Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Casino Revenue Sharing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lee County supervisors opt not to support Bristol's proposed change to casino revenue distribution
Summary
The Lee County Board of Supervisors met in recess and instructed their representative to oppose the City of Bristol's proposal to change how regional casino revenues are distributed, citing risk to a 14-locality agreement and legislative reluctance to amend state code.
The Lee County Board of Supervisors met in recess on Jan. 6, 2026, to consider a proposal from the City of Bristol to change how the Bristol Transportation District's Regional Improvement Commission distributes casino-derived funds among 14 member localities. A board member summarized the proposal and said it would apply only to casino proceeds, not to hotel or other Hard Rock receipts.
Board members were told the city's preferred approach, labeled "option 5" in the discussion, would more closely mirror the Lonesome Pine Regional Industrial Facilities Authority's distribution method and, based on current-year receipts, could reduce Lee County's share by about 22—3 percent. The board discussed that the change would require an amendment to the Code of Virginia and therefore action by the General Assembly.
A speaker who reported consulting with local legislators relayed that Delegate Kilgore and the senators mentioned in the transcript advised against pursuing a statutory change, saying there was little appetite in either chamber to alter the regional arrangement. The board also expressed concern that amending the statute could set a precedent that would allow the host locality to seek a larger portion of the revenues in the future.
After discussion, a motion was made and seconded that Lee County's representative should "leave it alone" (vote against the Bristol proposal). The motion was approved by voice vote; the transcript records "aye" responses but does not provide a roll-call tally or individual vote names.
Board members noted the regional nature of the original agreement and emphasized caution about changing a formula agreed to by 14 localities. One member asked how much influence Bristol's fiscal problems (including landfill issues mentioned in the discussion) might give the city leverage to press for a change.
The board also scheduled that their representative would attend the committee meeting where member localities would report back after meeting with their own boards and that Lee County's vote there would reflect the instruction given at this recess meeting.
The meeting then moved to other routine business.
