North Dakota Administrative Code Title 99 - State Gaming Commission
Overview of Title 99 – State Gaming Commission
Title 99 NDAC contains administrative rules promulgated by the North Dakota State Gaming Commission. These rules regulate gaming activities within the state, particularly focusing on tribal gaming under compacts, charitable gaming, and other gambling-related activities overseen by the Commission.
Statutory Basis
The State Gaming Commission derives its authority mainly from North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) Chapter 53-06.4, titled State Gaming Commission. Some key statutory elements include:
Creation and authority of the Commission: NDCC 53-06.4-01 establishes the Commission as a regulatory agency tasked with overseeing gaming operations.
Powers and duties: NDCC 53-06.4-03 outlines the Commission’s power to adopt rules, investigate violations, issue licenses and permits, and enforce compliance.
Gaming activities regulated: This includes tribal gaming (under tribal-state compacts), charitable gaming, electronic gaming devices, bingo, and other gambling activities authorized by law.
Licensing and enforcement: NDCC 53-06.4 grants the Commission authority to license operators, vendors, employees, and others involved in gaming, and to suspend or revoke licenses for violations.
Main Provisions of Title 99 NDAC
Title 99 contains various chapters; the major topics covered include:
1. Organization and Administration
Rules describing the composition of the Commission, meeting procedures, duties of officers, and administration.
Provisions on recordkeeping, confidentiality of investigations, and administrative hearings.
2. Licensing and Registration
Detailed requirements for licenses and permits for gaming operators, vendors, employees, and manufacturers.
Background checks, fingerprinting, fees, and grounds for denial or revocation.
Processes for renewal and suspension.
3. Gaming Operations
Specific rules regulating different types of gaming: bingo, raffles, pull-tabs, electronic gaming devices, and tribal gaming under compacts.
Operational rules on game procedures, accounting, audits, prize limits, and reporting requirements.
Requirements for ensuring fair play, preventing fraud, and protecting consumers.
4. Investigations and Enforcement
Procedures for conducting investigations into suspected violations.
Administrative penalties, fines, license revocation or suspension.
Appeals process for licensees or other parties affected by enforcement actions.
5. Financial and Operational Reporting
Requirements for detailed financial reporting by licensed entities.
Auditing standards to ensure compliance with laws and regulations.
Transparency and accountability mandates.
Important Concepts in Title 99
Licensing is essential: No gaming operation or associated person may operate without a valid license issued by the Commission.
Compliance and oversight: The Commission monitors all gaming activities actively through audits, investigations, and reports.
Cooperation with tribal governments: Tribal gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) is managed via compacts, and the Commission enforces the state’s obligations under these agreements.
Protection of public interest: The overarching goal is to ensure gaming is conducted fairly, legally, and free from criminal influence.
Case Law Involving Title 99 / State Gaming Commission
While direct case law interpreting Title 99 NDAC specifically is somewhat limited, relevant judicial decisions generally focus on:
1. Licensing and Due Process Challenges
Cases involving license denial or revocation often raise constitutional issues such as procedural due process. Courts typically require the Commission to provide fair notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a reasoned decision when denying or revoking gaming licenses.
Example principles:
Licensees have a property or liberty interest in their licenses, triggering due process protections.
Administrative hearings must comply with state administrative procedure acts.
Courts defer to the Commission’s expertise unless there is an abuse of discretion or lack of substantial evidence.
2. Tribal-State Compact Enforcement
Some disputes have arisen over the interpretation of tribal-state gaming compacts, with courts sometimes involved in reviewing whether the Commission or the tribes complied with compact provisions.
Courts recognize the sovereign status of tribes and the complex federal-state interplay, often deferring to negotiated compacts and the terms therein.
For instance, disputes over what types of games may be authorized, revenue-sharing, or regulatory jurisdiction have been litigated or mediated, often invoking principles of federal Indian law.
3. Enforcement and Criminal Proceedings
The Commission’s investigations can lead to criminal referrals. Courts review whether the Commission acted within its statutory authority.
Cases have addressed:
Validity of search and seizure in gaming operations.
Enforcement of penalties under NDCC.
Challenges to the Commission’s authority to impose fines or sanctions.
4. Interpretation of Specific Regulatory Provisions
Courts have occasionally interpreted specific administrative rules from Title 99 regarding permitted games, accounting standards, or reporting obligations.
For example, disputes over the legality of certain electronic gaming devices or whether specific pull-tab designs comply with rules have reached judicial review.
Example Case Summaries
While not all are named here, below are illustrative types of cases likely encountered in this field:
Doe v. ND State Gaming Commission (hypothetical): A case where a gaming employee challenged revocation of license for alleged misconduct, arguing lack of due process. Court held that the Commission followed proper procedures and had substantial evidence, so revocation was upheld.
Tribal Nation v. ND Gaming Commission (hypothetical): A tribal gaming enterprise contested a Commission ruling on electronic gaming device limitations under the compact. The court deferred to the compact language and affirmed the Commission’s authority.
State v. XYZ Gaming Vendor (hypothetical): Criminal prosecution following Commission investigation into illegal gaming machines. Court ruled the Commission’s initial investigation was lawful, and evidence was admissible.
Practical Implications
Operators must strictly comply with licensing rules and maintain transparency with the Commission.
The Commission is empowered to act decisively to prevent illegal gaming or misconduct.
Licensees have administrative and judicial recourse to challenge Commission actions but must meet evidentiary standards.
Tribal gaming relationships require careful negotiation and compliance with compacts and federal law.
Summary
Title 99 NDAC implements the statutory framework for regulating all gaming activities under the North Dakota State Gaming Commission. It governs licensing, operational standards, investigations, and enforcement. While case law is somewhat limited, legal challenges tend to focus on administrative due process, enforcement authority, and compact interpretation.
RELATED Blog
0 comments