A year after game room owner Eric Thompson advocated in favor of new Lubbock County regulations, he’s not too fond of the update county commissioners approved Monday.  

Thompson and his attorney are preparing a lawsuit. He’s also facing a misdemeanor criminal charge related to the county’s game room ordinance.  

“I think it’s debilitating. I think that it’s an undue burden, especially if you’re operating legally,” Thompson told LubbockLights.com after the changes took effect. 

LubbockLights.com previewed most of the changes before Monday’s meeting. But one came up at the last minute and was not listed in public records in advance.   

Commissioner Mike Dalby offered an amendment during the meeting to confine game room operating hours to Monday through Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. It passed.  

“Dangerous things occur inside these game rooms. I took an oath to protect the citizens of Lubbock County. I certainly don’t want them in a game room outside of operating hours,” Dalby said. 

Thompson said, “That’s going to cut our workforce in half. And it’s going to hurt a lot of people. I know that the clients – the customers themselves – are pretty unhappy,” Thompson said.  

Ordinance highlights (including recent update):  

Game room permit is required 

Separate employee permit is required, including background checks 

Game rooms may operate only Monday-Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

Exterior doors must remain unlocked during operating hours 

Exterior doors must remain locked when the business is closed 

A peace officer must be present during hours of operation 

Only one game room per 30,000 people in unincorporated areas of the county 

The one game room can only be located in Precinct 2 (Southeast Lubbock County)  

However, businesses operating before the ordinance could apply under grandfather status 

Grandfather status is lost if the location or ownership changes or if there is a criminal conviction  

‘By their very essence’ illegal 

The presumption by commissioners and the sheriff is the game rooms are operating illegally.   

County Judge Curtis Parrish said Monday, “I’ve been very vocal about being against game rooms. It’d be nice to have an amendment here that would say, ‘We’re going to dig a big hole and just shove them all in.’ That would be my amendment.” 

Sheriff Kelly Rowe spoke to LubbockLights.com two days after the meeting, saying, “These places, by their very essence, are illegal. I’ve struggled since the first discussions of an ordinance of basically trying to legalize an otherwise criminal enterprise.” 

Charge filed 

Thompson was charged on February 20 with a class A misdemeanor – specifically a November violation of the county’s game room ordinance.   

It wasn’t Thompson’s first misdemeanor. 

In 2016, officers seized more than $10,000 in a raid of his Senator’s Game Room in the 5300 block of South Q Drive, west of Interstate 27.  A judge later ruled the state could keep that money and not return it to Thompson. Thompson pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and was sentenced to one day in jail. 

His attorney said Thompson developed a non-cash system after the 2016 case.  

But Thompson said the sheriff has done this wrong from the start. He claimed his business, El Fronteriso, respects the law – even if his competitors do not.  

His business has 4,000 customers, he said. 

“I think that there’s a significant portion of Lubbock that are not scumbags and like to come play,” Thompson said.  

What can a game room give out? 

Thompson and Rowe agreed a payout cannot be worth more than $5 per win.  

But Thompson said you can add up wins for bigger prizes, “… as long as the ratio never goes over $5 per game played for the fair market value of the item awarded as a prize.” 

“No cash. You can never pay cash for prizes,” Thompson said.  

Thompson’s game room gives out tiny silver bars, he said.   

Rowe said game rooms in general are giving out big prizes. 

“When you’ve got a $5 limit on a payout, a new car or a new cafe-style motorcycle is going to exceed that,” Rowe said.  

Thompson hired a private investigator to find out if most game rooms are illegally paying cash. They are, according to his PI’s report.  

Private investigation 

Thompson hired a private investigator to visit 10 game rooms. In one location, there was no payout – just losses. The total cash payouts were more than $1,000.   

Location 1
No payout (loss) – September 26
$80 payout – October 2
$70 payout – October 25

Location 2
No payout (loss) – September 26

Location 3
No payout (loss) – October 2
$80 payout – October 9

Location 4
$185 payout – October 9
No payout (loss) – October 25
$120 payout – November 1

Location 5
No payout (loss) – October 16
$160 payout – November 1

Location 6
$120 payout – October 16

Location 7
No payout, loss (Investigator) – October 16
$75 payout (accompanying player) – October 16

Location 8
$50 payout – October 16
No payout (loss)

Location 9
No payout, loss (investigator) – October 25
$90 payout (accompanying player) – October 25

Location 10
$30 payout – October 25

Thompson shared that information with county officials but said they took no action.  

‘Unfair and unjustified’ 

Thompson’s attorney, Ben Garcia, said, “My client is trying to compete with other rooms that are being allowed to break the law. How are we supposed to compete with the competitors who are being allowed by the sheriff’s office to pay cash?” 

“They have targeted my client because he’s got the biggest business in town, even though he’s the only one who has shown respect for the law and a desire to do this legally. … But it’s just unfair and unjustified when we’re the only ones who are trying to do it legally,” Garcia said. 

Rowe denied singling anyone out.  

“Everybody is getting the same amount of time, same amount of visits and stops. I’d be very cautious of falling into, the whole ‘picked on’ thing,” Rowe said of his officers checking out the game rooms. 

Is the ordinance working? 

Historically, the Sheriff’s Department could file a misdemeanor charge for gambling. Rowe said that’s not much to work with. The ordinance, which first took effect on last May 1, in his opinion, has not been a magic bullet. 

“The enforcement on this has been – it’s a civil deal. We have not received a single civil fine yet for any various number of reasons. … I think we’re at about fifty-fifty on permit removals, from what I was told,” Rowe said. 

Meaning – his officers have been successful about half the time when requesting game room permits be revoked.   

Commissioner Jason Corley, who proposed the original ordinance, said it’s working.  

“Just making people register their business and having some reasonable requirements to have them register to have those businesses and some reasonable guidelines to operate them. That was all it took to go from 100 illegal game rooms down to about 31 is where we’re at today,” Corley said. 

Thirty one is not disputed. But before 2025, the county did not officially track game room numbers so not everyone agrees it was 100.  

“We haven’t seen a game room shooting. We’re not seeing the violence. We’re not seeing all the problems that we had before,” Corley said. 

Rowe disagreed. Calls for robbery, domestic violence and the like were running about one call per game room per year before the ordinance took effect. That hasn’t changed, he said.  

Asked if the ordinance is working, Rowe at first said, “I don’t really think so.” 

But as he thought about a little bit, Rowe then said, “There are certainly some areas that I’m receiving reports that this has potentially assisted. … My guys that have been out checking compliance and enforcement, as I was told this morning in fact, that they’ve received a lot of ‘thank yous’ from folks,” Rowe said.  

But Corley wonders if the ordinance will continue working now that commissioners approved changes.  

“My concerns are about some of these changes on whether or not they will see a legal challenge,” Corley said.  

“If you go to court, now you’re going to be having a court case about what is reasonable. So, I’m concerned we might be pushing our luck there,” Corley said. 

The biggest challenge will be hours of operation, Corley said.  

“We want to restrict these activities, but we don’t want to get the county sued either. … My concern would be that they throw out the whole ordinance. Then what?” Corley said. 

Lawsuit threat 

Thompson and Garcia said they’re working on a lawsuit. Thompson was in favor of the original 2025 ordinance, and Garcia said he had a hand in helping to write it.  

Thompson said, “I think the biggest thing that the original ordinance did is make people spend money on security.” 

There had been other shootings and incidents. 

Garcia said, “Those aren’t the employees, they’re not the owners. They’re not customers. Those are people that are outside trying to commit a robbery for the most part.” 

Thompson mentioned the case of Jamie Lee Pruett who was accused of shooting four people, one fatally, all in different locations in 2023. It just so happened one of the victims was at a game room.  Pruett remains jailed while his criminal charges are pending.  

Thompson and Garcia both felt like the recent changes went too far. The idea behind the original ordinance was to make it as simple as a food inspection or a building inspection.  

Garcia said, “Instead of just walking in with a clipboard like I designed this thing, they’re walking in in tactical gear with the SWAT team and long guns.” 

Moreover, Garcia thought the county violated the Texas Open Meetings Act.  

“The government body is required to give written notice of the subject of each meeting held by the government body,” Garcia said.  

Changes were listed on the public agenda, but not hours of operation.  

As of Friday at noon, the lawsuit had not been filed.  

Related

Related posts