the uncertainty and expense of a lengthy court dispute. With the proposal now rejected, Peoria faces a choice: renegotiate with Boyd Gaming or prepare for legal action. Meanwhile, the Illinois Gaming Board will soon review Boyd’s redevelopment plans, a decision that will significantly influence the future dynamics between the neighboring cities.
