Wisconsin Legislative Audit Bureau
98-5 Division of Gaming, Department of Administration
Summary
The Division of Gaming within the Department of Administration administers and
regulates the State's racing, Indian gaming, and charitable gaming activities. We
completed an audit of the Division to fulfill our audit responsibilities under
The Racing program's pari-mutuel tax revenue, which is calculated as a percentage
of the amount wagered at racetracks, declined by approximately 45 percent since
fiscal year (FY) 1994-95, when it was $4.7 million. In FY 1996-97, it was
$2.6 million, and the Division estimates that
The Division attributes this decline primarily to increased competition from other gaming opportunities. Unlike pari-mutuel tax revenue, Charitable Gaming program revenue has remained relatively stable since FY 1994-95. The Division of Gaming also currently receives a total of $350,000 annually from the 11 tribes as reimbursement for the State's regulatory costs.
We reviewed the Division's administrative cost allocation process and found that the Indian Gaming and Charitable Gaming programs are not assessed their full share of administrative costs. For example, although the Division's administrative staff have responsibilities related to all gaming programs, their salary and fringe benefit expenditures are charged solely to the Racing program. Therefore, Racing expenditures are higher than necessary because the program absorbs some administrative costs that should have been assessed against the Indian Gaming and Charitable Gaming programs. We estimate that if employe-related costs had been allocated according to work effort, an additional $164,500 in racing proceeds would have been available for transfer as required by statute, first to programs that aid local fairs and for educational programs related to livestock, and then to the General Fund. However, it should be noted that the Indian Gaming and Charitable Gaming programs have not had sufficient expenditure authority to pay all of the administrative costs that properly could have been allocated to them, even though their program balances have been adequate to do so.
While a more accurate allocation of administrative costs would have allowed for
additional
****
How to Order This Report | Back to Reports Page | Back one page |