New Chair Faces Tests at Nevada Gaming Control Board

When Mike Dreitzer assumed the chairmanship of the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) in 2025, he stepped into one of the most scrutinised regulatory roles in US gaming at a moment of unusual pressure for the state’s flagship industry. Nearly three decades after beginning his career at the Nevada Attorney General’s Office under then-supervisor Kirk Hendrick, Dreitzer succeeded Hendrick as chair, inheriting both unfinished business and a shifting regulatory landscape.

Dreitzer has described the appointment as the “honour of my professional life,” but the context underscores the scale of the task. Nevada gaming regulators are navigating heightened enforcement, economic uncertainty in Las Vegas, rapid technological change, and a high-profile legal fight over prediction markets that could shape the state’s approach to new betting products well into 2026.

Enforcement, economy and instability

Since Dreitzer took over the remainder of Hendrick’s term last June, the NGCB has issued four multimillion-dollar anti-money laundering (AML) penalties, signalling an aggressive stance on compliance. At the same time, Las Vegas has faced a prolonged tourism slowdown, adding financial strain to operators and sharpening the political sensitivity of regulatory decisions.

Compounding those challenges is internal turnover. Dreitzer is the fifth NGCB chair since January 2019, and none of his four predecessors completed a full four-year term. His current mandate runs only through January 2027. While that short horizon limits long-term planning, Dreitzer has indicated a willingness to serve a full term if reappointed, a prospect some stakeholders view as a potential stabilising force for an agency that has seen frequent leadership changes.

A central theme of Dreitzer’s early tenure has been technology-driven reform. Drawing on his background in the supplier sector, including senior roles at BMM Testlabs, he has argued that Nevada risks losing relevance if regulatory processes do not move at what he calls “the speed of business.”

Licensees operating in multiple jurisdictions have long complained that Nevada’s approvals can be slower and less predictable than those elsewhere. Dreitzer has acknowledged those concerns and framed modernisation as essential to maintaining the state’s status as the industry’s global benchmark. Under his leadership, the board has accelerated rulemaking activity, holding workshops to update regulations covering cybersecurity, game approvals and back-end systems. These efforts build on Hendrick’s removal of 16 outdated rules and align with Governor Joe Lombardo’s broader push to streamline state regulation.

A key component of the strategy is greater use of the NGCB’s internal technology lab, alongside external testing houses such as GLI and BMM. Dreitzer has described the relationship between regulators, labs and licensees as interdependent, arguing that closer collaboration can reduce delays without weakening oversight. His promotion of Jeremy Eberwein to chief of technology in January marked a concrete step toward strengthening in-house expertise.

Industry reaction

Major Nevada stakeholders have responded positively to the new administration. The Nevada Resort Association has cited Dreitzer’s collaborative approach and openness to feedback, pointing to recent cooperation on private gaming salon rules. Supplier groups have also welcomed his focus on aligning regulation with modern gaming technology, suggesting that dialogue between regulators and manufacturers is becoming more technical and pragmatic.

That support reflects a shared concern: as other US states and international markets move quickly to approve new products, Nevada cannot rely solely on its legacy status to attract innovation. The most visible policy flashpoint under Dreitzer remains prediction markets. Nevada was the first state to issue a cease-and-desist order against Kalshi, triggering litigation that continues to work through the courts. While an initial injunction in Kalshi’s favour was dissolved, the case—and parallel action against Polymarket—has placed Nevada at the centre of a national debate over whether prediction markets constitute gambling under existing law.

Dreitzer has maintained that current offerings do not comply with Nevada statutes, but he has also signalled openness to regulated alternatives. That stance matters for incumbent operators such as MGM Resorts and Caesars Entertainment, which have avoided prediction markets to protect their Nevada licences, even as rivals like FanDuel and DraftKings exit the state to pursue the sector elsewhere.

Whether a Nevada-compliant prediction product emerges remains uncertain. Any such move would require either creative use of existing regulations or legislative change—both unlikely to resolve quickly. Still, Dreitzer’s willingness to engage suggests the door is not closed.

You can take these new technologies and, if you do it right, fit them within the appropriate regulatory structure.

Looking toward 2026

By 2026, Nevada’s gaming landscape could look materially different if current trends continue. A successful push to modernise regulatory processes may shorten approval timelines and make the state more attractive for new technologies, from advanced digital gaming systems to novel wagering formats. Conversely, prolonged litigation over prediction markets could harden Nevada’s reputation as cautious, even as competitors experiment more freely.

Economic conditions will also play a role. If tourism rebounds, regulators may face renewed pressure to balance growth with enforcement. If it does not, scrutiny of compliance costs and regulatory efficiency is likely to intensify.

Dreitzer’s tenure, whether extended or not, sits at the intersection of these forces. His challenge is less about setting a new philosophical direction than about execution: translating collaboration and reform into tangible outcomes. For Nevada, the stakes are clear. Maintaining its role as the industry’s reference point in 2026 will depend not just on history, but on how effectively its regulator adapts to a market that is moving faster than ever.