Colorado gaming regulators are looking to give the state more authority to keep abusive sports bettors away from its gaming industry. The Colorado Division of Gaming is proposing changes that would allow regulators to place people who threaten athletes, coaches, team employees, and their families on the state’s involuntary exclusion list.
The proposal also addresses insider betting and attempts to manipulate sporting events. The move comes as regulators across the country face growing pressure to address harassment tied to legalized sports betting, particularly incidents involving player props and angry bettors.
The Colorado Division of Gaming discussed proposed changes to Limited Gaming Rule 29 during a stakeholder workshop on November 12. The revisions would expand the circumstances under which the Limited Gaming Control Commission could add someone to its involuntary exclusion list.
The proposed language covers threats of physical harm against athletes, immediate family members, sports governing bodies and their employees, team staff, coaches, and their immediate family members. It also extends to employees and patrons of licensed gaming and sports betting establishments, along with Division of Gaming staff.
People convicted of crimes against those individuals could also face exclusion under the proposed changes.
The distinction is important because the current exclusion framework does not specifically address every form of harassment directed at people involved in sports. The new language would give regulators a more direct mechanism to address those incidents through the gaming system.
Harassment is not the only issue addressed by the proposed changes. Colorado regulators also want the commission to have grounds to exclude individuals who violate the state’s insider betting restrictions or attempt to compromise the integrity of sports betting activities.
Colorado law already prohibits certain people with access to nonpublic information or influence over sporting events from wagering on events connected to their positions. That includes athletes, coaches, referees, team employees, and individuals with access to sensitive information. Violations of the state’s conflict-of-interest provisions can carry a Class 4 felony designation.
The proposed rule would connect those existing restrictions to the state’s involuntary exclusion process, giving regulators another way to address violations.
However, the Division of Gaming cannot currently require sportsbooks to independently ban every person placed on the state’s involuntary exclusion list. Supervisory Investigator Chris Krieger said the agency strongly recommends that sports betting operators follow those exclusions even without a mandate.
That leaves an important distinction between the state’s ability to identify and exclude individuals and the authority to force private sportsbook operators to suspend their accounts.
The proposed rule changes also come alongside a reporting effort intended to make it easier for athletes and other sports participants to bring harassment incidents to regulators.
The Division of Gaming has created an online reporting form that allows individuals to submit their names, roles, sports, leagues, and descriptions of incidents. Users can also upload supporting documentation to help investigators review complaints.
Krieger said one of the challenges regulators have encountered when working with professional sports leagues is getting athletes to report harassment in the first place. The division says it can investigate submitted complaints and coordinate with local law enforcement when appropriate.
Colorado is not alone in addressing the issue. Ohio, West Virginia, and Louisiana have taken steps to give regulators additional authority over bettors who threaten or harass people involved in sporting events.
The Colorado proposal still needs to move through the formal rulemaking process. A public hearing cannot take place until at least 30 days after the division files its formal notice, and any approved changes would take effect approximately 45 to 60 days after a commission vote.
