Double or nothing? Richmond City Council weighs casino vote do-over

City of Richmond may put casino on ballot again

Urban One’s proposed casino and resort was pitched for Philip Morris-owned land just off Interstate 95. (BizSense file)

After losing its bet last year on a voter-approved casino, the City of Richmond is weighing another roll of the dice as its neighbor to the south looks to get in on the action.

An effort to revive the city’s arrangement with developer Urban One and hold a do-over referendum on its proposed casino in South Richmond is set to go before the City Council at its regular meeting Monday.

Reva Trammell

The request from Reva Trammell, who represents the Southside’s Eighth Voter District where the casino would be built, was unanimously endorsed Thursday by the council’s Finance and Economic Development Standing Committee.

If approved by the full council, the move would re-establish previously approved agreements between the city and Urban One for development of its proposed $565 million One Casino + Resort and set the stage for a potential second referendum on November’s ballot. City residents narrowly voted the project down last November, with 51.4 percent of voters against it.

In Thursday’s committee meeting, councilmembers said the closeness of that first vote, as well as the project’s potential economic impacts, warrant a second try.

“Having a vote with that many residents that was that close, it is worth taking another bite at the apple,” said Kristen Larson, whose Fourth District makes up the western part of the Southside. The committee’s other members, Michael Jones of the Ninth District and Ellen Robertson of the Sixth, also represent areas in and around South Richmond.

According to city documents, the November referendum saw 38,750 Richmonders vote in favor of the casino, representing about 49 percent of votes cast. The city also notes that voters closest to the proposed casino site supported the project overwhelmingly, with at least 70 percent of voters in each of the Eighth and Ninth district precincts casting a yes vote. The 300,000-square-foot casino and resort was proposed at 2001 Walmsley Blvd.

Trammell, who doesn’t serve on the committee, called into Thursday’s meeting to speak in favor of the requests, which were introduced and referred to the committee at the council’s Jan. 10 meeting.

“So many people have been calling me, not only from my Eighth District but from all over, saying that they definitely want another chance to vote on the One Casino,” Trammell said. “It would bring in jobs, 1,500 jobs or more; it would restart the economic development all over in Southside…

“The people are just begging for us to be able to get another chance at One Casino + Resort, and also to have it in the same location and by the same people,” she said.

If approved by the rest of the council, the city would ask state legislators to schedule a referendum on the casino later this year.

The General Assembly in 2020 adopted legislation allowing Richmond and four other localities in Virginia to host voter-approved casinos, leading to the referendum held for Richmond in November. Referendums in the other localities — Bristol, Danville, Portsmouth and Norfolk — passed in landslides in 2020.

While Richmond seeks a second chance, one state legislator — Sen. Joe Morrissey — is looking to stop that from happening and wants to add Petersburg as a possible casino host.

Morrissey, whose district includes Petersburg, filed a bill at the start of the current General Assembly session that would add Petersburg to the list of eligible cities to host a casino, and prevent any city — in this case, Richmond — that has already held a casino referendum that failed from holding another referendum for at least five years.

Morrissey has said Richmond’s attempt at a second referendum so soon would go against the will of the voters. In session Thursday, Morrissey was not available for comment for this story.

Morrissey’s bill has been referred to the Senate’s Committee on General Laws and Technology. The committee hadn’t taken up the bill for consideration as of Thursday.

City of Richmond may put casino on ballot again

Urban One’s proposed casino and resort was pitched for Philip Morris-owned land just off Interstate 95. (BizSense file)

After losing its bet last year on a voter-approved casino, the City of Richmond is weighing another roll of the dice as its neighbor to the south looks to get in on the action.

An effort to revive the city’s arrangement with developer Urban One and hold a do-over referendum on its proposed casino in South Richmond is set to go before the City Council at its regular meeting Monday.

Reva Trammell

The request from Reva Trammell, who represents the Southside’s Eighth Voter District where the casino would be built, was unanimously endorsed Thursday by the council’s Finance and Economic Development Standing Committee.

If approved by the full council, the move would re-establish previously approved agreements between the city and Urban One for development of its proposed $565 million One Casino + Resort and set the stage for a potential second referendum on November’s ballot. City residents narrowly voted the project down last November, with 51.4 percent of voters against it.

In Thursday’s committee meeting, councilmembers said the closeness of that first vote, as well as the project’s potential economic impacts, warrant a second try.

“Having a vote with that many residents that was that close, it is worth taking another bite at the apple,” said Kristen Larson, whose Fourth District makes up the western part of the Southside. The committee’s other members, Michael Jones of the Ninth District and Ellen Robertson of the Sixth, also represent areas in and around South Richmond.

According to city documents, the November referendum saw 38,750 Richmonders vote in favor of the casino, representing about 49 percent of votes cast. The city also notes that voters closest to the proposed casino site supported the project overwhelmingly, with at least 70 percent of voters in each of the Eighth and Ninth district precincts casting a yes vote. The 300,000-square-foot casino and resort was proposed at 2001 Walmsley Blvd.

Trammell, who doesn’t serve on the committee, called into Thursday’s meeting to speak in favor of the requests, which were introduced and referred to the committee at the council’s Jan. 10 meeting.

“So many people have been calling me, not only from my Eighth District but from all over, saying that they definitely want another chance to vote on the One Casino,” Trammell said. “It would bring in jobs, 1,500 jobs or more; it would restart the economic development all over in Southside…

“The people are just begging for us to be able to get another chance at One Casino + Resort, and also to have it in the same location and by the same people,” she said.

If approved by the rest of the council, the city would ask state legislators to schedule a referendum on the casino later this year.

The General Assembly in 2020 adopted legislation allowing Richmond and four other localities in Virginia to host voter-approved casinos, leading to the referendum held for Richmond in November. Referendums in the other localities — Bristol, Danville, Portsmouth and Norfolk — passed in landslides in 2020.

While Richmond seeks a second chance, one state legislator — Sen. Joe Morrissey — is looking to stop that from happening and wants to add Petersburg as a possible casino host.

Morrissey, whose district includes Petersburg, filed a bill at the start of the current General Assembly session that would add Petersburg to the list of eligible cities to host a casino, and prevent any city — in this case, Richmond — that has already held a casino referendum that failed from holding another referendum for at least five years.

Morrissey has said Richmond’s attempt at a second referendum so soon would go against the will of the voters. In session Thursday, Morrissey was not available for comment for this story.

Morrissey’s bill has been referred to the Senate’s Committee on General Laws and Technology. The committee hadn’t taken up the bill for consideration as of Thursday.

Your subscription has expired. Renew now by choosing a subscription below!

For more informaiton, head over to your profile.

Profile


SUBSCRIBE NOW

TERMS OF SERVICE:

ALL MEMBERSHIPS RENEW AUTOMATICALLY. YOU WILL BE CHARGED FOR A 1 YEAR MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL AT THE RATE IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME UNLESS YOU CANCEL YOUR MEMBERSHIP BY LOGGING IN OR BY CONTACTING [email protected]

ALL CHARGES FOR MONTHLY OR ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS ARE NONREFUNDABLE.

EACH MEMBERSHIP WILL ONLY FUNCTION ON UP TO 3 MACHINES. ACCOUNTS ABUSING THAT LIMIT WILL BE DISCONTINUED.




Return to Homepage

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
66 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mark S Kittrell
Mark S Kittrell
3 months ago

“You got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them”. FOLD ’em and move on!

John Lindner
John Lindner
3 months ago

The justification for another vote is… we almost won?

The only way I would support another vote is if the council members who supported it were required to resign when it was defeated again.

Insulting.

Bruce Milam
Bruce Milam
3 months ago
Reply to  John Lindner

if we go back to the drawing board, then re-open the bidding. Urban One was the least experienced, least capitalized bidder of all of them.

David Lydiard
David Lydiard
3 months ago
Reply to  John Lindner

Exactly. If they vote FOR a casino then, do its’ opponents get another try because THEY almost won? SMDH If this ends up flying we need to remind its supporters who they answer to at the next election.

Brian Hutton
Brian Hutton
3 months ago

What a disgrace. When the second vote fails, do we try a third in 2023? Do we just vote until the Urban One PAC recipients get their way? If they actually do this, there needs to be recall petitions for all that vote yes starting the next day. Don’t let the city council tell you you’re too stupid to know what you want.

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Brian Hutton

This is a very good point — when the govt doesn’t like what the people voted for (I find referendums refreshing though the people are often only partially informed at best) if one can shove a redo at them, one wonders, if that precedent is set, how many is too much? I am not familiar with the legislation but I suspect that this is not in Richmond’s power to do more than ask for — say they get a majority on Council, well, the STATE legislation says that the munis had to vote by referendum, not vote as many times… Read more »

Dr. Abe C. Gomez
Dr. Abe C. Gomez
3 months ago

How much tax payer money will city leaders waste this time just for the proposal to be voted down again?

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago

hopefully not much if it goes through at the State level — I think UO was the big loser, money wise, on the whole process, not R taxpayers — how much could taking proposals cost?

Frankly, I smelled something fishy about some of the other proposals — I could not imagine some of being allowed to be built at some of those locations -= hipsters don’t like casinos and neither do prosperous bedroom communities. Maybe if it was a Bellagio type thing, which would be impossible here.

Ed Christina
Ed Christina
3 months ago

This is really the least democratic thing I’ve seen in Richmond in years.

Keep rerunning the vote until you get the result you want, and ignore the clear will of the residents of the city?

Why bother voting at all, voting just slows down the will of the money crowd.

Brian Hutton
Brian Hutton
3 months ago

New rule in Richmond — if a referendum is defeated by less than 4 points, you get to vote again and keep voting until the City Council decides the correct result is attained. Gee, why do people have such distrust of government? LOL

David J. Kupstas
David J. Kupstas
3 months ago

Trammell says people are calling her asking for another vote, presumably those who voted yes. Those who voted no would probably ask for there not to be another vote. Maybe they could take a vote to decide whether to have another vote.

Alan Wilson
Alan Wilson
3 months ago

So typical of politicians and bureaucrats. If they don’t like what their constituents have to say, they just find a work around. We just suffered through a presidential press conference demonstrating the same arrogance where the thought process is “the reason people disagree with me is because I haven’t explained it good enough”. NO, the people completely know what the deal is and they just don’t want it. The Richmond City Council should be ashamed of themselves, but politicians have no shame, only overblown egos.

Last edited 3 months ago by Alan Wilson
Betsy Gardner
Betsy Gardner
3 months ago
Reply to  Alan Wilson

Re: Richmond City Council – your forgot “Self-Serving”.

Alan Wilson
Alan Wilson
3 months ago
Reply to  Betsy Gardner

Indeed!

Keith Young
Keith Young
3 months ago

I am happy to hear this. The elephant in the corner of the room is white people in s this city see another avenue to suppress black economic empowerment.The Virginia Lottery already has gambling products in every corner of the city for over two decades. I don’t see anyone getting any coalitions together to eradicate the Lottery. The ineptness is not always with the city council but those who seek to control the growth of this city by surprising any sensible ideas ESPECIALLY when it comes to black economic growth. Research the decline of Jackson Ward (one of the most… Read more »

JORDAN TUCKER
JORDAN TUCKER
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

Laughable drivel

Keith Young
Keith Young
3 months ago
Reply to  JORDAN TUCKER

That’s because deep down the truth hurts..

Jim Phieffer
Jim Phieffer
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” — Bill Clinton

Brian Hutton
Brian Hutton
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

The truth is it was voted down, legally and without fraud. Live with it.

David Humphrey
David Humphrey
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

People who said they did not want this because they did not want gambling in the city seem to have forgotten that anyone can go down to Rosies and play the slots all day long. They can also go on their phone and gamble on sports anytime they want. Saying that they don’t think want it because some people would gamble too much have a superiority complex and think they can save others by deciding for them when the people they were trying to “save” both wanted and actually already have access through Rosies. This could have driven in more… Read more »

Brian Hutton
Brian Hutton
3 months ago
Reply to  David Humphrey

Sounds like there’s plenty of gambling. So why do you need more?

David Humphrey
David Humphrey
3 months ago
Reply to  Brian Hutton

I would prefer more revenue for the City. A full casino also includes a hotel, conference space, entertainment venue for shows, etc. All of which help to generate more jobs and revenue for the City.

Brian Hutton
Brian Hutton
3 months ago
Reply to  David Humphrey

you forgot about the crime. Ask Vegas about that.

Bruce Milam
Bruce Milam
3 months ago
Reply to  David Humphrey

Only the slotswere guaranteed. The hotel and entertainment venues were set for later phases.

Last edited 3 months ago by Bruce Milam
Ed Christina
Ed Christina
3 months ago
Reply to  Bruce Milam

So its very possible to end up with just a bunch of slots, and there are no guarantees for the rest of it?

John Lindner
John Lindner
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

When citizens said they didn’t want this in the predominantly white Scotts Addition area of the city, they were labeled racists. And when voters rejected the proposal to place it in a predominantly black south side neighborhood, again, they were labeled as racists.

Isn’t it possible that opposition to casinos isn’t centered around race?

Keith Young
Keith Young
3 months ago
Reply to  John Lindner

I wasn’t the citizens who did not choose the Scotts Addition bid even though a lot of people did not want it there. It was the majority of white citizen voting down a black enterprise that was accepted in a majority black area that raises the eyebrows. A totally different set of circumstances. The Scotts Addition proposal lost out to the Urban One proposal and not because white people did not want it there. Look at the demographics in voting. The vast majority of voter who voted no where white. That’s a fact. Some people need to get of the… Read more »

Betsy Gardner
Betsy Gardner
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

To be honest, I question how many people knew who the developers were. Many knew the casino was up for referendum and voted against it because it was a casino. This was not a race issue – should any opportunity come up with a qualified black backed developer that was not gambling related it would be embraced. Casino’s only bring prosperity to a golden few. They are never a panacea for economic problems either geographically or personally.

Ashley Smith
Ashley Smith
3 months ago
Reply to  Betsy Gardner

One could argue, logically, that our entire economic system only brings prosperity to a golden few.

Keith Young
Keith Young
3 months ago
Reply to  Betsy Gardner

You must be joking right? Anyone who took the time to read the proposal know it is NOT JUST A CASINO….please research and not parrot.

Bethany Aone
Bethany Aone
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

Keith Young, the city is majority black and the referendum was voted down. It is not a racial thing. Black, white, Latino. Asian and Indians voted and the results are NO CASINO. If someone did not vote then they missed the chance. Democracy gives us the privilege of voting, but not until you get the outcome that you want when you failed to vote the first time. Should Trump or Stacy Abrams be allowed to call for a new vote? Stop playing the race card when whites are the minority.

Roger Turner
Roger Turner
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

There are many studies that point out that minorities have a much higher rate of “problem gambling” than non-minorities. (search “Problem gambling among ethnic minorities: results from an epidemiological studyKyle R. Caler, Jose Ricardo Vargas Garcia, and Lia Nower“) The rate of “problem gamblers” among black gamblers has been quoted as being twice as high as white gamblers. Given those findings, one could argue that not voting for the casino is actually helping minorities as opposed to “suppressing black economic empowerment”. I myself go to many Casino’s and I would favor one in Richmond. However I have had many discussions with dozens of… Read more »

William Muse
William Muse
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

I agree, this is the elephant in the room that few want to acknowledge. The voting breakdown from geographically racial lines was eye opening. Black owned enterprises should be encouraged in all districts of the city, but I feel like re-opening this casino discussion will only waste more time of our City Council. Put it back on the ballot, fine I’ll vote for it again, but we don’t need another year plus of distractions, we need to move forward…

Brian Hutton
Brian Hutton
3 months ago
Reply to  William Muse

I’ll encourage all legal enterprises, I don’t give a damn what color skin the owner has. But this legal enterprise will do more damage to the community than good. We don’t need the negative national media attention we’ll get for our city leaders deciding their constituents are too stupid to do what they’re told. The vote has been taken, the community spoke its voice. Tell Reva et al. to deal with it, grow up and move on.

Last edited 3 months ago by Brian Hutton
Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

So untrue. Places like Richmond totally put their thumb on the scale for minority and one minority only. Maybe if this was not such a controversial business — I am sure most RIchmonders would LOVE the kind of business they could be proud of to locate in the city, the skin color of the owners would be not a factor. One other thing, I heard all the radio ads — clearly racist — this will be a “Black” bonanza for “Our Community” — community being a code word for some degree of “Black Sepratist ideology.” Few people talk about a… Read more »

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Shawn Harper

note, i re-read this and meant to type (along with other typos) “I was [not] opposed to it being in southside” — but, again, I live in Petersburg so I had no right to vote about it anyway.

Chris Terrell
Chris Terrell
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

It is 100% possible to be thoroughly against a casino and also support minority development. Maybe, just maybe, the simplest answer is that a casino is a lousy idea. I never play the lottery and I agree with you, I’d do away with something that disproportionately impacts the poorest among us (of all races). Your race cards look a lot like a 2-7, not pocket aces, from my vantage point. We have Rosie’s, we have sports gambling, we have the Virginia Lottery, we do not need yet one more avenue for people, especially the economically less well off, to lose… Read more »

Keith Young
Keith Young
3 months ago
Reply to  Chris Terrell

Here’s the thing Chris… I usually work off of this thing called common sense ( no offense to you) and my common sense tells me that no business is going to build a half billion dollar entity and base it off of the revenue of poor people. That is what they call a non sustainable model.They are going to have a production theater, park, entertainment theater with live shows but no one talks about that. People can see it as playing the race card but the voting demographics speak for themselves. The VA ABC not black owned, The VA Lottery… Read more »

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

What is common sense Keith is that people don’t tend to want casinos near where they live unless they are somewhat despairing of ANYTHING being developed in their town. And often, as it WELL KNOWN by now, it is often Fool’s Gold, like in Schenectady, NY — because often they just get the local slobs in. Most people do not know about the OTHER stuff UO was promising to bring — they just heard “Casino” and a lot of trying to convince African Americans to vote for it. But “Common Sense” is not good enough in this situation — I… Read more »

Keith Young
Keith Young
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

Do your research then talk to me.

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

You gotta do better than that with people. “Do your research” almost sound like a concession — you gotta explain the point a bit more than that. The whole “there are non-black-owned dispensaries and Rosies” SOUNDS reasonably suspicious, until you realize that those things were NEVER UP FOR REFERENDUM in RIchmond AND that there is nothing stopping an licenced African American dispensary. Heck, if there was, they could likely get rich by suing the taxpayers for blocking them from having a licence due to racial discrimination. As I have said before, I don’t think UO helped themselves the way they… Read more »

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

Well…. your larger point is dead on, but I95, no matter the intent, had a lot of bad effects on that community other than successful african americans departing for the suburbs….

The whole history of Jackson Ward is rather sad, even if there were some lights that shone there. It’s for that reason and many others that some people see Racism behind every rock… trust takes a while, and, it should be said, that goes for both sides. Trust is not a one-way street unless one party is a saint of some kind.

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Shawn Harper

BTW, where I am from, urban highways got built through poor “White” neigborhoods. With the emphasis on the word “poor” — it was a class thing and even more, it was a property value thing as well as a “does it make sense to build it here” thing. Often, the poorer neighborhoods are the easiest to tear down — often have the most renters, for instance.

Ryan Patrick
Ryan Patrick
3 months ago
Reply to  Keith Young

Voting “No” on casino = Racism

Got it. Makes sense.

kay christensen
kay christensen
3 months ago
Reply to  Ryan Patrick

Any time a leftist is being challenged about ANYTHING- their immediate ‘go to’ cry is “RACISM”. Try as you will, a leftist never argues the merits of the case using facts, data, or logic.

Ed Christina
Ed Christina
3 months ago

Hey Kay;

take that talk back to gttr

Matt Merica
Matt Merica
3 months ago

Every time I click on ANYTHING involving the folks who claim to “manage” the city or the individuals in charge of anything even remotely important in RVA it always makes me laugh. Thank you for making me laugh hard today lol

karl hott
karl hott
3 months ago

This entire idea just makes Richmond government look unprofessional when compared against the surrounding counties. Again.

Betsy Gardner
Betsy Gardner
3 months ago

Not exactly crazy about the vote result from the last election for our district’s city councilman. Can we get a revote on that?

Ashley Smith
Ashley Smith
3 months ago
Reply to  Betsy Gardner

Can we vote on a new Mayor while we’re at it, please?

Brian Glass
Brian Glass
3 months ago

What a waste of time! The City of Richmond has far more pressing concerns. It couldn’t even get it’s reapportionment done in a timely manner.
City Council didn’t ask for a “do over” for the downtown Coliseum project which was certainly more viable as an economic generator than a casino.

Ed Christina
Ed Christina
3 months ago
Reply to  Brian Glass

Well Green City makes a second go at Navy Hill a moot point.

Mo Kesser
Mo Kesser
3 months ago

Why do Northside Richmond Voters have Votes on a Southside Business proposal? Southside residents dont get to Vote on whther there is a Baseball team on the Boulevard or anything about the flying Squirrels, So why shold those voters have a say in this??? If a Major Corporation wants to spend half a Billion in a Capital venture then has to ask permission from a group of people that wont live,work or spend $$$ there. WTH? This deserves a second look,

Boz Boschen
Boz Boschen
3 months ago
Reply to  Mo Kesser

If the city is going to enter into an agreement on a private business venture anywhere in the city limits then yes you can have a say in it. It’s why we have a city council.

And if your concern is that more voters outside of the immediate area around the proposed site voted against it than the closest residents voted for it, then I think you’ve identified the issue. They don’t want it and they weren’t motivated to vote to support it.

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Mo Kesser

This would be a great point, except for the fact that the reason was decided at the STATE level that it would be decided in all proposed localities by REFERENDUM. Voila.

William Muse
William Muse
3 months ago

Send the casino to Petersburg – it might actually do something to revitalize that disaster of a municipality. As for Richmond, its booming and doesn’t need a cheap trick of a casino to spur more growth. Instead, City Council might want to focus on improving where it needs help – I just got a notice saying recycling is running a week behind schedule, so let’s focus on core services before we chase down a new signature project to help our Mayor get elected into a more prominent position. Maybe focus on renovating or building some new schools, negotiating a smart… Read more »

Roger Turner
Roger Turner
3 months ago
Reply to  William Muse

I have been to more casinos than I want to think about and I can tell you they are a reflection of the area they are in. I have never seen one “improve or revitalize an area” and subsequently I don’t think they really can “bring a neighborhood” down either. Putting one in Petersburg would be a really poor idea if you think it’s going to improve the local economy. Take a look at the Horseshoe in Baltimore, it has done nothing to improve the area it’s in since it’s arrival.

William Muse
William Muse
3 months ago
Reply to  Roger Turner

Aside from a few hotels in Las Vegas, I don’t visit casinos & I don’t gamble – but I am a fan of the free market and wouldn’t have a problem with a business of that size contributing to the job market and subsequent tax payments to whatever municipality they go into. That said, aside from some government support in paying for related infrastructure (roads, storm drains, etc) they should receive zero financial assistance.

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Roger Turner

The studies show something that you may perceive generally, but not understand granularly.

They sometimes hurt, they sometimes help. Where they hurt, they usually only hurt in the immediate vicinity. Where they help, they bring in out of towners somehow.

UO has the potential, both site wise and marketing power wise, to bring in people from out of state, esp people passing through. That would likely be a net plus for Petersburg or Richmond, esp given the proposed locations.

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  William Muse

Interesting idea about BRT on Rt One William. I think pulse has been not so good so far on broad, personally.

As a Petersburg resident, I support it where it is proposed — I would not feel the same if I lived in that neighborhood though.

Shawn Harper
Shawn Harper
3 months ago

Well, this is CLEARLY great politics for Ms Trammel, and perhaps points to why she has endured so long (I moved to Petersburg in 2003 and she was a fixture in city hall even back then.) She need not be successful to win most of the political points. It’s clearly what her constituents want and hence what she should fight for. Call me cynical, but given all the propaganda I saw and heard everywhere (whether I was in a Habitat restore or listening to more right wing radio) they were throwing money EVERYWHERE and that was good for Richmond –and… Read more »

Ed Christina
Ed Christina
3 months ago
Reply to  Shawn Harper

Shawn;
is there an actual official spot the casino in petersburg would go?

And how much of that land does Joe Morrisey own via shell companies?

Lori Anderson
Lori Anderson
3 months ago

I live on the Southside and voted no for the casino. I voted no because the City of Richmond has proven track record that they cannot manage money. Also, after it was voted down, Mayor Stoney wrote that he was disappointed that it didn’t pass and that it would have kept our taxes “low”. HA! When has the City of Richmond taxes ever been low?? We have the highest real estate tax is in area, along with a high meals tax. I try to avoid going to any restaurants in the city and if I do, I think of that… Read more »

Phillip Michael
Phillip Michael
3 months ago

Personally, calling a business ‘black owned’ is a major turn off. Who cares what the skin color is of the owner? I voted ‘no’ in Richmond for this reason.

Anthony Edmonds
Anthony Edmonds
3 months ago

So you’re telling me you voted no just because they called it black owned and you don’t think that’s racist? If it’s the only black owned casino in the world why wouldn’t you dwell on the fact that it’s black owned.

Phillip Michael
Phillip Michael
3 months ago

What? Blacks are one of the most successful racial groups in this country. They’re very well represented in all major industries, in science, in law, politics, etc.

So why must we attach the skin color of the owner to the business as some sort of way of bolstering support for a project?