My comment pertains to concurrent tournaments. VDACS' prohibition negatively impacts players, dealers, and charities because it exceeds their scope and isn't supported by law. This baseless constraint on legal poker events appears unwarranted without a crucial regulatory need to safeguard charitable gaming. Why do the regulations prevent concurrent tournaments when the Code permits them? A reasonable change is to strike proposed 11VAC20-30-90.F.

I’d like to comment on tipping. VDACS’ ban negatively affects dealers, players, and charities since normal poker room compensation is impossible, hindering charity poker operations, and potentially eliminating play. Tipping is vital for dealers’ income in the poker world. Why do the regulations forbid tipping while the Code permits it? This random limitation implies VDACS doesn’t comprehend the poker industry. A sensible fix is to strike this restriction on tipping.

My comment relates to the amount of the use of proceeds. VDACS requires charities to blanketly follow 11VAC20-20-110 for its use of proceeds formula. This destroys charitable poker. Charities couldn’t afford to host any tournaments. A tournament wouldn’t raise enough money to pay its bills and also meet this use of proceeds amount. Anyone who can run a simple budget for a tournament will realize that this formula is an incompetent approach. The fix is to apply the recently adopted formula for pull tabs to poker.