By Casey Smith
Indiana Capital Chronicle
A heavily amended casino relocation proposal advanced out of the Indiana Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday, sending to the chamber floor an ongoing debate over where the state’s next casino should land — and who gets to decide.
House Bill 1038 cleared the committee in an 8-5 vote, with some bipartisan opposition, after senators approved a lengthy amendment that allows a new Fort Wayne-area casino without the closure of the embattled Rising Star Casino in southeastern Indiana.
Several senators supported the bill only conditionally, saying they could oppose it later if concerns over casino siting decisions and the bill’s potential long-term fiscal impacts aren’t resolved.
The bill leaves three existing off-track betting facilities in place — in New Haven, Indianapolis and the Clarksville area — while restructuring the state’s remaining unused racing licenses as part of a broader effort to avoid expanding Indiana’s total number of gaming licenses.
Lawmakers are seeking to convert one of the two unused off-track betting licenses held by the Indiana Horse Racing Commission into a full casino gaming license, to be regulated instead by the Indiana Gaming Commission. The second unused off-track betting license would be terminated outright under the amended bill.
Senate Appropriations Chair Ryan Mishler, R-Mishawaka, said the move avoids a net-increase in the number of gaming licenses statewide.
Per the amended bill, the converted license would be located in northeast Indiana, which Mishler framed as an attempt to minimize financial harm to existing casinos — and the state budget — while expanding access in an “open pocket” region.
“This is a highly regulated industry, and it’s not free-market,” Mishler said Thursday. Indiana’s casino licenses, he emphasized, are “state assets” that must be deliberately placed to avoid costly ripple effects across the gaming system.
The Senate’s plan is a major change to a House-endorsed bill authorizing transfer of the license for Indiana’s lowest-performing casino from the Ohio River city of Rising Sun now held by Las Vegas-based Full House Resorts.
Who could apply — and what it would cost
The Senate amendment also broadens eligibility for the new license, allowing any casino operator in the United States to apply, rather than limiting applicants to companies already operating in Indiana.
To accommodate the expanded applicant pool — and allow regulators more time for vetting — the bill moves the application deadline up one month, from Dec. 1 to Nov. 1.
The proposal additionally sets a $150 million license fee, with $50 million spread over five years dedicated to a newly created “distressed casino fund.” That fund would be used to support local governments if a casino were to close outright in the future.
The bill maintains an existing requirement that any successful applicant commit to at least $500 million in capital investment.
If a casino does shut down — rather than being sold — the license would be terminated, Mishler explained, not returned to the state as a “floating” license that could later be redeployed elsewhere.
But the most debated part of the rewrite centered around where the casino could go — and where it could not.
The amendment removed eastern Indiana’s Wayne County from consideration and does not include Marion County, despite Indianapolis’ revenue potential. Mishler said those decisions were driven by concerns over “hold harmless” payments, which compensate existing casinos for documented revenue losses tied to new competition.
Northeast Indiana, he said, presents a different competitive landscape. Much of the pressure in that region comes from Michigan casinos, not other Indiana facilities.
“This is not a shot at Wayne County,” Mishler told the committee, stressing that the decision was “location-based” and not intended to be punitive.
Still, the exclusions of those counties frustrated multiple lawmakers on the committee.
That included Sen. Aaron Freeman, R-Indianapolis, who said he plans to pursue a second-reading amendment on the Senate floor to add Marion County — and potentially Wayne County — back into the bill.
“If the goal of our gaming system is not maximum revenue to the state of Indiana, I want somebody to help me with what the goal of our gaming system is — and why we would exclude two counties,” Freeman said. “You could make enough money in Marion County with tourism to keep the horsemen in Anderson, Shelbyville … All I wanted to do is have an open conversation, and we should allow free market capitalism to work, but that’s not what we’re doing here today.”
Local control, referendum language stripped
And while earlier versions allowed — but did not require — a local referendum, Thursday’s amendment removed that language entirely.
Mishler noted that local approval would still be required through county commissioners, with two of three commissioners needing to sign off on a casino project.
Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, raised concerns that Allen County voters would be “left out” of the decision, however. She objected to stripping out even a “weak” provision to make a referendum optional and ultimately voted against the bill.
“When I first heard that there was talk of a casino in Allen County almost two years ago, I assumed that this was a revenue decision for the state … and we would have eyes looking at how to best allocate our resources,” Brown said. “What is frustrating is — I appreciate the concern that is happening down in Rising Sun, and it’s losing money — but we will be doing this forever whack-a-mole, moving the poorly performing, looking for a spot to shove them somewhere around the state.”
House Democrat Leader Phil GiaQuinta agreed that the absence of a referendum “stands out.”
“We’ll just have to see how people feel about that, because … most of these things have had a referendum,” he said, pointing for example, to the casino license moves from Gary to Terre Haute.
“You have a cluster of casinos down in the southeast part of Indiana, and we’ve all said these are kind of like state assets — I mean, we get revenue from these. So how can we best maximize revenue without hurting others,” he continued. “It’s a very difficult issue with gaming, because you’re always like chess pieces. You want to move one, you affect others. So, it’s tough.”
Republican House Speaker Todd Huston described the amended bill as “a pretty good compromise,” especially for Hoosier communities worried about casino closures.
He pointed specifically to the distressed-casino fund as a safeguard for places like Ohio County — home to the Rising Star Casino — if a license holder were to consolidate operations elsewhere.
“Rising Sun will be able to continue to operate as they’re operating today,” Huston said Thursday. “I’ve had lots of meetings — for, I guess, seven, eight, nine years — with the good folks of Ohio County and Rising Sun, and we want to make sure we’re doing everything we can to support them.”
