Share 
The Chicago City Council’s plan to fast-track video gambling licenses has hit a procedural speed bump, even as supporters argue the city cannot afford to wait any longer for the promised revenue.
On Monday, April 13, the City Council’s License and Consumer Protection Committee voted to allow bars and restaurants to receive conditional city permits while awaiting state licensing. However, during the full City Council meeting on Wednesday, April 15, the measure was “deferred and published”—a parliamentary maneuver used by opponents to delay a final vote.
The legislative path: Legalizing video slots in Chicago
Chicago authorized video gambling as part of its $16.6 billion 2026 budget, passing the measure over the objections of Mayor Brandon Johnson. While the machines have long been common in suburban Illinois, they were illegal in Chicago for decades.
The city budget relies on $6.8 million in revenue from terminal licensing fees and taxes. This figure assumed that 80% of the city’s 3,300 eligible businesses—those with on-premises liquor licenses—would apply. However, state processing has moved slowly. According to WTTW News, only 222 businesses had filed state applications as of mid-April.
The case for expedited gaming licenses
Ald. Bennett Lawson, 44th Ward, a vocal proponent, told the committee that the time for debate on the merits of gambling has passed. “The ship has sailed,” Lawson said, according to WTTW News.
“We’ve approved video gambling terminals. It’s already in the budget. We need to start to get some revenue from it as soon as possible, or we are going to have more budget problems than we already have.”
Ald. Scott Waguespack, 32nd Ward, who sponsored the measure, framed it as a lifeline for “mom-and-pop” establishments struggling to compete with suburban venues that already offer the machines.
However, the Department of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection has raised concerns about the workload. Commissioner Ivan Capifali told the committee that his staff is working as quickly as possible to build a regulatory framework that was not included in the original budget planning, noting the task is “straining the department’s resources.”
Bally’s Casino vs. video gambling: The $70M tax debate
The most direct opposition has come from Bally’s Corp., which is currently building a $1.7 billion permanent casino in River West. Elizabeth Suever, Bally’s vice president of government relations, warned the committee that green-lighting thousands of neighborhood video terminals would “kneecap” the casino.
According to Suever, the move will:
- Force a renegotiation of the city’s host community agreement.
- Put $4 million in annual payments from Bally’s to the city in jeopardy.
- Potentially cost the city $70 million in annual tax revenue due to the lower tax rates applied to video terminals compared to casino games.
A study from a city consultant supported these warnings, suggesting the expansion could lead to a net loss of $3 millionfor the city in 2026 and the elimination of nearly 400 jobs at the casino.
Regulatory strain: City Hall’s logistical hurdles
The delay in the final vote comes amid a broader shift in City Hall power. A council panel recently rejected attempts by six alderpeople — including Ald. Jessie Fuentes and Ald. Rossana Rodriguez — to ban the machines in their specific wards. This defiance of “aldermanic prerogative” signals that the council leadership intends for gambling to be citywide.
The ordinance is expected to resurface at the next full City Council meeting. If passed, it would allow the city to begin collecting $500 application fees immediately, even if the machines cannot yet be plugged in.
