Tysons Casino Vote: Mapped

How the Virginia General Assembly passed a casino bill for Fairfax County over its local government's objection and what the vote map reveals.

On April 9, Governor Spanberger issued her first veto to kill the passage of Senate Bill (SB) 756 which had passed in the Virginia General Assembly at the end of March to build a casino in Fairfax County, more specifically, Tysons Corner.

The maps below tell a simple geographic story: legislators whose districts would never see a casino were largely comfortable voting for one. Those representing the communities closest to the proposed Tysons site were not. It mirrors closely what Fairfax County's own Board of Supervisors signaled in December 2025, when they voted 5-4 to formally oppose the casino.

What Was Actually Being Voted On

SB 756, sponsored again by Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax), would have added Fairfax County to the list of authorized host localities, which currently includes Norfolk, Portsmouth, Bristol, Danville, and Petersburg. Under the bill, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors would have been required to select a preferred casino operator and call a public referendum, with county voters making the final decision.

The proposed site was specific: a mixed-use development of at least 1.5 million square feet, located within a quarter mile of the Spring Hill Metro station on the Metro Silver Line in Tysons (shown by red star in maps below). The financial terms of the bill were also specific: 70% of the gaming revenue would flow to the state, 30% to Fairfax County.

This was the fourth time Surovell has sponsored some version of this legislation. Similar bills failed in 2023, 2024, and 2025 before SB 756 became the first to clear both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly before reaching its demise at the Governor’s desk.

The Vote, Mapped

Here is what the votes in the General Assembly looked like across the state.

SB 756 passed the Senate 25-13, with a large concentration of the no votes coming from Northern Virginia (NoVA.)

Zoom in on NoVA, NoVA Senators voted 6 yes, 6 no. The six yes votes: Perry, McPike, Pekarsky, Marsden, Carroll Foy, and naturally Surovell all represent districts in the southern and western parts of NoVA. The six no votes represent the locations closest to where the casino is proposed to be located.

The House of Delegates also passed the bill-55-41 with a more spread out support, but concentrated resistance in NoVA.

The House NoVA picture is more telling. The districts closest to the proposed casino site, and throughout Fairfax County are almost entirely no votes. The yes votes again come from districts distant from this casino and are concentrated in the southern and western house districts of NoVA.

Who was Actually Voting for This

SB 756 needed a majority of the full chamber to pass. Legislators from Hampton Roads, Richmond Suburbs, the Shenandoah Valley, and other parts of the state provided the winning margin for the casino and was largely bipartisan in nature with both parties sharing votes on both sides.

Surovell’s case was straightforward: the casino would generate tax revenue for Fairfax County without raising taxes. He cited projections from Ernst & Young that state the Sphere being added at MGM National Harbor will generate $1.5B in annual economic activity. Surovell also argued $800M-$1B in annual gaming spending from NoVA residents are already flowing to the MGM National Harbor on the other side of the Potomac.

The county’s independently commissioned feasibility study by MuniCap projected a more modest $19.9 million in annual local gaming tax revenue, a significant departure from the broader $155 million state-level estimate provided in a 2019 JLARC study, as reported by FFXnow. Some on the Board of Supervisors in Fairfax County have indicated that they believe the 70/30 revenue split is a bad deal.

Board Chairman Jeff McKay of Franconia put it plainly. Per WUSA9: “We’ve been saying for a lot of years that Fairfax County needs more of the money we already send to Richmond coming back to Fairfax County to support our public schools. What we never asked for was a gimmick…”

What Happened and What Happens Next

Governor Spanberger vetoed SB 756 on April 9, and she was direct about her reasoning: this wasn’t about casinos, it was about process. Every other Virginia casino was sought by the locality, with local government leading the charge. This would have been the first time Richmond compelled a local government to hold a referendum it explicitly opposed. “Local governing boards should lead on proposed casino development,” Spanberger said in her veto statement, “as has happened in every locality that now has a casino.”

Surovell has already committed to trying again. “I will not stop. We will be back,” he said after the veto. He has now pursued some version of this legislation for four consecutive sessions.

His underlying concern is real. Fairfax County faces a $131.5 million combined county-school budget gap for FY2027. The casino was one proposed answer to a structural fiscal problem that predates this debate and will outlast it. But with the county government, the majority of its legislative delegation, and organized community groups all opposed, the question now is what alternative revenue strategy the Board of Supervisors is prepared to put forward. So far, no public answer has emerged.

Spanberger’s veto closes this chapter. The veto is a win for the side that said no. But winning an argument is not the same as solving a problem. Fairfax County's budget gap does not go away because the casino bill did. The Board of Supervisors now has some breathing room, along with an obligation to use it.

Maps created using data from the Redistricting Data Hub (redistrictingdatahub.org). Vote data: Virginia General Assembly roll call records, March 14, 2026. Revenue projections per FFXnow reporting on Fairfax County's MuniCap feasibility study. EY economic analysis commissioned by Prince George's County, Maryland.