New Jersey lawmakers have introduced legislation that could clear the way for casinos at the Meadowlands and Monmouth Park racetracks, reviving a politically sensitive debate as New York moves ahead with plans for three new casinos in New York City.
The proposal was introduced by Democratic state senators Vin Gopal and Paul Sarlo and could lead to a voter referendum as early as November. Because casino gambling outside Atlantic City is barred under the State Constitution, any expansion would require public approval.
The timing is driven by concern that gambling activity and tax revenue could shift to New York once the three new casinos open across the river. That threat has prompted the owners of the Meadowlands and Monmouth Park racetracks to press state officials to support a fresh legalization effort in northern New Jersey, despite the decisive rejection of a similar proposal by voters in 2016.
Supporters argue that the two racetracks are logical candidates because both already host sports betting and horse racing. Gopal has argued that the state should not allow New York to capture gamblers from New Jersey without considering a response.
In making that case, he pointed to the fact that gambling is already taking place at those venues. “We’re already doing sports betting on site, we’re already betting on horse racing on site,” Gopal said in a The New York Times report. “Gambling is already happening. How is this any different?”
The bill also seeks to soften opposition from the south of the state by requiring at least 10% of tax revenue from any new casinos to be dedicated to supporting Atlantic City tourism. South Jersey political leaders, long protective of Atlantic City’s casino industry, have already signaled resistance.
Michael Suleiman, chairman of the Atlantic County Democratic Committee
Michael Suleiman, chairman of the Atlantic County Democratic Committee, described the New York casino expansion as an “impending meteor,” but said leaders in the region would still fight any move to authorize casinos in Monmouth and Bergen Counties. “We will have to defeat it,” Suleiman said.
Several casinos there shut down about a decade ago, and the nine that remain have had to compete with newer gambling venues in neighboring states. Governor Mikie Sherrill has also identified the revival of Atlantic City as a priority for her administration.
Former governor Chris Christie, whose administration backed the failed 2016 expansion bid, said that the vote delivered a clear message from the public. He said nothing in the last decade suggests a major shift in public appetite for casinos beyond Atlantic City, and he also argued that New York’s expansion is unlikely to profoundly damage the seaside resort’s position.
Even so, developers are trying to build support. Jeff Gural, managing partner of the group that owns the Meadowlands, said the aim would be to work with Atlantic City casino operators if the effort advances. “Our plan is to sit with the Atlantic City casino industry and come up with a plan to protect their interests,” Gural said.
Jeff Gural, managing partner of the group that owns the Meadowlands
Gural has also said New Jersey could adopt a licensing structure similar to New York’s, where winning bidders must pay at least $500 million upfront. He argued that the greatest competitive pressure from new casinos in North Jersey would fall on the upcoming New York properties rather than Atlantic City, which he characterized separately as a destination market.
Assembly Democratic Majority Leader Louis Greenwald said the proposal deserves discussion, but indicated lawmakers need more specifics before taking a position, including projected revenue and the overall structure of the plan.
According to a person familiar with private discussions, the administration is reviewing the idea without either endorsing or rejecting it, said The New York Times. Senator Gopal said conversations with the governor’s chief of staff, Alex Ball, had been constructive, but he acknowledged that the administration would need time for due diligence before deciding whether to back the measure.
