Manhattan Casino Bids for Caesars Times Square and The Avenir Rejected by CACs

Two of the downstate New York casino hopefuls are out of the race, as Caesars Palace Times Square and The Avenir saw their bids rejected by their respective Community Advisory Committees (CACs) on September 17.

Both CACs voted 4-2 against each proposal despite several members and both developers criticizing the accelerated timeline that forced final votes weeks before the September 30 deadline.

Many expected this outcome. New York City Council Member Erik Bottcher, Assembly Member Tony Simone, and Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine, all of whom had appointed CAC members on both committees, had come out against the bids before the votes.

Times Square Committee Rejects Caesars Bid

The short 12-minute meeting began with a review of a proposed amendment. It detailed a tentative agreement between the developers and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

The deal would have funded a new elevator to improve accessibility at the 49th Street subway station. It also supported circulation upgrades to subway lines 1, 2, 3, and 7. The committee rejected that amendment.

As the vote commenced, Laura Smith, the Mayor’s representative, voiced frustration that the meeting had been scheduled earlier than planned, cutting short the deliberations.

“By moving today’s vote forward, we have effectively lost nearly two weeks of deliberation,” she said, while voting yes.

Richard Gottfried, appointed by State Senator Liz Krueger, praised the openness of the process and the state-retained consulting firm. Still, he ultimately voted no.

The committee ended with four votes against and two in favor, disapproving of the Times Square proposal. Peter Hatch, the governor’s representative, was the other member voting in favor. Meanwhile, members Carl Wilson, Matthew Tighe, and Chris Carroll voted “no.”

This comes after two heated CAC hearings, one lasting six hours and the other seven. Both were the longest sessions among all applicants.

During the meetings, community voices were sharply divided. Supporters, including trade unions and business representatives, emphasized the importance of job creation and economic growth. Meanwhile, opponents, primarily Broadway and local residents, warned about the potential destruction of the theater industry, increased crime, and congestion.

After the vote, SL Green Realty chairman Marc Holliday lashed out at the committee members. He told them, “What you did here today was despicable,” according to Crain’s New York.

“The benefits you denied this community and this city and state — you have to live with that history forever,” he shouted.

Meanwhile, representatives from the Broadway theater industry celebrated in Times Square.

Hell’s Kitchen Panel Rejects The Avenir Bid

About an hour later, the CAC reviewing The Avenir in Hell’s Kitchen also voted 4–2 to reject its proposal, despite the developers’ extensive last-minute revisions.

Amendments presented at the meeting included expanding the housing commitment to 2,200 units with 550 affordable apartments (up from 500 initially promised), dedicating $100 million to cover potential housing shortfalls, pledging 75% of pre-tax casino revenue to community programs (estimated at $160 million over eight years), committing $90 million to MTA improvements, and setting local hiring targets of 4,200 NYC residents. The committee declined to approve the amendment, then voted down the overall application.

The two supporting votes came once again from the representatives of the Mayor and the Governor. Both Angel Vasquez and Nabeela Malik echoed Laura Smith’s concerns about the timeline of the vote. Vasquez said:

“At this moment in time, I believe that this vote should have been postponed. There are 13 days remaining until the deadline. There are nine full business days remaining until the deadline, and we were in conversations about the housing proposal up until last night, and those conversations are incomplete.”

Malik added: “By moving today’s vote forward, we have effectively lost nearly two weeks of deliberation… this accelerated timeline limits the opportunity for cooler evaluation and community discussion”.

The four no votes came from Quentin Heilbroner, Madeleine McGrory, Matthew Tighe, and Richard Gottfried. Notably, the latter two sat on both the Caesars and The Avenir CACs and rejected both proposals.

The Avenir bid had drawn deeply mixed reactions during earlier hearings. The usual argument for support was the job creation and a transformation of the area. Meanwhile, many residents opposed the project, fearing its impact on congestion and the neighborhood’s character.

The Avenir Requested a Postponement

Before the vote, The Avenir issued a statement urging the CAC to delay the meeting after receiving a “very significant additional request” from the committee late the previous night:

“Despite the Avenir team working in good faith throughout the process to respond to questions and concerns and amend our proposal as needed, last night at 10:50 p.m., the Community Advisory Committee made a very significant request, and our team has not been given a chance to consider this request before today’s vote. This action taints the CAC process, and today’s vote should be postponed.”

In an email sent to the committee at 9:36 a.m. on the day of the vote, the developers stated that they had submitted detailed answers to over 20 questions posed by the committee the previous week, only to receive the new request hours before the meeting. They requested a postponement of the vote so they could “continue to work with the CAC in good faith.”

Freedom Plaza Developers Tout Manhattan’s Remaining Bid

With the rejection of Caesars and The Avenir, only one Manhattan casino bid remains: Freedom Plaza on Manhattan’s East Side. Soloviev Group backs that project in partnership with Mohegan Gaming.

Soloviev Group CEO Michael Hershman issued a statement on Wednesday after the votes. He underscored what he described as the transformative scope of the $11 billion proposal:

“Our extensive planning process is reflective of input from neighbors, local leaders, and civic partners and considers how Freedom Plaza would not only fit into, but better our community… A transformative, generational piece of urban planning not seen in NYC in decades, Freedom Plaza embodies our core belief that development must serve the people who live, work, and visit here.”

Hershman noted that Freedom Plaza would include thousands of housing units, a large public park reconnecting the community to the waterfront, hotels, dining, and entertainment. The project will “power thousands of union jobs and generate revenues funding hundreds of millions in legally-binding community benefits.”

He added: “Despite the defeat today of two formidable applicants, we remain confident that one license should be awarded in Manhattan… It is the hope of all who support this worthy project… that our elected and appointed leaders will approve this collaborative plan.”

Freedom Plaza’s second CAC hearing, held earlier this week, saw a divided public response. A large part of the speakers applauded its scale and promised economic benefits. Opponents raised concerns about traffic impacts and proximity to hospitals and the United Nations headquarters.

The Freedom Plaza CAC has not yet scheduled a final vote meeting.

What’s Next

The double rejection of the Manhattan bids marks the first chapter in the next step of the casino race.

The remaining six candidates must receive CAC approval to advance to the state’s Gaming Facility Location Board. To move forward, a project must receive at least four affirmative votes from CAC members.

Notably, Resorts World New York City received unanimous support in both of its public hearings. Many expect it to move forward. The rest, including the two now rejected bids, sparked a division within the community. The common argument was the economic impact versus the impact on crime and congestion.

None of the six remaining bids has a final vote scheduled yet. Still, the September 30 deadline is looming as the pivotal moment that will decide which bids even reach the state board’s desk.