‘Rigged Process’ In Waukegan Casino Bidding: Potawatomi

WAUKEGAN, IL — The owners of the Potawatomi Hotel and Casino claim that former Mayor Sam Cunningham manipulated the bidding for a future Waukegan casino to favor the gambling company of former state Sen. Michael Bond.

Attorneys for Waukegan Potawatomi Casino LLC, owned by the casino-operating Forest County Potawatomi Community, have for more than two years been seeking to reverse the Waukegan City Council's October 2019 decision not to forward its casino proposal to state gaming regulators for consideration.

In court filings, the Potawatomi group alleges that the bidding was a "rigged process" and that Cunningham secretly directed the City Council to exclude it in a discriminatory manner. It also claims the city violated the Illinois Open Meetings Act and the state's gambling expansion law.

According to sworn testimony from 6th Ward Ald. Keith Turner cited by the Potawatomi, on the evening of the Oct. 17, 2019, special City Council meeting, Cunningham told him: "these are the three that we want to send to Springfield. Right. And that was what the vote was going to be. Right. Put those three down there."

The Potawatomi group pointed to the significant financial contributions that Bond, CEO of Tap Room Gaming, had provided to councilmembers who voted in line with Cunningham's request.

In the final weeks of the 2017 mayoral campaign, Bond directed more than $50,000 to Cunningham. Then, ahead of the 2019 City Council election, Bond and his network of companies and committees gave $250,000 to candidates he backed, essentially fully bankrolling four candidates who won seats.

Related: From Truck Stops To Elections, Gambling Money Floods Waukegan

According to the tribal casino entity, city officials favoring Bond's North Point proposal also selected Neil Bluhm's Rush Street Gaming/Rivers Casino for consideration by the state gambling board as a result of Rivers' teaming up with Waukegan Gaming LLC, the entity that had been selected by the city in an unsuccessful 2004 effort to bring a casino to town and had filed suit seeking the new license.

"Based on Bond’s campaign largesse and personal connection to Cunningham, North Point indeed had the inside track. But given public scrutiny of the Bond connection, the City also favored Full House as a relatively weak competitor that could 'quash' the (accurate) perception of bias toward North Point," Potawatomi attorneys alleged. "The selection of Rivers does nothing to negate this inference, because Rivers punched its own ticket in the form of damaging information it unearthed in the Waukegan Gaming litigation. Hence Cunningham’s directive to send North Point, Full House and Rivers, but not Potawatomi, to the Illinois Gaming Board."

According to the rejected bidder's suit, Cunningham did not properly disclose his communication with Bond to state gaming regulators, and former City Attorney Robert Long did not properly disclose communication from Bond's company that said it planned to lower its pledged financial contribution to the city. No comment was immediately available Wednesday from Cunningham or Long.

The suit also claims that the consultant — hired by the city after a ProPublica reporter began asking questions about Bond's role in the bidding — had improperly given the Potawatomi lower scores than their own analysis indicated. It cites a bid for city owned land that was millions of dollars less than the casino entity claims it would have offered.

Potawatomi has sought since May to file a second amended complaint in the case under seal. The city has opposed that effort and filed a motion for summary judgement on the case.

"[Waukegan Potawatomi Casino] tries mightily to establish that the Mayor (who did not vote), the City's gaming consultant and the aldermen who voted against them engaged in some vast corruption conspiracy," the city's attorneys said last month in a court filing, arguing the "so-called facts" presented were immaterial.

According to the city's attorneys, Waukegan has absolute immunity from the lawsuit. They also argue that the casino entity cannot bring the lawsuit because it is an arm of the federally-recognized sovereign Potawatomi Tribe, that the casino entity cannot prove that the city did not have good reason to reject it, that the entity had no right to sue under the Illinois Gambling Act and that the city did not violate the Open Meetings Act.

Waukegan's attorneys contend that no public comment was necessary at the Oct. 17, 2019, special City Council meeting because it was a continuation of a Sept. 18, 2019, public hearing, even though the City Council had convened another meeting in between.

On Tuesday, the group separately asked a Cook County judge to block the Illinois Gaming Board from choosing between the two remaining applicants for the casino license, Bond's North Point Casino and Las Vegas-based Full House Resorts, according to the Chicago Tribune, which first reported the suit.

The gaming board was due to make a "determination of preliminary suitability" for the Waukegan casino owners license at its meeting Thursday. (Update: The Illinois Gaming Board did not vote on any Waukegan-related matters at the meeting.)

Court records show attorneys for city and the Potawatomi are next due to meet for a settlement conference Nov. 30.

Earlier: Waukegan Casino License Applicant Withdraws Proposal, 2 Remain