Chavdar Vasilev is a journalist covering the casino and sports betting market sectors for CasinoBeats. He joined CasinoBeats in May 2025 and reports on industry-shaping stories across the US and beyond, including legislative debates, market...
Read Full BioThe Caesars Palace Times Square casino proposal held its second Community Advisory Committee (CAC) hearing on September 11, which lasted six hours and drew more than 200 speakers, split over whether it would revive or ruin Times Square.
The hearing was slightly shorter but no less charged than the project’s first hearing, which lasted over seven hours. Together, they stand out as far longer and more heavily attended than any other bid’s CAC meetings so far, showcasing the division among the community.
The Times Square project, backed by SL Green Realty, Caesars Entertainment, and Roc Nation, is one of eight contenders for three downstate casino licenses. Each must hold two CAC hearings before the committee votes on whether to advance it to the New York State Gaming Facility Location Board.
Developer Launches Offensive on Broadway League
The session began with a presentation by the development team, which turned into an offensive against opponents, such as The Broadway League. They positioned the bid as a once-in-a-century chance to transform Times Square.
Marc Holliday, CEO of SL Green, called the bid a “labor of love for five years.” He added that it had “the singular ability to transform lives.” He accused The Broadway League of waging “an underhanded smear campaign.” The League recently backed a campaign that has placed anti-casino messages in the playbills of Broadway shows.
Holliday claimed supporters “outnumbered opponents more than two to one in the last hearing.”
Former New York City Police Department commissioner Bill Bratton insisted the project would “make Times Square the safest commercial district in the world.”
He added: “The idea that a five-star gaming resort is going to attract crime and prostitution is not based in fact… It has not happened. It will not happen. And I can guarantee it would not happen.”
Desiree Perez, CEO of Roc Nation, said the plan would “make Times Square pulse with life again.”
Civil rights activist Al Sharpton, who’s backing the bid, spoke about Roc Nation’s involvement as a matter of diversity.
“There is not one Black or brown owner of a Broadway theater in 2025. Not one,” Sharpton said. “Jay-Z is nobody’s token. He’s the token booth.“
Supporters: Jobs, Safety, and Revival
Some residents, union leaders, and arts figures testified in favor of the jobs, investment, and security funding the project would bring.
Mike Hellstrom, vice president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America and a member of Local 79, said the Caesars bid is “shovel-ready,” meaning it would immediately put “thousands of construction workers on the job.”
He stressed the decision “should be made on an Albany level,” urging the CAC to let it advance: “We are ready to go to work, and thousands of construction workers will be able to put food on their table as we revitalize Times Square.”
That argument was echoed by Matt Goldman, co-founder of Blue Man Group, who told the committee: “There are eight legitimate bids. Three are going to get the licenses. I implore the committee to let this get to the state level.”
Carlos, Hell’s Kitchen resident, emphasized the jobs the project would bring:
“I live two blocks from Times Square… and I support this project because it’s going to bring steady work back to this neighborhood. I’ve seen storefronts sit empty for years since the pandemic. We need something bold to jumpstart this area again, and this could be it.”
Eric, also a Hell’s Kitchen resident, said: “I say hell yeah for a casino in Times Square… Broadway is for profit as well… A casino could bring investment for better transit, traffic management, and safer streets.”
Another resident, Nar, added: “It’s more about steady paychecks, more opportunities, and giving local businesses a boost.”
Opposition: Culture, Community, and Fear of Decline
Opponents outnumbered supporters. Many, including Broadway workers and residents of Hell’s Kitchen, delivered emotional testimonies.
Ben Simpson, a Broadway worker, said: “We already have a jackpot in Times Square — it’s called the theater district. A casino would not uplift our community; it would overshadow it.”
Dylan, a resident and IATSE member, said: “Casinos are exploitative… They are designed to keep people inside. It will increase traffic congestion. I believe any economic impact to the community will fall embarrassingly short of projections… Rome burned while Nero fiddled, and Times Square will burn while Caesar fiddles.”
Chris Brockmeyer of the Broadway League reminded the committee: “Any threat to our industry is a threat to the health care and retirement security of thousands of people who work on Broadway.”
Danny Whitman, executive director of Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS and a resident of Manhattan Plaza, called a Times Square casino “a horrible idea for Broadway and our residents.”
Whitman warned the project would cannibalize a thriving industry, increase traffic, and “deliver fewer jobs than other bids, ranking just sixth out of eight proposals. Broadway employs 100,000 New Yorkers. Why put those at risk?”
Bill Huner of Local 764 told the committee: “I worked Lion King at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas… they had to cut 20 minutes off a Tony Award-winning Broadway show to get people back out on the floor to gamble… They are not doing this out of the kindness of their heart. They’re doing it to make a profit.”
Jason Lax, president of the Broadway League, said the developers “smeared Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS” and noted: “They are promising 3,000 construction jobs… out of eight casino bids, that’s dead last… For permanent jobs, Caesars comes in sixth out of the eight bids.”
A Marathon Hearing Highlights Deep Divisions
More than 200 people spoke during the September 11 session. The opposition far outnumbered supporters as Broadway workers, theater unions, and Hell’s Kitchen residents filled most of the lineup. Meanwhile, pro-casino voices came mainly from construction unions, cultural figures, and a handful of residents.
Unlike the first hearing, the second session was more controlled. Still, it was no less emotionally charged. The marathon sessions expose how entrenched the two sides are.
In one corner, a promise of economic revival, including $26 billion spillover revenue for nearby businesses and millions more visitors. In the other, fears of cultural cannibalization and community destruction.
