Gaming Commission delays action on slot parlor regulations

The operation of the Dotty’s slot parlors and some its clones has been a contentious issue, especially after the go-round the Clark County Commission had that led to a controversial county ordinance and subsequent lawsuit.

The Nevada Gaming Commission got a reminder Thursday of just how controversial the issue has become, spending three hours in hearings without resolution to the question of whether the Dotty’s chain must supply tavern and food amenities to operate its parlor of slot machines.

After the hearing, which capped a nine-hour meeting, commissioners determined that the state Gaming Control Board would post three different versions of proposed regulations addressing the Dotty’s issue and reconvene a hearing at their August meeting to possibly enact one of them.

The commission is scheduled to meet in Carson City on Aug. 25 with a teleconference in Las Vegas.

The Control Board had posted its own proposed regulation on its website prior to the meeting.

Representatives of the Nevada Resort Association brought their own two versions.

Commission Chairman Peter Bernhard spent the first hour of the hearing questioning Station Casinos Executive Vice President Scott Nielson and association Executive Director Virginia Valentine about the organization’s proposed changes to Regulation 3.015, which addresses applications for restricted licenses.

Restricted licenses are held by small operations such as bars, taverns, convenience stores and grocery stores.

The association had submitted its proposal and a revision, and Bernhard grilled Nielson on the fine points of the proposal and the association’s motivations for suggesting them.

Then Commissioner Tony Alamo unveiled his own proposal, a blending of the association’s version and the Control Board’s version with some of his own revisions.

With so many different proposals being aired, the commission ultimately decided to look the issue over again next month.

But here are some of the issues in play:

• Should a licensee be required to have a bar and, if so, how big must it be? The earlier version by the association suggested requiring a bar that would seat at least six customers, but the later version required a bar that could seat 12.

• Should a licensee be required to have a restaurant? The association version said a restaurant should be required and it would have to seat at least 20 people, prepare and serve hot meals on the premises and be open at least 12 hours a day.

• Should a licensee be required to have additional space? The association proposal calls for requiring a minimum of 2,000 square feet if the establishment intends to operate more than four slot machines.

• Should a licensee be required to establish and maintain a contract or service agreement with a licensed liquor distributor? The association version requires that.

Another clause would retroactively require licensees to make changes after being approved by regulators.

The proposed regulation says that “for those establishments granted a restricted license between Feb. 2, 2000 and (the effective date of the regulation) shall have until (24 months from the effective date) in which to demonstrate compliance...of this regulation to the board’s satisfaction.”

An earlier related regulation took effect Feb 2, 2000.

The Clark County ordinance has even more requirements, leading Bernhard to question Nielson about whether consistent standards should be developed and whether some of the requirements in the proposed regulation would be too expensive for established operators to pay, especially in rural locations.

“Why should we, as gaming regulators, care about the size of a bar in terms of gaming control?” Bernhard asked Nielson.

Nielson said the association was merely attempting to establish a standard.

Bernhard suggested association members were trying to establish standards because Dotty’s and their imitators were successfully taking market share away from them.

Dotty’s parlors are quiet, homey and appeal mostly to women.

Patti Becker, a lawyer representing Dotty’s and its owner, Craig Estey, said the concept is hardly new to Las Vegas.

“He (Estey) came forward with this new concept in 1995,” Becker said. “It didn’t come yesterday. You voted for some of his locations.”

Randy Miller, owner of Molly’s Taverns, one of the Dotty’s look-alikes, said discouraging the concept could be costly to the local economy.

“I saw the concept when it came in ’95 and I thought they were out of their minds,” Miller said. “But then I said, ‘Is that a concept that I should look at?’”

He said in today’s economy, some of the restricted licensees are becoming the anchors of commercial centers and some employ as many as 80 people.