SugarHouse casino's financing package recently got the state's OK, but only some of the lenders who are putting up more than $220 million to build the slots parlor on the Delaware have been named.

The identities of some lenders are being kept confidential, and the local state senator wants to know what's the big secret.

During a hearing held Wednesday, Sept. 16, in Harrisburg, the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board approved SugarHouse's financial package, essentially ensuring the 10-month construction cycle will begin shortly.

Casino officials said last week that construction on the 22-arce site in Fishtown and Northern Liberties could begin as soon as October. In all, the $355 million interim casino structure will host 1,700 slot machines.

Chuck Hardy, attorney for SugarHouse, called the newfound casino backers "a consortium" of lenders.

Prior to this announcement, Neil Bluhm, a Chicago-based real estate developer and chief investor in SugarHouse casino, and a number of investors gathered $125 million for construction costs.

After the board approved the interim plan back in June, the investors were still $150 million short of the needed funds. SugarHouse spokeswoman Leigh Whitaker said Credit Suisse and Jeffries Finance are the two main lenders, contributing a combined $180 million. Yet, she declined to provide further detail about how the developer was able to get the remaining financing.

The casino was forced to search for new lenders after their original lender, Merrill Lynch, collapsed in the wake of last year's Wall Street meltdown.

Based on a request made by SugarHouse, the PGCB sealed some documents related to the new financing package, keeping the information confidential.

It was a move that state Rep. Michael O'Brien (D-175th dist.) and state Sen. Larry Farnese (D- 1st dist.) objected to in a letter to Gregory Fajt, chairman of the PGCB.

However, Whitaker defended move, saying the "documents are sealed because they contain sensitive financial and proprietary business information."

Contacted Monday, Sept. 21, Farnese disagreed with the decision.

"Wherever you come down on the casino being built ... the board has to protect the citizens of Pennsylvania," said Farnese.

Farnese claimed he is not anti-casino, but said he would like the riverfront casino sites moved to new locations.

He has fought the riverfront location of SugarHouse in the past, and has been critical of the state's management of its budding casino industry.

"The (PGCB) board needs to have more transparency. We need to err on the side of disclosing more information to the public," he said.

While Whitaker said the casino was only protecting "proprietary business information," Farnese said the board should determine what is proprietary and what isn't, not conceal documents at the request of the casino operator.

"Operations - especially with gambling - can try to come in and take advantage of the consumer," he said. "We need to know where the money is coming from and what are the rates. The people in Pennsylvania deserve to know where the money is coming from."