Share 
The Peoria City Council voted Monday night to reject a proposed settlement with Boyd Gaming that would have ended the city’s legal challenge to a planned redevelopment of the Par‑A‑Dice Hotel Casino in neighboring East Peoria. In a special session, council members split 5‑5, with one member absent, blocking approval of the deal.
Under the proposal, Peoria would have received roughly 2.25% of the revenue generated by the redeveloped casino — an estimated $1.8 million annually — in exchange for withdrawing its objections to the project and supporting the redevelopment plan. The deal also would have included compensation for projected non‑gaming revenues such as property, sales and hotel taxes.
Mayor Rita Ali, who supported the agreement, expressed disappointment after the vote, calling it a “rare opportunity” for Peoria. Opponents, including council members Tim Riggenbach and John Kelly, argued that accepting the offer would weaken the city’s position in enforcing a long‑standing agreement on where land‑based gambling must be located.
Longstanding dispute over land‑based gambling in Illinois
At the heart of the dispute is a 1991 intergovernmental agreement between Peoria and East Peoria that stipulates all riverboat casinos be located in East Peoria, while any land‑based casino must be in Peoria. Boyd Gaming, which owns Par‑A‑Dice, has presented plans to redevelop its aging riverboat casino with a new $160 million facility, and city officials contend the proposal effectively constitutes a land‑based casino in East Peoria — violating that agreement.
Boyd’s latest plan, presented to the Illinois Gaming Board, reconfigures the project as a riverboat development by placing a traditional riverboat structure in the Illinois River under the new facility’s footprint. This shift comes after earlier proposals that had drawn sharper legal challenges from Peoria.
Legal action and pending gaming board vote
Hours after the council’s split decision, Peoria filed a lawsuit in Cook County seeking a temporary restraining order to block the Illinois Gaming Board’s (IGB) vote on Boyd’s redevelopment plan. City attorneys argue that the plan violates both the intergovernmental agreement and the Illinois Riverboat Gambling Act.
The IGB, which regulates gambling in Illinois, had been scheduled to consider Boyd’s proposal at a meeting this week. The outcome of that vote remains pending amid the lawsuit and ongoing debate over whether Boyd’s design satisfies state definitions of riverboat gaming.
What’s next for Peoria and the Illinois casino project
With the settlement off the table, Peoria officials have signaled they will continue contesting the redevelopment through legal channels and maintain that Boyd must adhere to the 1991 agreement’s requirements. City Attorney Patrick Hayes warned that litigation could take years and cost millions, even if Peoria ultimately prevails.
Opponents to the settlement argued the city should hold firm to protect its long‑term interests rather than accept a compromise they viewed as insufficient. Supporters had cited the financial risk and expense of extended litigation as a reason to settle, concerns that remain unresolved.
Meanwhile, East Peoria leaders have continued their own development efforts along the riverfront, including plans for a tax increment financing (TIF) district that could support broader investment in the area surrounding the casino site.
Legal and economic battle over Par-A-Dice far from over
The council’s narrow rejection of the Boyd Gaming settlement underscores a bitter and unresolved dispute over the future of the Par‑A‑Dice casino and the broader economic and legal implications for Peoria. With litigation underway and the IGB’s decision still pending, the battle over where and how the casino can operate is likely to unfold over months — if not years — ahead.
