Behind the Bills: How Utilities,
Data Centers, and
Casinos Reach Into Our Backyards

From the Front Lines: How Richmond Really Works—and Why Communities
Like Great Falls Fight Back

As a dedicated community advocacy group, Citizens for Great Falls has gained first-hand insight into Virginia’s legislative process. Our members have engaged the Northern Virginia Delegation and other lawmakers through countless Capitol visits—especially during our four-year battle against casino legislation in Fairfax County. Those experiences reveal a stark truth: some voices drown out others when shaping public policy.

This year in Richmond, consequential fights over utilities, data centers, gaming, and more play out in a system that amplifies high-dollar interests. Three structural features make it so:

• No limits on contributions to candidates or leadership PACs.
• A powerful lobbying industry that drafts, negotiates, and kills bills.
• A low-pay, part-time legislature where most members juggle outside jobs and fundraising.

Lobbying Firepower

Dominion Energy (25 lobbyists), Amazon.com Services, LLC (12), and Comstock Hospitality Holdings (12)—key backers of the Fairfax casino—are just three examples flooding Richmond. The Virginia Conflict of Interest and Ethics Advisory Council tracks them, but their sheer numbers signal who holds the most sway.

Legislator Pay: Near the Bottom

Virginia ranks among the lowest nationally: $17,640 (House), $18,000 (Senate)—far below the $47,904 national average. Per diem helps, but most hold second jobs. Proposed raises to $45K–$55K by 2028 would still lag mid-tier states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Utilities: Consensus by the Biggest Players

Utilities like Dominion top donor lists, legally funding the lawmakers who set their rates and grid rules. Technical bills on cost recovery and clean energy lean heavily on industry experts—consumer groups rarely match their staff or giving. In a rushed session, “consensus” language from the largest players often prevails.

Data Centers: Local Pain, Statewide Money

Over 60 bills tackle grid strain, pollution, taxes, and siting—many from Loudoun, Fairfax, and Prince William, where growth sparks backlash. Developers paying $6.3M/acre in Leesburg and $3.5M/acre for Amazon’s Ashburn deal write unlimited checks and frame projects as “jobs.” [As reported by Washington Business Journal and Qz.com]

All this while groups like Citizens for Great Falls are engaged in policy battles over noise, grid overload, and blight, scrambling to track late amendments. But, even well-meaning legislators, on part-time pay and tight schedules, face a tilted field where lobbyists hold the edge.

Gaming: No Caps, High Stakes

Casinos, as proposed in Senator Surovell’s SB756 who has promised hundreds of millions in investment and tax revenue for Fairfax County has had steady support from Comstock Hospitality (12 registered lobbyists), trade unions, and local officials who seek economic wins.  Communities, like ours meanwhile, brace for traffic gridlock and social costs like addiction.

However, no contribution limits let gaming giants flood candidates’ war chests while lobbyists suggest policy choices that promote their legislative agendas.  When it boils down to a question of jobs vs. neighborhood impacts, money usually wins.

Time as the Force Multiplier

Virginia’s compressed legislative session and small staffs leave little room to master complex bills. Fundraising favors big-donor events.  Utilities, data centers, and gaming thrive in this high-opportunity environment.

This Session’s Stakes

Utilities, data centers, and gaming all involve deep-pocketed industries, technical debates, and long-term impacts on ratepayers and neighborhoods. Virginia’s citizen legislature could shine with better rules. Instead, the starting line favors those with lobbyists, checks, and draft language ready for filing.

Not every bill is bad or against the public interest, certainly, but session after session, organized money and special interest wins more often. For communities watching projects steamroll local concerns, it’s a structural flaw demanding reform.

Silent Threat Beneath Great Falls: The Community
Has Questions on Aging Potomac Interceptor Risks

Community members and Citizens For Great Falls are sounding the alarm over an aging sewer line most people never see—but that runs near homes, parks, and private wells.

The Potomac Interceptor, a massive 54‑mile pipeline that carries roughly 60 million gallons of raw sewage every day from near Dulles Airport to Washington, D.C., hugs the northern edge of Fairfax County, cutting directly through Great Falls and McLean. When it fails, our community is on the front line.

Citizens for Great Falls has sent a detailed letter to Dranesville District Supervisor James N. Bierman, Jr., calling for far stronger oversight, faster repairs, and real transparency about a system they say is “one of the region’s most critical” but least understood pieces of infrastructure.

A hidden pipeline with very visible risks

Most Great Falls residents first learned about the Potomac Interceptor the hard way.

In February 2024, a major rupture in Great Falls caused serious soil erosion and a collapse in the surrounding area. The incident required an emergency response involving multiple Fairfax County agencies and triggered extensive and ongoing repairs. For people who live near the line—or draw drinking water from private wells—the event was a jarring reminder that what happens underground can quickly become a neighborhood‑level crisis.

Then came January 19, 2026. A massive failure of Potomac Interceptor facilities in Maryland sent more than 243 million gallons of sewage into the Potomac River and continues to divert up to 60 million gallons a day into the C&O Canal. Fairfax Water’s upstream intake was reportedly not affected, but the sheer scale of that spill shocked residents and confirmed what many had long suspected: the system is vulnerable, and Great Falls is downstream of those decisions.

“The scale of the failure underscores ongoing regional vulnerabilities,” Citizens for Great Falls wrote, warning that a similar collapse in Fairfax or nearby Loudoun County could directly threaten public drinking water and private wells serving thousands of local households.

“Poor condition” ratings—and a lack of candor -Recent reporting has added a new, troubling layer for Great Falls.

According to an NBC4 investigation aired March 2, the section of the Potomac Interceptor that collapsed in Maryland—and is now sending tens of millions of gallons of sewage through the canal—had been rated in “poor” condition and in need of repair twice in the last five years. DC Water officials acknowledged that two additional sections in the same area were also rated in poor condition and flagged for close monitoring. Yet those warnings did not reach the public until after the disaster.

DC Water General Manager David Gadis has also admitted there is a 2024 report on the Potomac Interceptor, and he pledged at a February press conference to release it. So far, it remains undisclosed. That delay has fueled anger from environmental advocates and local residents alike. “The public deserves answers to some basic questions. What did DC Water know about the condition of this section of the pipe? When did it know it?” said Hedrick Belin of the Potomac Conservancy, calling the lack of transparency “deeply troubling.”

For Great Falls, where the pipeline runs close to homes, streams, and parkland, those unanswered questions are not academic—they go directly to whether families can trust that they’ll be warned before the next failure, not after.

Years of warnings—and still playing catch‑up - The Potomac Interceptor’s problems are not new.

DC Water’s own 2011–2015 inspection report documented “widespread corrosion” and “settled deposits” throughout the line, noting that most pipe segments showed signs of deterioration. Meanwhile, the American Society of Civil Engineers recently gave the nation’s wastewater systems a “D+” on its national infrastructure report card, emphasizing the need for massive reinvestment and better oversight.

Despite years of warnings, Citizens for Great Falls says the main response has been piecemeal: odor control, complaint management, and emergency repairs when something breaks, rather than a comprehensive rehabilitation plan that keeps Great Falls residents informed every step of the way.

Those concerns now extend all the way to Congress. In February, the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote to DC Water’s CEO, citing public records that suggested DC Water knew the Potomac Interceptor was “at risk of failure and in need of emergency repairs” before the January collapse in Maryland. The letter points to a $44.7 million emergency contract approved in May 2025 for Potomac Interceptor rehabilitation and redundancy—and asks bluntly whether that work was ever carried out and whether the recent failure could have been avoided.

Great Falls to County: treat wastewater like any other major hazard

Citizens for Great Falls argues that Fairfax County’s own planning documents have not kept pace with the risks.

In comments submitted in late 2025 on a Comprehensive Plan policy amendment, and in testimony before the Planning Commission, we urged the County to treat wastewater pipelines like the gas and petroleum pipelines already flagged as major hazards in county planning.

“Recent experience in our community suggests expanding this area of research and monitoring to include hazards from the Potomac Interceptor,” they wrote, emphasizing that the line carries huge volumes of untreated sewage and that failures can have “serious and continuing” impacts on land, water, and residents.

Those recommendations were not adopted. Now, after the 2024 rupture in Great Falls and the 2026 disaster in Maryland, the group is renewing its call for wastewater risks to be fully integrated into environmental hazard mitigation and emergency planning—before another failure tests the system.

A slow capital plan, and a push for faster action

DC Water has launched a ten‑year, $650 million Capital Improvement Program to rehabilitate the Potomac Interceptor. Citizens for Great Falls calls that a welcome start—but far too slow given the system’s known weaknesses and recent failures. For residents living above and alongside the line, a decade‑long schedule, with major work pushed into later years, feels out of step with the reality that the pipeline has already failed twice in just over two years.

In its letter to Supervisor Bierman, the CFGF calls on Fairfax County—especially in its role on the DC Water Executive Board—to:

• Demand timely, public inspection reports and regular updates on rehabilitation progress
• Work with regional and federal partners to develop clear recommendations for system upgrades, safeguards, and any needed funding changes
• Reassess and, if necessary, strengthen Fairfax County’s emergency and contingency plans for Potomac Interceptor‑related incidents

Citizens For Great Falls acknowledges that security concerns limit how much detailed infrastructure information can be released. But they argue that those concerns “must not limit responsible transparency” about what is being found, how quickly it is being fixed, and what the risks are for nearby communities like Great Falls.

What Great Falls residents can ask for now

Citizens for Great Falls is also urging Fairfax to take a stronger, more visible role in regional oversight, with a particular focus on prevention, not just cleanup. Their recommendations include:

• More robust public education on what should not be flushed—especially so‑called “flushable” wipes and other materials that clog and damage the system
• Targeted upgrades to grinders, screens, and pumps to reduce the chance that debris will trigger failures
• More frequent inspections and maintenance of pumps and lift stations, so minor problems are caught before they become major incidents

For Great Falls residents, the message is clear: the Potomac Interceptor may be out of sight, but it can no longer be out of mind.

Citizens For Great Falls is asking neighbors to stay engaged, follow developments, and support efforts to push for transparency and faster action. They emphasize that Supervisor Bierman’s continued leadership—and public pressure from the communities most at risk—will be critical in turning promises on paper into concrete protections on the ground.

The next time a pipe fails, the question will not be whether DC Water knew there were problems. It will be whether local leaders and the public insist on action in time.

Releated Story:  DC Water chief tied to Flint water crisis lawsuits now leads utility behind Potomac sewage spill; February 20, 2026 by Steve Neavling, Detroit Metro Times:

Background: DC Water current CEO, David Gadis, once held a senior post at Veolia North America, the firm that later paid $53 million to settle civil claims over its role in the Flint, MI water crisis. As Veolia’s municipal and commercial vice president, Gadis publicly vouched for Flint’s water in 2015, issuing statements of confidence even as residents were reporting foul, discolored water and—unbeknownst to them—dangerous lead exposure. Veolia’s review concluded the system met regulatory standards; independent researchers soon proved otherwise.

Three years later, DC Water hired Gadis. Today, he oversees the system that includes the Potomac Interceptor, the massive sewer line whose January collapse dumped more than 240 million gallons of raw sewage into the Potomac River. The episode has raised sharp questions about oversight, maintenance, and transparency inside the region’s most critical water utility.

For critics, the pattern is harder to dismiss: an executive who once helped project confidence in a public water system later revealed to be dangerously compromised is now leading a utility facing its own breakdown—raising fresh questions about judgment, accountability, and whether warning signs were again overlooked.

Support Safer Routes in Great Falls:
Speak Up Now for Forestville ES and Walker Road

Great Falls has a rare opportunity to secure real safety improvements for people walking in our community — but it will only happen if we show up and speak out.

Fairfax County has included two Great Falls projects in its $100 million Active Transportation funding initiative:

• A new crosswalk and sidewalk connection at Utterback Store Road and Loran Road near Forestville Elementary School
• Safety upgrades to the existing crosswalk on Walker Road between the Wells Fargo Bank and the Safeway shopping center

Both of these projects have been recommended before. Now they are competing for scarce funding against dozens of other projects across the county. If Great Falls families stay quiet, we should not assume either will move forward.

Why These Projects Matter
Forestville ES Crosswalk and Sidewalk

To get a crosswalk approved, the County requires sidewalk connections on both sides of the road. For Forestville, that means:

• A marked crosswalk at Utterback Store and Loran Road
• A new sidewalk segment on the side opposite the school

Together, these changes would give students and families a predictable, protected way to walk to and from school — instead of navigating confusing, unsafe conditions alongside fast‑moving traffic. This is a straightforward, high‑impact fix we should insist on.

Walker Road Crosswalk – A Good Idea at Risk of Going Wrong

The Walker Road plan has evolved. Earlier concepts the CFGF has supported and advocated for focused on making the existing crosswalk between Wells Fargo and Safeway safer as part of a broader community‑backed effort to calm traffic and narrow the roadway through the Village.  The recommendations involved the installation of pedestrian-activated flashing lights to alert drivers to the presence of pedestrians.  A relatively inexpensive countermeasure estimated at $8,000–$10,000 per unit (pole/sign). A full installation for a two-sided crossing usually averages around $10,000–$20,000. Now, the latest version introduces a pedestrian “refuge” in the middle of Walker Road.

We are deeply concerned that this change:

• Will require major reengineering of Walker Road
• Will interfere with the existing center turn lane
• Will undermine the traffic‑calming, lane‑narrowing design that the community previously fought for
• Will complicate access in and out of the Safeway shopping center and the Village Centre
• Will increase costs significantly, often requiring $30,000+ for the island alone.

In other words, a safety project we asked for is at risk of turning into a design that makes everyday driving, turning, and village access more difficult — without clear proof that it will make people on foot meaningfully safer.

We should not accept a one‑size‑fits‑all “refuge island” solution that undercuts years of local work to create a calmer, more functional Walker Road. Great Falls deserves safety improvements that reflect our actual conditions and community priorities.

Though cost estimates aren’t available for the two projects being considered for priority placement, the pedestrian “refuge” planned for Georgetown Pike at the Library has been funded at $895,000.

Now Is the Moment to Be Heard

The Fairfax County Department of Transportation (FCDOT) is currently prioritizing projects and asking for public input. This is our chance to say clearly:

• Yes to a safer crosswalk and sidewalk connection at Forestville ES
• Yes to fixing the Walker Road crosswalk — but no to a redesign that disrupts the center turn lane, undermines traffic calming, and complicates access to our village businesses

Public Meetings

FCDOT staff will present the list of projects, explain the scoring and prioritization process, and take questions:

• Wednesday, March 11, 2026 at 12:00 p.m.
  Dial-in: 571-429-5982
  Conference ID: 920 793 086#
• Thursday, March 12, 2026 at 7:00 p.m.
  Dial-in: 571-429-5982
  Conference ID: 645 326 483#

Project-specific feedback must be submitted by 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, March 31, 2026.

What You Can Do This Week

• Complete the survey and strongly support the Forestville ES crosswalk/sidewalk project and a sensible, community‑aligned Walker Road safety plan: https://publicinput.com/i40500
• Attend one of the virtual meetings and ask direct questions about:
• The crosswalk and sidewalk on Utterback Store/Loran
• The design and impact of the Walker Road pedestrian refuge

Share this information with Forestville “Walker” families, Village businesses, and neighbors who use Walker Road daily

If we don’t speak up now, decisions about our school routes and our village main street will be made without us. Strong, visible participation from Great Falls can secure the Forestville crosswalk we need and push the County to rethink the Walker Road “refuge” before it becomes an expensive mistake.

Thank you for standing up for safer — and smarter — routes in Great Falls.

Casino Showdown:  
How a powerful Senate leader pushed SB756 toward
Fairfax County— and why local officials now hold its fate

A high‑stakes casino bill backed by one of Virginia’s most powerful lawmakers is barreling through Richmond, and Fairfax County is being lined up as the next host — whether local residents want it or not.

Casino bill advances with leadership backing

SB756, sponsored and driven by Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D‑Mount Vernon), has flown through the General Assembly with a speed and ease most major bills never see. It passed the Senate by a comfortable margin. Then it cleared the House General Laws Committee on a 12–7 vote before the House Appropriations Committee — the graveyard for many controversial proposals — voted 18–4 to send it to the House floor.

On paper, SB756 only makes Fairfax County “eligible” to host a casino and ties any project to a mixed‑use development of at least 1.5 million square feet. In practice, that language is a political fig leaf. By embedding the casino inside a bigger package of hotels, entertainment, and offices, supporters are trying to disguise a major gambling expansion as a neutral economic development plan and deflect criticism from the communities that will live with the consequences.

The core question is simple: who asked for this? Not Fairfax residents. Not local neighborhoods. This is a top‑down project originating in Richmond, being sold to Fairfax after the fact.

Influence, pressure, and political risk

Surovell is not just any patron; he is the Senate Majority Leader. He helps shape committee assignments, controls the flow of bills, and can decide which ideas get airtime and which die quietly. When a leader with that much clout champions a bill, every vote becomes a test of loyalty as much as a judgment on policy.

Lawmakers know it. They have seen what happens when members cross leadership on marquee bills. Even without public statements, the message is unmistakable: if you stand in the way of a leadership‑backed project, your committee assignments, your priorities, even your political future can be at stake.

That power dynamic should alarm Fairfax residents. When the choice is between angering leadership and listening to local constituents, too many legislators will choose to protect their standing in Richmond. SB756 is not moving on the strength of community demand; it is moving on the strength of political muscle.

Divided but fragile support

Supporters like to point to “bipartisan” votes as proof of broad support. The record tells a different story: a fragile coalition, held together by pressure and rapid‑fire amendments, not genuine consent.

Several Fairfax County Democrats have already voted against the bill in committee — a clear signal that the communities closest to the potential casino are deeply uneasy. At the same time, other Democrats and a bloc of Republicans have moved the bill along, even as its language keeps shifting in ways most constituents never see.

Some members have changed how they vote as SB756 has been amended, reinforcing the perception that real negotiations are happening off‑stage, in caucus rooms and back channels, rather than in front of the public. That is not what transparent policymaking looks like. It is what happens when leadership wants a result and the process is bent to deliver it.

Statewide revenue politics at Fairfax’s expense

Supporters frame the casino as a job‑creator and tourist magnet. But look closely at who is most enthusiastic, and why.

Casinos are already authorized in Bristol, Danville, Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Richmond, and Richmond voters have rejected casino proposals twice. Those projects were sold as lifelines for economically struggling cities. Fairfax County, by contrast, is one of Virginia’s wealthiest jurisdictions, with a strong tax base and significant corporate presence. It does not need a casino to survive.

Amendments that keep moving the goalposts

The text of SB756 has already been reworked multiple times, with each change carrying big implications for where a casino can go, who benefits, and who bears the risk.  Earlier versions tied the casino to Tysons. That at least gave the public a sense of where the fight would be. Senate amendments then stripped out that limit and opened most of Fairfax County to consideration — a dramatic expansion of what was on the table, with minimal public discussion.

A House General Laws substitute later layered in labor‑friendly provisions such as prevailing wage and union‑related requirements and tinkered with how revenue and local benefits would be structured. Then, in a familiar pattern, the House Appropriations Committee advanced a version that stripped out many of those protections and rewrote key revenue language, pulling the bill back toward a more developer‑friendly framework.

Each step made the bill more complex and less grounded in a clear, community‑driven vision. Residents are being asked to react to moving targets, while those with the most at stake — big developers and state budget writers — see their priorities steadily protected.

Fairfax County now holds the line

If SB756 becomes law, it will not automatically build a casino — but it will put Fairfax County on the firing line.

The Board of Supervisors would first have to decide whether to place a casino referendum on the ballot. That decision alone will test whether county leaders are prepared to stand up to pressure from Richmond and powerful development interests. If the Board says yes, voters will then be forced into a high‑dollar battle at the polls, with casino backers likely flooding the airwaves and mailboxes.

Even if a referendum passed, the project would still need zoning approvals, land‑use decisions, environmental reviews, and site‑specific permits — all controlled by the Board of Supervisors. Those are leverage points, but only if supervisors are willing to use them. They can insist on strict conditions, reject unsuitable sites, or simply refuse to move forward.

Next stop—Governor Spanberger's Desk

Upcoming County Meetings/Hearings

• Planning Commission: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 at 7:30 p.m.
• Board of Supervisors: Tuesday, May 5, 2026 at 4:00 p.m.

• Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: Tuesday, March 17, 2026 at 4:00 p.m.

• Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: Tuesday, March 17, 2026 at 4:00 p.m.

  ---

• May 12, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. - FY 2027 Approved Budget Public Hearing
• May 13, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. - FY 2027 Approved Budget Public Hearing (if needed)
• March 19, 2026 at 6:45 p.m. - Advanced Academics/AAP Center - North Springfield ES

Volunteers are welcome