Bill to create 10‑year charitable gaming oversight commission draws support and calls for guardrails

Concord ' Lawmakers heard testimony on HB 328, a bill to establish a 10‑year Charitable Gaming Oversight Commission to monitor the rapid expansion of machine‑based charitable gaming in New Hampshire and to recommend administrative and legislative changes.

Rep. Alvin Ames, the bill sponsor, told the House Ways and Means Committee the commission would review social‑impact findings, problem‑gambling safeguards, how charitable proceeds are distributed and whether gaming concentration or facility proliferation requires new limits or municipal opt‑in/opt‑out options. "This commission is directed to submit a report ... annually," Ames said, describing the commission's charge to make recommendations for administrative and legislative changes.

Why sponsors and supporters say it is needed

The bill follows the November 2024 report of the Interim Gaming Commission and two contractor reports by Spectrum Gaming Group that analyzed market structure and social impacts. Supporters said recent growth in historic horse racing machines and machine‑style charitable gaming has produced substantial new revenue streams for operators and for charities that participate, and that the state lacks consistent rules for selecting charities, monitoring concentration of ownership and addressing problem gambling.

Alicia Preston of the New Hampshire Charitable Gaming Operators Association told the committee the industry supports reauthorization of a study body and offered to continue as a resource during rulemaking. "We are here in support of this legislation," Preston said.

Public‑interest testimony and problem gambling

Dr. Deborah Warner, a psychologist who attended the commission meetings, urged stronger problem‑gambling resources and recommended that public (citizen) members have voting standing on the commission. "I would like that the public members ... be voting members," Warner said, arguing that public participation strengthens the commission's recommendations. She also urged training for mental‑health professionals who will be called upon to treat problem gambling.

Lottery Director Charlie McIntyre and the Lottery's chief compliance officer emphasized the need to fund the commission's work. McIntyre noted the prior study commission had carried a budget and asked the committee to consider funding for administrative costs.

Key policy areas the commission would examine

- Problem gambling prevention and treatment, and whether current funding and referral systems are adequate. - Standards and transparency for how charities are selected to receive proceeds from charitable gaming, and whether distribution processes are equitable. - Potential concentration of gaming facilities and ownership and whether municipal opt‑in/opt‑out rules or placement limits are necessary. - Whether historic horse racing should be regulated differently or reclassified to capture additional fees and reduce operator software costs.

Concerns and potential amendments

Several committee members suggested limiting voting by executive branch staff with regulatory relationships to gaming operators (for example, lottery staff or the attorney general's office) or allowing them to serve as non‑voting participants, an issue sponsor Ames said he would accept for further drafting. The lottery urged dedicated funding for commission operations; the prior commission had non‑lapsing funds in its enabling language that the Lottery administered.

Ending

Committee members generally expressed interest in creating a structured, bipartisan oversight body. The committee took testimony but did not vote; members asked the sponsor and agency staff to return with clarifying language on membership and funding. No formal action was taken at the hearing.