 I also want to first note that we do have a quorum. I can see that, but we will do a roll call. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye, good morning, everybody. And Commissioner Stebbins. Aye. Good morning. I am hearing a lot of the noise. So what I will try to do is mute everyone. And for my fellow commissioners and participants, you'll just have to unmute yourselves. Thanks. Just because of the bells that are ringing as everybody joins, we appreciate so much of our staff joining today's meeting as they have been joining throughout this process. I wish to first note that given the unprecedented circumstances resulting from the global coronavirus pandemic, Governor should in order to provide limited relief from certain provisions of the open meeting law to protect the health and safety of individuals interested in attending our public meetings. And keeping with the guidance provided this meeting will be conducted using remote collaboration technology. And if for any reason, it's a technical problem. With our remote connection, we will have an alternative conference that I established immediately on our website. So thank you for joining. I bring to order this public meeting, number 298 of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission on April 23rd at 10 a.m. Before we get started, I want to just make a few remarks. In keeping with a mandate issued by the state, the commission extended temporary closures of the state's three casinos properties on April 3rd until May 4th. We will revisit operational status before May 4th, as we noted in our prior meeting, as we continue to take our lead from the Baker-Polito administration and public health officials. They are providing guidance based on their assessment of critical health benchmarks. As you can imagine, at this time, we're unable to provide a definitive timeline for the safe resumption of operations. However, we do want all to understand and appreciate that we are fully engaged with our licensees in preparation for a new normal in the myriad of considerations for a safe and sustainable reopening process. What we do know for sure is it won't be as simple as unlocking the doors and switching the lights back on. Countless organizations around the globe are devising plans for post-pandemic operations. These are, as we have said, uncharted waters. I appreciate that Wynn, MGM, and Penn National have been industry leaders in this discussion, engaging top public health experts to establish best practices and preparing plans to ensure that patrons and employees feel safe. It is also helpful that Wynn and MGM are able to share valuable insight based on relevant experience in Macau. Recently, Wynn CEO, Mathematics, issued a 23-page report that detailed a health and sanitation program for the Las Vegas property. It outlined many critical requirements, including physical distancing, meticulous cleaning procedures, PPE for guests and patrons, and, of course, reduced occupancy. As MGM and Penn also publicly noted, plans understandably continue to evolve as new information and data becomes available. The commission certainly recognizes that these plans will vary from state to state and will unroll at various stages. When the time is right, the commission and our licensees will likely have the benefit of lessons learned and will certainly have the benefit of strong data-driven state and local leadership. I think it's also worth emphasizing that whatever the plans are, they will require a robust public education campaign for customers and employees. Right now, though, the focus remains on staying home to stop the spread and flatten the curve. But as we think about looking toward the next phase, whenever that may be, there will be no shortage of logistics to consider. I appreciate our licensees' continued commitment to health and safety. And to all on the front line are dedicated medical personnel and all of those who are supporting their efforts. And, of course, all who are ensuring our supply line. We, again, express our gratitude. And I think of that for all of my fellow commissioners. And likewise, we can thank our staff, the MGC team. You've been amazing in your meaningful engagement and continued commitment to one another. And we thank you for also being responsible and doing your part by staying at home. And with that, we'll move right into our business today. We have quite a few minutes to approve. Commissioner Stebbins, please. Good morning. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, colleagues. First, I want to give a special thanks to Shahra Baddard, who's been great in helping pull these minutes together from the various meetings we've had over the past month. I'll begin with the approval of the March 20th, 2020 meeting minutes. Those are in your packet. I would move their approval subject to any typographical errors or any other non-material changes. Are there any questions or edits on Rike? Commissioner Zuniga. I was just going to second that motion. Okay. Any questions, edits? All right. We'll do our roll call. Commissioner Cameron. Well, Commissioner Cameron, I think folks just need to unmute. I'm sorry. And Commissioner O'Brien the same. Aye. Thank you. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. Commissioner Stevens. Aye. And I vote yes as well. Thank you. Five-zero. Commissioner Stevens. Sure. The next item is approval of minutes from the March 25th, 2020 meeting. Those were in your packet. I would move their approval again, subject to any typographical changes or any other non-material matters. And I will second that. Any edits, comments? Excellent. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. Commissioner Stevens. Aye. And I vote yes. Thank you. Five-zero, sure. Okay. The next package of minutes is from the April 3rd, 2020 meeting. I would move their approval again, subject to any typographical changes or any other non-material matters. Second. Any questions, comments, edits? Excellent. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. Commissioner Stevens. Aye. And I vote yes. Five-zero. In the last set of minutes for this meeting are the minutes from the April 9th, 2020 meeting. I would again move their approval, subject to any typographical errors or any other non-material issues. Second. Are there any questions or comments or edits? I have a question. I'm sorry to throw off our batting average. On page four, perhaps you can help me with this. I'm wondering about the one statement under the 1057 a.m. It says paragraph, it says there was a discussion around the need to reassess the commission's fiscal priorities. Licensees will receive the benefit of the full five million assessment. Is that what we intended to say? Derek, did you see that line? I did see that. I did see that line, Madam Chair. And I think I can work on getting some language to Sharra to update that because what we did was we gave back $2.1 million. The only reference of five million was to assess the full amount of the resource development fund requirement, not resource, public health trust fund. So I can get some revised language that talks about the monthly distribution, the monthly casual request for the quarterly assessment, as well as fully implementing the public health trust fund five million. Because if I understand correctly, we are actually requiring them to pay that full amount without any cost mitigation. All right, so that's good. Does that make sense, Commissioner Zuniga? Yeah, I remember that to be the discussion that the relief was only gonna be, if at all, just in terms of timing, but prior to the fiscal year. Right, and all the rest, I think does address that it was just that particular line that I was wondering about. Okay, excellent. If we could have that friendly amendment, I don't know how we address that, Commissioner Stebbins? We can make that clarification. We can send around an update if anybody's interested in seeing the language, but I think that clarifies the statement as Commissioner Zuniga and Director Lennon pointed out. And can we proceed then? So do I have a second already? I'm sorry. Thanks, Ani. Then, Commissioner Cameron? Hi. Commissioner Cameron? Hi. Commissioner Zuniga? Hi. Commissioner Stebbins? Hi. And I vote yes, thank you. Thank you, Sharra, for all your work and Commissioner Stebbins on addressing all the minutes with our video recordings. We really appreciate your staying on top of all of them. So thank you. Of course. Moving on to our administrative update, item number three on the agenda, interim executive director Wells. Good morning. Good morning, Madam Chair. Good morning, members of the commission. Given last meeting's extensive rundown on our remote working operations, I won't further all of those again and reiterate those. I will note that I do continue to be impressed with the staff and the volume of the work that is being accomplished during this time and the utilization of our remote capabilities really has been impressive. So I'd like to give a shout out to the staff and the IT department for just making that happen and continuing to work during these times. And as the chair has already referenced, I do also want to reiterate that we do have a real focus on the process of reopening the casinos at the appropriate time and I'd just like to describe, we're looking at that basically in two buckets in two different areas. One is, what do we as regulators need to ensure to protect the integrity of the games and the operations before reopening? Because we did shut down all the casinos right at once and we'll have to reopen them again. As you know from before, opening casino is an extensive regulatory process. Fortunately for us, our gaming management, Bruce Burke and definitely Bruce Band and Burke Kane, they've experienced in this area because they were involved in the reopening of the casinos in Atlantic City after Hurricane Sandy. So we're in good shape in this area. The checklists are done as far as being able to ensure once we reopen the doors in that area of integrity of the games and integrity of the operations will be in good shape. The second bucket, the second area we're looking into obviously is how do we and the casinos address specific concerns regarding COVID-19? Though as the chair had mentioned, we will be coordinating with government officials, health experts and also determining best practices from other jurisdictions to see what we really need to do to ensure the safety of staff, patrons and employees at the casino. So that is an ongoing process as time goes by and we see how things evolve in our state and nationwide and across the world. What we learn from that will be applied to how we go about this process. So staff is focused on that, continual meetings and continual conversations. So aside from that, I know further updates. I don't know if the commission has any questions but again, I'm impressed with the staff. They're ready to go and they're continuing to work. Questions for Karen on Rike? Yeah, thank you. I'm just following up on a point you made, Madam Chair. Both the MGM and Wien have experienced in these sort of public health operations in the age of the coronavirus because of their Macau operations. So the question, Karen, I take it we are learning those lessons as well from our conversations with the licensees. Yes, and we've got a team and actually we have a meeting set up tomorrow for a group to be looking at what are the lessons learned in Macau because they did close operations, they did reopen, what worked, what didn't work. So we'll be working on that as well. Great, so I look forward to learning more about that at a later time, maybe, you know, offline. We can have Commissioner Wells keep us updated on an ongoing basis. The team will be looking at it, but perhaps it can be incremental reports. That's helpful on Rike. She's gonna go. Okay, anything else? Okay, that's all I have for number three. Okay, so no other questions for Karen at this time? All right, thank you. Thank you, thank you very much and thanks to the entire team. Moving on to item number four, a Director of Research and Response for Gaming, Mark VanderLinden, good morning. Mark, can you hear us? Are you first? I've had some body internet connection here, so I hope I don't freeze up on. First, I wanted to point out a typo in the memo that I sent out. I'm going to discuss with you a request by MGM and Encore Boston Harbor to delay the launch of Play My Way until September 1st, 2021, not September 1st, 2020, as it states in the memo that I submitted to you earlier this week. So with that understanding, just I would like to just quickly run through the what Play My Way is and the shared request by MGM Springfield and Encore Boston Harbor. So as you know, Play My Way is an innovative budgeting tool designed to allow Massachusetts Latino patrons the ability to monitor the amount of money they spend on electronic gaming machines, slot machines, and inform their decisions to continue or to stop their play. It's a first of the kind in the United States that helps players make decisions about their gambling and to monitor and understand in real time. Play My Way is a budgeting tool that's on slot machines. Currently, it's only at Lane Ridge Park Casino and it was launched in 2015 as a pilot. As in 2018, there was a decision by the commission and our licensees, MGM and Encore Boston Harbor, that they would also adopt Play My Way after the initial trial period at Lane Ridge Park Casino. Rather than regulation, we entered into an MOU with those two companies. On October 1st of 2018, the MOU stipulated that it would be launched no later than September 1st, 2020. Since October, 2018, both of those operators in addition to the Gaming Commission and IGT have worked diligently and in good faith towards the completion and launch of Play My Way. However, on September 27th, interim executive director Karen Wells received a joint memo from MGM and Encore, which I attached to your packet, requesting a delay to launch until September 1st, 2021, citing the need to postpone capital expenditure projects due to the COVID-19 outbreak and the resulting suspension of operations. CIO and I spoke with MGM and Encore on September 10th. We wanted to just receive a little bit more information about their request and the timeline that they laid out. They provided quite a lot more detail just in terms of what the cost is and what their intention to roll Play My Way is out. And following that conversation, we were both in full agreement that we should work with them cooperatively and accept that September 1st, 2021, but recognizing that perhaps as we continue to work with them depending on how they resume operations that perhaps it may be before that. So I come before the commission to just see if you have any feedback and then we'll see a approval. You know, I think this is a very reasonable request. It's both, given the circumstances, one in which we react to the operational reality around the implementation, but also is a cost mitigation to managing the cash as these licenses manage their cash operations during this period. So I think it only makes sense to grant this. There's a lot of that goes into putting these together needs to be tested on the floor and approved by the labs and kind of that is really possible in this environment, even though there could be some development, but I think I agree with the recommendation and I think it's reasonable. Other questions for Director Van Der Linden. Just a clarification, Madam Chair. Director Van Der Linden, I agree with Commissioner Zuniga and your recommendation that this is reasonable and that we should approve this. I think you gave a September date that you had a conversation with the licensees and I just, I think probably meant an April, early April conversation, right? Is that correct? Yes, that's right. So we had a conversation with them on April 10th. So it's still right here this month. Perfect. No worries, thank you. Yeah. If I just may add, I really do feel that both operators and IGT have really been working hard in the development and pushing this forward. And I wanna emphasize the good faith and diligent work that has been happening since that MOU was signed. Great, nice to hear. Thank you. Yes. And I also appreciate that they gave us this much advanced notice. During, this is dated March 27th. Fact is, is that in the midst of all of this, they did prioritize this to make sure to issue a joint letter to us. So we appreciate that heads up. Any further questions for Dr. Vanne-Linden? And do we need a vote on this? You would like a vote? Yes. I would like a vote. The MOU has Katrina and I as the signatories, but given the role of the five commissioners in this entire project, I think this is the affirmation that this is a significant change to it. And a vote that I would appreciate. So that's really important to acknowledge. You know, given that the MOU is executed by Katrina and Mark probably in a formal vote, is it needed? But I appreciate that this is a request from the two licensees. So if we have, unless I hear any kind of suggestion contrary to us voting, I have a motion that would be great. Certainly, Madam Chair, I move that the commission allow on core Boston Harper's request and MGM's request to delay the implementation of the play my way, play management system until no later than September 1, 2021, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting suspension of operations as discussed here today. I second. Okay. All those in favor will do a roll call. Commissioner Cameron. Hi. Commissioner O'Brien. Hi. Commissioner Zuniga. Hi. And Commissioner Stebbins. Hi. I vote yes. Thank you. Thank you. 5-0. Thanks for the good work. And again, thank you to both Seth and Jackie on that effort. Moving on now to item number five. From our legal division, from General Counsel Grossman. Mr. Grossman. Good morning, Madam Chair and commissioners. Good morning. So there was a matter. This is the licensing and registration matter. And there was an issue brought to detected by the staff. It was brought to our attention by the licensees relative to the terms of the employee and vendor licenses and registrations. Essentially, there are some individuals and entities whose licenses and registrations are expiring or set to expire during the period of this temporary closure. And so for a variety of reasons, the submission of renewal applications may not be feasible at the moment, but the resulting expirations could lead to some administrative difficulties on the back end of the process. So as a matter of equity and efficiency, we set out to remedy this issue, come up with a proposal to remedy this issue. And Bill Curtis, who's on the line here, I can see him down below, will walk through the issue for you as well as to offer a recommendation to address the matter. There are a variety of options that are available for your consideration, but there's one in particular that we believe will be best to address the issue in the most cost-effective and efficient manner. So Mr. Curtis, if you will, if I could just turn it over to you and ask you to run through the issue and the recommendation. Good morning. Good morning, Licensing Manager Curtis. Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Commissioners and Attorney Grossman. Thank you for the great intro. As Todd mentioned, we were contacted by a few of the licensees. The main question is about employee renewal. Some of the folks that are up for renewal right now are running into some problems to be able to complete their work. As of early as yesterday, as late as yesterday, we received an email from one individual who said she didn't have a computer, so she wasn't able to complete her work. She was a little nervous about being able to return to work for license expired. We've had a few other folks that have run into the same problem as well. Some individuals are having problems obtaining the documents from various federal agencies in order to submit their renewal in a timely manner. So what we did was we contacted the developer to ask them about LMS, which is the Licensing and Assistance Windows, because I don't know. That's how individuals apply for a license and a registration with us. It's only. They gave us four proposals and we really are very happy with it. We'd like to recommend one proposal to you. That would be, they would allow a grace period to these employees. So anybody's license that was going to expire in April or May or June, however long this pandemic is going on, we would be able to, with your approval, offer them a grace period. What it would be is the developer would add a function to our Licensing Management System, which we already have in a different function. This would allow the folks to get some time to file their renewal. If we did not allow this grace period, these licenses and registrations would expire. Folks wouldn't be able to return to work when the casino is open. And once the casinos did open, they would have to apply for entirely license registration. That would cause some hardship on us as well as the licensees, but us we would have folks with two different records in LMS. And I think that would be a little difficult for the licensing staff in order to process the application, as well as the investigations unit to conduct a deep investigation on these folks and not being aware that they might have another LMS record. So that would be the hardships on us. The hardships on the casino would be that they would have to issue all new credentials to folks as license numbers would change, as well as expiration dates would change. So they would have to go into their databases and recreate numbers as well as expiration dates. And also these individuals might not even be able to work because their license application would still be pending. So that would be the first option. And this is the number one option to allow for the grace period. It can be regulated by the commission. So we can control that. We can give them 30 days, 60 days, 90 days. And this function can be used, again, if we run into this problem. So that was the first option. Second option would be a direct database expiration date update. But that the developer would have to create a custom database SQL script. That would take some time. There's very limited control over that. This is something that we could only use one time only. And there'd be no way of tracking. And as the folks know that use LMS, it's a great tool because it's very historical. Whoever touches a record, we do have a fingerprint on that. So we're able to know it does what at any time. The third option would be the expiration date update for a custom program. Again, the developer would have to write a custom program. We may be possible to target the specific individuals. And it would require quite a bit of testing. And it would take quite a bit of time to implement. The fourth option would be an addition, addition of the grace period functionality. This would allow users who have been previously licensed or registered to buy for their renewal after the license registration has expired. This would apply to everyone. But it needs a requirement phase, which what that means is a developer would have to sit with us and find out our requirements. This would take a little bit of time. And it would need extensive testing. So if we went with option 234, by the time the developer was able to roll out the scripts or the new functionality, folks licenses could expire, registrations could expire. So we would run it to the issue of having multiple requirements again. Sorry about that. So that's what the employees, with the vendors, the vendors, it's a little bit different. Non-gaming vendors, they're not in the licensing management system. That's something that the licensing division works on manually. So a few of their folks as well have reached out to vendors have reached out to us. They're pretty concerned about, you know, are they gonna be able to go back to work selling their goods and services, you know, if the license has expired. So we try to take a little bit of a hardship off of them as well. I believe it's a period that we should give to these folks as long as, you know, you can do the commission doesn't approve it. Now our recommendation, we sat down, attorney gross when I sat down and he would recommend that you allow, if the shutdown is 60 days, we allow these folks, a grace period is 60 days to submit their renewals to us. But again, we can change that any time. We can change that to 30 days. We can change it to 90 days. I mean, again, this is the fastest tool that the developer can do for us. And it's also multiple times. So if we've ever run into another problem like this again, we've already got a fix. So I'd appreciate any questions that anyone has. Questions for Bill. Yes. Hi there, license and manager Curtis, how are you this morning? Yeah. Listen, thank you for laying out those four options. And certainly the option that you recommend in conjunction with the legal team makes the most sense for a number of reasons. And also, what you pointed out, the effect this would have on the licensees, the MGC, I think the most critical piece you pointed out though is for us not to be a barrier for folks to get back to work. I think that that piece is really critical. And the option that you're recommending certainly ensures that that won't happen, that there will be this period and people as soon as it's safe can return and be able to make a living. So thank you for laying that out. And I agree with your recommendation. Thank you, commissioner. Yeah, madam chair, I'd also like to echo commissioner Cameron's comments and also thank our CFAO, Lenin and director Wells for their leadership on this issue also. You know, I think this makes perfect sense. We don't want anybody having to scramble to find their paperwork if and when we get a reopening date. And just to offer a little bit of stress relief to small businesses who have so much on their hands right now as well as to gaming employees who also might find themselves furloughed at this point. I think this is, it makes sense. And just offers some relief and provides a little bit of relief of stress to an individual who's trying to think of not only everything else they have on their plate, but oh my gosh, how do I renew my license? How do I renew my registration? Just to ease them of that burden I think makes a lot of sense at this time. Commissioner O'Brien, commissioner has got any questions for our licensing manager, Curtis. I don't have any questions, but just to reiterate, I wanted to thank him for his time and attorney Grossman's time yesterday for going deep dive on this for me. It makes option one makes the most sense for a lot of reasons. Efficiency ease of reuse, if we need to do this again as we cycle in and out potentially. And he also gave me details and assurances in terms of the integrity of LMS, in terms of who has the ability to actually implement the grace period. And I was satisfied with the protections that are in place. So to me, this solution is the most cost effective ease of use and also preserves the integrity of the system. So I think it's a good idea. And I just wanted to thank them for their time to walk through it yesterday. Commissioner Sunica. Yeah, thank you. Perhaps you think, thanks again, I agree with the recommendation, but let me perhaps talk a little bit about how I came to understand this issue that maybe is good to state for the record. There's a mechanical issue with our CMS, which we're gonna fix with a small cost consideration for our developer because of the upcoming expiration for certain people who've been licensed. But there's also a policy question as I think of our last discussion on the annual, on the year that people have to cash their tickets. And the policy parallel here is that we are not necessarily extending the validity of people's licenses as they expire. We're only allowing for them an opportunity to fill out the renewal application on our system later time, which we call this grace period which we can modify as needed. But the licenses, if I'm correct, this is a question really for Bill and for Todd. The licenses will continue to expire on a rolling basis and people, because they don't have access necessarily everybody to either the documentation or internet or what have you, we are fixing with this small patch our licensing management system to allow them to renew with pre-populated PLC, if you will, so that we don't get a duplication of records and the like. So is that a fair statement? In general, we're not changing the policy. People's licenses will continue to expire as they were issued three years ago or what have you, depending on the license, but they will have an opportunity to renew that license as we are touching on it. Yeah, Bill, go ahead. What it would allow, if I understand your question correctly, what it would allow, it would let these, it would, the folks would have the ability to renew their license, but only be a small few. I'm right now, I mean, I have figures that, I know it's about 20 people by the end of May. So it would only affect these few people and them only. Everyone else still have to renew their license to the proper manner, they wouldn't get any extended time, because they should be able to, once the casinos open up and folks are back in and the HAI departments are in operation to offer some assistance to these individuals, those folks should be able to submit their approval on a timely level. These folks, like I said, at the most, I believe it's like 20 people at the most. They're the only ones that would be affected because they don't have the capability to submit their renewal because their license would expire, but it's only for a second to select few. It's not for, did that answer the question? Yeah, and Bill, so these few, their licenses won't expire. That's the purpose of this, is that they would keep the same record. It's not that they have one license and then have a gap and then have to get another license. Their license won't expire. They get a grace period to renew, but it's only that select few. The issue on the license term is that on the backend, so if their license would have expired on, say, April 15th of 2023, it still expires on April 15th of 2023. We're not pushing back the license time on the backend. You're just extending it right now so their license does not expire while these casinos are shut down and they have time to get their documents in order. Is that correct? Unfortunately, they can't finagle the date because in the script that was written for the program, it allows for either a five-year license or a three-year license. So if we allow them the additional, say 30 days to submit their renewal, 30 days would be added onto the backend of their license. Okay. If we try to play with the expiration date, that would really conflict with other parts of the system and there's no guarantee it would work as well as we don't even know if the system could crash if you try to play with 20,000 records to adjust everyone's expiration date. This would only affect the select few they would get. So I mean, we could go with a 30 day. Again, we can control the amount of time that we give to these folks to the grace period to submit their license. There's really no way to ratchet back the date because it's programmed into the system where folks either get a five-year renewal or a five-year registration or a three-year license. If I could just add a couple of comments or questions. First off, it's my understanding. Well, first off, I should say that I agree hardily with Commissioner Cameron that our goal is to make sure that our system doesn't create some kind of a barrier to getting back to work and I appreciate that very much. Secondly, I also wanna thank Bill and Todd for their time. I think we all have had the benefit of very helpful briefings in accordance with our open meeting law requirements. So thank you. I also understand that licensees themselves through their HR department actually help the employees. So it's not even so panicle. In other words, some will not have access to a computer which you've acknowledged, but they also get assistance in properly filling out their license, whether there's a language barrier or any other sort of misunderstanding or lack of clarity in terms of filling out the license or support given by the licensees. So the shutdown of operations really impacts the overall process. And your count right now Bill is 20 as of this month. You haven't been able to assess or have you how many will be in May and potentially June if the operations continue to be suspended. Is that right? Currently, Chair, there's four for the month of April. Yeah. And there's 16 for the month of May. So we'd reflect on 16 for us. So there's, I mean, I think it's a fair question to ask why do we need the technological fix if could we possibly do it manually? But what happens is the expiration occurs in the system and they're out, correct? Correct, correct. I mean, we did have the function for legacy with a paper application, but if the individual didn't get that to us in enough time for us to upload it and enter it that way, they'd run into the same problem again. I mean, the license would just expire. That's a problem. It's a hard date for it to expire. And the only thing that keeps the individual's license registration from firing is successful submission of a renewal application. So one feeds off the other. Being one, we develop the system. I mean, we never even thought of something like this to happen. And I mean, it's just something that's just, I feel like it's a one-off. And if it does happen again, the approval would be able to take care of it. Unfortunately, the folks would get a little extra time on their license, but we can control that. And if we rolled out, say, 30 days, we can continue to give them an extra 30 days. So say that the casinos don't open up and people don't come back to sometime. The folks in April, we don't come back to, I mean, say June 1st, we're able to give them another grace period of till June 30th to submit their renewal application. So it's just not like a one-time fix. So unfortunately, it has to be in increments of months, not days, so if we were allowed them to have one month, which would be 30 days at the onset, that would be great. And then if they weren't able to submit their renewal because of the closure, then we could give them an extra 30 days. But if they were open and they failed to submit their renewal, then they have to apply all over. I'm sorry, you broke up right on that last part. If we were to give them a grace period of the 30 days, you know, for the folks in April, we give them a grace period of 30 days. And the casinos don't open up. The H.I. department doesn't open up until sometime in June. We could give them another 30 days to allow them to submit their renewal application because of the closure. But if it's because of they just didn't do it, we don't have to allow them to have that extra 30 days. I understand. There's also a problem, I think, if you try to do it manually, correct me if I'm wrong, Bill, but you have to close out the other file and then you're gonna have to open another file with another tracking number. So now you're gonna have separate numbers for the same employees, which in my view also creates a risk that as you go through in years going forward, that you might have somebody looking at vetting this person and not having all the files that they really need. So to me, the manual actually creates a risk later on that I just don't think we need to take. Thank you, Commissioner O'Brien. That is the obvious question. Why not just do it manually? But it does create that risk. And I thought that Todd and Bill explained that really well last week, yesterday, I'm sorry. Excellent. Other questions, Commissioner Zinnicka, you were leaning in. Yeah, thank you. That's an HD signal. Yeah, perhaps so just to write if I perhaps the point I was sort of talking to before, we are not with this process, nobody's getting an extension of their licenses. The renewal, the term of the licenses need to be the same. But what we are effectively doing is allowing for this fix on the system to allow, to implement this grace period for the renewal of the licenses. So whenever people licenses expire and it's gonna happen on a rolling basis, we have the ability to adjust these grace periods as they manifest themselves. As the closures continue or not, we have the ability to react by extending these grace periods to renew their licenses. But effectively, if they expire, they expire, they have to renew. And that's our process. Well said. Bill, one just quick question is, we get down to the end of the month in subject to the commission's vote on this agenda item. Are you planning to create some type of email message or letter that would go out to everybody whose license or registration is coming up for renewal in the month of April to explain what our process will be? Sure, we could develop something like that and we'll also send it to the HR department of each casino as well. Because some of those folks will probably reach out to the HR because there are some folks that are actually still in HR. But sure, we had one woman yesterday and we told her that we can work through the process. But yeah, sure, we can do that. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you. Can I just get some clarification on the memo? Because I'm not sure if you're shifting, Bill, on the recommendation, but in the memo says staff is requesting that the length of the grace period equal the number of days that the gaming establishments are closed. Sorry, Chair. With commission on Zuniga's concerns, I feel that since we're able to do it multiple times, I would say we rolled out in the shortest period, which would be 30 days. One more time. Because if we, I mean, say we're close to 70 days, if we give them 90 days, I feel better that we're able to have that fingerprint as Commissioner O'Brien was concerned with. It was a great concern because I didn't even think of that. We'll be able to see, like it's a 30 day. And if we have to give them another 30 days, you'll see 30 days there again. And there's only a select few that are able to do that. We have to be super users and there's only two of us, myself and Interim Executive Director Bells. So we're the only two that have that capability to do that. But I would like to go back on my recommendation after listening to, and I'd like to recommend a 30 day and I hope that Todd will agree with me, as well as Karen. Because I just feel that I think that's probably a little bit more of a safeguard, which I know some folks have a concern about. And at the same time, it will probably, when the employee comes back, they should have enough time to be able to submit. If they know they've got like a 60 day grace period, sometimes people don't feel the need to submit their renewal right away or their application. They just go, oh, well, I'll get to it. They'll give me another extension. So if we have like, excuse me, grace period if people have like a 30 day, I think that will kickstart the employee to file their renewal, I don't know if that works. Commissioners, Karen, any comments? I guess my question is, are you looking to amend what you're asking for? So the last sentence really would read that the length of the grace period would be executed in 30 day increments. Yes ma'am, yes, please. Okay. I think that's reasonable. That's things reasonable, yeah. Okay, thank you. And so if the closure then ends up being more than 30 days or 60, we will then effectuate those increments. There will be another grace period and then a grace period. Is that the thinking? Correct. And again, it's, I think 30 days is more manageable and where we're able to use this tool numerous times, we could just, if we see that the April folks aren't gonna be able to get their renewals done by the end of May, we could give them that 30 days. Additional questions, comments? My one last question would be, should we be doing this in terms of months, since it sounds like you said the system is doing months and not days? So should it be one month increments as opposed to 30 days? Yes, they can do it for one month, but they, on their proposal, they wrote one month equals 30 days. Yeah, so 30, 60, 90. So 30 would be, correct. Additional questions, comments? I do know that you're looking for a vote on this to get guidance. Commissioners, do I have a motion? So Madam Chair, I move that the commission approve the licensing division's request to institute a grace period for vendors and employees affected by the closure of the casinos due to the COVID-19 pandemic to file their license and registration renewals. The length of this grace period will be executed in 30-day increments. Second. For the discussion, questions, comments? Barring none. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. Commissioner Stevens. Aye. And I vote yes. Five, zero. Thank you. Thank you to my Assistant Manager Curtis. As always, you do just a really detailed job in helping us to truly understand your systems. And I know personally, I appreciate it so very much. So thank you. And to Mr. Grossman, thank you too for your assistance yesterday in briefing me. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, commissioners. Appreciate it. Thank you. And I think that's for five A and we have both, we have Mr. Grossman and I carry Tracy, Associate General Counsel, joining us on that discussion with the benefit of Commissioner O'Brien. So thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and commissioners. I'll kick this one off again. I see Ms. Tracy down there as well. It's always, of course, important for a regulator to be able to clearly identify the scope of its authority, but particularly in the event of an emergency situation. And it's similarly important where possible for stakeholders to have a clear understanding of the regulator's views in that regard. So given the present circumstances, it seems prudent to take the time now to do just that relative to the gaming commission's authority. Ms. Tracy will introduce and discuss a set of draft regulations for your consideration that get into the commission's authority to act in an emergency situation. So good morning, Madam Chair and commissioners. Good morning. So you have a memo and a draft of this regulation in your packet. By way of background, we had started looking at this in mid-March towards the outset of the pandemic. We'd started looking at the authority of the commission to act in the event that the gaming establishment needs to be closed for public health or safety reasons. And we found that the authority existed but that it was spread out among various statutes and regulations in 23K and 205CMR. So we drafted this regulation to compile and clarify the existing authority of the commission to act in an emergency situation. We've outlined in the reg some examples of what an emergency situation might include things such as a declaration of a state or a national state of emergency or a natural disaster. But we've also noted that this list isn't intended to be all-inclusive. And we just wanna be clear that this regulation doesn't create any new authority. It only clarifies and consolidates existing authority. So the regulation outlines the various authority of both the IEB and the commission, which is found throughout chapter 23K. The IEB has the authority to order a licensee to cease and desist particular activity or to suspend a gaming license in certain situations. If the IEB were to act in those instances, the licensee would need to be provided with a hearing within seven days before the commission, within seven days of that action. And then implicit in that, of course, is the IEB's authority to work with the licensee is to try to come to an agreement about any types of conditions that, operating conditions that they might want to impose in lieu of suspension of a license. The IEB also has authority to make recommendations to the commission for particular conditions to be imposed on the licensee or for suspension of the license. And then, of course, the commission has very broad authority, as you all know. Commission would have broad authority to issue orders or to establish procedures to be followed by the licensees as a condition of licensure. These could apply to gaming or non-gaming activities and could include closure of the casinos in whole or in part. And in those instances, the licensees would need to be afforded a hearing before the commission, before any action was taken. So this is kind of an overview of this regulation and we wanted to open it up today for discussion among the commissioners and any questions that you might have. I'll just start off thanking Todd and Carrie. We've been working on this and going back and forth for the better part of the last month. And it really started with the current situation that we're in, but then it also got us thinking about, you know, things we haven't thought of yet and other circumstances that may put us in the situation of having to move a fair amount of speed. And so, trying to consolidate the various sources of authority and how that would be executed, making it clear to MGC staff, but also the licensees, what's the process, what's the procedure that's going to be followed, et cetera, and then also specific to this going through reopening in terms of, I think to Carrie's point, how do you execute conditions on the license that are not simply, you're open, you're closed? And so this is the start of the dialogue to make sure that everything that we can think of at this point is in this, but with enough flexibility to go forward without having to be overly specific. Questions or comments for Todd, Carrie, and Commissioner O'Brien on this matter? I will interject right now. When I would actually slightly correct, Carrie, because the legal team was looking at this authority while in advance of mid-march, you revisited it with, I think, the hint from Commissioner O'Brien that it would be good timing to revisit it now, but we are asked early on what would be the commission's authority to suspend operations in light of the pandemic. And you did, too, Mr. Grossman and Ms. Choisey did an excellent job of briefing us. The statute, I think Commissioner O'Brien and I, because we were put together at this particular time, we looked at the statute and we felt confident that we could make solid arguments that the commission had full authority to unilaterally suspend operations. We were fortunate because after so much discussion with so many significant stakeholders, including the public health officials, our state leadership, our local leadership, and, of course, the licensees that the licensees acknowledged the paramount importance of the safety of the employees, of the patrons of our employees, and did not resist our desire to temporarily suspend operations. So I appreciate very much that Commissioner O'Brien had our sight to say, okay, we were there, we didn't have to rely on, as you say, putting it all together. And now with the idea of a regulation should, in the future, something that's hope it's never at the same scale that we're looking for now, but should there be an emergency or crisis that needs for us to think about one licensees operations, we would have this in one place. So with that, I understand today, Todd, that you're not looking to vote on this, but rather have a discussion among us commissioners. And then you would actually share the language with the licensees as well. Do you wanna just go over that plan again for our record? Of course, thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, the plan commissioners for today, subject to your approval, of course, is that we have a full discussion. You gain a comfort with the proposal and then we circulate it to the licensees for their review and comment, as they have not had a chance to look at this and obviously it directly impacts them. And that we do that before we commence with the promulgation process, in which of course it opens up to a public hearing and what have you. And ultimately you could determine to adopt these regulations by emergency at an upcoming meeting in a week or two weeks or even three. So prior to engaging in any of the formal regulation adoption process, it makes sense to me that we would allow the licensees to comment, to allow them to have some input before we move forward with this to ensure that we understand where they may be coming from when it comes to our authority. Of course, we've laid out what we believe it to be. It would be helpful to know whether they agree or have a different view of it now, as opposed to later on. So for those reasons, I'd recommend that at the conclusion of your discussion, if you do have that comfort level, that we just circulate it to the licensees for review and comment. And then we come back and whether it's a week or two weeks to move forward. Ms. Sharpe, did you wanna add any corrections or anything on missions? No, I don't think so. I mean, I think it makes sense, given what we have right now for a timeline, to do that we always have, for some reason, we need to move faster on that. We can deal with it at that time, but I think it's what Attorney Grossman's outline seems like the right process to follow. And I wasn't saying corrections for Mr. Grossman, it was corrections for me. So thank you. Commissioner Cameron, do you have any questions or comments? Again, this is an area where I benefited fully from a thorough explanation with the legal team, really going through their thought process and how they came to put these together and their consensus. So that was really helpful to me and came away understanding fully and agreeing with this recommendation. I also agree with the recommendation that we get it out to the licensees in case there's something we haven't thought of. Excellent. Commissioner Stebbins. No, I also benefited from the briefing by the legal team. Thank my colleague, Commissioner O'Brien, for her work and agree there doesn't seem to be anything pressing at this point that we can't put it out to our licensees and get their feedback on it before we move ahead with the promulgation process. Excellent. Commissioner Zunica. Yeah, no, only to agree that I think it's a right approach. I think it was clear, although in many different sections, the authorities that we have are usually rather broad and we really appreciate it. I think the whole purpose of issuing regulations is to clarify things in statutes, et cetera. And it's very relevant that they all be in one place. I think this is good work. I think, as you said, Chair, there is so much that we've accomplished in the past with just simply dialogue. A case in point I might add that play my way, which we discussed just minutes ago was the result of that dialogue. We don't necessarily issuing regulations which we always thought we had the ability to do or unilaterally. And that was the case in this closure, the class closure, but it's important to note what that authority is precisely for those promulgations. And I think it's good to have it with us. So I'm in agreement with this. So for this item, you're not looking for a vote, but I think you are hearing a consensus from all that the next steps that you've outlined sound reasonable and smart. So thank you. And again, thank you to Carrie for all her good work and Todd for your good work. And that work again was happening during a very trying time and it was excellent work at the time. And now I think we're taking care of the future. This will be a good step for the future. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Moving on to item number six, do we have any commissioner updates or any statements or anything we want to say? I'll go through the list and unless you want to do the lean in. Commissioner Cameron, are you all set? I am, thank you. Okay, commissioner Brian. And nothing for me. Thanks. Okay, commissioner Zunica. No, well, only to note something we haven't discussed here, but it's been widely reported in the press the approach that wind resorts has had. You sort of alluded to that in your opening remarks chair, but I will just emphasize that the commitment that they made to keeping their employees for this period is nothing short of remarkable. They're paying them in full and they're also paying out of pocket for what would ordinarily come from customers in the form of tips. So I just want to mention that that is one thing that really stands out to me in the past few days and I didn't want to go on this. Yes, and that's a very valid point. I do know my hope that we remember that we have recognized that in the past and I know that our communications director Elaine Justko has included it in the public blog notes that she distributes, but it is no short of remarkable. It's extraordinary that wind resorts has been positioned to be able to extend to all of their employees about 15,000, I believe, Enrique, you can correct me to keep them on their not only with the effect of benefits, but their salary and their tips. And that right now, that commitment is through May 15th. And if I'm right and anybody can correct me for our area, that's about 4,000 or so employees. Is there a better number? Well, I think that's a good proxy. It may be more than that, but I think obviously they are counting on, effectively acquiring a lot of goodwill, a lot of loyalty from their employees, perhaps being in a good position to restart operations quickly. And again, it's a testament to their financial capability and to their commitment to the community in many ways. Yeah, I think I also saw that CEO Maddox recognized the cost to the entity to retrain everyone. That cost can't be equal to all the goodwill that they build with their labor force. And so I know that many of the employees are echoing their thanks among all of their entities. So I'm glad that you brought it up. Any, Commissioner Stevens? I just wanted to mention I had a great chance to join Director Vander Linden and Theresa Fiori yesterday on a conference call with the Game Sense team to see how their ongoing work, even during the suspension of operations and had a great presentation by one of the Game Sense employees. So it was just good to reconnect and see everybody still hard at work and preparing for the eventual reopening. So it was a great call and thanks to Mark and Theresa for including. That's great. Any other comments? Barring none. Do I have a motion? So moved, moved to adjourn. Second. Okay, roll call. Commissioner Cameron? Aye. Commissioner O'Brien? Aye. Commissioner Zuniga? Aye. And Commissioner Stevens? Aye. Chair votes yes. Thank you. And everyone be safe. 5-0. Thanks, Cheryl. Thank you, everybody. Bye. Thank you.