 I'll set date. Great. Good morning, everyone. This is a convening of the Massachusetts gaming commission. And because we are holding this meeting virtually, I'm going to do a roll call of my fellow commissioners. Good morning, commissioner override. Good morning. I'm here. Morning, commissioner Hill. Good morning. I'm here. Good morning, commissioner Skinner. Morning. I'm here. And good morning, commissioner Maynard. Good morning, madam chair. I am here. Excellent. Thank you so much. But today is December 6. And it's public meeting number 406 of the Massachusetts gaming commission. Before I turn to our second item on the agenda and our general council, I would like to make a few introductory remarks. Today, as we begin our evaluation of these applications. We as commissioners are reminded of our principal responsibility. To ensure the public confidence in the integrity of the gaming industry here in Massachusetts. And the strict oversight of the gaming establishments. And now sports wagering operators through rigorous regulation. We are reminded that the MGC's licensees. Will be held to the highest standards of compliance. Including an obligation to maintain their integrity. As we have said in the past. The award of a gaming license in the Commonwealth is a peerless privilege. And our laws require gaming licensees to be held to those highest standards. On a continuing basis. We are reminded that the MGC mission commits us to creating a fair. Transparent and participatory process. That engenders the confidence of the public and participants. By law. That process is to maximize the benefit to the Commonwealth. But critically. It must minimize potential or realize. Unintended consequences. I want to thank you my fellow commissioners for your commitment to that mission. And for your thoughtfulness and diligence today. And over the next several weeks as we evaluate these applications. I feel very fortunate to serve with each of you. Particularly as we work tirelessly to implement this new law. With the public's interest in the forefront. We are very grateful for the contribution each of you make. Individually. And as collaborating colleagues. We thank you for your dedication as public servants. And commitment to the MGC mission. With that. Let me give a brief overview of today's agenda. And I want to thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. With that. Let me give a brief overview of today's agenda. First you will hear from our general counsel Todd Grossman. We will review the statutory and regulatory framework. That will guide us as we evaluate the applications. application for a Category 1 license using 205-CMR-218.063 as guidance. After that presentation, I'm imagining we're likely to take a short break and then we will hear from GLI, the IEB, and RSM relative to the technology, suitability, and finance components of the application. That will lead us to a section by section analysis of the application during which the applicant will answer your questions. Staff members and our legal team in addition to GLI, IEB, and RSM will also be available to answer questions. To ensure that we have ample time to reflect, finalize any personal notes, memorializing our impressions, and follow up with an unanswered question, we will break shortly at the conclusion of each section. Then after any further questions for purposes of review of the Category 1 applications, I will seek from the group comments and a sense as to whether we have a consensus regarding the quality of the applicant's response to that section. Do the applicant not meet expectations relevant to the standard of review outlined by General Counsel Grossman? Did the applicant meet expectations, or did the applicant exceed expectations? At any time during the public meeting, the commission may determine that an executive session is required for us to fully review and evaluate certain information in the application as we set forth in the agenda. Should we vote to go into executive session at this time, it is anticipated that the public session of this commission meeting will reconvene today at the conclusion of any such executive session. And after our review of the application, we will then consider whether we wish to proceed with our determination process fully or in part, or defer that decision entirely to another day. With that, commissioners, if you have any questions now before we proceed with General Counsel. I'll set for now. Okay, then we turn now to Item 2 on the agenda. Good morning, General Counsel Grossman. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning and good morning to all of you commissioners and to everyone who is joining us here at the meeting today. We're of course here so that the commission may evaluate the application received for a category one sports wagering license from Plainville Gaming Redevelopment LLC, which is the licensee that operates Plainridge Park Casino. Prior to commencing the review, it may be useful to set the stage by walking through the legal provisions and principles that will inform the commission's decision making. So with that, I'll highlight a few provisions of the Massachusetts Sports wagering Act, which of course has been enacted under Chapter 23N of the general laws. And then we'll go through a number of sections of the commission's recently adopted regulations. Of course, as always, questions and comments are invited along the way. So with that, allow me to begin with Chapter 23N. And I think the first place to look at is Section 6B1, which says, quote, that the commission shall issue a category one license to any holder of a gaming license, as defined in Section 2 of Chapter 23K, that meets the requirements of this chapter, meaning Chapter 23N, and the rules and regulations of the commission. Provided, however, that any holder of a category one license shall not be issued a category two license. What that means in the present matter here is that Plainville Gaming Redevelopment is a holder of a gaming license under Chapter 23K. Accordingly, if it otherwise meets the requirements of Chapter 23N and 205CMR that I'll discuss momentarily, then it shall be issued a category one sports wagering operator license. That said, the entity cannot also be issued a category two sports wagering operator license, even though they would otherwise qualify for one. Only one license can be issued to this particular entity. Before we look at the commission's regulations that govern the licensing process for a category one applicant, we should discuss what a category one sports wagering operator license is. The term is defined in Chapter 23N, Section 3, to mean quote, a license issued by the commission that permits the operation of sports wagering in person at a gaming establishment, as defined in Section 2 of Chapter 23K, and through not more than two individually branded mobile applications or other digital platforms approved by the commission. Provided that the mobile applications or other digital platforms shall be qualified for an issued a category three license, end quote. So, if this applicant before us today were to be awarded a category one license, it would be authorized to operate an in-person retail sports wagering operation at Plain Ridge Park Casino, and it would be authorized to operate two mobile operations. This category one license is the tool that enables the licensee to operate through those two mobile platforms. But remember of course that the entities that will actually run those mobile or digital platforms first have to obtain a category three license themselves. So, now let's look at the commission's rules and regulations that have to be met by the applicant in order to be issued a license. And I think the best place to begin here is with 205CMR 218, which as you know is the section that sets out the application requirements, standards, and procedures. The process itself has of course already begun. The administrative sufficiency review was performed upon the submission of the suitability portions of the application, and then the commission convened a public meeting yesterday in order to receive public feedback on the category one applications. Momentarily, we'll walk through the factors and standards that the commission has set out for the award of the license. But prior to doing so, there are a few other provisions and principles that are important to keep in mind. The first is that the regulations provide that the commission shall analyze the factors and considerations set out in the regulations, but need not do so in any particular order or give any individual factor, any particular weight, and in fact can assign no factor, no weight at all if it's deemed appropriate in the circumstances. Next, you'll recall that the regulations provide that the commission may require or permit the applicant to provide additional information or documents as the commission deems appropriate in its review of the application. So, if you're evaluating the information provided in an application relative to a particular factor and you determine that further information is required, you may direct the applicant to provide it. Similarly, if during the course of the commission's evaluation the applicant observes that there is additional information that was not provided that may be of use to the commission, it may request an opportunity to provide that information. Further, it's noteworthy that the present review is being conducted as part of a regular public meeting of the commission under the open meeting law and not in an adjudicatory proceeding. That means a number of things, including that all deliberations must take place in public and that if necessary the executive provisions of, executive session provisions of Chapter 30a may be utilized as the chair referenced in her opening remarks. As it pertains to this instant matter, Section 21a7 of Chapter 30a allows the commission to move into executive session to quote, comply with or act under the authority of any general law. In the present situation there is a general law that gives the commission authority to move into executive session and specifically that Section 6i of Chapter 23n and that says that applications for operator licenses shall be public records under Section 10 of Chapter 66. Provided, however, the trade secrets, competitively sensitive or other proprietary information provided in the course of an application for an operator license under Chapter 23n, the disclosure of which would place the applicant at a competitive disadvantage may be withheld from disclosure under the public records law. In sum, if there is any specific information that the commission would like to discuss, but that the applicant has identified is falling within the confines of that definition that I just read, and the commission agrees that it falls under that section, the commission may move into executive session to discuss that specific information. While the statutory provision of Chapter 23n relates to the public records law and not the open meeting law, to require that the subject information be discussed in public would nullify the whole purpose of that provision, which is designed to protect the information from public dissemination. Accordingly, application of the executive session provision I referenced is appropriate in this instance. And finally, before moving into the factors themselves that will guide the commission's decision making, it's also important to recall that any finding the commission makes must be supported by substantial evidence. That term is defined as evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. So when making a determination as to whether there is support in the application to find that a specific factor has been satisfied, or that it has not been satisfied, the commission will have to ensure that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the conclusion. There is one exception to this rule, however, and that is one area in which a heightened standard is applied, and that is in the review of the applicant's suitability. By the terms of Section 215 of the commission's regulations, any durable or permanent, if you will, finding of suitability must be supported by clear and convincing evidence, not just substantial evidence. The substantial evidence standard is a slightly lower standard, and there is jurisprudence that tells us that clear and convincing proof exists. When evidence induces in the mind of the fact finder, meaning the commission here, a reasonable belief that the facts asserted are highly probably true, that the probability that they are true or exist is substantially greater than the probability that they are false or do not exist. And for evidence to be clear and convincing, it must be sufficient to convey a high degree of probability that the proposition to be proved is true, and it must be strong and positive, full, clear, and decisive. So that's the definition of clear and convincing evidence versus substantial evidence, and of course we can revisit these definitions in any of these other standards as we move through the process. So now, if I may, allow me to lay out the factors that are identified in Section 218 of the regulation. As the chair mentioned, one way you may choose to move through the evaluation that will follow when we get to that part of the proceedings would be to take the application factor by factor and begin to draw conclusions as we move through it as to the quality of the information supporting each factor. You'll recall that the commission identified some factors under each of the factors in the regulations. Prior to beginning a discussion of any one particular factor, it may be helpful to pause to outline what each of these sub factors are, though I will not do that right now. The factors are included in Section 218.06 subsection five of the regulations. Each factor falls under the umbrella standard that the commission included in the regulations which directs that in determining whether to award a sportsway during operator license, the commission will evaluate the application to determine, quote, whether a license award would benefit the commonwealth, end quote. So that's the main standard that will have to be met in order to award a license, but in reaching that conclusion, that is whether a license award would benefit the commonwealth. The commission provided that it will consider the following factors and recall that the application itself was designed so as to elicit the information from the applicants in each of these categories. And here they are. Number one, that the will look at the applicants experience and expertise related to sportsway. Number two, the commission will look at the economic impact and other benefits to the commonwealth if the applicant is awarded a license. Number three, the commission looks at the applicant's proposed measures related to responsible gaming. Number four, the commission will look at the description of the applicant's willingness to foster racial, ethnic and gender diversity, equity and inclusion. Number five, the commission will look at the technology that the applicant intends to use in its operation. Number six, the commission will look at the suitability of the applicant and its qualifiers. And I'll come back to this one momentarily to add a little bit more texture to that. And number seven, the commission may look at any other appropriate factor that it deems appropriate within its discretion. So those are the factors that the regulation outlines that the commission should review and determining whether to award a license. And as I mentioned, I'd just like to circle back quickly to the suitability factor for a moment. You'll recall that the commission adopted section 15 of the regulations to govern suitability determinations in the context of sportsway. And it included provisions allowing for a durable finding of suitability, namely the so-called final determination, if you will, though it also included a provision related to a preliminary finding of suitability. In the matter before you hear today, you may choose to award a durable finding of suitability if you conclude that the applicant and each of its qualifiers has already demonstrated their suitability by clear and convincing proof by means of the review that has been conducted under chapter 23K and that they've maintained such suitability on an ongoing basis up to the present time. In that event, no preliminary finding need be entered, and this applicant could move right into durable finding territory. In support of that principle, I direct your attention to section 6D of chapter 23N, which says that in investigating the suitability of an applicant, the commission may use information obtained from the applicant pursuant to chapter 23K, chapter 128A, chapter 128C, or information from other jurisdictions where the applicant is authorized to conduct a sportsway journey. So those are all the factors that the commission must consider in order to make a licensing decision. As you work your way through the evaluation, though, it may become clear that a condition of licensure will be appropriate in a particular area. For example, you may find that the information relative to a particular factor is lacking. In that event, it does not mean that the applicant cannot be awarded a license. It simply means that that area may require to be supplemented with an appropriate condition. License conditions are described in section 220 of the commission's regulations. You'll recall that there are a number of automatic conditions, like the obligation to obtain an operation certificate prior to commencing operations, and that the operator comply with chapter 23N and all of the commission's regulations. But there's also a provision that allows the commission to impose any other condition that it determines are appropriate to secure the objectives of chapter 23N and 205CMR. As a practical matter, I might suggest that the commission begins discussing any additional conditions as part of the review of each individual factor. Then, once the commission has made its way through all of the enumerated factors, but before any final decision is made as to whether to award the license, the commission can shore up what those final conditions will be in the event the commission is inclined to award the license. Once that's done, the commission may decide whether it will award the category 1 license, whether it will determine that the applicant is eligible to request the temporary license while the complete suitability assessment is performed, or whether the commission will deny the license application for failure to meet the requirements of the regs or for violating section 6E or section 9 of chapter 23N. At that juncture, a written decision will be prepared and issued commemorating the commission's decision. And keep in mind that the award of the license does not mean that the licensee has the green light to commence operations. It simply means that the applicant, which will then become the licensee, would be eligible to work towards the award of an operation certificate, which is a prerequisite to conducting sportsway during operations. That process is described in section 251 of the commission's regulations and requires submission and approval of such things as their internal control plans, including their house rules, and compliance with any conditions that the commission may impose as part of this licensing process. So that covers all of the points I thought would be helpful to touch upon as part of the overview guiding this process. I'd like to just stop there, if I might, and turn back to the chair and the commission to see if there are any questions or any points that would be helpful to clarify. Questions, commissioners? I'll set. Joan, Councilor Grossman, can you just give me one clarifier? You mentioned, after describing the difference between the preliminary and durable suitability decision-making, and you referenced a, I thought it was a section six, where there's a description. Can you just go through that briefly with me, please? It's a description, I'm sorry, of the... Just go over that point. I thought you, I lost you on after the durable versus a durable versus preliminary suitability. I thought you then referenced the section six, but I may have misheard. I may have said that. Well, I'd be happy to just talk about... That would be helpful. The suitability piece. So you remember that given the wide variety of applicants that the commission anticipated it would receive, and the understandable time and attention that goes into reviewing the suitability of applicants, the commission wanted to ensure that timely decisions could be made responsibly. So there were essentially two paths that were set out in the regulations as it applies to suitability findings relative to the award of sports wagering license. The first is what was referred to as a durable finding of suitability, and that is in section 215.01A of the commission's regulations. In that situation, it essentially covers an applicant that the commission is comfortable while it is reviewing the sports wagering application has already met the clear and convincing standard and can be deemed suitable now, as opposed to further investigation and review being performed by the IEB and then coming back to you. I would submit that it's most appropriate on its face for application to the category one applicants who hold gaming licenses under Chapter 23K, as they have already submitted themselves to a comprehensive background investigation and been deemed suitable under 205CMR. And of course, the IEB has submitted reports to you detailing the supplemental review that it has performed. You may find, based upon that evidence and the provisions of Chapter 23N, that the applicant before you today is suitable, and there is clear and convincing evidence of its suitability, in which case you could award it a durable finding of suitability. And no temporary licensure would be awarded if you were to award them a license, they would just have the sports wagering license. By contrast, the commission also set up a different path, and that was what we referred to as a preliminary finding of suitability. And you recall the idea there was that the commission and the IEB would not necessarily have the time needed to conduct a thorough comprehensive background check of each applicant and all of its qualifiers. So there were certain principles and provisions set out under which the commission could find that the applicant has preliminarily demonstrated its suitability, but it could be awarded a temporary sports wagering license. But the understanding there is that in that event, the IEB would then continue a full investigation into that particular then licensees background and investigation and come back to the commission at a date in the future to provide all of its findings at which point the commission could decide whether the applicant then licensee has met the clear and convincing standard. In that event, the applicant or licensee would have been operating, but operating under a temporary license instead of a, let's call it a permanent license. And so that was the distinction that is drawn in the regulations between the durable finding of suitability and the preliminary finding of suitability. Thank you. It was really helpful. And of course, the section six that I was referencing is 23. That's very helpful. So thank you so much. I think that was really a helpful reminder as we pursue today's discussion. Any other questions, commissioners? Okay. Then Councilor Grossman, if you're all set, I think we'll turn then to the next part of our agenda, which is the presentation of application for category one sports wagering operating license to be submitted, that has been submitted by Plainville Gaming Week Development, LLC, doing business as we know it, Plain Ridge Park Casino. And I welcome today North Groundsville, the general manager of PPC. Thank you. Good morning, North. Good morning, Madam Chair. So if you give me just a minute, I will share my screen and I've got a presentation that we will go through today. So we'll just bear with me. North, before you get started, do you want to just reference who is also on your team available for questions? Certainly. And I should have offered that my apologies. And then commissioners will decide, should we let the presentation flow and then ask our questions afterwards? Or General Manager Groundsville, do you prefer to be interrupted to you? I'd prefer to get through all of it and then take questions, but we're happy to adjust to whatever the commission prefers. Mr. Scherzer, are you all set with that plan? Okay, hearing no objection. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair and good morning, commissioners. So joining us today, and I'll reference them again at the end of this show here are my boss, Aaron Chamberlain, our Senior Vice President of Regional Operations, as well as Chris Soriano, our Chief Compliance Officer. So Aaron and Chris are on the line. Also, as you know, Jay Snowden, our CEO, participated in the last few licensing hearings. He is in a board of directors meeting today that has been long scheduled and he does send his regards. If there are any specific questions for him that we're not able to address, he is able to make himself available with notice up until 1pm today. So with that, I will jump into our presentation. Our agenda today is pretty straightforward. I'll open with some introductory remarks about our presentation itself and then we'll roll right into the highlights of our application, which covers our background and experience in sports wagering. The betting experienced guests could expect our plans for responsible gaming, our employment impacts, our continuing commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion, and finally a few words about our financial suitability. I'll wrap up with some closing remarks and we will then be prepared to take your questions. So with that, a few items, just notes on our presentation itself. Our complete license application was submitted to the commission on November 21st, 2022 via secure file transfer. This presentation is a supplement to rather than a replacement of our submitted application. The completed application represents our complete response to the license application and any discrepancies between this document and our application are inadvertent. We redacted certain information from the application made available for public viewing and those redactions were made based on our reliance upon an understanding of the Massachusetts public records laws. Specifically the exemptions provided in section C regarding unwarranted invasions of privacy, section G regarding trade secrets and section N regarding records relating to security or safety of persons, buildings or structures. We also redacted some information from the public form of our application due to federal securities laws covering release of certain information to investors. I will cover our safe harbor disclosure in the next slide. So based on the redaction, there may be some information in our complete application that we will not be able to discuss in a public setting. We will of course be responsive to questions regarding redacted portions in any executive session the commission chooses to enter into. So with regards to the safe harbor disclosure, I'll read the first paragraph and let the second much longer paragraph remain in there for the record. This presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the private securities litigation reform act of 1995. These statements can be identified using forward-looking terminology such as expects, believes, estimates, projects, intends, plans, goal, seeks, may, will, should or anticipates, or the negative or other variations of these similar words or by discussions of future events, strategies or risks and uncertainties. So with that the the first thing that we were asked to address in our license application was our background and experience as it relates to sports betting and this slide shows that Plain Ridge Park exists within the broader ecosystem of Penn Entertainment and that one is one that stretches across both the United States and Canada. We operate 43 properties in 20 different states and we operate 25 retail sports books and online sports wagering and 15 different jurisdictions. As you look at the individual retail sports books, this slide is meant to establish our experience and expertise as a retail sports wagering operator. One of our very first retail operations launched at Hollywood Charlestown shortly after the PASPA repeal. Incidentally, I was a part of that launch as well as the launch of the Maristar and Blackhawk. So should PPC receive a license to conduct retail sports wagering, this would be my third launch of sports wagering. Additionally, our Vice President of Operations, Joe Wenzel led the launch of sports wagering at his last property, so this would be his second launch. So we have experience and expertise at the local level as well as experience across the company. Turning to some estimates regarding wagering volume, as of December 31st, 2021, Penn Entertainment had 24 retail sports betting locations across 10 states that produced $775 million in handle or wagers that generated $85 million of gross gaming revenue. This made us the second largest provider of retail sports wagering in the United States. And further estimates of our weight of wagering volume, market share and gross gaming revenue are provided within the unredacted version of our application. So each operator has a slightly different setup to the way that they operate their sports books. And I just wanted to lay out the entities that would be involved here at PPC. The first is PPC, you of course are very familiar with us. Should sports wagering be approved at PPC, we would contract with Penn Sports Interactive through an intercompany agreement. Penn Sports Interactive is a wholly owned subsidiary of Penn Interactive and its ultimate parent company is Penn Entertainment. PSI would provide some key services, but PPC will be the one running the book. All the people working at the book would be a PPC team member. And all of those folks would be licensed by the commission. And I'm sorry, I was remiss in not noting that Jenny Brown, our vice president of marketing, this would be her second launch with regards to sports wagering as well. So then that, that leads us to the, I'm sorry to, okay, so that leads us to our plans for the actual wagering space itself. Given the speed of execution needed to be opened by the end of January, PPC would launch a sports wagering operation in two phases. The first phase would be a temporary sports book near our revolution lounge. In this initial phase, we would have five teller windows and 18 kiosks. And one of our prior conversations, Commissioner O'Brien expressed some concerns about having kiosk in our racing area due to the presence of underage guests. We heard those concerns and based on that feedback, we elected to locate all of our kiosks within existing gaming space. More detailed blueprints, including the surveillance plan for the area are provided in the unredacted version of our application. Should sports wagering be approved at PPC, we would also begin working on a permanent sports book location. This would be a multi-million dollar capital investment to transform the existing fluid space into a Massachusetts-centric, fully integrated, barstool branded sports book and restaurant. This is a format that we've seen work really well in other jurisdictions and having the bedding and food in close proximity has been well received by our guests in other jurisdictions. In this slide, you'll see to the left an overview of the entire space that shows the restaurant to the left of the entrance and the teller windows to the right. And the second picture gives you a little better view of the restaurant's look and feel. On this slide, there's a closer view of the bedding counter. Should our license be approved, we would request this area be designated as gaming space. As with our temporary location, this wagering area is beyond the security podiums. An entry would be for guests 21 years of age and older. As I mentioned in the prior side, the sports book and full service restaurant would be integrated with a bar and a dynamic audio-visual package. We couldn't be more excited about this project. We believe it would be a great opportunity for us to get this space back up and running, give our existing guests a new amenity, and give some new guests a reason to come visit us at Plain Ridge Park. Guests who are placing wagers at the property, at the retail sports book, those wagers would be fully integrated with MyChoice, which is our award-winning loyalty program. When players place bets using their MyChoice rewards card, they earn status, offers, and MyCash rewards just as they do now when they enjoy other forms of gaming at Plain Ridge Park. On the employment side, our plans for employment include opportunities both within the sports book itself, as well as the space currently occupied by Fluties. On the sports book side, we would employ a sports book manager, supervisory staff, and tellers or ticket writers. And during busier times, the numbers shown here may not be enough, and we would add staff in proportion to the business volumes. On the sports bar, we would hire about 40 team members. The positions needed will include management opportunities in both the front of house and culinary areas, servers, hosts, bartenders, and other culinary positions. As we've previously reported, getting this outlet open would go a long way towards restoring the balance of female team members here at Plain Ridge Park. One of the questions people may have is, should sports betting be approved here, how would people make a bet? And with regards to how people would make wagers, we have two options and one neat tool to help them. Guests would be able to place their sports wagers either at an automated kiosk or at a teller or ticket window. They could also use our Bet Builder website to help save time. The Bet Builder is a website where guests can enter all of their bets. Once they're ready to place their bet, they scan the QR code that's generated at the bottom of the betting slip, and the betting slip would populate with any updates to pricing that may have occurred from the time they placed their wager, or they selected that wager until the wager is placed. Now wager pricing will be available via odds boards, odds sheets, the Bet Builder website, or at the teller windows. Additionally, team members would be prepared to answer any questions that guests may have regarding how to place a wager. Subject to all necessary regulatory approvals and unless otherwise specified by the commission, the sports book at Plain Ridge Park would offer patrons the opportunity to wager on an estimated 5,000 or more wagering markets, where results can be determined on the field of play and can be provided by a box score or other statistical analysis. This incorporates over 1,000 domestic and international sports leagues across 45 different men's and women's sports and includes exhibition, preseason, regular season, postseason, and all-star events for all approved sporting leagues. Professional sports league drafts of MLB, MLS, NBA, NHL, NFL, and WNBA. And of course, all of those betting catalogs are subject to commission approval, and we know that that is work that's ongoing. But that being said, in accordance with chapter 23 in, there are wagers that are specifically prohibited. In those instances, the sports book at Plain Ridge Park Casino would not offer wagering on high school and youth sports, injuries, penalties, and player discipline or replay reviews, proposition wagering on individual collegiate athletes, nor college sporting events involving a Massachusetts college, unless the institution is involved in a collegiate tournament involving four or more total teams. So turning now to responsible gaming, we note that PPC has a history of commitment to responsible gaming. And we've shown that commitment by our implementation and ongoing support of the MGC approved responsible gaming plan. We promptly report and notify the IED of any potential breach of this plan. And we support our local Game Sense advisors and their leadership through many channels, a few of which include our annual support of Game Sense's Toys for Tots, Gift Responsibly Campaign, Game Sense's Responsible Gaming Education Month, and Problem Gaming Awareness Month. Penn and Plain Ridge Park are also recognized for their responsible gaming efforts with awards such as the 2021 National Council of Problem Gaming National Corporate Newsletter Award and Quarterly Game Sense Excellence Awards to Plain Ridge Park team members. We would also continue that commitment with sports wagering. And so a few other comments with regards to responsible gaming, all of our work at Plain Ridge Park exists within Penn Entertainment's responsible gaming efforts. And at Penn, we have an exclude one exclude all policy. And what this means is that anyone who is part of an exclusion program at any one of our properties is excluding from gaming at all of our properties. And we do not differentiate between the types of gaming. We have responsible gaming committees at both the corporate and property levels that meet regularly. And we train our employees when onboarding and also provide them with regular refresher training. We continually monitor research and industry updates with respect to responsible gaming. And we adjust our materials accordingly. We are regular participants in industry discussions and conferences on responsible gaming. And finally, we offer self exclusion, financial restriction and limit setting programs in both retail and online settings. We're also proud of our partnerships with the International Center for Responsible Gaming, the National Council on Problem Gaming, the Responsible Gaming Council and the American Gaming Association. With regards to advertising as it applies to responsible gaming, what I'll say is a continuing theme that we have here is what you've seen from Plain Ridge Park in the past with regards to our advertising and our responsible gaming efforts is largely what you will see as it relates to sports betting. So our responsible, our advertising with regards to sports wagering will contain responsible gaming messaging. We'll reflect generally accepted contemporary standards of good taste. We'll strictly comply with all federal and state, federal standards to make no false or misleading claims. We'll strictly comply with all restrictions placed on licensees and the commonwealth through effective legislation or regulation. And we will comply with the American Gaming Association's Code of Conduct for Responsible Gaming. We specifically will not appeal to children or minors in our advertising, feature those who are or appear to be under the age of 21, will not claim or make claims or misrepresentations that gambling will guarantee social, financial or personal success, will not be placed before an audience where most are ordinarily expected to be under the age of 21, will not imply or suggest any illegal activity, will not encourage people to play beyond their means, will not imply the certainty of a reward, will not exaggerate the chances of winning, and will not encourage irresponsible play. On the training and workforce development front, all newly hired team members complete a new hire orientation that covers the company's history, background, values, and guest service training. We also cover workplace policies such as respectful workplace, benefits, discipline, and pay time off. Additionally, new hires receive department specific training. Sportsbook employees would receive additional training on money handling procedures, regulatory requirements, wagering types, wagering systems, and house rules. Plain Ridge Park offers internal training and development programs for our team members at all levels of the organization. We also offer tuition reimbursement to our existing team members. One of the flagship development programs that we launched in 2022 that you'll recall that we spoke about in our Q3 update is the Emerging Leaders Program. As you will recall, this program is primarily for hourly team members who are interested in pursuing management positions within the company, and we're proud to report that five of the eight graduates from that program in our initial class were women. Finally, Plain Ridge Park Casino will continue to pursue the programs we discussed in our 2020 license renewal, including workforce development partnerships, building relationships with educational institutions, and participating in local job affairs outside of Plain Ridge Park. With regards to our workforce diversity, our application provides a listing of our employment numbers and diversity distribution as of the middle of November. The slide you see here is the data that we presented to you to the commission in our Q3 2022 update. As we stated previously, it is our belief that our percentage of female team members would improve with the opening of a sports bar. Although it's not reported in this slide, we are very proud to say that our diversity at the very highest levels of the property meets or exceeds the numbers listed here, with 20% of our VP and above group being diverse and 60% being female. Now taking a look at our supplier diversity, each quarter PPC comes before this commission to report our diverse supplier spend. This slide shows the figures from our most recently completed quarter. Diverse suppliers have been and will continue to be a part of our qualified spend here at PPC. In the most recent quarter, we met or exceeded all goals of diverse supplier spend. And now a few additional words about efforts that Penn makes and our ongoing commitment to diversity equity inclusion. Penn is committed to building a diverse and inclusive workforce across our organization. Our executive leadership team and board of directors have over 100 plus years of experience in the gaming industry. Our board of directors is made up of professionals from many disciplines, including investment banking, asset management, tax accounting, and consulting, advertising, gaming entertainment, and more. And their level of expertise is unparalleled. From a diversity standpoint, our board is 44% female and comprised of three military veterans and members who are white, Hispanic, Asian, African American, and LGBTQ plus. Penn was included in the 2021 and 2022 champions of board diversity by the four of executive women and the 2021 breakfast of corporate champions, which recognizes companies that lead the way for gender balance on their corporate boards. In 2021 and 2022, we were included in Forbes magazine's list of America's best employers for diversity. And we've received accolades from the all in diversity project and are certified as an age friendly employer by the age friendly Institute. In 2021, we launched a $1 million diversity scholarship program for the children of team members that's goal is to have a goal of pursuing secondary education. It was a resounding success in year one with 47 recipients, 58% of which are the first generation to attend college. We also created a $4 million plus STEM scholarship fund and internship program at historically black colleges and universities in states in which we operate. The program now has six partner HBCU schools. In addition, we started a new pilot program to help mentor and develop hourly and early career team members who want to pursue leadership positions at the company. And that's the emerging leader program that we discussed earlier. Penn supports diversity, investment and involvement in the sports wagering industry and has implemented policies to make diversity, equity, inclusion a priority through corporate policies such as pens supplier diversity initiative procurement efforts are coordinated to achieve increased diversity spending and the development of new opportunities for diverse businesses. Penn supplier diversity initiative is a coordinated effort at the corporate level and across all of our destinations to develop strong partnerships with diversity suppliers. Putting diversity first, we more than doubled our diversity spend in our first year partnering with businesses owned by minorities, women's, women, disabled individuals and veterans. Our 2021 diversity spend increased from 52 million in 2020 to 68 million in 2021, which is a 13% increase year over year. In addition, we're continuing to enhance our efforts through Penn's small business incubator, the program that onwards minority businesses and assist them in growing from local to national suppliers within our company. Locally Plain Ridge Park Casino maintains a diverse vendor base and actively supports its community, including ongoing financial assistance to the following organizations, the Boston Pearl Foundation, which is a 503C nonprofit organization, and the mission of that foundation is to advance and support education by providing underserved students with the financial assistance needed to attend college. Specifically, the focus of the foundation is to further the education of young black women who enroll as freshmen in a four-year college or university. Additionally, New Hope Organization, another 501C3 nonprofit organization, serve those affected by domestic and sexual violence. Their clients benefit from a full spectrum of programs they offer, allowing them to receive domestic and sexual violence services in one place. Their services include crisis intervention, violence prevention, life transition and self-sufficiency opportunities, while promoting behavioral and systemic changes to reduce violence at the individual and community levels. We believe that diversity is a driving force that moves our company forward and we're building a more inclusive company, giving our team members support they need in their work to help more people find their fun. Our most recently publicly-discosed EEO1 data reports that the company's workforce is 48% female and 46% of company-wide team members are diverse of a diverse race or ethnicity. In 2022, Penn Entertainment launched a company-wide diversity training program. All team members were required to attend a series of courses covering diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging, allyship and unconscious bias. We are currently in the process of delivering additional training to all leaders of people within Penn. And I will now say just a few words about our financial suitability. I know that there will be some more discussion about this to follow, but there are really two points that we wanted to draw out in support of our financial suitability. The first is one just around our stability as a company. As you look at our least-adjusted net debt leverage, we are at 4.3 times, which is well below industry standard, and our percent of fixed rate debt is at 85%. Our earliest loan maturity is currently in 2026, and we have a lot of liquidity available to us, $2.6 billion, as of the most recently reported period. The other thing that speaks well to our stability as a company is historically that regionally-based companies, which Penn is an operator that exists within that space, performed far better than the Las Vegas strip following the 2007 to 2008 downturn, and the current operating environment is much more favorable than that today. So in closing, we just wanted to say that as we wrap up, we're really excited about this opportunity here at Plain Ridge Park. While this would be a new form of betting, look, we remain the same Plain Ridge Park that you've known for the past seven years. We greatly appreciate the relationship that we've had with the Commission and with the Commonwealth and with our local and surrounding communities and partners over the last seven-plus years. And now, as I said before, we're prepared to take questions. I think, Madam Chair, you might have said this may be a time that you were interested in taking a break, but again, I wanted to say that my boss, Erin Chamberlain, our Senior Vice President of Regional Operations, as well as Chris Soriano, our Chief Compliance Officer are here and available as well. Thank you, North. And commissioners, if you'll allow me, I am thinking it makes sense for us to take a brief break, hold our questions, have the presentations that we're anticipating, and then make our way through the applications as I suggested and revert back to General Manager Brownsell and his team for the questions that are pertinent to both today's presentation as well as the application. Does that make sense or do you have particular questions that are particular to the presentation that are also relevant to our future discussions? Commissioners, does that make sense to hold, Commissioner O'Brien? No, I think it does. I have comments and questions, but I can put them on the end. Okay. Commissioners, do you agree with Commissioner O'Brien and me that that might make most sense? Then we'll have our full, really, all the information in front of us to make our application review the most meaningful and efficient. Okay. With that said, thank you, General Manager Brownsell, again, for the excellent presentation, with your team being here. And it is 11. Right now, why don't we return it at 11? 15 commissioners. That makes sense. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you, Dave. Commissioners, because we are reconvening this public meeting, number 406 of the Master of the Game Commission, I'll take a roll call given that we're using a virtual format. Commissioner O'Brien? Good morning. I am back. Thank you. Commissioner Hill? Present. Thank you. Commissioner Skinner? I am here. Thank you. And Commissioner Maynard? I'm here. Excellent. Thank you. So we are now turning to item four on our agenda. And we will have three presentations and analyses. First, we will be hearing on the technical components of the application from Gaining Labs International. GLI was the first to write and set Gaining Technical Standards, which are now considered to be the industry benchmark worldwide. GLI has continuously responded to the industry by innovating new standards and allow in testing, allowing regulators to feel confident that they are providing a safe, responsible method of revenue generation for their stakeholders and integrity preservation. We have before us today, Kevin Mulally, who is Senior Vice President of Government Relations and General Counsel. He has 40 years of diversified leadership in law, regulatory policy, outcome measurement, economic analysis, and organizational administration. As GLI's primary liaison to elected and appointed officials, he regularly interacts with regulatory agencies, key organizations devoted to developing gaming policy, and senior level executives of gaming development, manufacturing companies, casino operators, lotteries, iGaming operators, permutual weight training facilities, sports betting, operators, and all related vendors. We also have Joe Fennewydd, Director of Client Solutions, over 16 years of experience. Joe brings in the gaming industry with extensive experience in developing practices for its online game platforms. Joe also has over 16 years of product management and operations management experience. He's recognized for demonstrating a natural attitude for overseeing all stages of the product development life cycle. Good morning, Kevin and Joe, and thank you for your work that you've been doing with the Gaming Commission thus far, and thank you today's presentation. Good morning, Madam Chair and members of the Commission. It's a pleasure to be here today. We are enjoying our work with you. Whenever I hear that summary of my career, I feel really old, but happy to be here and give an overview of the regulatory framework that we promised you to ensure the integrity of the technology that would be used to protect the integrity that will implement sports wagering. I'm sorry. We assured you that the framework would be proven and consistent with other strictly regulated jurisdictions that had sports wagering that are similarly situated to Massachusetts. So GLI 33 as modified to align with the Massachusetts statute and the regulatory structure you have for the other forms of gaming you regulate is the foundation of that regulatory framework. It is augmented by operational risk control requirements that include change control regulations and boundaries for and guidance with regard to internal control standards. As we've explained in the past, sports wagering is much more dynamic than the land-based gaming operations that you are more familiar with. And so the initial testing and certification while essential is only the beginning. It will require continuing efforts involving ourselves as your test lab and your staff and cooperation with other regulators to manage these dynamic systems that are deployed globally but regulated locally. I would encourage you and your staff to continue your involvement in the regulators internet gaming task network security task force that I think is essential to the efficient oversight of these systems in the long run. If we have a lot of very diverse requirements spread across a number of jurisdictions it's actually going to be a net drag on risk control and cooperation going forward will be essential. And so for the remainder of the presentation I thought it best to turn it over to an engineer not a lawyer. And so Joe Bunavith, Boston native and our director of client solutions who has many years of experience developing these systems prior to coming to GLI will discuss the certification, the process of certification and the field inspections that will be precursor to the operational certificate that is that Mr. Grossman outlined in your process. Joe. Thanks for having me, Madam Chair and members of the commission. My name is Joseph Bunavith. I work for Kevin Mullally. My title is Director of Client Solutions. If you pick up on a Massachusetts accent at some point during this presentation I was born raised in Monterey, Massachusetts and tended to master engineering. So I'd like to give an overview on the submittal certification and verification process in regards to implementing retail or referred to as like over-counter or like kiosk for sports wagering. And but before we can take submittals at the independent test lab the mass Jamie commission will have to approve 205CMR 138, 238, 247 and 248 which are on schedule for next week. After those approval the operators can prepare to submit their code bases for the entire sports wagering system they intend to deploy. That preparation includes an architecture review which is a complete comprehensive and technically accurate description and explanation of the sports wagering system includes the description and layout of all hardware devices and virtual servers, all server and client software modules including all the software versions and the layout of all network communications between the various software and hardware modules. An explanation of all third-party integration and services is delivered at this time. Post the technical documentation review the critical files regarding compliance will be identified and documented. We will run a supervised compilation of those source files, the signature of those files and the compilation steps and the signatures of the compiled code. Once complete the source code can be submitted for testing in a lockdown environment. The lab will verify the events, markets, points, breads, bed acceptance, results, corresponding time stamps and all data logging for audits and reports. The verification and enforcement of bedding limits will also be observed. All the edge cases and test requirements at that time around everything to do with those limits will be implemented. The verification of pre-event and live data feeds, bed settling and corresponding logging and reporting will be noted and we will review their change management process and procedures. Then at that point post successful submittal and requirements for testing we will move towards the certification process. The test lab will verify the changes made for the master's specific deployments. This will include source code differential and the change testing to the last reviewed version. We will evaluate the product to the master's specific requirements which have, which indeed have adopted GLI-33. And then we will transfer in all kiosk machine hardware devices and firmware. At that point we will start issuing certificate for the versions that will end up in Massachusetts to take forward-spending. Post the certification issuing a field validation process will begin in conjunction and or guidance from GLI and in conjunction with the MGC. They will verify all the machines on the floor match the certification report by model number and they'll do the same for like all the bill validators, the printers and all devices that are on the floor. We'll verify all the signatures of the installed firmware on the kiosk and the bill validator and all the signatures for the production server and the critical file signatures as well. We'll run test data through a sampling of kiosk and retail point of sale. Likely a two to three day process will be in place to place wagers, let them result and settle overnight, rexile those data and verify the reports and everything's recorded correctly. We'll then all a review of the internal controls for procedures to operate the sportsbook, check the technology for configurations such as proper setup for roles and user rights management and potentially interview key personnel to ensure they know and fall all procedures from the operators internal controls. And at that point per blessing from the MGC, everything will be good to go to accept wagers in the state of Massachusetts. Thank you, Joe. And Madam Chair, commissioners, we're happy to answer any questions you might have. Commissioners, questions for Governor Joe. This time. Mr. Skinner. Chair, are we holding questions? I just want to make sure I understand. I thought the request was to hold questions until the end of our presentation. And I just wanted to check in. He asked if it makes sense, something specific that you would like to ask? I think it makes sense. I do want to point out that throughout the day, we also have a system director through span available from my AB on some of the technology related questions that Kevin and Joe have addressed. We will be going through the technology components of the application. Kevin, are you not available later in the day? That's the only one. Yes, Joe will be available, but I have to leave at 1.30 p.m. your time. So that's the only caveat, commissioners, something specific that Kevin raised that perhaps Joe might not be able to address. In that case, you know, I can hold my questions for later. Thank you much, Commissioner Skinner. And what we'll do too is if there is a question for you, Kevin, we will make sure to be able to address it one way or the other. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you very much. We'll hold our technology questions, and then we will move on to suitability and our investigations in enforcement bureaus, Chief Enforcement Counsel, Heather Hall. Good morning, counselor. Good morning, Chair and commissioners. Thank you. Again, a tough act to follow. As you know, I always struggle with the tech and I am glad I get to defer to people from GLI and Bruce's team on that piece. So with respect to my portion of the discussion here today, I will be brief. I know you all have a lot of matters to cover today. So as noted in the IEB's executive summary, and actually as General Counsel Grossman noted earlier this morning, in evaluating PPC suitability for the Category 1 sports wagering license under Chapter 23N, the commission may leverage the information obtained and the suitability investigations performed pursuant to the casino gaming law under 23K. The criteria for suitability in the gaming law substantially aligned with the criteria for suitability in the sports wagering law, and it's stated in the IEB's executive summary. With respect to PPC, in 2013 the commission found PPC and each of its then individual and entity qualifiers suitable in connection with their initial application for a gaming license. And those suitability findings were issued after full investigations by the IEB. And then as new qualifiers joined the company, they were required to submit to the full background review process as well. The IEB conducted the full background investigations as required by the statute of regulations with respect to those new qualifiers, and all of them are listed in the IEB's executive summary. The IEB submitted investigative reports to the commission with respect to the recommendations on suitability, and the commission issued positive determinations of suitability for each of those qualifiers referenced in the executive summary, again, both entity and individual. And also for those who were joined the company subsequent to the issuance of the initial license. You know, and as the IEB stated, PPC's license to operate a category two gaming license under chapter 23K remains active and in good standing. And, you know, as we also noted, the applicants have a continuing duty to maintain suitability, as well as the continuing duty to update the commission on the event of various occurrences set out in the regulations and as required by the IEB. They also have a duty to inform the commission of any action that the license reasonably believes would amount to a violation of the gaming law. And I would just note, again, that PPC through PEN has continued to provide updates to the IEB, and the IEB remains in regular communication with PPC. And I think with respect to my prepared marks, that's all I have at this point, but I'm happy to answer any questions that the commission might have. Well, Councilor Hall, are you available for questions throughout the day? Absolutely. Hold, or would you like to ask questions? Okay, then we'll continue with the presentation next from RSM, RSM-USLLP. It's one of the leading providers of audit, tax, and consulting services in the United States. RSM have been working with Massachusetts Gaming Commission to provide insights and analyses to help the commission in our evaluation of the applications. I'd like to introduce to some of the some of the individuals who'll be presenting during this meeting. Greg Navelloth leads New England Financial Investigation and Dispute Services Practice. Teresa Merlino leads the RSM's National Gaming and Hospitality Practice. Jeff Chats leads RSM Strategic Finance Practice. Connor Laughlin is Director of RSM Strategic Finance Practice. The RSM team has been asked to join the meeting and make a presentation related to certain aspects of the applications. Please note, RSM is not presenting on all aspects of the application. Specifically, RSM has been asked to provide insights based on their experience and research into the following sections of the application. That's with respect to section B2, subsection D, sports wagering experience, description of sports wagering operation. RSM has been asked to focus on applicants' estimated market share within each jurisdiction. We've also asked them to look at C2, projected revenue. RSM has been asked to provide insights into all aspects of the applicants' projected revenue. C3, subsections A through C is on the construction, the gaming establishments. RSM has been asked to focus on the construction timeline and a reasonableness of the proposed gaming area. Subsection G3, the financial stability and integrity section. RSM has been asked to provide insights into all aspects of the applicant's financial stability and integrity. And then we invite RSM for their talking points at this time. Good morning. Good morning. Thank you for the kind introductions. This is Greg Navaloff. I am a partner at RSM and joined by the other colleagues that you've introduced. Certainly wanted to thank the commission for inviting us to attend this meeting. We've got a lot of documents and a lot of information in a short period of time. We've done our best to get through all that information, a lot of back and forth discussions, making sure we had the right documents, but wanted to kick off this discussion and hand you over to the right subject matter experts. Teresa, who is on the line, will jump into and discuss briefly our approach and then we'll get into some of the detailed discussion. Teresa? Good morning, Teresa. You're just happy to be on mute. Thank you. I apologize for that. Thank you all. I appreciate this to be meeting with you here today. My name is Teresa Merlino. I'm a principal in our gaming and hospitality practice and have been involved with gaming since the late 1990s. And RSM has been involved with gaming for the last 50 years. So we're happy to support the Massachusetts Gaming Commission in this important exercise in providing sports book to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We understand the importance of the licensing process and the importance of these meetings. We've accumulated a diverse team of professionals to present on the topics as requested by the commission. As of note, to specify and support what the chairwoman mentioned, we'll be focusing on B2D, sports wagering experience, B2, projected revenue, B3A through C, construction of the gaming establishment, and G3, financial stability and integrity. I'd like to introduce Jeff and maybe Jeff and Connor if you can briefly speak to your experience and then I'll go over the introduction. Sure. Thanks, Teresa. Hi, everyone. Jeff Katz here. I lead our strategic finance practice here at RSM and I'm based in Boston. So spend the bulk of my career doing financial analysis and corporate finance and looking at entities and their overall financial capacity. Connor? Hi. Good morning, everybody. I'm Connor Lachlan, a director with the strategic finance team. Prior to RSM enjoying their strategic finance and FPNA team, I spent 12 years in a BDS, BRS group or business restructuring services group. So as we present, begin our presentations, please note this presentation is based upon documentation received as of December 2nd, 2022. The discussion prepared by RSM team is based on preliminary research to date and is subject to change if new information becomes available. Questions posed to our team may require further research. If we're unable to respond to a question before the end of this meeting, we will circulate a response to the commission as soon as practical. I'll start with section B2, the market share for retail. The market share analysis is noted in B2D is closely linked to the C2 projected revenue analysis as requested by the commission. Fourth book revenue is the handle or the amount wagered multiplied by the whole percentage or win rate. The whole percentage can vary significantly from period to period based upon player wagering activity in unique, particularly in unique markets. The betting mix, meaning the different types of games for methods to bet that the players may choose to wager on and the results of those games played. For example, sometimes the underdog wins and they win big and that may actually benefit the casinos or it may benefit the players. So the whole percentage is a difficult number to pin down, typically, although we can certainly use referenceable information from other jurisdictions to understand what likely hold percentages will be over a period of time. The estimated market share is relevant to the revenue connections and that's the first area that we'll be focusing on with B2D. As the market share influences the handle, Plain Ridge Park provided retail market share and other jurisdictions within their application but did not explicitly include an estimated market share for Plain Ridge Park. As part of our analysis, we used external research to understand the likely Massachusetts sports book market size and use this external research to understand Plain Ridge Park's assumptions, which will be described here by Jeff today. So in our review, Plain Ridge Park did not specifically provide with market share for the state of Massachusetts for retail sports betting. So what we prepared after looking at third party market research, we prepared an analysis which extrapolated the low end and high end of estimated GGR. And so that's how we expressed market share, so gross gaming revenue for both the retail and online sports betting markets. And based on that low end and high end, we then looked at the historical breakdown between retail and online sports betting of states that have already legalized sports betting. And so we came up with a contribution related to the retail sports wagering for GGR, basically a range of low and a high end of the range. And based on that, we were able to essentially calculate whether or not the forecast that was provided by Plain Ridge Park Casino was in the range that was implied by the third party market research that we prepared. Then what we also did is we looked at the hold percentages over time for that they had expressed in both their low base and high end scenarios, which was the same across all three scenarios. And within that, we looked at data for all the states across the U.S. that have legalized sports betting for both retail and online sports betting. And that was within the range as well. And it fell right around the middle of the past 18 months. Then from there, we again looked at their GGR in terms of the percentage growth annually to make sure that that made sense with the forecast provided by the third party research that we analyzed. And again, they were within the range there. And that's how we came up with a total estimated GGR range that they fell within. And then in terms of revenue, what we did after that is we looked at the taxes that the proposed taxes from the state applied that to the GGR, the range that was provided by Plain Ridge Park Casino, and we came up with a taxable dollar amount that would go to the state overall. And based on those assumptions that were utilized, it seems to be within the range of reasonableness. I'll pause there and see if there's any questions or we can wait till the end. I think that the commissioners are intending on holding questions as we go through the application. I think it'll be you're providing important context for us now, Jeff. So that makes sense, commissioners? Are you in agreement? Okay. Thank you. So yeah, so I'll continue on then. I think just in general, what we found as a summary is that the estimated projections as provided by Plain Ridge do appear to be in alignment and in agreement with the industry overall and appear to be assumptions that are based on performance of other jurisdictions that Penn Nationals is competing in. Other areas that are included within the section C2 include projections related to non-gaming sports wagering revenue and the methodology used to arrive at these projections. We observed that the non-gaming revenue projections were provided, but the underlying assumptions to come to those calculations did not appear to be explicit in the application. We did note that the location of the new sports book is going to be located in what is currently Flutey Sports Pub, and it may be a benefit for the commission to understand how the non-gaming revenue projections for the new venue compare to historical performance of Flutey Sports Pub given that it is in the same location. As it relates to the description of plans to compete with other jurisdictions, we did observe that there was discussion in the application related to marketing and advertising consistent with traditional and digital type advertising. They also reference the MyChoice player loyalty reward program as a component to help compete with other jurisdictions adjacent to the Massachusetts market. We have seen from an industry perspective this would not be necessarily applicable to the applicant, but from an industry perspective we have seen difficulties with other systems and other jurisdictions in the combination of a traditional loyalty program for like a lot and table game type program and a sports book offering. So the combining of those two databases and reward programs have been problematic and other jurisdictions. We would, the commission may want to understand the approach and timing of linking the current MyChoice loyalty program that's currently in place at Plain Ridge Park Casino with the planned sports book platform as noted in the application. So that concludes our overview of C2. So moving on to C3, which is the construction of the gaming establishments. RSM was specifically asked to focus on the construction and timeline and reasonableness of the proposed gaming areas. We observed the application and as shared also in Plain Ridge Parks Casino presentation, the retail sports book location will be a mixed-use space with a central location on the gaming floor and appears to be in a place which will have good foot traffic. The location would appear to promote high energy and entertaining experience and the presentation as well as the application as provided by Plain Ridge Park does seem to be consistent with the industry. We compare the proposed square footage of Plain Ridge Park Casino's proposed new venue with other sports book markets including the New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Michigan sports book markets. While the square footage may differ between the properties the proposed square footage by Plain Ridge Park Casino is generally consistent with the marketplace and appears to be in alignment with proposed revenue estimates. The application applicants proposed schedule is comparable to other remodels for the construction of similar size and duration and this particular analysis was performed by our team that specializes in construction audits and does 100% construction analysis. The considerations for the construction timeline are relate to supply chain impacts in particular and as we considered their construction plans we noted that specialty items with long lead times may impact the ultimate completion of the project. However the remodel of this space does not appear to be a significant risk of supply chain issues as the physical layout will not require specialized equipment as far as we could tell from the application and there appear to be limited structural changes both of which have extremely long lead times with the supply chain challenges. Other items such as custom carpeting, custom furniture or finishes may not be available within the timeframe as provided by Plain Ridge Park Casino. However the casino could very likely install temporary fixtures for example if the custom carpet that they'd like to install gets delayed there still would be options to do some temporary carpeting and as long as it meets safety standards they could still open within the timeline. So with that kind of overall assessment we found that the applicant's proposed schedule is comparable to other remodels and is in a position to be successful with the proposed timeline. And then now we have section G3 and Connor will speak briefly to this. Thanks Teresa. Yeah it is part of RSM's engagement and assisting the MGC in its financial suitability review. We analyzed the current capital structure of Plain Ridge Park's parent company Penn Entertainment. I know North Groundsville of PPC touched on this during his presentation but I will go ahead just to affirm his comments for the commission. Since 2016 Penn has significantly grown its brick and mortar retail casino footprint. According to public filings during this timeframe Penn has increased its number of properties under management from 27 to 43 or approximately 60 percent. It is apparent Penn has incorporated these new properties into its growing portfolio without straining its available liquidity support its ongoing operations. As of September 30th of 2022 Penn has a total debt balance of approximately 13 billion an increase of approximately 3.4 billion since the fiscal year ended 2018. Despite Penn's growing total debt it is apparent that the company has historically and currently maintained ample capital and liquidity support in sportsbook operations at the PPC casino as well as its other ongoing operations. Penn has maintained an average total available liquidity position of approximately 2 billion for the period 2018 through September 2022. As of September 30th 2022 Penn has approximately 2.7 billion in total available liquidity comprised of 1.7 billion in cash on hand and 1 billion in availability under its current credit facility. And with that you know I think this concludes our portion of the presentation and perhaps I could pass it back to Teresa for any final remarks. If there are certainly any questions at this time although understanding that we will be available for the duration of the presentation to answer any follow-up questions. Commissioners very very helpful all three presentations very helpful for really giving us a preliminary background context for our next exercise which will be now to walk through the application. Commissioners should we would you like to take a a five-minute break or before we start that process or are we ready to go? Commissioners you know what commissioners I'm going to take a five-minute break. We'll be back at noon. Appreciate it. Thank you Dave. Thank you everyone. Again this is a reconvening of master sustaining commission public meeting number 406 and because we're holding this meeting virtually I will do a roll call. Commissioner Bryant. I am here. Commissioner Hill. I'm here. Commissioner Skinner. I'm here. Commissioner Maynard. I'm here Madam Chair. Thank you excellent and again thank you to all for the morning's presentations and I believe I've asked before we get started I've asked Councilor Grossman, General Councilor Grossman to just reflect and advise us on as we navigate our review the fact that there are redactions redacted copies of the applications and we of course have had the benefit of the unredacted applications and that is what we have concentrated on in terms of our review so Councillor Grossman please. Thank you. So as the commission is aware you do have redacted versions of well version of this particular application and of course it has also been posted on the commission's website. That was done in the name of transparency and what is sure to be a keen public interest in these proceedings and the the issue that we were addressing is the idea that under the public records law that all documents are presumed to be public records unless the information or the document as a whole meets a particular exemption and in the case of the applications we received which number in the I think thousands of pages it will have will be and would have been a tremendously difficult to have been able to post those applications in a redacted fashion if we internally were to have gone through each and tried to apply the exemptions ourselves and so what we asked for is that each of the applicants take a try at redacting their own application consistent with the law and the law that specifically applies to this situation is of course the public records law which contains a series of familiar exemptions including the privacy interest that we're most familiar with perhaps but also a statutory exemption and in the case of sports wagering applications the statutory exemption was set out in chapter 23 and section 6 I and I read it earlier but I'll just repeat it here to refresh everyone's recollection and what it says is that trade secrets competitively sensitive or other proprietary information provided in the course of an application for an operator license under chapter 23 and the disclosures disclosure of which would place the applicant at a competitive disadvantage may be withheld from disclosure under the public records law and so each applicant went through and redacted their applications in accordance with that provision and any other provision of the public records law that they thought applied it is important to point out that the commission and commission staff did not itself go through the applications and make those redactions and so with that those have been posted online and are available for public review today so we do have a sense as to what the applicants think are the sensitive information or other documents that may be potentially exempt under the public records and so with that we will navigate this discussion recording I think you're a point that the commission and the commission staff not make those redactions is important and I also must admit I did not memorize them and so I suspect I'm not alone that I see at least some heads nodding so general counsel Grossman and commissioners please chime in as we proceed is there any guidance that you can give us as to if we start to navigate into something that is truly a permissible redaction or an area where we need to exercise caution under the law and perhaps moving to an executive session if we find that that's fitting how will how will you guide us well like you I have also not memorized all of the exemptions although I've certainly looked at them what the most efficient way of doing this would be to put the onus on the applicant to flag any areas of concern if the commission is about to veer into territory that may implicate these issues and if they are to do so we should consider pausing the proceedings to make a determination as to whether the information that is being elicited or to be discussed fits within the confines of an exemption and if so and that determination can be made in executive session if we need to know specifically what the theory is depending upon the situation then we can move into executive session as we noted on the agenda we might do and then discuss just that limited piece of information or series of points in executive session and then return to the public session to continue with the conversation so that's I think the best way to go about this evaluation if that makes sense commissioners any questions for general counsel grossman okay all right then just a reminder we are now moving to item number five on our agenda where we will review and begin the evaluation of the application for category one sports wagering operating license submitted by ppc and our agenda notes the factors that general counsel grossman went through that our regulation establishes as criteria at the end of the day when we do ultimately end of the day whether it's today or another day we do engage in our determination process um counsel grossman and the legal team will guide us through um the um whether or not we've met the the burdens of um evidentiary burdens or not we the applicant has met the um evidentiary burdens and that will be a process that we're familiar with in in terms of other for the work today it's a little less familiar if you will indulge me I think um general counsel grossman agreed it might be helpful for us as I mentioned earlier that the conclusion of each um section and I will say you know section a fully section b fully as we walk through those sections ask questions and if we need to go back in the section it can be all very organic um at the end I will see um and we can ask questions of the applicant and any team members as well as our rsm and gli but that the end I'll see the consensus generally as to the quality of the applications section and we'll do you know does it does it not meet expectations does it meet or does it exceed so that's just a kind of a a measure for us that legal will keep a record so that we know if there are deficiencies that we want to address ultimately or of course where there are uh then we will applaud those those um places where we um are particularly pleased so with that um we will start with uh with section a are there any questions or comments for the um team or for the applicant on section a itself I can start madam chair um thank you i'm just i'm just uh getting right into my my note sorry excuse me yep thank you um so in terms of experience or expertise in regards to sportsway during for this applicant I don't have any concerns at all with um the application that was submitted or the presentation today I have confidence in them in that regard okay and in in terms of the actual section commissioner bryan any particular um concerns about what was submitted in terms of the actual okay anyone in that section thank you any other um comments or questions around a commissioner skinner a um i'm b no okay we'll move to b if i just want to check in are we all set with a it meets a for consensus purposes I agree um with commissioner or bryan the experience and expertise related to sportsway during and other jurisdictions I think has been fully vetted in the application as well as in the present presentation today so i'm okay uh moving forward to section b excellent I will also join for the record so we have a full consensus on a and thank you um commissioners for for elaborating excellent my section a chair is general information um the experience and expertise is b so I do have questions and comments relative to section b I think that that we're going to section b commissioner bryan you wanted to maybe explain I just point of clarification I think the letter numbering on the app does not line up with the letter numbering on agenda so I thought the chair was going letters on the agenda that's why I said a so just to clarify all right so actually again um the letters the factors that are in the agenda will be what we we we go through at the end of our position those are the factors for our guidance and the legal team will be walking us through that when we make our determination and those that is our framework and we will have a burden of substantial evidence generally except for the strength to suitability but for right now a is that just general application and we will then move to to section b and wondered mr. scanner I wonder if that's what was happening so thank you for the follow-up right now we're moving to the really the you know the substance of the application and there are several subsections b1 and b2 apply in this instance b3 and b4 do not those are for category three competence only so walking through each subsection and we'll have this is our first time doing this exercise so we are allowed to navigate carefully and well we're always nimble it's okay if it's a if we move back and forth we will get better as we go through this but right now b a is background is fourth wave drink everyone able to open that up b a oh one any questions madam chair I have a question that relates to I think section b overall um with respect to ppcs reliance on PSI pen interactive I assume is the same as pen sports interactive it's clear north in the application and in the presentation today that ppc is relying very heavily on the expertise of that entity um could you just describe a little bit more of the nature of the contractual relationship that ppc will hold with psi right um so commissioner scanner that will end up being an intercompany agreement uh whereby psi would provide certain services as a vendor to ppc um what I will say is that um I look at this relationship a lot the way I look at when we buy for example a slot machine right we don't have specific expertise in building slot machines or developing the math models that are there we rely on vendors to be able to provide technology um and into that you know to gli other vendors to look at what whether or not that equipment meets the criteria for the jurisdiction where we come into play is the operation the efficient operation of that equipment and so we look at this relationship very much in a similar way uh we don't have the ability or the expertise to go out for example and to create our own slot hardware that's just not something that that we develop so we use vendors to help support us in that situation um I will also say with regards to sports wagering that having a another party who manages the markets or the risk of the large wagering pools is fairly common within the industry and most folks use someone to help assist them in that process so is it accurate that psi will be operating the retail sports book for ppc it is not accurate they would be a vendor to plain ridge park um where they would provide certain services but all of the team members who are operating the book the people who are booking the bets the people who are um you know helping customers all those types of things will be plain ridge park casino team members who are licensed by the commission okay um the services that psi is providing to ppc does that include marketing services it does not advertising services okay does not so it's specifically with respect to um purchasing of equipment for sports wagering the kiosk for instance the wager display boards so they provide that equipment and then they also provide certain trading services so trading services are eventually the folks who set the lines for us who say this is the wagers you know this is the amount that this wager pays that type of pricing information is set by as a service by psi so think about it in terms of like the the math model behind the game or the slot machine unfortunately that's not a a fixed thing the way it is with a slot machine so there's somebody who manages that dynamically in the background and so psi would be new to the massachusetts market and not only will they be collaborating with ppc on your retail sports book but also i understand um although we haven't gotten there yet on your mobile sports book and so my question now then is for um our ieb team uh heather i think you're still on is we have the suitability report and i think i might be conflating suitability with the expertise and experience but generally um what is what is the commission's obligation with respect to review of suitability of psi as a potential qualifier for pen entertainment and or ppc because the current suitability report that we have before us does not mention psi nor does it mention this other entity that's reflected in the application uh pen interactive ventures so i just need some help trying to understand the relationship there for sure i'm prepared to answer that question if um if if you're looking for an answer for my eb please um uh johnson hall christini thank you thank you so i appreciate the commission um commissioner skinner's question i think one way uh to help in terms of miss uh commissioner skinner's question and this overall question is to look at this in terms of the steps that we are taking um and look at it as a step by step process um we have a executive summary before the commission today and um that executive summary has information in it that pertains to the suitability of ppc and its qualifiers and that suitability was determined after full investigations by the ieb in the context of the gaming license under the 23k umbrella um so in terms of the the step that we are at today there is the application for the category one sports wagering license for ppc now there is also the question about ps i's application that will come at a next step which is um ps i has applied for a category three sports wagering mobile application license um and they are considered a tethered um applicant to ppc as well as one other applicant um that will come before the commission with respect to the analysis of ps i's suitability i would just kind of go back to what general counsel grossman was saying earlier in that context we will be providing a report that reflects simply a review for preliminary suitability and that is based on um under the regulations that are promulgated by the common law the submissions by the applicant and its qualifiers um and also an open source review of both the applicant which is ps i um pen sports interactive and the individual qualifiers that are connected with that particular applicant um so that will be the category three step now it is it's kind of an um interesting dynamic in the sense that ps i is also a vendor but that said ps i is an applicant for category three mobile application license um so i just want to i hope that that kind of frames it in terms of going step by step and happy to answer any further questions about this or anything in the suitability um i know there are there are matters for discussion and i'm happy to be here uh with respect to any issues that the commissioners would like to um to discuss so i can probably chime in a little bit as to commissioner skinner's question it sounds as if mr skinner you're also asking about sort of operational competence as opposed to integrity honesty and good character is that that's sort of your question well that but more generally um what is what is the responsibility what is the commission's responsibility with respect to ps i given that it is a vendor of ppc will be uh procuring the sports wagering equipment on behalf of ppc i understand that we're reviewing ppc's category one application but i the way i read the application is that ps i is very very heavily intertwined um with with ppc and its sports wagering endeavor again we're talking about retail um but i also understand um that that ps i they may have a greater role on the mobile operations side so i'm just trying to understand how um we undertake a review of ppc's application given that we haven't really dove into ps i and i understand the nature of a contractual relationship um but to me because it's ps i that holds the contract with ppc's vendors they're exercising control over the operation to some extent so i'm just trying to understand how we how we process that and you do have the option as the chair mentioned earlier about uh you don't have to vote today you could make the decision to wait and get the information next week on the the tethered operator and that evaluation and do it all together so that certainly is a is probably a good option under these circumstances because you're correct there is sort of a connection there that might be helpful but i'll defer to the chair and the other commissioners how they want to vote thank you executive director well so um commissioner skinner you you've raised an important question um i want to turn to the other commissioners for their their questions um with respect to section b but i do want to give a general manager grounds out a chance to reply to perhaps add any further clarity around ps i which um i think it is a question that immediately jumps out at us because it does your your initial your initial section explains that uh that it will be this contract that will be required um to really operate its retail wagering operation yeah i think um you know i we we can certainly get into the the detail later on and you know i'm not able to speak to the the process the commission will follow to kind of make determinations on the the vendor ps i or on their category three application but broadly speaking i think the the thing to bear in mind here is that ps i is a wholly owned subsidiary of penn entertainment as is penner interactive and so ultimately you know a lot of the things that a lot of the resources that we're relying upon we're relying upon ourselves uh to be able to deliver so perhaps some commissioners that might be a good segue for us to continue on section b and then perhaps the pin in that issue and look more um perhaps think more deeply or take a deeper dive into suitability when we get to that that section commissioner brian commissioner hell commissioner maynard commissioner brian yeah no so there is an interplay here with the the upcoming cat threes and this applicant um i was using ps i narrowly in this particular context in terms of the applicant being um ppc um but i see commissioners skinner's point and i do think that some of the issues that i have and want to talk about circle back to the interplay with some of the marketing and some of the cat threes that we'll be dealing with next week so other other comments i viewed it as the same way madam chair is that you know if this were just in the cat one space um we may actually not get as much information as we're going to get because it is in the cat three space too so i think we're going to get a lot of information about ps i and uh look forward to um to hearing it thank you so as we continue through the um sections sub sections b1 um and and um b2 are there particular questions that you want to raise in addition to commissioner spares madam chair before we move on if i may i just want to i want to join the consensus um that i do you know that there's confidence in ppcs uh expertise and experience in in operating the retail sports uh majoring well thank you and again and i know that that's a factor but today's exercise right now this exercise is not to go through those precise factors it's rather to look at the applicant's response and the quality of it to see if we one want to get more information from them and please remember that is a possibility in all the subsections under section b if you want anything further we can ask um if if you want to applaud them for the quality of their answer this is a good time to and if you want to ask questions about the particular subsections this is the right time but we don't need to make our findings with respect to the factors laid out in subsection in our in item five on our agenda that will be something as again our our legal team will walk us through that very carefully because there's subsections to each of those factors in our regulation so we want to be um as much as i appreciate everyone's consensus on that and i think we have that we will revisit that fully okay so in terms of section b um but i'll i'll go ahead and then get get the ball rolling thank you commissioner skinner for your first question um it was alluded to this question um was alluded to by um rsm and and i may ask for for um then for choriza to come back on it because um in b2a i believe um general manager ground sale you do indicate that guests will be encouraged to sign up for the my choice players card in order to earn benefits and offers with each wage of place um i have a two part or maybe a three part question but i think three to use indicated that that the use of the loyalty program has been problematic and other jurisdictions could you comment on that more generally and then north i will be asking you to um to let us know really what is happening right now with the player card information and um and um whether or not it's being transferred to potential online sports wagering partners so that's really what i'm wondering what the status of that information is and then on the third question so choriza thank you again for earlier your your um your presentation and for your ongoing advice i'll just revisit briefly the challenges the operational challenges that are occurring in other jurisdictions so you have the the usually it's the operator the brick and mortar operator that's offering the retail sports book similar to how ppc has proposed um their operation they the the brick and mortar operator will provide staffing they do cashiering activities they monitor you know patron activity in the retail space and and support marketing efforts so what what what we thought proposed is very consistent with the rest of the industry um but there's a plot there's typically a third party platform provider so that's the actual um wagering platform that is managing the lines and managing um you know kind of the payout ratios and providing the technology that enables the retail sports book to offer the game so those third party platforms because of the explosive nature of the industry have often been built uh outside of i would say the traditional gaming it framework so what that means is that you have more i would say more heavily software driven companies versus traditional slot machines or table game type systems that have always understood the importance of having an integrated kind of or not always but have have evolved to understand the importance of an integrated players club loyalty program right so if you have a card at the table games and you earn points there you can also earn points at the slot machine and that's all under the umbrella of the traditional brick and mortar um environment so that's that that's that player loyalty program what we've seen in other jurisdictions is because you're bringing in a third party platform there's been a disconnect between the loyalty program at the sports book level and the loyalty program with the brick and mortar meaning that players may have two separate accounts they can't merge their accounts they can't combine points and while um that just may be the operational reality that the commonwealth may need may need to deal with i think it would be helpful for the commission to understand the applicant's approach to having um to to integrate either planning to integrate those loyalty programs or perhaps they already have an opportunity they've already integrated those and they don't anticipate any issues or they may they may have a six nine 12 month plan to work towards some sort of integration system and so that's just the industry overall and and that doesn't have any the application was was neutral to to any plans that ppc may have and whether these issues may or may not relate thank you yes if you'd like to sorry on on that issue madam chair we are already fully integrated so they're they're not two accounts for players all of their tier credits and all those types of things go to a single account so um that's really helpful to know that it really was more of an integration issue than something further um one question i'm struggling with uh and it might be something for you joe um for travisa as well as um the applicant um it's it's it's they for me to assume that in the sports wagering landscape across the country as um offers come online like just the position that we are in in astro juices that they um might be already cultivating their customer database so that when massachusetts um sports betting is actually legal our framework is in place those accounts are set up or am i assuming that they will pause and wait for that in other words across the country or could they be using their cultivating that database now to get massachusetts folks on board is that a landscape you're familiar with joe um generally in general that answers yes and that's pretty typical throughout the entire game industry whether it's brick and mortar digital sports betting online anywhere uh you know the the big corporations that uh dominate the landscape have larger databases and when they move into new markets they're able to onboard customers uh quickly it's you know pretty kind of standard standard stuff so to speak yep so that's right so what about they're setting up can they also set up their sports wagering accounts that customers could they do that in advance of our um technically there's nothing just there to stop them uh depending how the operator has it's set up uh yes would they make deposits to as well as well technically there's nothing there to stop that as well yep any in your experience do regulators um include regulations that would preclude deposits until um i would have to specifically look up that uh off the top of my head i can't answer with confidence um but i want to say uh not usually uh but i i will follow up with something specific there um so um north now just ask if if that's something that you know whether it's happening with respect to um uh ppc and its anticipated other partners uh so at this point we didn't believe that the commission had made a determination yet on preregistration it is something that some other jurisdictions have allowed but at this point we thought that was an open issue thank you and in fact i i i think it may be commissioners an open issue um for us to consider the risks attached to that um so uh i see both joe and kevin if you're chiming in this yeah so i got your answer back already okay and the answer is uh no there's no other jurisdiction to actually uh disallows that money deposited in in what they call a single user type account um and quite often operators will also use a preregistration process uh where the market is not technically open uh for taking bets yet but they do allow uh onboarding knowing that it's coming uh where they'll use um uh you know promotion or the marketing team will use promotions you know sign up now capture you know their username and or first, last and email uh and then post the launch of the actual sports betting or application now this is mostly going to deal with mobile and cat three when it comes to retail it's going to be more anonymous betting over the counter so uh specifically with the mobile operations that deal with like a single sign-on concept you have one username one email one account and when you enter that specific jurisdiction you can launch to bet uh within that that you're geolocated uh your KYC know your customer verified uh within that jurisdiction and and that will all happen before you can actually place a wager yeah and madam chair if i could uh take a moment to address um the larger issue of this these closely monitored network of third-party service providers um not only is it the norm it's it's a good thing um and it is not unusual not only in the gaming industry but in other areas of highly regulated KYC like financial services um we're highly dependent on those third-party experts um just like you are with i mean as an example you have an expert niche industry in geolocation you have a net expert niche industry in payment providers and so the fact that the operators are using this portfolio of service providers is is good and you know one of the frustrations from a regulatory perspective with traditional land-based casino is the largely the the the ability to generally gamble gamble anonymously with cash um that is what is so good about uh the online delivery channel is that unlike when you walk into a casino i don't know who you are i don't know how old you are i don't know where you're from i don't know where your money came from i don't know anything about your player history you're largely able to kind of go there in a ghost-like fashion that's impossible in an online environment where i know exactly who you are i know where you are i know how old you are i know where your money came from i know your entire player history and now i can provide you with a lot more tools to be able to manage your behavior you can you can set limits for how much time you spend gambling you can set daily and weekly or monthly limits for how much you spend um but that's all dependent on these expert service providers um so just want to emphasize that it's it's it's the norm and i think there are tremendous regulatory benefits to it um the the right the the new regulatory skills that are needed is the ongoing operational risk control of of that whole more dynamic process and that's what i think we've emphasized in the gli university training and that your staff and the commission i think is embracing so that's very tough on i think i i want to just um um then uh general um manager uh uh carl zell north um you have said that you are waiting to see if there's a determination from the um the gaming commission of this issue and so we want to be able to provide that guidance uh whether it's through um an internal control a a reg um whatever is appropriate i think um commissioners i'm hearing it's the landscape i'm not surprised by that i i have to say i had some equity issues in mind as the retail um entities are standing up they have direct access to new customers but as i understand it probably any potential sports operator in massachusetts could be in fact cultivating their customer database as well as loading the customer's potential wallet um virtual or like the electronic wallet so i i think that was a little bit of a policy issue in my mind um kevin whether there's any equity issues here but it sounds as though this is the general landscape and i guess what i'm hearing is that from um because of the third party um experts that are giving um the guidance to the operators the risks are low to the consumer i think allowing allowing sign up for all the operators at this point is a pretty low risk because they're not able to go live it it avoids some some bottlenecks and some some rush that um you know can you know they're certainly capable of handling it but it's always better to do this over time and the risk of doing something inappropriate or wrong is so so grave that i think the operators would be very conservative in how they implemented those those pre sign ups but it's certainly a policy decision for the commission there's no technical reason to to to say yes and no technical reason to say no it's just a it's just your preference okay um no it's did you want to comment no the only thing i would say um you know at this point is obviously it's a you know an ongoing issue will continue to watch it and look for the commission's direction okay um commissioners i don't know if you have any comments on that but i'm of course looking at general counsel grossman how we would proceed here if we need to give a little bit more guidance to our our application here well i i made a note that this would be a good subject to discuss as part of any license condition perhaps that's one way to address it and then of course generally we can adopt a regulation that encapsulates whatever policy position the commission would like to take as kevin just laid out of course there should be uniformity across the landscape with whatever the decision is but i think it can be handled in either or both of those ways and i would also add on councillor grossman that i understand that it's it's difficult because we're penn is involved in the name of like all the entities that are involved in this but we do not offer our account based wagering at the retail level so um people can certainly sign up for a my choice card today um at our property in order to establish an account but they're not able to load any dollars onto that account at the retail level as it exists currently thank you yeah okay commissioners do you have other questions on on section b of the application madam chair just relative to the landscape can i ask joe to repeat his opening line in his answer to your question i only got there's no other jurisdiction that disallows and that i didn't hear the rest of what you said there depositing okay thank you mr. maynard i just want to follow up on that point that you brought up and it's very important madam chair a vote that i took earlier this year was conditioned on tackling this issue um that was when there was a request to reopen the timeline the reason that i did not reopen is that i wanted to make sure that we set a level playing field going forward for for everyone category one two and three and what i'm hearing from kevin today is that maybe the easiest way to set that level playing field is to let everyone start to curate the state of now so um you know i don't know again i was kind of confused by the back and forth between you and councillor grossman on how we're going to settle that that issue if it's going to be in a separate meeting if we're going to have that open discussion but um that is something that is important to me is to make sure that we do address that equity issue that is real and doesn't exist thank you and uh commissioner maynard we also i got another inquiry from another perspective like sportsway during licensing on the same thing so they are they are wondering what the parameters of the commission will be thank you so um good it's something for us to address and and uh and i like the idea that we can uh consider it in our our determination discussions okay other questions for um in section b um can you remind me if the issues around the overview of wagering activity is um concerning to um for the purposes of redactions nor is that something that they have so i i think with regards to the specifics of how we made determinations around wagering volume um or activity those those things would be the the nature of how we came about those and the actual numbers themselves we would consider to be trade secrets um you know if if we want to talk generically about those and and uh the basis for them i would just say that it's based on our experience of other jurisdictions with similar population sizes um and and kind of what we've seen happen but again all of those estimates are really at this point just estimates they're the best they're the best we have um and i think you know many of us have seen through launches and other jurisdictions that sometimes those estimates are spot on sometimes they're high sometimes they're low um but they they are our best estimates and in terms of offerings this is a um an operational question for us and you know you happen to be at the beginning so i'll ask these operational questions and see we've learned from other jurisdictions um and this is also for our experts um rsm and um gli that we know that you're going to comply with the offerings under 23 and restrictions i think we understand that that's clear in your application but with respect to the offerings um generally when a a stake is launching um um sports weight training retail and otherwise do you find have you found that given the extensive extensive um number of states now that provide this that they launch with an extensive offering like the one that you're suggesting or is it a practice to um perhaps have a less but compress that list of offerings as we roll out sports ranger the traditional approach has um been on a larger catalog of events that are approved by the commission um so again the keywords being there approved by the commission so obviously we um have worked with some of the other operators to suggest to the ieb a catalog that we think is is um a reasonable catalog to uh to launch with um based on you know knowledge that we have around certain markets and what we think uh players will want to be betting on um but again we uh so there's there's unanimity I believe amongst the operators about what that should look like but uh full recognition that ultimately that's the commission's decision Teresa do you want to weigh in on that at all in terms of I don't know um if that's outside of what you've been looking at we we reviewed the listing as proposed and then we certainly didn't cross-reference it from a regulatory perspective just assuming an alignment with the the gaming commission's guidance on acceptable offerings I will say that you know sports book you know sports book is reliant the success of a sports book is reliant upon volume of wagers right so if you only offer a few options that creates maybe a limited amount of interest for the public well why should I go out of my way to wager on this so I'm gonna wager on a game that yeah I'll just go you know wager on that with my buddies while I watch the game you know kind of off off the books kind of um mechanism I think the the value to the public for sports wagering is offering fair regulated gains that provide a variety of interesting options to uh wager on and see that entertainment and excitement from games so we'll we'll traditionally see um a little bit more comprehensive offering listing uh you know there's there's traditional bets and then there's in-game bets and parlay bets and there's some other mixtures of offerings that we will see from variation between jurisdiction note that the the more offerings you provide will traditionally increase the win win rate you know if you have a have an operator or a platform that's monitoring the lines well people will will make wagers that are to the benefit of the commonwealth and to the operator versus just you know straight head to head games where you know the lines are just they they have to monitor those lines really closely and so the the whole percentage of whole percentages are typically a lot less very helpful depends on the experience yeah the experience you want to provide the the public would be what the gaming gaming commission would would need to consider very helpful um I think I'm all set on that question anything else on on section b commissioners okay then we'll move on to section oh um at this point let's just do take a consensus that if you don't have any further questions for anyone on any of section b do we find that it um that the applicant has um has not met has met or has exceeded um um uh expectations with respect to fulfilling the application any any I would I would share with you madam chair that I think they have met what they needed to do for section b and I'm comfortable with what they put in their application and I was just going to add uh with your last um your comment regarding what would be available for betting and things of that sort is I went through that list and I'm very comfortable with what they have put forth uh for for the sports that would be bet on um until we have that discussion of course um but they were they were basically what we would look at for for betting and what sports we would probably look to uh can I make one quick note on that as the general industry what might seem extensive to a new jurisdiction may not be to a jurisdiction that has been doing it for 30 plus years like say Nevada uh so while this list um may seem uh big uh at first site uh I can assure you that the amount and Nevada has a uh a commission approval process similar throughout the entire industry so the amount of uh types of bets uh prices offerings and events that have come across a more mature jurisdiction that will make that list look actually probably small and what I'm hearing Joe and Kevin is that there's not um particular need or risk for um newer jurisdictions to start with a more compressive as you haven't seen that and that was helpful for me to hear um yes and Kevin say okay that is contrary to what we or some of us had heard well that's not on discussion yeah yeah I mean in the end it's the it's the commission's approval as yeah understood right I think it's I feel comfortable would be we feel comfortable with the commissioner Brian I'm saying narrowly on the question of my comfort level of did they satisfy um the requirements for me for a day yes they did I also agree Madam Chair that they did meet those uh requirements for Section B thank you and Commissioner Maynard you're all sent same for the record okay and I am too so we'll move on to see I am watching the time commissioners let's try to get through another another section before we pause um and navigating my system here there we go so section C has a number of component subsections and they all apply it will be to except for D4 to um a category of on applicant this is um we can go through each section or if I can just hear particular questions that might be helpful do I have any particular questions I do Madam Chair I'm sure everybody has this question which is when you're talking about North you went through sort of your anticipated increase and sort of the FTEs for putting in a sports book and then the bar area and RSM raised this as well but I had this question also which is can you compare that to sort of what your food and beverage FTE count was pre-covid what the expectations were is this going to be a net ad or those numbers 10 to 15 37 to 45 net ads over pre-covid or is that adding to what you're at right now um thank you for the question um Commissioner O'Brien those numbers are based on where we are right now I mean obviously we didn't have sports wagering before um so for the sports book those are a net ad for the sports bar those would be roughly equivalent they might be off by by one or two but they're they're roughly equivalent okay so the the net gain if you go back pre-covid is like the 10 to 15 sports wagering specific correct okay and that and that is consistent with what we've seen in in other jurisdictions and as I said in the presentation there there are some instances in which you know it's going to be a really busy season for example NFL season tends to be you know in college football tends to be a really busy season and so we'll probably use more team members than that during that time period um and then as things ramp down in the summer um you know you're likely to see that it maybe goes back to more to that core group um but we would expect that though those volumes will the number of team members involved will fluctuate and especially you know there there may be a period of time in which retail is the the option prior to online I would expect in that period that there will probably be an initial bump um so we've tried to provide our best estimates of what we think those numbers will be understanding that there will be variations that happen okay thank you you're welcome other questions for sub for section C commissioner skitter are you in thank you north with respect to your recruitment efforts um what do you intend to do differently as I understand it the fluties um bar has been closed uh since COVID as a result of COVID and has remained closed since um I think in your presentation earlier you specifically uh said that you believe employment of your female population will improve as a result of the opening of the sports book there um why do you think that is in again very specifically what what do you intend to do differently um to recruit for that space so the main thing that I would say is that the the primary reason of why we believe that it would increase the percentage of women is that that outlet traditionally had a higher percentage of women involved in it so we believe that that is likely to happen um in that outlet with regards to our recruiting efforts what I would say is that um I think that if you look at the most recently reported jobs figures um you'll you'll see there's a large increase you know some of the most net jobs added within the country over the past few months have been in the hospitality and leisure sectors so we feel a little bit more confident that that is going to become a little bit easier for us I will say that there are a number of things that we have done internally to begin um you know to make sure that our processes are really working well for team members and or potential team members and making sure that we are getting folks through our process quickly enough um and so I I think in this area I would say our belief has really built more upon just the generally improving business conditions in the labor markets that are evident more broadly um and that you know our recruitment efforts will will continue thank you and and one of the things we we have added I'm sorry just one of the things that we have added recently is we did make all of our team members benefit eligible on their first day of employment so rather than having to go through their normal waiting period we've also provided some hiring bonuses some other things like that um you know to to continue to be an attractive employer for potential employees. Madam Chair? Yes, Michelle. North if I read the application correct and I think during your presentation you also said you're going to continue working with your community colleges you're going to continue working with your chamber of commerce that what you have been doing but um I want to hear from you right now you're going to continue doing that and um getting these numbers up a little bit. Yeah absolutely we we certainly will and and we've had some relationships with um some local colleges and universities that have proved fruitful for us in bringing in interns um you know we've seen a very healthy mix male female diverse candidates um with that group and so we'll we'll obviously continue in that direction. Michelle Maynard. Thank you Madam Chair um so you did bring this up earlier north about as Commissioner Skinner said increasing female workforce I know that percentages are hard to get as in my prior career I also had to work with this same issue. Is PPC committed to making sure that these jobs are management level jobs I know that you have management system management level jobs and full-time jobs or is this going to be heavily weighted on on weight staff and entry level jobs? So there'll be a mixed commissioner Maynard of those obviously the the largest number will be at the the entry level because that's just where we need the majority of people to be able to serve guests. On the management side and and the supervisory side you know we'll continue our commitment to make sure that we are bringing in diverse candidates into the pool and that we are also promoting people from within who've shown the aptitude to be able to take over management positions the emerging leader program being a great example of that. Thank you. And just to add I'm sorry again we we report to you on a quarterly quarterly basis with regards to our supervisor and above diversity figures male female diverse candidates veterans etc and like I said at the you know one of the things that is a joy about working at this property is that we have the benefit on my executive team of being able to say not only are we at those numbers that we are for the entire property we're we're beating them so whereas our goal is 15 percent for diverse population overall our executive team is 20 and whereas our goal is 50 women on the exact team we're at 60. Thank you other questions focused on labor and workforce development do we want to move on then and to other questions in section C are there other questions? Madam Chair it's not a question for the applicant but more of a request I guess to you and our Chief of the Gaming Agents Division I'm wondering if we could hear from Bruce Band kind of letting us know what what the involvement of IEB has been in PBC's proposal to expand the gaming area build out this this space for the new sports book and and what and what we should expect as a commission going forward as we consider this application excellent excellent question again I don't want to put Assistant Director Dan on the spot he hasn't redoed the application so this isn't about evaluating the application but we know he's been busy so yes thank you. I've reviewed the plans and everything we've been working very closely with PBC on this so far everything in their plans look great from our view they've kind of started construction as far as clearing the area on that the plans look good they've been 100 cooperative with everything that we've asked of them and we have no concerns at this point. Do you have any specific questions? Perhaps just to add on perhaps ultimately as I understood today there would be a request from PBC for an expansion of the gaming area in order to build this out did I miss hear that Director Band? That would be for the final part with the flu dis addition yes that that would be initially for the temporary that that wouldn't really be the case. So that would need to come to us? Yes. Just to clarify Bruce there's no requirement to get commission approval to expand the gaming area for the temporary space that's actually on the casino floor itself. Okay okay I okay so it's not within the existing. It's a final product that expands the area. Okay thanks that was an important clarification. Yes. I have another question and North if you don't want to answer this you can get back to me but are you going to keep the the handberry pass footprints? You know it's so funny it took me it took me probably three months before I noticed that football which is bad notice the football is hanging from the ceiling and heard the story but it is a it's an interesting part of the facility. I don't know if the footprints will remain but we'll we'll definitely get back to you with an answer. Okay thanks. Fun memories I remember the game yeah oh yes yes and we'll forgive um forgive you North for that three months lapse. I'm surprised that that wasn't the first thing that Burke and Bruce pointed out to you when when they um they met you. I don't know how long an outsider took to notice. Yeah. But he's no longer outsider and on Massachusetts. Okay I know I have a question that I'm not sure if it's again a protective question but I did hear from RSM that they are comfortable with the projected revenue in terms of their extrapolation but in in the documents are also some tax implications that were made. Are we comfortable? We are at some point going to be addressing promo play. I think we have that marked up for the December 12th meeting in the afternoon. North um if you this is protected we will take the steps necessary but can you advise as to whether your calculations have assumed even though I know you know it's not a determination has it assumed a deduction for promo play. I will be happy to cover that in exact session. I know that that's an open question with the commission at this point. Commissions do do you want to wait until the 12th for that or is that um I'm sure that you saw that what I saw and I wasn't sure if it was all protected or not in terms of the tax calculation um do you want if it's important for us to understand those documents better then we can meet in executive session after the lunch on on perhaps there are other issues that I don't know um council Grossman if we decide uh that there might be a few items if that's permissible to go into executive sessions um consecutively if we want further clarification. As long as we're precise as to what we're going into executive session for I think you could do multiple subjects at the same time. Madam chair yes may I suggest that we might want to wait till the 12th because I think once we have our discussion once we make a decision then I think all of the licensees before us may have to readjust their numbers. That would be my suggestion. I'm fine with that that we could wait for the 12th and then I wasn't sure where Northwick's on on this issue so thank you. That's fine with me and I'm fine with the the documents that I've reviewed for the understanding that I think I understand the calculations. Can I ask one more question about the temporary space? I don't think RSM noted anything about the temporary space. Teresa you're off right now but if one of your colleagues is available did did construction of the temporary space raise any concerns for you that would be where they would launch for the school? Yeah no just to revisit a bit about what we previewed in our opening remarks we had no concerns over the construction the big issues right now in the gaming and hospitality space as it relates to construction our supply chain issues and those are primarily based around the the construction the building the actual building material based upon our limited review or our limited review and the limited information provided in the application it does not appear that there's any major structural issues or highly specialized equipment that would impact the ultimate opening of the the facility from a construction perspective. There may be delays as it relates to custom furniture and fixture type matters but based upon our experience with other hospitality driven organizations you can often find temporary replacements in order to accommodate the opening in a timely manner and then once those specialized fixtures or or furniture comes in you can you can replace those so I think the it's very likely that the operator will be able to open the facility with the proposed timelines and obviously meeting any safety obligations that they may have. And that's a good segue for me because this is the bottom line question assistant director Van you were part of advising the commission in an earlier meeting where Commissioner O'Brien raised quite rightly the concern around access to kiosks it was concentrated on the the racing area but we also want to make sure that only of age patrons make their way to the kiosks do you anticipate north having I think Bruce imagine some kind of roping off where there would be security to ID anyone who has access to the kiosk does that temporary space imagine that or are you imagining something different. Thank you madam chair the temporary space is within existing gaming space near the revolution lounge so as with the permanent location they would have to pass through the security podium in order to access that space which means all folks who get back there would be presumed to be 21 years of age or higher. So no need for any kind of and and everyone is comfortable the surveillance will be of course over the kiosk and then I did hear you say with respect to the permanent would be on expanded gaming floor so that would uh Bruce does that suit what you were envisioning that has been there on the gaming floor we're all set yes yes okay. Commissioner Maynard. So I have a question related to to that into the construction in general I am not an expert in temporary cages or fences or moving about money um Bruce is probably a question for you is this pretty standard if you direct a temporary cage for the record Bruce showed me how to get through a hole in a cage once so maybe that's the reason this conversation is. Are you comfortable with the temporary structure as is and as is right. North and I have discussed that in detail and he's agreed to make whatever modifications we needed to that cage or to be safe and secure thank you. Okay other questions in um section C this of course includes community engagement it includes um as as Commissioner Maynard referenced the um security issues which we do know that IEB will working will work very very closely with the um licensees on Madam Chair. Yes. So I'm just trying to understand North and I'm looking at I think C5 I think we can talk about that one if I'm not mistaken. Yeah so right now you guys do a phenomenal job reaching out to the community you work with community groups um you've shown us that with your quarterly updates so what I'm trying to envision or understand we're bringing in sports betting which brings in more revenue but how does that enhance community involvement which is something that I care deeply about right do you understand what I'm trying to get at um so I mean we certainly we're going to continue to be a good local partner right I mean we we are engaged across the number of different entities you know we mentioned two of them today being New Hope um and Boston Pearl but we're also intimately involved um with the town of Plainville with the town of North Attleboro with the Attleboro Norton YNCA with the United Regional Chamber of Commerce the Tritown Chamber of Commerce the New Colony Habitat for Humanity we're actually we'll be talking about this on our next update but we are a large sponsor of their most recent habitat build so I mean I think a lot of the types of things that you've seen from us in terms of being a good partner within the community will will continue and you know generally look as as we as we do well our surrounding communities do well um and you know we I think that we have a demonstrated uh commitment in that area and I don't foresee that changing and I think you just answered my question in your last uh second or two so thank you very much thank you madam chair thank you I want to point out that section C does um address Massachusetts Lottery Commission um and I want to point out that I know that PPC has um does report quarterly to us on its partnership which was at the lottery under 23k there's an affirmative statutory provision that our gaming licensees are to to ensure that the casinos and the lottery work hand in hand and not in somehow competitive fashion and I want to point out that PPC you've had an excellent record on that front and and and the reporting and and I I do think you answered that in a way that I feel was sincere that you will work for the benefit of the lottery going forward in a way that that will support what was clearly established in 23k and what we have now made by policy at least a paramount objective for us so thank you on that I like your answer thank you madam chair I have a question based on that if you don't mind sure thank you north does the MOU that was included this will that cover sports wagering also is sufficient to do that or will that have to be reopened uh Mr. Maynard I believe that that one will be covered by the MOU that we have with the lottery um you know we're bringing in a new amenity but our relationship with the lottery remains um and so I I believe that it's covered okay thank you mishers other questions for um section C oh if you don't mind that's okay um north just curious the number of ticket windows is dropping from um five in the temporary space to four in the permanent space why is that I think probably um so our final plans have not been determined for the the final space I would say that's largely based on our experience and other jurisdictions of what happens when online betting comes into play um that you know initially there is a kind of a push or a rush as it were um that that may happen and then as online wagering kicks in that that volume at the retail level may diminish so um you know again I think this is one where uh a lot of times we make predictions and that there are very best guesses and sometimes those um you know are high sometimes they're low and sometimes they're right on but based on what we've seen in other jurisdictions we think that's right I'll just say from uh I'm going to put on my my hardcore operator hat here and say that you know nothing frustrates patron more than having a line and seeing three empty spaces um in there you know occasionally lines happen in our business just because 15 people decide to come in all at once in an unpredicted time of day um and so we always want to try and match our available volume to the anticipated uh demand um but the the net reduction of one is really just that anticipation um uh Commissioner Skinner that we we think that after retail goes live um I mean after the online goes live there will probably be a diminishment in demand at the retail level and that makes a lot of sense and but um speaking of traffic and volume um you indicated in the application that you uh PPC will engage the local police department um for periods of extraordinary volume are you able to anticipate in advance when what those periods might be when it comes to sports wagering so that that particular um engagement of the local police force you know we we do that now um you know for example we do have Plainville detail that's on site during Kentucky Derby um you know other high volume business days we do bring additional detail if we think that our own security staff will be insufficient based on our experience and other jurisdictions we do have thoughts about days and times that we think that there will be increased volume and increased interest from a player perspective some of those will be things that are um easy to anticipate and know going forward um you know so you know a period during certain tournaments for March Madness for example or bowl games may be a time of intense wagering activity some of them will be ones that will a game will pop up with particular significance that was not predicted um a particular team gets knocked out of a tournament and therefore a local team um passes through to a tournament or something like that that can be something where we have less of a one month lead time on but more of a hey we got a couple days um to be able to to figure that out um and in those instances we'll continue to work with the local fire and police departments on making sure that we're ready to serve thank you thank you madam chair i did have another question but i'll i'll yield to my fellow commissioners if there is a another question from either of them um my only outstanding question i will wait until we get to the technical component but it really if it does build on your earlier question about psi and the integration of camby into their role of monitoring and setting the line and how it's integrated into staff so we had similar questions um i'll hold on that i it was prompted by the job descriptions that are provided for your your your manager position so if you allow me to revisit that our tech um commissioner skinner your next question yeah this manager i'm i'm so very sorry may i please nakisha i'm sorry um commissioner skinner um i just wanted to add with regards to the who makes the determination ultimately of whether a wager is accepted or not falls within ppc's ability that's that's all ultimately our decision to say we will either accept this wager or not you know whether the betting market is available that decision exists with staff at property and i apologize for interrupting the commissioner skinner that's a really good clarification because i thought i saw camby was setting the line and maybe i misread it but your job description i don't think includes that so i don't know if it's above the manager and it's going to be in your other executive team that does that but um so maybe it is helpful to just clarify that commissioner skinner thank you for your patience so is that and is that a group decision or is that going to be that new position that you're you're going to be so i mean ultimately that'll fall within the management of of the staff that that manages that area right um you know a market could be open um from the perspective of our risk manager being camby and an individual at the property could make a determination that um they do not want to accept this wager from this patron um it could be that they meet a certain criteria that set out in terms of they're not um allowed to place that wager either by virtue of their self-exclusion or a provision in the law that says you know a league has said that they do not want them to be able to wager on an individual event um those determinations it could be based on the fact that somebody believes that there is a title 31 concern with regards to that patron that they may want to exercise discretion to not accept that wager um ultimately you know again camby is there to facilitate the market for us um and and i would say you know kind of leading into the comments made um by gli you know generally markets that are larger are more efficient um from a lay from a from a perspective of a player having access to a much larger market or risk manager like a ps i through camby um is one that is ultimately in the best interest of the player if lines are set upon a very small betting pool within a very localized market um those that pricing that may be available to the guest may vary and be very volatile um and and also may not be the best pricing that's available so that's that's kind of part of the reason that that we see that ultimately is a good thing but again just you know to the extent that there's comfort that the commission has with ppc and with the licensees at the property um you know those decisions ultimately lie here um you know if somebody uh accepts a wager that they shouldn't it's going to fall to the staff here and not not to a vendor and so we'll learn more about camby's role in the monitoring um in the next section but it's really helpful to know um about that thank you right now commission it's better thank you for your patience i'm sure no problem um this next question could easily fall uh under a couple of sections of the application so if it makes sense um to ask it again later i'm happy to do that um it pertains to responsible gaming and uh how that works at kiosks because i understood from an earlier discussion um from uh folks at gli that kiosk wagering is anonymous did i hear that correctly you can kind of view a kiosk uh as a system that works very closely like the point of sale without a person it's just as a digital interface you put money in get kicked a ticket out whereas you're not going up to a person say give me a hundred dollars on the Celtics tonight you're basically putting a hundred dollars in and pressing a button give me a hundred dollars on the Celtics tonight and the kicks ticket out so it's the exact same sorry go ahead joe like that so it just it works exactly the same as a like a point of sale of the countertype system it's just digital so as a body i i know we have quite a bit of of work to do on the responsible gaming side as it pertains to sports wagering um but what ppc has indicated in its application is that a lot of the measures that are in place on the gaming side will also be applicable on the sports wagering side and i just if we could talk a little bit about how that works with respect to kiosks commissioner skinner i this is one where um there's some federal legislation here that i want to make sure that i don't um violate so i would love to cover this one and i give you a very fulsome answer in executive session i i definitely have an answer to your question and can give you some i think some comfort on this point thank you nor you're welcome so we've identified um one area where it would require an executive session uh i'm wondering before now commissioner skinner that this is an area as a body that we need to be exploring i believe um executive director wells that director vanderland is not necessarily available right now he is here he is here you know so i don't i don't know if he could answer your question more generally um in terms of uh how our g and kiosk relate and um and whether we would explore maybe perhaps some more sensitive information as i do but i'm i really because i'm not sure what exactly you're thinking about i want to make sure you're satisfied just okay um we've got director vanderland and now good afternoon uh commissioners commissioner skinner do you just um i'm not sure if i invited um mark in the is it helpful to at least let him know the um the question that you asked to excellent one sure i'll take whatever we've got right now um until we can get to executive session um mark i'm just wondering um given that um wagering at kiosks is um an anonymous sort of process as joe just described how do we attach the responsible gaming principles and measures that we have in place on the gaming side um to those kiosks so for example if someone is on the self exclusion uh uh list um what tbc is saying is that um and i cannot remember the exact terminology and it's possible i could be confusing this with another application but when you're excluded from one you're excluded from them all so if that is the the plan how does that work at a kiosk where the operator could potentially not know who is placed at wager so um you know i think that first the gaming commission is moving forward with a proposed regulation that would separate sports wagering voluntary self exclusion from casino self exclusion and it's up to the licensee then to determine whether they want to blanket exclude an individual if they're on one list they would be essentially excluded from casino and sports wager that's that's my understanding of it though um that may not be the case depending on how the commissioner weighs in on this um you know an individual on the voluntary self exclusion list currently um can walk into a casino there's there there is id check for some patrons walking through but there isn't necessarily a positive id check or they don't run it across the voluntary self exclusion list every time somebody walks into the casino so i think that there would be a corollary to that um in terms of placing a bet from a kiosk i think i i look forward to a further discussion but when i think that in general from kiosk there needs to be information um related to game sense related to responsible gaming that would be on the kiosk so general information um players that are gambling with a player card um my play card um should have access to a full range of um limit setting options um that and the commission will be discussing uh those what that entails um in an upcoming meeting um through regulation thank you mark and and i i gathered that you would want to make sure that of course some of the tools that are available on the king floor would be available in at the retail sports featuring um facility but the window and and the um kiosk and then generally but you know if you've raised a um a point of inquiry so if um we could just pin that um possibility going to executive session commissioner skinner is that okay that is okay okay thank you other questions for section c commissioner it is 140 and our next um section is section b where we start to look at the responses from diversity equity and inclusion we then uh go into for the next will be um e is responsible gaming which includes advertising plans technology and then g is suitability i know we have counselor paul available i want to make sure that she is still available then finally we go to the financial stability which we've had we've heard from rsn so we have a good deal ahead of us commissioners we can continue to go in alphabetical order i also will entertain whether or not you would like to shift to out of order as long as we get through each um but before we move from c and then take perhaps a lunch break i do just want to go through um the exercise of finding whether we have a consensus on this section so c um i see commissioner hill is saying it meets at the very least commissioner brian yes i agree excellent commissioner skinner we also agreed that's our maynard agree okay thank you for your submission on this respect to um section c north and your responses and to uncle helped guide that discussion i think we should break now it's 141 um to 210 for a half an hour does that work for you commissioners um it it is um going to be a long day i think um but a very fruitful uh exercise will come back a little bit renewed 210 and should we start with diversity commissioners there's something to think about i'll be flexible when we start off if you have a different ordering line okay thank you so much thanks day now some are here in the office may have let's go get lunch right so again commissioners we are reconvening our messages gaming commission meeting number 406 today and because we're holding it virtually i'm going to do a roll call thank you commissioner brian good afternoon i am here good afternoon thank you uh commissioner hill i'm here commissioner skinner good afternoon i'm here the commissioner maynard i am here great thank you so much we'll move on here we are on agenda item number five and we just completed uh section c of the application of ppc if we like we can move right to um diversity equity and inclusion in section d unless you feel we should go out of order well set okay then with respect to um um the section d you have questions for north or or questions for our team gli or commissioner brian if i could um so i want to start this off by saying that um you know since i've been here i've always been impressed with ppc's ability to to work on their numbers for the dei numbers and in particular laud you for the the program that you do to sort of advance women within the organization i know you've you've lost some people to other pen properties because of how well you guys have done and i want to start off with that um we touched a little bit when i think um commissioner hill asked you a little bit about sort of the women and what kind of positions they're going to have when you bring back the food and beverage um i did want to touch on the supplier diversity i know that when i first got to the commission the the local spend at some of that was a little higher i'm just wondering if you could speak to um the supplier diversity in your application um so on the supplier diversity um i think that again we we would consider any spend related to this some of it will be things that are not part of qualified spend because they come from a sole source some of them would be things clearly that um do not so for example um if i am using a certain company to provide my kiosks that's a sole source that i'm not able to to boot out so it wouldn't fall within the qualified spend piece but there's certainly other aspects um that that we use with regards to that and then um you know i think within what you should expect from this that all of this gets lumped in that you know our our overall spend commissioner o'brien i i think to the extent i can give you any comfort i can tell you that i meet monthly with our finance team um or with our procurement team to make sure that we are on top of our diverse spend and that we don't get behind it the worst thing to me that could happen as we come to you to present for a quarter and you know i get to the end of the quarter and figure out that we missed a goal by a percent or two um you know i want to know early so that we can react differently and and um i will tell you that really this is one of those things that's part of those daily operations that you know part of the reason i get to be able to report the good numbers here is that we've got a team here on property who works very diligently to develop that diverse supplier vendor base and that we continue on that route with regards to the the local spend some of it this is kind of a function of what is considered a surrounding community with on our surrounding community and agreements um there's obviously a lot of towns that surround us here um but there's only a certain number of ones that we have surrounding community agreements with and so some of those things fall into a massachusetts spend that aren't specifically designated as local but they're still within the commonwealth um and so again you know we um that being said it's still a goal that we have it's one that we work diligently to achieve um you know i think we've we've got a decent history here and um i wouldn't expect anything different from us going forward thanks welcome other questions for um general manager grousa on diversity not a question madam chair comment um i do note that um there was a 13 increase in diversity spend from 2020 into 2021 so just kudos there and and and hopefully that will continue to create increase excuse me over time with the introduction of sports ledgering to the commonwealth thank you other comments or questions question maynard just a comment that um you know i love the league program the new hope program pro foundations you mentioned earlier um and and really the work that you're doing to put folks into college and including the children of your staff members and i just really wanted to highlight that i noticed that in in the application i appreciate it thank you commissioner maynard we actually had in the inaugural year one of our team members children win the large prize so we have one large prize that's a several large prizes that are $40,000 uh scholarships so $10,000 each year for four years um and that went to the child of a current team member who is diverse um and is pursuing education within the commonwealth so we were really glad and i believe in a stem field at least when he initially entered so um we're really excited to be a part of that i'd also be remiss on this part if i didn't have erin she's far too modest to bring this up on her own so i'm going to have to prompt her to talk a little bit about the work that she's involved with in regards to women leading at pen more broadly within the pen organization we here at the property level actually you know absolutely have female executives who are involved in that program but erin has done a lot of work in that space too and i thought i might give her just a moment or two to talk a little bit about that program hi erin erin i don't know if you're on new um a little uh tech issues here are you speaking out erin she is but she's not sometimes if it's muted on your keyboard you won't be able to hear you yeah i'll vamp while she's does that and tell you that she does amazing work um she and and when well wendy hamilton our senior vice president of human resources um we actually both go back quite a ways um probably about almost um probably 20 years that we've known each other um and wendy and erin have been very passionate about the women leading at pen program and ultimately the goal there is to make sure that women understand that they are wanted um in leadership ranks we find that their instances in which women um in the company have felt uh at least in the past that there wasn't a path for them to get to an executive level um and so a lot of what we do is letting them know that we do want them to be involved in those executive roles we do support the talents and the things they bring to the table and encourage them um by making sure that they get good mentors who are people at higher levels in the organization who have navigated um that world and so that's um we can certainly maybe let erin come back later when she can get some some time there but again it's something that we take um you know any consideration we were out in las vegas recently uh for the gaming show and um you know they actually a couple of the gm self included said hey you know i i really would like to know what's going on with this program and how it is that you know are there additional things that i as a leader can do um to to support the mission of women leading at pen um you know i don't want to i need to know from a general manager's perspective you know are we meeting the requirements of the program um you know i i want to preserve the space for the women to be able to you know um have that place where they can come together and discuss without feeling as though they're being monitored but i still also need to know if we're doing the things that we said that we were going to do and um being good stewards in that process so that's ultimately where where we fall on um on women leading at pen and like i said erin's been a great part of that um as have many other executives within the company congratulations to erin um and i just wanted to add to the uh to commissioner maynard's list of notable uh diversity of initiatives to pen small business incubator program i um had that starred and i forgot to mention it so um a lot of good work uh on the diversity side happening thank you just a note uh the commission decided to include this as a separate section to have stand alone because we value this issue so much it reflects the values of the commonwealth the goals of the commonwealth as a public um for the commission as a public entity um and you really you really provided a very thorough and thoughtful response and that's because it's backed by great evidence so congratulations to you on on on the good work of the parent company and how it shines in plainville um we're very very pleased with that and my only uh notification would be um that's going to be a reminder to me that the application includes a statement that diversity is the driving force that moves the company forward and that everyone has a voice at ppc and pen entertainment so thank you for reminding us of those important benefits okay any other questions or comments on this section d all right i'm just going to i think i've got kind of a sense of the consensus but i'm going to go through that uh commissioner bryan not in your head i'll set yeah i'll set okay i see commissioner hill's giving a thumbs up commissioner skinner commissioner maynard and we're all set thank you thank you for the thoughtful response okay then we're going to move on to section e unless i hear otherwise we'll all set we'll go right right um on to responsible gaming how about everyone to get themselves organized no questions on responsible gaming um i actually do madam chair and this is an area where it's a little bit here and it's a little bit into suitability right came to the question that commissioner skinner asked in terms of looking at mobile and sort of the broader picture per pen um you know barstools is not an applicant for this or your tethered but you've been co-branding with them i think since our q3 of 21 pen has been coming in and putting that logo on their power points on the quarter least to us um and there's been some press coverage in terms of barstools and the advertising and the marketing and some of the players involved there so when i look again at responsible gaming i'm looking at um the we're asking you to talk about the commitment to corporate social responsibility in that section and again there's a little bit of this and a little bit of suitability in terms of um you're going to have a barstools branded sports bar um on the premises according to the proposition that you guys are putting forward and i'm concerned about some of the historical marketing associated with barstools and in particular when you look at some of the coverage this year and in particular the recent coverage in the new york times about some of the conduct of barstools um and again madam chair if this this may be partially here and partially in suitability but i would like um to have a discussion about that and some of the things that are brought up in the article in terms of marketing and advertising that maybe is going toward college age students and then some of the other types of advertising and marketing that you guys have hitched yourselves to and you'll be taking over 100 over ownership in the near future so i'd like to have a fulsome conversation about that well i i i think that we can have the conversation with respect to looking at just section e um but i don't want to mystify anyone i believe it is part of the public record that there was a or at least part of our record that there was a supplement to report um is is that something that we can address um in this forum by councillor grossman i believe some of that has been marked as yes that's it i mean so some of it is but the fact about the new york times article we want i believe that's that's okay to mention yeah certainly i mean that's in the public realm we can talk about that without limitation of course and and just to clarify i wanted to mention that to councillor hall am i not mistaken did the applicant bring that to our attention or did that come to our attention we um we did through disclosures and conversations with penn we were aware that the article was coming um and so when we got it which i know another i believe one of the other commissioners was aware of it as well as soon as we got it um that was forwarded to the commissioners and then as you all know director lilias did do the supplement to the executive summary which i didn't bring up earlier because i know it will i think foster some discussion so i didn't want to derail and you know presentations up until this point that said happy to discuss any questions anyone has with respect to that supplemental to the executive summary or the article or anything else but in the name of the article just so everybody understands it sure give me one second here it's the new york times article from the i believe it was november 20th of this year obviously and the name was a risky wager desperate for growth aging casino company embraced degenerate gambler and that link was provided with respect to um the article in the uh supplement to the executive summary so that gives a little bit of context so i think there's some technical suitability questions that will come um and evolve but i also think for the rg discussion commissioner bryan there's a little bit more context perhaps you'd want to proceed now sure so in terms of um responsible gaming i know you partner well with mark and his team in terms of playing my way you were the first ones to launch it at ppc um but when i particularly was going through that article looking at how and again since q3 of 21 the company has co-branded themselves and put the bar stools as they come to us even though we weren't offering you know sports wagering and the commonwealth at that time and particularly in referencing to the article they talk about an episode in the end of september of 22 where i believe david portnoy and other members from bar stools are out near the university of tennessee and they talk about the marketing that goes on there and in your responsible gaming section you reference the aga's guidelines about marketing and advertising and a couple of things that they talk about is not marketing to those of your 21 um i believe the the legal gauge in tennessee to gambles 21 um that you're not supposed to deliberately advertise or where it's reasonably expected um that at least 73.6 percent of the of the audience will be of legal gaming age um and to not advertise on college campuses and so that from a responsible gaming context wholly apart from personality conversations that we can have um the effort to co-brand with them and then that will be coming into the commonwealth as well in terms of this branding and this bar uh i i'm disturbed by that and i'd love to have a conversation about how the company is addressing those types of things. Sure commissioner chris soriano chief compliance officer happy to be getting the conversation and had great great points that you raised and really appreciate the opportunity to have this conversation about responsible gaming. One of the things that i think is important to keep in mind about the responsible gaming context of sports wagering and college campuses and otherwise it is somewhat of an evolving area. I think as you see college waders being taken on college sports um sports shows that take place that are general content shows that take place near college campuses um and otherwise so this is something i think that the entire industry is looking at and it's it's it's an important point for the entire industry to be looking at my point being is you could ask that this question could be asked and this dialogue could take place around many others not just bars so so that i think is one is one important place to start the aga is responsible marketing code i think is is incredibly important and in fact we're one of the signatories to it and i sit on the code compliance review board so certainly something that that's near and dear to me and and making sure that we're in compliance um as best as we possibly can is something that i think is very important to pan as you've you've seen from our history a couple of points to to think about in this context there is the concept out there of advertising that is sort of generally made available um signage billboards etc and then i think there's the more nuanced concept of specifically targeting to those who are underage and i think the line as to where that is is something that that that's under a lot of discussion we of course think very seriously that we will not target to those who are underage that we will not encourage signups promotions otherwise to anyone who is underage and when and we have lots of processes in place that if someone who's underage should see an advertisement and decide that they want to sign up for nap they'll get flagged as underage they'll get blocked from the system so i think looking at the more more broad perspective of how do we you know how do we make sure we're controlling well what are we doing we have and and you know certainly barstool is a company that is very active in the needy space it's certainly on lots of different platforms in lots of different places something like over 100 different channels of distribution podcasts etc 90 some odd personalities we've undertaken since we became affiliated with barstool since we became a part owner of barstool one of the things that we did was impose really strict compliance guard rails on what it on what it is that barstool does we regularly train we regularly coordinate with barstool you may have seen that there's responsible gaming content that has been prepared by barstool a public service announcement that barstool regularly tweets out featuring barstool personalities that discusses the concept of responsible gaming in somewhat of a more relatable the younger folks manner and i think we're all faced with listening to the concept sometimes of the national sports betting and that ends with the really small print what a whole bunch of state disclaimers or with someone speaking super quickly about the different disclaimers and so one of the things we thought that would be creative here and try to reach a different audience would be to have barstool personalities prepare a public service announcement that they could then put out and to talk about responsible gaming in that context and to weave responsible gaming organically into the content that it is that's out there certainly you know i think it's important again that we follow these guidelines and so this this concept around barstool's responsible gaming marketing is something that internally we discuss a lot as part of our corporate responsible gaming committee it's something that we discuss with various responsible gaming stakeholders certainly you mentioned the partnership that we have with director van der linden and something that we obviously continue to collaborate very closely on we have experts from the responsible gaming community who we regularly consult with in very candid discussions where sometimes they tell us that something that they think we're doing is working and something may not be but that said i wanted to give this assurance that that this is not a concept that we take lightly in any way shape or form and that understanding and evaluating where the industry is going from from that perspective i think is really important erin i think your your audio is is fixed and i don't know if you have anything to add from the operation side hopefully uh hopefully you can we can hear you now wait erin now you're now you are muted i can see we're having a little trouble seeing you as well i think you just might be sitting low on the camera but i think you do have to unmute them i just want to pause on on what mr sariano said you were talking about the industry and what the industry is doing and today we are focusing on the applicant and i just want to remind you that we could talk about generalities but we we we probably should think about this application now certainly chair and i appreciate that i just wanted to start my comments by saying that this is generally something that as an industry where i think his operators collaborating to try to understand a little better and make sure that we're implementing the best practices right i'd also go right ahead now we can hear you erin and good afternoon good afternoon my apologies i love that this is memorial as now my team knows that i'm technologically challenged and now it's been proven for the entire commonwealth of massachusetts to see so my apologies um and judgment i appreciate the opportunity um and to to your point madam chair i think that's a great point obviously we operate in a larger context of the industry but here at pen entertainment specifically i think one of the things that i would point out and i don't want to cast stones at any of the competition but what we are not doing is specifically sponsoring any um colleges or universities from marketing perspective with any sports betting agreements you have not seen pen entertainment enter into any of those types of agreements very purposely um we um are very cognizant that um you know folks will will come through those channels and you know under 21 folks will be disproportionately recognized there and so we've made a very clear decision to not enter into those types of agreements so i do believe that speaks to kind of the the broader view that we're looking at in the longer term range that we're looking at here from pen entertainment from a responsible gaming standpoint so with specific questions to the colleges and universities i do think that's an important distinction for us to clarify from a pen entertainment versus some of the other folks who maybe you read about in the article other thing i i guess i just wanted to add as well as one of the things about the barstool personalities is they are very forthright um and you know you can see either through their instagram posts or their twitter posts you know these guys regularly comment about the amounts that they lose not just the bets that they win and so i think they set up a realistic expectation um as it relates to to sports wazering um and the seriousness with which they take responsible gaming and and i i would add on to that north i agree and i do believe um as you know oftentimes what a lot of responsible gaming unfortunately has been reduced to is a lot of times of folks checking the box right and maybe boiler plate information at the end of an advertisement or something and one of the creative things that i've seen the barstool teams media arm and their personalities team up with us to do is to create not just talking about some of their realistic wins and or losses excuse me but really talking about in it in very much their own voice why this is important and what they really do and how they do that and so i have seen that it cuts through i believe um a lot of the clutter i would say in terms of these advertising opportunities as well like it's it's a very innovative approach to responsible gaming it speaks to younger people in a different type of voice that i think resonates with them and really makes it stand out a little bit differently that's not entirely the only thing that we do we clearly do all of the other things as well but i think that's in addition to kind of that more um standard industry you know wide approach that we've taken we've also done some more creative things in partnership with a barstool team to help get that message across so i mean if i can circle back in particular to sort of the Tennessee example that was in the article it seemed that there was also sort of a co-marketing for an alcoholic drink when again legal age is 21 in Tennessee you're on the university campus so i'm reading that and seeing game you know 21 is the legal age to drink alcohol into game and yet you have this these people out there um you know talking about betting and then you know pushing for an alcoholic product and so you know is there anything else factually that that you want to let us know in terms of that particular incident in terms of those two concerns that that i raised that i find disturbing which is when you have the legal age being 21 on those two points and you're on a university campus i would say commissioner as city as to the discussion and as to sports wagering i think one of the important things to keep in mind was this was the the barstool college football show um which was was broadcast from there um there was no sports book an advertisement this was barstool media so this was not the barstool sports book um this was not the gaming operation um and so you know it was a more generic college football program rather than a specifically targeted barstool sports book um type promotion yeah they talk about betting during the program don't they listen well i think they do commissioner it's it's not a sports book specific right yeah sorry not go bet on this or use us or anything i think it's generic content i mean when i was i think it's pn they're talking you know almost everyone's talking betting um these days in that in that context so i think it you know fell moral in the lines of a generic media certainly not anyone's intent to target the college campus um and underage batters can i ask this question and this is a follow-up to erin are we being genuine here because i believe that pan entertainment brought the article to the attention of i e b i don't believe you would have brought it to the attention of the i e b if you thought that they are that they and i'm using they because you're using the word they that your spokespeople for barstools are advocates for responsible gain if that were the case why would you bring that article to the attention of i e b because you wouldn't assume that there's some risk attached to that article so i just want to make sure we're all being very very very clear here that the regulators here in massachusetts are really at a crossroads because the timing of this article is such that's right when we are having these conversations so now we have an obligation to reconcile what we are here but it's very available publicly as to barstool and really this is the the significant personality attached to barstool and what um we're going to do about it as we think about this application and you know i i'm you know hearing commissioner of ryan's your your draft is your draft except for this issue is excellent on the responsible gaming and and i commend you for it it's comprehensive it it's beyond a plus plus um you have you say in it um forgive me oh you're there right here so you know the aga code of conduct and chris i know that you're involved with the aga um you know adopts measures that um and this is where you say team members your team the prized members of ppc are advised the ppc is responsible gaming training to um of the following topics and it highlights the aga's code of conduct and i pulled a few of the words of the of the measures you know these are measures to ensure that marketing reaches the target audience and not underage or vulnerable populations i i'm guessing tiktok which is a a prime barstools um a platform you know one might think and i think in 2021 um 25 percent or any range of the the tiktok viewers um i know it's expanding in age but um we that the um code of conduct also reflects generally accepted contemporary standards of good taste i'm more flexible um and it also contains a responsible gaming message and i hear you saying that maybe the message is something different um on note that in um one well first off i guess i'll continue you also have a statement that's what's both gambling advertising will not quote contain claims or representations that gambling activity will guarantee an individual social financial or personal success the New York Times questions that and then also that um that the um advertiser won't be placed before any audience or most of the audience is ordinarily expected to be below the legal age of 21 and also that they are not advertising does not encourage people to play beyond their needs you know losing a whole lot means you probably waged too much right so the idea that there's addressing losing as somehow a responsible game measure it's hard for me to get my head wrapped around luckily we have our own expert but i just want to make sure that we don't dive into this idea of ironic responsible gaming um through the barstools personality as being something that that that we're that we're really seriously addressing here um unless i unless there's a whole lot of data though back it from that's for me to understand it it's unfortunate because i have to say that i this should like for me on this issue um and we're just facing this article at this particular time i turned right to my fellow commissioners commissioner maynard commissioner skinner commissioner hill commissioner brye i actually would like to see if there's a response to what you just said madam chair thank you it's a tough one um general manager grounds out yeah so i mean i i would say um so specifically was regards to the incident that commissioner o bryan uh references that that event did not take place on campus um and i understand that there are concerns broadly that people have that the thing always to bear in mind as well is that you know college football games in the south are very large events that include a student body but probably i think it's fair to say the vast majority of people there watching are over the age of 21 um and and the spectators as well so i mean um i i understand the concern here i i agree with the chair's assertion that you know we we do take our commitments seriously and that you know when we think there's a potential breach that we bring it to the i e b right away and i believe that that chris um and the rest of his team including samantha have been very um you know fulsome in their communication with director lilios and making sure that um she she has the information that she's needs and is not left uh flat-footed in that regards and if i may add to that chair to your comment earlier about us bringing things to the attention of the i e b um as a highly regulated company with a robust compliance function we regularly communicate with our regulators about anything that we think may have raised questions on the part of our regulators so when we knew and saw that an article was coming out we wanted to proactively get that information to the i e b in the event the i e b had had questions regarding it it's it's certainly not the first item i brought to the attention of the i e b on a confidential basis and and so we you know we enjoy that relationship of candor um and and of place information in front of the i e b that again we may think just be of general interest or may raise questions uh but i just want to clarify that point to bring it out there um we could also you know certainly perhaps in executive session be able to provide audience data uh regarding barstool's reach and and some metrics that we have regarding it if that would be helpful so i mean from my perspective that would be helpful for me because again there's there's been a branding effort since pretty early on in january 20 you buy an interest and buy q3 21 your your co-branding and i i'm going out on a limb here that the the barstool themed sports betting bar that you'd want to put in ppc is not the only one of its kind across your property so there's been a marketing push to affiliate barstool with gaming so i appreciate and understand what you're saying that in the context of the article in the episode that i asked you about but that's not what that was but there is an overall catch to the following and sports betting and that's where when i see that and i see responsible gaming and our desire to do that with you guys and again i do want to reiterate that that you guys have been great with responsible gaming i in north i appreciate the fact that you heard me in the very beginning to say i was not comfortable with kiosks uh for sports betting being in a in a paramutual area where 18 year olds and 20 year olds were going to be milling around and you reacted responsibly in reaction to that but this is still an area given the marketing push that you're doing with taking that brand and tying it to sports betting that i i do have concerns about that i would be interested in seeing that data in an executive session and to that point commissioner o'brien and and others i think in an executive session we could also provide additional data on some of our advertising guidelines that we use in house as well in partnership with barstool in ensuring that where we are targeting advertising we are doing so responsibly so i i think we would welcome the opportunity to provide you more detail in executive session on that topic as well commissioners do you have other other questions there's a there is what i'm hearing that the applicant is reluctant to share advertising data because it's probably protected under the public records i leave that to general council of grossman to sort that out with the applicant on whether that is is more appropriate for an executive session than for the public meeting setting but i do want to make sure that we flesh out other issues around responsible gaming you know as i said i'm on paper the the responsible gaming section is is excellent and it does reflect everything that we know about ppc and you led with that north at the beginning and that wasn't lost on me i'm sure it was lost my call commissioner so for that we are so grateful because you have been a leader in the space as commissioner bryan pointed out you know early on adopting so many of the innovations that come out of the gaming commission but we're not the only regulator who values responsible gaming and knows the import of that and we also know the operators understand how important it is to regulators across the country and around the world but as i said earlier around across France right now because of the information that's presented to us i also want to note and and i don't believe that this is protected but um and i don't have the dates so forgive me but i also know that um in your 10k in your report as you see filing you note is this is permissible is this public to go on anything that's in publicly disclosed to investors in the 10k would be yes so you know pet entertainment um our investment in and partnership with barstool sports may result in potential adverse reactions negative publicity or changes to our business regulatory or other stakeholder relationships our relationships with state gaming regulators stakeholders and business partners could be adversely affected as a result of our affiliation with barstool sports in addition our business partners or stakeholders may react negatively to actual or perceived threats from our affiliation with barstool sports and the individuals influencers and our media personnel is connected with barstool sports so we're not raising anything none of the concerns we're raising today are our private in nature you you recognized pet entertainment recognize them and so that's why i say we're at a crossroads right now because we have an important evaluation going on so um but i i did hear you um on the idea that that this could be some kind of a responsible gaming approach um i am focused on and there are other issues and we know that but i'm like commissioner brian focused on not just the the play at universities but just the messaging around you know what i perceive to be your application of excessive gambling and i could be convinced as i said with data um but that is it's it's it's both you know the targeted populations and then just the messaging that is being used and how we reconcile that with our programs anything that you want to add commissioners or general manager else not at this time okay so in terms of this being appropriate for an executive section i think that i don't know other questions about responsible gaming in general outside of the of the barstool um you know uh relationship the branding and commissioner brian is quite right this is not complete news to us in fact we're on the public record expressing earlier um it issues around branding um it's just again now this matters squarely in front of us commissioner brian is that fair i think it was within the last year that we publicly have mentioned it right yeah missioners i don't think there's any need to repeat what was already said madam chair and uh since there's been a request to get some information in executive session i would look forward to those discussions at that time i agree i don't have anything substantive to add but just an appreciation to commissioner brian for raising the issue um barstool sports is the elephant in the room and i think we all would appreciate um further uh discussion not only on responsible gaming but on the compliance side the compliance issues that uh commissioner brian alluded to as well commissioner skinner are you also thinking about the issue um unsuitability at all because i'm wondering if that we should be thinking about an accompanying going into an executive session for what i do understand is suitability might have some concern does we analyze that i'm sorry i said i said compliance but i i did mean suitability okay that's what i wonder thank you and thanks for the application so um and i have some issue i have some issues with that as well madam chair right and i know that that's um much you know more easily perhaps i don't know um counsel gross when can you give us guidance on those two topics and do we have anything else in terms of the finance that question that came up i was fine um with my question earlier i think i can over resolve on the 12th anything else that we are thinking of so far that's come up with respect to a need for an executive session and then i wonder does it make sense that's for a second and go through um madam chair and then g is suitability sorry madam chair yes i believe if my notes are correct and and please correct me if i'm wrong but commissioner skinner wanted to talk about responsible gaming and kiosks and we were going to do that in an executive session as well yeah thank you the kiosk question thank you so much i i hope we still have um yeah we have the show still available so do we want to proceed with um f section f and then and g makes sense part suitability anyway and then um if that would give uh councillor grossman the opportunity to perhaps consult um with um the applicant as necessary um or um if that's need necessary uh councillor grossman but let's go right to share and then we have the benefit of pli available still on those questions questions in section f commissioners a quick pivot i guess um i'll open it on a general question north i thought it was a very very helpful again piece of your application um i guess i i raised the issue around can be and as i understand it can be really is almost like a is the integrity monitor um for you but then there's also another is there another um i think you referenced at the the national monitoring system too could you just explain that so we make sure we understand that and then how it's integrated into ppc staffing please right so with what that part references when it's talking about the integrity piece is monitoring for betting patterns that may indicate um somebody acting illegally or trying to exploit a market um and so what ends up happening there i probably don't want to go doing this too much in a public of exactly how but um but to just say that we do monitor for suspicious activity i mean we have ways of coordinating with other books to be able to look to see if they also see suspicious betting activity that would make us call into question uh the integrity of any individual match and and can be real name just because i think probably um many of us have had have met at least our interact with somehow with folks from can be with sports information system they will be a contract you'll have a contract with them or is that through psi so psi would hold the contract um our contract is with um with psi okay and then but can be a separate apart correct now i'm chair that's commissioner i have a question based based upon that one um in my notes i have written that can be a psi um would quote ensure that data breaches will not occur there've been some issues i i for one probably shouldn't say this publicly but i use passwords on multiple different platforms right the same one not all of them but a few um we've seen that that breach can occur in this industry um with psi can be whoever is is monitoring that would they have um the regulatory uh infrastructure in place but they have the infrastructure in place to catch this happening right so if money gets out starts being spent quickly and then let's say is there someone to pick up the phone on the other end that's really what i'm asking is there someone to pick up the phone if this happens uh and they can get this shut off quickly because a lot of people have their bank accounts tied to these um these accounts so um commissioner maynard thank you for the question to that i think i'm just to be clear so this really when when we're talking about can be um in the retail setting we don't have accounts that players are registering for in the retail setting so in the retail setting there should not be a concern that's not a service that can be is providing to us at the retail level so this is a better question on the cap three i'll table it for the cap three yes sir i will tell you that they will be much better at answering your question than i will put a pin in that commissioner maynard it's a great question okay any other questions on the on the for gli even to understand some of the responses we have our experts here madam chair i have a general question um joe in your presentation you walk through the steps that an applicant is required to undertake to begin the technical compliance process with gli short of that i mean is there any guidance you could give commissioners in terms of the sufficiency of you know the the technical component of ppcs application um just in terms of you know making a determination or coming to a consensus that this particular section of the application has met certain requirements is there any guidance you could you could give to us as we review that question i think what might help you is to understand that ppc actually specifically can be has been certified and i wouldn't doubt if it's over 25 jurisdictions even more if you went worldwide uh can be specifically has been around for 15 years providing sports uh betting platforms and systems and applications uh in in the compliance world um in the european markets and uh and was here first in the united states uh and they we have we work directly with them all the time uh as they submit for all the other jurisdictions sports sports betting in the united states so and actually what the process i laid out was as if one of the the the operator was going to come to us fresh we would actually start off given that it's going to be can be and the relative third party pieces that they commonly use uh running a differential between the mass state regs that will be approved by the commission and gli 33 uh will because they've been through the lab so many times uh the uh well i mean the the process is still the same it's it's it's as thorough and as complete on the on the tech side as you can imagine uh it's um but we're so familiar with the way their systems and uh engineering is uh outlined it it uh it brings them to um an easier an easier path to the lab so to speak thank you that's helpful other questions on this section um we didn't take um uh any kind of a consensus on ink because we've got work to do but i would like to be able to find out how we feel about that if you've had a chance to answer all your questions excuse me do we have um are we okay with this meeting expectations i see nodding heads from commissioner bryan commissioner hill commissioner maynard and commissioner skinner are you comfortable with section i am to the extent that i understand it um you know it would just be helpful to have you know take a couple minutes to understand um which components are relevant to the retail sports book as opposed to the online operation and if i may commissioner skinner's point i agree the reason i was having a little bit of trouble and asked the question i asked is because i don't know how much crossover and turnover there's going to be from your app to the kiosk to the window right which is why i did ask the question commissioner maynard to be clear it's a valid question because uh with regards to the way that the kiosk presents the lines the underlying software that helps with all of that that is within the the purview of canby's service provision so that they will some of the risk management pieces and some of the software will touch that the only piece that will be separate would be the account basis which i think was a basis of your question really was just like you know from an accounting standpoint did they have good security controls i will say adding on top of all of that at the property and at the corporate level we do have it security compliance meetings where we regularly review our processes to make sure that there are there are not opportunities for for data breaches you know these things can't happen but it is certainly something that we monitor both at a corporate and a property level any further questions on that or follow-up questions commissioner skinner you don't gli is available there's no question that's but this is the time for you to get comfortable that we can always go back but there's anything that's probably a particular no nothing in particular just a general i mean a general understanding of the technical pieces would be helpful i mean you know we we've gone through our gli standards process so we've adopted the standards for massachusetts but then overlaying those i guess with what we see here presented in the application i guess we'll come in a later time maybe i could do this follow-up question because it's very fair uh joe you reviewed section app did you review section app of the application joe of the application i can't say i just i reviewed the uh technical expertise in reliability portion yeah so the reliability yeah so that's on the wager except as as for the whole section i'm not sure okay yeah so i think that's what we're looking at um is there was there anything that stood out to you that concerned you with respect to the integrity of the technology or the capacity of the technology nope nothing everything seems fairly standard coming from the technical perspective can i say standard and best of class yes to the highest of well that's helpful to me thank you is there any other question with respect to app commissioner skinner um the others have indicated uh level of comfort to proceed um we can note that that you might want to revisit this as we continue today okay all right excuse me madam chair i actually can share my screen real quick it may actually solve a lot of questions that miss uh commissioner skinner maybe others have okay um i have a very high level document that outlines kind of how sports fighting systems work and this may streamline some of the confusion between what piece is digital and what piece is not and how they are uh related so let me try to do this really fast and that's particularly important to me joe because you know it was set at the beginning of this session that we are considering ppc's category one application for retail operations and so can you guys see my screen or hear me still yes we can see the screen my computer's acting up really quick so rather go real fast here joe i don't know if you can hear me i was in the middle of a sentence i just want to complete my thought um sorry where we're where we're struggling or i'm struggling with with um the question of psi versus ppc um and a lot of what is contained in section f relies on the psi retail operations as i read it i just want to make sure that we are um parceling out i guess for purposes of this category one application the pieces that are relevant to the retail sports wagering operation and and that and that's important because we haven't reviewed the psi portion of the application thank you can you guys see the dot dot diagram on my screen i care okay so it's just a really high level of view maybe clarify some of the confusion uh the there's i tried to simplify what a sports betting platform and sports betting systems and how they interact between the cat three like the digital uh mobile applications and the lamb based or retail applications so you see down on the right you've got the the data in the risk management this is feeding into because all the prices and all the events that data is going to be the same so it's handled on retail and it's handled in mobile so that's brought into the main sports betting engine server and all the bets are placed on it and typically and certainly in regards to massachusetts these servers actually physically located within the borders of massachusetts as discussed many times to satisfy the wire act this is where the bet is accepted actually within the geolocation of uh you know and and that is to be further outlined by the commission on on where the actual physical locations of the service will be i think we have to get here did indicate that yep and and you can see on the left um those the there's a the difference between the left and the top is the the lack of uh account base wagering where the account base wagering is operated by a player account management system or pan platform whereas over the counter and kiosk are non-account base wages in other words a hundred bucks on the celtics kick out a ticket move right along but all of it works off that main component that main sports betting engine server so this hopefully can clarify today we're discussing that bottom piece those bottom pieces and and how how they can get stood up to so that uh pen national take bets at um at that facility does this help i think this helps them mr skater i think it shows how your earlier question and i think we're going to discuss in executive session how the um the kiosk and the retail is really quite separate part of the kyc yeah so i think the beta term is probably non-account based wagering because uh if if the patron is to look underage or walk into the facility uh they could get their id checked it's very honestly it works exactly like how somebody would place a bet on the slot machine yeah uh is exact same uh and if if they place a bet over a certain amount uh i believe right now in discussion is ten thousand dollars or more uh they go into a separate process where their ideas checked and they're verified so those rules are still pending so non-account based wagering is likely a better term than uh what i said earlier anonymous um it's technically non-account based wagering so cool very helpful okay i agree thanks joe for providing the clarification this this um visual was very helpful okay i'm gonna stop sharing my screen and um i've given this to katrina and others and i'll make sure the commission can uh have this for their reference okay are there questions and very good clarifier um on section okay then commissioner skitter again i understand that we have at least one question that needs to be clarified what are you getting more comfortable with this section i am yes thank you madam jen thank you all right then um i think we have a general consensus should we move on to section g then and this is where um we will get into suitability as well as um i just want to get the application in front of me because we're looking now at it's the last section and it's suitability in the individual the corporate integrity piece then it's the individual's qualifier integrity piece but it also includes the financial stability and integrity which rsm did address and then compliance um which is a little bit more general i wonder if we should just focus right now on g3 financial stability and integrity and see if there are any follow-up questions you have for our folks at rsm if they are still hanging in there with us do we have any further questions i'm turning to my notes commissioners did anyone lean in we may have answered them along the way i'm all set on that piece no other questions on that particular section of f of g my apologies in terms of questions that relate to section g that would not that would be for the public forum do i have any questions on that michael are you saying yes i'm just to put a finer point on why i reference this area is it it's somewhat related to the responsible gaming and the advertising in the marketing but it is again the branding that's been happening particularly with what's going to be on site and barstool to not acknowledge the fact that there is a lot that goes with david portnoy being the main marketer of barstool and that the applicant has hitched itself to that to that company to that brand deliberately the the bar in the in ppc will be named after it etc that to me not delving into what that means in terms of suitability honesty integrity of the applicant i think bears a discussion by this commission why i brought it up the first time and why i would bring it up again in this context thank you commissioner brian and if i could just add just a clarifier and you can let me know if i've got it right but the reason why just a reminder that suitability with respect to barstool that is not the applicant today and we recognize that are looking at the suitability of the qualifiers and the entity itself and i think that's why it's still it's germane to today's correct right okay so um are there other thank you for that again uh commissioner brian for for bringing up and clarifying commissioner skinner do you have other questions about whether it's like g or section g i did but i think i just answered it in my head it was regarding um i think i'm okay it was regarding um my questions g for e f and and g that wan answered with respect to ppc but we do have the executive summary regarding the suitability for ppc so i i think i think i'm good okay thank you all right um so we need um why don't we take uh just a a five minute break i think we'll need some guidance i want to give general counsel grossman the opportunity to get guidance together is five minutes enough hot or should we make a ten minute break and then i'm i'm imagining that we are anticipating going into an executive session or sessions and i'm not sure if we need to come in and out or if we can do that in the collective way and then we have to make a determination whether or not we will be coming back to the public meeting so do you need about five minutes or ten minutes and north you might want to take a quick break as well um how much time do you guys need ten minutes would be wonderful thank you okay great all right then we'll pause for ten minutes thank you very much thank you thank you sam or somebody can someone please confirm if this is working you're good iron we hear you we hear you oh my goodness my apologies to everybody um thank you uh Aaron no worries we've been living this world um and we navigate it well um thank you so much and if you want to add into what was um the great question that you want to add in later we'll take it we would love to hear about that initiative and anything else you wanted to add thank you thank you madam chair i appreciate it thank you thank you Dave it wouldn't be new england in december if it wasn't almost pitch black at three forty fireworks have been a change for you it was it was uh but you know what i do i do there is a part of me that enjoys just the natural rhythms of the year like you know oh we're getting to the part of the year where the days are shorter and then come december 21st you know the days will begin getting longer and there's hope out there and all those types of things so uh i i do somewhat enjoy that you know i i do start listening to you know the the weather person about what's prime the sun is going to rise and what time it's going to set i'm with you but it is dark right now no thank you for trying to make us feel better about the way we do our time zones here and i am you know what i have learned uh commissioner hill each place i live to appreciate it for what it is and not not trying to make it into something different so when my when my daughter was living out in idaho and it was 9 30 a quarter of 10 p.m and the sun was still shining i'm like oh how nice this is yeah different different world yes sir yeah we were in iceland and i felt like it extended our vacation vacation because it would still light out yeah like more hours for fun all right so we do have business to attend to it um so are we streaming yet the continuing to stream day yep we are back and ready to go okay excellent thank you so um thank you all we are um convening once again of our meeting today of a message of gaining commission and i'm going to do a roll call because we are again using our virtual platform commissioner brian thank you i am here excellent commissioner hill a very dark place i am here that's only because we're talking about the dark how dark it is outside yeah that is accurate yes um and uh commissioner skinner i'm here excellent and commissioner maynard i am here all right thank you very much we can get started and just to remind everyone where we left off is that we recognize there were a few matters of import and for us to really have a fulsome discussion we need to probably think about um going into executive session and that requires the commission to vote but first before we get started i'll have him a council uh gross and give us some advice well thank you madam chair yes so um as described earlier there are provisions of the law that allow the commission to move into executive session for the purposes that have been outlined but i just wanted to add a little bit more color to that if i may um in advance of your vote so of course we can't go into executive session just to discuss sensitive information in general it has to be in accordance with chapter 30a section 21 and one of the enumerated purposes in this case section 21a 7 talks about going into executive session for purposes of complying with any general law and in this case under chapter 23n section 6i there is a provision that talks about certain pieces of information that may be withheld from public disclosure under the public records law and it provides that if we are dealing with trade secrets, competitively sensitive or other proprietary information that's provided in the course of an application the disclosure of which would place the applicant at a competitive disadvantage it may be withheld so the the two areas that have been identified here would need to fit within the construct of section 6i that is to say the commission would need to conclude that the information is either a trade secret is competitively sensitive or is proprietary and that if we discussed it publicly here it would place the applicant at a competitive disadvantage so i think the first thing that is important to do is to identify precisely what the information is that we will be discussing in fact the law requires that specificity and it says that you have to be as specific as possible essentially without compromising the purpose for which you were going into executive session in the first place so i think it would be helpful if we just took a few moments to talk about the two areas that have been identified and as a general matter i wrote down that the first one related to certain advertising information relative to barstool sports and associated data that will be helpful in understanding the advertising plan so that's that's one of the areas and we should polish that to the extent possible to make sure we're very clear as to what the commission is intending to discuss maybe we stopped there before moving into the second did i have that right i think i asked that i was open to hearing data to understand better the um the advertising plan and the responsible gaming tactics and particularly as it relates to under 21 and so they were going to get into some of their demographic information so to me that goes into maybe competitive disadvantage if they're going to be talking about it i apologize i did also want to provide some additional context for commissioner skinner regarding a question she had around kiosks and again there's there's some information there that an executive session will become more clear why why we're asking that to be protected so i think that's the second issue and we should we should get to that too because i just want to be clear what the the specific issue is without compromising it of course but it's okay to make it um i i really appreciate commissioner ryan wanting to be particular around the underage but i also thinking responsible gaming generally too right and so that's one area is that and and that comes under i suspect that well it seems to me and maybe north can add some color to that or or chris or erin but that sounds like it would be competitively sensitive it's not necessarily a trade secret or proprietary if if i have that which part well let's talk about just the advertising the advertising marketing issue yeah so the the actual demographics of the demographic breakdown that we wanted to be able to provide an executive session of stuff that's not public knowledge and so that is something that we would consider to be a trade see a trade see okay that might be different than the other might be right the broader discussion is probably the competitive and with regards to the kiosk issue that commissioner skinner referenced i believe that would fall under the public records law i believe it's section n that talks about safety of people in buildings there's some pieces in there that again i'm happy to discuss an executive session as it relates to responsible gaming i'm sorry i can't be more uh i can't be more fulsome in this discussion here okay and then and and then was there another piece in terms of the suitability yeah the suitability where does that fit in so in the bar stool i'm i'm basing this somewhat on having seen the redacted and the unredacted that competitive sensitive competitive sensitivity i think is where i would put that i i think that would work and i would just also note chair and wishers that there were two other exhibits that were marked um as requested as confidential with that were touched on the executive summary and i maybe commissioner ryan is referring to that as well i just wanted uh those two and then there's a partial on something else yep okay so the suitability relative to barstool sports is a separate issue from the advertising related one i believe even though they're both involved barstool sports and then the third issue is the use of the kiosk vis-a-vis responsible gaming so there's three separate issues which is okay as long as we've identified them and those are the issues we're going to discuss and not anything else um and i apologize profusely this is erin hopefully you guys can hear me um if you wouldn't mind um i would like to just give him my technical difficulties there i wanted to make sure i was clear on my art some of my rg comments before we kind of moved into some of the exact session that might help um a little bit so um just really briefly and i know there's probably other stuff that we will address as well but when i was discussing some of the more creative rg messaging i don't think i was extremely clear and i want to be very clear on this topic because it is very important to me i've been doing this for a long time and um and have been regulated in many jurisdictions and and that reputation is very important to me rg is something that we take very seriously everything that i was talking about is built on the foundation of everything that we have done on plain ridge park we will not change that we will continue to add to that we will continue to build on that so all of the different programming that we do all of the different advertising that we do all of the different messaging that we do to support responsible gaming will remain in fact we'll continue to learn and innovate and grow like we have over the past seven years in the common wealth and adding to that and getting better every single day towards responsible gaming so i want to be very clear with that what i was trying to say in articulately did um is that we also believe there's additional ways that we can reach more audiences with responsible gaming and so we always want to be at the cutting edge of responsible gaming we believe this is one way for us to add to what we're already doing what we will continue to do and so for example um the messaging that i was referring to were a couple of media personalities from bar stool who actually did a pretty creative responsible gaming message that message has actually been viewed now over one million times by folks who probably maybe we could guess um wouldn't have listened the same way to that message as they did to other messages and it made a made a different kind of impression it was in no way intended to replace anything that plain ridge park and entertainment anybody else would do it was simply to support that in a new um in a different way and so we're really proud of the fact that we've built this long foundation i didn't want to discourage that in any way shape or form so my apologies that came through that way what i meant to say was we also believe we can continue to add and grow and innovate there and in fact we i just learned while we were on break in fact that we are psi was the first um us-based sports gaming operator to receive the responsible gaming councils rg chat um so we continue to try and work with different groups make sure that we're bringing that message out and so hopefully that adds a little bit more clarity and i'm you know be happy to answer any questions on that but i did want to make sure i was i was really clear on that because it is a really important very helpful erin thank you other other comments before we take um the steps needed to go into executive session and erin it's nice to hear you okay um so it's my understanding uh general counsel grossman that i um as chair must read this language into the record and then my fellow commissioners and i can decide whether or not to actually go into executive session and is it written are there any changes that i need to make because i know it has to be read precisely yes madam chair i think this situation is a little bit different from the ones we've encountered in the past in that when we wrote the agenda um entry we didn't know specifically what the information would be that we would be moving into executive session for so i think we'll need to include the three specific reasons um within that paragraph um and i can i can help you with that thank you one second okay i just uh sent you a message uh by email madam chair thank you let's hope i um we could actually there we go i got it so again um this is is um pursuant to the public records long right or the open media law i'm sorry um that right now the commission anticipates that it may move to go into that it may go into executive session under chapter 30 hay section 21a of section 7 for purposes of compliance with chapter 23 and section 6 little i of the general law to specifically discuss advertising issues related to barstool sports and a review of associated data to discuss the use of kiosk related to responsible gaming and to discuss the suitability of barstool sports as these matters relate to trade secrets are competitively sensitive and or proprietary information the discussion of which at an open public meeting excuse me would place the applicant at a competitive disadvantage and commissioners i would need a motion if we do want to move into executive session the the only clarifying thing i think i would do uh madam chair is that the suitability is as to the applicant but in connection with um barstool okay so and to discuss so the motion would be amended and to discuss the suitability of barstools of the of well to discuss the barstool and it can in its connection to the suitability of the applicant yes to discuss barstool in connection with the suitability of the applicant as these matters relate to trade secrets are competitively sensitive and or proprietary information discussion of which an open public meeting would place the applicant at a disadvantage do we need to read the whole thing into the record again um council grasp it or is it good i think it's it's clear at least to me yep our record will record that so do i um so that motion is made but that clarifier do i have a second second thank you okay any further edits or discussion all right commissioner brian hi commissioner hill hi commissioner skinner hi commissioner gross honey i just keep commissioner maynard sorry councilor grossman um and commissioner maynard it was an i my apologies and i vote yes thank you five zero and my apologies just for the record i just wanted to make sure so i'm i'm being attributed with moving correct yes you were the movie yes with your clear with the clarifier yes you were the movie yes because i just offered it all right and then my apologies i'm general council grossman i've made you a commissioner there for a second i don't know you don't have to apologize for that that's flattering um we should we should also of course just clarify whether we'll be coming back into public section yeah so um that's the next topic uh because um as i stated at the beginning we could decide um to make our decisions today um or we could decide to continue this matter for future discussion we could also decide to make a partial decision today commissioners thoughts i believe commissioner skinner and maynard had some questions that they thought might be answered more specifically when we get to the tethered and connection with these applications so i don't know if a partial or deferred makes sense then in that context agree i i think you know in order to have a a more comprehensive discussion around uh psi and its relationship to ppc the applicant i would be in favor of postponing a deliberation relative to the approval or denial of the application are we in agreement on that commissioners we are i would have a question i'm not sure if it was karen or todd i would like to see you know what that means as far as what we're doing to hold that vote would it be holding the vote till after all three of the category ones or are we saying till after every application all the way through the category threes i would like to know the implications before i make a decision on that commissioner made i may be able to answer that question um i think that uh particularly if you are making the determination say at the beginning of january we will operate um particularly for the category ones because there's a shell in the statute we will just continue to operate so that there is no potential slip in the timeline so for example the if you uh complete the promulgation of the regulations regarding the internal controls to schedule for december 15th we would go ahead and have them submit the internal controls we would go forward with the process regardless of whether the vote has been completed or not okay so i see no reason why we wouldn't get more information than before we take the vote and we this is the twelfth and the thirteenth right we would get more information in particular about the the tethered threes is that right yeah the um the public hearing the public hearing the 13th and 14th will have evaluations 13th point the 19th money is on the tethered so 13th, 14th, 19th, 20th okay it could be um and and my thought would be that we follow suit and and we would claim bc's tethered first if that's helping us um and and and there's we can make a this we can put this delivered to process in front of another public meeting or another hearing you know we we can well while it's harder and harder to find time the it's the calendar is stretching and accommodating that's one way or another so i'm sort of hearing people are comfortable with uh with um perhaps first off we can return after this discussion we could reserve that right to return to public meeting in the event that we have from that from our executive session any questions that we want to ask folks um or we could decide that we're all set and then we won't convene back to the the um the team and experts that would not be going into the executive session and then i guess um council grossman for our team will need to know who can who should be part of that in second session um so commissioners do you think uh how are you feeling do you really want to know that you know um do we feel that um we want to come back um we would ask people to be you know would stay within within earshot um or we could say that we won't be convening reconvening and that would you know we would be giving notice to the public what would be the purpose of reconvening this public meeting madam chair well it would be to come back to the public meeting to perhaps should there be any information that comes out of the executive sessions that would prompt additional questions on the application because this is do you want to reserve that or do you believe you're all set i believe we're all set and don't need to come back after the executive session that's one commissioners opinion one commission i think i think there's a lot to digest from what we've heard today it's been almost um six hours worth of information and it's been great information um that needs to be digested by all of us commission on brian can i just get a commission me no i agree because we can always if there's something that we want to do publicly before we vote in december i think we would have time to do that i don't think it would be so time consuming you couldn't do it then okay commissioners can we would we be able to address any uh outstanding questions on the 12th or excuse me the 13th when we convene again for the psi application yes okay then i'm in favor of uh closing this public meeting out in moving into a second session i just i just want to clarify this is today's a public meeting on the cap one could we reconvene on cap one on yonk on theirs yes but i wouldn't want to merge i don't want to merge necessarily the category three in cap one it's already complicated enough as we struggle today to segregate the two um does that when we vote we can always have it on for final discussion right before the vote that's right i agree with that commissioners that clarified yes it is except that you know i think like it or not the applications are somewhat merged anyway so right we just might put them separate for deliberation that's all yes all right and then commissioner maynard are you all set to i've exhausted my questions but for what i believe it's going to come up during this session all right then um um i i know then that the public session of the commission will not reconvene at the conclusion of the executive session so technically what happens here is we leave this virtual platform and then we go into another virtual platform and uh north and team i presume you have the link to that okay north you probably have done this before so you're familiar with the process you have i am familiar i have not yet received the link i don't believe okay um but i'm happy to forward that to the other folks from penn he would be participating i actually haven't received it yet either cherry i did get an invite for friday and i wonder if perhaps it was the wrong it's not it's not the same Heather uh yeah it's for the people that you want one one at a time please come executive director welts uh matter of chair if the commission would just indicate what staff members or consultants you would like in the meeting i'll coordinate with crystal most send the executives uh session invite to those parties so we need to make sure that north and company get the and the link and then get permission to Heather Heather Todd and i would like Kathleen Kramer as well as we're working closely on these reports together thank you okay um can we expand anyone from the gaming agent team commissioner skitter is that relevant anything for your kiosk question i think so but i was kind of trying to depart to to bruce i don't see him on oh i do see him right bruce if you're available i would like you to participate hey bruce what about gli rsm or do you want to eat some representation from there maybe gli because of the tech issue is that within the within the parameters of what's allowed by law so are we going to have to segment this so they're only in for where they're relevant no it's okay if they're there as long as we're only talking about the specific issues that you've voted to move into executive no but i'm not so sure that um pen wants gli and that's a good point they might they might know yeah so um yeah we might need to always go back with questions directly um to gli we could circle back to them that's me being commissioner skitter right so i think that that makes good sense i think we we've got um the right right folks and of course we'll bring our lawyers with us as well if that's okay okay thank you yeah i was just going to add christina gales from anderson creaker i'm taking a minute so i uh believe them also supposed to be in the executive session yes okay thank you anyone else all right so um again uh thank you to the entire team who's part of today's presentation rsm gli thank you for your expertise and um at this point in time the public meeting do move we don't move to adjourn that will adjourn in the executive session right that closes the whole thing right yes we do need to remember to adjourn the meeting in the second session wait at the executive session level yes so what i say then is um thank you everyone and we will now conclude this public meeting and we appreciate everybody's attention thank you so much it's better uh getting the invitation it's it's a 10 a.m meeting just click on the 10 a.m meeting i just i just forwarded to you more and to the folks that um at the gaming commission todd can you send it over to a nk i didn't catch that yeah they have it okay perfect thank you