Fiscal impact
reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for
standing finance committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they are used for other
purposes.
Current FIRs (in
HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are available on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us). Adobe PDF versions include all attachments,
whereas HTML versions may not.
Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC in
|
SPONSOR |
Salazar |
DATE TYPED |
|
HB |
32/aHTRC |
||
|
SHORT
TITLE |
Indian Gaming Revenue Distribution |
SB |
|
||||
|
|
ANALYST |
Neel |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
|
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
|
FY04 |
FY05 |
FY04 |
FY05 |
|
|
|
|
See
Narrative |
|
|
Recurring |
Local Government |
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
REVENUE
|
Estimated Revenue |
Subsequent Years Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
|
|
FY04 |
FY05 |
|
|
|
|
|
See
Narrative |
|
Recurring |
General
Fund |
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)
LFC Files
Response
Received From:
Gaming
Control Board (GCB)
Department
of Finance and Administration (DFA)
No
Responses Received From:
Attorney
General (AG)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of HTRC
Amendment
The House Taxation and Revenue Committee
amendment changes the distribution from one-sixth of net receipts to 11.4
percent, thereby reducing the fiscal impact to $115 thousand (see revised
fiscal impact).
Synopsis of Original Bill
The bill amends statute to make a distribution
of one-sixth of net receipts of revenue sharing from Indian gaming facilities
located within the municipality. The
distribution will be made to the municipality where the gaming facility is
located for infrastructure or for police and fire protection. Distributions are required to be made each
quarterly with DFA administering the program.
REVISED FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The GCB considers net revenues figures by tribes
as confidential as prescribed under the gaming compacts; therefore an accurate
fiscal impact is difficult to ascertain.
However, the impact will be minimal since only one facility would
qualify for the one-sixth distribution (
Continuing
Appropriations. HB 32 appropriates one-sixth of net
receipts from revenue sharing agreements for Indian gaming facilities located
within a municipality. This
appropriation continues in subsequent years.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE
ISSUES
Tribal Gaming. Currently 13 tribes have gaming compacts in
Mescalero under the 1997 compact and 11 others under the 2001
compact. However, 16 casinos are
in operation because four tribes have more than
one casino and the Jicarilla Apache Nation is not
currently operating a casino. As described by
GCB and the Attorney General, three legal actions
related to the compacts are pending:
As
provided under the 1997 gaming compacts, the Gaming Control Board initiated
arbitration with the pueblos
of
nonpayment of revenue
sharing. After arbitration was initiated, it became apparent the tribes and
arbitrators intended to
decide the legal question of whether or not revenue sharing was legal
under the federal Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act. The New Mexico Attorney General determined
the legality of revenue sharing under the
federal law was not subject to arbitration but must be
decided in the courts. The
arbitration has been stayed by the New Mexico Supreme Court.
Federal Lawsuit.
In June 2000, the Attorney General filed
suit in federal court against 12 gaming tribes in
provisions of the 1997
compacts are legal under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act; (2) a
declaration that the tribe’s
failure to make all revenue-sharing payments is a violation of the
compact; and (3) an injunction
against all Class III gaming conducted by the tribes, or, if the
revenue-sharing provision is not
enforceable, a ruling that the compact is invalid. Ten of the 12
tribes settled the case by signing
the 2001 compact and paying the state collectively $91 million.
The
two remaining tribes, Pojoaque Pueblo and Mescalero Apache, have a motion to
compel
arbitration pending in front
of the federal court. Once that motion is filed, the Attorney General
will either be in arbitration or
proceeding on the merits of the claim.
The current gaming
compacts, which became effective in December 2001 and expire in 2015, provide
for revenue sharing at the rate of 8 percent per annum for net win over $12
million and, if under $12 million, 3 percent per annum for the first $4
million. Additionally, the compacts state the tribes will pay the state $100.0
per year as “reimbursement of the state’s costs of regulation. The tribe and
the state further agree that such amount fairly reflects the state’s costs of
regulation ...” This amount is to increase by 3 percent each succeeding year.
The following
information shows tribal activity since inception of the 1997 compacts:
Tribal Revenue Sharing
and Regulatory Fee Payments
1997 Compact:
FY98-FY00 $ 66,818.9
FY02 Settlement
Agreement 91,000.0
Total 157,818.9
2001 Compact:
FY02 $ 9,717.2
FY03 (2nd qtr. pd. in
July) 7,989.2
Total 17,706.4
Total Received from
Tribal Gaming $175,525.3
2001 Compacting Tribes,
Net Win*
Isleta 51,120.4
Laguna 8,568.3
Sandia 58,888.5
San Felipe 13,025.5
SN/yr:lg:dm