Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

CrassostreaVirginica OP t1_iz9rijd wrote

For those paywalled, this article preview from VPAP:

>Richmond's first wish from the General Assembly is another opportunity for voters to approve a casino, even if the city has to share regional gaming revenues with a potential rival operation in Petersburg. Most of Richmond's legislative priorities for the coming assembly session center on promoting affordable housing and protecting existing homeowners from being taxed out of their homes by an overheated housing market. The city also wants, as its second highest priority, to prevent any state effort to accelerate the required completion of a $1.3 billion combined-sewer cleanup of the James River before 2035.

15

lunar_unit t1_iz9t522 wrote

>to prevent any state effort to accelerate the required completion of a $1.3 billion combined-sewer cleanup of the James River before 2035.

If the state and/or Fed chips in more dollars, then just get it done. If they don't, 2035 isn't realistic if it's solely funded by local dollars

15

lunar_unit t1_iz9vj9r wrote

Trump was pretty sad about being defeated too. But that's how Democracy works. Not everyone is going to be happy, but if 51% of the neighbors vote a certain way, that's how it's gotta stay, unless we plan on fighting each and every election until we're happy with the results.

If enough people had wanted the casino, then enough people would have voted for the referendum, but we didn't, and we didn't. 🤷‍♂️

33

Diet_Coke t1_iz9vob6 wrote

>promoting affordable housing and protecting existing homeowners from being taxed out of their homes by an overheated housing market

Oh, I've got the solution guys! Let's let homeowners and out of town investors buy homes and turn them into short term rentals. That will fix our housing market.

26

freetimerva t1_iz9w50p wrote

I can't wait to vote NO again.

Voting to allow some asshole from Atlanta to have a casino monopoly in Richmond is embarrassing.

Either just legalize gambling or dont.

94

Diet_Coke t1_iz9x9hb wrote

I agree, if I was king of Richmond for a day I'd change our zoning rules to make it against regulations for an LLC to own a 1 - 4 family dwelling. Homes should be for shelter, not investing.

8

goodsam2 t1_iz9yxan wrote

It doesn't matter about short term rentals or not. I'm convinced a lot of that is a tax scheme to get around hotel taxes which are high because it's out of Towners.

The reason they buy it as investors is because the supply is not meeting demand so prices will rise. The big investors literally put in their sheets they love NIMBYs.

Add enough housing so that investors lose money. IMO the investor talk is because people don't like the idea that it's the people around them who are raising prices.

2

JosefDerArbeiter t1_iza0niu wrote

I'd love for the site of the casino to be a new manufacturer. I'm not sure what type of business that would be, but surely the city could court some global company to choose this lot as an investment location? The area is already built up for manufacturing and storage.

Instead Richmond is choosing to dig their heels in.

8

Ditovontease t1_iza10wu wrote

>to prevent any state effort to accelerate the required completion of a $1.3 billion combined-sewer cleanup of the James River before 2035.

lol

so basically "priority 1 is casino, priority 2 is keeping the james polluted for as long as possible"

cool. coolcoolcoolcool

8

GMUcovidta t1_iza3yg4 wrote

There's times they have to- like if they're building a new development, warehouse etc. they may have to buy and demolish several single family homes. They may also buy a single family home and transition it into something else. You see this a lot with large older properties being converted into hotels, event venues etc.

It should definitely be regulated but a flat out ban doesn't make sense.

6

Mr_Boneman t1_iza4le3 wrote

Councilman Mike Jones LLC owns the house he “lives in” in his district. Of course he owns multiple properties outside the city and his son was a star QB at Henrico HS while he was serving on city council. Managed to put a stop sign in front of the house on a commuter road as well that makes no sense being there other than to make his life more convenient. Really need someone to run against him in the new HOD district carved out for him as he preps to be our next mayor.

9

americanspirit64 t1_iza5tee wrote

This is the end result of unregulated Capitalism. Without regulation nothing will change. The prices of housing it going to continue to rise, which means wages will rise as well, in direct opposition the Federal Reserve Banks, desire to lower wages in the misguided believe that inflation is caused by a shortage of low paying workers. We are at the highest employment rate in decades 3.5%. First raise the minimum wage to fifteen an hour. Then regulate utilities. Biden should have made it clear it railroads can't fix the problems and give sick days. The government will nationalize the railroads companies... F*ck Casino's. That isn't a economic plan its a lobbying issue.

3

goodsam2 t1_iza9ij0 wrote

The casino plan was for them to pay Richmond $20 million plus $1 million per year, along with donating some amount to charity and another music venue.

Since we can authorize them or not they had to pay Richmond an extra tax, on top of another business moving into an empty area.

5

SwanOverSunshine t1_izafqcm wrote

Oh no, is he going to run for mayor? He’s so terrible, def not smart and ethical enough for that. He’s such a divider in the community, very us vs them. Was hoping he’d go into the general assembly where he would do less damage since he’d be one of many.

7

SwanOverSunshine t1_izag0p5 wrote

I wish we the actual people of Richmond could send a request for what we want to the General Assembly. Doubt the casino would be top of the list. Bet something related to more state funding for schools, teachers, and roads would be . . .

18

DCFishingGuy t1_izai0vh wrote

>richmond.com/news/s...

So then all these go up for sale, the people living their get evicted, the same people don't have the money to buy them, the housing market crashes which affects the larger economy and the people who couldn't afford to live before are the most affected. Congrats you just destroyed our city.

−1

Diet_Coke t1_izanhps wrote

No, they could still be owned by individual investors just without the protection of an LLC. One impact of that is that it makes slumlords personally liable for their properties, they can't play a shell game with LLCs and avoid liability for giving their tenants lead poisoning or failing to remediate black mold. From an insurance perspective, it would also limit one individual to owning ~4 - 5, maybe up to 15, 1 - 4 family dwellings because you can't get insurance for more than that as an individual.

I'm sure there would be some people who sold their properties. This change likely would put downward pressure on housing prices, which would be a good thing. It would not crash the market.

6

freetimerva t1_izar2zw wrote

Richmond is spending all this time and effort for a casino...

and in the same breath...

>The city also wants, as its second highest priority, to prevent any state effort to accelerate the required completion of a $1.3 billion combined-sewer cleanup of the James River before 2035.

Levar, we got real problems in the city and a casino isnt one of them.

43

Professional_Book912 t1_izar8d3 wrote

It should read "Stoney" not "Richmond".

We are F'd until a new administration. This one does not care about the employee.

14

SauseegeGravy t1_izaracl wrote

But if you hit it big you can continue to afford living in the city.

3

I_AM_RVA t1_izatj94 wrote

The casino is going to be so fetch

0

tornadogenesis t1_izauieq wrote

Richmond literally voted no on this. This brings it to the bottom of the "wish list"

How about enough ambulances to serve us? How about fair pay for emts? How about more money for teachers and schools?

All the casino will do is pad the pockets of the politicians and the rich. Disgusting.

30

tornadogenesis t1_izav6sg wrote

As someone who lives in Richmond i cannot vote for for people in Petersburg. If they want it they can vote yes. I can however vote and say, "No thank you, not in our city. Take your filthy money elsewhere."

That money up front sounds appealing but there is a much greater cost in the long run. The casino is not a boon, it is a money drain that funnels our cash into the pockets of the rich and the politicians.

6

Gwala_BKK t1_izb2q1f wrote

Not true though is it? Casinos are a blatantly immoral and predatory business and accepting that into your culture has snowballing effects. Petersburg shouldn't have one either but I'd rather it be outside of the city than have it directly festering in the heart of what is currently a very positive movement

0

LostDefectivePearl t1_izb32ym wrote

Who the literal fuck wants this fucking casino? Never met a real person who does.

5

fishmapper t1_izb3ezu wrote

Because that’s a cost of $5600 per resident of the city(1.3b/230k). A family of 4 cost would be over $20k for their share.

Really the state/fed funding is the only way to make this feasible. You have new residents to the city (new movers or new born for the last 50 years) who are on the hook for over 100 years worth of bad infrastructure.

3

fishmapper t1_izb3n41 wrote

Other newer cities and large urban areas have the luxury of not trying to shoehorn two sewage systems into space that’s been built up like Lynchburg Richmond and Alexandria (or was it Arlington?)

2

LostDefectivePearl t1_izb4fun wrote

I’m looking into an LLC for when I buy a house because I don’t want my name to be that easily searchable in public records. My partner has gotten death threats at work due to the nature of her job. It wouldn’t be hard to see who holds the LLC but just that small obstacle would probably stop some unhinged people from finding our address.

1

bozatwork t1_izb4o1m wrote

Wow, that headline is so inaccurate and annoying. I listen to City Council meetings, attend school board meetings, go to PTA meetings, attend my district's town halls, attend my civic association's meetings, subscribe to the newspaper (digital), follow the local broadcast news, talk to my neighbors and coworkers, and I can tell you that a casino has not been listed as a priority by anyone in the last year. We are asking the General Assembly for a lot but a casino isn't on the list.

18

Alligetiserror37 t1_izb7zti wrote

Affordable housing, fixing the damn potholes, cleaning the James, so many things before a fucking casino

18

gravy_boot t1_izb8yfs wrote

> But moving it a few minutes further down the road outside of an invisible border will prevent it from affecting the city at all.”

Literally no one here has said that- this is just you inventing something that doesn’t exist so you can wag your finger at it.

0

Asterion7 t1_izb970r wrote

Do your own research. All the studies were linked here the first time around. Casinos and sports stadiums are almost always long term net negatives for municipalities. I don't think it's changed in the last two years.

As for "political boundaries" last time I checked Petersburg was a decent drive down an interstate. I think we will be mostly insulated. Again I don't think Petersburg should go for it either. But I don't live there or vote there.

2

gravy_boot t1_izbcsmr wrote

Ah ok, one comment which wasn’t referring to any part of Petersburg that’s “15 minutes” south of Richmond. But I guess you adeptly conclude that we all agree it’s fine.

0

Mr_Boneman t1_izbd2bp wrote

I fear he’s setting up his HOD run to raise funds/gain attention for his mayoral run. Grade A affinity scammer, Dwight Jones with CTE and makes Stoney sound like a Rhodes scholar. He wouldn’t win if someone competent runs against him (Please John Balisles) but if it turns into a 3-5 person race that’s where I worry. Not enough people pay enough attention to him or know how shitty his record is, or that he couldn’t even properly file paperwork to run for office. Addison is too milquetoast to win against him and has other un redeeming qualities that would make it hard to beat him.

2

gravy_boot t1_izbf2ra wrote

Petersburg the city, which is what that person was talking about, is a 30 min drive. Not 15, which is what you are imagining that we all believe is fine.

> any logical reading of the anti-casino folks’ arguments in context makes it clear the vast majority believe that.

This is instructive about how your broken logic works. Because you saw a handful of comments by noisy redditors you can somehow deduce what the “vast majority” believe.

I guess that’s similar to how you deduced what 85% of people want based on the votes of 15%.

0

plummbob t1_izbnw2v wrote

>
>
>Richmond advocates a constitutional amendment to allow local governments the option of creating tax exemptions and other tools to protect homeowners from rising real estate taxes because of soaring home prices and assessments.

​

​

prop 13 to RVA? I heard its been a resounding success in california.

​

​

> Allowing local governments to develop and implement means-tested, long-term owner-occupied real state tax relief programs will help prevent the displacement of long-term owner occupants due to dramatically rising property tax assessments, thereby leading to neighborhood gentrification,” the city states as its third legislative priority.

​

​

we'll fucking do anything but legalize more housing. we'll even ensure people are stuck in pockets of multi-generational poverty before they legalize more housing.

4

Mr_Boneman t1_izby27x wrote

I’m not aware of it? My guess is when he left the Stoney Admin he knew what was coming with regards to their competence and agenda. I’m sure he’ll do something’s I won’t agree with, but him and Agelasto are sorely missed on CC.

2

RCBilldoz t1_izcacic wrote

Please, someone, FOIA all the document used to determine the casino was a top priority.

City workers? Residents? Council? Le-Le?

3

RCBilldoz t1_izcapqm wrote

This is Stoney’s last stand. What are there? 2 years left? No time for real change. He needs this casino to move to his next goal, whatever that is.

4

Charlesinrichmond t1_izciya6 wrote

Okay putting my lawyer hat on this makes so little sense I cannot even parse it

This would require the complete conversion of the US to a communist society to work I'm not actually kidding. You have to destroy most American laws it makes the Trump take on things look minor

You might not realize how trumpian this is

0

ThatSadOptimist t1_izcoioj wrote

Funny, when I show up with a few hundred friends to talk about gun violence, he's not around. Maybe he's hanging out with other people in Richmond.

0

Tylerjb4 t1_izdimdt wrote

Off topic but I would legitimately rather be ruled over by a monarchy that I disagreed with as opposed to being a political minority in a democracy. The only saving grace is the constitution with the bill of rights.

−2

Djlewzer t1_izdqbhc wrote

Would love for development contracts to be tied to things like this. My guess that it’s effectiveness would be limited because not everyone would do it. Developers would just go elsewhere. I would love to be proven wrong though.

2

freetimerva t1_izdwjpe wrote

You obviously live on the north bank of the river west of downtown.

I live and work in southside where the vast majority voted YES. A lot of people here truly believed that a casino would help the community.

Urban One spent over a million dollars spreading lies to Richmonders about the benefits of their development. They probably spent a similar amount getting local officials on board.

2

LostDefectivePearl t1_ize3rgz wrote

Thank you for not outright saying short pump lol but no, I think it’s because I work in science/medicine so there’s apparently a significant bias in that group.

Personally I have always hated casinos, they weaponize one of the sweetest human emotions (hope) to efficiently extract money from people who are almost always not rich.

3

lunar_unit t1_izesk5e wrote

That's not a very well thought out statement.

You're a minority every time the other party that you don't support wins enough Congress seats and has a sitting president. That's how our system has worked for over 200 years, and while it's far from perfect, it's worked fairly well over time.

You having never lived under a true monarchy, means you can't actually compare what that means, but if you take a look at monarchies like Saudi Arabia or Brunei or historical European monarchies, if you disagree politically, they can disappear you or take all your assets without any lawful due process protections at all.

1

Tylerjb4 t1_izf5u3m wrote

Hitler rose to power democratically.

Pol pot was elected.

American democrats fought to keep black people enslaved, and then with as few rights as possible.

An elected American democrat president put Japanese in internment camps.

An elected American democrat president marched Indians from their lands to Oklahoma.

Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.

1

lunar_unit t1_izf9ml7 wrote

Dude, what's your point? Humans fucking suck everywhere, in every time in history. And you still have more rights in an American democracy than in a monarchy. Go ask Jamal Kashoggi how he feels after Mohamed bin Salman, Crown Prince of Saudi ordered his killing and dismemberment (on foreign soil, no less) and got away with it even though everyone knows he did it.

If you're trying to suggest that life would be better if we had Trump as King, (I see you don't mention any Republican political shenanigans in your examples) then you drank too much Kool aid, because he doesn't give a shit about anybody but himself.

Back to your original statement, if you've lived your entire life in the US, you've lived under both Democrats and Republicans. Can you say your life is better under one, compared to the other? And being that you have lived under that kind of situation, what are you still doing here?

1

Tylerjb4 t1_izfedur wrote

You’re comparing possibly the best democracy against one of the worst monarchies. In a more comparable matchup, I would much rather live in modern Saudi Arabia than third reich Germany.

I would definitely take king trump because he can be held solely responsible. If he does something terrible, we yeet and replace him. At least a monarchy has long term generational investment in the success of their country. Our government is too busy trying to pass laws just to spite the other half.

Fuck the republicans, too. But the 3 biggest American fuck ups I could think of were Democrat orchestrated. You got anything the republicans did worse than those 3?

Personally, I’m more of a libertarian, minarchist, ancap. All governments suck ass. Their sole function should be common defense, enforcing contracts, and protecting natural rights.

1

Charlesinrichmond t1_izfewfe wrote

nope. The Trump who wants to destroy the constitution and our democracy and rule of law.

He wants to destroy some aspects. You want to destroy other aspects. I actually give you the benefit of the doubt and I don't think you realize what you are proposing.

Corporations are just people. Groups of people. Your proposal boils down to overturning property rights, which is a big change in our society, and would quite literally require pitching a big chunk of the constitution

0

lunar_unit t1_izfkz5j wrote

And royalty has been the force behind millennia of greed, corruption, colonialism, invasions, pogroms, ethnic cleansings, slavery, torture, land theft, unfair taxation, murderous crushers of dissent, etc etc, all over the globe.

>All governments suck ass. Their sole function should be common defense, enforcing contracts, and protecting natural rights.

Maybe we can agree there, but in a human world, there's always going to be corruption, and the most corruptible are most drawn to power, regardless of their political affiliation. We're fucked!

Anyway, have a good weekend.

1

plummbob t1_izfqdxh wrote

Depending on the extent, that could just geographically lock people in place because they would face a steep increase if they tried to move. It would also result in inderdevelopemnt, causing home prices to appreciate faster than otherwise.

0

plummbob t1_izfryhz wrote

A homestead exemption in rva won't help if you try to move to nova. It would have to be statewide, but we can see in areas other areas like california and colorado, it doesn't help in any long term way in maintaining affordability. Nor does it help renters, who are often low income, and depending on the extent can cause budget issues from a decline in revenue.

A more economocally effective policy is a low income tax credit.... a "property tax break circuit breaker"

1

TNRAOIH t1_izfs9gt wrote

That’s interesting, I’ll have to read up on the capitalist economy of the Sioux prior to the expansion of colonial powers. Maybe there’s also some research on how the North Sentinel Islanders, currently untouched by modern global powers, independently developed their own capitalist economy.

2

TNRAOIH t1_izgm7lc wrote

Agreed. And a system where the base is gluttonous exploitation that is marginally and temporarily tempered down based on how the leaders at the time feel isn’t a viable system anyways

1