 I'll set Austin. Thank you. Good morning. We are calling to order meeting number 274 of the Massachusetts gaming Commission on Thursday, July 12th 2019 at 10 a.m. Here in our offices at 101 federal Street in Boston We'll begin with item number two commissioner Stevens, please Sure. Good morning, Madam Chair. I'd move the commission approved the minutes of the June 12th 2019 Commission meeting those meeting minutes are included in your packet again I'd move their approval subject to correction for any type of graphical errors or any other non-material matters Any questions comments corrections? Do I have a motion? second second All those in favor? I Madam Chair, but it was abstain. I was not at that meeting. Oh, okay And opposed all right For one abstention, please Catherine Sure Secondly, Madam chair and move the commission approved the minutes of the June 27th 2019 meeting against subject to Corrections for any typographical errors or any none other non-material matters. Are there any I don't know if there's a second first. Yep second second. Are there any corrections edits? I Actually have one please commissioner Stevens, I didn't get a chance to speak to you beforehand on Page seven or eight if it the record could just reflect that I confirmed with Dr. Lightbound that notwithstanding the concerns that commissioner Cameron had raised Dr. Lightbound was still Prepared to make the recommendation that had been set forth in our book. So that would be probably right before 1136 a.m Okay, do we have any other questions or comments all those in favor? Opposed 5-0. Thank you Moving along please to Item number three Second director for erosion for your administrative update, please sure. Good morning commissioners So I have three parts in my update I will be taking care of two and I'll ask general counsel blue to do the legislative update on the general update I have a couple items one is I just want to address an update to our agenda that happened Since we initially posted it on Tuesday morning Yesterday morning, we added a new item for a and pushed item 4b down one One notch and I just want to talk about the process of why we did that the substance of that will be addressed by the IDB in their presentation This item Schuster versus Angkor versus Boston Harbor. We called it blackjack slot pale compliance We were made aware of a lawsuit filed against Angkor Boston Harbor when we now see on Monday afternoon By the time we looked at it and analyzed it in the Tuesday And understood the implications in terms of the integrity of gaming in massachusetts Which of course, I'll remind you which I think none of us need any reminding Is the first declaration that the general court found in section one of 23k That integrity of gaming in massachusetts have the highest priority That this lawsuit Had people very concerned About whether Angkor Boston Harbor and indeed the commission's oversight was appropriate It was happening in terms of a particular type of blackjack game We thought was appropriate based on what we do by yesterday morning To get in front and address the commission as soon as possible. I say we I'm talking about the IEB and the folks have reviewed it So yesterday morning, we asked the agenda to be updated quickly to reflect that in a timely manner I am Happy to note that the update seems to have worked I heard on the press in a particular press station this morning that it was being we are doing this I note that there is a bunch of press and stakeholders here today So I hope that notice was sufficient But in terms of integrity of gaming, we thought it was appropriate to get in front of the commission as soon as possible The substance of that update i'm going to leave to the IEB for section 4a If I didn't want to tell you a little bit about the process of how we got here So that is one item the second item is last week A number of staff members general counsel blue director lightbound Director van der linden and myself updated the gaming policy advisory commission on a number of items The chair was there in her new capacity as on on that We talked about the same update. I gave generally last commission meeting on region c Also horse racing the need for an extension and director van der linden also did A lot of update on responsible gaming and what's coming up in the next year or so So that was in the legislators the legislators were very involved Asked a lot of appointed questions And certainly seemed to be interested in all aspects not just Regency racing responsible gaming all aspects of the update Um, the next item is we were made aware last week Um, that in pending litigations abrams et al versus massachusetts game commission et al Um, one of the counts alleging open being law violations in relation to region a deliberations Was decided by uh, judge sanders in a business litigation Session section on a summary judgment motion in favor of the commission, which means that count has now been dismissed It is a 12 page and I may be biased, but I would say practical well-reasoned decision And I want to thank, you know, our legal staff and our legal counsel helped get us to that point It it sounds easy, but there was a lot of preparation depositions and work behind that. So thank you Um a couple household matters You will note if you went to your office today, we have a new phone system And right now we can receive incoming outgoing calls This new phone system has a lot more capabilities We'll be exploring those capabilities as we go on But I do want to thank the it folks because replacing that phone system overnight making sure it works And getting up to speed seems easy, but often it is not we're going to have a lesson on all the new capabilities We're going to phase that lesson in as a matter of fact The the the good news bad news is this phone system is so good. You'll never be able to say I didn't get that call So So that's what I am told This the last item I would actually like to reserve To potentially right after lunch I'd like to recognize an employee who is leaving us But I'd like to have that person in the room and I haven't made arrangements for that quite yet I'd like to maybe hold off that and do that a little later in the day so That is my general administrative update on horse racing, which is item b Again, as I said, we were up in front of the g-pack And director light bound explained to the members The need for the extension obviously coming up on july 31st And if we don't have an extension That would mean literally the end of not only racing but simulcasting We we've been in this situation before we're we're competent We will get an extension, but just on way and on on the implication We do have 14 days of racing in august 14 days of racing september 17 and october 13 in november That go to actually the end of november november 29 And we are scheduled to have a racing day august 1st So a delay would potentially implicate that day of racing, but i'm not Implying there'll be a delay, and I hope there will not be a delay in the extension So a couple items. I I know last time The chair had asked for an update on Racing reviews slash investigations, and I think the commission had also asked director light bound For an update on sort of the closing of suppin. I'm going to ask that we could do those at the next meeting The next meeting in august Fill those those requests So with that unless you have any questions on those first two items I will turn the legislative update over to general counsel blue I actually have One one comment on the topics that that you um That you mentioned and that is also the dismissal or the decision in our favor Of the open meeting law case I just want to add my congratulations to the legal team or outside counsel a lot of people that Work on this Many many hours more than we Would like to but are necessary for the process And i'm really Happy for the for the outcome Thank you Okay Good morning commissioners Good morning. Good morning. July 15th the committee on economic development and emerging technologies Took testimony on nine bills related to the commission These bills addressed a change to the state ethics statute to allow municipal employees to sit on an advisory committee Without violating chapter 268 a section 4 regulating online gaming and daily fantasy sports Transferring money from the resource development fund to the community preservation fund Allowing plane ridge park casino to expand to include table games Requiring each slot machine to have a sticker describing responsible gaming resources Creating a region d which would consist of worcester county And allowing slot machines in veterans organizations There was some limited live testimony at the hearing the hearing was relatively short. It went about two hours No action was taken by the committee at that time We will continue to monitor the progress of these bills going forward Any questions? No, but general counsel bluight. Did we in fact Make any submissions in support of any of the bills? I believe we made a submission in support to the change to the state ethics And that was our filing and that was our filing. Yes. Excellent. Thank you Um, can I mention something along those lines? Um We we um on at least three of those Bills in the past we have included because this is not the first time that they've come up Although they have not Passed we've included in our annual report a position or a highlight as to what What we suggest the legislature look at notably racing We've stated now More than a couple of years in a row As to our position that we believe the legislature should address In a holistic way not just year to year The topic of racing The g-pack that you mentioned is is something that we've been We we've highlighted in the past One one of the ones you mentioned then the reason I mentioned these these things sometimes these hearings come up In between commission meetings without necessarily The opportunity for for for commissioners to weigh in and I would just note that To the extent that we have in the past and in some cases we have That could be a really good reminder of prior prior positions To the hearing to the to the people who have these hearings There is at least one That one one position One bill that you mentioned and that is to allow slot machines in veteran Places, I forget the veteran halls And and I I actually remember a hearing years and years ago when these first came up in which I testified before the committee And I think that was an important Testimony because at least in some committee members minds These slot machines were okay The fact that the gaming act actually made them Clarified that that they were legal was an important part of the testimony So again where where we have done testimony in the past I would just remind ourselves and the staff that we could Either do it again in between meetings or come back and discuss them The next commission meeting where it's feasible If that if we need to We can do that. Yes On the note of raising Council or director Do we have an indication that the legislature is likely to extend the current one-year racing bill or is there any Any talk about let me say in a different way. We don't have any reason to think they won't At the g-pack the Both council blue and Dr. Lightbound and I believe you and and certainly I my capacity on the g-pack committee Explain that in the implications if there is not an extension and it was clear that the legislators who were on that committee understood the implications and Welcome Welcomed our input and our advising and we'll continue to communicate with them Certainly members did ask for that So that is my update. Thank you very much I'll set them. Thank you. Moving on to item number four We have with us Gaming agents division chief assistant director bruise band and regulatory compliance manager Mr. Carpenter store carpenter I think they have our and there's bruise Yes, madam chair behind you, but do we want to bring folks up to the table? Perhaps that's the best. Thank you. And then we have um president de salvia joining us and General counsel from morning And bob, we just introduced the head of table games. Yeah, thank you so much. Sure Um, good morning commissioners bob de salvia president of on core boston harbour I am joined this morning by jackie crom our senior vice president and general counsel and doug williams Who is the vice president of table games for on core boston harbour? Thank you for having us this morning Thank you and welcome Madam chair commissioners On monday july 15th The investigations and enforcement bureau was made aware of a lawsuit Alleging that the on core boston harbour was not following the rules of the game for blackjack as a Approved by the massachusetts gaming commission Uh, the lawsuit further stated that they're playing out, uh blackjack at odds of six to five uh on core The there's also stated that it wasn't being dealt correctly as uh outlined in six a of the rules of the game Related to six to five blackjack variation The i.b. Gaming agents reviewed the claims and have Lemonarily found on core to be in compliance with commission's rules and regulations for paying out blackjack The rules of the game on blackjack, which are posted in the commission's website Use the term six to five in two different contexts There exists a six to five blackjack variation Which is a a particular type of blackjack game that is separate and distinct from standard blackjack And utilizes different dealing procedures from standard blackjack Section six a of the rules of the game Relates to procedures for dealing the six to five blackjack variation game is used The 65 blackjack variation is not currently offered or never has been offered Uh at on core Section seven of the rules of the game by contrast relates to the payout provided to a person who is Playing standard blackjack odds at three to uh odds At when they're dealt a blackjack it includes options of the gaming license To pay out uh those wins at three to two or six to five Section seven d of the rules of blackjack requires that notice be provided as uh to which the option is being used at the blackjack table With respect to the payout odds discussed in section seven of the rules of game On core currently offers blackjack tables with both three to two payout odds Which is 64.5 of their blackjack tables And six to five payout odds which are 35.5 percent of their blackjack tables to the facility The payout odds at a particular table are displayed on each table's felt layout Uh, I don't know if we can pull that Okay, as seen in the in the picture, uh there Uh The six to five payout odds option provided in section seven is also authorized by other jurisdictions Including nevada, connecticut, maryland, colorado, iowa, kansas, michigan, missouri, mississippi New mexico and ohio to mention a few We can get to the the blackjack thing. I can point out the uh Be start on the third page Okay, that is a picture of three to two blackjack If you see the top line near the float where the chips are it says blackjack pays three to two And if you can go to the next slide, please And this is a six to uh Blackjack that pays out six to five which again is up at the top of the circle on the tables The lawsuit further alleges that encore failed to refund slot credits in full at the ticket redemption machines on the casino floor On current encore currently does not use coin in its redemption machines on the casino floor A patron possessing a ticket for a dollar amount and change who Redeems her ticket at the redemption machine will receive the full dollar amount and a ticket for For the change that ticket can be redeemed either in the slot machine or at the cashier's cage for the full amount What we did find is that it probably was not posted clearly enough By on court so they have since added can we go to the next slide, please the sign on all the tru machines That explains That and that's located on all the machines on the floor Uh In this furthermore any tickets not redeemed within the uh Within one year constitute unclaimed cash and prizes pursuant to 23 k 50 And the value of the unclaimed in each prize is deposited into the common oil scamming revenue fund We have any questions I do Mr. Band In your experience Some would say very lengthy experience Um Is this common way of educating and letting people know what the odds are they're clearly stated on on the felt Every jurisdiction i've ever been involved. That's the way that the most common way of notifying Individuals which game that is and what the odds are correct Thank you So the the lawsuit appears to um confound the section six and section seven In our in our regulations to claim that you're not dealing Appropriately, but that's in the case of that different game. Yeah, that's a variation of blackjack. That's a handheld game The cards are dealt differently to the players and everything It up to this point. We have not had that game played anywhere in In Massachusetts, but we have had uh the six to five payout correct at mgm on on certain tables Which is the same strategy that anchor seems to have a mix of both a six to five payout on the lower minimums And a three to two payout on the higher minimums correct Commissioner, I think The way I was educated on this I think the you're right the word conflate is exactly right So six to five Is used in two terms right one is a variation of blackjack. That's a that's a sub game of blackjack It's not offered in mass. It is offered. It's not so far. It hasn't been dealt in massachusetts Six to five also is a type of play out payout for someone playing What we might think of a standard blackjack if they hit a blackjack. Yes, they can either be six to five or three to two but You need to know at that table What is it if I hit blackjack and center blackjack and that is the purpose of the felt Is to make clear so when people go and look they should know If I hit blackjack and this standard blackjack this table I'm either gonna get six to five or three to two They can choose which table to to sit at and obviously as they as the director said There's a mix of tables at anchor for those So that's that was sort of the education I needed to have in the last 24 hours to understand That six to five was used in two different terms type of game type of payout And what what we are concerned about because we only have one type of blackjack game Is the payout in the notification to the player? That seems to be being done appropriately right The other I did ask separately. I did ask the encore folks to come and talk a little bit about The change issue and the tito machines and how we got here so you completely understood it We don't need to get to that right now, but I would like them to address that so you sort of understand that granularly how we got there But before we we got to that point Just for context You know brad bruce or or bob The the industry I mean I've been to las vegas recently have observed that That practice of six to five payout Has been in effect for a number of years Do you want to expand a little bit more on that and it's usually around the Tables that have the the lowest Minimums That you know Players that bit more are effectively afforded the three to two payout And that has been going on for now a number of years at least in this vegas trip. That's correct commissioner Including our own facility in las vegas and win an encore any other questions Well, I did have a question on the signage if we could we could get to that Yes Sure, I well maybe it would be helpful bob if you could just explain how the Genesis of getting to where the tito machines pay the dollar and Take it for the coin amount. That's great. Thank you. Thank you ed. Um, first of all On behalf of everyone at encore boston harbour, I support The original comments about making sure that integrity of the games is paramount It is just important to encore boston harbour as it is to the gaming commission And also to the commonwealth of massachusetts Second of all, I would like to thank the i e b for being extremely Diligent and quick to come in and do a review of the policies and procedures at encore so that we could get this issue Out out of the way quickly We are very pleased To before I get to the tickets ed just we're very pleased that uh bruce and the team locally on site have came They've reviewed our policies and procedures and have found that we are following them exactly the way we should be It's important for us. It's important for our customers to know that that is how that we are dealing the games With regard to the tickets, um, I'd like to make it perfectly clear for two Very important items before I get to the the sign on the on the actual unit First and foremost Never ever did we ever engage in rounding anybody's payout Every single customer gets every dollar And every penny that they have coming due to them A rounding is not part of the equation Um, the other the other thing I want to be perfectly clear about Is that there is a policy in place already for what happens for unclaimed tickets in the commonwealth The money does not go to the licensee The money goes back to the commonwealth in its gaming revenue fund at the end of uh I don't know if they do it at the end of the fiscal year or at the end of the calendar year What the time period is but in no way shape or form does that money ever come back to encore boston harbour Those are two points that we absolutely wanted to make clear today And we appreciate the opportunity for being able to come here and say that publicly With regard to the machines, there's one other method That customers very commonly use In order to redeem the leftover change And that is that and and and probably a lot of people maybe don't understand this Is that not only can you take the leftover coupon Which would have something less than a dollar on it and redeem that at any cashier's cage But also many customers actually collect and hold on to them And then the next time they go to play a slot machine You can actually take that ticket and put it into any one of over 3000 slot machines that are on the casino floor And that money will then be put onto that games meter And nor does it matter the denomination of the game So for example, and this is really important for the public to understand If in fact you had 15 cents left over and that was what your ticket was And you decide to play a one dollar slot machine You can still put that ticket in the game You can put it on any game on the casino floor And it'll register on the meters because the meters are in both dollars and incents So there's not only the opportunity to cash them out at any cage cashier's cage window But also you can also put them in any other slot machine very commonly when we talk to customers What most of them typically do is they save them up And if they have them over the course of a visit or time at one point or another They don't usually go over one by one to the cage to redeem a 15 cent coupon Typically what they'll do is they'll gather them up and at the when they feel like it They'll stop over at the cage and they'll probably take a stack of them and then redeem them at a later date Or they'll put them in another slot machine That's typically how customers over the years have used the remaining Sense that doesn't it doesn't come out of the machine And by the way the reason that That the machines are typically set up that way Is that in order to keep those ticket redemption units full and operating because they are widely used By every slot customer. I believe we have 28 of them. I think on the casino floor And we place them all over is that if to keep them full of coin Is very difficult during your high volume periods And there's nothing worse than a customer going up to one of those units and having them be out of service And so what's very common in the industry is that you use the game You use the the redemption unit to basically pay out the cash to the dollar amount And then any remaining piece left over you put on the ticket for the change. That's less than a dollar You notice the sign that executive director bedrosian pointed out It added it adds clarity to what the proceed. I know it's I can't read it sideways, but um, you know, but it I'm sorry. There we go Machine only dispenses cash ticket Will print For change. Please take ticket to the cashier to redeem. Basically it adds a clarifying statement to the unit We added them to all as mentioned we added them to all of the units to express clarity But it but again, I go back to point number one and two that I made at no time did we ever round And not give customers back the money that they truly deserve And at no time did we ever expect that any leftover or unused tickets would wind up going to encore boston harbour And bob, is that what the lawsuit alleges that the last two points that you made that that you're keeping the money And you're not correct that we're not even giving the customer the money or we would keep any unclaimed money Both of which are completely untrue Yeah, the unclaimed issue. I mean there's procedures from racing that go back, you know Decades for that are similar to what we have in the gaming act any unclaimed tickets Get, you know rolled over after a year And and go back to the common You clearly don't have that instance here commissioner o'brien So the sign doesn't point out that you can put it into the slot machines Um, so I don't know if there's some other way to put more a bigger signage in the general area I don't know if these are clustered in more than one two three together. Have you got them laid out? So everybody knows what their options are And or whether there's a machine that can be dedicated to coinage If somebody doesn't really want to queue up a cash or walk around and not lose these things I don't know what the technology is or whether you dedicate one just to coinage But you don't have that we could we could certainly we'll basically take both of those items under advisement We um, you know typically with signage you try to keep it as short as possible because you have trouble with You know and folks they're they're going in a hurry But if if we might even ask some customers that and if they feel that that would add extra clarity We're happy to change those. They're very easy to change And certainly we could Have maybe some that do the coin and some that don't that's certainly something we'll consider both of those But thank you for the suggestions So and the signage is only in the ticket redemption units, right? It's not in the slot machines because every slot machine gives you whatever Correct, that's the ticket. That's correct That produces the ticket that you then take to the ticket redemption unit when you want to cash out and Those were put on casino floors a number of years ago to help alleviate lines at the cashier And just make it more convenient for customers. Like I said customers are very used to this This is not a new concept in the industry and like I said most of the time They sort of collect them and deal with them at a later date I Go ahead. I was just I'm sorry. I was curious. Is it the same GM these pens? Um Coin in their ticket redemption units MGM and PPC both Dispense coins you just this is just the way you you guys went with us for a business decision If you will correct, it was it was more because of the volume on the busy periods And the choice was really more for customer service because you don't want those units to go out They're very important for keeping the slot floor engaged And in fact when it if in fact you were at the unit And it happened to run out of coin The actual tru unit goes into a tilt and that means you have to wait for then a fill Of the tru unit and you'd have to literally stand there and wait Uh, and it could be you know, it could be a while but before you go to the bank Get the appropriate coin Get a security escort go out to the unit fill the unit and then have the customer redeem it We've seen that happen before And customers get very upset if they have to stand in front of that ticket redemption unit while you do a quote fill So typically on a in a high volume Area It's usually advantageous to not have the coin Right, but maybe a maybe a mix is not a bad idea. So we'll we'll certainly take a look at that Um, Mr. DeSavio I appreciate your second point that you certainly don't want To have the public believe that any of the uh Overage goes to Your company in the same vein It's really core to our mission that we safeguard fair play for For all of those who are at your establishment I'm not terribly and I suspect that our commission My fellow commissioners are not terribly interested in having any of the overage go Emoniously to the commonwealth fund correct either. So I do recommend that we explore options so that Someone who sees that they are owed a quarter doesn't just get frustrated and say, oh, I can't deal with a queue Or it's hard to get to the the um, the uh, cage Or somehow they don't want to deal with the credit because maybe they're not going to be going back To the casino. So I appreciate your exploring sure some options And I like the idea of maybe a few coin machines that you can attend to more regularly, right? Thank you. Thank you commission. Yeah, I wonder. I mean as you get Past the high volume initial opening phase, I suspect that would also be part of your Analysis sure just just how you calibrate that, you know engage that demand if you absolutely which we look forward to Any further questions comments We appreciate you coming in. Thank you. I just want to thank you for being so nimble and thorough in this review to our IEB very helpful and I I I think that director projogen explained that we do have to Stay very much Very poised to be able to accomplish our oversight responsibilities. So thank you Thank you commission. Thank you. Thank you We're moving on now to item 4b and we have Deputy director loretta lilios We'll be presenting on plain rich park casino in the read transaction Good good morning commissioners morning if you would like to introduce who's with you, please of course so So this matters before the commission for final approval of the request by plain rich park casino our category 2 licensee Allowing pet national gaming to sell the real estate located at ppc To a subsidiary of gaming and leisure properties ink in a real estate investment or a read transaction So with me today is the team of investigators That did the background review required by our statute and regulations And comprise the information in the report before you Monica cheng Is the lead financial investigator? on the on the matter trooper tom roger from the state police Is the lead lead investigator and financial investigators? Faizo and david bickay also participated in this Also, there are representatives from both glpi and penn national With us today I think there are three individuals here We have brandon more a general counselor for glpi And the two representatives from penn national are carl sodasanti and frank donahue Morning as you recall in august of last year after an initial investigation by the ieb The commission granted interim authorization for this transaction interim authorization Allowed the real estate transaction to close and it did close in august of 2018 The transaction resulted in the transfer of the real estate That's the real estate in the premises of the licensee located in plainville to the ownership of glpi With ppc sub leasing the property back through Entities and chart a in your report In your packet depicts the configuration of the relevant entities Under this arrangement glpi is a passive landlord of the real estate Our licensee continues to hold the license continues to be the operator of the property And continues to be the indirect but wholly owned subsidiary of penn national gaming That was the arrangement and our investigation has shown nothing to the contrary We're here now for the second stage of the process required under our regulations Which is for you to consider and vote on final approval for the retail transaction Which includes suitability determinations on the qualifiers associated with this transaction So since august of last year the ieb has conducted further review of the suitability of glpi And the individual qualifiers and we've submitted the report summarizing this further investigation A significant portion of the review focused on financial Suitability of glpi and its relevant subsidiaries after the penn pinnacle merger and the real estate acquisitions by glpi That resulted as a consequence of the merger And and included the acquisition of the real estate at ppc And monica as the lead financial investigator can summarize the highlights of the ieb's investigative findings That are detailed more fully in the report. Good morning commissioners Good morning. Good morning. So when I last came before you I summarized the expected impact of the plan transactions and our plan to Verify evaluate and conclude on these transactions once everything has finalized and closed So on top on october 15 2018 these transactions were completed Since then our investigation was expanded to include analyzing glpi 2018 financial results Performing ratio analysis and reviewing financial covenant calculations for the six years and did december 31st 2013 through 2018 The year end 2018 results show that the ppc real property has been incorporated into glpi's real estate investment as an asset Along with five other tropicana properties that were acquired along along the same time These results also showed additional senior unsecured notes that was issued to finances acquisitions Rental income and interest expenses have increased in 2018 as well Although in smaller scales because we only looked at two months of these income and expenses before the calendar year ended In addition to performing racial analysis a review of glpi's financial covenants was also done As you have read on page 18 of this report. There are three Uh ratios that were calculated by investigators Showing fluctuations over the six years that were driven by significant events that took place in that time frame The remaining four ratios were those that glpi must comply with in accordance with their debt agreements We review those calculations and confirm that glpi has been compliant each year After our analysis of glpi our focus was on reviewing the final numbers of the pen pinnacle merger and the related ppc glpi re-transaction The estimated purchase price of the merger when the deal was first announced was 2.794 billion The final price was 2.85 billion The increase was driven by higher pen stock price at the volume weighted average But offset by lower pinnacle debt that was ultimately retired and overall lower transaction costs Financing like by pen was secure for well above the amount that was needed for the merger And during this review, we also substantiated the 215 million sale price of the ppc property As an update and as reported by pen the estimated cost synergies of a hundred million That was expected to be generated from this merger has been increased to 115 million After pen 2019 first quarter results showing positive effects of the overall integration As of march 31st 2019 40 million of these synergies have been realized with the remaining 15 Expected to be realized by the end of this year 2019 and 60 million by the end of 2020 So through our investigation, we have gained an understanding of glpi's operations Its financial history since its formation since in 2013 and the growth it has realized since Further this investigation allowed us to gain insight into a new phase of pen national as a gaming operator After its merger with pinnacle and integration of the pinnacle properties Overall the financial investigation did not serve as any negative findings or derogatory information So to the extent that there are questions about the financial aspect of this Transaction might be a good time now While it's fresh in your mind to address monica or any of the representatives who are here I do have some additional matters on suitability of the individual qualifiers to go on to It's probably a good time to recognize that Both companies were Extremely cooperative forthcoming even on the glpi side made outside their outside Experts available to us to allow us to really gain an understanding of the transaction and the company To put us in a position we are today with it Well on that note, I I do have a question or two of of the representatives from either pen or or glpi I think the if I can if you can kind of come into the microphone I will I will mention That I I find these these report to be very thorough. It's clear what you described monica and In the the due diligence that you did And what's reflected in the report is is is really good I might have a comment or two about you know what the implications are But before we we we get to that In in the purchase price in determining the purchase price and the rent You explained that there is the methodology of taking half of ibita and then Dividing that by by a cap rate of 0.10 to come up to 10 percent to come up with with that number I was just curious if that's the same methodology that you applied to the other properties as part of this transaction To the extent that you can comment on that and I'm just I'm just curious So from from glpi's perspective, it is consistent. I mean we didn't we didn't purchase The other properties pen purchase from pentacle We already owned most of those properties through our acquisition of pentacle back in 2016 But I can tell you from a valuation perspective The roughly two to one rent coverage, which is what we look at as ensuring that Both the landlord and the tenant are healthy because the last thing we want as a landlord is to have a tenant that ultimately can't pay The rent because it's great in the first few years But ultimately that tenant will be in trouble and that's bad for us as a landlord Healthy tenants are good for a healthy landlord. So we look at two to one is sort of a barometer So the same two to one coverage that we looked at with this plain ridge plain bill facility Is consistent with how we've looked at all of our other leases And consistent with how we've looked at other opportunities With glpi right It's the 250 million happened to be just around the amount that you invested initially. I was wondering if that That factored in or it's really about, you know, the rent coverage Commissioner that's a coincidence. It really is the rent coverage and the 10 cap formula Yes Which probably means that you invested the right amount if you're getting that back, right? Not that is correct My only other comment is really about the the transaction. I think This is very economical. There's lower cost of capital that that comes in as part of the transaction And there's It's it's it's it's beneficial for both companies I was i'm familiar with the read transaction from a few jobs ago and and and they are coming back into the market For all reasons relative to To cost of capital and whatnot I would just mention This this transaction actually takes me back to You might remember a couple of the commissioners who were one of the applicants at Regency had proposed at the time To try to finance something via via read transaction Ironically with glpi that that That didn't come before us at the time That never made it, you know, that didn't come to fruition I believe that the way that the IEB has analyzed this which is to designate glpi as a qualifier Is appropriate according to our statute But because of that context, I am just mindful that By designating them a qualifier it potentially shuts off What I see is a legitimate transact legitimate way of financing For other licensees shuts out glpi because they they would have An interest into one license In Massachusetts already this is a different section of the statute in which which precludes having more than one interest into the Having having an interest into more than one licenses again, I think The the analysis of the Of the IEB is appropriate And you know, and I think all things considered it's it's It's a good transaction Thank you. And just to clarify. I think what you're referring to on that restriction is one of the statutory Requirements, okay. Yes Now I don't see a way around it. I'm just stating kind of like what this does The way we've interpreted your you've interpreted the site that the the notion of Having an interest in in a license I think it's appropriate that that glpi be a qualifier Because because they do even if they have a passive role in In simply just, you know, providing the initial financing and then collecting the rent But That's neither here nor there Essentially this your approved through your approval request today encompasses a suitability Determination so there are six individuals who are Whose suitability is before you today? So I'd like to briefly address each of the six of them. You received their individual reports Previously with more detailed information The first is Mr. Moore mr. Brandon Moore whom you've already heard from And With respect to him and all of the qualifiers the investigators conducted the background review that's required by the statute and the Regulations as part of the investigation for each of them We reviewed the materials that were submitted in their initial or renewal forms Verified that information Requested and received supplemental and updated information Conducted criminal records motor vehicle checks reviewed directorship positions business associations And any material litigation As well as character references and media coverage Confirmed that no qualifier made any qualifier made any prohibited political contributions in massachusetts And we performed the review for financial stability and integrity That's required by massachusetts law. Each of them was interviewed in person by IEP Investigators and was fully cooperated Cooperative during this process. So we reviewed them in accordance with the criteria for overall reputation and Remind you that there are although there are is a recommendation from IEP For findings of suitability for all of them today that suitability Is ongoing that each of the qualifiers has a duty to maintain Their suitability throughout the pendency of the license And that the IEP continues to monitor suitability on an ongoing basis as well So turning to mr. Moore. He is a new qualifier for the commission all of the remaining five You've previously issued suitability determinations for But mr. Moore is a senior vice president general counsel and secretary for glpi And he has been since soon after it was spun off from penn as a re in november of 2013 Before that he was vice president and senior corporate counsel at penn from 2010 to 2014 He is steeped in the details of this transaction He has been a wealth of information For the IEP and he's been the point of contact for the IEP on this review He's got a financial and illegal background with Bachelors in finance from penn state and a law degree from u penn. We did review as is required by statute That all of the humane's in good standing. He's licensed in a number of jurisdictions including louisiana pennsylvania california indiana mariland ohio no derogatory information associated with Any of his licenses or any of the other jurisdictions Moving on to mr. Soto santi who is also here this morning He's the executive vp general counsel and secretary of penn national and he has been since 2014 He's been with penn since 2003 The commission previously determined him to be suitable in connection with the licensee's initial Application the IEP conducted updated reviews and conformance with our renewal protocols This also included a review of his licenses and other jurisdictions They are all in good standing no derogatory information or any other issues of concern were identified Mr. Peter carlino is chairman of the board president and ceo of glpi and he has been since the spin-off In 2013 commission also previously determined him to be suitable in connection with the initial application Until recently he also served as the chair of penn national and was also the ceo He's credited as being the founder of penn national led it through its public offering and its growth into the Multi-jurisdictional owner that that it is and he's been at the helm of the glpi rate transaction spin-off as well He resigned from the penn board in june of this year because of antitrust considerations that arose post transaction My understanding now that glpi and penn both own and operate properties In louisiana, but he is serving as an emeritus, but non-voting member of the penn board now The IEP did conduct updated reviews and including an in-person interview with him And no derogatory information was determined was identified So he just resigned in june of this year. So just a month ago. Correct Okay He had I know you explained mr. Sotosani when you came that he had recused himself For certain aspects when the transaction was Was being Put together he he recused himself as did The other overlapping director at the time david handler from anything that had to do with negotiations with glpi both in the course of the Deliberations on the pinnacle transaction and a handful of times before that In fact the corporate governance guidelines and product policy for each of the two companies Require those recrusals and the IEP did review Minutes of meetings that indicate identification of potential conflicts and subsequent recrusals by those parties But now the issue is on a continuing basis Does not exist anymore because the overlap Has is not there The IEP did conclude that His resignation was timely with respect to the claim that We did not require the resignation where the recusals were Appropriately implemented by our review and you know, I think it was My understanding is that they were done on the advice of Inside counsel, but that no federal regulators required The the resignations and it was strictly with respect to louisiana And not this transaction. It was not really it was related to It relates to a section of the clayton act called section eight which prohibits Um overlapping directors and officers in competitive jurisdictions and when penn bought pinnacle in october of 2018 We had one year to resolve any potential problem with respect to section eight and so For a variety of reasons there are situations where that gets accelerated One such situation would be reelection to the position that's created the problem And in june of this year 2019 We were set to reelect peter and david to our board at glpi And that would accelerate the timeline under which you had to resolve the issue So prior to the reelection of those two individuals to our board The decision was made that that peter carlina would come off of pennsport David handler came off of our board at the same time David does not serve in an emeritus role on our board. So david is completely removed from our board But that's why we did it at the time that we did it and the reasons why we did it We were not asked to do so by the ftc. It was not highlighted as least as far as i know glpi Is an issue by the ftc. We did a pro act Thank you for the clarification Thank you So so moving on to the fourth individual timothy wilmott We conducted an updated review of him last year in connection with the interim authorization because he was named as trustee for the trust that was required to be created for this transaction He's the ceo for penn and has been since 2013 Before that he was chief operating officer penn from 20 2008 to 2013. He was also president contemporaneously with being ceo From 2013 to 2017 We updated his background again in these intervening months since the interim review and confirmed among other things That his license is remaining good standing and that there No negative information was revealed John finamore senior vice president of regional operations for penn national and the plain ridge facility is in the region of his oversight The commission also found him suitable in connection with The initial application. He's been in his current position since 2002. He's been in the casino industry Since 1995 and in the hospitality industry for his entire career. The investigation revealed no derogatory information And lastly william fair The executive vice president and c e c fo and chief development officer for penn national commission determined him to be suitable in 2017 Ie be conducted limited updates in connection with this review because so little time had passed since the initial finding of suitability But the review conducted Revealed no derogatory information So the ieb is recommending findings of suitability for each of the qualifiers And the matter is before you for a motion in a vote on the final approval And the determinations of suitability, but the ieb and obviously the companies are here to address any any remaining questions that you may have And again with the reminder suitability ongoing obligation to Continue to maintain suitability and have affirmative disclosure responsibilities on the part of the qualifiers So At least the last three individuals that you mentioned, they don't have an interest in glpi This was just a good opportunity to get that refresh on their suitability Which had done when we first awarded prior to first awarding the license is that correct that that's correct and because the pen related entities that They are involved and were directly related to this transaction We did exercise our discretion and identify them as qualifiers and took the the opportunity to refresh their suitability now I think it's a good occasion Did you want a separate motion for each qualifier or are we doing this? Overall, um, we I think mr Stebbins could make a motion if he chooses And could refer to the names in the report or we i'm prepared to list them out for you If you'd rather do that, but they all appear. I think it's on pages two and three of the report So before we do that, um You know, I know, uh, mr. Moore was the only qualifier we had not seen before and that's a very clean report. Obviously, um, certainly agree with the recommendation of suitability and, um The other fiver are, um updated suitability and No issues with any of them at all. Um, so I think the recommendations are sound Is there going to be any other discussion about the entity qualifiers or are we doing this as individuals and then separately them The glpi related the three glpi and the two related entities are discussed in the financial portion of the investigative report the pen related Entities that appear on the chart and chart a the full review Uh, was conducted in connection with the interim Authorization there were some updates on records checks, uh for them again revealing No changed or derogatory information for them. So are you asking us to move anew on their status? Or is it we don't need to because nothing came up that would call it into question? Uh, there were not Findings of suitability Last august so I am looking so we do need that. I am looking for determinations on suitability for the six entities The six individuals As well as the an overall vote of final approval for the transaction Um With the rudder's assistance I do want to thank Loretta and your team because you did prep me Commissioner oberna. I can't remember if you were you were here for in august as well I wasn't and so I do thank you for having brought me up to speed on the interim decision that the commission made So I do have that back. I just wanted to make sure that of course it was incorporated into your Memo but you provided it earlier to me. So thank you And today's report of course was very very thorough and I agreed with Your assessment in terms of the individual suitability Reports that we received as well Thank you I would also just want to know, you know, I Think you shouldn't have this get lost in this discussion that these types of transactions do happen However, because of the uniqueness of the massachusetts law, this doesn't change any of the financial obligations that And and now the property owner have to the community of plain Just correct all because there is no change of control all of those conditions all of those agreements Remain with the licensee um Madam chair if it's okay, I'd move that the commission Grant final approval pursuant to 205 cm r1 16.09 For the transfer of the real estate located at plain ridge park casino and race course located at 301 washington street Plainville mass to a subsidiary of gaming and leisure properties ink A real estate investment trust This approval is conditioned on glpi remaining a passive landlord with no change in control over the massachusetts licensee Further issue positive determinations of suitability for each of the six entities associated with this transaction In each of the six individuals associated with this transaction is named on pages two and three of the IEP's report dated july 8th 2019 Second Any further discussion or questions? Those in favor? I opposed Five zero. Thank you Catherine and thank you Thank you chair. Thank you commissioners and thank you to the team. Thanks for such a thorough job Investigating and thank you for coming in. Well, thank you guys and uh having appeared before this commission and working with the staff Since 2013 I would be remiss to not congratulate you on having three licensees up and running None of us have aged at all in that six years Thank you There's been a request for a five minute break If we could return it's 1115 if we could return around 1120 that would be great gives Umbudsman Ziemba and his team a chance to set up My apologies, uh, we're we're back reconvening our meeting and we have uh Umbudsman Ziemba On the community mitigation fund applications for fiscal year 2019 a significant amount of work And we are looking forward to your presentation. Thank you Thank you very much chair and commissioners Today we are reviewing the applications for the 2019 community mitigation fund Before you today are the 23 applications under the categories of transportation planning Transit projects of regional significance specific impacts workforce development non-transportation planning reserve grant applications and tribal gaming technical assistance I first would like to recognize the review team for this year's program, which included commission of bruce devins general council Catherine blue director of workforce supplier development and diversity development jill griffin workforce program manager crystal howard enforcement council kate artigan associate general council carry teresy construction project oversight manager joe delayney and program manager mary thurlow We'd also like to thank the administrative team of mary and dually And jamie ennis for all of their assistance including providing copies of the materials To the commission and the review team as you are aware. They are quite voluminous The review team has provided recommendations on this year's applications for your review in your packet We're making these recommendations after a very thorough review which involved numerous meetings to the review team Meetings and conference calls with all the applicants a public comment process Outreach to the licensees and mass dot on applications and the submission of written responses to review team questions The review team evaluated these applications against the 2019 community mitigation fund guidelines As commission is aware the commission and staff spend months working on draft guidelines with the benefit Of advice that the commission solicits from the public from host and surrounding communities And from other experts that are part of the commission's gaming policy advisory committees Including notably the local community mitigation advisory committees in regions a and b We thank all of those people for all of their hard work in crafting the guidelines In an effort to ensure fairness and to respect the input provided by these communities and others The review team worked hard to be faithful to the guidelines that were carefully created through this very collaborative process One recommendation from these advisory committees is that the commission should establish target spending Authorizations in each region that reflect the revenues received from the full resort resort gaming facility in each region This is the first year that revenues from mgm sprayfield casino were applied to the funding for region b Because encore boston harbour has not was not yet open as of our december 31st budget setting date No encore boston harbour revenues were applied to the target budget in region a Now that encore boston harbour is open encore boston harbour revenues will be factored in setting the targeted spending for the 2020 program Despite the fact that encore boston harbour revenues were not yet available Both the recommended spending levels in regions b and region a are within the range of the targets With the region b applications falling under the targeted spending amounts And the recommended funding level for region a applications only slightly exceeding the targeted spending You will see that the review team recommends approximately 3.9 million dollars in new grant funding Plus another approximately $275,000 in the use of reserves and tribal fund technical assistance For a total of 4.157 946 50 for all grants The 3.9 million dollars in new spending is within the overall projected targeting spending level of 6.7 million in 2019 The fact that some funds remain is comforting as we will continue to learn About the impacts from all our all of our facilities over the coming months before next year's program Today we plan to break up the presentation of the grant recommendations into numerous different subsections First i will present the transportation recommendations next crystal howard will present the workforce recommendations Following that general counsel blue will discuss some legal considerations regarding one grant application Involving focus in the city of sprinkfield After the focus conversation, we will continue on to the other specific impact applications mainly involving public safety matters Enforcement counsel kate hardigan will brief those for the commission Finally crystal and i will discuss the non transportation planning applications In addition to comments commissioner stevens will provide on all the applications that he have to review He will provide some emphasis on the non transportation planning applications Which predominantly involve economic development activities and plans So i understand that you've had the benefit of the packet which includes a summary memorandum and additional detail on each of the applications Perhaps summary is an unfair word as the summary memorandum is over 30 pages But given that we will not try to repeat what is in those documents But instead will give an overview of the grant requests and the specific items for the commission to consider I recommend that the commission hear the presentations first regarding the categories of grants that i mentioned Before diving into any one application and follow the general overview of each category and questions that the commission may have I recommend that the commission then vote on individual applications. So To summarize on that After we go into each grouping of category of transportation grants Then that would be a good time for the commissioners to discuss any of those applications asking any further questions And then we could then have a vote on individual applications if that's acceptable to the commission That sounds good to me. I I did have a question if you're done with your overview Yep On a number that you on the big picture number that you mentioned There's a 4.1 Million figure Yes of the recommendation server of the review team and you mentioned a six million dollar figure In that context. Yeah, so can you just speak to that again? Sure. So We recommended a funding level of six point seven million dollars in the in the guidelines And what that was comprised of was five point two million dollars in the remaining funds Under the original outlay from other licensees. So out of the original 17.5 that we had available There was five point two available And then we allocated one point five of new revenues from mgm springfield To that total that one point five Was the funds that we received up until december 31st of 2018 Which is what we utilize for our our budget spending date Thank you Okay, so with that as a general framework Let me just turn to the transportation applications Pursuant to the guidelines the commission has authorized planning grants for planning activities And generally we try to make sure that the planning project is really Related to addressing Transportation issues or impacts that relate to the gaming facility The commission anticipated spending of approximately one million dollars on these grants in the guidelines We recommend spending of approximately approximately 1.45 on in this grant category So let me just give you the just very brief quick summary of these grants and we can dive in more detail Some of these will be very familiar to some of you on the commission because We have indeed granted very similar grants in past years And specifically the first one out of the gate is boston City of boston is requesting 200 000 For a portion of the design costs of improvements to sullivan square and rutherford avenue The city's application states that as approximately 70 percent of the traffic generated is projected to go through sullivan square Funding for the reconstruction of rutherford av Is warranted and sullivan square The city further notes that the grant would cover a portion of the estimated 11 million dollar design cost for this project The review team continues to support the requested funding for this important project Although the commission has provided significant funds toward the design The grants continue to represent only a fraction of the overall design cost The review team does note that the boston project has uh has moved Slightly in this last funding round before the MPO And it's been adjusted to reflect a fiscal year 2022 start date boston anticipates that in late fall or very early winter It will submit a 25 design to mastod The project was recommended by mastod and was a major component of the work of the lower mystic regional working group Lynn is seeking a transportation planning grant in the amount of 200 000 dollars to perform a traffic analysis functional design report And preliminary design for uh root 107, which is western have quarter Lynn is uh also submitted a 2000 grant application under the specific impact Grant category But this application had been withdrawn. It was a duplication The review team believes that the city has demonstrated the appropriate nexus to the encore boston harbour casino For the purposes of these planning funds when the commission first established the transportation planning grants It was recognized that transportation projects often require very significant time to plan And that effective planning is important to help avoid delays in remedying any impacts that may be identified in the future Mastod has supported this grant Medford The city of medford is seeking 200 000 dollars in funding to design a multi-use boardwalk under the root 28 bridge Medford also noted that this underpass will connect multi-use paths in medford to station landing in the wellington t station encore will be running is running employee shuttles from station landing to the facility And this will allow employees to safely access shuttles without having to navigate Wellington circle or cross route 28 either on foot or by bicycle The review team recommends that the commission approve this planning grant station landing and wellington mbta station Are very important connection points to the encore boston harbour casino The review team recommended that medford utilized the design period to determine availability from potential private and public partners For funds to actually construct the path the funds requested would just be for the design portion The the path could cost up to two million dollars to complete West springfield the town of west springfield is requesting a planning grant of 83 400 To plan design build three bicycle station pads and install electrical service to them to support the valley bike share system Stations one and three Will be the municipal contribution to the bike share expansion proposal for the use of c mack funding Station two would be done independent of the c mack proposal During the deliberations on the 2019 guidelines, there was a lot of discussion on whether this would be the year where Mitigation funds could be used for the construction of transportation projects To date funds can only be used for transportation and planning and design purposes It was decided that we would wait until a future program to authorize the use of funds for construction activities With the exception of a special new transit program The 2019 guidelines list the following types of activities planning consultants staff data gathering surveys data analysis design Surveys engineering reviews public meetings hearings and report Preparation as the review team believes that west springfield's application falls outside of these eligible activities The review team does not recommend that the commission approve of this grant request Instead the review team recommends that west springfield provide comment during the development of the 2020 mitigation fund guidelines which may potentially cover transportation construction activities Or which could otherwise expand the list of eligible planning activities Everett and summerville everett and summerville are requesting $425,000 to advance the planning and design of the mbta silver line bus rapid transit service From its current terminus in chelsea Through ever along the mbta commuter rail right of way to sullivan square and then to summerville And terminating an appropriate red line or green line intermodal facilities The joint applicants note that the design will use to the extent possible any previous work By on-course ctps mass dot as part of the lower mystic working group They further note that they anticipate being able to complete a 10 percent level of engineering design on the everett quarter and Concept level design on the summerville quarter where some further analysis of root alternatives may still be necessary Given the important benefits that could result from an extension Of silver line service to encore bosson harbour the review team recommends that the commission approved the requested funding Provided that the joint applicants be required to consult with mass dot and encore bosson harbour on the proposed design procurement documents The review team also notes the commission staff needs to Approve of a more detailed scope budget and timetable for the planning effort This is a typical provision in the in the grant contract documents But it's even more important here given the coordination that would be necessary to ensure a successful planning effort Mass dot has authorized one million dollars for the purpose of designing an extension of the silver line In its comments mass dot supports the grant, which it believes would be complementary to its study reverence august reverence august seek a grant Four hundred and twenty five thousand dollars to a further advance the planning and design Of transportation road network improvements along the root one project corridor as identified in previous studies funded by the community mitigation fund Traffic studies have indicated that approximately nine percent of encore bosson harbour traffic May utilize root one The main focus of this project is to create a preliminary design for improvements to the root one and root 99 Interchange and to work towards its inclusion in the state transportation improvement plan The project will also evaluate smaller standalone Projects that were identified as part of the traffic model developed for the root one corridor with the respective project benefits and constraints Mass mass dot indicated its support of this grant And requested a role in determining the final scope of the design work The review team recommends that the commission fund this grant and the commission require reverence august To consult with mass dot regarding the scope and budget for this planning effort And prior to submission of the scope budget and timetable of to the commission staff In the event that parties cannot reach a consensus on these items Commission staff would report back to the commission about any area of disagreement The next category is transit projects of regional significance We had two applications in this category The 2019 community mitigation fund guidelines state that in 2019 the commission will consider no more Than one project that offers significant transit benefits in each category one region And one project related to the category two facility Applicants should demonstrate how the funds will be used to expand regional transit connections The commission anticipates authorizing no more than $500,000 in grants for this category Everett in summerville, uh, the application seeks a grant of $500,000 to fully design a connection From draw seven park in summerville across the mbta tracks to the assembly station headhouse here and after they're called the connector And to prepare an application for a federal build grant to help finance the construction of the connector And or propose pedestrian bridge To allow pedestrians and bicyclists to travel across the mystic river between summerville and everett The commission has been a very big supporter of this project over the last few years It's an important recommendation of the lower mystic regional working group and can provide new transit connections for the city of everett And it could connect up bicycle and pedestrian pathways all the way from lin to boston Although the review team recommends the authorization in $400,000 in funding to complete the design of the connector The review team does not recommend the $100,000 for assistance in filing by a federal build grant The review team also recommends that the commission require the joint applicant submit a proposal on how they will procure and manage the design work The review team also recommends that the joint applicants submit a more detailed timetable for the design Finally the review team recommends that the commission requires staff approval of the revised rp before its release Staff would be instructed to consult with angkor boss in harbour To determine how the plans for the design of the connector would work with the plans for the pedestrian bicycle crossing Of the mystic river and it would be our intention to make sure that we have a current understanding of all these plans Before moving forward with any funding Uh the final application under the transit category is the pvta pvta proposes to expand its downtown circulator service The loop to seven days per week pvta also proposes to add an extension to its current service into west brinkville This service would provide a connection to mgm and union station Uh from the hotels that are located along group five in west brinkville The review team looked at the utilization of the current loop service and felt that it would be beneficial to improve Utilization of the current service before expanding service Given the overall state target spending amount the strength of the pedestrian bridge connector And concerns regarding the current utilization rates the review team did not recommend this project this year Instead in an effort to improve the utilization of the current loop service The review team recommends that the commission consider authorizing some funding Perhaps up to 25 000 to assist in the pvta's marketing and advertising effort for the existing loop service As noted in the review team memorandum the pvta should be allotted for its planned marketing and advertising efforts Perhaps some additional funding could alleviate some of the resource burdens for the pvta And that concludes my brief summary of all these applications I have a question about the um Let's see which one here Oh the um the west springfield Application now Am I to understand it that the working group found that it really didn't fit into the guidelines? Correct. So possibly in the future That would be uh Applicable, but it does not fit this year. That's correct. Um, we did ask the applicant What would be the effect if we weren't able to fund that this year and that they would be sought for future years They did indicate that uh two out of the three stations Because they need to move forward on those because other federal funding is available for those purposes That they would probably likely have to move forward with those and pay for the match from them from Whatever dollars that they may have locally the major portion of the grant would be for the third station Um, and we are hopeful that if indeed we do Amend our guidelines for next year that that could maybe be an application for next right Okay, thank you Um, I I had a question on the revere on saugust Um root 1 and root 99 interchange um, your memo lists um A number of smaller projects that this grant could go towards Right. Can't you just give me remind me and give me an example of what those projects might be and Is it is the root 99 and and uh root 1 area Are they specific to the what's closest to the anchor casino? They they are close. Um We did note that in all of the environmental documents that there was a significant 9% number that of traffic that relates to the encore casino that would be traveling through that corridor as I try to find the application section on uh on Revere, I do note that um, mass dot would like to be consulted about the specific cope, uh, A scope of what elements that would be pursued through that through that grant and mass dot has indicated that It would like a little bit of focus on multimodal portions of the application but in answer to the review team Revere and saugust indicated That short term improvements could include potentially providing a third traveling on root 1 northbound Between cobalin circle and root 99 and saugust. That's approximately 1.8 miles Or a widening of north street salem street in revere It could potentially a third travel lane on root 1 northbound between cobalin circle in revere and root 99 They could potentially relocate root 1 northbound on and off ramps at the lynn street north street salem interchange And revere in coordination with ramps They could explore bridge work requirements for the third travel lane on the northbound root 1 side They could also take a look at the Northern strength community trail bridge the salem street bridge The town line brook culvert north of root 1 and root 6 the interchange and provide safety and mobility improvements for the root 99 Quarter including the root 1 root 99 interchange So you see that that they're sort of a mouthful of potential options which Speaks to the further coordination with mastod about what exactly should be studied in general Improvements to root 1 can be very expensive And so I know that both mastod and revere and saugust have been trying to concentrating on these Smaller projects that they could actually move forward within you know constraints of state resources And with mastod's focus on multimodal applications We really think the coordination between them And revere and saugust is necessary before we approve any any revised scope of one or many of these studies But so the recommendation is and what we would Even if we approve this that this specific scope come back to us like we've done in other Um other instances. Yeah, once that project is better Understood by the parties. Yeah, it certainly could I think the recommendation and the memo was that it Come back to staff after review of that, but if um if the commission wanted to see that as well We could certainly make that happen Well, I'm different on that. I just um, I just know that there's a lot of There's a lot to improve in that whole corridor. Yes But then the question for us really pertains to one of precedent for example, how connected Is any one of these improvements? Yep To to the casino. Yeah And and that's just one that that just Does not seem very defined at this point Uh, well, I think it has become more defined over the years and that there's been a lot of focus On collaboration between the two parties. We asked Revere and saugust how often they've been meeting with mastod and they included a reference to a bunch of significant meetings Even after we asked them a number of questions regarding the scope We asked them to go meet with mastod again. We followed up with mastod regarding their support for this proposal and they indicated that support John quick question, um, just to follow up on that do we have As a look at the giraffe motion you've given us when we approve these Uh part of our ability to actually effectuate those Relationships and those parties talking together you envision through the grant agreements and how you plan this structure That's right And one thing I will mention and we've had a number of conversations between Mary Thurlow and Joan Delaney and Catherine You we're starting to get some pretty significant number of projects under our belts and they do require You know a good amount of conversations to go back and forth to make sure that they happen on time and they Get the input of all the parties and so Um now potentially with a couple facilities That have been opened We can devote even more time to making sure that things move forward quickly and that we get all the necessary reports and And people pay attention to the details that we're describing in these commission meetings And in particular as it relates to this application, right? One of our partners mastod is like we want to be at the table We want to have some impact in the scope So us being able to drive that not just hoping the parties are all on board But to stipulate that somehow into the language of the grant agreement is the way to make it happen. That's exactly right One one thing that That's not part of these analyses, but and and I think it should it's just for future reference Because I believe the guidelines speak to these eventually money that has Grants that have been previously approved but not used they have there's there's a sunset element to these, right? Isn't there like a three-year Yeah, so our grant contracts are for a four-year period. Yep, but in addition to the existing awards We also have reserves that the commission annually reauthorizes. Yes, so if if a community hasn't utilized that reserves we Basically in the mitigation guideline process over we renew those and roll them over But you know, we're thankful that you know, some of the communities are Are still taking advantage of some of the existing reserves For example, foxboro later on in the analysis is volunteered to use its reserve for a multi community effort So, you know, there's good reason to take a look at those grants Just an observation More joint applications this year than ever before which is a good thing. I know The team has encouraged that so communities working together because most of these issues in particular with transportation are not They don't end at the at the city line, right? Right. So that was encouraging to see it was it's great You know, it was I think two years ago that the commission included that new bonus structure for lack of a better word So if communities work together they can take advantage of some additional funding for planning activities And it really is forming these partnerships specifically, you know, I want to commend Ruvir and sagas They work together on a lot of different grant applications, both economic development and transportation And you know, it's uh, I many eons ago. I used to work at communities and development housing and community development and we're always trying to promote regionalism and in many ways these grants are really Helping do that same sort of mission. So that's a great point. Commissioner Was a brilliant idea by somebody Great job Wait a minute, did you want no no wait, I cannot take credit for all of it I have one question with respect to um pvta. Yes, john. I can't remember when um, you briefed me Did we discuss whether there are readily available metrics? Uh on the usage in terms of I know we talked about should it doesn't make sense to expand evening hours versus I'll be fine. Do they have those that data now or would that be something we could help them collect? So they are collecting ridership numbers and the answer to a review team question They provided those numbers and so they're not having trouble Figuring out how about uh, so they have the analytics of actual ridership. Have they've been able to Uh conduct surveys for the community at large to see if if for instance Um, right if opportunities for five days a week or seven days a week were provided would that be Something that they would like I guess maybe we may be concluding based on the metrics alone But I I think we did have a discussion about it Maybe they if it's not available Every day They don't make it part of their equation. So I wondered if there's been if there's any I know we're going to There's a suggestion of promotional dollars. Right. I wondered if there were any other If there's any other support we could provide to help Understand the community's needs. If not, that's okay too, but I just wondered. No, I think that's a very good comment. So, um One thing that we know will happen is we know that mgm spring field And pvta have an ongoing dialogue regarding the use of the of the loop service and They have met numerous times to try to improve that service And indeed one of the recommendations from pvta that sprang from some of those conversations was that potentially if you added a couple of additional days From the sort of the transit world you provide more of a Understandable transit environment. So if you know that the the the bus is going to be there every single day You might be more inclined to to take the bus on that monday and tuesday From our review it competed a little bit with How we were looking at the at the projections because we know that both monday and tuesday they were those are on the lower end of casino Uh attendance and and so part of our concern was if you have an existing loop service that Is not being as utilized as highly as everybody wants it to be And then you added the two new days which are actually lower attendance from the casino's vantage point that it just Might just provide further questions regarding what you're doing in that in that regard to that service so, um specifically for this year We really thought that maybe the focus should be on Just trying further efforts to enhance utilization of the existing service And with all fairness to the pvta and their expertise They say that one of the best ways is to make sure that people know that it's available for seven days, but We had asked them whether or not expansion into more nighttime hours would beneficial because restaurants Are you might want to have people to take advantage some of the local restaurants past 9 at 9 p.m Even though it was that was part of their considerations They determined that that wasn't going to be their priority or priority for this, but the review team did eventually Not recommend this grant But it doesn't sound as though they're looking for any additional resources to assess community interests, but we are The recommendation that i'm hearing from you is that perhaps rather than funding their application request that we provide Some form $25,000 for promotional and and yeah So let me describe a little bit how we envision that would occur and it could accomplish the what you were just describing Is that what we would do is? We would go and have a conversation with the pvta the city of springfield in mgm springfield about this proposal for Up to 25,000 We would try to determine the time period for that marketing and advertising campaign And what we would hope to do is not it would not only Provide a benefit for the loop service as well to make sure that people know about the loop service but potentially also could be utilized to To get further interest in some of the stops for the loop service And so we would come back to the commission with whatever whatever proposal After those conversations, but to your point If there's a need for further evaluation of what other elements might be necessary. We can have that conversation within that context Thank you You know it occurs to me that You know and I and I think that's that's a right approach That's a good compromise just to try to promote the existing service. There's multiple ways not just necessarily media you know those those Those things that come out of that people put out out of in restaurants where they put in the menu or the special for example If they were placed in each of the stops right that might prompt the bystander to kind of like say Hey, I didn't know and let me right. Let me now go to whatever That's a good idea in its application It noted that it wanted to do a lot of the outreach to the business community and that that's a good suggestion And I wanted to just laud the pvta because utilizing Constrained resources They were volunteering to go do all of these steps to try to promote the service And we think that potentially this $25,000 could assist them in that effort because they do have Constraint those ideas that that could be used so what once again a lot of credit goes to the pvta for their application Any more questions or comments from mr. Zimba on this portion of the presentation I if it makes sense It's 1204. I thought perhaps we could go on with miss howards presentation and break for lunch Does that make sense? Is everybody Do we have all in the mood? Oh, should we do a vote now? I'm sorry, but that My apology. I guess we should probably vote in segments Madam chair what so we have workforce and then we have We did transportation Yes, I'm just wondering time frame if it makes sense to work right through or Or or not So I'm always a fan of working through but it depends on how everybody's Stomach so I think Just give a little bit of preview of my colleagues comments I think workforce is really sort of the the next big one that might just take a little bit more explanation But I'm not I don't believe the presentation is too long The focus springfield Discussion might take a little bit of time. Yes Might take a little bit of time the remainder of the specific impact applications I think we have a good handle on those I'm not sure how long those would take. I don't know Kate what you think of in terms of your presentation Half an hour So I would seem like a short lunch break After this and then powering through after that makes the most sense after transportation. Yeah after the vote on transportation Yeah, or should we um one thing because we have one of my colleagues here has to catch a plane at the end of the day So get through the crystals and then vote and then take the break. That's fine And if I could sneak one more under her from Just keep taking Everett and Chelsea, which is also connected to workforce, but it should be really great That's fine And I think I I think we should I'd like to defer to mr. Zamba and take your your recommendation But in terms of transportation and transit We are looking for emotion and It would be with respect to my apologies Each each particular this is new for me in terms of the formatting each particular application Or on I believe emotion is included in here. Yeah, I saw yeah, but we But as to each individual we've done them we've done them separately in the past, right? That's what Which so it would be starting with Boston? Yes, I think that makes sense I I did see the motion in front of me, but I wanted to make sure I was interpreting it correctly So rather than at the end we'll do them by categories, but individually Move on each one. So Starting Madam chair. Yes starting with Boston. I moved that the commission approved community mitigation fund grant request from Boston any amount of two hundred thousand dollars is described in the memorandum from community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 And included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to the submission to the mission by the applicant Have a detailed scope of work timeline for work to be completed under the grant and execution of a grant agreement between commission and the applicant second Any questions? Those in favor I posed five zero Moving on to Lynn Madam chair, I moved the commission approved the community Mitigation fund grant request from the city of linn in the amount of 200 thousand dollars as described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 included in the july 18 2019 commission packet Subject to the submission To the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work Timeline for the work to be completed under the grant in the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Second Any questions? All those in favor Chair can I just clarify one thing In conversations that I would counsel blue when we referenced Items that are in the review. There are other conditions that are included in that review in the motion was designed to include those other conditions Include over and above the scope working budget and timetable. So it's all in set forth in the memorandum. It's yes, correct Just as a point of clarification So catherine, are you all set with the the language that we're using or should we amend our language? No, I think your language is fine Okay, thank you Any further questions those in favor? Opposed five zero and lin moving forward to medford So madam chair, I move that the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant request from medford In the amount of 200 thousand dollars as described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated July 12 2019 and included in the July 18 2019 commission packet subject to the submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work A timeline for the work to be completed under the grant and the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant second Any questions comments all those Commission, okay All those in favor I Five zero Madam chair, I think we need to go back and do ever summerville Can we jump over that one? No, it's god's sake. I'm whispering. No, west springfield is next coming in every spring field is next At least from the update We uh, we heard first from medford west springfield and then ever summer Sorry about that Well, thank you. We don't want to miss. Um, so on west springfield This is the one in which that we had the concern about Conforming with our guidelines and perhaps next year. There'll be an opportunity to address it Do we have a motion? The recommendation of the review team is to deny the replication So I think if you just move to accept the recommendation of the review team For west springfield that should be appropriate I'll move that commission Move Strike that I moved that the commission Accept the recommendation of the review team Of the community mitigation fund grant requests from the city of springfield To deny their uh application West west spring i'm sorry town of west springfield. Thank you To deny their their application as described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 I included in the july 18 2019 commission packet second Any questions clarifications Those in favor? I Five zero Everett summerville, I moved that the commission approved the community mitigation grant Fund grant request from everett and summerville in the amount of four hundred and twenty five thousand dollars As described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet Subject to the submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work Timeline for the work to be completed under the grant and the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Second Any questions or clarifications? All those in favor Opposed five zero. Thank you Now moving on to revere sagas That's the route one 107 Do I have a motion with respect to that proposal? Madam chair, I move that the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant request from revere sagas in the amount of 425 thousand dollars Is described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team Deleted date dated july 12 2019 included in the july 18 2019 commission packet Subject to the submission of the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work A timeline for the work to be completed under the grant and the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Second Any questions? All those in favor opposed Five zero. Thank you Moving on to the transit projects We have two Everett summerville So madam chair, I um I moved that the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant request from everett and summerville Uh in the amount of um 500 000 dollars Sorry 400 000 you're right um Yes 400 000 dollars um As described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to the submission to the commission by the applicant Of a detailed scope of work a timeline for the work to be completed under the grant and the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant second Any questions? Clarifications those in favor I Opposed Five zero The pvta uh application Um, I can take a stab at it Because I think it's another one that we modified, correct? Yes Yeah Yes Yeah, thank you I'll move that the commission approve Um The amount of 25 000 dollars Of the community mitigation fund grant request From the pioneer valley transit authority To be used to um Promote the um ridership of the loop As described here In the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to the submission uh to the commission Of the detailed scope of work A timeline for the work to be completed under the grant And the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant second Any questions clarifications all those in favor I Opposed five zero So that completes your presentation and it's your recommendation that we move on now to miss halberd, correct? That is my recommendation Thank you. Thanks for squeezing me in I will be concise so we can all go because I am also hungry Um for the workforce applications. Gail knows that's important to me Um, we did have three applicants come in for these workforce grants for a total of 900 000 dollars is the request um The committee is recommending approval of 813 000 just over that actually although we'd had targeted 600 000 So I will start with the more complex application where we have adjusted the funding which is boston Uh, we are the boston application actually comes from the mayor's office of workforce development And it requests to continue building on previous previous work with the casino action network Which is a collaborative between training entities community action agencies on core and our community partners Uh, the focus is on general outreach and updates providing resume help application assistance and providing referrals for skills training opportunities Which is a little bit of a shift in focus from the skills training application that we saw in boston previously Um, it does also provide culinary training slots at either nicat the boston location salvation armies croc center and community work services Um for bridge to hospitality graduates specifically um It also there's an additional A new opportunity that looks to offer contextualized esol training for boston's vietnamese community through viet aid And that's the newest component of of the boston applications that we're seeing um So given the competition for funding We, uh, recommend to award 213 000 400 of that 300 000 request As part of our, uh, recommended exclusion We have removed 30 000 of the staff time to coordinate an employer convening convening through the peck uh private industry council, sorry um and That was just one of the Least integrated programs in this application that we felt that we would be able to utilize The funding in better ways We also for that same purpose. We recommend reducing the culinary training from 104 000 to 75 000 Since this is a new program. We have seen in previous years that it takes time to roll Roll these programs out. These are also bridge to hospitality graduates only so they must first go through the bridge to hospitality training And then enter the one of these culinary programs And so we think that the 75 000 would aid them in that and then uh, we reduced 17 000 from the community funding which Is because there was there seemed to be an overlap between la commune dot And the chelsea collaborative in the mass higher metro application, which Is what i'll discuss next Additionally, the overhead was adjusted once we finalized that With the mass higher metro north application the program also continues to look toward working with the community action network, which they've Worked together in this past grant year Uh offering community engagement outreach and recruitment It also still offers culinary arts through nekat in this Everett specific program But they will no longer offer english for hospitality or the direct hospitality readiness training They do intend to expand the reach of services to more participants by reducing those direct service Provisions and working more closely with the community partners for the referral of services Uh in this application, we're we're recommending the full funding of 300 000 But we are also requiring that both of these eastern mass applicants Meet at least once or twice over the course of this grant duration to coordinate the proposals and also Seek to come together next year in their grant application In western mass we have uh, holio community college Which they continue to integrate the work done in the 2017 and 2018 community mitigation programs with uh stick and spring field public schools Still aiming to increase literacy in the spring field area, but also offering hospitality programming And hotel programming in uh the 2019 grant application Specifically, they're looking to enroll 180 individuals in the english literacy for workplace program and 100 in the adult Basic education courses as well as continuing culinary arts offerings out in western mass They also look to have 200 individuals Receive gaming scholarships for the gaming school The most specific change to this model Was that hampton prep, which is offered through stick will now focus on english in the workplace for hotels specifically As opposed to general adult and basic education GED high set courses We're Recommending full funding of $300,000 for the western mass applicant as well any particular questions Well, just on just a question on the comment that you made that We will be encouraging the two applicants to come You know together next time Is there An incentive like we have with regional applications that we might think about Or or rather, let me put it this way. Why would there would there be an incentive to come? Together if they were only Eligible to apply for 300,000 let's say and and I know this would be a discussion for the future guidelines But it just I just wanted to kind of touch on that Well, we had a similar Circumstance out in western mass a couple of years ago Where we had Two applicants that came in for the one program in our guidelines We've stressed that we wanted one integrated whole program for the region And we received two applications and because of the needs at the time where mgm sprinkle is getting up up and running before they We funded both But we asked them to actually start working together And as a result of that collaboration, we did receive a joint application in the following year So people are mindful of the fact that we're trying to have basically one integrated hole for the region Um, they're probably also mindful that we you know, continue to authorize one or two or however They may be but we're certainly encouraging in regard to future guidelines You know, perhaps that's something we could consider of if you do have just one Integrated hole that serves the entire region Maybe there's some way that we could reflect that in for lack of a better word Some sort of a bonus structure Well, and and and perhaps as we move forward with this program If we can Either fund or request that people come with, you know specific data, let's say As as to what these grants are You know resulting in Or what the need is out there or Right more than one Even if it's done a collaboration basis That would be really good to try to ascertain Yeah, and we're going to continue to try to do that and uh, but in regard to the eastern mass applicants this year We felt very comfortable recommending both because there obviously is there is a need out here For a good number of uh, you know skilled train workers Well, the volume is larger, but but you did try to Assess overlap and and made uh made adjustments accordingly. Yes, that's right Yeah, I would just add, you know, this this year's applications For the eastern region varied from last year because last year we had two regional employment boards applying Um, one covered the host community and some of this surrounding communities. There was a separate one for boston Don't want to have overlaying Uh, kind of regional responsibilities What was exciting about this year was the city of austin kind of stepping into into the mix, but I think to christel's point, you know the collaboration the requirement of meeting periodically with our licensee and a lot of the stakeholders was excellent We had one of those You know, I think it was almost the first of its kind to see Community-based organizations municipalities training providers at the state level all coming together to try to Work out You know opportunities to fulfill the training needs not only of our licensees, but the impact that their hiring might have on the greater region so There's some Great parts about both applications, but I think we have An opportunity to kind of encourage that working together in partnership, perhaps In the coming year any further questions from miss tower I think the The fact that we had the interest is is exciting As I understand it there was there were guidelines that you set last time and Was for two $300 ones and in this case the recommendation is to exceed the original budget So working Going forward I too would like to see The joint ventures so that we don't get any duplicity in the use of our our resources And it just will make greater collaboration greater out better outcomes. So Thank you if I just I also want to just touch on the the holioc application and you know to echo what christel said happy to see that the the hampton prep component of stcc I think change to more Accurately reflect what the need is in the local hiring community You know the hcc program also continues to focus on funding for the gaming school The gaming school has had great success in their conversion rate of graduates and getting them into employment opportunities with our licensee I do worry that they have an aggressive goal of training 200 more students in the upcoming year uh, and I I think Hopefully, you know christel and jill You know working with john we can look at what are they doing to get the word out? Is it a question of marketing the fact that dealer jobs are still available. They're certainly I think also a need For dealers on the eastern end of the state But we're getting into a tightening labor market and how we're going to advertise those opportunities You know the boston and the the metro net north Applications Rely a great deal or a good deal on community based organizations who can go out make that one on one touch to A potential job candidate. So I think we need to focus maybe Offer some flexibility on holiopes grant to see what they're doing overall to try to recruit people for the gaming school Um, I think we've got to dispel a notion that just because the casinos are open There are no more job opportunities at the casino or in the in the immediate area, but Do you think that word is out there commissioner that that there may not be any more opportunities? Are you concerned that they won't fill these 200 slots? Is that I I I am concerned that I think they've tried to be creative. I think we've made some adjustments to their current grant to Fund a class as opposed to just offer scholarships so they could handle a group of students But I think You know, it's a it's a it's a tightening labor market and trying to find that's that's a pretty aggressive goal So I think it's a combination aggressive goal balanced with Is there a just general perception out there in the community that mgms opened There's no turnover. They're not still looking for employees. I missed out so I think We should have a conversation with them about Doing some more marketing And and maybe find some other models of marketing that that I think boston and metro north Incorporated very well into their work. Well, can I ask where the anticipated 750 vacancies number came from? It says mgm the anticipated 750 Out they can see that a staff from mgm or where does that come from? That's from So we are still having occasional workforce collaborative meetings out in western maps and that was early on this year But they had anticipated that they would have that range of turnover in the next year Especially I that was prior to on course opening and they thought that they would be losing a lot of dealers out to on What one important piece of data to look for us as we move forward is that turnover rate? You know that that is supposed to diminish. It's it's supposed to be high at the in the first few years Uh, my the big question I have is whether Whether it's a 30 percent or 25 percent rate that Perhaps by definition must apply differently to different occupations And that's and that's what we really should be paying attention, which is part of your point commissioner and And so on I I just want to mention that I think the process that the team has set up here is is really good in the sense of Having guidelines having us look at the guidelines every year To be able to react to have to have enough flexibility to the proponents to come in and and and propose what might be more Of the need that they're seeing or that they think they will see which is also important Is is really the best that we can do and then just take this year after year I think it's important to note too to bruce's hesitation that they are now looking at different models of how they will operate this gaming school So you mentioned how we had transferred We had made an amendment to the budget last year in order to fund a course But also they're looking to be able to work with different constituency groups that they had in the past for example the Farm workers they want to off pull in different students who wouldn't really think of this as Perhaps their next step and get really in front of them and then offer something that specifically Works with people who are all on the same level. So that's not really something they've done in the past So that may help with some of this Increased interest that they're looking to do But we do keep an eye on their marketing and their budget as they as they come in and they've requested amendments So we we just might see some more Any further questions or comments? Thank you now Moving forward in terms of adopting the workforce applications Do I have a motion with respect to the boston application So Madam chair, I move that the commission approve the community mitigation fund grant request from boston in the amount of 213 thousand dollars and 400 As described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 And included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to the commission Subject to the submission to the commission By the applicant of a detailed scope of work a timeline for the work to be completed under the grant and the Execution of the grant agreement between the commission and the applicant In second Any questions comments? Those in favor Opposed five zero Thank you Moving on to holiote community college Madam chair, I move that the commission approve the community mitigation fund grant request from holiote community college in the amount of $300,000 It's described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 And included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to the submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work Timeline for the work to be completed under the grant Completed under the grant and the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Second Any questions comments? Those in favor Opposed five zero And then the final workforce application is mashire metro Mnw Uh, madam chair and move the commission approve the community mitigation fund grant request from mashire metro north workforce board In the amount of $300,000 It's described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 And included in the july 18 2019 commission packet Subject to the submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work the timeline for the work to be Completed under the grant and the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Second Any comments? The only the only thing I do want to comment is that the licensee comments that are throughout all the applications are very Noteworthy and this one on corbos and harvard does support mass hires application to continue recruiting and training followed by individuals For positions that are back facility and that they've enjoyed the partnerships that they see with these community collaborative So we I guess we just want to note that we understand that the partnerships extend with the licensees. So With that said, uh Those in favor I opposed Five zero, thank you And mr. Zm but I think that you thought perhaps kate should move or I think we were going to ask for One on the non-transportation planning applications, which is the shell seat ever application Oh, I'm sorry. It was crystals my another section So while this isn't a workforce application, it did have a lot of workforce language drafted in it. You'll see that A lot of the application talks to the curriculum in which They bring about the workforce Potential for the some of the curriculum But the cities of evera and chelsea came together for this proposal requesting a hundred and five thousand dollars To implement a needs assessment for the planning of the establishment of a tri-lingual enterprise center at bunker hill As well as the development of a curriculum for its business students Which would be minority small businesses is their target It's being modeled after the enterprise center at salem state Salem state college And the training curriculum will assist minority small businesses Which may currently struggle with acquiring the skills necessary to compete for on-course business in terms of vendor contracts and These are things such as social media courses business development being able to market themselves more properly and Just networking and connection So they Are looking to program the needs assessment and then work from there to develop the curriculum for this A hundred and five thousand dollars which we're recommending full funding Any questions from miss howard More just a comment madam chair Again, I think I think this is An interesting Proposal I think as crystal pointed out it's driving Some education for small businesses that might be impacted By the presence of on-course at the same time Uh, you highlighted our licensees comments on the previous application in this one. They're talking about the fact that Their we've saved program may come into play with some of the local participating businesses So there could be an ancillary benefit going out the other way Um, again, there is some we get back to the issue of some workforce skills training Um, I would suggest if we do approve this grant that The folks at bunker hill are become part of our regional workforce applicant Conversations And again, it it might serve as just a another reason to consider More inclusive or a broader Application from the region Kind of going forward, but it was great to see the review team asked, you know, is this just limited? Um To to chelsea and evert and you know, the kind of response back is we do want to broaden this for the benefit of the entire region So I think there's something to also build upon here at the same time commissioner, do you want to amend amend the the recommendation to Formalize that the community college become part of that Do you think you're comfortable with that just being an informal recommendation? Again, I think it's something that we can work out with the execution of the of the grant agreement Any further questions? Okay, do we have a motion for the Non-transportation chelsea application Madam chair and move the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant request from The cities of chelsea and evert in the amount of a hundred and five thousand dollars Described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet Subject to the submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work Timeline for the work to be completed under the grant and the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the Yeah second Any questions comments Excellent job Doesn't favor I Opposed Five zero. Thank you And save travels Thank you It's 1240 I think that i'm hearing that a brief lunch break would be helpful it would yep, okay I I no longer deferred mr. Zm So I want I want to approve these grants not on the basis of hunger Right, so it's uh 1240 can do we say 110 or do we say one 110? No, I think you need at least a half hour a half an hour 110 if we could uh reconvene then and uh We'll go back to the the rest of our excellent applications. Thank you so much Austin we're all set. Thank you We reconvene meaning number 274 continuing on our mitigation grants presentations. Mr. Zamba Thank you very much Chair in accordance to the plan that we talked about before the break what we were going to do is Next turn to specific impact grants And we're going to ask council blue to give a little bit of a Description regarding one particular grant springfield focus So in that application the city of springfield is seeking 555 925 to provide funds to the springfield technical community college assistance corporation Or other eligible public entity To construct permanent improvements for the relocation of the focus Springfield community television Public access studio or other community public access television studio During the review team's deliberations of this application the 2019 application involving focus The applicability of certain massachusetts constitution restrictions remained an issue The review team asked springfield to provide a legal opinion Explaining how this application meets the applicable massachusetts standards Because the the response did not seem to answer all of the questions for the review team The review team determined that the commission should hear from the commission's legal office on the matter In opinion on this matter is included in your packet The review team suspended further review of the application until The commission could Review more about the opinion and so what we determined is that we would ask The general council blue to provide you at least a little bit about that opinion Thank you. Mr. Zimba in your packet. You have a memo from Kerry chorisi who has analyzed this subject very closely and a couple of times over the last year or two In general and and the memo goes into greater detail The massachusetts constitution has what's called an anti-aid amendment It prohibits using taxpayer funded dollars for a private entity The legal department has looked at the cases under that anti-aid amendment There are a number of them not a huge number, but there are a number of them And we also this year were able to ascertain more facts about what focus does and what services they provide And in looking at that the legal department's recommendation is that providing This money which would be for the benefit primarily of focus to carry on its activities Focus being in a Non-profit entity, but not a governmental entity would violate the anti-aid amendment So we we um did as mr. Zimba said ask the city of springfield for a more detailed Opinion on their views of the matter They could look at the same case as we did and perhaps provide us with maybe a different opinion We did not receive that from the city. So based upon our analysis We believe that the commission cannot grant this money to focus without violating the anti-aid amendment Can you um just go into a little bit more detail that the memo does? Because there is the public purpose element that some of the cases have looked at Which does apply here the at least for the continuing of operations And I recognize that An important piece here is the build-out in order to relocate But in a scenario where without it Then the operations are in real jeopardy. Let's say in which then The public purpose operations might actually I don't know if this will happen, but might actually cease to exist How does that cut across some of the other cases that you've looked at? So what you see when you look at the cases is The court's asking what is the primary benefit of the money that you're providing Is the benefit primarily to the private entity or is it to the benefit of the public? And so I think A a case that makes it more clear for me is the act in case where it was public money That was going to a church to put new windows in the church The community was supportive of that application because the church was part of the historic City's town center and that they thought that that helped the town to have This church be renovated in the center What the court basically said in that case the purpose of new windows really benefits the congregation primarily There is a secondary benefit But the primary benefit was to benefit the congregation of the church I think in the focus situation the primary benefit of the money that's being requested here Is to build out a new space By potentially new equipment For focuses primary use there are potentially secondary uses such as They can provide some live streaming to the city of springfield which the city could purchase from other sources if it wished um, but that that Space and that equipment is going to be used by focus and when we asked if there were other potential uses for that There was some sense that maybe but there was no strong sense that anyone other than focus would get the use of this At least in the near future In in you know the several of the cases refers I think here we noted to um Use of educational monies private versus Public education and you talked about the kaplan versus town of actin case um I found the helms versus the commonwealth Case particularly interesting because actually this was money Going directly to a private entity For a benefit that obviously had a benefit to the greater community Um with the stipulation that there was no indication that any private person was benefiting from the expenditure So help me understand kind of how that would dovetail with The application that we're considering right now so the difference in that case which it is an interesting case is that that particular I think it's a ship Was designated as a public memorial And so while there was a private entity that was maintaining it The actual item being maintained was was considered a public memorial So the money yes, it went to a private entity, but the benefit was primarily public in the case of focus Focus is not a public entity In in any way shape or form And the money that's going to them is to benefit them first, but they do have secondary public benefits So so the distinction in the helms case is that that particular ship was designated by the commonwealth as a public memorial Do you have any Don't I thought the memo was well done and clearly explained, uh you know the parameters of what Um what can and can't be done with uh with these monies Commissioner agrarian No, I was somewhat familiar with the anteated amendment from my Work in a prior agency and I have to say that the outcome of the memo did not surprise me that when this first came before us What I anticipated seeing was potentially something where both the recipient and the primary user were going to be public entities That is not the case. And so if there were secondary or tertiary benefits to focus as a result of such an application That might have put us in a different posture But each time this has come before us Focus the not-for-profit has been the primary if not sole beneficiary um, I so I I would agree with the conclusions in the memo in terms of the the problems with the anteated amendment and the application I I am struggling with this one not because That's I think Catherine and Kerry. No, I thought this was an excellent memorandum I I do have um experience from my prior um work on anti-amendment, uh Analysis the anti-aid amendment analysis It is a a difficult one and the helms case makes it a difficult analysis I I was familiar with the acting case In the facts before the SJC ruled on it I think one of the The analysis includes a three prong Analysis and the third one is I think an important one to consider And that's whether the grant avoids the risk of the political and economic abuses That prompted the passage of the anti-aid amendment You know acting involved a church And that was a significant factor in in the analysis because the anti-aid amendment stemmed in many ways from The use of public resources to support Not simply public schools, but private schools, particularly those that were religious and affiliation. So I'm having trouble Figuring out whether helm supplies here and it's the public purposes that focus provides and the one I you know I am focused on Not to make a pun Is you know that they broadcast the school the school Board the school committee meetings and they broadcast the Springfield city city council meetings And they have that purpose I do and I don't I think what I'm struggling was understanding focus as an entity because of its licensing process And how it became designated by springfield to be this provider of public educational and government Broadcasting and whether that makes its purpose shift more from even though it is a absolutely a private entity of a 501c3 if it shifts somehow Because its purposes are in fact Somewhat public It is not an easy analysis and I can see either Conclusion and so I feel I come back in law school and and I had readily been I'm not in a legal role now, but You know it's what did the judge eat for breakfast? Question where do we go in terms of the application of helms versus act in here? With that I want to be differential to our our legal team, but I also know that springfield will There are some real practical Implications in terms of there's a real a deadline coming up in terms of its eviction And I'm not even sure what happens next if if I assume that they will still go without this money I don't even know what the plan is but with that said I I Absolutely respect the conclusion that that You've come up with and I and I have to say given The difficulty of these analyses I could if you had concluded otherwise I would absolutely have respected that too and and and so it's For me a little bit of a call It's a it's a difficult call and in many ways because I probably don't fully understand the entity Well one of the conundrums that I have though is this is not their first bite at the apple I mean they were through the last time understanding There was an issue and there was not a substantial change in my view in terms of what they submitted And so if the question in the conundrum before the commission is In part the details of focus who will own the equipment, etc. That would clarify this This is their they've had multiple opportunities also. And so I do I I guess I sit easier with the analysis and the end result in part because they've had opportunities and I don't see a substantial answer to the questions that would move the analysis I agree a lot with what I agree with everything you say Chair, I think it's it's a bit of a judgment call But but you know what I'm comforted with with the analysis I have a question relative to what happens next Does the does the analysis and I think I mentioned this earlier, but does the analysis change if the entity was to See operations There's a direct benefit going to The improvements where they were in an equipment But is there a nexus because and I don't know the answer to this If they see operations then the public purpose is Certainly eliminated meaning to the detriment of of it being a public purpose Does that change the equation in any way? They're not suggesting that in their application I should add they're not saying, you know, we'll we'll go out of business But it is at least conceivable that if they are Have to Abide by, you know, the the the non-renewal of their of their lease Without a place to go that at least temporarily those operations could cease to continue I think I think that's an interesting question. I I don't think it changes the analysis. I think The analysis When you look at it really is what's the primary You use of the money that the commission would be providing and If they went out of business, but we're going to try to come back into business Their primary use of the money would still be To lease and renovate space and potentially purchase equipment So they could use it for themselves While they do have a secondary benefit to the city I mean the benefit to the city As I understand it from their application is primarily that they livestream city council meetings They have some city Notifications of things like when meetings are upcoming and I think potentially some school issues There are other benefits that they provide to the city what we've understood this time Come from them assuming the obligations that Comcast has under Comcast franchise agreement with the city And so That's not necessary. I mean it's a benefit that the city. I believe negotiated for but it's not It's really Comcast's obligation to provide some of those so So I I think it's still the primary use of the money would be for their purpose And not Not primarily for a governmental purpose On bud's museum, but do you have more background on their plans and the effect of this? Well, the effect of it is that Significant funds were invested to get this facility up and running a number of years ago And the reason why They're focusing on this now forgive me for saying that word The reason why people are paying attention to this now is that we're coming near the end of the lease and What mgm sprinkled have notified us is that they didn't they don't plan or they don't expect to For focus to move before the end of the year they stated that in their letter to us a little bit earlier, but Time is pressing Focus has indicated that In order to move in establishing a new facility it would require at least six months But it really comes down to a matter of what funds would be available to establish a new center So that the city would not lose any of the services that are currently provided Through focus and so that's that's a distinct question of what the city might might lose Even in the short term and would focus And or the city have funds to to Build a facility and have someone else provide these types of services to the city of springfield About that. Oh, could I just follow that up? That's one of my questions kathryn What it's a two-part question one. I don't know if I understand Truly what focus does for private purposes And would there be another option? I suppose could The springfields designation A focus as its community Provider a broadcaster if you will does that Make it more of a public entity in our mind because it's doesn't or could they just designate another entity tomorrow I'm just wondering It focus has a special position because of that designation by springfield so my understanding of how This particular kind of public access works is that The cable companies are required to provide this if they negotiate this in their contract to obtain a franchise from the city so and and in fact there is some Discussion in front of the FCC of Of removing this requirement in the next couple of years from cable company So a cable company goes in and if the city says I want to What they call a paying station then they have to negotiate as to how that sets that up That doesn't really change the status of the entity the entity is still legally of this one in particular is a 501c3 The services that they provide Could potentially be provided through a lot of different sources. So In live streaming for example, like the commission live streams or purchases live streaming services There are other places for the city of springfield to purchase those It's possible that the local public television station, which is different from this kind of a Pag station could provide some of the same services that Focus provides The difference is this is something that the cable company is required to offer All cable companies as of the moment And so springfield appropriately Negotiated with that as part of their cable franchise Comcast put in the majority of the money in the beginning to set it up Part of the money that keeps focus running as I understand it is comes from the cable fees that are paid from the cable company to the city so It's still very much a private entity Ombudsman Siem and I have talked about this a lot of times potentially if a municipality were to create A The facility itself that it owned and created or in this case Let's say stick had the facility that it owned and created In least that space to somebody like focus That would be a different situation for the commission because you would be giving money to a governmental entity That controlled the facility and could make it available for others to use as well as well as this particular entity And I think to commissioner o'brien's point. This is the third time this application has become Before the commission it has morphed and changed over time But never quite gotten to the point where there's a governmental entity that actually Owns the facility the equipment is responsible for its operation So we're always confronted with the same question about the anti aid provision One thing I will Reference is that we do in this new amended application You would have a public entity that's that assistance corporation that would Basically lease the facility to focus Focus would come with its private equipment And so there's questions about that but the city of springfield did amend its application originally Um, they they were asking for assistance for directly to the the private entity and they did change this application over time Part of the question that is what is the purpose of our funds? And what is the nexus to the casino? and so Part of what springfield's challenge has been to construct something that would meet constitutional muster But with the underlying purpose is that they can potentially lose the services that are provided by focus And that is the reason why we can get involved because It's focused that is potentially losing its space at mgm springfield So we couldn't necessarily just go and pay for springfield to build a cable studio Because that'd be a general purpose for for springfield the the the difficulty is that Focus is necessary to the equation because we can only provide funding if there's an impact that's caused by the casino And so the question We do reference that springfield has had a number of different opportunities to try to provide different Structure on here and i'm positive that they have provided a different structure This last time around where we asked for a legal opinion Further legal opinion on this Um, they provided a legal opinion, but on different questions. They provided a legal opinion on the public Whether or not the new assistance corporation does have a public purpose and it serves a public purpose But they didn't specifically respond to who has the primary benefit as a focus or is it the city of springfield? and That that sort of remains out there And you're addressing one of the questions that I raised if I could put aside the anti aid amendment issue Was this even a valid application if the community Stick is the applicant because it wasn't directly impacted But apparently in the past the commission has decided that if the private entity has a strong Public partner In the impact is shown Then it's an acceptable application. I may not be saying as well as you but uh, uh, let me just reframe it my own words The I think the commission determined that there is an impact that is being caused Through the through the casino and that would be the relocation the need for relocation of this entity And then there's a separate question of is the remedy for that impact Is that a questionable remedy of the constitution under the constitution and how about having bringing in a public partner Even if the partner wasn't the original directly impacted Entity that's okay. Right. So that may be part of the remedy But then you still have the question you still have to do it, right? Who has the primary benefit there, right? And I understand that I was saying step If we separate out that at least that threshold question was resolved for me too. Yeah so for example If a city had a number of different businesses that were impacted by By parking restrictions in an area We could spend our dollars to build a public parking lot That would serve the wide area As long as we're creating the public purpose to make sure that there's enough public parking in the area Even though it would have the private benefit to And that's the type of thing that we've tried to construct of finding an answer in the past Is is it is it possible that? The city without this funding Goes back to Comcast to say you're still required to meet this obligation And when you build out this space it was all At your time, but that was part of the requirement and and the lease assistance Was embedded in the you know in both the lease and the improvements So it's really your Responsibility to go back and find a new space Um, in other words that the that the That the city can't go back and turn around to to the original requirement, which is really Comcast I I don't know if they can do that If they're in the midst of their current contract, I I believe that their contract is coming up for renewal soon So I would think if the FCC doesn't change its requirements They could raise the issue in the next contract with with any Cable company that bids on the franchise it may not you know, there may be more companies that come forward But I think when the next cable franchise comes up, this could be the subject of negotiation between the city And that cable company or cable company Let's focus down broadcast commercials and uh in private It's private um Menu of offerings and commercials and does it do that kind of thing, but it's a 501c3 I assume it fundraises for the benefit of its 501c3 Um, yeah, it does not it does not broadcast commercial Up types of material. It creates a great deal of its own community based material. It does do that I don't believe they fundraise and this was one of the like channel two No, this is one of the things we also discussed as part of the review team Could they potentially go out to fundraise to cover some of their relocation costs? And and in fairness, we didn't ask them that question But but it it doesn't I don't believe that they do they are well supported because we've gotten letters of support in the past But I don't believe they fundraise and I'm I'm certain they do not broadcast commercial type material or commercial So what the content is community based content? Yeah, so if it's really a local community networks for for Individuals who reside in the spring field in this greater spring field area to access that information They tend to focus on, you know school plays school sports teams public meetings of different types That kind of information I I just I have some I'm familiar with focus only because they used to cover our city council meetings when I was in spring field This application process has been for lack of a bird better word kind of clunky I don't think it's anybody's fault in particular, but you know, there's been requests made of the city of spring field further information that they could provide Um, I think the most recent requests we have for that They kind of came back with a new proposed solution as to how to address the anti Amendment as opposed to trying to give us a legal explanation for it um You know money that's currently generated from the contract with Comcast or charter would then Comes into the city coffers the city has a responsibility to put it out Without an entity or a facility to do that the money just kind of accumulates and accumulates You know throughout the term of the contract um I also have a concern that in this current request that we're being asked for the lion's share of the money Even though we're not the one who's doing the displacing I have a further concern that Uh that that Corner of the mgm property not go dark We understand that some of the related developments have taken longer than expected if there is At least that is expiring at the end of september And focus or the entity or the studio closes that mgm has left with the dark corner Is is part of their property and is part of their project and is part of the the downtown community So I do I do have concerns about that I also see the the need of the city again to take The use of these funds that are building or are provided Through their agreement with Comcast to do this community program had And obviously we're not talking about granting money specifically to focus. We're talking about granting money specifically to the city of spring um Help me understand if the hypothetical was the city was out looking for The facility the city signed a lease for space Again to fulfill their obligations under the contract comcast uh How would that Be affected by the anti aid amendment in this case I think it's it's hard To say without seeing what they would do. I think If the city came and said we're building A public access television station We're going to own it. We control it, you know, it's not a 501 c3 It's it's part of the city of springfield's governmental entity Then I then I think that makes it easier on the anti aid piece I think we then get to ombudsman ziemba's question about where's the impact from the casino And now maybe because of where we are now And focus has to move because of the casino That you know, that might be easier to address. I think As we have seen a number of entities were required to move as mgm assembled its property parcels And in most of those cases, I believe mgm made some provision for those folks to move This one having this case too. Yeah, this one is a little different. They they got to stay on past mgm's opening Because they originally they were asked to move sooner mgm let them stay on mgm is contributing a termination fee under the lease so they are providing some benefits some resources But I think that the cleanest way would be potentially if the city of springfield Had as part of its governmental entity The facility for public access television station and then it would be Easy we'd be giving money to a governmental entity. They would be providing the service. They might hire someone else To run it for them, but they would be ultimately responsible. They do have to have it. I mean, I'm just Speculating on the bandwidth of city government to run these type Services might certainly fall to an outside entity focus or anybody else who they would they would choose to Select to do their business I'm sorry. You're gonna. Yeah. No, well This is only a minor comment you made, but I think Let me just mention. I am really not concerned that that space would be empty. It would be up to mgm first of all to To to tell them to move upon lease expiration. They could go month to month They could also renew at a new rate of rent if it was in the commercial interest of mgm Or they could themselves occupy that space mgm just from a from a local landscape perspective Mgm is really holding all the cards here And they have as you mentioned council already extended what was the originally anticipated date of Of vacating the premises and you know and that that could actually continue Um, it is focused that finds itself with the inability to build out something That's You know, that's according to what operations they need to carry out That that puts them in this in this situation One of the things the commission could consider Because we don't necessarily have to make a decision on this one today Is you could ask the city of springfield in a formal manner to respond to the memo that the legal department has put together And come back and offer their side of of the issue We did ask a fairly explicit question, but I also know the city is is busy They don't have a huge legal department Perhaps a request from the commission that you know, you would find it helpful for them to respond and come back with something Might add to the discussion to respond to the memo yet that you have here. Why does Helms versus actin and so on and so forth Basically what their view on the law and however they they see it So they they've never really given us that have they No, they have not so they haven't had the benefit of this opinion, obviously Okay, we've asked them for a legal opinion and they answered some questions regarding the structure But they didn't answer the specific question or maybe the They provided some case law in the last Go around but the benefit of A concrete understanding in this memo may assist them in addressing all the specific points about primary benefit secondary benefit And the like and structural issues regarding the cable Franchise whether or not additional ancillary services such as shot spotter and others could be negotiated as part of a cable franchise fee So There might be some benefit in that to the city weighing in So you're agreeing with the general counsel here that maybe that would be helpful to go back to the city They think the general counsel is a Good idea that we have discussed My my concern with that is like I thought they we had a fairly robust conversation about the problems of the anti-aid amendment The last time this came before us And we had a solution of not moving forward in the application at that time allowing them to resubmit extending lease, etc I feel like ground talk day to some extent where At a certain point You know, I have how many opportunities you're given and I hate to sound heartless, but the onus is not on us to Prove the sufficiency of an application. Am I wrong? That's correct. So, I mean and what is the normal burden or standard we put on an applicant In terms of their responsibility to come forward and give us an application that is sufficient Then I'm not trying to minimize the loss potentially of a public benefit to them in focus, but Their adherence to focus Maybe is misplaced. I don't know the nuances of the agreement with Comcast, etc But I'm not going to stop Giving a pointed direction to the city to respond on that legal point But I don't feel like this is a surprise either I do think that You know, there's some underlying goals that we all share Which is to try to mitigate the impacts from this, you know, right and and Um And the city also has responsibilities for its use So if it has to follow the law and all of its grant-making Activities, so I do understand that there has been significant back and forth on this particular issue over time But, um, you know, there could be some obviously some real-world impacts that may result from From some these questions Well, just just to add to your to your point, uh, commissioner, um The you know, denying or suspending or not acting on this application by itself could then cause the the city, um to Re-evaluate it and apply it the next time around we have a yearly process. This is not the last time That could It could come back with Something that satisfies a structure that satisfies all of the concerns stipulated here So we see some value in Going back, but on the other hand They've had uh, they've had ample time to To supply us with the materials needed I mean, I guess there's the procedural question today, which is the initial recommendation going into this I believe was to What withdraw or take no action on this or deny it? It was a suspension of the review to suspend the review And so the question probably in the first instance is are we agreeing to suspend the review based on the recommendation Of the status of the anti-aid amendment causing a problem And then there's a secondary issue is there a supplemental motion going to be put forward in terms of specific directive to the city? To respond pointedly to the anti-aid amendment When when we say suspend review, does that mean decline the Application I want to make sure so it is the suspension put on hold and that is the recommendation Originally, I thought Was that the original recommendation is that the review team suspended its review Ending a legal review by the right and then and then now we have the legal review So now What was what was today's recommendation? coming in From the team I think it would be up to the commission at this point to determine whether they wanted further legal information from the city Or whether the commission felt comfortable enough based upon the legal department's analysis to deny the application at this point Knowing that they can always refile next year if there are different facts or a different situation But in and unlike the other Applications, there is not a team recommendation in light of In light of the legal opinion Well, as I understand I just I'm just I just as commissioner stevens pointed out beyond the legal questions There's questions regarding the grant in terms of the amount of the right contributions and so you didn't make those upset decisions so reasonableness of the actual cost of the facility and the like Right, so I understand there hasn't been There wasn't a bifurcated analysis Well, I would suggest that at a minimum there's a consensus at least emerging that We not approve the application as submitted And so the question perhaps Is is one of uh, suspending or denying Where we might have a difference Is is there I mean I don't think the jump in is there a difference because in the end there's a grant Cycle if it's suspended for its grant cycle Well, I think didn't we defer the last time didn't we defer a decision rather than suspend Correct that it could have been taken up at a subsequent hearing prior to February 1st the new application development Correct, I think defer or suspend would result in basically the similar results So I do need to I feel a little bit disadvantaged here because I wasn't part of the earlier conversation So I do need to understand the implications of a suspension Does this mean that that these are these are not magic words defer and suspend Could be interchangeable Could we have a motion that says review with there's one option review Suspended with the opportunity and give a deadline to The city of springfield to provide an opinion Perhaps they might even go to an outside firm because this is complicated To get an opinion for analysis Is that one option another one would be Denied straight out another one would be I can't imagine that there's another suspension in something or or Given your deny given the Your analysis I guess because that was requested before in light of in light of the Opinion you could deny or it could be denied Notwithstanding the anti aid amendment Although it doesn't sound like that you that doesn't sound like do that analysis. Yeah. No, that's exactly correct Would it Be welcome for you to be given the director in this commission to go ahead and complete the second part of the analysis In terms of is there enough is there a possibility here that the recommendation of your route would be to deny it because it doesn't meet the other aspects Um, I think it's probably more likely we would Discuss the actual amount of the grant Rather than And whether or not the the total amount of assistance Um is warranted And what role would Other parties involved including the the city to play a part in the funding of the application Those would be more likely the questions that would be resolved by a further review Um, which is one of the reasons why we said if we needed the initial determination before we give it to all of that Well, I I don't If we have a legal opinion that says we can't We, you know, we don't believe it fits To go back and do more work And say you come up with a lesser number because you think that's more realistic We still have this legal opinion. So I'm just not really clear on Why we would do that additional work. I mean I Maybe the city getting back to us Um with with their own analysis would have some value, but I actually don't see the value in The team Going back to do work when we have this legal opinion Yeah, if anything go back and work on the structure That addresses the The constitutional concern, but that would be on the applicant Yes, right I'd like to take a brief break just to check something if that's okay That'd be great if we could have five minutes, please. Thank you Thank you reconvening And just turning back to Where we were on this particular issue I think we're looking to decide on whether or not we move forward on the The recommendation that is I guess it's not really set forth in front of us. So we would have to have a motion As to what we would like to do Yeah, I um I think I agree with commissioner o'Brien that There have been opportunities to To provide additional information And that has not come forth and I am comfortable with uh with our legal Um analysis and Um And move that we deny the application Yeah, I'm persuaded by the arguments here as well. I'll vote in favor of that motion I think it's a very sympathetic applicant. I think there is a clear Public purpose albeit not the primary when it comes to the monies that are being requested from us and that ultimately is There should be the basis of our analysis, so I'll go along with that motion I think that I can note that unlike my fellow commissioners. I'm singularly situated Because I I haven't had the experience of of Having this application in front of me and perhaps if I had been here um in the prior uh Meetings I might have Have Thought differently than where the commission has come out. I am likely to Not necessarily have voted To support the application, but would have invited further advice, perhaps from An independent council because my prior experience does say and and I and I and I think Catherine appreciates this it is it's it's a very very difficult analysis and so I am I'm I'm not likely to support this motion and I I think For for focus. I do think it's also a difficult application But I would just have invited Additional additional information and I do know that they may not have provided that in the past But I do understand that this is a distinctly different application given that we do now have a public entity as a partner here So those are any further discussion commissioner Anyone commissioner good. Uh, all right. So in terms of Those in favor And those opposed Three two Thank you, and thank you again for and Kerry's not here, but Catherine and Kerry. Thank you very much for the analysis Uh, thank you again for the analysis and the briefing. Thank you very much Moving forward Okay Thank you chair and commissioners Uh, we're going to move to complete the review of the remaining specific impact grant applications The remainder of the applications involve public safety matters And we're joined by enforcement council kate hartigan To give us her review Good afternoon. I'm here to discuss the remaining for specific impact applications, but through these came from the average Thank you, is that better I hope so, okay So we do have four remaining specific impact grant requests to discuss They come from the Everett police department the hampton county district attorney's office The hampton county sheriffs department and also the springfield police department And I will take them in that order for you noting that Of the four two, we are recommending full funding for two. We are recommending partial funding for The first application comes from the Everett police department The total requested amount of funds was 232,088 dollars and 90 cents We are recommending reduced funding of 182,088 dollars and 90 cents and the reduction is due um to A portion of the request of $50,000 that was asked for To offset overtime costs for directed patrols Surrounding the 2am to 4am extension of the liquor license at on core boston harbour Upon further review and as is indicated in the memo submitted by the review team This particular request did not fall within the guidelines due to a time frame that specified within the guidelines that Mitigation funds can only be expended for costs that were being experienced Or that were experienced by the time of the february 1st 2019 application date So unfortunately, although we think this is a meritorious request Due to the Specifications in the guidelines that we did not find that the community mitigation funds could be applied here However, as the memo notes We do and did have a discussion of Pending next year's community mitigation fund guidelines, whether or not this may become an eligible expense Evaluating whether or not operating costs incurred by police permits could then be included As the commissioners are certainly well aware of training costs or something that are able to be mitigated with community mitigation funds But again next year's guidelines remain to be seen and there was a suggestion that perhaps funds from the host community agreement payments could be used To offset the cost for this year Again pending potential qualification of this cost for next year The remainder Of the request from ever came to offset the cost of sending six police officers to the police academy to backfill Six positions that were vacated by current members of the ever police department Who became members of the gaming enforcement unit working in conjunction with the massachusetts state police? And that is a similar expense that was requested by springfield in previous years that was found to be acceptable We are recommending funding that portion of the request from the ever police department Those officers have been through the academy and have graduated and are working currently As are the members of six members who are in the g eu And working with members of the massachusetts state police So Could i just comment on this one certainly i'm sorry unless you weren't Were you finished with this explanation of this applicant? I was i was going to ask if there were any questions Okay, sorry i beat you to that You know i i really applaud everett for really being proactive and thinking about Two to four and thinking about what that will take to um to make sure communities are safe Um in fact we hosted a meeting this week You were both there commissioner bryan myself um Really to talk about this issue. Are we doing enough as a group to um to make sure We're keeping it safe as possible. So um So, I mean, I think this is a very worthy Idea and I and I hope that we do consider allowing the cost next year because I really think it's it's critically important um And you mentioned the six new officers and you know, we got a report that the That the six officers working in the gaming enforcement unit. They are working really well together Security, you know force multipliers so a very productive meeting all the chiefs are focused on this issue So I do uh commend everett although I understand That it doesn't fit the guideline this time, but I just I don't I want it to be uh I want everett to realize everett pd that we really come in this and think it's worthwhile, but um You know next year's application. Hopefully we'll we'll take some of these costs into consideration Thank you Any other questions or comments on this particular grant? Okay in that case moving on to the hamden county district attorney's office The total amount of funds requested by district attorney galoonie was $100,000 The committee the review team rather is recommending Full funding of this grant at $100,000 The reasoning behind this particular grant as it has been in past years was to mitigate The cost of personnel that need to be added to the office to Handle the increased caseload from the casino at the time of the application 255 cases had come through the spring field district court As i'm sure the commissioners are aware this is one of the busiest district courts in the commonwealth in massachusetts And these cases were again directly attributable to the casino There was an additional amount of money that had been previously requested beginning in 2018 to Develop a tracking tool so that we have a consistent definition and consistent data reporting on What types of cases we are deeming attributable to the casino Certainly that will be valuable data moving forward for future grants And although that money has not been expended The recommendation of the review team was to leave that portion of the 2018 grant active And to coordinate with the district attorney's office to develop that tracking tool As we anticipate continued increased caseload in the district attorney's office from casino based activity So we did feel that that amount was also appropriate given The increased burden on victim witness advocates in particular Who do screen in all of these cases at the district court level as they come in through the arraignment session Victim witness advocates as i'm sure some of you are familiar in your prior careers Are really key to the process of reaching out to victims. It is quite time consuming And it is extremely valuable in terms of processing a case First contact with someone and seeing the case through to its end So in terms of adding victim witness advocates administrative personnel Who will also help to intake these cases at the district attorney's office We did feel the amount of the grant was appropriate and then it was appropriate for full funding When this came up the last time I know there was some Discussion on my part about whether they should reach out to the mdaa and talk about getting assistance in terms of their case Dragging so has anything moved in that regard Not that we're aware of at this point, but I will say in my past employment out of former agency i'm familiar with the mdaa and the tracking system that's used statewide and In terms of our coordination with the district attorney's office in hamden county Certainly we could open discussions about maybe adding on to or building off of the system That's already in place if that may build some efficiency into the timing especially to get this up and running So we're generating the data well because I know there was some discussion about norfolk county and Bristol in terms of them Saying that they didn't get enough of a caseload out of the casinos to merit Really investing in a case tracking in that regard But if you put them all any of the jurisdictions that would feed into the district courts Hosts and surrounding communities that maybe there should be some discussion In conjunction with the mdaa so that you can get a case system that is consistent with everyone That's an excellent idea and certainly we can Have discussions about that. I think that's critical to be able to track Real impacts right with the daa's office. I know same thing. I remember Norfolk county Saying hey, we don't really have a way to track and They didn't have the resources to try to even investigate a tracking system and certainly as Encore is up and running and we are able to determine what directly directly attributable cases are from the casino to have Comparable data from the regions I think would also potentially be valuable to to all the stakeholders here And that's the tracking tool that you were referencing earlier, right? Yes different from what was the the acronym that you use commissioner for these other state Oh, the mdaa is the mass district attorneys association and so each of the county daa's are members and all I thought that was a tracking tool. No, but they do provide the last I knew they provided a lot of the underlying it For all the daa's offices, so there's already a system in place any additional questions Moving on the next grant request from the hampton county sheriff's department And this has been a request that began in 2016 Due to the need to relocate The western massachusetts correctional alcohol center wmcac This facility was displaced by the construction of mgm springfield. There was a two million dollar cap set on this Request in 2016 in a yearly allocation was capped at not more than four hundred thousand dollars This is to mitigate the relocation cost and having to find a new facility rent cost, etc And we do have a request for four hundred thousand dollars from The sheriff in hampton county and we are recommending Full funding of that. This is an extremely valuable facility. I know certain members of the committee Are familiar with its functionality and it's tremendous success in western massachusetts So we do think that this was also appropriate an appropriate request to continue The functioning of this facility in western massachusetts Any questions? Okay, and finally we have a request from the springfield police department This was the second grant request that we are Partially funding the full request amount was for $360 129 and 42 cents. We're recommending funding at a level of 228 457 and 68 cents This was primarily a request for equipment related to public safety Cost incurred and the needs public safety needs that have arisen since the opening of mgm springfield There was quite a long list submitted By the springfield police department that was very carefully reviewed by the team And we have Funded the majority of the list. I think it perhaps is easier if I Kind of point out what we have chosen not to fund rather than what we are funding So there was a request for four license plate readers And i'm happy to explain what those are members of the commission aren't familiar And oh, yeah, I I do want to hear about okay, certainly just um So license plate readers they requested for there are six already in operation around the perimeter of the casino These would be stationary plate readers as opposed to license plate readers attached to police vehicles They would be at the kind of on and off ramps Of surrounding the casino so a license plate reader and these are Very prevalent and not only used by law enforcement these days I don't know if some of you are familiar with when you go and you you pay to park somewhere And all you do is input your license plate or your registration number And oftentimes municipalities will have a small little golf cart that drives around and it has a An automated license plate reader on the front of it and it just reads your plate And if you've paid and input in your plate, you're all set if you haven't you get a ticket So this type of technology is extremely prevalent both in the private sector and in law enforcement It's quite valuable for law enforcement In terms of being able to Identify vehicles that you know may or may not be significant in a potential investigation It's also significant for members of mgm springfield security You know in terms of investigating things that may happen in house like a property crime Or whether a vehicle has been parked in excess of some parking limitation So it's my understanding you just said that there are six I did read in catherine's I guess it was carrie's memo correct on the anti aid amendment that focus had actually provided The license plate readers Are those the six or are there in addition to the ones that there was an additional request? There was an additional request before and We were recommending just two so but the six that are there are the ones that focus provide correct Okay, so so focus provided six and you're suggesting two so that would make a total of eight But it's so it definitely reflected the early ones. Great. Thank you So Any any further questions on like license plate readers not at this time? Okay. Um, so In addition, uh, there was a request for two motorcycles. These are kind of compact sport style motorcycles not the traditional um Harley-Davidson model police motorcycle that you may be familiar with and The request for these was so that officers may be able to maneuver in tight spaces In in and around the casino However, we did agree to fund pedal bicycles or traditional bikes And felt that These also would be able to maneuver in tight urban areas where members of the g eu or metro unit may need That particular capability So we declined to fund or recommended fund two motorcycles and and similarly Two Polaris rangers and these are atv type type vehicles And one utility trailer that could be attached to the back of these atv Type vehicles and And similarly we we thought there were perhaps other Ways that these could be valuable to the department that were not directly attributable to the casino so These are particularly helpful on rugged terrain And there is not a great deal of rugged terrain surrounding the casino Where it's situated in downtown springfield. So For that reason, we did not recommend funding for that But the majority of other items and i'm happy to give the commission some examples of items we thought were directly attributable There were message boards that were used during the opening that were rented That the police department found helpful in Maintaining crowd control and traffic They are asking for message boards of their own to be able to use to put them up around the casino And they do tie into the software request for the traffic software because There is a link between the traffic software that would be accessible to the police department and the message boards They can broadcast directly out to the message boards using that software So there was an appreciation by the members of the committee that they were looking to build efficiencies into the requests And allow pieces of equipment to coordinate with one another Also requests for things like cones Because mass mutual generates a lot of pedestrian traffic when they have large scale events there And as the commissioners are aware, this is a downtown setting And can be highly trafficked when events are letting out and The police department has found that use of cones some of which they've had to borrow from the dpw Has been particularly effective in limiting pedestrian traffic to the sidewalk areas And preventing people from being too close to oncoming traffic Also, water rescue kits. This may not seem to have as obvious of a connection. However as The members of the commission may be aware the waterfront park the riverfront park Was part of mgms development of its property and there have been and are planned to be events on the riverfront And so these water rescue kits Would be very useful for the department in terms of first response to An incident involving someone going into the water So unless there are any questions on particular items, and I'm happy to go down the list if you'd like, but I'm also wary of the hour So I just had one question about the trunk vaults. Are we talking about weapons storage with the trunk vaults? These are trunk vaults. They would be used to retrofit cruisers. Yes And and specifically there was a request for patrol rifles as well And it's it's very much That's an efficiency builder as well in terms of officers being able to Secure their weapons and their cruisers and have them easily accessible when they're responding to a call Instead of keeping them in a general armory Which is an option, but not as efficient I have one perhaps historical context question, uh, john maybe refresh our memories Um, uh, at other instances on these types of costs, um The the host community payment the impact fee, uh, at least in some cases was Towards public safety items That could have been anticipated When the host community agreement was signed relative to these types of costs Have we looked into that in the past or what what can you sort of comment on? We have looked at that in the past and and, um, Springfield provided an answer Regarding the applicability of the host community agreement and why it is appropriate. They noted that there are 20 additional officers that were Hired over and above what was anticipated when they entered into the host community agreement And that that represents a very significant expense for the city of Springfield So in terms of reasonableness of the grant, we took a look at the the equipment cost versus the overall cost of all Of the personnel and we thought that it was a reasonable and justifiable expense from the mitigation fund So the host community funds went to pay for the 20 Over and above what was already allocated for public safety expenditures The city is incurring expenses for an additional 20, uh, 20 officers and their associated equipment That's part of your analysis of the reasonableness reasonable amount in comparison to those additional Expenditures, uh, Springfield is If the committee, um You know, this was that this was a detailed job to have to go through each item And and determine whether or not is a casino related expenditure. So I really do give you credit for being that thoughtful about the list and That's that's it I think your your decisions were wise as far as what is reasonable and what is not with uh, With this list of equipment Thank you And that completes my portion of the specific impact grants So commissioners, I think what we'd be looking for is a vote on the specific grants under the specific impact grants Everett, excuse me. Everett, please. Madam chair. I move the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant request from everett The amount of 182,088 dollars and 90 cents As described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to submission by the applicant of the detailed scope of Any work aside from the assignment of the officers to be completed under the grant and an execution of any grant agreement Second Those in uh, any questions those in favor? Hi Opposed five zero Moving on to um, hand in county d.a.'s office the their application to have a motion Yeah, madam chair. I uh, move that the commission approved the committee mitigation Fund grant requests from handling county district journey's office and the amount of uh, 100 000 dollars Um, as described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to the Submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work a timeline for the work to be completed under the grant And the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Is there a second? Second Those in favor? I Opposed Five zero Moving on to hampton county sheriff's application Uh, madam chair. I move that the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant request from the hampton county sheriff's department in the amount of 400 000 dollars Is described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet Subject to the submission of the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work a timeline for the work to be completed under the grant And the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Any questions those in favor? I opposed five zero Moving on to the springfield police application Madam chair. I move the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant request from the springfield police department in the amount of 228 457 dollars and 60 cents As described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 And included in the july 18 2019 commission packet Specifically subject to And this may be up for comment whether the confirmation By the applicant with the commission in terms of the list of equipment to be purchased A timeline for those purchases to be completed Uh, and the execution of the grant agreement between the commission and the applicant in connection with the requested Uh quick question. Is that 68 cents as opposed to 60 cents or is that the old The 68 cents it is 68 cents You get coin or is that a ticket? Put it back in the slot. I don't want them to come up. Sure. So with that friendly amendment 60 to 68 cents. Do we have a second second those in favor? Opposed five zero That concludes specific impacts I'm butzman's the emba. Thank you very much chair. So to conclude the presentation today. We're moving on to non transportation planning applications all of these applications are are reasonable sized applications I'll provide a general overview and I know the commissioner stephens is Is ready and able to provide any amplification regarding these summaries Um, chit. So the first one is chickpea in springfield So the cities of chickpea and springfield are requesting $50,000 to begin implementing potential projects as outlined in Reinvesting in the gaming economic development fund implementation blueprint and economic development strategy for the renaissance of a great american downtown Springfield mass the review team Recommends commission approve of the requests from the cities of chickpea and springfield The purpose articulated in the application and further refined in the response letter to the review team Are consistent with those articulated in the guidelines for non transportation planning grants Um, foxboro plainville and rent them before you go there This chickpea springfield You mentioned it was for the Activation of downtown right did that mean Both the downtown of springfield and chickpea or just the springfield one Yeah, it's uh, just to be clear, uh, they're referencing two documents one our white paper But one a second document that has been developed locally That I believe in included the input of mgm springfield, which is that implementation blueprint I think chickpea is looking for Some exploration of expanding air service to west over air reserve base Is a means of maybe being able to Allow easier access for some of their patrons to fly in and out of the region. Yes. I remember those Proposals, if you will from the white paper efforts So the next application is a joint application by foxboro plainville and rent them The joint applicants have requested $75,000 to hire a professional marketing consultant firm to prepare a marketing strategy strategic and creative plan For the destation marketing of the towns of foxboro plainville and rent them the joint applicants envision this regional approach benefiting plain ridge park casino By attracting more tourists business travelers meetings and conventions and visitors to the region and establishing this area as a viable destination For overnight stays the review team strongly supports this initiative Which could provide substantial benefits to the region and plain ridge park Which will continue to face growing regional gaming competition We do note that this grant would not count against the overall totals allocated for this particular year because foxboro has Very nicely volunteered to utilize its reserve to pay for this grant Yeah, if I can just add this is This and the application before it I think are really unique and Maybe something to watch in terms of the results as We look at future years of mitigation funding But if you go back to The original purpose of the reserves it was Maybe used to help communities plan how to avoid potential adverse impacts And how to best take advantage of the economic opportunities that may result from such facilities Uh, and what impressed me about this is that they're almost doing both They're almost using this reserve to ensure the ongoing competitiveness of of plain ridge park and the jobs Uh, they provide in the revenues that they generate as well as look at how they might improve the fortunes of the entire region so It's creative that they find a way to kind of meet both objectives of reserve funds within one application The next application is from the city of north hampton. It's requesting $29,000 for continued marketing activities Building on the activities that have already been funded by the commission Uh, such activities including evaluation of the marketing campaign performance Um, and they will focus on the newly posted north hampton live website and monitoring how traffic Is going on that website and how that could impact their ability to focus on on local restaurants and hotels The review team supports this very reasonable request from the city of north hampton to continue its marketing efforts Just to just to add to that, you know again kind of Complement the city of north hampton for being proactive and What they may foresee is negative impacts to you know, their local restaurant hospitality Businesses I think the review team and john and I have talked about Making sure that there's still ongoing conversations between mgm and north hampton so that Uh, it's not necessarily an adversarial impact, but there are opportunities to partner Uh, I think something the commission should look at going forward is Is we do additional research on economic impact is Assessing impact in communities of both locally collected taxes like hotel and Meals taxes, which would certainly I think be a identifier of whether A community was being negatively impacted by the presence of mgm, but again You know, we'll certainly encourage mgm in springfield and north hampton to continue to work together and think about opportunities to partner, but I think it's a it's a reasonable request One good one good thing that I will add is that mgm springfield has provided a support letter and for this grant as well Um Is there any uh data Anecdotal or otherwise relative to an impact and I and I agree with you commissioner that it's uh, they're taking a good approach In both reasonability and proactive But um, is there any data from that? It's a city right the city of north hampton correct relative to um any Impacts so business so part of it is they're now in the in the phase of evaluating how their marketing efforts have gone, but they do know um that the spending Um supports over 250 small business retail retail businesses in north hampton Who employ hundreds of people north hampton annually generates nearly a hundred? Million dollars per year in meal spending which results in approximately six million dollars in state tax revenues And 750 thousand dollars in city revenues. And so the case that was made is that this small expenditure would help Make sure that those revenues continue to be available for the for the city of north hampton and for the common one One of the things I liked was they are going to monitor and measure You know the feedback, um the resources. So I think that's a really important piece of this. It's not just marketing It's how are we doing right? What's effective? It's pretty small dollars Uh the next application is from the city of revere the city of revere has requested $50,000 for the development and distribution of a tourism video that will promote the city of revere As the destination will also feature on core boston harbour casino as a nearby major attraction Uh the review team recommends that the commission approve of revere's grant requests It has a clear plan for Implementation of the results and it is clearly related to addressing issues or impacts Potentially caused by the gaming facility one thing we also Make mention is this is a continued further effort by revere and sagas to to work together They both filed matching applications because they wanted to promote their individual communities But they're working together on a lot of similar ideas to promote both of those communities So we commend them for working together Along those lines, um the town of sagas has also requested $50,000 For the uh a forementioned video focusing on sagas locations I I would just add again john mentioned it, you know the fact that these communities are working together They're certainly trying to see how they can maximize The location of on core boston harbour casino being so close um I'm also encouraged by the fact that you know Talked about this a lot. We have two major licensees that encourage Their patrons to get out and explore the area in and around the casino whether it's mgm springfield or whether Um, it's even you know plane ridge park to an extent But on core has done that also, you know boat trips to get you to downtown faster to explore downtown And uh, you know the change they went through to you know change around some of the retail knowing that Getting somebody to go out shopping in downtown boston is just as beneficial for the region. So Um, I applaud these two communities working together and and trying to get folks Coming to the region who may not have come to the region to think about taking a Side trip out to a neighboring community Yeah, I agree. It's a great uh good idea I did not realize that revere beach was the oldest public beach in the united states I did not know that did the commission did the uh The review team realized that I may have missed that one. You did John talked about it often. I think turn over your meetings. So you learned something from these applications. That's right So with that that concludes the uh, non-transportation planning applications moving forward on individual non-transportation Planning applications chelsea efforts application. Do we have a motion? I think we did that one already. We did chelsea, but there's one. Oh, I'm sorry. She could be springfields. I'm sorry It was when yes, I know It was with uh Madam chair had moved the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant Request from chickpea spring in springfield and the amount of $50,000 as described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team to late dated july 12 2019 included in the july 18 2019 commission packet Subject to the submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work timeline for the work to be completed under the grant and execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Second It was in favor. I opposed Five zero On northampton, please a motion Madam chair, I uh, I moved that the commission approved the community mitigation fund grant request from the city of northampton In the amount of $29,000 as described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july july 12 2019 And included in the packet dated uh july 18 2019 subject to the submission By the applicant Of a detailed scope of work a timeline for the work to be completed under the grant And the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant second Any discussion those in favor? Opposed five zero and going back in terms of the memo. We have the uh joint application of foxborough playing bill in rentham Do we We approve the application although under we understand that the reserves are being used generously by foxborough Do we have a motion so madam chair I move that the commission approve the community mitigation fund grant request from foxborough playing bill in rentham For the amount of $75,000 as described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to the Submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work A timeline for the work to be completed under the grant and the execution of the grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Second Any discussion those in favor? Opposed five zero Moving on to Saugus Point tonight Revere, I'm sorry moving on to review. Thank you, madam chair I move that the commission approve the community mitigation fund grant request from revere The amount of $50,000 is described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the july 18 2019 commission packet subject to submission To the submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work timeline for the work to be completed under the grant And execution of grant agreement between commission Second discussion those in favor opposed Five zero and Now saugus Do we have a motion? Madam chair, I move that the commission approve the community mitigation fund grant request from the city of saugus In the amount of $50,000 as described in the memorandum from the community mitigation fund review team dated july 12 2019 and included in the packet dated july 18 2019 subject to the submission to the commission by the applicant of a detailed scope of work A timeline for the work to be completed under the grant And the execution of a grant agreement between the commission and the applicant Any discussion those in favor? Aye Opposed five zero So madam chair, I have one final grant category, which is tribal gaming technical assistance fund So this is a category of grants that is a carryover from last year's grant does not represent new funding And and what this fund does? It makes available no more than $200,000 in technical assistance funding to assist in the determination Of potential impacts that may be experienced by communities in geographic proximity To the potential tribal gaming facility in taunton Pursuant to our guidelines The commission has determined that any such funding would only be made available After approving of any application by the southeast regional planning and economic development district If it is determined by the commission that construction of such gaming facility will likely commence prior to or during fiscal year 2020 So even though that this is just a continuation of prior Priorly approved funding a separate vote of the commission would be necessary to move on any such technical assistance Based on the criteria that I just described Any questions? Are you looking for just a general carryover motion to continue the with the funds? Any substantive questions Do we have a motion um I move that the commission approve The continuation of the reserve For tribal gaming technical assistance from the southeastern regional planning and economic development Agency in the amount of $200,000 subject to a further finding that by this commission that the The casino the proposed casino in taunton commands construction Before the end of fiscal year 2020 second Any questions comments those in favor aye opposed five zero Thank you Chair commissioners that concludes my report I'm buds from seamba your team and you did awesome. Thank you so much great work Thank you. This is The whole process. I think john you sat down with me on day two to go over this Initially the process and so that was in february. So sort of seeing it in this Snapshot. It's excellent work and it's exciting work mary Congratulations on all I know I know you are She looks really happy. Yeah she's Safe travels wherever you're vacationing So, thank you If that concludes your presentation Director, I think that you have someone you want to acknowledge. Thank you I'd like to reclaim some of the time I deferred on my administrative update for two things actually The first thing is a couple of people remind me what I forgot to remind the commission July 28th week from sunday is the spirit of massachusetts at ppc The spirit of massachusetts did not happen last year it happened the year before It is a joint race put on by planche park casino and the harness horseman's Association of new england It's a $250,000 race and it really brings in the finest Horses available and for those of us who were there two years ago It is it is really something behold. We I think we have a great Stock of horses that race at ppc, but this is the equivalent of watching future holofame pitchers pitch in their prime These horses are spectacular If you have the opportunity to go and watch it. It's a great day Lasted two years ago. They have the The revolution who they have then zone militia. Yeah, then zone militia. They had they do all sorts of things there It's quite a day. So just a reminder that is July 28th, which is a week from sunday The last matter is a thank you to a staff member Joe Matsumoto our chief project manager who is leaving us I am not going to disclose where she is going And it's but it's an important job. I'm not surprised. Joan has done a great job for us specifically Joan led us through a transition in a license management system that was crucial crucial for our success If we didn't have a license management system It was up and running when we were trying to license our two category one casinos and Also finished bar casino shortly after it opened. It was done. I think those of you Here at the time remember and I don't know how everyone did it They did that licensing on paper about 500 employees That's quite a challenge. We never could have done that Thanks to Joan working at their outside vendor and our folks here We were able to get a I'd say premier system up in writing We're still working on it, but we're very fortunate to have her help The other thing that she was crucial in was creating a Tracking commitment management system that helped us both on the gaming and license commitment side track our commitments For opening the two facilities, you know, you know, we thought how are you going to track these thousands of things? Spreadsheet there was no way that's going to work with spreadsheet So the system she developed helped us and our licensees get through the opening process of two casinos in a year Helped everyone be on the same page literally and track, you know, where we were in terms of You know, what we had to work on what was on fire. What was smoking those sorts of those sorts of things So I do want to thank Joan for all the work on our behalf Wish her the best and She's going on to a big important job. I'm not surprised and I know she'll take the the tablets that she used here to that new job So Joan, thank you very much. Thank you You know, I'd just like to add to that Joan. I think you really you brought Very different state government experience as well as Other experience to the job and I think that was critical And you were very helpful to me coming from another state government and not this one Even the acronyms. What the heck does that mean? So, uh, but really very helpful and a very organized brain that helped us When we had I don't know how many projects going on at one time on the early stages. So very appreciative Of your calm demeanor very good teacher to others as well Your trainings have been superb and I know that all of those skills will serve you well in the next Next job. Thank you very much. I appreciate it Well, I learned early on that you were a bradford institute fellow and we and in fact I learned that and that's exactly what happens when you lend somebody We were contacted to Provide jones assistance to other parts of state government because of that fellowship And in fact that probably Introduced you to other state government and that's why we are now going to be saying goodbye to you So when you lend something sometimes it doesn't quite come back. So good luck to you and it really We heard both that and I heard about the work that you did While we were lending you and and I know it was Really applauded for for how you Facilitated that work and so thank you And uh, good luck. Thank you manager Yeah, it seems like a long time ago But it's not that long that we were wrestling with the projects that you mentioned director the licensing management system was really A trial by fire when you came in to help to help fix that And you with director paul Connelly see how how easy people will leave now get forgotten Well, who was that we'll be asking next year jones. Who was jones? What was her last name? No, we're really really formed a great team to try to get this on a steady state of correcting something that we had just gone down a Something that was that really needed to be corrected for the operation of these and and this was a mission critical Project and and it was very Very well executed. So We're we're sorry to see you go, but we know what you will do. Well, were you wherever you go? Thank you. I would uh, I would echo What gail and kathie and and rike have said You came in and helped us out of a jam with some big big projects. Um, I think we should memorialize your wall of post-its Before you leave, but Uh, you know integral part of making this work and allowing us to stand up casino gaming in massachusetts as well And as quickly as we did and I won't lose track of you because someday. I hope to go to hawaii I'm going to have to reach out and figure out where I need to get Thank you. I'm happy to consult. I just want to thank um, all of the commissioners Executive director bedrojan marianne dually who's been there from the very first day helping me to navigate um And I especially like to thank everybody who At the commission who led and who followed either hesitantly at first enthusiastically at times To attempt new things. That's what attracted me to this agency. I actually had no interest in The gaming industry at all, but I was Convinced to come here because You wanted to be a 21st century agency to Not just be a regulator with a hammer, but to be a partner And you were open to new things and I I know and I hope that that spirit will continue. There's a lot more To do there's a lot more coming down the pike that you can anticipate and that you can't anticipate But I really appreciate your willingness Madam chair even on such things as being open to lending me To another agency not every agency in state government does that it's it's Not I think the the common Because of the potential to lose somebody But I appreciate all of that and your longer term vision of Assisting the whole state So I want to thank everybody for all of their support and I want to thank all of the staff Who you may not have witnessed or you may have heard through the grapevine had to tolerate thousands of questions from me Sometimes questions that led nowhere And sometimes questions that led to quite fruitful Opportunities and new capabilities. So I just want to thank everyone It's been quite an experience and I look forward to staying in touch Right. Thank you. We do too. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you chair Moving on to commissioners updates Just looking at our clock it is 257 Does anybody have an update You had referenced your public safety meeting that went well yesterday. I think I ran into I ran into the Everett police chief. Oh, you did. Yes. No, it did. I I do appreciate the The enthusiasm the willing I mean everybody showed up every community we called a meeting to really Make sure we were all on the same page and And asked them for their advice as we always do because frankly they That's their expertise and they do come up with good ideas or information that we hadn't had so those are kind of my favorite meetings and And I do appreciate all of the the willingness by all of the communities all the chiefs to to interact to be part of our Solution to keep it safe here in in massachusetts Your thoughts on the meeting I also thought just the the collateral benefit of just a couple other thoughts of collaboration that came out of the meeting Sort of you know a happy coincidence at the end of the meeting of other things that I think will come out of it So it was good excellent I think uh commissioner o'Brien and I could just update on the RFR for that Was issued in connection with the retention of an independent monitor pursuant to our able decision As just reported publicly and in the RFR The due date was june 28th and we were very pleased with the response and we have been We we convened a team We don't call them procurement management teams anymore as Different acronym to to report on acronyms, but in any case we we've been meeting At length and continue to work on on the selection process. So stay tuned Thank you I want to thank you both because uh, it's apparent to all of us how hard you're working To get that right and I know it's an awful lot of work So we appreciate it on on behalf of the commission that you're willing to serve and the entire team is I see they're reading. They're reviewing. They're You know really trying to get it right. So thanks A lot of good responses I'm looking at your volume I think it's called the strategic sourcing team. Yeah, that's the new acronym ST Yes, it shipped it and that makes sense too. So Strategic, and I think that's what we're attempting to be so I'd like to just mention one thing We we all receive that communication from um that came to commissioners devins and Commissioners devins responded. I think it was very appropriate. We've done that in the past when some of the communications come in um, I would just The the letter that came in suggested that there was little that mgm was doing relative to entertainment compared to other casinos in in connecticut And and I think the response was was adequate As to note that they are doing quite a bit and they're also other things that they do via the much mutual which they now manage I would I would add just one thing for uh, you know for the record for our Edification here and that is that Unlike Connecticut, uh, anybody that came into massachusetts Was required to abide by certain things that impacted the entertainment Offerings for one, uh, they could not build any theater or arena or hold an event That had more than a one thousand or less than three thousand Um, uh seats They were also required to and this is something that we still monitor Enter into an agreement with what was designated an impacted life entertainment venue My from my perspective and I think I mean, I mean, uh, I'm interpreting the the the general spirit of the legislation in this effect Was that there was an intention to build on the entertainment options Of the places that these casinos were going to go And I think that's something that's important to maybe You know communicate In the future if that concern continues to arise Again, I think your response was very on point and most importantly timely because we've also operated under the Principle that when we get communications like this we respond um, you know expeditiously and and also just copy the rest of the commissioners and the staff So I just wanted to mention that Any further update Do we have a motion Second That would be to adjourn for clarification. All those in favor. I Opposed five zero