The Jefferson County Board of Supervisors discussed the idea of applying for a gaming license to potentially bring a casino to the Fairfield area during their regular meeting on Monday.
The discussion was prompted by community member Deborah Williamson, who serves as one of the leaders of the Fairfield Beautification Commission. Williamson presented the idea of exploring a casino resort development in Fairfield, suggesting a possible location near the AmericInn hotel, though no specific land has been identified or secured for such a project.
Williamson said her interest in the proposal stemmed from observing the significant revenue generated by the Riverside Casino and Golf Resort in neighboring Washington County and the lack of financial benefit Jefferson County receives through the Washington County Riverboat Foundation (WCRF).
According to Williamson, the WCRF is intended to distribute gaming revenue funds to 13 counties, including Jefferson. However, she claims Jefferson County typically receives only minimal amounts, ranging from $100 to $1,000, with few, if any, local grant applications approved. Williamson also alleged that when Fairfield organizations apply for grants, their requests are often declined — even for similar projects that Washington County groups later apply for and receive approval on. In one case, she noted, a Fairfield project that requested about $100,000 less than a comparable Washington County application was still denied funding.
Williamson and the Supervisors also noted that a casino development could create new jobs and attract restaurants and tourism, but acknowledged the idea could be controversial. Concerns mentioned included competition from existing casinos such as Riverside in Washington County and Catfish Bend in Burlington, broader social issues tied to gambling, and potential opposition from community groups, including members of the Maharishi community.
Riverside Casino has been entangled in legal disputes over the new Cedar Rapids casino, arguing it would hurt their business and challenge the state’s licensing process. If Fairfield were to pursue its own casino proposal, Riverside could similarly push back or pursue legal action to protect its market area and revenue interests, potentially complicating the project’s approval.
The Supervisors expressed a mix of caution and interest in the idea, emphasizing that any proposal would require broad public and legislative support before moving forward.
Supervisor Joe Ledger said it was “too early to give an opinion,” but acknowledged that a casino could have a “good economic impact.” However, he voiced concern about the social side of gaming, noting that “a lot of people you see there [at casinos] don’t have money to spend.” Ledger also pointed out that competition and potential legal challenges from neighboring casinos could pose additional hurdles.
Supervisor Susie Drish said she was open to exploring the idea, adding that she would be in favor “if it will be good for the community.”
Supervisor Lee Dimmitt also said he was not opposed, noting that such a project “would bring a lot of jobs to the community.”
At this stage, the casino proposal is only an early idea brought forward by a citizen, not an official plan or application. No formal action was taken, but the Supervisors agreed to continue examining the proposal.
