Richmond Resort & Casino

[I miss RVA]

19 minutes ago, RiverYuppy said:

I wish we had selected a casino other than the Urban One one. What were the merits for it over the other ones?

Objectively, I'm not at all sure - and I'm not going to delve into conspiracy theories, such as "pay-ola" etc. But if memory serves, it does seem like these folks were the city's choice right from the get-go, regardless of how much the city attempted to "hide" that fact. Without going back and rummaging through all the coverage (and relying only on my - admittedly - faulty, swiss-cheese memory) I do seem to recall that these folks didn't merely "emerge" as the top contender. I believe that the city administration had them picked out long before the process started - which further emphasizes the completely backwards way the city went about this whole process. WHY select a purveyor before securing a "yes" on the merits of even having a casino? Not saying it would have been the difference maker, but one has to wonder if perhaps the measure would have passed had the city been a bit smarter about this - and put less emphasis on the "who" and "where" and first established the "whether" or "not".

Just my very tarnished two cents.

[Brent114]

The people get to choose what they want.  Oh well. 
 

Now the Pamunkey  can build their casino, without the amenities, create the same negative effects (without any of the positive) and as a bonus they won’t pay taxes.   Good job white saviors! 
 

I hope this goes to Petersburg now.   I always thought they could benefit from it more and positive growth in the metro area is good for Richmond. 
 

As for what the rich black lady said…black people  can smack talk each other.   I saw nothing wrong, or even interesting, about anything she said.   
 

The question that was never asked is: who was funding the opposition?  They spent millions of dollars too (and had a plane flying over the folk festival pulling a “vote no” banner).   I suspect it was whatever group owns all of those Queen skills games at every corner market lol. 
 

It was still a great night in the USA so I’m not too sad about this failing.  I am  sorry for South Richmond residents though.  They will have to wait another 40 years for any economic activity. 

[I miss RVA]

22 minutes ago, Brent114 said:

The people get to choose what they want.  Oh well. 
 

Now the Pamunkey  can build their casino, without the amenities, create the same negative effects (without any of the positive) and as a bonus they won’t pay taxes.   Good job white saviors! 
 

I hope this goes to Petersburg now.   I always thought they could benefit from it more and positive growth in the metro area is good for Richmond. 
 

As for what the rich black lady said…black people  can smack talk each other.   I saw nothing wrong, or even interesting, about anything she said.   
 

The question that was never asked is: who was funding the opposition?  They spent millions of dollars too (and had a plane flying over the folk festival pulling a “vote no” banner).   I suspect it was whatever group owns all of those Queen skills games at every corner market lol. 
 

It was still a great night in the USA so I’m not too sad about this failing.  I am  sorry for South Richmond residents though.  They will have to wait another 40 years for any economic activity. 

I wonder if the Pamumkey still have that tract off of Commerce Road? Remember that picture of the gorgeous high-rise hotel they were planning?

If, in fact, they DO go the long-route and build here (and who knows how long that process will take) - do we have a good read on where they might locate their casino?

[EJ_LEWIS]

The renderings of the Casino were real nice.  What were the reasons for Richmond voters voting down a Casino?

[eandslee]

1 hour ago, EJ_LEWIS said:

The renderings of the Casino were real nice.  What were the reasons for Richmond voters voting down a Casino?

I tend to believe that it was the operator of the casino that people didn’t like. Plus, there was the way they were chosen by the city (very suspect), and I still believe there is some prevailing idea that the casino was the only part of this development - not sure any of the other amenities they were offering were even being considered.  I believe many inaccurately thought this was just going to be a really really big Rosie’s!  
 

Oh well…in any case, I’m now pulling for Petersburg to step up and vote in a casino.  They honestly should have had the next crack at it before Richmond got a second chance anyway.  Call him crazy, but Joe Morrissey was onto something by pushing to vote for casino in Petersburg in the first place.  Maybe someone can pick up where he left off. 

[whw53]

In my opinion the fact that everyone north of the river and most of NW south of it were staring at uncontested assembly races played a psychological role here. To many this became a way to build in some political purpose in the face of otherwise uncompetitive precincts.     - the narrative was easy to buy into and  for those that are new to Richmond or at VCU it was a way to feel like they were important or a real part of the city.  It was activism for lazy people so it fit the bill for what a lot of well-off self important crusader types need to get by. 

Edited November 8, 2023 by whw53

[Flood Zone]

Based on a sample size of "people I spoke with," the most common sentiments* I heard were:

- Vote 1: This thing feels a bit like the Springfield Monorail;

- Vote 2: We already voted this thing down; how many times do we have to revisit it?

I'd say the latter accounts for much of the difference between the two results. 

*By which I mean "anti" sentiments; I spoke with several people who supported it, too.

Edited November 8, 2023 by Flood Zone

[I miss RVA]

2 hours ago, eandslee said:

I tend to believe that it was the operator of the casino that people didn’t like. Plus, there was the way they were chosen by the city (very suspect), and I still believe there is some prevailing idea that the casino was the only part of this development - not sure any of the other amenities they were offering were even being considered.  I believe many inaccurately thought this was just going to be a really really big Rosie’s!  
 

Oh well…in any case, I’m now pulling for Petersburg to step up and vote in a casino.  They honestly should have had the next crack at it before Richmond got a second chance anyway.  Call him crazy, but Joe Morrissey was onto something by pushing to vote for casino in Petersburg in the first place.  Maybe someone can pick up where he left off. 

You hit on a couple of salient points, @eandslee. 1.) The second vote, it can be argued, absolutely was torpedoed by the overwhelming dislike of the operator. This group played their tactical cards about as inanely as can possibly be played, particularly toward the end. No idea what their thinking was, tactically - but it was sure to backfire. I watch a YouTuber who presents a lot of history of the NFL and every week posts multiple episodes criticizing stupid coaching moves during games in a series of episodes called "Dumb Decisions". The actions of this casino operator during this referendum cycle - and for the city writ large during the ENTIRE process - could qualify as the epitome of "dumb decisions."

2.) The entire process - not even getting a "yay or nay" vote on even HAVING a casino before going to what should have been the secondary part of the process - determining where to put a casino and who should operate it - was, IMNSHO, doomed to fail from the start. I would be curious to know how the other localities - all of which had no difficulty getting these measures approved - handled the situation. I tend to think that this methodology torpedoed the first vote, to the point that the second referendum stood almost no chance of winning.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: City Hall has NO business attempting to cosplay as development brokers. Given the significant involvement of actual legit professional planners in the cases of the Diamond District and City Center - I'd argue that the jury is still out on those two initiatives. But it seems like when the city administration tries to don the developer's hat (witness Navy Hill, now the casino, among many other pie-in-the-sky failed measures over the past 50 years), nothing good comes of it.

[123fakestreet]

5 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

 Not saying it would have been the difference maker, but one has to wonder if perhaps the measure would have passed had the city been a bit smarter about this - and put less emphasis on the "who" and "where" and first established the "whether" or "not".

Agree with this. First of all, do we even want a casino? Then, who is the operator that gets awarded the license? Finally, where will it go?  All of this stuff was done out of order, or without appropriate input.  There's only one final vote that goes on the ballot, but the city needed to do a way better job of selecting which one that was.  

Would have loved a casino run by LIVE! or another operator, and in a more prime (but not out of place) location. UrbanOne seemed to grease all the skids and get their proposal chosen by local politicians, while the other developers didn't even seem to do basic research on the Richmond market (no way in hell Richmond was going to support a Casino near Stratford Hills).  So UrbanOne was the chosen developer by City Council and it was them, at that location, or nothing.  Then they flubbed the whole thing not once by twice with their incompetence.

Their entire first pitch seemed race based - a black owned Casino for black customers, benefitting local black residents with jobs.  Which always seemed weird to me on basic business sense, if you are in Vegas and there are 20 casinos sure differentiate yourself by appealing to the black market, but if you are the only game in town why limit your market to ~12% of the population?  Anyway, they used that same philosophy in their political campaign as well, they seemed to think black voters are the majority in Richmond and we will just go all in on their vote, forget anyone else. They either didn't try or had no idea how to appeal to white voters, and it showed*.  They paid them a little lip service by implying if they didn't vote yes they were racist.  The whole approach was really divisive and just turned people off.  The 2nd campaign was much less race based (other than the CEO going on the radio and shooting herself in the foot) - renaming it the "Richmond Grand" was a lot more appealing, but the damage had been done and people weren't going to give it a 2nd chance.  

UrbanOne really comes off as a completely incompetent and corrupt organization with an idiot racist CEO, and while I wanted a casino I'm glad that organization won't be operating one here.

*this is where any decent company would have hired a marketing firm to handle this, which it seems like was done the 2nd time around.  Based on what I've seen of the CEO my guess is she very arrogantly and foolishly said the first time that they knew how to appeal to the black market and they'd run the campaign. Colonial Downs probably insisted on hiring a professional marketing firm the 2nd time around, which is why the campaign was so much better. But that's just my theory.

Edited November 8, 2023 by 123fakestreet

[KJHburg]

In other news Urban One's stock price dropped 35% today OUCH.  Perhaps insulting people who may disagree with your proposal is not the best strategy.  This company should never be given the opportunity to bid again on a future local casino.  

UONE: Urban One Inc - Stock Price, Quote and News - CNBC

[I miss RVA]

41 minutes ago, 123fakestreet said:

A First of all, do we even want a casino? Then, who is the operator that gets awarded the license? Finally, where will it go?  All of this stuff was done out of order, or without appropriate input.  There's only one final vote that goes on the ballot, but the city needed to do a way better job of selecting which one that was.  

Would have loved a casino run by LIVE! or another operator, and in a more prime (but not out of place) location. UrbanOne seemed to grease all the skids and get their proposal chosen by local politicians, while the other developers didn't even seem to do basic research on the Richmond market (no way in hell Richmond was going to support a Casino near Stratford Hills).  So UrbanOne was the chosen developer by City Council and it was them, at that location, or nothing.  Then they flubbed the whole thing not once by twice with their incompetence.

Great stuff all the way around, @123fakestreet. A lot to unpack - so for now, I'll respond to your first two points:

1.) 100% spot on!!! You nailed the correct order in which this process SHOULD have unfolded. Would it have taken several votes? Probably. But the FIRST vote should have been the "yes/no" on a casino vote. Alllllllllll the other stuff could have either been handled via public hearings, other methods similar to how the city worked to get input for the Richmond 300 Plan and the various satellite SAPs - or even could have gone to separate referenda. HOWEVER - even just establishing whether or not the electorate wanted a casino should have been determined right out of the box. Worry about who will run it and where it will go only AFTER the "yes, we want it" part is secured. No idea if the city was trying to "game the system" (sorry, I couldn't resist!) - or maybe take a shortcut by combining what were several connected but disparate issues into one huge "one-size-fits-most" kind of vote - but if that WAS their strategy, it totally backfired.  (As the football guy I follow on YouTube says - "Welcome to Dumb Decisions!!!")

2.) Again, without going back to research all the twists and turns in the road that took place during the selection process, but I do believe that the city was hellbent on selecting Urban One throughout the bidding and selection process - and that the other operators really not only had little more than a snowball's chance of being selected, but were little more than "window dressing" to give the appearance that the selection process was, in fact, a legitimate process that was actually remotely "fair". I seem to recall having the gut feeling that the process was neither fair nor legit. (Not necessarily going to go as far as saying "the fix was in" - but man oh man, if my faulty memory serves...)

And yeah - no one in their right mind who knows much/if ANYTHING about Richmond would even remotely think that a casino in Stratford Hills would be anything other than a non-starter.

I'm honestly not sure if or how the city could have fumbled this one worse than they did. Not saying a casino would have been accepted by the Richmond electorate (particularly the uber-conservative, old-school, old-guard of the electorate). But the city really didn't give this any realistic chance of succeeding in the way they went about managing a process that could have netted better results had it been handled correctly.

[I miss RVA]

24 minutes ago, KJHburg said:

In other news Urban One's stock price dropped 35% today OUCH.  Perhaps insulting people who may disagree with your proposal is not the best strategy.  This company should never be given the opportunity to bid again on a future local casino.  

UONE: Urban One Inc - Stock Price, Quote and News - CNBC

I'm sure that major screw up (insulting those opposed to them) - plus the fact that their initial setback two years ago (by just a razor-thin margin) turned into a resounding 16-point hammering at the hands of the electorate wasn't lost on investors - hence, folks bailing on the stock. Methinks folks can't get those stock certificates to the shredders fast enough on this one.

[123fakestreet]

2 hours ago, I miss RVA said:

I'm sure that major screw up (insulting those opposed to them) - plus the fact that their initial setback two years ago (by just a razor-thin margin) turned into a resounding 16-point hammering at the hands of the electorate wasn't lost on investors - hence, folks bailing on the stock. Methinks folks can't get those stock certificates to the shredders fast enough on this one.

They are getting ready to get de-listed anyway.  Which I felt like was overplayed by casino opponents, but in her radio interview the CEO completely brushed it off as -her words- "a status symbol" with the attitude that they weren't going to correct anything and didn't care if it happened. WOW message to current and potential investors. You can get away with that if you run a mom and pop business but not how you run a publicly traded company valued at almost $200M.  Absolute arrogant incompetence, which is a strong running theme for this woman.  She wants to make money so bad by opening a casino but can't put her ego aside in the pursuit of it.

[plain]

Kathy Hughes fumbled the bag in the late hour with her big mouth. Whatever slim chance of getting a YES vote disappeared, and she has only herself to blame. This is going to have some long repercussions for Urban One, and something tells me she's not done putting her foot in her mouth.

 

Also, much like the first time, I don't believe many of the people that actually like the idea of having a casino in Richmond actually got out to actually vote (for anything). If it isn't a presidential or gubernatorial race involved, a lot of people (especially many people I know smdh) isn't even going to bother. 

 

I completely agree about the process though, it was completely ass backwards. A vote for a casino period should've came FIRST, then the selection of an operator could've been hammered out afterwards. Both the mayor AND city council should've realized this from the very beginning, but alas, here we are.

 

And this point it's going to be either the Pumunkey Tribe in Richmond or someone in Petersburg. I'm going Petersburg all the way.

[I miss RVA]

25 minutes ago, plain said:

Kathy Hughes fumbled the bag in the late hour with her big mouth. Whatever slim chance of getting a YES vote disappeared, and she has only herself to blame. This is going to have some long repercussions for Urban One, and something tells me she's not done putting her foot in her mouth.

 

Also, much like the first time, I don't believe many of the people that actually like the idea of having a casino in Richmond actually got out to actually vote (for anything). If it isn't a presidential or gubernatorial race involved, a lot of people (especially many people I know smdh) isn't even going to bother. 

 

I completely agree about the process though, it was completely ass backwards. A vote for a casino period should've came FIRST, then the selection of an operator could've been hammered out afterwards. Both the mayor AND city council should've realized this from the very beginning, but alas, here we are.

 

And this point it's going to be either the Pumunkey Tribe in Richmond or someone in Petersburg. I'm going Petersburg all the way.

!!! Well said, @plainon all four points.

My quick response to each of the four:

1.) It was a fumble as epic as Earnest Byner's goal-line (well, 1 yard line) fumble in the 1987 AFC Championship Game (January 1988) at Denver that cost the Browns a trip to the Super Bowl. A "yes" vote was, at best, on life-support - and frankly I don't think it was realistic. HOWEVER - her idiotic comments completely sealed the deal. At that point "NO" went to "OH, HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL NO!!!".

2.) Sad but true.

3.) Bingo. Establish a "yay" or "nay" before worrying about ANY of the details. The details are a moot point if the whole shebang gets shot down up front. I might be wrong, but I think the casino measure had a much better chance of passing on a generic "do you want a casino in Richmond" vote - rather than a "do you want this casino run by these people in this location in Richmond". To this day, I don't understand how/why the city couldn't get this simple equation right.

4.) Technically, we could get both, no? Meaning - Petersburg could get the next at-bat for the casino (I think that would have to go back to the G.A. to be approved as a locale for a casino) - and the Pamunkey can build "by right" (through they have a long process to follow as well.) My question remains: if the Pamunkey DO build in Richmond, will it be on that tract toward the southern portion of Commerce Road?

[wrldcoupe4]

The Pamunkey can’t get their Norfolk site out of first gear, what makes you think they can do both at this point?

[eandslee]

Yeah, I don’t have any faith that the Pamunkey can pull it off in Richmond either.

Let me also just say that if Richmond had not delayed voting on whether to have a casino the very first year when everyone else in Virginia voted, I think it would have passed in a landslide like all the other locations in Virginia.  The delay caused people to think of all the reasons not to build one and the build-up of those sentiments ruled both Election Days.  The delay in voting was the death knell for Richmond’s casino. 

[I miss RVA]

14 minutes ago, eandslee said:

Let me also just say that if Richmond had not delayed voting on whether to have a casino the very first year when everyone else in Virginia voted, I think it would have passed in a landslide like all the other locations in Virginia.  The delay caused people to think of all the reasons not to build one and the build-up of those sentiments ruled both Election Days.  The delay in voting was the death knell for Richmond’s casino. 

!!!  THIS!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[wrldcoupe4]

We also structured ours differently. Everyone else voted first whether to have a casino or not and then selected location and operator later. 

[HRVA]

10 minutes ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

We also structured ours differently. Everyone else voted first whether to have a casino or not and then selected location and operator later. 

Every other location had a site and operator selected prior to their respective referendums. I believe that was a requirement in the state law that was passed enabling all of this. 

[HRVA]

Here’s the specific language each municipality had to use in their referendums:
"Shall casino gaming be permitted at a casino gaming establishment in ________________________ (name of city and location) as may be approved by the Virginia Lottery Board?  [ ] Yes  [ ] No"

And the requirement that a preferred operator be selected prior to the referendum:

An eligible host city shall promptly submit its preferred casino gaming operator to the Department for review prior to scheduling the referendum required by § 58.1-4123.

Both link to the Code of Virginia sections quoted.

 

[I miss RVA]

15 hours ago, wrldcoupe4 said:

The Pamunkey can’t get their Norfolk site out of first gear, what makes you think they can do both at this point?

Oy vey - stuck in the proverbial mud on their development, are they? Wow...

[I miss RVA]

Not to beat a dead horse, but Axios Richmond has a brief analysis of the vote tallies by city precinct in this month's casino referendum redux. Nothing really "new" in terms of what parts of the city gave the most or least support to the initiative. According to Axios - quoting figures released this week by the city registrar's office - the least support came from the Fan and the Museum District, with just 14% and 15% of voters in those districts respectively voting "yes". The most support came from Mosby Court and Gilpin Court, where 88% and 83% of voters there respectively voting "yes".

And there you have it.

From today's Axios Richmond:

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2023/11/16/casino-referendum-results-divide?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axioslocal_richmond&stream=top

Edited November 17, 2023 by I miss RVA

[DalWill]

On 11/17/2023 at 9:56 AM, I miss RVA said:

Not to beat a dead horse, but Axios Richmond has a brief analysis of the vote tallies by city precinct in this month's casino referendum redux. Nothing really "new" in terms of what parts of the city gave the most or least support to the initiative. According to Axios - quoting figures released this week by the city registrar's office - the least support came from the Fan and the Museum District, with just 14% and 15% of voters in those districts respectively voting "yes". The most support came from Mosby Court and Gilpin Court, where 88% and 83% of voters there respectively voting "yes".

And there you have it.

From today's Axios Richmond:

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2023/11/16/casino-referendum-results-divide?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axioslocal_richmond&stream=top

Confirmed my point in the previous posts. The million dollar question: what’s next?

[rjp212]

Not to rehash the Casino debate, but the land formally planned for the Urban One Casino is now on the market.    Hopefully, it'll land some sort of logistics or manufacturing relocation.

https://thalhimer.com/listings/philip-morris-operations-center/