State PAC files largest campaign finance report in Lebanon County’s history

A state-based political action committee representing the amusement and gaming industry submitted a $4.35 million campaign finance report with Lebanon County election officials that is believed to be the largest ever locally filed.  

State Sen. Chris Gebhard (R-48) said the report filed by Operators for Skill PAC dwarfs all others filed in Lebanon County. Operators for Skill PAC supports manufacturers and operators of skill gaming machines, including Georgia-based Pace-O-Matic.

“This is the largest filing in the history of Lebanon County, actually probably combining every other filing ever in Lebanon County,” said Gebhard.

Operators for Skill PAC spokesperson Jeanette Krebs provided a statement to LebTown that said the PAC “is registered in Lebanon County because it made contributions earlier this year to the district attorney campaign of Pier Hess Graf.”

The PAC reported that on Oct. 21 it donated $10,000 to Friends of Pier Hess Graf as a campaign contribution, according to its 30-day post-election report filed with the Lebanon County Elections Bureau on Dec. 2. That report covers the contribution period from Oct. 21 through Nov. 24.

Of the $4,451,000 in monetary contributions to the PAC during the reporting period, $4,350,000 came in the form of loans, including $1 million in loans each from Thomas J. Deleo, Louis D. Miele, and Michael R. Pace.

Gebhard and Lebanon County officials said state law only requires organizations to file campaign finance reports with the commonwealth. LebTown asked Gebhard his view on why the campaign report was filed with the county’s elections bureau if not required by law. 

“Why did they file in Lebanon County? Because I think they wanted people like you to hear about it and get to see it, and I think they wanted other people in the local area to get to hear about it and see it,” Gebhard said. “I think that was entirely what their purpose was.”

Krebs asked LebTown to submit written questions, receiving in return a one-page document titled, “Here is a statement from Pace-O-Matic, which designs Pennsylvania Skill games.”

Concerning funds provided for the district attorney race, the statement provided by Krebs on behalf of Pace-O-Matic said: “Pace-O-Matic, like many organizations, operates a political action committee that supports candidates who understand the importance of legal skill games to small businesses across Pennsylvania. Our Operators for Skill PAC complies fully with all applicable laws and requirements, and it contributes to both Democratic and Republican candidates.”

“The PAC is registered in Lebanon County because it made contributions earlier this year to the district attorney campaign of Pier Hess Graf,” the statement added.

LebTown sent additional questions to Krebs asking specifically why the PAC filed in Lebanon County, whether the PAC supported other DA races in Pennsylvania as a statewide political action committee and, if so, to detail those contributions. Krebs referred to the previously provided statement but did not elaborate further.

LebTown asked Bill Bova, chairman of the Lebanon County Republican Committee, if the local filing was a shot across the bow of Gebhard’s campaign since his seat is up for reelection in 2026.

Bova replied that he doesn’t want to speak for someone else’s motives.

“We’ll have to see where they actually spend their money” he added, noting that the bulk of the funds are in the forms of loans to be paid back to the contributors. “It’s really hard to answer the question because when you have a (proposed) statewide tax with a significant amount of money in it – and I don’t know if they filed in any other counties where they do business or are involved. So it’s really hard for me to describe their motives.”

Bova confirmed that he had heard discussions about candidates asked to run against Gebhard, who officially announced his campaign for reelection on Dec. 9. He said the endorsement process for the party will begin soon, and he prefers to wait and see if someone announces a candidacy against Gebhard – but he declined to say if anyone had turned down an offer to oppose the sitting senator in the upcoming May primary.

Currently elected Republicans in Lebanon County contacted by LebTown, including state Rep. Russ Diamond and county commissioner Mike Kuhn, said they would not be pursuing the seat.

“I’m glad to hear that Senator Gebhard is seeking another term,” said commissioner Kuhn. “He has my full support!”

Graf said she would never consider running against Gebhard in an email sent to LebTown.

“I have been a prosecutor in Lebanon County since 2009 and the District Attorney since 2020,” said Graf. “Being a prosecutor is a job I truly love and am humbled to do. We recently won re-election and the people of Lebanon County have placed their faith to continue as DA.”

“I am grateful and feel blessed to continue in this role.”

Graf said Gebhard is a friend and has been a vocal supporter of her for years. “I wish him well in his campaign,” said Graf.

All candidates planning to run for office in this election cycle must file their petitions by March 10. In the case of individuals running for the state Senate, petitions must be filed with the commonwealth, according to county elections director Sean Drasher.

Gebhard and representatives of the small games industry have been at odds over Senate Bill 756, which outlines regulations and a tax structure for skill games. Gebhard is the prime sponsor of SB 756, and numerous yard signs opposing the bill have popped up around Lebanon County.

With co-sponsors Senate President Pro Tempore Kim Ward (R-39) and Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman (R-41), Gebhard plans to make skill games part of the gambling industry in Pennsylvania. The trio of leaders, along with state Sen. Rosemary Brown, proposed the legislation last year.

“The process I went through was, I basically had gotten all of the stakeholders together and I tried to negotiate a deal that they all could agree with,” Gebhard said, adding those negotiations included Pace-O-Matic and other industry representatives. “We had actually made some good progress, had actually met two different times with everybody in the room. And I was thinking we were making good progress. The day before the third meeting, the skill game people contacted us and said, ‘We’re not interested in doing this anymore. We’re done.’”

That left Gebhard wondering what happened, adding, “I could never really understand what the purpose of that was because I did think we were making positive progress, but they walked away from the table.” 

Pace-O-Matic said in the statement provided by Krebs that “with respect to legislation, Pace-O-Matic supports Senate Bill 1079, sponsored by Senator Gene Yaw (R-Lycoming) and Senator Anthony Williams (D-Philadelphia), as well as companion legislation House Bill 2046, sponsored by Representatives Danilo Burgos (D-Philadelphia) and Jonathan Fritz (R-Wayne).”

“These bipartisan proposals offer reasonable, commonsense solutions that should receive broad legislative support. The bills establish an affordable, per-terminal monthly fee designed to protect small businesses and nonprofits. Sound tax policy should strike a balance between generating revenue and fostering growth — not impose punitive measures, which, unfortunately, is the basis of legislation sponsored by Senator Chris Gebhard.”

One of the biggest disagreements between all parties is the percentage of tax that should be generated for the state by the games, which can be found in mini-markets, gas stations, and other establishments throughout the state.

Gebhard’s bill calls for a 35% tax, which is lower than what Gov. Josh Shapiro has proposed (52%) but higher than Yaw’s bill (16%). 

“It’s a starting point to talk,” Gebhard said. “Gene Yaw’s bill was 16%. The governor wanted 52%. 35% is halfway between them. It’s meant to be a starting point to start a conversation. It wasn’t meant to be a finished product.”

The sides also disagree on who should provide industry oversight. Gebhard said that in his legislation the games would be under the jurisdiction of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB), which would also oversee where the games are located.

“There’s a lot of people that want to talk about revenue, they want to talk about taxes. That’s not what is important to me. It’s never been what’s been important to me. What’s been important to me is, one, everybody that I talk to tells me they don’t think these machines should be in every corner of the commonwealth,” he said. “They don’t want to go into a gas station and see them there. They don’t want to go into the laundromat and see them there or their hairdresser.” 

Gebhard said the skill game operator industry opposes regulation.

“They don’t think that we should have a restricted environment about where they’re going to be. But you have to get controls around how they operate, who, where the money’s going, how the money’s processed, what is that monitoring system that exists? That’s the regulatory environment that we need,” he added.

Pace-O-Matic officials do not want their games to be regulated by the PGCB, according to the statement provided by Krebs.

“As for who should regulate skill gaming devices, the PGCB (Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board) is controlled by the casino industry and has attacked legal skill games for nearly a decade at the casino industry’s behest,” the statement reads. “Internal emails revealed just how much control and influence the casino industry has over the PGCB, as they met illegally to plot how to kill the skill game industry and declare war on Pennsylvania small businesses and fraternal clubs.”

The industry proposes oversight by another state agency, Pace-O-Matic said in the statement.

“If past behavior is an indicator of the future, the PGCB will simply regulate the skill game industry out of business. The proposal we support establishes the Pennsylvania Lottery as the regulator for skill games. We believe that is a better solution, as the Lottery already monitors many of the locations where our games are located.”

The sides also disagree on how the games are used, with Gebhard saying the devices are predominantly for gambling while Pace-O-Matic states the games involve player skill.

“Pace-O-Matic’s Pennsylvania Skill game is a game of predominant skill. Contrary to misinformation spread by casinos and their allies, the games are not games of chance and are legal in Pennsylvania,” said the statement provided by Krebs. “Every court that has reviewed the games — including the Commonwealth Court in a unanimous decision — has upheld their legality. Skill is required throughout all aspects of the game, and players can win every time.”

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court heard arguments late last year on this question, but justices have not yet issued a ruling on the matter.

Gebhard disagrees with how the games are being used by players based on prior testimony given by the skill game representatives.

“I think they’re predominantly a gambling device. When you look at the argument of predominance, basically it is 51% gambling or 51% skill, so whatever it is, that’s going to determine what the game is,” he said. “They testified in it at the Supreme Court, their own attorney testified that the vast majority of people play only the gambling part. They do not play the skill part. So to me … it seems like they’re gambling devices.” 

Gebhard said skill games industry officials got upset when the PGCB tried to provide oversight, which led to court cases being filed that are now before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. A ruling is expected in the next few months, he said.

“Their major problem is the game control board was very combative with them years ago because they (PGCB) deemed these games to be gambling and therefore they said, ‘Hey, we have oversight over these.’ And that’s what kind of prompted all of the lawsuits that happened. They were trying to exert authority over the skill game industry, the skill game industry said, ‘We’re not gambling, we’re skill,’ and that’s when those lawsuits happened,” he noted.

Gebhard said if the court rules they are gambling machines, they “would technically be illegal, every one of them. … If they were to be skilled machines, then they would fall outside the definition of a gambling machine that’s in Act 4, which is the Gambling Act.”

The Pace-O-Matic statement provided by Krebs says that the PAC exists to protect the interests of “legal skill games to small businesses across Pennsylvania.”

Gebhard noted that he’s been supportive of assisting organizations that use small games of chance as fundraisers for themselves. 

In 2025, Pennsylvania Senate Bill 995, which aims to increase the prize limit for local small games of chance, was introduced by him. The legislation is intended to support local clubs, fire companies, and nonprofits by updating the prize cap, which had not been adjusted since 2013. That legislation currently sits in the Community, Economic & Recreational Development Committee.

He doesn’t support the idea that the industry itself is “small.”

“When I see an industry that has put $4 million in a political action committee in 30 days, it doesn’t seem like an industry that’s, you know, on its last legs of survival,” Gebhard said. “It seems like an industry that’s flush with cash. So I have a hard time buying into their argument that, ‘Oh my gosh, if you guys put rules and regulations in place, we’re gonna go bankrupt.’”

Davis Shaver contributed reporting to this article.