New Jersey has had its most eventful years when it comes to its gambling industry for some time now. In the first place, the state saw four of its twelve casinos close doors in 2014. In 2015, efforts for casino expansion beyond Atlantic City emerged. Early this year, the proposal was approved by the Legislature and is now to be voted on by residents at the November ballot. Meanwhile, PokerStars, the world’s biggest poker room, launched its operations within New Jersey’s borders only several days ago.
Casino gambling was first introduced in the state following a 1976 referendum. Voters approved the establishment of gaming venues in Atlantic City, the only place within New Jersey where casino gambling has been legal for four decades now. The city quickly turned into a preferred gaming destination and had its very happy times.
However, the once-popular gambling hub is now way too far from its former glory. As mentioned above, it lost four of its luxury hotel and casino resorts within the span of less than one calendar year. Not to mention the fact that city officials have been in a state of despair for some time now, looking for ways to fill considerable budget gaps and prevent it from going bankrupt.
Gambling expansion in neighboring states was to a great extent what brought Atlantic City to current state. Its glitzy resorts were clearly not enough to keep people from spending their money somewhere else. And those same glitzy resorts were clearly outshone by other glitzy resorts in the region.
What is more, the expansion in surrounding states is far from being over. New York is on its way to launching its first three full-scale commercial casinos and Pennsylvania is considering the legalization of online gaming options. In addition, a number of new casinos are set to open doors in New England, a region located not far away from New Jersey.
Over the past several years, revenue from Atlantic City’s casinos has fallen drastically. It is true that the city has been reporting certain improvement in the past month but it is still too far away from its previous luster and financial results. In order to prevent the gambling hub from losing more much-needed casino revenue to venues in neighboring states, New Jersey legislators came up with a controversial plan for expansion within the state’s borders.
Last year, there were, in fact, two bills to be introduced to lawmakers, with them both calling for the establishment of two full-scale gambling facilities in North Jersey. The proposals met both strong opposition and quite a lot of support. Opponents argued that such an expansion would be detrimental to Atlantic City as the new venues would steal customers and revenue from the resort’s existing casinos. Proponents, however, claimed that the establishment of two new casino complexes was exactly what the state and its struggling gambling industry needed.
Here it is important to note that both bills contained provisions under which the two North Jersey venues would annually contribute a portion of the revenue they generate to help Atlantic City. The proposals differed in the exact percentage of revenue that would be paid to the city in a bid to improve its economy.
One of the bills was introduced by Senate President Steve Sweeney and, therefore, was backed by the Senate. The other was sponsored by Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto and had the state Assembly’s support.
Another important difference between the two proposed legislations was the ownership of the two new casinos. Senate President Sweeney’s bill called for both new venues to be built and managed by operators that have already been operating casinos in Atlantic City. Under Assembly Speaker Prieto’s proposal, only one of the North Jersey facilities was to be owned by and existing Atlantic City operator.
After months and months of bickering over which one of the two bills was the better one for Atlantic City and New Jersey as a whole, the two legislators and their backers eventually agreed upon a single proposal that would need to be approved by state residents. Under that proposal, existing Atlantic City operators would be given the chance to be the first to bid for the two North Jersey casinos. They would be allowed to partner with investors from outside the state but they would own at least 51% in the venues.
Atlantic City operators will be given a certain period during which they would have to apply for a license. If, however, they fail to do so, interested parties from outside New Jersey will be allowed to bid for ownership.
Another important thing to take into account is a provision of the bill that requires for the amount of $1 billion or more to be spent on each of the two new casinos. Legislators have pointed out that they want full-fledged gambling venues and not just “slots in a box.”
Earlier in March, the state Legislature approved the proposed legislation. In order for the casino expansion plan to be materialized, an amendment in the New Jersey Constitution should be implemented. And this change should be approved by state residents. New Jersey voters will have their chance to state their opinion on the matter at the November ballot.
For that purpose, lawmakers approved last month a ballot question. Voters will have to answer whether they support the establishment of two full-scale casinos in North Jersey. Here is the full text of the question:
“Do you approve amending the Constitution to permit casino gambling in two additional counties in this State? At present, casino gambling is allowed only in Atlantic City in Atlantic County. Only one casino in each of the two counties would be permitted. Each casino is to be located in a town that is at least 72 miles from Atlantic City. The amendment would allow certain persons to apply first for a casino license.”
After the casino expansion has been backed by the state Legislature, issues regarding the proposed legislations, or at least some of them, have been ironed out, and a ballot question has been agreed upon, it is now up to operators, legislators, and other involved parties to convince New Jersey residents why they should or should not vote in favor of the proposal. For that purpose, millions of dollars will certainly be spent over the next several months on various campaigns in support or in opposition of the planned expansion. And we all will have to wait until November to find out what voters think on the matter.
