Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gaming Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews modernization of bingo rules; debate over raising prize cap to $6,000
Summary
Senate Bill 73 would adjust bingo rules including changing a carryover cover-all number and raising a maximum prize cap from $4,000 to $6,000. The hearing drew commercial halls, volunteers and lottery officials with mixed views on impacts to small halls and problem-gambling safeguards.
Senate Bill 73, presented to the Senate Ways and Means Committee by Sen. Sharon Lang, would modernize several provisions in New Hampshire's charitable gaming statutes, including changing the carryover "cover-all" ball count back toward long-standing practice (from 50 to 49) and increasing the maximum allowable per-night prize limit from $4,000 to $6,000.
"This bill I'm bringing before you is at the request of the industry," Lang said. She described the measure as updating an old statute and said the change to the cover-all ball count and the prize cap would help bingo halls remain competitive with other gaming options.
Representatives of commercial halls, distributors and bingo operators offered differing perspectives. Jan DiMarzio, general manager of a community bingo center in Manchester, urged caution on the prize-cap increase, saying most bingo nights at smaller venues do not reach the existing $4,000 limit and that raising the cap could disadvantage small, volunteer-run halls. "All your smaller venues will be forced to close," she warned, arguing smaller halls could not match larger commercial halls on higher jackpots.
Other witnesses, including industry representatives and managers of larger halls, argued the changes are needed to help charities and halls compete in an altered market. Dee Lush, a long-time bingo operator, recommended a compromise of changing the cover-all to 48 rather than 49, citing technological changes that increased the number of cards in play. Chris (Hudson Veterans Memorial Hall) testified that the accidental statutory change to 50 balls in 2014 was not widely understood and that restoring 49 would reflect long-standing practice; he said larger jackpots help draw attendance and support charities.
Lottery officials acknowledged the confusion around the cover-all ball count. Valerie (Lottery) said the commission discovered the discrepancy last summer when reviewing statutes and advised halls to comply with the written statute; she described the change as likely unintentional in prior legislation. The committee also heard questions about problem gambling funding and whether higher jackpots would require additional addiction services. Lottery staff said problem-gambling funds exist but are not directly tied to changes in the bingo statute.
In executive session the committee voted to pass SB 73 (OTP) and place it on the consent calendar; the motion to advance was moved and seconded (movers recorded in the transcript) and carried by voice vote (tally not specified in the record).
Why it matters: The bill affects charitable and commercial bingo operations, which support local nonprofits and veterans' organizations. Supporters argued the changes modernize an outdated statute and help charities compete; some smaller halls warned the changes could favor larger commercial operators.
What remains: The bill will proceed with the committeerecommendation; opponents and advocates may continue to press for amendments regarding prize limits and protections for smaller venues.
