TRENTON — A resolution to place a question on November's ballot asking New Jersey voters to approve expanding casino gambling to the northern part of the state cleared its first legislative hurdle Thursday — even as critics continued to warn the plan will cause further damage to Atlantic City.

The state Senate's budget committee voted 9-2 to approve the controversial proposal.

Proponents say the plan would help the Garden State stay competitive in the increasingly competitive northeastern gaming market, bring thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in revenue to north Jersey, and provide funds to help Atlantic City rebuild and revitalize itself.

What does Wall Street think about north Jersey casinos and Atlantic City?

But state Sen. Jeff Van Drew (D-Cape May) — one of two lawmakers to vote against the resolution Thursday — said families in south Jersey are worried the plan will cause more casinos to close Atlantic City, which has already seen four gambling halls shutter and thousands of jobs lost over the last two years amid increasing competition in nearby states.

Wall Street rating agency Moody's Investors Service issued a report Wednesday that more Atlantic City casinos could close if the proposal moves forward. 

"Atlantic City is going to be an economic dust bowl if this happens," Van Drew said. "Nobody knows if the plan is going to work."

State Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) and state Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto (D-Hudson) had bickered for weeks over the right way to present the plan to voters. But on Monday, Gov. Chris Christie announced the lawmakers had come to an agreement. 

Now that the feud has subsided, the compromise resolution is moving quickly: It was introduced Wednesday, and Thursday was the first time lawmakers voted on it.

The proposal still has to be approved by the full state Senate and Assembly before reaching voters. Both houses need to pass it by three-fifths majorities by August.

Currently, New Jersey's constitution allows casino gambling only in Atlantic City. But, this resolution would ask voters on Nov. 8 to amend the constitution to allow two casinos in north Jersey, in two separate counties. The exact locations have not been decided yet. 

If approved by voters, the amendment would require that operators who already own Atlantic City casinos be offered the first chance to control at least 51 percent of each new gambling hall.

But there's a strict time limit: According to a last-minute change introduced Thursday, bidding opens to everyone if no current Atlantic City operator applies within 60 days. A previous version of the bill had the window at 180 days. 

"It shortens the window for those who are concerned that existing Atlantic City operators would not show interest or sit back," said state Sen. Paul Sarlo (D-Bergen), a co-sponsor.

The amendment would also require the new operators to invest at least $1 billion in each facility to make sure the casinos are entertainment centers and not what critics call simple, "slots-in-a-box" gambling halls.

The tax revenue from the new casinos would be divided among programs for senior citizens and the disabled and to help Atlantic City.

Which Atlantic City casinos raked in the most money in 2015?

But state Sen. Jim Whelan (D-Atlantic), a former Atlantic City mayor, said he's worried that once the north Jersey casinos are built, they would be successful only until a casino opens in Manhattan — which would prevent people in New York City from traveling into New Jersey to gamble. 

"It won't be 30 years," Whelan said. "It will be less than five."

Sarlo said he believes New Jersey needs to "act fast" because "there is only a finite amount of gaming revenue in any state."

"North Jersey is flourishing," he said. "I think there is enough disposable income up there that will want to enjoy and spend some money at these casinos."

Brent Johnson may be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . Follow him on Twitter @johnsb01. Find NJ.com Politics on Facebook.