A bill to make Fairfax County eligible for a casino is advancing through the Virginia House of Delegates after undergoing some significant changes from the version passed by the state Senate earlier this month.
The House’s General Laws Committee voted 12-7 yesterday (Tuesday) to send Senate Bill 756, patroned by Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D-34), to the chamber’s appropriations committee. All four delegates representing portions of Fairfax County, including committee chair Del. Paul Krizek (D-16), opposed advancing the legislation.
Prior to the vote, Krizek proposed — and the committee accepted — a substitute that adds several new provisions to Surovell’s bill, including criteria Fairfax County must consider when selecting a casino operator, an increased licensing fee, a revised gaming tax structure and a change to the referendum process.
Labor requirements, new tax split proposed
The bill backed 23-14 by the Senate on Feb. 13 had already been amended to remove criteria restricting potential casino sites to Tysons, while still requiring that any gaming establishment be part of a larger mixed-use development with at least 1.5 million square feet of space.
However, Krizek’s substitute introduces procedural changes that would further separate Fairfax County from the five localities where Virginia has already authorized casino gambling, carving out a new process for approving an establishment and allocating the resulting gaming tax revenue.
Among other changes, the revised bill requires Fairfax County to choose a preferred casino operator that agrees to pay construction and hospitality workers prevailing wage rates, enter a contract to hire union workers, and voluntarily construct, fund or dedicate land for at least one public safety facility, such as a police or fire station, to handle “the projected impacts” of the casino development.
Once the county selects its preferred operator, it would notify Virginia Lottery, which currently oversees gambling in the state, for a preliminary review and approval to hold a referendum on whether casino gaming should be permitted at the proposed site.
Unlike in Bristol, Portsmouth, Danville, Petersburg and Norfolk, the referendum would need to be approved not just by a majority of Fairfax County voters, but a majority of voters in the magisterial district where the casino would be located.
“If it’s in Springfield [District], the Springfield District would also have to approve it,” Krizek explained to the general laws committee. “So, even if it got 80% [support] of the rest of the county and only 49% of Springfield District [voters], it would not pass.”
If the referendum fails, the county would be prohibited from holding another one on the same question, meaning the same site couldn’t be targeted again. If voters don’t approve a referendum before July 1, 2029, the bill’s provisions would expire, and Fairfax County would no longer be eligible to host a casino.
Should a referendum succeed, Virginia could issue a license to the casino operator for $150 million — a significant increase from the $15 million fee established by the state’s current casino gaming law, which was adopted by the General Assembly in 2020.
“Inflation has come and $15 million is not what it was seven years ago,” Krizek said, adding that half of the fee would be distributed to Fairfax County.
Fairfax County would also receive half of the revenue generated by a 40% tax on the casino’s adjusted gross receipts, which are the money it makes minus payouts to winners. The other revenue would go to the state, allocated as follows:
- 5% to a problem gambling treatment and support fund
- 5% to a capital fund for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
- 1% to the Virginia Indigenous People’s Trust Fund
- 0.8% to an Open-Space Lands Preservation Trust Fund
- 0.2% to Virginia’s Family and Children’s Trust Fund, which supports child abuse and domestic violence prevention and treatment services
- Any remaining revenue would be deposited in the state’s fund for school construction.
The arrangement represents an apparent attempt to appease Fairfax County leaders who have objected to a potential casino due in part to Virginia’s existing gaming tax revenue split, which roughly works out to 30% of proceeds going to the locality and 70% benefitting the state.
Testifying before the House General Laws Committee yesterday, Fairfax County Legislative Affairs Director Jennifer Van Ee thanked Surovell for being open to amendments based on the feedback from local officials, including the removal of the restrictions on where a casino could be located, but reported that the Board of Supervisors remains opposed to SB 756, pending a review of the substitute.
“We have not been able to review the new amendments but have concerns around revenue splits, lack of an established gaming commission, and we have not asked for this authority,” Van Ee said.
The House passed a bill from Krizek on Feb. 17 that would establish a Virginia Gaming Commission. The measure will be considered by the Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology when it meets later today (Wednesday).
Unions and community groups on opposing sides
As they have for past hearings, labor unions showed up at the committee meeting to voice support for the Fairfax County casino bill, a position likely further bolstered by the prevailing wage and union contract conditions in Krizek’s substitute.
SB 756 is the top priority of this legislative session for the Northern Virginia Labor Federation, said President Virginia Diamond, who advocated for its potential benefits for both workers and Fairfax County’s revenue. She noted that the county was unable to fully fund raises for teachers promised last year under a collective bargaining agreement.
“We feel strongly that this is an opportunity that is unprecedented and that would be life-changing for thousands and thousands of working families, people that are currently in poverty and would have the opportunity to get jobs in the middle class,” Diamond said.
Forming a Fairfax County Jobs Coalition in 2024 to rally support for a Fairfax casino, labor leaders have said that labor peace agreements already secured from prospective developer Comstock Companies would result in over 5,000 union jobs with high wages.
Though Comstock hasn’t released a formal development plan, it has been eyeing land near the Spring Hill Metro station in Tysons for an entertainment district that could include a 6,000-seat performing arts venue, a 600-room hotel, a convention center, retail and housing in addition to a casino, per a flyer that circulated among state lawmakers during the 2025 General Assembly session.
One labor agreement would pay $34 per hour for housekeeping jobs, and the developer — who wasn’t named — has agreed to employ local construction workers through union apprenticeship programs for the entire 4-million-square-foot project, according to Don Slaiman, who was representing IBEW Local 26, the D.C. region’s electricians’ union.
“This job will give people 30, 40-year careers working on this,” Slaiman said, describing the agreements as more extensive than ones the union had for Maryland’s casinos. “And really, we just want the people in Fairfax County to have the opportunity to vote.”
In a rare moment of labor and business unity, the Northern Virginia Chamber of Commerce has also endorsed the casino legislation, calling it a “bold” idea for diversifying Fairfax County’s economy as the region tries to ease its reliance on the federal government.
“The current proposal is a mixed-use development that will include at least $4 billion in private-sector investment,” Charlie Russ, the chamber’s government relations manager, said. “A single development that provides these benefits without the need for public investment is a historic opportunity for the region and for Fairfax County.”
As opponents noted, however, there’s no guarantee that Fairfax County would select Comstock as the developer, though Krizek’s substitute would at least require any alternatives to also offer competitive wages and work with unions.
Representatives of the No Fairfax Casino Coalition, which counts dozens of local homeowners’ associations and Vienna Town Council among its members, argued that a casino would compete for spending and jobs with the region’s existing gambling and hospitality options, while also potentially driving away businesses and residents who don’t want to be near a casino.
“SB 756 is not a one-off. It piles yet more gaming expansion onto an already crowded landscape of online fantasy and sports betting, iGaming, and legalized skill games,” McLean Citizens Association board member Linda Walsh said. “Casino expansion reduces profitability for existing casinos and means less revenue for existing casinos. Casinos should be placed where they deliver the most economic benefit and the least cannibalization of existing operations.”
Bills authorizing skill game machines and internet gambling are working their way through the General Assembly, and Democrats in the Virginia House released a budget proposal on Sunday (Feb. 22) that anticipates raising $270 million from those operations, starting in 2027.
Tysons Stakeholder Alliance President Paula Martino noted that a draft study by Fairfax County, obtained last week by FFXnow, estimated a development would generate $29.1 million in annual tax revenue for the county and $53 million for the Commonwealth — lower numbers than what Comstock projected and a 2019 state study predicted for a Northern Virginia casino.
The county numbers include meals, sales, real estate, transient occupancy and other taxes in addition to gaming revenue, but the study didn’t incorporate any residential development. It was also commissioned prior to the current General Assembly session and appears to have assumed a smaller-scale development than the 1.5-million-square-foot one required under the legislation now being considered.
“There are many serious challenges facing our residents and the Commonwealth, the rising cost of living, access to affordable housing, traffic congestion and fully funding public education,” Martino said. “A casino anywhere in Fairfax County will not solve any of these problems, and based on the data, it will not deliver the revenue that has been promised.”
A representative for Freedom Virginia, which conducted a poll last year that found opposition to a casino among Fairfax County voters, said the lobbying organization advocates instead for “fair revenue generation” through closing tax loopholes that benefit the wealthy and corporations.
Responding to the detractors, Surovell maintained that Fairfax County needs to consider new kinds of developments to attract residents and boost its commercial tax base, claiming that the office vacancy rate in Tysons is “double the national average.”
As of the end of 2025, the overall office vacancy rate for Tysons was 20%, according to Tysons Community Alliance data. That rate has stayed flat for the past year and aligns with the national rate 0f 20.5% reported by the commercial real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield.
“The bill requires an entertainment district to be constructed: a 1.5-million-square-foot convention center, entertainment complex, an event venue, hotel, not just a casino,” Surovell said. “Fairfax County is larger than eight states and doesn’t have a single place you can host a convention.”
“At the end of the day, I would ask the committee to let Fairfax County voters decide if they want this or not,” he concluded.
Aside from Krizek explaining his substitute bill, the only committee member to speak about the measure was Del. Marcia Price (D-85), who represents part of Newport News and lamented that the House hasn’t passed other legislation to expand local and state revenue options.
Bills to overhaul the state income tax structure and introduce new taxes to fund Metro and other transit systems in Northern Virginia, for example, failed to advance.
“Many people that go to casinos that are already established are some of the same folks that live in the same areas we’re arguing are impoverished and need better schools,” Price said, noting that revenue from MGM’s casinos didn’t stop Maryland from facing a budget deficit. “If we’re going to continue to build budgets around vices, we will continue to be at the will of the house, and the house always wins.”
