Petersburg, Virginia officials have declined to release the winning proposal for the city’s ambitious casino project, citing the cancellation of the competitive bidding process and the absence of an awarded contract to Maryland-based Cordish Companies, the prospective developer. Shaunta’ Beasley, Petersburg’s Freedom of Information Act officer, stated in an email, “Therefore, the file is closed and no records are available.”

Partial glimpse at Cordish proposal:

While some details about Cordish’s proposal have been disclosed, including plans for a $1.4 billion mixed-use development over 15 years featuring a casino, a 200-room hotel, and an event center, the full scope remains undisclosed. This lack of transparency has sparked concerns regarding the city’s handling of the casino endeavor.

Megan Rhyne, executive director of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government, criticized the opacity surrounding Petersburg’s casino pursuits, emphasizing the importance of transparency in public projects. The refusal to release comprehensive details of Cordish’s proposal has amplified apprehensions about the project’s impact and feasibility.

Petersburg’s decision-making process regarding the casino has been characterized by limited public involvement. While a town hall was held for residents to hear presentations from competing companies, the selection of Cordish by the City Council occurred with minimal public deliberation, raising questions about accountability and representation.

Legal opinions and political pressures:

The cancellation of the competitive bidding process was supported by Petersburg City Attorney Anthony Williams, who deemed the process legally flawed due to perceived external political pressures. Williams argued that the bidding process was imposed on the city and compromised its autonomy in decision-making.

Controversy has swirled around allegations of political interference in Petersburg’s casino project. A letter of intent signed by City Manager John “March” Altman in favor of Bally’s Corporation prior to the selection of Cordish has fueled suspicions of external manipulation. Despite claims of coercion from state legislators, Petersburg officials have faced scrutiny over their decision-making processes.

Demand for transparency:

According to Virginia Mercury, Critics have called for greater transparency in Petersburg’s handling of the casino project. Requests for comprehensive documentation, including the full Cordish proposal, have been met with resistance, fueling skepticism about the city’s commitment to openness and accountability.

Industry experts have voiced concerns about the adequacy of the information provided by the city. A preliminary recommendation from financial consulting firm Davenport and Company highlighted Cordish as a strong contender, yet the lack of detailed analysis has left questions unanswered. Sebastian Sinclair, a gambling industry consultant, criticized the limited transparency and urged for more comprehensive due diligence in evaluating casino proposals.

As Petersburg navigates its casino project amid allegations of opacity and political influence, the call for transparency remains paramount. The refusal to disclose crucial details and the opaque decision-making processes have cast doubts on the project’s integrity and public accountability, underscoring the importance of open governance in major municipal endeavors.