Provides relative to the Video Draw Poker Devices Control Law. (8/1/13)
Impact
One of the key impacts of SB 164 is the potential increase in the number of video draw poker devices that can be operated within designated facilities, which supporters argue could enhance revenue from gaming. By abolishing previous attendance limits and adjusting separation distances between poker facilities and sensitive locations (such as schools, playgrounds, and historic sites), the bill aims to facilitate greater access and operational flexibility for these gaming establishments. However, this change may also raise concerns regarding the social implications of increased gaming activities in proximity to vulnerable community areas.
Summary
Senate Bill 164 amends the existing Video Draw Poker Devices Control Law in Louisiana by modifying regulations related to the location and spacing of video draw poker facilities, particularly at truck stops. The bill removes certain limits on the number of video draw poker devices that can be placed at licensed pari-mutuel wagering or offtrack wagering facilities. Furthermore, it establishes various prohibited distances depending on when the facilities applied for permits, effectively creating a tiered regulatory approach that reflects the registration timeline of the facilities in question.
Sentiment
The general sentiment around SB 164 has been divisive. Supporters, particularly those in the gaming and hospitality industries, argue that the amendments will bolster economic activity and job creation through increased participation in legalized gaming. On the other hand, critics express concerns about the potential normalization of gambling in environments close to educational and recreational facilities, suggesting it could undermine community standards and promote gambling-related issues.
Contention
Notable points of contention include the bill's implications for local governance and community autonomy over zoning regulations related to gambling facilities. Detractors are worried that relaxing restrictions could lead to an oversaturation of gaming establishments, adversely affecting community character and safety. The discussions emphasized a balancing act between economic incentivization through expanded gambling options and preserving the integrity of community spaces against an increased presence of gambling operations.