Law Change May Hasten Philly Casino

Pennsylvania state Rep. Scott Petri has introduced a bill that would eliminate the gaming law prohibition involving multiple casino ownership, to defeat appeals against a South Philadelphia casino.

Pennsylvania state Rep. Scott Petri, who is chairman of the House Gaming Oversight Committee, is looking to jump-start the anticipated groundbreaking on Philadelphia’s second casino by eliminating the gaming law provision that is the basis of appeals against the award of the license to the Stadium Gaming partnership.

Stadium Gaming is a partnership of Baltimore-based Cordish Companies and Greenwood Gaming, owner of the Parx Casino at Philadelphia Park in Bensalem, the most profitable casino in Pennsylvania. The license for the city’s second and last casino was awarded for a casino in the city’s sports stadium district, carrying the Cordish “Live!” brand. An existing Holiday Inn will be refurbished to create a boutique hotel connected to the casino.

The award of the license—as has every other casino license in Pennsylvania—was appealed by one of the losing bidders, in this case, Market East Associates, to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The appeal was joined by SugarHouse Casino, the current Philadelphia casino, which has opposed any second casino in the city.

With 12 casinos operating, no award of a casino license by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board has ever been overturned on appeal from losing bidders. However, in this case, the court has ordered the board to re-examine the ownership structure of Stadium Casino to assure the participation of Greenwood does not violate the gaming law’s restrictions on multiple casino ownership. The law states that no licensee that owns more than 85 percent of one casino can own more than a third of a second property.

Since Greenwood owns Parx, the law would forbid the company from owning more than 33.3 percent of the Philadelphia Live! project. The court directed the board to verify the ownership stakes in Stadium Casino.

Petri’s bill would eliminate the ownership limitations in the gaming law. “The one-and-one-third rule is really an archaic provision,” Petri told the Philadelphia Inquirer. “The gaming board would like it removed, so that’s what the bill does.”