The same thing is happening with its competitor Foxwoods, which was also granted the right by the state of Pennsylvania to move forward on these projects.

However, HSP Gaming, which is backing the $450- $550 million Sugarhouse project claims the city is holding them “hostage” by failing to clear final hurdles needed to get the project in the ground. So, the company has filed a petition asking the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to declare that the requirements for building SugarHouse Casino have been met and to order the City of Philadelphia to process its permit applications and issue the permits necessary to build SugarHouse’s facility on Delaware Avenue.

“We do not take this action lightly," said Bob Sheldon, President of the SugarHouse Casino in a statement obtained by onlinecasinocrawler.com. "Since being selected by the Gaming Board, we have worked in good faith to receive all of the approvals needed to begin construction of our project. In recent weeks, it has become clear that our
approach was not working and that we needed to pursue legal recourse."

Its been nearly a year since the SugarHouse Casino was selected to receive a gaming license by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, and five months after its’ Plan of Development was unanimously approved by the Philadelphia City Planning Commission and legislation to allow construction was introduced in City Council and two months after SugarHouse agreed to a Development Agreement with the City of Philadelphia, they have not been able to begin construction.

SugarHouse has met repeatedly with community groups representing SugarHouse’s immediate neighbors. Over the past six weeks, SugarHouse had a series of productive sessions with several community groups with the goal of negotiating a mutually beneficial Community Benefits Agreement. However, its patience has waned and its taking this matter straight to the State’s top court.

For what its worth, Pennsylvania Governor Edward G. is backing the move by HSP. "I am in full support of this action, given the importance of gaming revenues from this facility to reducing city wage taxes and expanding the Pennsylvania Convention Center. I understand that Mayor Street, on behalf of the city, also supports this filing. I believe that under the gaming act and Supreme Court decisions, the city was, and is, obliged to facilitate - not frustrate - the decision of the gaming board,” said Rendell.

"Philadelphia is already reaping the benefits of revenue from casinos in other parts of Pennsylvania as we are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to condemn and demolish property in preparation for the planned expansion of the Pennsylvania Convention Center in downtown Philadelphia,” he continued. “Philadelphia senior citizens are also receiving property tax rent rebates supported by gaming funds, and all Philadelphia wage earners will see substantial wage tax reductions when all gaming facilities are up and running. These benefits are too important to the city, the region and the commonwealth to be delayed indefinitely by government inaction.”

Steve Cozen, of Cozen O’Connor, is leading the case for SugarHouse. He noted that according to the original gaming act, the Pennsylvania Race Horse Development and
Gaming Act, the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board was given sole regulatory authority over the location of casinos in the City of Philadelphia. In an August 3, 2007 ruling, the Supreme Court reiterated the sole authority of the Gaming Board, writing,

“We conclude that the words of these statutory provisions are clear and explicit and reveal that the General Assembly intended for the Board to have the sole authority to locate Category 2 licensed facilities in cities of the first class. That is to say, only the Board makes the decision to locate a licensed facility,” said Cozen.

© Copyright 2007 Online Slots Place's material. It may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.