Problem gaming rules expanded

John Wilen

Wednesday, Oct. 28, 1998 | 11:35 a.m.

The Nevada Gaming Commission is moving to require all gaming establishments -- no matter how small -- to put employees through basic problem gambling training programs.

This is a significant departure. Earlier drafts of proposed new regulations applied only to big nonrestricted licensees like slot route operators and hotel-casinos.

During a special meeting Tuesday, commissioners rejected a Gaming Control Board proposal that would have required the training only for nonrestricted licensees.

Commissioners instead instructed board attorneys to redraft the proposed regulation to encompass all establishments that offer gaming machines, from the largest resort casino to the smallest laundromats and convenience stores.

"If you've got two machines, if you're going to get the benefit of the machines, you can do the training," said Commission Chairman Bill Curran. "I would rather cast our net more broadly than more narrowly."

Curran appeared to have the support of the full commission.

"I think it's good for everybody, and I haven't heard a meaningful reason why it's not," said Commissioner Brian Sandoval.

For several months, the commission has been considering a seven-section regulation designed to address problem gambling. The regulation, originally drafted by the board under the direction of former Chairman Bill Bible, has been discussed at several special commission meetings in recent months. It is set to be formally adopted by the commission at a special telephonic meeting Monday.

The Nevada Resort Association and the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling support the measure.

Under the regulation, both restricted and nonrestricted gaming licensees would be required to provide literature on problem gambling and to post a toll-free problem gambling hotline telephone number near their gaming machines. All licensees would also have to establish programs allowing patrons to self-limit their access to casino credit, check cashing privileges and direct mail marketing materials.

Because of what the board sees as "inequities" in the gaming industry between smaller gaming establishments -- which operate under restricted licenses -- and their financially powerful resort casino counterparts -- which operate under nonrestricted licenses, the Board decided to require only nonrestricted licensees to provide basic employee training programs.

But that requirement didn't sit well with slot route operator Anchor Gaming, which operates gaming machines in leased space at grocery stores, convenience stores and bars throughout the state; and also owns and operates one small tavern.

While the slot route companies themselves operate under nonrestricted licenses, most of the locations where they run machines operate under restricted licenses. Anchor Gaming President Michael Rumbolz noted that under the board proposal, Anchor would be required to train employees at its gaming establishments, while competing establishments not owned by slot route operators would face no such requirement.

"If it's good for us, why isn't it good for everyone else, Mr. Chairman?" queried Rumbolz.

Rumbolz noted that Anchor has already committed to training employees at all of its locations. He was mainly concerned the Commission would set a precedent, effectively putting nonrestricted licensees who themselves own gaming establishments at a disadvantage to their restricted-license competitors.

Sean Higgins, head of the slot route industry group Nevada Retail Gaming Association, also called for expanding the regulations to include restricted licensees.