New North Jersey casino ballot question could be on the cards

After being defeated in a state-wide ballot on 8 November, proponents of legislation that would have expanded casino gambling outside of Atlantic City have suggested that they could return to the polls with a more specific proposal for the north of the state within two years.

[dropcap]F[/dropcap]ollowing the defeat, New Jersey state senator Paul Sarlo explained that a shift from a two-casino plan anywhere north of the city of New Brunswick to a one-casino concept located at the Meadowlands Sports Complex in the borough of East Rutherford could see success.

“In the early stages, there were stakeholders interested in a possible casino in Middlesex [County] and Sussex [County] as well as Newark, Jersey City and the Meadowlands [Sports Complex],” Sarlo told The Record newspaper.

“It’s too early to tell if we should go back to the voters in two years but I wouldn’t necessarily be opposed to it.”

It’s inevitable that there will be a casino in the Meadowlands and there may be a market for another casino in north [New] Jersey.

Proponents of the New Jersey Allowance For Casinos In Two Additional Counties Amendment, also known as Public Question One, suggest that the lack of specific details over where the casinos would be situated and the barring of out-of-state operators from the tender damaged the campaign in favour of the expansion.

“It’s inevitable that there will be a casino in the Meadowlands and there may be a market for another casino in north [New] Jersey,” said Ron Simoncini of the NorthStarsNJ campaign, which supported the ballot question on behalf of the Meadowlands Regional Chamber Of Commerce.

“The trouble this time was nobody got to understand the economic impact casinos would have for the region and also the fact that we are just trying to recapture the spending now going to New York and Pennsylvania,” he added.