Sec. 7. (a) In granting a license under this chapter, the
commission may give favorable consideration to the following:
(1) Economically depressed areas of Indiana.
(2) Applicants presenting plans that provide for significant
economic development over a large geographic area.
(b) This subsection applies to any owner's license issued for a city
described in section 1(a)(1) of this chapter. The commission must
require the applicant to provide assurances that economic development
will occur in the city and that adequate infrastructure and site
preparation will be provided to support the riverboat operation. In order
to prove the assurance that economic development will occur, the
applicant must:
(1) construct or provide for the construction of an approved hotel;
or
(2) cause economic development that will have an economic
impact on the city that exceeds the economic impact that the
construction of an approved hotel would have.
(c) This subsection applies to an owner's license issued for the City
of East Chicago. If a controlling interest in the owner's license is
transferred, the fiscal body of the City of East Chicago may adopt an
ordinance voiding any term of the development agreement (as defined
by IC 36-1-8-9.5) between:
(1) the city; and
(2) the person transferring the controlling interest in the owner's
license;
that is in effect as of the date the controlling interest is transferred. The
ordinance may provide for any payments made under the
redevelopment agreement, including those held in escrow, to be
redirected to the City of East Chicago for use as directed by ordinance
of the city fiscal body. A requirement to redirect a payment is valid to
the same extent as if the requirement had been part of the original
agreement. If the ordinance provides for the voiding and renegotiation
of any part of a redevelopment agreement, the mayor of the City of East
Chicago may negotiate with the person acquiring a controlling interest
in the owner's license to replace any terms voided by the ordinance.
Terms negotiated under this subsection must be ratified in an ordinance
adopted by the city legislative body.
As added by P.L.277-1993(ss), SEC.124. Amended by
P.L.234-2007, SEC.302.
Notes of Decisions
Zoeller v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc., 904 N.E.2d 213 (Ind. 2009).
· cites it 4× “…the proposed economic development into consideration when granting riverboat licenses to competing applicants. See Ind.Code § 4-33-6-7(a).”
City of East Chicago v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc., 878 N.E.2d 358 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 6× “Because that condition might amount to an "implied durational term" that would prevent the agreement from being terminable at will by East Chicago, the trial court properly denied summary judgment.”
Foundations of East Chicago, Inc. v. City of East Chicago, 927 N.E.2d 900 (Ind. 2010).
· cites it 2× “Tucked into the budget bill as Section 302 was the provision at issue today, a new subsection to Ind.Code § 4-33-6-7 (2008), which reads: (c) This subsection applies to an owner's license issued for the City of East Chicago.”
Hoosier Env't Council, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 105 F. Supp. 2d 953 (S.D. Ind. 2000).
· cites it 2× “§ 4-33-6-7(a). According to the plaintiffs, these passages “make clear that the fundamental purpose of the proposed casino complex is to stimulate significant economic development over a large geographic area.”
Foundations of East Chicago, Inc. v. City of East Chicago, 905 N.E.2d 30 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 6× “[4] In 2007 the general assembly amended Indiana Code section 4-33-6-7 [5] to provide as follows: (c) This subsection applies to an owner's license issued for the City of East Chicago.”
Carter v. City of East Chicago, 881 N.E.2d 1114 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Section 4-33-6-7(a) provides the Indiana Gaming Commission, in granting a riverboat casino license, “may’' give favorable consideration to economically depressed areas of Indiana and to applicants presenting plans that provide for significant economic development over a large…”
Mays, William v. Trump IN, Inc, 255 F.3d 351 (7th Cir. 2001).
· cites it 2× “” Ind.Code § 4-33-6-7(b). Consequently, Gary applicants had to build an “approved hotel” or “cause economic development that [would] have an economic impact on the city [exceeding] the economic impact that the construction of an approved hotel would have.”
— Ind. Code § 4-33-6-7(a) — 3 cases
Hoosier Env't Council, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 105 F. Supp. 2d 953 (S.D. Ind. 2000).
“§ 4-33-6-7(a). According to the plaintiffs, these passages “make clear that the fundamental purpose of the proposed casino complex is to stimulate significant economic development over a large geographic area.”
Carter v. City of East Chicago, 881 N.E.2d 1114 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
“Section 4-33-6-7(a) provides the Indiana Gaming Commission, in granting a riverboat casino license, “may’' give favorable consideration to economically depressed areas of Indiana and to applicants presenting plans that provide for significant economic development over a large…”
— Ind. Code § 4-33-6-7(b) — 5 cases
City of East Chicago v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc., 878 N.E.2d 358 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
“Because that condition might amount to an "implied durational term" that would prevent the agreement from being terminable at will by East Chicago, the trial court properly denied summary judgment.”
Hoosier Env't Council, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 105 F. Supp. 2d 953 (S.D. Ind. 2000).
“§ 4-33-6-7(a). According to the plaintiffs, these passages “make clear that the fundamental purpose of the proposed casino complex is to stimulate significant economic development over a large geographic area.”
Mays, William v. Trump IN, Inc, 255 F.3d 351 (7th Cir. 2001).
“” Ind.Code § 4-33-6-7(b). Consequently, Gary applicants had to build an “approved hotel” or “cause economic development that [would] have an economic impact on the city [exceeding] the economic impact that the construction of an approved hotel would have.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.