Twenty-seven Chicago City Council members have called on Bally’s to resume full construction of its planned $1.7 billion casino and entertainment complex in River West after the company slowed work on parts of the development due to a dispute over video gambling terminals.
The alderpersons sent a letter demanding a public hearing with Bally’s representatives and the Johnson administration, arguing that the construction slowdown could affect thousands of union jobs, planned economic benefits and commitments made under the Host Community Agreement between the company and the city.
As reported by CBS News, Bally’s announced that it was “resetting” the pace of construction after Chicago approved plans to introduce video gambling terminals in bars and other locations. The company argues that expanding video gambling outside its casino property could violate the agreement signed with the city in 2022.
The dispute has focused on non-gaming sections of the permanent casino development. While work on the casino area remains on schedule for an expected early 2027 opening, construction has slowed on the hotel, restaurants, event space and other planned amenities. Around 1,500 workers at the site were temporarily affected by the slowdown.
Council Challenges Bally’s Interpretation Of City Agreement
The council members argued that Bally’s obligations extend beyond opening the casino floor and include completing the wider entertainment complex promised to Chicago.
“Chicago did not enter into an agreement for a casino floor alone. It entered into an agreement for the complete development Bally’s promised to build. The Council expects Bally’s to deliver that project and expects the administration to enforce that commitment,” the alderpersons wrote.
They also stated that continuing casino construction while delaying other parts of the project does not remove Bally’s responsibilities under the Host Community Agreement. The letter noted that completion of the development depends on substantial progress across multiple components, including the hotel, retail areas, event facilities, exhibition space, greenspace and Riverwalk improvements.
The council members questioned whether Bally’s has enough financing available to finish the entire project and said taxpayers deserve clarity regarding the company’s ability to complete the development as originally planned.
The planned casino complex was expected to generate significant economic benefits for the city, including projected annual local tax revenue of $200 million. Bally’s previously committed to building a large-scale development featuring a hotel, entertainment venues, restaurants and gaming facilities.
Bally’s Defends Construction Decision Amid VGT Dispute
Bally’s has maintained that the slowdown resulted from concerns over Chicago’s decision to permit video gambling terminals. The company said expanding gaming options outside its property could affect the business model agreed upon with the city.
“We are looking forward to appearing before the City Council to speak to why we are resetting the construction schedule,” Bally’s Chicago said. “We understand and embrace our obligations under the Host Community Agreement for jobs and capital investment. We have held up, and will hold up, our end of the bargain.”
The company has also warned that the introduction of video gambling terminals could harm casino revenues and require discussions over parts of the existing agreement. Bally’s said Chicago’s decision creates uncertainty around the financial assumptions behind the project.
The company previously threatened legal action against the city, arguing that the 2022 agreement provided Bally’s with exclusive rights related to gaming expansion within Chicago. The council members responded that video gambling terminals have been authorized but are not yet operating, meaning Bally’s cannot claim an active violation of the agreement.
“There is no impact on Bally’s bottom line,” Ald. Brendan Reilly said, arguing that the dispute may be connected to the company’s financial situation rather than the immediate effect of video gambling.
Ald. Anthony Beale, who supported bringing video gambling terminals to Chicago, also questioned Bally’s explanation.
“We believe they don’t have the cash flow, and they’re blaming VGTs that are not even operational in the city of Chicago,” Beale said. “We need to get to the bottom of what is really going on. … If they cannot fulfill their obligation to the city, we need to be looking for another operator.”