Two Chesterfield billiard halls get approval for off-track betting
Off-track betting is officially on for two billiard halls in
The Board of Supervisors voted 4-0 on Wednesday to approve conditional use permits that will allow betting on
Both places can now legally offer account-based, touch-screen wagering on horse races. The setup is similar to video poker, where users create accounts and draw from them to pay for their wagers. Similarly, winnings, if any, go back into the accounts.
"It's very similar to what you could do if you had a smartphone; you could access that," said Carrie Coyner, the lawyer who represented the Diamond case before the board.
In asking for approval, she said the vote would correct "a bit of a hiccup."
Diamond installed six of the betting machines a year ago and has used them since. Owner Thomas C. Dorsey said he thought he had approval at the time.
Coyner said a survey of neighboring businesses showed no opposition to the permit. Midlothian District Supervisor Daniel A. Gecker said he had spoken to people in the area, too, and had come across no opposition.
No one spoke on the case during the public comment period of the hearing.
"Although we use the term 'off-track betting,' it's not the same as the state code would define off-track betting, the kind of parlor you see in the city of Richmond and elsewhere," Gecker said.
There was even less discussion on the Murphy's Law case, which came about 10 minutes later. Planning Director Kirk Turner read the staff analysis and recommendation, the restaurant owner agreed and no one stood up to speak. Other than noting the similarity to the Midlothian case, no one on the board commented.
In both cases, the permits are specific to the businesses and are non-transferable. The permits also prohibit external advertising of the betting and dictate that access be through the establishment, not through dedicated exterior doors. (From Richmond Times-Dispatch reporter Zach Reid)(photo shared from Bon Air Buzz)
I have to admit I absolutely hate this period of time between November elections and the New Year with regard to politics. Frankly, why should anyone be surprised there were no public speakers regardign this issue when you hear it on Nov. 30th when people are otherwise occupied with preparing for Christmas, buying trees, decorating and of course shopping.
Evidently, our Board members reviewed these cases and considered that those that would seek off track betting facilities currently living in the County have to cross into the City currently to place bets or play machines. I guess the Board felt compelled to attemtp to keep that revenue here in the County, but at what cost? This Board and its predecessor have time and time again attempted to change Chesterfield. People like Mr. Gecker call it being "progressive", but at what point have we lost everything that has made us exactly who were are and what it has meant to be from Chesterfield?
It is as if the Board feels this measure is merely an extension of the push for more "sports tourism", but if local buisness owners do not objectn is that the barometer by which our leaders should be looking at the future landscape of Chesterfield. Would the owners object to "Gentleman's Clubs"? Does not Chesterfield lose revenue from these ventures located over in the City from Chesterfield residents? Is that reason enough to permit them here in Chesterfield? I think not.
