Senate committee hears bill to fold gaming commission into attorney general’s office

The Senate Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on Senate Bill 2224, a measure that would abolish the state Gaming Commission and vest full authority to administer and regulate charitable and other gaming with the Attorney General’s Office.

Senator Yana Bridal, sponsor of SB 2224, told the committee the bill would remove what she described as an unnecessary middle step in rulemaking: "let it be administered fully under the attorney general's office," she said, arguing the attorney general’s staff already drafts and approves administrative rules used in the industry.

Opposition testimony came from Scott Meske, representing the North Dakota Gaming Alliance, who called the commission an important check on centralized power. "Giving 100% of the oversight and regulation to one office" would set a "very precarious precedent," Meske said, noting the gaming commission currently votes on proposed administrative rules before the attorney general reviews them.

Jamie McClain, who identified himself as a current Gaming Commission member, and Deb McDaniel, director of the Gaming Division in the Attorney General’s Office, both described how rules are drafted and how the commission is used in the current process. McDaniel outlined the rulemaking steps: AG staff draft rule changes, give public notice, hold a public hearing, gather written testimony, then the commission meets and votes; the attorney general’s office later reviews rules for legality. She said the commission routinely acts as a venue for stakeholder input and that some rule topics — for example, machine placement or defining an establishment type — have been contentious and were addressed at the commission level before reaching the attorney general or the Legislature.

Witnesses and some senators pressed both sides on when the Gaming Commission last met and why; McClain said the commission had only three members and needed two more gubernatorial appointments to be a full panel. Meske said a multimonth trial of kiosks is underway and that the commission has not met because the panel was not full. McDaniel said the commission had not met in part because the body lacked a full complement of commissioners, and that the kiosk trial had been initiated to gather evidence for possible rulemaking.

After testimony and discussion, the committee voted on a motion to give SB 2224 a due-pass recommendation. The committee recorded a 4–3 vote in favor of a due pass recommendation.