(C) Virginia Mercury This story was originally published by Virginia Mercury and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Petersburg casino plan requires reapproval from General Assembly • Virginia Mercury [1] ['Graham Moomaw', 'More From Author', '- April'] Date: 2024-04-04 The Virginia General Assembly has a standard way of tentatively saying yes to something while reserving the right to say no later. It’s called a reenactment clause, a paragraph tacked onto a bill that requires the General Assembly to approve it a second time. That’s the approach the legislature is taking to the plan to bring a casino to Petersburg, giving the city enough of a greenlight to move forward with its casino plans while explicitly leaving open the possibility the legislature could change its mind. Last month, the General Assembly approved a bill adding Petersburg to the list of Virginia cities eligible to host a casino. But the approved version, which would give Petersburg the ability to ask its voters to approve a casino in a ballot referendum, includes a reenactment clause that says the measure won’t take effect unless the legislature approves it again at either a regular or special session. Because Petersburg is currently in the process of reviewing proposals from five would-be casino developers, the reenactment clause could potentially give the General Assembly an opening to rescind approval for a Petersburg casino if lawmakers decide they don’t like the way the city process is going. The reenactment clause was added to the bill and taken off multiple times as the legislation worked its way through the legislative process, but legislators haven’t laid out a clear explanation for why it was included in the version sent to Gov. Glenn Youngkin. “Like all bills going through the legislative process, various members have policy perspectives that get incorporated as part of the bill along the way,” said Sen. Lashrecse Aird, D-Petersburg, who is sponsoring the bill along with Sen. Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth. “I remain in active conversation regarding whether the clause will remain on the final version of the bill.” It’s possible Youngkin will send down an amendment removing the reenactment clause from the bill. If he does, that amendment will be considered when lawmakers return to Richmond April 17. Petersburg Mayor Sam Parham didn’t respond to requests for comment. On March 22, Aird announced the five finalists hoping to partner with Petersburg on a casino project. The city is considering proposals from Bally’s, the Cordish Companies, Rivers Casino/Rush Street Gaming, the Warrenton Group and Penn Entertainment. Bally’s and Penn are established national casino companies. Cordish, a Baltimore-based development group, was chosen as Petersburg’s initial casino partner in 2022, but that project didn’t move forward. The Warrenton Group is a D.C.-based real estate firm looking to move into the casino industry. Rush Street Gaming already operates the Rivers Casino in Portsmouth and is looking to add a second Virginia casino in Petersburg. Rush Street Gaming has made more than $112,000 in campaign donations to General Assembly members and the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus, according to the Virginia Public Access Project. The other finalists have not been big donors to Virginia politicians, apart from a $20,000 contribution Cordish made to Republican Ed Gillespie’s 2017 campaign for governor. Aird is hosting a town hall in Petersburg on April 14 that will include presentations from the five casino finalists. Her announcement of the event stressed that it’s up to Petersburg to pick which company is right for the city, despite the concurrent involvement of state officials. “The selection process is managed by the City of Petersburg solely,” Aird’s news release said. Youngkin, who has until April 8 to act on the casino bill, said he too was unclear on why the General Assembly had added a reenactment cause to what he said started as “a pretty clean bill.” “It seems to have a purpose,” Youngkin told the Mercury last week. “And I need to understand that. It’s rare for that to happen on a bill like that, and so I’m trying to understand exactly what concerns the legislators had with regards to the process of citizens in Petersburg having a chance to opine on that casino.” The companies interested in building the casino have also seemed confused about the logistics of Petersburg soliciting casino proposals without having clear approval to host one. “If the General Assembly passes SB 628 and the Governor signs it into law, only then will the city move forward with the selection process and filing for a referendum,” city officials wrote in an addendum to Petersburg’s request for casino proposals responding to questions from companies eying the opportunity. That answer came in response to a question about whether the city has a “specific date” in mind on when it might be able to pick a casino operator. Petersburg’s casino RFP says the city will insist on its casino partner entering into a “labor peace agreement” for the project involving “each labor organization that is actively engaged in representing gaming, hotel, food and beverage employees in Virginia.” This week, Youngkin signed a pair of casino bills that would remove Richmond as an eligible host city and limit cities to one casino referendum every three years, a measure that would prevent a repeat of Richmond’s two failed casino referendums in 2021 and 2023. Many Richmond voters felt that after they said no to a casino in 2021 they shouldn’t have been asked a second time just a short while later. [END] --- [1] Url: https://virginiamercury.com/2024/04/04/petersburg-casino-plan-requires-reapproval-from-general-assembly/ Published and (C) by Virginia Mercury Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/virginiamercury/