Iowa House advances casino moratorium in the backdrop of debate over Cedar Rapids proposal 

Iowa lawmakers have taken swift action on a proposed casino moratorium that would temporarily halt the licensing of new casinos in the state. House Study Bill 80, which was advanced Monday by both a subcommittee and the House Ways and Means Committee, proposes a retroactive moratorium beginning January 1, 2025, through June 30, 2030.  

The bill also includes provisions to prevent the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission (IRGC) from issuing licenses to proposed casinos projected to decrease adjusted gross receipts at existing casinos by more than 10% or negatively impact the annual distributions of qualified sponsoring organizations. Additionally, the legislation would block casino applicants from reapplying for eight years if their license request is denied by the IRGC.  

The proposal comes as the IRGC prepares to decide on a new casino project in Cedar Rapids. The Cedar Crossing Casino and Entertainment Center, a $275 million facility, is up for consideration at the IRGC’s February 6 meeting. 

Advocates for the project, including Cedar Rapids city officials and Linn County representatives, argue that the casino would generate revenue for both the community and the state. However, opponents, including representatives of existing casinos, contend that the new development would cannibalize revenue from other gaming establishments and lead to job losses.  

Frank Chiodo, representing Elite Casino Resorts, which owns Riverside Casino and Golf, Rhythm City Casino, and Grand Falls Casino, expressed concerns over the potential impact of the Cedar Rapids casino. He warned that it could lead to the loss of 237 jobs at the Riverside Casino and jeopardize a $100 million construction project at the Rhythm City Casino in Davenport. 

“You have hundreds of millions of dollars invested, a bunch of jobs — thousands of jobs — on the line, and we want to change the rules in the middle of the game and wonder why there’s concern amongst the industry,” Chiodo said, calling on lawmakers to pass the moratorium.  

Despite these concerns, supporters of Cedar Crossing highlighted the economic benefits the casino could bring to Iowa. Studies suggest the project could add $60 million in statewide gambling revenue annually while taking less business from nearby casinos compared to previous proposals. 

Larry Murphy, speaking for the city of Cedar Rapids and Linn County, argued that existing casinos should focus on adapting to competition. “It’s not fair for a well-muscled industry to come to you and ask you to interfere with the capitalist system,” Murphy said, noting the importance of allowing competition within Iowa’s industry.  

Rep. Sami Scheetz, D-Cedar Rapids, echoed this sentiment, highlighting the value of competition in strengthening the state’s gaming revenue. “At a time when we’re seeing our gaming revenue go down … it’s time for some competition that’s going to inject new money into the system,” Scheetz said.  

However, Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, R-Wilton, the bill’s sponsor, dismissed claims of a free market within Iowa’s casino industry, labeling them a “fallacy.” He argued that the Legislature has a responsibility to regulate the industry to protect existing businesses and jobs. 

“We created the IRGC, we change the rules literally every single year,” Kaufmann said. “And on a decision of this magnitude, I believe that it is within our purview, which is why I chose to pursue this.”  

Cedar Rapids Mayor Tiffany O’Donnell called for the IRGC to be allowed to make its decision independently. “If the governor and the Legislature decide we’re going to have an Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission, they need to be able to do more than decide who gets new carpet and who changes a light bulb at a casino,” O’Donnell said. She described the Legislature’s interference as “distasteful and disheartening.”  

The bill was passed by the House Ways and Means Committee in a 17-8 vote and could be on the House floor as early as Thursday.