Times Square casino bid gets support from local union reps

In an unprecedented move, New York City labor officials have stated their commitment to build a Caesars Times Square casino, contingent upon state approval.

This past Wednesday, the New York State Gaming Commission conducted a virtual public comment hearing to discuss the proposed Caesars Palace Times Square project, brought forth by Caesars Entertainment in collaboration with SL Green and Jay-Z’s Roc Nation. A follow-up hearing is scheduled for May 28 at 5 PM local time.

The two-hour session marked an essential phase in the environmental review process. According to Robert Williams, Executive Director of the NYSGC, the commission classified the project as a “Type 1 action,” indicating potential environmental implications that necessitate a thorough review.

The main goal of the hearing was to gather public feedback from elected officials, community leaders, and residents as stakeholders work towards developing a draft environmental impact statement. This is just the beginning, with further input periods to come before the final environmental statement is submitted.

The Caesars proposal aims to transform the existing office tower at 1515 Broadway into a sprawling casino, hotel, and additional amenities, a project that will require comprehensive gutting and retrofitting if granted a casino license.

Casino bidders must submit their official applications to the state by June 27. Neither the commission nor project representatives provided a timeline for the environmental statement process. Once all bids are in, the commission will award up to three licenses before the year concludes.

Times Square: A Logical Choice for Casino Development

Robert Schiffer, Executive Vice President of Development for SL Green, initiated the hearing with a compelling presentation, asserting that Times Square represents the “logical choice” for New York City’s casino landscape, given its status as the heart of the city’s entertainment district.

Unlike many casinos designed to retain patrons indoors, this project is envisioned as a hub that enhances community engagement. Schiffer shared a visual representation of the urban grid, highlighting nearby dining, lodging, and transportation options that make this location incredibly advantageous.

Schiffer emphasized two pivotal points that resonated with speakers throughout the hearing: there will be no housing displacement, and construction disruptions will be minimal. While the project does not include housing facilities, its location in Times Square ensures existing residents remain unaffected. The repurposing of the existing structure will also significantly reduce construction timelines and noise pollution.

“Our team is dedicated to a New York-first, neighborhood-forward, sustainable approach,” asserted Schiffer.

Strong Support from Labor Representatives

During the public comment segment, a significant majority—approximately 75%—of speakers identified as union and labor officials, all of whom voiced robust support for the project due to its promise of construction and permanent job creation.

“This project is unique in guaranteeing a significant influx of new, well-paying union jobs,” one speaker proclaimed. “These jobs depend entirely on securing this license.”

Many argued that Manhattan is likely to secure one of the coveted licenses, considering three of the eight proposals are located there. Apart from Caesars Times Square, other contenders include Silverstein Properties’ Avenir project and Soloviev Group’s Freedom Plaza proposal.

Speakers posited that developments housed in other bids could pivot toward non-gaming uses in the future. However, they emphasized that the viability of the Caesars Times Square project is heavily reliant on acquiring the casino license, noting that its attractiveness as a potential development opportunity diminishes without it. Nearly all labor representatives praised Caesars and its partners for their collaborative efforts over the past several years.

Concerns from the Theatre Community

Opposition to the project emerged primarily from the theatre industry, which has consistently voiced concerns. Proponents argue that a casino aligns perfectly with the entertainment fabric of Times Square, while opponents contend that gambling does not complement the arts.

One speaker expressed apprehension about construction noise impacting rehearsals and matinees, raising concerns about traffic congestion that could hinder patrons’ access to performances.

A singular focus on responsible gambling was also highlighted by one participant, who warned of the potential financial distress that a casino could bring to local communities and vulnerable populations.

“Once individuals begin to lose money, support systems must be put in place to assist them,” he argued. “These negative impacts are often overlooked, and the casino’s profitability relies on extracting money from the community.”

The discussion continues as community stakeholders weigh the potential benefits against the risks associated with this high-stakes project in the heart of New York City.