The Hammond Common Council opened an extended debate over a resolution urging the Lake County commissioners not to select a site for a proposed Lake County Convention Center and ultimately voted to table the city resolution until the May 12 council meeting.

Background and mayor’s remarks: The draft resolution (25 R-08) argues that a county convention center would require substantial public subsidy, could subsidize one casino at the expense of others and would not be in the best interest of Hammond taxpayers. Mayor Tom McDermott strongly urged prompt council action, saying that the Hard Rock Casino’s growth had already reduced revenue to Hammond by millions of dollars and that a convention center tied to that site would “potentially subsidize 1 casino at the expense of other casinos, including Horseshoe Hammond.”

Calls for more information and tabling: Councilman Tyler said he supported protecting Hammond’s fiscal interests but asked for more time to gather financial analyses and to consult with neighboring municipalities about partnership possibilities. He moved to table the resolution until the May 12 council meeting to allow the council to gather additional information and meet with regional officials. The clerk’s roll call on the tabling motion recorded that the motion carried 6–3.

Why it matters: Council members who pressed for delay said a near-term vote would be premature without the county’s financial analysis and possible revenue-sharing proposals. Supporters of immediate passage argued the council should go on record opposing the convention center now to protect current city revenues, citing estimated losses to Hammond from competing casinos.

Discussion highlights: Mayor McDermott cited a figure he said the city had already lost to Hard Rock — “$13,000,000 a year” — and called the convention-center plan a “boondoggle.” Council members expressed differing views on whether county funding proposals (such as changing innkeeper taxes or other sources) would affect Hammond. Several councilors said they wanted the council to take a formal position before the Lake County commissioners’ decision date, while others preferred to review the county consultants’ financial report before voting.

Next steps and procedural outcome: The council’s tabling vote means the city will revisit the resolution at its May 12 meeting; members said they expect to use the intervening weeks to request further analysis and to seek clarifying conversations with county and neighboring-city officials.

Ending: The council’s decision to delay puts Hammond on record as engaged in the countywide debate while leaving the city’s formal position unresolved pending additional information.