## Facts

- In 2004, Florida voters approved a constitutional amendment (Art. X, § 23, Fla. Const.) authorizing Miami-Dade and Broward Counties to hold referenda allowing slot machines at certain pari-mutuel facilities.
- The amendment limited slot machines to “existing licensed pari-mutuel facilities” in those counties that had conducted live racing or games during the two calendar years immediately preceding the amendment’s effective date (2002 and 2003).
- The Legislature implemented the amendment through chapter 551, Florida Statutes. Section 551.102(4) defined an “eligible facility” as a licensed pari-mutuel facility in Miami-Dade or Broward County that existed when the amendment was adopted and that conducted live racing or games during 2002 and 2003.
- Calder Race Course, Inc. operated a licensed pari-mutuel facility in Miami-Dade County. Calder had conducted live thoroughbred horse racing for decades, including in 2002 and 2003.
- After the amendment and implementing legislation, Calder obtained a slot-machine permit based on its status as an eligible facility.
- Calder later obtained a summer permit for jai alai and decided it wanted to discontinue thoroughbred horse racing and instead operate jai alai while continuing slot-machine operations at the same facility.
- Calder petitioned the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering (the Division), for a declaratory statement under section 120.565, Florida Statutes, asking whether:
  - it could discontinue thoroughbred racing and present a full schedule of live jai alai performances and still remain an “eligible facility” for slots, and
  - it had to have conducted summer jai alai performances in the prior state fiscal year to maintain slot eligibility.
- The Division issued a final order granting the declaratory statement, concluding Calder could substitute jai alai for thoroughbred racing without losing eligible-facility status and that prior-year summer jai alai performances were not required.
- Florida Thoroughbred Breeders’ Association, Inc. and Ocala Breeders’ Sales Co., Inc. appealed in consolidated proceedings, arguing that continued slot eligibility required Calder to continue the same pari-mutuel activity (thoroughbred racing) that originally qualified it for slots.

## Issues

1. Whether a pari-mutuel facility that qualified as an “eligible facility” for slot machines based on conducting live thoroughbred racing in 2002 and 2003 may later discontinue horse racing, conduct jai alai instead, and still remain an “eligible facility” under Art. X, § 23 and section 551.102(4), Florida Statutes.
2. Whether the facility must have conducted summer jai alai performances in the prior state fiscal year as a condition of maintaining its slot-machine operations.

## Decision

- The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Division’s final order granting the declaratory statement.
- The court accepted the Division’s reading of the constitutional amendment and chapter 551 as permitting Calder to present jai alai games to continue slot-machine operations.
- The court rejected the argument that the constitutional and statutory scheme required a facility to continue the same type of pari-mutuel wagering activity that originally qualified it for slot eligibility.
- The court also affirmed the Division’s determination that Calder was not required to have conducted summer jai alai performances in the preceding state fiscal year as a condition of continuing slot operations.

## Legal Principles

- Constitutional and statutory interpretation begins with the enacted text; courts do not add conditions that are not expressed.
- Where the eligibility definition is framed by historical facts (existence at the time of adoption and live racing or games in 2002–2003), the absence of language requiring continuation of a specific pari-mutuel activity weighs against implying such a requirement.
- In review of an agency declaratory statement interpreting the regulatory scheme the agency administers, a court may uphold the agency’s interpretation when it is reasonable and consistent with the constitutional and statutory language.
- A court will not transform eligibility criteria tied to a facility’s past operations into an ongoing “same activity” mandate without clear constitutional or statutory direction.

## Conclusion

The First DCA affirmed the Division’s declaratory statement that Calder, an eligible facility for slot machines because it conducted live racing in 2002 and 2003, could discontinue thoroughbred horse racing and instead operate a full schedule of live jai alai performances while retaining slot-machine eligibility, and that no separate requirement compelled Calder to have conducted summer jai alai in the prior fiscal year to continue slot operations.


Florida Thoroughbred Breeders' Association, Inc. v. Calder Race Course, Inc., 283 So. 3d 843 (2019)