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 a vailable 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 Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

SPONSOR Stewart

DATE TYPED 03/09/05 HB 966/aHTC

SHORT TITLE Restrict Gaming Establishment Locations

SB

ANALYST Medina

APPROPRIATION

Appropriation Contained Estimated Additional Impact Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY05

FY06

FY05

FY06

NFI

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

REVENUE

Estimated Revenue

Subsequent

Years Impact

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY05

FY06

Indeterminate

Indeterminate Recurring

General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Gaming Control Board (GCB)

State Racing Commission (SRC)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of HTC Amendment

The House Transportation Committee Amendment clarifies that the Gaming Control Board is

prohibited from issuing a gaming license to a racetrack gaming operator if the proposed gaming

establishment is to be located within three hundred yards of an external boundary of the state

land on which the racetrack is located in a municipality with a population of more than 300,000

according to the 2000 census.

House Bill 966/aHTC -- Page 2

Synopsis of Original Bill

House Bill 966 grants the New Mexico State Fair the power to locate a gaming establishment

adjacent to the racetrack or in the facility in which seating for the racetrack is located, provided

that no gaming establishment is located within three hundred yards of an external boundary of

the state fairgrounds.

The bill further amends the Gaming Control Act to prohibit the Gaming Control Board from is-

suing a gaming license to a gaming operator if the proposed gaming establishment is to be lo-

cated within three hundred yards of an external boundary of the state land on which the racetrack

is located in a municipality with a population of more than 300,000 according to the 2000 cen-

sus.

Finally, the provisions of the Gaming Control Act making a racetrack operator’s license void are

amended to include voiding licenses of gaming establishments in the same municipalities that

move locations to within three hundred yards of an external boundary of the state land on which

the gaming establishment is located.

Significant Issues

According to GCB, an assessment on any affected racetrack’s current location needs to be con-

ducted to ensure that their current location doesn’t violate this proposed bill. According to the

Racing Commission, the provisions of this bill would enable operators to double the number of

slots and can be competitive with other tracks or casinos.

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

The provisions of this bill would require GCB to consult with the affected municipality zoning

authority to ensure that gaming establishments (racetracks) are three hundred yards of an exter-

nal boundary of the state land on which it is located.

TECHNICAL ISSUES

According to GCB, an assessment on any affected racetrack’s current location needs to be con-

ducted to ensure that their current location doesn’t violate this proposed bill.

ALTERNATIVES

The Gaming Control Board suggests the following:

“The following new wording in 60-2E-7 (B) (2) could be construed as confusing:

provided that the board shall not issue a license to a gaming operator the gaming estab-

lishment of which is to be located within three hundred yards of an external boundary of

the state land on which the race track is located in a municipality with a population of

greater than three hundred thousand according to the 2000 federal decennial census;

This section, initially, does not address a specific gaming operator until further in the

House Bill 966/aHTC -- Page 3

amendment. This nonspecific language in the beginning could become confusing and

nonprofits within the affected area could interpret this change to affect them; therefore

the recommended amendment to 60-2E-7 (B) (2) and for consistency 60-2E-27 (B) (3)

should read:

provided that the board shall not issue a license to a racetrack gaming operator the gam-

ing establishment of which is to be located within three hundred yards of an external

boundary of the state land on which the racetrack is located in a municipality with a

population of greater than three hundred thousand according to the 2000 federal decen-

nial census;

This change in language would greatly clarify the intent to limit a specific gaming opera-

tor’s location.”

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL.

According to the Racing Commission, the amount of revenue that may be added to purses and to

the general fund may be limited.

DXM/yr:lg