Why don’t Texans want a casino? It’s not the law, it’s the principle

One by one, residents of the Texas city of Irving stood up to voice their opposition to controversial plans for a new casino complex to open in their own backyard.

“We do not live in Las Vegas because we do not want to live in Las Vegas,” one man who described himself as a local educator said at the city’s planning and zoning commission meeting last Monday.

“This deal is a bad deal for Irving and what happens in Vegas has to stay in Vegas,” said another resident, during the six-hour-long meeting that rolled into the early hours Tuesday.

At a separate heated town hall event the week before, others held up signs saying “Don’t Vegas my Irving” as a casino lobbyist was booed and jeered for nearly two hours.

Despite the protests, at around 2:30 a.m. Tuesday, planning commissioners voted to recommend approval of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation’s plans to install a “destination resort” with a casino to the city council.

But ultimately the residents prevailed — at least for now.

Following immense public pressure, Sands announced Thursday it had removed the casino element from their proposal.

For the last month, Irving has been embroiled in a scrappy public fight over the proposal put forward by Sands, owned by Trump megadonor Miriam Adelson, who also has a majority stake in the Dallas Mavericks.

Sands bought the property and the land where the Texas Stadium used to stand in 2023. Now it wants to rezone it to be home to a new casino.

But aside from fierce opposition from many Irving residents, Sands has another major battle on its hands: gambling is illegal in the state of Texas.

The casino behemoth has been lobbying hard for gambling legalization in the state for years.

“Y’all can relax,” casino lobbyist Andy Abboud, the company’s senior vice president of government relations, told the unimpressed town hall last week. “It’s not even legal yet!”

But campaigners believe Sands is biding its time in order to achieve its end goal.

“They're facing some challenges at the state level, but they are playing the long game,” Irving city councilman Luis Canosa told The Independent. “They are lobbying very hard, spending tens of millions every year. And it doesn't matter for them if it gets legalized in 10 or 15 years, they still want to have the security that they have the rezoning, which once it's given, cannot be taken away.”

Texas has some of the most restrictive gaming laws in the U.S. and campaigners argue that greenlighting casinos would lead to a rise in domestic violence, gambling addiction and human trafficking.

To build its casino in Texas, Sands needs a Constitutional Amendment legalizing gambling at state level to pass and it needs Irving City Council to approve the zoning entitlements.

“They want to leave gaming open to establish a full predatory casino that extracts money from the working class, from hurting families, from addicts, from older people in Social Security checks that cannot afford to lose anything,” Canosa said. “It's going to be a machine to extract money from the working class people for the exclusive benefit of billionaire special interests.”

Canosa described Irving, a suburb of Dallas, as a place where people “from different walks of life coexist peacefully” and where many Texans have moved to raise a family.

At the tense town hall last week, Abboud from Sands was asked by a resident whether the company was considering alternative cities, such as Frisco, Arlington or Dallas, for its $4 billion development.

Read the full article on independant.co.uk