An Act to amend and reenact § 18.2-340.20 of the Code of Virginia, relating to charitable gaming; denial, suspension, or revocation of permit.
Summary
HB1157 amends Virginia’s charitable gaming law to clarify when the Department may deny, suspend, or revoke a permit to conduct charitable gaming or an authorization to conduct electronic gaming. The bill keeps the core standard that the Department may take action when an organization is not in strict compliance with the charitable gaming article or Department regulations, and it preserves the requirement that such actions are subject to the Administrative Process Act.
The bill also reinforces procedural protections. Except for specified existing exceptions, the Department must provide notice stating the proposed basis for action and the time and place for a hearing before denying, suspending, or revoking a permit or authorization, or before seizing charitable games or funds. Hearings may be conducted by hearing officers selected from the Supreme Court’s list, and aggrieved parties retain the right to seek judicial review under the Administrative Process Act.
Impact
HB1157 affects § 18.2-340.20 of the Code of Virginia, the statute governing enforcement actions against charitable gaming permits and electronic gaming authorizations. It does not create a new regulatory program, but it confirms and organizes the Department’s authority to discipline noncompliant organizations while preserving notice, hearing, and appeal rights for permit holders and other affected parties. The practical impact is on charitable gaming operators, nonprofit organizations authorized to conduct gaming, and the Department responsible for oversight and enforcement.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It advanced unanimously through subcommittee, full committee, both chambers, and final passage, with no recorded dissenting votes. The voting history suggests general agreement that the measure is a procedural clarification or administrative update rather than a substantive expansion of enforcement power.
Contention
No major opposition is reflected in the available record. The only potentially sensitive issue is the balance between regulatory enforcement and due process: the bill preserves the Department’s ability to deny, suspend, revoke, or seize gaming-related property, but it also requires notice, hearings, and APA review. Any concern would likely come from charitable gaming operators or nonprofits focused on maintaining strong procedural protections, while regulators may view the bill as reinforcing compliance authority.