Romanian Mayors Push for Local Power Over Gambling Venues

Romanian Mayors Push for Local Power Over Gambling Venues

A debate over the future of gambling regulation in Romania is unfolding, with municipalities pressing for more authority to shape how betting shops and arcades operate within their borders. The push has emerged after a critical audit earlier this year questioned the capacity of the National Gambling Office (ONJN) to enforce licensing rules and secure tax revenues from the sector.

At present, licensing remains firmly under national control. Local councils can only provide non-binding opinions when an operator applies to open a physical venue, leaving municipalities with limited influence over the number and location of betting outlets in their communities. For years, this arrangement has been criticized by local leaders who argue that towns and cities bear the social impact of gambling while having no meaningful control over its regulation.

The Ministry for Development has now tabled a draft bill that seeks to shift part of that authority to the local level. The measure would introduce zoning authorisations, under which municipal governments could decide which areas of a city are off-limits to gambling halls. The proposed framework would allow councils to justify restrictions on grounds such as public safety, urban planning, or health considerations. It would also give municipalities the right to impose taxes on gambling operators, with proceeds earmarked for social services, community projects, and law enforcement.

For Nelu Popa, the mayor of Reșița, the reform is overdue. He has argued that the ONJN’s lack of effective oversight has allowed gambling outlets to multiply unchecked, leaving local administrations with few tools to respond. In his view, the current imbalance between national licensing and local impact has created a regulatory gap that needs to be closed. He presents the new bill not as a radical change, but as a corrective step that would bring authority closer to where the consequences are most visible.

Support among other mayors reflects similar frustrations. Many argue that the present model places the economic benefits of gambling at the national level. At the same time, the costs, such as pressure on social services and neighborhood disruption, are absorbed locally. The proposed taxation powers are seen as a way to address this disparity, ensuring that municipalities can channel gambling revenue back into programs that respond to the issues created by the industry’s growth.

The backdrop to this push is the highly critical audit of the ONJN, which revealed significant shortcomings in its ability to enforce rules and collect taxes. The report concluded that gaps in oversight had contributed to the unchecked proliferation of betting shops and arcades. It also raised concerns about the regulator’s broader capacity to monitor an industry that has expanded rapidly in recent years. The findings have strengthened the case for decentralization, with local leaders arguing that national institutions alone are not equipped to manage the sector effectively.

If the draft bill is adopted, the relationship between operators and regulators will change significantly. Companies that previously dealt only with national licensing bodies would also need to navigate municipal approvals and tax frameworks. This could introduce uneven conditions across the country, as individual cities and towns may adopt different zoning rules or tax rates. For some operators, this could mean adjusting business models to account for a patchwork of local regulations. For municipalities, however, it represents the opportunity to tailor policy to local realities.

The reform also raises broader questions about the balance between economic opportunity and community protection. Gambling generates substantial tax revenue at the national level, but the rapid spread of venues has led to concerns about social harm and urban planning challenges. By shifting part of the regulatory burden to local governments, the new framework attempts to align revenue collection with responsibility for addressing these concerns. Whether this alignment will be effective or whether it will create new layers of complexity remains uncertain.

From a policy perspective, the bill reflects a trend toward decentralization in Romanian governance, where local authorities are seeking greater control over industries that have a direct impact on their communities. It also highlights the ongoing tension between national economic priorities and municipal responsibilities. Gambling, with its combination of fiscal significance and social impact, has become a focal point for this debate.