The individuals involved in the Bally’s Richmond Casino bid likely experienced a feeling similar to being rejected by the infamous “Soup Nazi” from Seinfeld when they received the news on Wednesday. Despite giving citizens a chance to invest and putting in significant effort to secure the opportunity to build a casino in Virginia’s capital, Bally’s has been eliminated from contention.
On Wednesday, it was announced by Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney’s office that the committee has narrowed down the candidates to two. Bally’s is not among the two competitors. Additionally, hopeful gamblers in the city have been informed about the identity of the final bidders.
There will be no Bally’s Richmond casino
There were initially six competitors at the start of this episode. However, only The Cordish Companies and Urban One’s proposals have made it to this stage. Bally’s attempts were not enough to secure one of those two spots.
Leonard Sledge, the director of the city’s Department of Economic Development, expressed gratitude for Bally’s interest in creating a resort casino project in Richmond. However, due to concerns regarding site access, environmental factors, and necessary approvals from non-city entities that may not be granted or could delay the project timeline, the evaluation panel has decided not to consider the Bally’s project or the Parkway Crossings site for a resort casino. Sledge also acknowledged the valuable input provided by the citizens of Richmond during this process.
There could have been a certain level of foreshadowing present in this situation. Bally’s officials expressed a desire for the casino to be situated on a piece of land close to the Chippenham and Powhite parkways, including the vicinity of Forest Hill Avenue.
However, the residents of Stratford Hills were not pleased with this decision. Bally’s subsequently suggested an alternative location situated behind Rosie’s Gaming Emporium on Midlothian Turnpike. Nevertheless, the city rejected Bally’s request for flexibility, stating that the approval of both the operator and the site are interdependent. Consequently, it became necessary to proceed with Plan B.
Bally’s efforts came up short
Bally’s executives embarked on a “listening tour” as Plan B, aiming to mitigate opposition to their proposal by directly engaging with the citizens of Richmond. Despite the conclusion of the final event on April 14, Bally’s continued to explore alternative strategies.
In addition to making the offer more enticing, Bally’s provided Richmond residents with the chance to participate in the ownership of the potential casino. However, since the committee has decided to move forward without Bally’s, the specific details of this arrangement have become irrelevant.
The task that Bally’s has left behind will now be taken on by the two remaining applicants. It remains uncertain whether they will be able to effectively reconcile with the residents who are opposed to having casinos in their neighborhoods.
Selling citizens on casino projects
The support of Richmond citizens holds immense importance for both potential operators as, unlike in other cities within Virginia, the residents of Richmond have not yet had the opportunity to express their views on whether they desire casino gaming in their city. Opposition concerns encompass the following:
- Crime increases
- Environmental impact
- Lower property values
- Small businesses losing clientele
- Traffic congestion
Both The Cordish Companies and Urban One must now work to persuade voters that the advantages to their city will surpass any potential drawbacks. Cordish aims to construct its $600 million Live! Casino & Hotel Richmond at the intersection of North Arthur Ashe Boulevard and West Leigh Street, while Urban One plans to develop its $517 million project at the former Altria Operations Center on South Commerce Road.
If a significant number of Richmond residents share the same concerns as the residents of Stratford Hills did about the Bally’s plans, it is possible that the election could result in defeat for either developer. In such a scenario, one of the developers would be denied a license.
Related Articles
