One by one, residents of the Texas city of Irving stood up to voice their opposition to controversial plans for a new casino complex to open in their own backyard.
“We do not live in Las Vegas because we do not want to live in Las Vegas,” one man who described himself as a local educator said at the city’s planning and zoning commission meeting last Monday.
“This deal is a bad deal for Irving and what happens in Vegas has to stay in Vegas,” said another resident, during the six-hour-long meeting that rolled into the early hours Tuesday.
At a separate heated town hall event the week before, others held up signs saying “Don’t Vegas my Irving” as a casino lobbyist was booed and jeered for nearly two hours.
Despite the protests, at around 2:30 a.m. Tuesday, planning commissioners voted to recommend approval of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation’s plans to install a “destination resort” with a casino to the city council.
But ultimately the residents prevailed — at least for now.
Following immense public pressure, Sands announced Thursday it had removed the casino element from their proposal.
For the last month, Irving has been embroiled in a scrappy public fight over the proposal put forward by Sands, owned by Trump megadonor Miriam Adelson, who also has a majority stake in the Dallas Mavericks.
Sands bought the property and the land where the Texas Stadium used to stand in 2023. Now it wants to rezone it to be home to a new casino.
But aside from fierce opposition from many Irving residents, Sands has another major battle on its hands: gambling is illegal in the state of Texas.
The casino behemoth has been lobbying hard for gambling legalization in the state for years.
“Y’all can relax,” casino lobbyist Andy Abboud, the company’s senior vice president of government relations, told the unimpressed town hall last week. “It’s not even legal yet!”
But campaigners believe Sands is biding its time in order to achieve its end goal.
“They're facing some challenges at the state level, but they are playing the long game,” Irving city councilman Luis Canosa told The Independent. “They are lobbying very hard, spending tens of millions every year. And it doesn't matter for them if it gets legalized in 10 or 15 years, they still want to have the security that they have the rezoning, which once it's given, cannot be taken away.”
Texas has some of the most restrictive gaming laws in the U.S. and campaigners argue that greenlighting casinos would lead to a rise in domestic violence, gambling addiction and human trafficking.
To build its casino in Texas, Sands needs a Constitutional Amendment legalizing gambling at state level to pass and it needs Irving City Council to approve the zoning entitlements.
“They want to leave gaming open to establish a full predatory casino that extracts money from the working class, from hurting families, from addicts, from older people in Social Security checks that cannot afford to lose anything,” Canosa said. “It's going to be a machine to extract money from the working class people for the exclusive benefit of billionaire special interests.”
Canosa described Irving, a suburb of Dallas, as a place where people “from different walks of life coexist peacefully” and where many Texans have moved to raise a family.
At the tense town hall last week, Abboud from Sands was asked by a resident whether the company was considering alternative cities, such as Frisco, Arlington or Dallas, for its $4 billion development.
“I hate to disappoint everybody…but we're focused on Irving right now,” he replied.
Abboud tried to bill the complex as a “family-friendly” destination.
“It would become another spectacular entertainment option for people that are living here,” he said, as some people in the crowd shouted. “It'd be more restaurants, it would be an arena. It would be family-friendly entertainment with bowling alleys, movie theaters…an arena where you can see everything from Coldplay to Lady Gaga to Disney on Ice.”
Abboud, who was hit with questions for over an hour, was honest that Sands is not interested in opening the development without a casino.
“Can you please do a destination tourist place but without a casino?” Sister Mary Angelica asked. “This would show that the Sands company really cared about the people who live here and are not only profit-minded.”
But Abboud’s answer was all business.
“The bottom line is that if we're going to build a $4 billion facility and build an arena and build all the other amenities, the gaming component helps us subsidize and build all of the other amenities that make it great,” he said, to a chorus of booing.
For now, the company says it will proceed with the complex without the casino.
“Team Sands will now pretend they don’t want gaming in Irving until they get a friendlier council,” Canosa said after Thursday’s win. “If their pro-casino candidates get across the finish line, they’ll bring it back in a heartbeat.”
The councilman was the first to bring the city’s intention to fast-track the plans to the public at the end of February and claimed the company “tried to go behind residents’ backs” with the negotiations.
“We don't want it here, and the residents don't want it. There's massive opposition,” he told The Independent.
Not everyone agrees. City council member Dennis Webb said it was a loss of opportunity for Irving.
“I am sad that people keep wanting to come to Irving wanting to do something for us, and we keep losing all of these opportunities to get some great amenities for our citizens, who constantly tell me there is nothing in Irving to do,” he said, according to the Dallas News.
Sands executive Mark Boekenheide reinforced Abboud’s message that the company “cannot commit” to the project without the casino element. “The economics will not work without a casino piece,” Boekenheide told city council members Thursday.
The executive said that the complex is projected to create 9,000 jobs for the community and could generate millions in tax revenue for the city.
Speaking before Thursday’s meeting, Casnosa told The Independent he would be “proud” if his fellow council members stood up to Sands.
“If the gaming piece gets delayed or taken out, that will mean that at least enough of the representatives listened to the people and stood strong in in, frankly, a heroic act,” Canosa said. “Because whenever people see in Texas that Miriam Adelson is showing up with an interest, everybody bends over backwards.
“These people are very powerful. It does take a lot of integrity to stand up.”
Dina Asher-Smith collects MBE from ‘funny and really charming’ King
Waymo plans to bring its driverless taxis to Washington in 2026
Baseball star Shohei Ohtani’s ex-interpreter has prison start postponed
Trump intel team grilled in Senate after war plans leaked in Signal group chat: Live
Top Democrat calls for Hegseth and Waltz to resign over Signal leak
Trump refuses to answer questions about deportation flights, citing ‘state secrets’
