Along with Newham, Great Yarmouth, Hull, Middlesbrough, Milton Keynes, Solihull and Southampton, Leeds was one of the places awarded a large casino licence in 2006. At a Leeds City Council executive board meeting the process to select an operator will be started. The Council anticipates that a licence could be granted by December 2011. On today’s Agenda is the consideration of the report of the Director of City Development providing an update on the process for the awarding of the large casino licence.
This report provides Members with an update on the process which the Council will need to undertake to move forward with the awarding of the Large Casino Licence. Within this report, officers have proposed the 3 objectives of securing a positive and significant economic impact, the maximisation of a financial return to the Council and that any financial return accrued will be used to facilitate the delivery of projects in support of the Narrowing the Gap agenda.
Ultimately the objectives outlined above will be reflected in a ‘Statement of Principles’ which will be incorporated, in due course, into the Council’s Gambling
Policy, to be approved by full Council following the budgetary and policy framework rules. This Statement of Principles will be the key document that will outline the Council’s overall approach to the awarding of the Licence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The selection process will be in two stages. Stage 1 is a routine licence application, similar to the process every gambling premises licence is subjected to. In effect applicants will need to demonstrate that they are fit and proper organisations to hold the Large Casino Licence. Stage 2 is the application of the greatest benefit test. There are some similarities within the licensing process to a tender process, where each operator will be asked to demonstrate how their bid would result in the greatest benefit to the area.
If the Council only receives one application for the licence then it will be bound to grant that licence if the applicant was successful at Stage 1 of the process. There would be no Stage 2 and thus no prospect of securing any of the benefits discussed above or offsetting any of the costs through licence fees or capital or percentage of yield payments. (E-03.10.10)
|
|
