 Good morning. We are calling to order meeting number 279 of the Massachusetts gaming commission on Thursday, September 20 20 no, it's not September October October today. It's October 10 2019 at 10 a.m. At our offices here in Boston at 101 Federal Street. We'll begin with item number two commissioner Stevens, please share. Good morning, madam chair In your packet you have the minutes from the September 26 2019 meeting I would move their approval against subject to a correction for any typographical errors or any other non-material matters Any discussion or recommended edits this time? Very no for the discussion. Thank you. Sure. Excellent All those in favor I Opposed 5-0. Thank you Next item is the administrative update. I Do not see our executive director this morning Catherine good morning commissioners executive director for bedrosion is out sick today He's asked me to give you an update on the 2020 racing applications We received by the appropriate deadline one application. It is from Plainville gaming and redevelopment also known as Plain Ridge Park They have filed a timely racing for 110 racing days harness racing at the PPC race course We have scheduled the hearing in the community Which is a hearing in Plainville at the Plainville Town Hall for October 31st at 10 a.m. Between now and then we will go through the application redacted We're appropriate and put it on our website So if anyone has comments they can submit them into us before the hearing and then all the commissioners have received a Copy of the application so that you can take a look at it and if you have any questions, please let us know Once we have the hearing in the community We will be back before the commission on November 7th for you to ask any questions of the applicant and then to make your Decision on that application any questions So you said you said the hearing date was Scheduled for October 31st. That's correct and any commissioner can come it's a public meeting Commissioner Cameron will preside but any anyone's welcome to come and We were going to be in Plain Ridge at a different date for a different meeting right November 7 But the hearing needs to proceed. Yes. Yes, that's right. We'll be voting on the application November 7th on November 7th. Yes Got it So 10 a.m. In the in the hearing is where it the new At the new town hall as opposed to usually we've had it at the senior center So it's nice with that new facility to have it there Any further updates? That's all I have item number four This is the commissioners reports or updates We've decided to bring this to the beginning of the meeting because it warrants Considerable attention and we've had it at the end of the agenda last meeting. This is concerning the relicensing for Plain Ridge commissioners O'Brien and I Think we've had a general conversation about what we should consider in terms of renewal But I think the most pressing issue today had some conversations with IEB about Timing and what they need direction from from us and in particular the depth of review on The licensee and the qualifiers and based on my conversations And I'm sure Ms. Wells can elaborate they they are doing they do ongoing reviews obviously of everyone and then they have a process when people are changing in and out they have different forms that they have used for The vendors and the licensees etc. And how they refresh If there's any change in circumstance, I think based on my conversations My recommendation would be that be the process that we direct IEB to conduct in connection with the renewal of the license Maybe Ms. Wells can give the rest of you more detail on what that means, but my conversations with IEB I felt very confident that in addition to the ongoing review that they do all the time Making sure that they follow that in connection with this process would satisfy due diligence in terms of the licensee Yeah, yeah, and you know the bottom line is pretty much what what the commissioner Brian says I'm there as well Karen will explain the process for renewal for vendors of which we intend to recommend or we recommend that That be followed in this case for investigations and updates of pen But just to expound a little bit on on the prior remarks It's it's it's really Context here matters quite a bit There is specifically has been a couple of really Noteworthy and important procedures that we've done recently notably with the investigation into the The merger and the transaction into the reed for pen which was done in two phases a Temporary approval and a final approval If anybody's interested we could go through through that, but it's important that to note that that's an important context into What has happened recently for for the review of pen other things that you alluded to commissioner director wealth can also expound upon but The every new qualifier Follows the same procedure of an investigation. It's the multi-jurisdictional BET form with the Supplemental Massachusetts form So the initial Investigation that we had because everybody was a new qualifier at the time with all the historical really has a natural refresh into the years as we as we move along and Last but not least it's all of all two more things All of the qualifiers the licensees the Executives the key gaming executives. They are they're all under the affirmative continuing obligation to report any issues to The IEB and they in fact do they collect them the read them they analyze them and so the very nature of Licensing them and knowing them really on a day-to-day Really would not warrant in our opinion the initial deep dive Referred to that that we did back then So do you want to expand a little bit on what we do for vendors, which is what we're trying to emulate? Yeah, again, the in the IEB is just looking for a general policy directive from the Commission So we know what we're Expected to do For this renewal and it's that the range could be from the deep dive to do nothing and you know because there's ongoing suitability So based on internal conversations in the IEB's recommendation is that we do a review Which is generally similar to the renewal protocol that we have established for gaming vendors primary So those are the slot machine manufacturers the table game manufacturers These are companies we take a very hard look at because it goes directly to the integrity of the games and want to know About those companies in in depth so the renewal protocol for those companies They they get licensed for three years So it makes sense that you'd have a streamlined process if you're only renewing if you're only licensed for three years And you're renewing you can't do a deep dive every three years because it takes your time to do those investigations So we have a streamlined process that involves abbreviated form submission a Confirmation of ongoing suitability disclosure requirements, and it does have both the state police and a financial investigator Investigation and review and analysis So the recommendation is that we translate that protocol to the Penn renewal I would also Take a look to include the questions that the Commission just recently Reviewed for the Massachusetts supplement that we had a public meeting discussion on whether we have them fill out the masks up Or I just add the questions to the form. I can do it either way I'll just see what makes sense based on potential redundancy in the application But given that there is an ongoing suitability requirement for all our licensees I think it makes the most sense because we do have a sense of the company and we're always checking Do you know is there ongoing litigation? Is there have there been other regulatory infractions? What's going on with the the executives on their individual basis? so You know the reasons I would suggest in summary that we are recommending this type of review for the Penn suitability renewal is The category to license term is only five years unlike the 15 year of the category one licensees And as we've discussed once License suitability is ongoing and the burden is on the applicant to maintain that suitability and provide information to the to the Commission there's a continuing duty to report and as Our experience with Penn National is they are there actually they have a very good system of reporting their license in multiple jurisdictions They have people that are assigned to make sure that license that their regulators are informed of any activity that's going on any changes any Potential regulatory infractions things that are going on and they've done a good job with that And we do have an ongoing relationship With the company and we do monitor those issues with the company. So we monitor their SEC filings Litigation reports compliance matters, etc. So it's not as if we're coming in cold the way We were back in 2013 where we're just trying to understand even what this company did and what their background was the other the other point just to Make it is that the The IEB recently also did an analysis of that whole week transaction. So that took a big look at the company and the You know the changes that were going on there and there were certain new qualifiers and we looked at those So that has been very recent You know given that there have been no significant areas of concern with Penn National with related Relation to their ongoing suitability I think that this format where we have an established protocol We have forms if we can just modify that for this purpose. That's the most efficient use of our time resources and it will Effectuate the due diligence requirements for an ongoing suitability of the licensee for your decision Director Wells I think whatever we do should is set sets a precedent and So, I mean, I'm hearing all of the the ways that Penn has been responsive but I'm just Do you feel like this? this methodology Minimizes our risk for example if we had a licensee who had multiple issues Which they don't I understand that but is this something This what you're recommending this format You would feel comfortable with this that we would still be minimizing our risk. You'd be looking at all the pertinent issues. I Understand in an abbreviated format, right? And I think that's a that's a very good point because whenever we do an investigation You know the the forms and sort of that cursory review is it is a mechanism to identify red flags Identify areas of concern where the investigator can take a take a look at that area So for example, if there was a licensee that had an issue Even if we use these abbreviated forms This will catch the major areas where there may be an issue of concern and that does not preclude the Investigators from going in that direction So we have broad discretion as to what we want to look at and if anything comes up Even if it's in an open source check on it, you know and on an either a press article some other information We still have the ability and the resources to go down that road and look at that in depth It's the the recommendation on the System is just how do we sort of start the investigation and get the initial information You know can I Expound on on I think what I think you also you also mean which is you know this question of president The way we at least I have been thinking about it and I think we should Is that these would be should be flexible for one? But also perhaps only applicable to category two license, right? In Canada category ones are well 14 years from now and admittedly many of us are not going to be here and regardless, it's it's it would be it would be very hard to bind let's say or you know or or Forza commission the future commissions and as to what they might want to do there in that in that sense You know unless I'm really I really I really think it's impractical for us to start issuing regulations Let's say on renewals that applied to category ones at this juncture Right, I would agree with that and I was going to make the same point And also to your point in terms of how long it takes to have someone in a five-year term where half the term is basically Processing the renewal is just also a waste of resources on everybody's part The one thing that I did comment on when I talked to I be and I want to raise this with everyone is well I don't think we need a formal Process that we don't need new forms and we can work with what we have I would like there to be a memorialization at the end in terms of were there any issues that needed to be vetted further And an overview of what was done so that if somebody is looking back historically Particularly 14 years from now maybe trying to figure out how to renew category one There's something discreet that they can go to to see what process we followed and so I do want something writing It doesn't have to be to the level of a full-blown suitability report necessarily But something that would be public record in terms of what was done. Yeah, I'm thinking that you know Obviously a 500 600 page report is not what I think the Commission is looking for right But I can do some kind of either letter to the Commission or memo to the Commission just sort of outlining broad strokes what what? What they review a compass and if there were any issues and they may be resolved sometimes things come up and resolve them Okay, it's it's not something that the Commission needs to be concerned about but if there are you need to know about that And there could be there's there's a larger not just the investigatory material and the forms But perhaps what you also mean is the broader scope of review, which I think we're going to talk about in a little bit I think they're There is an assumption and a presumption that will do a compliance review with all of the initial Promises or you know commitments that that they made some of which is done by our ombudsman and staff that there might be also a What I suggest should happen which is a little bit of more focus into The property Financials which is something we have not done as recently the retransaction focus a lot mostly on the company and The other company qualifier in that case GLP I so there's specific procedures that I think we should you know We should undergo and memorialize of course because I Would submit that they might be more relevant five years from now if we extend the license for it for five years Even before the other category Yeah, I would just add I Like the idea of keeping the the review simple And I think from our conversation yesterday. I like the process. She's been visioned in addition to answering some of the new Questions that we added to the mass sub-form But if you you also look back when we did the RFA one and RFA two You came back to us at the start of our RFA to deliberations to give us an update on suitability So that's something we've done already and I think it kind of fits nicely into a renewal process to have that part of the report from you So I just wanted a comment with respect to Commissioner Cameron's Observation it is difficult to think about policy making When we take into consideration Either the personalities that are in place at the time of decision-making or in this case the the entity that we're looking at and you know kudos to PPC for Being so good at reporting to you and your team Director Wells. That's an important part of the ongoing Suitability process that we must do and so it's putting us in the position where to Commissioner O'Brien's point it wouldn't necessarily it would not make sense I can say more affirmatively to use these Critical resources to really duplicate efforts that have already been done So I would just reiterate that a decision to not do the quote-unquote deep dive at this time is in no way compromising or in any way not Indicating the importance of our vigilance It's that we have been vigilant during the course of the period and so Going forward You know who knows what the future will bring but if I understand right now You're not looking for necessarily firm firm guidance from us just a general direction Maybe in the future there would have to be a clearer policy that in fact at the very least every so many ten years For instance a deep dive is required But at this point given the context of where we're in it just wouldn't make sense to use resources unnecessarily at this point I just need a consensus from the Commission as a whole that this approach is Consistent with the sort of the thinking of the Commission and we're all on the same page. So when we complete it we're not In a position where we have to go back and do something else Do you want to give any direction in terms of memorializing? It doesn't it could be a memo It could be should it come to us publicly? No, I should come to us publicly I want this to be easily accessible to the public and yet the future commissioners to be able to see what we did and as Director Wells described it I see it as short and concise an overview of the process that was conducted and then the conclusions that were made and to The extent that there was anything that did require a deeper dive that that's flagged in the document and this is on suitability Correct and what I can do I can work with Commissioner O'Brien So I can do a draft and work with her and make sure that that's consistent with her vision of how this would go But but there does appear to be a consensus emerging around the notion of parallel tracking What procedures we currently do for the vendors when we do the renewals Those just don't come in public Right Yeah, I think your recommendation is entirely appropriate So nobody no no do we need a normal boat? Can we just give you? Yeah, we don't have a boat marked up. I think you've got direction I'm comfortable And should we see if attorney Grosman does anything? Yes Attorney attorney turns us on its head or if you could now elaborate on the rest of the process, that would be great. Thank you Good morning. Good morning Cut out my greetings and introduction. We'll move right into the meat of it So I think suitability is clearly an important part of any renewal process But there are of course other elements that you'll want to consider in conjunction with that things like some of the compliance with the license conditions whether things are going well and the host and surrounding communities You should consider things like they as they do in at least Pennsylvania whether you want to conduct a hearing in sorts in the host community to allow for public comment of any kind And issues of that sort So I think there are a number of other elements that will want to consider as we move forward and crafting some type of process Though I think as discussed the suitability is the cornerstone really of that as it is and most other jurisdictions so with that if it's helpful we can move into Some of the policy questions that have been posed and see if there's any consensus Around some of that and of course if there isn't at this point, that's okay as we're just going to really start crafting I think some Regulations if that's where everyone wants to go And we'll have another opportunity to modify those or and either even solicit the public input So the first question really revolves around whether there should be a Fee for the renewal the statute actually does require a renewal fee In the case of The initial fees you'll recall they were 85 million 25 million dollars respectively for category one and two the Commission elected not to enhance that in any way so as to allow The licensees to put any additional funding into the buildings themselves In our case now the statutes actually say that any fee should be based on the cost of fees associated with the evaluation of The licensee so it appears as though the statute did not contemplate any type of substantial relicensing fee just that We would assess any costs associated with the suitability investigation or holding any hearings or things of that nature of course we tax all of the Licenses on a daily basis and on an annual basis based upon the number of Gaming positions they have so they are paying substantial fees to begin with and it does not appear as though the statutes contemplated assessing any kind of sizable Renewal fee but that being said if the Commission does have some discretion in assessing some kind of fee here at least in the Case of the category two. I believe it says the fee must be at least one hundred thousand dollars So we can we can start there. Of course, you don't have to Identify specific fee at the moment, but it'd be helpful just to gain an understanding of any thoughts you have on that And the 100,000 is intended to cover the relicensing costs Essentially, I think that's what it would go towards But I think the hundred thousand dollars goes to the game to the game revenue fund That's gets divvied up to all the other various funds that penalties and You know taxes on gross gaming revenue. That's right, so it's not actually money. We see necessary That's a good point Here and you know thought covered it well, but There's there is a slight distinction between the fee that the statute directs us to look at for category one and for category two Category one specifically says there's there's no Minimum, but they say It needs to be to cover the costs of the investigation category two does set a minimum Perhaps suggesting that the that the investigation This is perhaps that the investigation for a category two might be less than a category one I don't know if that's the case, but it does that you does say the minimum to be a hundred thousand for category two And we can also infer that it is for the purposes of the investigation But I might correct that the in terms of the category two there is not a direct connection between Whether that fee should be for the investigation Well, no actually there is in both cases the statute in different so it's all somewhat disjointed It doesn't say this all in one place. You have to piece it together from different sections But okay in both cases category one and two it does say that it has to be based upon The cost associated with the investigation And looks this though at least with respect to one if the renewal fee shall be exclusive of any Subsequent licensing fees Under the section. What does that mean? you know Set renewal fee that would be Shall be exclusive of any subsequent Which section you I'm looking at footnote That it's 23k 10d section 10d 10d The commission shall set any renewal for such license based on the cost of fees for Social the evaluation of the category one licensing. I'm not sure if the same language as a bill is Two do you know? I don't know. But I don't know what it means in terms of slumps to put In other words, I did hear commissioners Zunica say, you know, we do chart. I think it was you charge Fees and taxes regular. Maybe it was you So I think that they are suggesting that It's supposed to be exclusive to the other fees that we charge whether right our licensees love that or not I think that's at least a fair way to look at it. We can we can take a closer look at it. It's subsequent It's it's interesting that subsequent Yeah, well, there's there's always been that dichotomy, you know, in which licensing fees applied to the initial ones 85 and 25 million the individual ones The renewal fees in this case I Think I think it suffices to say that there's a presumption that the fee be associated with the investigatory cost. I Think we like like initially we would have the discretion if we wanted to set it higher But ultimately I am of the same mindset as initially that if there was to be cost benefit in terms of charging a fee upfront or Allowing the possibility of the licensee to invest in a longer term Use of capital whether it's in putting more amenities or doing more promotions I would be more in favor of the latter not the former This is just in parallel to what we decided at the very beginning where we did have the clear Discretion for the initial fee to let to set it higher That the 25 and the 85 million dollar initial licensing fees were a floor and the statute expressly allowed us to to set it higher My then I am now of the mindset that a Longer term view is more preferential and that charging anything upfront in terms of just purely a fee comes at the expense of a Longer term investment Does it make sense though in terms of it looks as though it's can't be less than a hundred thousand for category two Could we say the one hundred thousand dollars plus? Any it does anything that exceeds that if it's a real cost in terms of the connection But otherwise it would just be the base can we could just that seems the most Simple the simple solution we can't go under a hundred that no right no under the floor is a hundred Yes, even if the course were less It's assumed or I'm assuming that if the costs are higher just on the investigation that it would be that higher cost amount To recoup the cost of that investigation It would be fair to the other licensees because our other our cost to do those investigations We didn't charge them directly would come out of proportionately of the other two, so I think it's important to to Identify those costs whatever they come out to be a hundred fifty or whatever, you know, whatever in excess of a hundred thousand I'm just charged Assess that on on the on the licensee in this case pen directly But what I'm suggesting we don't do is go anywhere above those investigatory costs This is there's just an open question of the investigatory costs because we've set up Dynamic of incorporating ongoing suitability reviews into this renewal And so really we have a bigger question of determining those costs How do we and is it simply the discrete task of renewal based on mimicking the vendor form? We just talked about or does it literally go back and look at anything tied to suitability of pen and what were the IEB costs associated with that that number could drive that hundred thousand number higher Well, I would suggest I understand the point and it's a it's a fair one I said I was assuming the former just you know, not that not the latter. It would be I know And I was thinking about the latter So that's why we do have to have a broader disc I agree that we clearly have to be at least a hundred thousand I do think there has to be a broader discussion of what's the delta between those two numbers And are we going to go over a hundred and so how are we going to draw the line across well? Let me make sure I understood we're talking about the same thing. I Think it would be a really, you know Time-consuming to try to go back in time And I says and try to figure out what costs what Investigatory costs were driven by pen and pen only But we don't have the answer to that truly yet That would be a question for IEB and whether they can do that quickly or not Well, for instance commissioner O'Brien when you asked how to memorial How the suitability study is conducted you asked director Wells to memorialize that process right for instance They might include as part of that process What they learned during the reed review, right? So do we take into consideration the cost? Affiliate with the reed or do we only look for it's right? Is that a fair example? Yes? I'm suggesting it would be too time-consuming to try to ascertain those costs because either in the past and I And we'll really pay for them, which is fine one way or another But we would have to and again it would be a question to IEB But if they kept time sheets by activity, which I doubt they do for example, and they spent all this time You know at different times in a very long period of time investigating the reed It would be difficult to ascertain unless they try to do it difficult but not impossible Why don't we get director Wells to Assist with this and what they do track because I think they track costs very well And I've been in situations of having to do it after the fact and it is possible to get a ballpark Commissioner O'Brien did you complete your I'm saying I've been in situations where we've been asked in my prior positions to do cost of prosecutions Yeah, either indemnification in either investigative and there is a way to recreate It's a question of how accurate and how much time right so Commissioner O'Brien is correct and and Commissioner Zinigut is also correct. So the As a discreet example the re-review we tracked all that I don't know if the bill went out or not But that is going to be built so that wouldn't be That's already in process. So those that kind of thing the sort of the Regular check-in So like the SEC review my time I look at the litigation That's going to have to would would necessarily have to be an estimate So it's not as if there's documentation that would support that cost So that that's a little trickier and to do a historical analysis over the last five years on that Would potentially be A Difficult to do and I'm not sure about the accuracy We would probably have to low-ball it to be fair to the licensees you could do some kind of estimate But it's not as if we have specific records on that because that's just part of my day-to-day duties Or another like a potential investigator's duty. I'm just on that you have the duties of the other two as well Right. You mean the other two licensees. Yes Just like you're doing that with pen you're doing that with MGM and and and win and I would submit that Perhaps it's proportional to The proportional bill that they all get in other words. It would be In my opinion our cost of your cost salary. You're assessing you're assessing them currently proportional you are three and so If we were to try to go back and true up these last five years eventually The other licensees might want to do the same and we might end up in a similar place I mean, I think there's a there's a happy medium here that you know to the extent that there are real and reasonable Direct estimates that we could go back in like the retransaction Because a for example if we hired consultants and there was a real, you know, and I don't think we But but but what if we did? That might be an easy and as another example you mentioned before New qualifiers come in right so we track all those expenses and we bill for those Individually so there there's for the most part those are already tracked and already being built and then sort of that that General overview is not necessarily tracked in that same to that same level of detail. That's just part of my job part of Our Chief Enforcement Counsel's job part of the you know the head of the financial investigation That's part of the sort of their day-to-day duty to have a sense and that's just their job. So It's sort of both Commissioner Cameron, do you have some but I think whatever new costs associated with this particular investigation Not a problem very easily correct. Yeah, we have a protocol. You have okay And I think our licensee is not just PPC, but they've always acknowledged that Certain amount of money get you back anything above and beyond that's going to come back out of your pocket So right kind of operating under that assumption Yeah, I think that fair based on what the additional work is Yeah, and I think the the happy meeting that you suggest commissioners in is possible Because I don't think it would be entirely fair to not look back at all right Considering what we just give mark given for a directive that we're going to use the past history Right in the past work to actually support the renewal. So we can come up with that happy medium I think yeah, this is again a working process. So right we would get some feedback and see how you're allocating those costs and we can Look at them then because you would come back to us for for guidance on that But there's a there seem to be a Consensus or agreement that we reserve the fee to the cost of investigations And not try to increase that which would be my recommendation if anybody wanted to I would say tied to the cost of investigation that are related to the suitability Process, whether it was well, no, the renewal renewal renewal sort of belly Yes, but with respect to both looking back To the degree that's practical and then of course looking forward is the easy part. But so Just the amendment. Yep. All right. So there may not be sort of a discreet Because for example the discreet the discreet bill may just be going forward or if we want to do some kind of estimate on I'm familiar with a little Commissioner Brian's talking about the cost of prosecution to go back That's a little more challenging. We could do something in that respect but would be a sort of a Lowball estimate and then but we wouldn't obviously double bill for the read analysis or double bill The qualifiers so some of those are just already done. They're out there. Yeah, they would be credited Exactly. The other day would be credited. Yeah, proportionately, right? And it might be helpful to note that Karen, you know these were already billed we're not double billing But this is all part of it just so we understand them because it might be that that Through this process. It justifies the one hundred thousand dollars. It may not even exceed the one hundred thousand dollars Well But but I do what I do right now manage expectations But I do want to note to the right now is a good point that they're very cost-effective the initial investigations that we did Included a lot of consultants that by necessity charged by the hour and I there's a huge premium When we have our investigators in house that you know, right and that do a lot of it as a matter of course and And with a really minimal these days use of outside help, correct It is really rather cost-effective So enough guidance to help on number one. I think that's helpful. We can certainly craft some language around that Thank you. Thank you. Yeah number two To what would this term of the renewal be the statute addresses this in part And it has slightly different language for each of the licenses the 15 year license Says that the initial period shall be for a term of 15 years Category 2 It says that the license shall be for a period of five years So in theory and this came up as an issue so it's worth Discussing even if it's only briefly depending upon People's sentiments on this whether the renewal terms should likewise be 15 and or if we're only talking about category 2 5 years Or whether there's any wiggle room to increase or decrease The term of the renewal period it seems to me that the statute Contemplated that the renewal period be for a term of five years But there is an argument that could be made if you wanted to That it could be for something else Yeah, I would take that Kind of reading the legislative language I think to your point as an indication of we would expect no less than a five-year renewal and I would start there Saying that you know renewal for the class two is five years But you know I'm having some thoughts of do we want to go beyond I mean we have a lot of tools and mechanisms Available to us to pull back a license it for some reason the operator Starts acting inappropriately or what have you we don't trust the operation skills or what have But I'm comfortable with a minimum of five years Well, let me pick up on that because I'm the one who You know think that we could be creative here or we could be flexible if we read the the language You know broadly For the following reason and you know again, it's it's it's up to us I think there's there's enough in the language that would direct for a renewal of five years. I Think the reason to get it for something higher Would be almost as if we were conducting these these bidding if you will these Negotiation the one thing that we could offer To pen in exchange for Whatever they would be willing to do in terms of additional investment. Let's say Is the term of the license being different than five years being higher So whatever of value they might want in terms of an additional capital investment That is the only the only thing available to us. I know I I'm just saying, you know, maybe maybe you're not on board But if we said be shaking my head, I do But if we were to say of you know, let's say if we offered a 10-year Renewal term they might be willing to say in exchange of that I will do Whatever and it would be something that we could listen Listen to I'm not comfortable with that. I I We are very new here in the Commonwealth I'm very comfortable with the five-year take a look these companies change so frequently That I would be comfortable with a five-year and I don't think we should tie it to Something they may offer. I just I'm just not comfortable You know five years is a good amount of time and then we'll take a look we've already Looked at a process that streamlines it which I do agree with But I just I guess I'm just not comfortable with in any way I don't think there's a need to do that Yeah, no, it's it is really a philosophical question. I think I'm you know coming from Trying to extract value to the commonwealth. I would I would you know, it's it's a matter of saying that again What could they? See of value That we could offer. I think it's really just that If they were approved anything else is really up to the legislature, you know A different a different a different number of gaming positions. It's all if it means that you Table games. It's all limited to category ones and and and it would be In going with the principle that was in statute as seen you will get this Privilege the ability to run gaming But in exchange you get a minimum capital investment a licensing fee and all these other things If we were taking that principle to the renewal process and that is just what I'm suggesting But by the way, I think it's a little creative myself I think there is the way all of the sections In the statute come together One could really just presume that it was intended to be a five-year renewal process. I wouldn't suggest going much Longer than ten years for example And it may very well be that Ben would be in a position of saying whether it's five or ten If there's enough competition, whatever We're not willing to or able to put anything of value In terms of additional capital investment. I'm just Commissioner Brian before I comment. I just wondered if you so I don't see quite the wiggle room legally to go beyond five necessarily particularly the first renewal there had been some conversation that we had on Given the landscape given the fact that the others were just up and running We don't know what it's going to look like even to the extent that we were going to consider something like that And it would legally feasible under the statutory structure Would it be more prudent to stick with five for the first renewal? Consistent with the statute and the idea that in the future you could possibly expand Could be reserved in terms of the strict meaning the plain reading of the statute it shall be for five Consistent with the new landscape. We don't know what the dynamics and the impact are going to be with everyone getting live and possibly Regency also coming online That is the prudent cautious approach to say the statute says five the landscape is changing five gives us the ability To even if we want to consider what you're talking about Five years later time. Absolutely. Yeah, I'm a commissioner Cameron's view that it right now where we stand and looking at the statute I think five is the number and if I could just add in I I think this is an interesting debate I do question if I were General counsel for one of our licensees whether they would be comfortable with not having their license renewed at the expiration of five years because Another there could be a challenge to suggest that they are operating without a valid license So there is a very significant five years from now No, the minute that they didn't get renewed If we would offer seven would they would say would they review our and they might get an opinion from their own counsel to say Without due respect commission We actually can are concerned that we would be operating without a proper or or perhaps more to that point That a future commission says none. I know that seven year or ten year was not But I think you don't have one, you know, they're you know to the extent their public companies They would need to be ensured very clear that their license is valid to in order to continue operating So that's I of course We haven't had this discussion with any of our licensees I presume but I would say that given what I see in the statute Barring any other, you know, real clear conclusion from Our our legal and even outside counsel on this I would say that we're probably Confined to five years However, we would like maybe to interpret the language Because we could put our our licensees a bit at risk Yeah, I'm comfortable with the five years. I think it's consistent. I think it gives our licensees Expectations of knowing what the landscape is five years. We had the initial five will have the second five It's a safe bet, but I think it's logical and gives them a level I do like creativity though. I just felt it was important to as a threshold topic to identify that You know, if we were in a principle of bidding of sorts of asking What would they able to to even return again for the benefit? But it really sounds like there's a there's a majority or a unanimous Building I was on the fence on this But I want to pick up on your point and think about this maybe as part of the process is I think there's Kind of two pieces here that I think we should think about one is We're going on the expectation PPC wants to be renewed. I think we need to have some type of Trigger that they tell us they want to go through a renewal But secondly think of you know the process where we will be hearing from IEB and an updated suitability I would give our licensees a chance to say this I think to your point. This is what we want to do over the next five years Not just have this be a rubber stamp approval of a license have them give us an opportunity to hear What they plan to invest Because they do have a Reinvestment requirement, but also what their plans are maybe for staying competitive in this market Give them a chance to pitch themselves Yeah, I think it's it's a fair bet first Fair assumption to assume that they want a license renewal. They signed a 20-year lease on that building And we know any or Revenue it was you know, so they they would owe a big amount of rent if they if they didn't get a renewal but but in in following with you know The the principle of you know a documenting but be Making them Put on the record what they are assuming or willing to do going forward Maybe this leads nicely into Point three in your memorandum The different policy questions that we want to consider This do you feel you have guidance on number two that I think there was clarity on that point. So yes Point three I think is really the heart of the matter Which is what exactly do you want to look at as part of this renewal process? You've obviously a pined on the suitability of the Individuals and entities designated as qualifiers. That's a key component to all of this for sure There's also of course and you touched on this and Commissioner Zuniga mentioned it in a specific context There's the financial suitability of the overall entity, which is likely an important consideration as well Things like the overall health and capitalization of the parent company the debt equity ratios and things of that nature Which are I? Things that are looked at on an ongoing basis, but things that you should also likely take a look at during this renewal process and things that Probably don't take a lot of further evaluation the evaluation may already have been done But just that a report on it Would be something to consider as part of the renewal But then there are other issues that again are things that the Commission and staff Have been looking at on an ongoing basis, but things you may want to consider specifically as part of the renewal Like compliance with all of the licensing conditions that were assessed Upon the award of the initial licenses just taking a holistic look at those to ensure that there are no gaps The compliance with the host and surrounding community agreements whether you want some type of Communication with the host and surrounding communities to Get their take on all of this whether as I mentioned before you want to conduct any Hearings and solicit public input on any of this. These are all things that some other jurisdictions Do when reviewing? Renewal applications. There's the capital expenditure plan, which is Something that each of the licensees are required to do PPC and National have a multi-year plan that was approved by the Commission I'm going to say two years ago or so which covered a five-year term It is looked at on an annual basis to ensure that they are compliant with it But it would be perhaps a good time to look at it as part of the renewal process to ensure that it is Where you want it to be? and with so with all that there are a wide variety of Topics that you may wish to consider as part of this renewal process and We can include as many or as few of them In the regulations as you wish the only one that is Interestingly not subject to debate is compliance with the I love agreements, which the statute says you must consider as part of your renewal process And remind me did they have any I love I believe so with the rent them and Places like that. I think they have actual agreements The rent model. It's not the town. I actually think all of your All of your Elements that you point out here look appropriate for review as part of this process And I actually like the idea of a public hearing we do it with racing reviews It makes a lot of sense you hear from people they get a chance to talk about What they like or don't like and I think that is an important piece Yeah, and that is I think fundamentally a really good Way to have the licensee put forth what they're Proposing what they're willing to do if anything different not just their history and compliance at a summary level but also What what their perspective just like any racing application that we get year after year Boots forward Anything missing from the list. It's hard to think of what might be Yeah, the only thing I would go back and focus on is Give some thought to the review of the RFA to application which I know is You talk about that, but it's also folded in make everything that was in the RFA to became part of the overall license You know, maybe not a formal process, but you know each commissioner You know we three of us worked on different parts of that RFA to application Maybe just going back to those Reviewing them and using those for whatever questions we might have to pose to in this case, PPC is part of the Public hearing with not a public input hearing, but a public discussion with PPC with respect to their renewal You miss this or you didn't do this or your shifted course From the RFA to to where we are now Let's have a conversation Do you think that's something that we have to mandate or is that just part of what individual commissioners would be? Appropriate materials in order to prepare I feel comfortable leaving it to the individual commissioners Because I do believe all point for trying to memorialize memorialize this process But those elements were were captured in the license conditions Your best recollection they were and and I would think is part of any renewal process You would want to review all the license conditions for compliance and more additional conditions if you thought that was appropriate And we should remember that we did What was initially supposed to be a midterm review that turned into more like a three and a half year review But for for important reasons not because we were late Where you know that was a time where we also recalibrated some initial conditions Where there was perhaps an aspirational goal that was Based on different set of circumstances that needed to be lowered for again for good reasons It was not that like that we just agreed we really tested the the reasons and the efforts That they had undertaken I would imagine a similar process if it's needed I The only back to your question Chair I the only thing that I would just clarify in what I think is really a comprehensive set of bullet points where it comes to the the topics as part of the renewal analysis Is on the second to last the financial suitability which I mentioned earlier that it be perhaps focused on On the property level not necessarily on the company level which we have done and we're I mean we could we could do the company level as well as a refresh But what I what I think is most relevant for us anyway especially as it as This process moves forward Into what is now a competitive a very different phase than the initial term when when when Ben started with these License they were they had a clear period in which they were going to be the only ones operating in the Commonwealth and that had a set of conditions that really mixed into the financial picture They they know that it's a very different everybody knows that it's a very different competitive landscape as this next second second set of the next five-year period and And it is in that context that I would just myself would like to understand or work with the IEB financial investigators to get you know a picture of Their financial condition going forward at the property level Just to clarify would would you want it at some degree a review of The parent company as well, but also the focus on the property in other words both, but with focus And I I know because of the mid-term review they put together Really helpful summary level reports to their own corporate executives That is that rolls up into their financials from the property level it is it is that that I'm referring to just to add to what's already been made about the Us having a meeting on this where we can hear from Interest other than ourselves and the licensee. I do think that that's critical a its transparency to the process and be it also allows Thoughts and suggestions that we might want to put in his conditions that maybe people that are on The receiving and sending in of regulating this industry might not think of I do think it's critical To do that. So whether it's one or more. I think there's at least one We had a public hearing by statute in the first time around and we did actually a post community hearing That was the statutory one. We also did a surrounding community Hearing in some instances because there was so much interest we ended up doing that over multiple days But I think a similar process might be also well received I mean it could be satisfied in one but to your point if we get there and there's simply not enough of an Opportunity for anyone who wants to be heard to be heard. We should be open to the idea Minimum I think that makes sense and we'll definitely work that in I think it's also important to remember There's an interesting dichotomy that emerges as we talk about this as it pertains to the category two license And that is that you will as was mentioned earlier Review the category two license about three times before you review the category one once So there should be some consideration to migrating some of these Elements over to category ones in some format even though you won't be going through a formal renewal process So I that's just one of the things that strikes me as we go through these discussions Me like potentially having public meetings to carry input just as a midway point or five years out something to think about Yeah, in interim review, whether it's that or just common period or open whatever Well, the the renewal forms that we just talked about We don't have to wait 15 years to get a refresh on the category once 14 years because suitability is But it's a good mechanism to kind of keep keep that fresh again Not necessarily part of the category two process, but we depleting to whether we should consider it for the category one That's very helpful. I think we can get started on preparing a set of regulations that capture all of these Comments and sentiments and remind me again of the timing because I'm thinking of course public hearings the calendar Just so that we can start to plan well the The Plain Ridge Park casino license expires on June 24th 2020 so sometimes before yeah Be responsive on the early side of the new year I would think we'd want to get the public input, right? Yes The final question To throw out is that the statute does talk about at least in the context of the category ones that if there are any issues the Commission believes need to be sent to The legislature for consideration for amendment to any statutes that we do that It says 180 days before the expiration of the first license So if there's that I there's nothing that comes to mind for me, but if there's anything That we think will serve as a roadblock of any kind There's an invitation in the statute to send it to the legislature There's nothing that comes to my mind especially after the discussion we had for example We had different views as to the term that would be one thing to perhaps get legislative direction, but Although that is a different point. Yes, I think I don't think we were necessary. I think to Commissioner Cameron You were actually thinking five years seems to be the right snapshot. Yeah, I was where yeah You were thinking that where I don't know Commissioner Brian, but I was thinking that the statute limits us. So yeah, no legislature changed it Of course that would give that would address my concerns Well, but and I'm making the point that I think we're all set on that I I think we don't we don't need a legislative recommendation There have been as part of the political process proposals that are entirely out of our hands that are Up there in the legislature and they can take them or not that would affect Potentially these these these license Or these licensee rather You know if we are focusing on like we did on what we clearly have Here which is you know the fee the renewal term the conditions Adhesion only very as well as the suitability. I think we are really covered Consensus that this juncture. Yes, we have nothing for excellent Nicely done. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very thoughtful memo. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you commissioners Really important work. So thank you We're going to break for five minutes and this will allow folks to transition the next stop will be ombudsman Zimba. Thanks so much We're reconvening our meeting item number five ombudsman Zimba, please Thank you very much chair and commissioners. I'm joined here today by Joe Delaney construction project oversight manager First on the agenda is the beginning of the process for the 2020 mitigation fund application guidelines Earlier this year. We announced community mitigation fund awards pursuant to the commission's 2019 guidelines The item before you today is the beginning of the process for approving the guidelines for the next year's program By statute applications by communities and other governmental entities are due to the commission No later than February 1st of each year in order to give communities time to put together their applications We plan to issue the final guidelines for the 2020 program no later than the beginning of December and that should give applicants approximately two months to put together their applications applicants can also to use the period between now and the and the issuance of the new guidelines to put together their applications as well Because undoubtedly even though we will make some changes the guidelines will will look fairly similar to last year I would predict So in order to solicit input and advice on these guidelines as we do every year we reconvene meetings of the local community mitigation advisory committees and then the subcommittee of community mitigation And also we plan to hopefully have a meeting with the gaming policy advisory committee These committees include appointees the host communities Surrounding communities regional planning agencies the mass municipal association department of revenue And others to provide very valuable in advice and input and we thank them all for all of their input to date We're hoping to have two meetings of each of those groups except only one meeting of the of the G pack We have already had our first meeting in the region a LCM AC And we had one meeting the subcommittee and community mitigation to date So in order to make these meetings as useful as possible We annually develop a list of items that the committees could discuss the memo is in your packet We that memo has a number of different questions that staff have identified based on last year's practice and Things that we understand the commissioners would like to review and and we anticipate communities would like to review so My goal for today is just to understand if there are additional questions that commissioners have That we should explore as we develop the guidelines We anticipate coming before the commission at least two times more on the guidelines by the beginning of December Wants to report back on on the input in to come up with the draft guidelines and then want to finalize such guidelines We plan to bring the first draft to the commission at at the next commission meeting and then following the commission's approval Hopefully of the draft our practice is the post of the draft guidelines for public comment So today is just designed to get a consensus on the list of questions To explore as we put together our draft of the guidelines, of course if individual commissioners have any questions beyond today's meeting We'll obviously take those into consideration when we come up with the draft guidelines So we don't anticipate trying to answer any of these questions today. I won't go over over every question on the list Although we really try to slim the document down this year. It is still rather voluminous But I will highlight just a few of the bigger items that will take into consideration as we put together our draft documents One is workforce Program pilots as the commission knows For the last three years. We've had pilots and I think that they've been really pretty successful to date I won't go into details about those successes I know that director Griffin has an item on the agenda for a little bit later And she can give you just at least a couple sentences about our history to date regarding the workforce programs But they continue to be probably some of our most popular programs and all of our committee meetings and also Given the circumstances on hiring both in the east and in the west they really do seem like we would we will need to Continue those but again, you know, we're not answering any questions today. We're just coming up for those considerations One other big item that we'll take a look at is whether or not we should utilize mitigation funds for the construction of transportation projects as the commission is aware Our funds can be used for the design and permitting of transportation projects But to date we have not utilized our funds for the actual construction of transportation projects Now, I think it's quite obvious that We could not pay for all of the costs of some of the very very large transportation projects that are out there so We need to figure out how we could if we do choose to move in that direction How we could play a part in a funding strategy for some transportation projects that would benefit the regions One other thing that we'll take a look at is what operations related Impacts should be addressed. We now have Fully operational category one facilities by the time of next year's application We'll have about a year and a half under our belts for MGM Springfield and about a half a year's worth of activities Out at Encore so by that time we we certainly won't see all of the impacts that will develop but potentially we may see some of the Impacts out here in the east and we'll learn a little bit more about some of the impacts occurring out in the west We obviously do benefit from all of the studies that are taking place We just had a report last week regarding some of the real estate issues Out in the west and we have some public safety reports that we Before the commission I believe in the beginning of November So in regard to the operational Requirements one thing that we will take a very careful look at is what public safety needs should be addressed and how should we How should we put that into the guidelines? So we'll take a look at that and hopefully we'll get a little more input by the time we come up with our drafts But obviously there have been significant funds put into place Both by the facilities and by the host communities But are there additional needs that we should take a look at during this past year? There was a request by one community to have some funding for late-night patrols Because it didn't meet the the guidelines last year We weren't able to fund that but that prompted us to take a look at what we should what should we think about for this upcoming year? So With that as a general overview on one thing I will get into a little more depth on at the next commission meeting is the the sort of dollars and cents of the program We're in the process of putting together our estimates for next year's program based on the revenues that have been coming into the fund So far this year and I'd like to get into a little bit more depth about what we're projecting for next year for the overall program So with that I ask if the commissioners have any questions or I turn it to Joe What was the last point you made John about? The amounts available you were gonna take that at a later meeting Yes So when we present the guidelines what I think I'll go into some depth about is if the anticipated level of funding for next year's Potential program what's available what's being put into the fund now This provides a context of what we could utilize for for expanded programs or continuation of existing programs at that time to Will you be addressing the tools that you use for outreach and To encourage really substantive excellent applications you've gotten out of the past but Presuming that there's going to be more funding Will you be addressing that at that juncture? Is that a I could answer take a shot at that now. So I Reference the committee meetings that we have both in the east and in the west these local community meetings And so we have representatives from all the surrounding communities and the host communities And so what we do is we go over these guidelines in depth so that they can understand what goes into a successful application We give them a little bit of a flavor of what would be a successful application You know as Joe likes to say in the past probably the biggest thing that we have to take a look at is whether or not The grant that's being requested relates to impacts being caused by the casino There are a lot of great projects out there We've seen a lot of great projects come our way But we have to satisfy that nexus for the statute. So we have the local meetings. We publish These guidelines for public comment There are numerous numerous groups that I mentioned that have a lot of expertise and they do their own outreach Mass Municipal Association has done its outreach in the past of these guidelines and hopefully we'll get to legislators and others as part of our G pack process, but we have the public input as well through That we do the public comment period as well In a lane that would be also something that we could really use our social Tools for that great. Thank you. But but we're not suggesting that we relax that requirement of The grants being tied to the impacts coming from the casino, right? No, no, no, no I guess what I mean by that is when we try to educate All of our committee members and communities. Thank you that we We repeat that and repeat that and repeat that That it's a statutory requirement so without that the application will fail That is correct, and that is the main reason why applications Well, I have some I some reactions to some of the you know some of the comments, maybe I don't know if they If a couple of the points that I have Would be into guidelines, but I think it's a good perhaps topic of discussion and one is or the first one in that rubric is To eventually give more discretion to staff to manage what is becoming, you know a necessity of a grant program and that is perhaps slight cost overruns or maybe an Initial budget that changes a little bit, and it's still related I don't know if we want to call it a contingency or again a discretion the amount of The votes that we have had to take as a result of of of changes are really minimal but I think It's not really us that I'm worried about it's the The resources that it might take you here internally and then locally in trying to figure out and go back and forth Between whether that whether a cost or a or an item was really what was approved And whether we would have to bring it up back to us or And so on and so forth. So I'm not sure that that goes in the guidelines. I'm just putting it out there but if it's a 10% contingency or something to that effect some kind of threshold that under under which You guys can have the discretion as you see fit And above which she would have to bring it back to us That's just something that I think might be really helpful as this program builds in terms of significance Thank you commissioner. I Think that might be something we might want to bake into the guidelines as well For next year and maybe even if we have a reason or need for this year Maybe we could bring that separately up during the course of this year to the Commission You'll you'll see an item a little bit later on today That is up for consideration by the Commission where it is literally the movement of a couple thousand dollars from one account to the Other account and we felt that we needed to bring it back to the Commission because we initially brought the three or four thousand dollar Change to the Commission and since it grew in costs. I didn't believe that we had the authority or we should move forward without it At least informing the Commission But those are the types of things that they do require a lot of back-and-forth between us and our grantees And even you know arguments or disputes between staff members Do we really need to do this at such a de minimis expense? So it does take some time, you know, certainly the Commission acts pretty pretty darn quickly and all of these requests But sometimes it does take a little bit more to get to the Commission Some of this so that might be something worth considering. Yeah, and I get I'm more worried about what does happen or does not happen Locally as a result of just the necessity of having to consult with us every two weeks Let's say with that with a time with a window of you know within within the next two weeks The only thing I would say on that is I'd be more comfortable with a de minimis dollar threshold Yes, then a percentage because if we're gonna be handing out grants of a significant amount Yeah, I would want to know about it before they changed it Rather than a sort of as you're talking about de minimis a thousand two thousand that's different than a percentage I'm not so sure I feel comfortable with a percentage That's consistent with contracting practices, you know, there'd be a dollar right minimum change Really good a good suggestion and good point And by the way, if if any You know any changes are required that the staff feels is not the original approval That always is assumed to come back to us or come back, you know to a next Right, you know, you'd always have the discretion to go back to us. Yes You know as you'll see from director Griffin's we err on the side of bringing it back to you Or even though it was approved by the Commission the documents were in the packet It may not have been obvious in some of our presentations what the actual story was so there's an item in there today that May not be needed to come to the Commission, but we thought we should It's just something to consider You know, I think it gives you flexibility the program is gonna get harder and harder to manage because it's gonna grow and we've been very Very diligent because especially the first few years because there was only one Source of funding the licensing fee that had to last through the construction years Now there's gonna be more of a rhythm with the monies that comes from the operations And I think it's only something to consider The other thing that I wanted to mention is I don't know if we're ready for it this Time around but it's something that we've put off and that is a notion of a multi-year grant if we are considering again, perhaps with subject to resubmission or Reapproval or whatnot, but our our mechanism has been one only limited to to a year Even though There have been a couple of projects that span more than more than a year But again as if we're thinking of eventually putting larger grants out there because we're now thinking whether they could be In conjunction with other funding sources for construction projects, for example, I think we're gonna be In the need to contemplate the possibility of multi-year Grants Just to reflect on that One of the big conversations that we've been having at the committee level is for larger transportation projects Obviously, as I mentioned, we cannot pay for big costs and if we do pay for big costs They would have to be over a number of years where we could pay Not a little bit but a sizable amount out of each year's grant over a good period of time And how does that work? And if someone is bonding for the overall cost of the transportation project Can they rely on our funds because we have to make these determinations each year And we can't we don't know for certain what our revenues are going to be for the upcoming year We don't know for certain even Other aspects regarding the licensees and the licenses indeed. They're all subject to Commission action. So there's some risks that we have to really think about and we are working on it No doubt and and and if we if we ever get to a multi-year option I would be very much in favor of having really That be a small percentage of the overall grant consideration, I wouldn't want us to go you know committing Most of the funding or or even a majority of the funding available for one year because by definition The funding to this fund is going to fluctuate. There's going to be some variability So whatever whatever commitment we make at any given point, you know Has the certainty of taking away, you know future year Available funding, but I think now looking back at this program. We have had a Real focus on planning grants mostly and those have been very helpful But if there's really a need out there and there are some good examples There's there's the the notion that we should be thinking towards, you know expanding that that funding The final point I wanted to make is perhaps. I don't know if you alluded to it or it's this is a sentiment to the What you're getting in terms of feedback from the local committee committees But I think When it comes to operations or or trying to address operational impacts that we like we have done before We begin to get a feel for What those are before we put out, you know a Commitment of any kind In the guidelines I'd rather us Let that process be organic not very similar to what we experienced through through through the construction phase Those needs are going to begin to you know identify themselves and I'd rather much have that intelligence rather than trying to make You know Assumptions as to what would be an impact before really seeing I'm just I'm just I'm just agreeing with Or you know with perhaps what you said or the practice that we certainly have had Which is well, let's let's just wait and see When it comes to some of these operational impacts Along those lines, I did mention that we try to take advantage to a lot of the research reports whenever they are available So we can ascertain what impacts are housing public safety and the like and over the course of this next year as well We will have the advantage of a lot of the traffic studies For MGM and for on-court indeed plane which just completed another traffic report So even some of those impacts will better know Commissioner I just as always very thoughtful work The committees are obviously working well and coming up with good ideas. So it just Lots of interesting questions to consider moving forward Commissioners I would like to note that I did notice a typo in our the memo on the first page I think the Commission remembers that we awarded approximately four point one million dollars in grant funding for this past year and so but the the number and the In the the bold the text the Commission awarded a total of instead of three point six eighty two that should be three point 882 and then over and above that is the two hundred thousand that we have from the tribal grant and then at seventy five thousand degrees are totally to the But that's a typo in there that three point six eighty two And building on commissioner Cameron's point I'm In terms of the process The committees are you finding that they're the local committees are you finding that there's easy consensus or Were there any ass that you would have liked to have entertained that? Just didn't really meet the statutory demands or the past policy Requirements No, I do I think we find these committees extremely useful We're really trying to struggle with a lot of the details a lot of the members have been meeting with us for a good number of years So folks remember What we discussed last year for example on the transportation construction item we chose not to have a general Transportation construction item we had one exception which was a transit project of regional significance, which was sort of a pilot program but People realize why we didn't make why we made the decision last year on Transportation construction and they were having the same conversations this year so but we may open it up and I think folks are They understand the constraints that were under and But the potential for the program as we get new revenues in and indeed this outcome of year We will have some significant new revenues Everyone else that Further questions comments Thank you. I think we're moving on now to item. Thank you by be On the appointments great. Thank you So next up commissioners is a request for reappointment of several members to the local community mitigation advisory committees and committees Subcommittees under the gaming policy advisory committee The local community mitigation advisory committee of reappointments I've included biographies of the appointees that were provided to you last year We are recommending the following reappointment for the region be LCM AC Ellen Petashnik For one of the two human service provider appointees We are actively working on the remaining region be representatives and may Have one or more more recommendations for you by the next meeting I think commissioners Stevens for all of his assistants and reaching out for some of these new members For the region a LCM AC We are again recommending Vincent panzini as the Chamber of Commerce representative Mr. David Bankrupt as the regional economic development representative and Myra in a grown Rivera as the human service representative for region a We still have one more human service representative open position in region a So we're very pleased that these very qualified individuals helped us over this past year and That they have agreed to continue to help us in prior years We recommended that these appointments should be at the pleasure of the Commission In addition to these appointments the Commission also needs to appoint a commission representative for the subcommittee and community mitigation a representative on the public safety subcommittee and also a representative on the Subcommittee on addiction services Commissioner Stevens and Commissioner Cameron Were appointed by the Commission to the community mitigation subcommittee and the public safety subcommittees respectively Last year last year the Commission appointed Mark Van der Linden to the addiction services subcommittee as you know Mark and Commissioner Zaniga Have been actively involved in the issues of relevance to this subcommittee So I will turn it to a discussion by the Commission regarding either the reappointments To the LC MECs or to gauge interest by commissioners for the appointments to the subcommittees Well, I'd like to turn first to the Community mitigation advisory subcommittee whether you're recommending Commissioner Stevens I understand commissioner Stevens. You are interested in continuing and if I Do we get to we get to vote would you like to vote? So we have some votes included in your packet I think it's framed as one should we have a motion that covers all of them So to the extent that you are comfortable with that that's fine to the extent that you want to amend that emotion That's that motion. That's okay, but in many case I would I would recommend and we can vote comprehensively that Commissioner Stevens continues in that work His commitment is clear. I could do that Yeah, is that a motion or should I make the motion? Well, I think it would be nice to do it on an individual basis to Okay, I would I would move that we Reappoint Commissioner Stevens to that to that role with mitigation I have a second second any further discussion or questions for Commissioner Stevens any further hearing none I And you're abstaining commissioner stubborn so for Approvals and one abstention. Thank you Commissioner Cameron you have served in this capacity As the chair of the public safety committee subcommittee. Do you wish to discuss your experience? I do It's been it's been a worthwhile Experience I've served since the beginning with with that by the way the I was the representative from the Commission and the Public Safety Committee then in turn voted me in to chair and It's been I think we've done good work. They've added Excellent value. I think moving forward There's even more value to be added by this group because we really now have casinos up and running and we have Public safety issues that need to be addressed. So I think moving forward This Public Safety Committee will be of even greater value Having served in this capacity. I would like for discussion purposes and an emotion I really think Commissioner O'Brien would add great value to public safety She like me has a public safety background and I believe this would be an appropriate time for a transition and to To have Commissioner O'Brien serve in that capacity with public safety And Gladly make that motion And by the way, I'm not hitting her cold we have discussed this she has been Value I look member she's come to meetings. She's added great value But now to trim to officially transition and chair. I think would be appropriate If I could just add in to compliment Commissioner Cameron some recommendation first off it and I did jump in ahead of my fellow commissioners because I Just wanted to first before we discuss this very good recommendation that we have to acknowledge Commissioner Cameron's leadership extensive experience and expertise in Public safety and what she has brought in terms of her leadership to that very important subcommittee We are extremely fortunate that Three appointing officials had the wisdom to a point galed to that position Recognizing what she brought To this commission respect her extensive law enforcement background And I know that with that experience, but also your leadership you have garnered the respect of all of the local public officials particularly the the law enforcement community And and given the work Here really the Gravity that it deserves, but also you've achieved a collaboration. That's really significant and unique so I want to wish publicly You know my personal gratitude and also if I can the gratitude of all my fellow commissioners for your leadership and of course leadership recognizes that sometimes the transition is important and Commissioner O'Brien is appointed by the Attorney General in the public safety capacity and brings an extensive background in as a prosecutor and a great deal of Varied State and legal experience which will help her in that role if we go forward Now that you elaborate if you wish well, I think that's a great summary I mean the one thing that I would highlight of your remarks is that You brought Very important key players to the table Which is very relevant later. It'll come to The example of what we have not been able to do in the addiction services of committee But the point is that that's a key piece of this I hope that you will continue to to help in those efforts you know, it's Again bringing the players that sometimes have well not sometimes they have day jobs Otherwise they care They have the the important the the outlook of looking out for the community first And so coming to cooperate on regional efforts is really critical Sometimes not at their top of their priorities Thank you everyone. I appreciate that I will continue to be a part of it Um, certainly, but I do think it's appropriate time to transition I think that that works well I think it's a great, you know, she's she's had the the task of I don't want to say corralling cats but corralling a bunch of these commissioners and they got alluded to some individual interests but having everybody at the table and I think A lot of that has not only been based on your persistence, but the fact that They respect your background. Um, you know, we're talking about a lot of the public safety officials at the municipal level, so And certainly appreciate commissioner brian's background and experiences Both from her legal work as well as her kind of due diligence work People go back so I think it's a it's a great recommendation commissioner brian, do you Do you accept the responsibility if given it? I do. I do. I know it's big shoes to fell and I agree the The respect that she gets by by the nature of her background and who she is I hope to be able to step in successfully more than happy to Go through excellent and and the transition will be Perfect because you'll have gail to turn to as you start to you've already met So many of all the the look I think you've met them all Leading chief so the transition has been underway. This formalizes it. Do I have a motion? Uh, madam chair, I'd move that uh, the commission Appoint Commissioner cameron is a member of the public safety commission as well as commissioner brian One or two or No, I'm sorry. There's only one representative. There's only one representative. So it will be commissioner brian Do you wish to restate your Emotion So that first is withdrawn thank you commissioners withdrawn And again move to reappoint commissioner Oh brian as the commission's representative to the public safety committee second I would just have a The amendment of a point commissioner brian rather than reappoint And and and add the friendly amendment that we thank commissioner cameron for her service Do we have An approval all those in favor? I And abstain you abstain for Eight eyes and one abstention. Thank you and thank you again Cameron and commissioner brian for stepping up Zuniga do you wish to speak about the addiction service? Yeah, let me let me do in the same format Mentioned that unfortunately unlike the public safety subcommittee the addiction services subcommittee has not met For reasons having to do Totally not with our efforts I do recommend that we continue or the appointment of mark van der linden And that we renew our efforts to To get these subcommittee to To meet As a statute intended There's a little caveat to all of these and that is that by by memorandum of Of understanding we do have the public health trust fund executive committee which Dresses Some but not everything that I think this subcommittee intended to address Which is why I think we should really renew our efforts in trying to get these advisory services The addiction services subcommittee of the g-pack to move To meet these coming year Perhaps the first the thing is really to reappoint mark van der linden to that Have Motion or discussion well discussion I suppose just I would agree with your recommendation that director van der linden serve in that position He's certainly got the background and passion and You know abilities to to really make that work effectively I agree with that recommendation. I think it might be helpful For us to at least put on our agenda in the near future and maybe not the immediate future Just an update on on the strategies for trying to meet this goal and And and perhaps The strategies including public outreach for those experts to come and participate in this important work. So Maybe maybe our later november or december meeting we could revisit this but I do I do Agree with the recommendation that mark be our continued representative Any further discussion No, we can certainly come back with we we don't appoint the chair to this committee The governor's office does there was a person identified a little while ago I think in either case that person or someone else would have to be re-appointed as well And that's that's the piece that we'll come back to chair So that would be a piece of the strategy to make sure we're all communicating well. That's excellent. Thank you So madam chair, I would I would move that the commission approved the appointment to the addiction services subcommittee of the of the g-back of mark van der linden director of research and responsible gaming We have a second second All those in favor I I opposed Five zero. Thank you. Thank you mark Moving on to the other Appointments or they are in fact all the appointments correct. So with respect to region A perhaps we could take the region separately Is there do you have any questions for for john concerning those nominees and john can I just ask are these These committee meetings. How how often do they meet and is the attendance strong? It's always a challenge to get quorums for all of these meetings And we try to meet at least two times in the fall And then quarterly, but it's been a real challenge, but we're going to keep on working up Well, thank you for your efforts and Questions or I defer to john's expertise here in terms of these reappointments Do I have a motion if there's no further discussion? Uh, madam chair, I move that the commission approve the reappointments to the region a lick mac of mr. Panzini Mr. Bancroft and Miss agarone river second All those in favor aye. Aye. Aye Opposed five zero. Thank you moving on to region b. We have one appointment human service provider ellen how to Any questions for john on this recommendation Very no, madam chair. I move that we That we agree With the appointment with the approval of miss ellen Patronik as the region be lomac human services provider for this opening Okay, the second second all those in favor I opposed five zero Thank you. Does that address everything that you need? That's great. So one other item, which is the 90 day Report for a number of different commitments that had to be met by on core boston harbour As part of the operation certificate. I'm going to turn it over to joe Thank you commissioners So in your packet are two memos one dated 10 7 That provides an update on the section 61 status of the on core project and the second memo was dated 626 This memo was presented at the june 27th meeting and it's just provided for your reference Because the two memos work together So at the june 27th meeting the commission gave on core 90 days after opening to complete the items that were presented from that memo Now that the 90 days have passed there are still a few items that need to be completed at this point most of them have been done Um, you know, for most part these are sort of paperwork items that uh, don't really uh, you know, such as Some permit closeouts with mastot things like that Um, and some minor construction items, such as some work that's going on next door at the nbta facility That they're coordinating with the nbta on Um, you know, none of these have any material impact on the operation of the facility And uh, you know, they're working towards getting them done. They're just taking a little bit longer than um, Then we expect it so We do expect these items to be done soon, but because there are outside agencies involved we have mastot nbta city of austin on some of these You know, some delays could creep in that, you know, really aren't In on-course control. So what we're recommending is to give this another 90 days and we'll report back in december I expect fully that all of these things will be done by then um You know, and again, it's it's mostly just kind of a paperwork kind of effort to get to get stuff done Commissioners, I'd like to just highlight one item that was on the original list Which is an escrow agreement that needs to be reached between the city of boston and for boston harbour And so we've been carefully monitoring the progress of that document and it's in signature stage So we had anticipated that it was going to be ready for this meeting It may be but we haven't heard yet today. Yeah for for yesterday four o'clock yesterday afternoon Jackie Cromman told me that it that they had signed it had been sent to the city They're just awaiting their signature and the account has actually already been set up and is ready to accept money. So That's truly a a real just paperwork item that we expect at any So Each of these issues that you've outlined are close Well, I think on the first five issues on the memo. Those are done And then there are The next four are the ones that are that are almost completed And then the last item on here is the we had that sort of you know that that list of thousands of items We were down to about a hundred at opening. We're down to about 40 now I think by the end of next week, I'm probably going to knock about 20 of those off the list So again, it's it's it's getting right down to the to the final little pieces But none of them give you pause. They're all um Really, you don't anticipate any snags and and meeting these commitments. No, no, thank you And we didn't we didn't set this up for a vote I thought we could just come back and revisit it in december if you want to do it Or you could vote an extension if you wanted to Are we comfortable with with december? So that gives you a couple of months Yeah, yeah, the only thing I would comment on is if it it does wrap up faster than you expect Yeah, we'll report back to the first meeting that it is done or if there's any issues to come back We'll do Great Thank you Thank you, and that concludes our report. Great Thank you, john and john Moving on to Item number six Um Really a combined effort of our two departments Director van der linden and chief information officer Katrina jacob combs and scott hell with our gaming technical compliance manager Oh, and we see travis of diore who is our program manager in Responsible gaming. Thank you Good, I think is it I think it's officially afternoon. Good afternoon. It is fair woman and commissioner. Thank you Um If we we are bringing before you an update on play management for category one casinos It's actually been quite some time. Um, since we we brought this before you It's been about a year since um, I provided an update to the commission on the status of this development So I think it's worthwhile just providing some background to you about where we've come from and where we currently are So by way of background A key initiative of the gaming commission's responsible gaming program is the play my way budget setting tool It supports the responsible gaming framework, which is to provide Timely accurate and balanced information to empower patrons to make informed choices about their gambling Um play my way was developed um and launched in june june 9th of 2016 at plain ridge park casino Um, it was at the time. Uh, we launched it as a pilot program Um, we we uh worked closely with plain ridge park casino has been a great partner and in this project um, we worked closely with them to to To market it or to Offer it as a benefit to player card hold player card holders Um patrons have the opportunity to enroll in either a slot machine or at one of the game sense kiosks The program is completely voluntary you can enroll in it or you don't have to enroll in it, which was a high priority of I believe now several years ago of commissioner cameron That that was very important to you. Um players can set a daily a weekly or a monthly budget They can um, they can unenroll at at any time The they provided provided notifications at every 25 percent starting at 50 percent of their budget It doesn't stop a player from Gambling once they reach 100 percent of their budget, but it will continue to provide Notifications at every 25 percent This as a side note was an important feature that If we're providing informed player choice, we want to provide a moment We don't want to stop somebody from gambling if they choose to continue to gamble, but it's an important piece where we Provide them with information At a juncture and they can make the decision about whether to continue to gamble or whether it's time to stop based upon that that information Mark, do you have any statistics on How many players actually do stop at their budget or if they continue to play through the We do have that information. Um, we've had two evaluations of the play my way program to to date I don't have the specific information In mind, but both of those reports are are posted to the Research page of our web and that statistic is in there. Thank you And today the report isn't on that. I just because I'm kind of coming in new on this I I wondered so I'll look at that. Thank you. Yes But I think it's most that choose to use the program Are staying within their budgets. Isn't that Yeah, you know, I I I really want to provide okay the accurate information on this I would need I I'm happy to to go back and provide some Topline data from from those evaluations. We intentionally didn't provide that and The update today just because it was about where are we going with category one? Right. I want to be fair to you on that. That was just I wondered if you happened to know I can say this that I remember which which was a big finding. Maybe mark is just just not want to Venture until I'll be happy to venture And just rough numbers Perhaps in these terms Of the people that used play my way They were more likely to stay within their budgets than those who didn't And there is and that there is a fundamentally good finding from the tool I think there's less less about whether you go over or under but it's more about Whoever is using it is generally staying closer to the to what they intended There's also a very important thing to note, which is the uptake Into this tool That happened for for a variety of reasons but of reasons, but especially compared to other places Elsewhere in the You know in the history that have undertaken The caveat of all of these is Which are our evaluators pointed out is whether that initial finding Whether we're seeing something that is because people likely to use these tools We're likely going to be staying within their budget Anyway, in other words if and the comparison is for the whether it's causation The comparison is to the Fitbit if you might remember If if using a fit bit is the people who are most likely to be concerned with their fitness Are those that use a fit bit? Versus those those who don't But I think there was a lot of a lot of great Findings from from that initial evaluation I think in the context of this discussion I think we should which was going to be my point, but I'll make it now We should look to a feedback some of which was from the evaluation, but then some of which was Is anecdotal but powerful Can be incorporated to modify the tool And I have the top one that I know mark has you heard me talk about And that is the early notifications There's evidence that a lot of the people that like this tool Use it for just the overall total the monthly statement or the ability to check in from time to time And they're not really all that interested in In the early notifications when when you haven't even hit your budget So some users and this again, this is anecdotal. I don't want I don't want to put under the evaluation set Budgets that are Well in excess of what they intend to play Because they don't want to be Getting that notification that says you're at 50 percent of your budget. Well, if my budget was 100, why don't you remind me when it's 100? and so But the point to this effort is to make sure and we I've had these these these points to I made this point to Katrina and scott And mark of course That these can be configurable And I know it's not going to be configured by the user But if we are developing a tool that can change because we have now Not anecdotal, but real evidence or an evaluation effort that says do away with this early notification Or let the user Choose one way or another That we incorporate that in these development of efforts Um It's always balancing which I know that that that is another very important lesson learned here Which is if we make it too difficult for people Too many options too much legalese in in the in the site. We turn people off and they don't sign off sign up so All of these things come to provision and and and that is the Essentially the efforts that are currently taking place Including a lot of those lessons In here, I mean to your point I think that it's the importance of ongoing evaluation And so we have two evaluations of the play my way program right now The intention is that this evaluation is is ongoing And so while there is not an evaluation in the field right now, we continue to track data Um with an eye that that we will Continue to evaluate this program Release that's that would be my very strong recommendation um To to go off script and to support some of what commissioner zuniga's points This this was uh, this was a pilot It was it when we started down this path back in 2015 um What we had was a body of evidence About this type of technology about this type of tool That was that was somewhat mixed Based upon its development and other jurisdictions nowhere had it been developed in the united states and So what we had was was Some gray literature at at best looking at other jurisdictions in australia or in Canada And so the commission was kind of Challenged with a decision about how do we proceed with this? It's completely in line with where the Where the legislature envisioned a progressive responsible gambling program to go It's completely in line with what are recently adopted responsible gaming framework And where it was what was adopted and recommended in that framework But how do we proceed then with a tool that that doesn't have a solid empirical evidence based to it the gaming commission? I think very wisely took a decided to to press forward but in a very cautious manner adopting a precautionary approach one in which said There seems to be promise here not only just within within Other jurisdictions with this type of technology, but it's in line with other types of technology outside of the world of gaming And so let's let's adopt it In a non regulatory approach Let's evaluate it and let's seek the cooperation of each of our licensees In doing so and leverage some of their expertise in this area as well And so That was a lot of kind of the The conversations that were happening back in in 2015 2016 as we as we developed this It was after those two evaluations After our operators category one operators had an opportunity to to see this tool That it was decided then In 2018 State memo i'm going to go back on now. I apologize so back in january of 2018 Where the commission met again to say okay, so we've we've we have this pilot project We have an evaluation. We we've seen what the uptake is Which is which is relatively powerful information for us So where do we go now beyond this this pilot project and the commission? Decided that that we would move again in a non regulatory path toward developing a play management tool With cooperation of mgm springfield and on core boston harbour And so without a regulatory path it was decided that the best path forward to memorialize the This commitment was through an a memorandum of understanding Which was then signed About nine months after that in october of last year and that mo you laid out what what should we expect? What does development look like? What what should the tool what features should the tool have as well as what is the time? So based on the information that that we had to date It held many of the same features that the current tool has with some flexibility to As permission and zuniga pointed out to to make some adjustments to it And it it set a timeline for implementation of september first 2020 so with these modifications that are Um Due to some of the the evaluation right what some of the users would be looking for I think so what we're talking about is The user having the ability to say don't notify me until i'm at 100 percent. Is that what we're talking about? Yeah, it it doesn't it it allows us to to set it at We can we can set it so it's configured so that the Notification would be received at 100 percent It's this tension. I I I've I've torn between saying let's completely leave this up to the the patron And the challenge there is that it has more touch points before Between enrollment and when you're back and you're able to to start you gambling And Or making it as simple as possible where there's very few touch points Which was an original priority of this program We don't want there to have to be a user's guide in order to to roll in it. We don't We don't want it to be overly complicated. And so I think um and uh You know katrina and scott can speak to this I think where we're going with this is is in the right direction But we're still and even even with the current development We have a lot to learn about what players what will be useful for players what type of information And configuration will be will be best for for them. And that's where the the function of ongoing evaluation Was it a strong? Was it just a couple of users who thought that they wouldn't want to be Notified until they hit a hundred percent or was that really a strong theme of the evaluation? I I you know The evaluation provides some some clear insight, but I the evaluation also didn't provide A lot of clear answers to two questions like that I think that as as commissioner zuniga pointed out that we have anecdote the the strongest evidence of that is anecdotal Um experiences of our game sense advisors and their interactions with patron at planer park casino Where they had repeatedly heard that they didn't like to receive the the multiple notifications over Over the while using the tool, but they felt like The information when they would go back and check it was actually very useful And that people were setting up double their budgets Let's say so that their first notification was actually the one that they originally intended I think just to Really to just set back to our original agenda item Yeah, I think that we don't want to get too far off course because I don't believe Folks are really prepared to discuss all the various um policy considerations that you would be Considering down the road if I understand correctly the proposal today Includes the technical capacity to bring in flexible us to to be flexible enough to Really address important policy points for the future One of which would be the kind of example that you gave perhaps less or more notifications But that's not what we're here for today. Correct. Today is an update on where we stand the the commission adopted this MOU Um in collaboration with our our licensees It charges um IGT to to Go forward with development based upon those those specific requirements that were laid out by the commission and and our licensees And so today is really an update of where we where we are in the in that development Um, there's a lot of there's I started it. So thank you Well, but I think that um some of these these questions that really highlight just how How complicated this and complex this really is I mean we're we're Introducing technology that interfaces with the player at a slot machine that provides them with information And is it the right information? Is it delivered to them at it at exactly the right time? Does it really do what it's truly intended to do? Which is provide them with information where they can make a decision about whether they can continue to gamble or stop This is this is a fundamental question about how we promote responsible gambling in in massachusetts And I think it's it's a fantastic conversation Um and one that that I think we will look at How we implement play a play management tool now, but it will also inform How we move forward in in in this direction as well as other directions and Going again off script, which I'm I'm sorry, but Katrina and I have had some I think very exciting conversations about what is the intersect between Um technology And the programs That we offer and through the mgc or through anybody else that it gets back to this idea of how do we promote positive play how to implement safer levels of gambling for people Who choose to gamble and I think that that so I think it's it's an exciting time in a lot of different ways and Should be a really good conversation And I know we we should move on from from this conversation, but it's really part of it We should remember or for your benefit Chair when we came up We came up with the intervals There we looked when we first started looking at this Tool we looked at all the efforts that had been done Outside of the united states on prior similar tools and there's a lot of caution about for example providing A slide bar where people might want to go to the middle Where you know to to set a number that they want to gamble Because that might incentivize some people that would have never gone to that place to just go with that default In other words just the interface for simplicity versus What it can cost others to to do there was a subject of a lot of study and discussion We initially started with notifications at 75 90 and 100 And it was the evaluators who suggested 50 75 with different incremental That the same number of increments, you know a 25 percent increment And my point has only been That it is in that same spirit that we should be able to look at and challenge those assumptions And have the flexibility to do that the technical flexibility because In other jurisdictions where they gave a lot of options to In terms a lot of configuration capability to the user It ended up resulting in the user just eliminating You know, it's there's too many numbers or I got confused. I put in the wrong number A number that I intended to be Weekly or monthly I put it in the week and that confused me and I and now I'm getting all these notifications that I intended Etc so So that's that's an important part of what we are set out to do It boils down to what you just said earlier mark, which is we're committed to doing this with another evaluation effort One that I believe we have also learned lesson from which is I really want us to have an evaluation that's more in real time that can help us develop the tool or improve it Not just tell us whether there's you know past failed kind of audit Which is something that I think is a is a big lesson from the from the first effort We want these tools to continue to be improved And and that's how we should be thinking about the next evaluation place Some of the barriers in the original Evaluation efforts dealt with our ability to generate very specific reports and flexibility in those reports it's a you know It was an early version of of this type of tool and I think that That has been in our mind in the development of the of this tool with With iGT and I know Katrina and Scott specifically as we're moving through this development The ability to do these type of ad hoc reports is Is front and center Yeah, just to add to that and you highlighted some really important points commissioners Zaniga is that This has been a growing process Because it was piloted with ppc basically originally the whole concept is evolving as we're getting Evaluation and feedback from the patrons As our staff has become more engaged, especially on the technical side Mark and I've been in scott and Teresa have been collaborating quite a bit on how can we expand What play my way means to us in this moment and For today's purposes, obviously we are reporting on iGT's compliance with what the MOU Technical requirements are but that does not mean it stops there This is a continuous growing process And I think as we get more data back as we have access to that data and the reporting requirements that we will Review and really data mine to figure out what do the patrons want to see Without being more prohibitive and more of a deterrent in education That's really going to enable us to build or work with our licensees and the manufacturers a better product And that totally depends on our path as we move forward. So there's lots of great conversations To be had again, this isn't the final stop. This I think is just the beginning It's leading up to a destination. I think there's a lot of iterations of this to come that we're going to see as time moves forward so Just one last point and then I just want to show you some of the the status of the development to date So what's what's happened since october of last year to date? And where do we need to go before september 1st 2020 one of the the so Play my way at planer's park casino was built On the platform a scientific games platform because that's their casino management system is scientific games We needed to It's not going back to the drawing board, but it's also it's it took significant development because both On court boston harbour and mgm springfield used a different slot management system The right they use igt advantage and so it's a completely different company and it It operates functions slightly different And so it required quite a lot of development So I thought it would be useful for us to just It it both supports kind of what what it looks like at planer's park casino in a lot of ways, but it also shows you what it will look like On the igt advantage system, so Many many similarities. So what you see are two two screenshots That would appear when somebody initially Enrolls in the program So this would show up either on a kiosk or on the actual slot machine itself The enrollment screen provides an overview of play my way And the incentive if there is an incentive for for enrolling Can I point out a typo? Yes, the incentive No, it's an important one the incentive is a five dollar drink credit not a five drink award Oh Well, actually it's it should be a food food. We Okay food voucher. It's a five dollar incentive Right. Well, that's that is actually quite flexible. We we can provide an incentive Or we don't have to provide an incentive and that's one of the areas of flexibility of the program Currently at planer's park casino. There's a five dollar Food voucher. It's not for drink. It's not for gambling It's very specifically for any one of the food vendors at planer's park casino Yeah, and just as an FY these screenshots the content was it's not finalized yet This was just for demo purposes. So thank you for pointing that out. We will let IGT know This is this is IGT right development. I otherwise I'd have to sign up. I was just gonna say Then you'd have a different issue that people pushing buttons. They really don't know what they're pushing Can we add free soft drinks? You're very very, um Sorry about that But we will we will work on well and it's working with our operators to our licensees on what what do what would be an appropriate incentive And how can we think creatively about this? So That goes back to another reason why I think it's we get a lot out of a cooperative arrangement with our licensees to to advance this That we wouldn't necessarily get if it was a strict regulation at this point in time So that's these are the uh two enrollment screens So, um budgets are broken into daily weekly and monthly as I said early on very IGT advantage looks very similar to The scientific games the amounts can be adjusted at any time to accommodate the player So if you're in the middle of your play you can Log into the play my way system and and adjust your your budgets and you can leave Two of them blank, right? You can sign up for just one. That's what you want. Correct. Um, we have a another screen just ahead that would show How if you you wish not if you would only wish to have a daily budget But not a weekly or monthly the other two would be defaulted to zero and you would only receive these notifications Notifications for the the daily amount. So here are the two budget the three budget screens I'm sorry where you would you would set those those amounts Um for security purposes that it's linked to your player card. I'll play any enrollment in Play my way it's linked to your player card. So you must have a player card in order to enroll in In play my way. That's because that's how it tracks you tracks your play over over time To ensure the security of it You're asked to enter your player reward number Um, as you can see on the screen here So They're using a player reward card, but in addition to that they have to have a pin number It's the no no It's the same pin number as your player reward card. So it's linked to your player reward card In fact, this was another decision point. Do we want it to be completely separate from your player reward card where you would perhaps have a Play my way card and a player reward card again, um Where we want this to be as simple as simple as as possible With as few touch points as possible. So, um, we decided that it was best to link it to the player's reward card And it was marked not importantly It was marketed. It is marketed as a benefit of your player rewards card. Correct. Yes We need the information to track the play But it's also a point of You know as a another just interesting side note this this Tool was just recently launched in by the british columbia lottery corp Um NBC casinos and they did not place it under their game sense program They placed it as a benefit under their player reward system So we obviously took a a different path with this but it but it highlights the point that This is this is a a benefit for people who are enrolled in the player and their player reward programs Okay So you players can track their play over time players can adjust their budgets or can Or continue to to play so this was a a point that commissioner zuniga made that There are people who don't wish to necessarily receive these types of notifications But they really value that real real time information about About how much they've spent gambling It's it's important to note that this tracks the ups and downs this tracks exactly how much you you've spent So it will it will take what you if you're if you're ahead it will take that into account But it's really a truly a budget setting tool So if you say you want to spend $50 it will track that it will track on that $50 It won't necessarily just track the amount of money that that That is bet And that's that's a that's an important concept and I don't think I'm articulating it very well But it it really is intended to track the amount of money that you want to spend It's it's the net of all your Expenditures with with gambling minus your losses. I mean minus your Yeah, it would be net net loss, right? We're not lost Um, there is also a feature on here that provides just general information general information about the game sense information center Responsible gambling tips An information about how slot machines work that can be accessed at at any time You can unenroll At any time which is a feature that was also important to the commission when when we first set it up that There is no cooling off period. There is no delay if you wish to unenroll you can unenroll at any time Again, it puts the power of this tool Squarely upon the patron of if they use it and how they use it But it does ask information about if you are unenrolling why are you why are why are you unenrolling? And I think this was will be valuable information and Determining how we how we continuously improve That the experience for the player and use Mark I apologize. I might have forgotten can a player also access all of this information At home They cannot access all of this information at home The two places that they can access information is from the slot machine is Or from one of the game sense kiosks But it highlights um commissioner stephens. I think some of the Where are the where where what direction can we go? Can you enroll and change your budgets while while at home and kind of a cool state of mind? Should you be able to receive the your notifications? On a on a smartphone and connect it not necessarily through the slot machine screw the kiosk But have it delivered through through your phone Um, they these are the ways in which I think we need to be attuned to where Where technology can take us and what ultimately will be helpful for patrons at at casinos to to stick to a budget that they wish I think those points about mobile notifications would be especially important if in when the commonwealth chooses to move forward with Sports betting and or online at some point. I think that's really important to be thinking about that already And I think the other important point here is Remind me if I'm accurate Don't we have about 12%? Who who actually are using the tool? That's correct. And that's a really high number so one measurement of Of success that you can't you can't overlook is what is the percentage of enrollment of Eligible players and currently at plane rich park casino Where we have over 20,000 people currently enrolled in in the program With a relatively modest unenrollment rate of It's in your your memo of Around 3200 or 3,300 people have have unenrolled If people, you know, you can unenroll at any time We want to make this as simple as possible. So if you don't find it useful, you don't like it and you can unenroll And so I found this to be Incredibly powerful and I think that it speaks not only to the tool itself But this is this is part of the game sense program and the game sense advisors at plane rich park casino They they take a lot of ownership of this and a lot of pride that this this fits very well within our overall approach for for the game sense program I think that's key and you will continue to you know to value that it happens very organically with people who are either Trying the tool and need some help and there's the games and advisors who can help Or the the other way around they have a relationship with the game sense advisor and they get them to use a tool or answer questions Just back on the uptake the historical uptake of some of these tools in the past as was in the low Single percentages Um, so being about that is really is really good But it also may speak to that the fact that there is a lot more acceptance of technology And we may be just observing some of that. It also goes right to your point about how some of it is most of it is now moving mobile and so There there ought to be at those Thinking that thinking about, you know, where else might somebody be able to Consult or not get notified And just to add to that to what you were saying commissioner Cameron These are all the conversations that mark and my team have had kind of behind doors With sports gaming on the horizon and all of the other eye gaming components or anything else that may hit our jurisdiction Really looking at the tool and evolving it to be that mobile app to be more accessible And expand its usage into those newer arenas as opposed to just being on prem Is going to be critical to its continued success, but allow our patrons or allow the the Commonwealth citizens to be more informed about their gaming decisions and their budgets and being more responsible So all of that like I said earlier, it's really an evolving process and it's really Of course, I have to nerd out a little bit. It's really exciting for us because from a technical perspective there's just so much complexity and data and Just really neat opportunities to really build and expand this with either the operators and or the licensees Or developing internally Katrina that was my question In terms of this technology Do we directly have access to the data so that we can perform the data analytics or we have to be Outsourcing that no, we do have access to the data. It can be a little complicated sometimes with because a ppc system being on acsc and IGT is on advantage and we're a couple versions behind on the IGT advantage Not just us but the properties themselves. So in order for what we just presented For on core boston harbour and mgm to take advantage of the play my way solution They actually have to upgrade their entire system And have to be compliant in order for this to meet the september deadline for 2020 We have access it can be a little cluggy, but scott and and pre our our engineer our gaming technical engineer Work diligently on making sure that that communication and that transparency into the data the data sets are there And we're always building and evaluating reports. So as we get more familiar With the play my way and the responsible gaming requirements. We're gonna we're really digging into that more But the bottom line is is that technically we'll have that. Yes That's moving forward. Yeah, and some of that It hasn't been accessible to us or readily available. And so having scott and Katrina Very involved in the development of it with IGT and our operators has is really important. I can't bring that in house. Yeah one one other so Giving credit where credit is due when we talk about a very successful Implementation certainly our game sense advisors are true champions of this on site, but we also had A very thoughtful strategic rollout of this led by um lane briscoe um And um thinking about how we successfully communicate this do a communicate a successful communication of this And from the onset if you take a look at at the initial enrollment of Play my way out of the gates. It was it was within the first month if it just stayed where it was um, it was outstanding and and I think that it set the tone for play my way To to really to to really take off. So Thank you to Elaine for Mark I had a chance to share with you and and the chair that this This was a prominent part of a couple of presentations at the international gaming regulators conference In fact, one of the presenters really had these Screenshots and and did the game sense commercial Um showed it to the audience. So there was really a lot of interest in the work that we're doing Um groundbreaking is how it's been described and um lots of questions around Um What we're doing Lots of accolades as well. So I do think Yeah, the team has um and part of that is the communication piece Um, so I just it's nice to be at a conference out of the country And hear so many Good thoughts about this work So I don't think you're looking for a vote today But I think you have a consensus of our gratitude for the the expansion of this pilot program to the other two Licenses and we actually should acknowledge their cooperation through the MOU Yeah, so Definitely that you know, we've we've had you know over the course of the past several months We've had a number of meetings. They are they are there. They're present. They're they're assisting and driving That's it's uh, it's great to see something that started off as As a stiff headwind that was led by the gaming commission to to to initiate this to see Um some tailings to see our operators taking taking some leadership in this and some And ownership and helping to drive this process Before I go to my fellow commissioners to reason scott, do you wish to add not to put you on the spot? But certainly your part and integral part of the team I'm good both mark and katrina covered Thank you Thank you commissioners. Any further questions for this team? Well, thank you for all those separate efforts and um keep those up Thank you. Thank you for the update and then we'll look forward to the policy important policy discussion future Thank you Moving on to uh, director griffin and item number seven on our workforce supplier and diversity development and lots of reasons to celebrate a very exciting Tuesday, so we look forward to your update on that and the Roll out of the best practices report And um, I'm joined by program manager crystal Howard as well. Welcome crystal so first off I um, would like to say that yesterday we Released our built-to-last best practices for diversity in the construction industry at our event in at smith college in northampton mass And I'd like to thank Chair jud Stein and commissioner stebbins commissioner o'brien also For participating We were really pleased with the results received very good feedback and audience Actually close to a hundred people Far more than we expected quite honestly It even felt like more I was trying to guess the numbers great bro. Yes. Yes But everyone seemed very engaged to the very end It asked great questions. And so we're really pleased with the outcome So Thank you all and just in summary. We had municipal and state officials higher ed And hospitals Contractors and builders and I just wanted to take a quick moment to thank Folks who were responsible internally for making it happen crystal Howard number one commissioner stebbins Director Driscoll and our digital communications coordinator austin bumpis were Really, we can't give them enough credit for helping out so I should add that jill. You did a tremendous job emceeing and you Moderated a very interesting panel So you and your whole team's leadership It created a really exciting exciting day And the stakeholders were so diverse that were there and Interesting questions. I don't know. I lean if you want to comment, but before you go on to the substance of you You know, I came back really just so thrilled with what I knew was such an important event for you It was so successful Great. Thank you so much To that end we Officially released this report. This is a summary The report's arth author Peg Berenger of fine point associates couldn't be here today. She's traveling But we'd like to thank her. This is a summary and I'll I'll note that this report Is already posted on our website so One of the lasting legacies of the casino construction May well be the focus of on equity and inclusion Related to the construction workforce and also the business opportunities as well Our agency commissioned this report To capture and share the promising practices that we saw develop over time With our licensees and also through the monitoring process And you know, this led to new opportunities for thousands of massachusetts residents and and We wanted to share some of these learnings We think this document will be a lasting roadmap for other projects to follow So you'll see We This is uh outline of the of the report I'm gonna turn it over to crystal now So arkansas and interviewed over 33 individuals to really get a grasp on what she was reporting because she was not in this industry and as you know It's a little bit difficult when you're talking about construction in its own But then the casino diversity aspect She had no idea so she did a really great job when we got this first draft. It was um, it was just phenomenal, but the acknowledgements uh indicate those individuals who were Interviewed and then you'll see that most of them are from the aoc many of you have attended one at least one of our aoc meetings and uh, these participants came Some of them most of them came pretty frequently some of them once or twice But it actually is through the history of ppc all the way From plain ridge to the opening of on course So we were pretty intentional about making sure that Each phase was included in the report and she did a great job with that So the report and and the report's author concluded after all those interviews that um, and you heard this yesterday probably Quite a bit the integrated supply and demand strategy. I think um, historically It was thought that we don't have enough Diverse workers and that's the problem But without the demand And the diversity goals and the construction projects that are embracing those goals that it Doesn't work And so this report calls out and and really chronicles that integrated strategy So as part of the overview Peg the author of the report actually compiled a really great graphic that demonstrates the history and milestones over time Really the building blocks of how this Work came together and so this kind of opens up the document As to what we're going to be speaking about through the entire report and Additionally as part of our overview really it highlights the implementation of the expanding gaming act and Really hones in on the diversity plans being the integral part of the gaming license All the way through our contracting and workforce diversity Even till as we're moving through but primarily highlighting the construction so In the overview It's the importance of diversity is just reinforced and she really bulleted out the applicants From applicant time period being Diversity plans being formulated then and then how they were presented publicly for comment And then the actual implementation. So all even just that various strategy um, so as we Mentioned earlier the demand strategy included Effective diverse hiring and contracting practices like making diversity a requirement Formulating plans with specific numeric goals Communicating the diversity goals widely and making sure everyone understands the goals throughout And although this seems like a basic Practice it's not often Utilized from start to finish. So from the pre-construction meetings all the way through the project Designating a compliance officer or a team reviewing diversity histories While hiring all contractors And so these together In addition to some of the others mentioned Really form a very strong and effective Program and as you all know Both licensees required their contractors to Individually submit plans on how they would achieve diversity. We also required this of our licensees Um, both licensees had data tracking systems um And internally they provided weekly reports showing diverse worker hours and Held very effective corrective action meetings when they saw that things were not working One of the I think newer best practices that we saw emerge was Um utilizing not just the stick but the carrot as well And so recognizing and rewarding contractors who were Meeting or exceeding the diversity goals. So both programs had awards At some point during the process So throughout the report. We actually had the opportunity to highlight some Um, really great stories Which you guys have actually probably heard the ultimate abatement was one of the greatest stories that Came from a woman owned business So nina and charty was actually highlighted in the report as She had received an original contract of 250,000 But it increased up to 1.5 actually over 1.5 million And the unique story about nina is that ultimate abatement when they went through the armory building They used an entirely all female crew. So it was great to be able to highlight that in the report Additionally, we broke out the report's demand strategy into both workforce specific And contracting specific practices. So we were able to bullet point out some of those throughout the report The report actually illustrates many examples of the community outreach that we we and the licensees did through job fairs and um One of the interesting components we did see was that a lot of the talk from within the industry was about core crew and so we really had to Emphasize that that was a diverse crew that people should have been using as as their primary Group of workers from day one. So there was a lot of talk around that in the demand strategy Additionally, there were some really great strategies to retain diverse workers And the hard hat actually that's there is one of the Strategies that on core used in their construction phase To help identify some of the veterans who were at first a little hesitant in coming forward and identifying themselves And it was a really great way to get um the the not just the Identification but the recognition on the project of how many veterans there really were as they were wearing these These hats to identify themselves Interesting strategies that came out quick question Do we understand or do we know why they may have been hesitant to self-identify? I mean, uh, so I guess what we see is it's more of a cultural component. It's just sort of We see that even in our suppliers and vendors person. I have had this conversation actually, um it's I want to say it's a hum a humble component They just they they either don't want to identify or we have also heard that there's some stigma sometimes attached to that That they're concerned about what that may bring to their to people who now know that they're veterans that they are perhaps have some mental health issues or just Some of the stigma that comes from previously serving which we've found that since they did this veteran hard hat Identification process it was actually very inclusive and people were really responsive to that positively so it kind of helped break that is how encore had perceived it to us, but um, I think it's The interesting thing about how many veterans were on the projects is that we've seen that that is not accurate So people are more willing to come forward and were afterwards just identifying themselves. So it was good for everyone And here's a another great story. Um felicia dillon who's on the left attended the very first tradeswomen Tuesday event And if you'll remember that This is a part of a program that we helped launch and fund the build a life campaign That is administered by the northeast center for tradeswomen's equity So felicia attended the very first session and was accepted into the sheet metal workers apprentice program shortly after and there are many other illustrations of success along this way We were celebrating that yesterday as well And some supply strategies To accompany or complement the demand strategies Include advocacy for the underrepresented You all know that in our access and opportunity committee meetings. We had A diverse group of individuals who came to every meeting And some of those advocates include the policy group for tradeswomen's issues Um, we had community groups who were representing various constituencies and and that's actually a really important part of the process Industry recruitment, um, we also, um The massachusetts girls in trade This was an effort Launched by encore boston harbors jenny peterson In conjunction with the vocational technical school to recognize Young women who were enrolled in non-traditional careers and What started on one side of the state Launched into a full statewide effort That has actually seen a couple of years and multiple Conferences So it's very exciting. Um, yesterday Lieutenant governor karen palito mentioned that she's actually been to several of these So that was exciting to see Pre-apprenticeship training is Yeah, i'm just going to correct you if you are saying yesterday, but you do mean tuesday the event Oh, it feels just like yesterday. I've already said yesterday, but wasn't yesterday throughout my apologies Tuesday, that's right. Tuesday Thank you for that clarification Um, I was just telling someone earlier that it feels like friday, so i'm a little mixed up Um The pre-apprenticeship training, um, you know Both licensees worked closely with building pathways in the eastern part of the state and then community works in springfield and The trades union recruiting and apprenticeship programs were represented as well The contractor certification Our partnership with the commonwealth supplier diversity office was crucial in terms of ensuring that Small and diverse business ownership That these businesses were actually certified and and Licenses could actually get credit for their utilization Contractor training for example subject constructions trade partnership series to ensure that um Small and minority and women-owned business and veteran-owned business actually Were trained and understood the policies and were able to work effectively to get the contracts So these were all highlighted in more depth in the report and then we have other stories examples of MBEs like Mitchell clinton the owner of cmj llc the landscaping and trucking company that worked at the mgm site And there were so many great examples of businesses who Received an opportunity or or Worked on either project an integral to this Um Process is an effective monitoring strategy And the access and opportunity committee. I think it was Best described in this quote down below constant monitoring and collaboration problem solving By the multi stakeholder AOC was central to the success of this strategy and The report's author heard over and over That the access and opportunity committee was was crucial This is just another highlight. Reggie Cole actually was one of the contractors on mgm site He actually While we are very concerned about minority women and veterans on the project He actually was able to report that all of his employees were from springfield Obviously we cared about the locality of the projects as well. So that was an interesting story to highlight so You have heard about the outcomes, but um, it can't be overstated that these practices together with our licensees Attention and dedication resulted in some very strong outcomes in terms of diversity and opportunity for our residents And um, one of the key Points that we emphasized yesterday was the intentionality of um Of utilizing these practices together and it doesn't have to be hard, but you have to be intentional from the beginning So With that i'll Close my remarks and ask for any questions. I don't have a question, but I do have a comment and I just think the work is tremendous The leadership Watching you director griffin Grow through this process when the group do you remember the initial groups were somewhat combative And you're strong steady Respectful leadership really I think made a tremendous difference and They commend the team for the work and the results Great work. Thank you. Thank you I think early on the access and opportunity committee It was a very diverse group with diverse opinions and Everyone needed to learn how to trust each other and respect that everyone was coming at it from different viewpoints, but Each were very valuable All together I would just add to that the you know, the aoc meetings and I think the way you ultimately structure them was to have both Licenses reporting and I think that kind of created its own little internal competition on those between our licensees Certainly the relationships improved from the get go, but Nobody wanted to come in with numbers that were Not as strong as the the other project happening at the other end of the state So keeping that consistent and and you had people who would weigh in with suggestions for both licensees It wasn't kind of one or the other based on where somebody was based I learned a lot of meeting management tools from Watching jill Yeah, one of the things that we also found was the shared learning. I think both licensees admitted that They were able to learn from each other. So that was great too I have to say one of the things that struck me the most powerful from tuesday was The the real life highlights that you brought in and we'd already heard from the gentleman who was the painter But also the to see the employees And to hear sort of the the real life impact was One of the most powerful things I think of that day and then the other takeaway for me was um I wasn't there to see the progression of it and the evolution of it So what struck me though yesterday Tuesday falling into your benefits of um of the panelists that was really one of them made a comment about Work workplace diversity almost being akin to ocean and and workplace safety decades ago And that you really are at the beginning of a wave where The fight hopefully to say that this is a valid Area to focus on in projects seems to be ending and it's more a question of implementation Um and it was hopeful to say to somebody look we were having these ocean conversations decades ago I lived through that and this is the next phase and we're we're going there um Was I think a really Powerful statement to the work that you were able to achieve in a really short period of time Right that I had to agree when I heard that statement and I think that was my currents from shun and design and construction who is the western massachusetts representative and He recalled when safety was not One of those top Teared Things that companies thought about and now of course you want to give a safe work site Yeah, that's a very powerful comment. I um or point. I'm sorry. I missed uh tuesday But I just want to add my my congratulations to All of the factors that worked well here your leadership Clearly was a big one We started without without with an outside chair Ron Marlow who was prominent in other efforts similar But not part of this agency and I would submit that The role that we played one not Detracting a little bit for one of regulator to more of a convener In this setting really worked in a positive way. There were other important factors that I think would have been mentioned before The licenses were very engaged They were competing at times This was a very visible very highly highly visible projects And and there was a real sense in the community and many other stakeholders that we don't want to miss this opportunity so Numerous stakeholders many of them are credited in the report We're very involved Making these meetings really working meetings not just Speaking opportunities And that is one of the things that I think really contributed to to this success I hope others can replicate it. I I I think there's differences in different projects I think it's very hopeful that we're at least in the minds of some We're moving in the direction of these being a Requirement not just a wish Or or a given For the benefit of of everybody But I but I do think that Because the licensees because of what they do A gambling is is still viewed with skepticism by many They knew they had to be very committed and very much in the form of delivering the goals that they Set out to deliver and that also plays an important factor Yeah, I would just pick up on that, you know, this is kind of a wrap up to our You know a legacy of work. We're going to leave behind but as I had the chance to ask some of our Partners from the building trades on Tuesday was you know, how did how did you feel this event went? They all talked about the fact that the people that needed to hear the message were in the room so public higher ed Private higher ed anybody who's doing a building project or Is a contractor that's going to be doing future work Was in that room and heard the message and they were some folks that Up to this point the building trades and not been able to make that pitch. So, you know Moving beyond the great work that we did in the legacy we created Looking to the next phase is now that there's real open opportunity for Some of the women that were represented in that room and the veterans and Diverse construction workers now they're looking ahead to think that there is going to be another project That's going to follow our model and they were elated with that result put before him on Tuesday Yeah, I think there was one point when Mayor of a western mass town raised his hand during the question and answer and said You know, can anyone tell me how you implemented this? at a municipal level these requirements and to have City manager at augustus being able to From his perspective Give that advice was really great. So Anyway, thank you thank you Thank you. And again just to recognize commission. There's devins in your role leadership in this effort you know We're very lucky to have the team of jill griffin and crystal howard Elaine and others, but it's been your leadership that's been a steady stewardship So thank you for your efforts. And I know it's very much from the heart which This is in many ways. So I think Elaine provided us with the word passion driven passion focus and purpose and And it really resonated on on tuesday And I do think that we're left with An obligation to continue to To support replication We have to stay within our mission But this work that you produced And that we commissioned Will serve as a great blueprint. We were lucky to be hosted by spring By smith college That was able to announce that they exceeded their diversity goals In their recent construction of the neilson library So already we're seeing a kind of a partnership across the commonwealth that I hope that we can continue to be part of even if we're not always in the driver's seat So we'll look for those replications and how we can continue the conversation down the road. It's important important work Great. Thank you. And I'd like to also Give my thanks and appreciation to commissioner stevens as well For this project and I was happy. I was happy. Let me be part of the team All right, uh, you do have another piece for us, right? Um, uh, directors yamba mentioned, um That out of the utmost of caution we wanted to bring this Case before you Um as Part of the staff review of the workforce program budgets in region b Holyoke community college and And their sub grantee springfield technical community college Requested two minor funding changes for their fy 19 Workforce program and They have requested to utilize some of those funds in fy 20 that were not fully utilized We we believe that these this is in line with What you approved However There were some things that were not explicitly Clear when we spoke to you last time. So we wanted to bring it back Did you have any? Questions well before I ask that Holyoke community college has requested the use of 35 000 to hire a part-time career counselors to advise support and coach participants in their program And there were some funds that For example that cost a little bit more than they had thought for testing and Bus passes and things like that. So so we are I believe asking for a boat Yes, does everybody have the chance to read the memorandum? Yes. Do we have a motion? Again I moved that the commission approved the revised budget and reallocation of funds awarded to Holyoke community college Pursuant to a grant from the community mitigation fund as described in the memorandum from director of supplier and workforce diversity jail griffin ombudsman jonesiam and program coordinator crystal howard Did it october 7 2019 and included in the commission packet? second Any questions with respect to the memorandum? Okay All those in favor I Opposed Five zero. Thank you for the really helpful memorandum that made it clear to us great. And I just have one last director Xiemba asked me to say one or two words regarding the workforce grants. And so I will do that We've we have found these grants to be very successful in connecting individuals with Careers in culinary hospitality and gaming specifically dealers We have talked to licenses the need is still great, especially in the culinary and gaming areas And so we will work with the guidelines to to ensure that Some of these funds are still available for these purposes at least this next round Thank you. That's an important thing. I know and in springfield We learned that mgm's springfield is working very hard on workforce development, particularly in light of our unemployment rate so The impact of the workforce Development grants are So thank you Thanks. I'll set. Yes. Excellent. Thank you so much. All right came We all set to move on to item eight Finance division, will you be giving the report? Yes. Thank you. I believe that Our chief financial officer london is unable to make today, but I know that he's been working very hard with Agnes bullio to Provide this report in conjunction with your work on rike. So thank you Yeah, director Lennon is out on a family medical issue, but he provided a Very good summary like he has done in the past of the Budget close out for the fiscal year of 2019 that is included in the packet Just to recap some of the figures Um The commission approved a fiscal year 19 budget in the amount for the For the gaming control fund In the amount of 33 million 400 33.4 million Which required an initial assessment and licensees of 28.3 million And during the year like we do We came to periodic Budget quarterly budget revisions and that grew to A 37.81 million Which revenue projections were 37.64 million This necessitated 29.6 million in assessment of licensees The commission was relying on at least 163,000 In reversions to bridge the gap between anticipated spending And anticipated revenues. This is as of as of the last the third quarter So in your packet today, there's the actuals for the year and the actual spending for fiscal year 19 In the gaming control fund Was 36 points 34 million And revenues were 37.78 Million The result of which is a 1 million 1.44 million surplus for this year And as is our practice we will that will be credited Towards the fiscal year 20 as initial assessment on licensees So I will point out that the gaming control fund is composed of both statutory costs and regulatory costs Of the 37 1.81 million budget the gaming regulatory costs were 27 million The gaming control fund spending For fiscal year 19 was 36.34 million which was 3.9 percent less than the approved budget the The chart in Page two provides a high-level summary with some high-level Exponation of certain line items, which were either underspent or overspent that results in the Under spending that I mentioned before But in general the regulatory costs were underspent by 3.1 percent The indirect cost Was this year fully applied by by the state and represents a 12.2 percent increase from what was originally budgeted The office of the attorney general has underspent their budgeted amount by 11.3 percent The research and responsible gaming Portion of the budget is underspent by 7.3 percent And the ABCC did not spend its budgeted amount Which is every year is amounts only to 75 000 dollars So as I mentioned the chart on on page two Provides some of that high-level view of the variances And as again as mentioned The excess revenue or the difference between the revenue and the expenditures that provides an excess Of the planned amount will be credited to the licensees in the amount that is Highlighted on page three of the memorandum. I can pause here and see if anybody has any questions relative to What's in the good in the packet or our practice relative to Budget revisions and assessments. I had the chance to meet with the CFAO director Derek Lennon yesterday and walked me walked me through all the numbers Pretty comfortable with these explanations and where we saw some savings I might state for the record that Legal costs we treat Separately we come to approve increases we we we initially budgeted by what was what is minimum required for our insurance But there's enough Legal costs still or certainly for this last fiscal year And we have come to ask for budget revisions in this particular area in the last three quarters Notwithstanding all of that legal costs after the last revision were We spent less than the latest revision, which is good news But they will continue with some You know with some regularity at least in the in the short term This is the first year that we had an assessment Portion of the public health trust fund being funded by The revenues that come from mgm and that is what is reflected in At the bottom of the chart here on page two that incorporates An isa that we signed with dph in which we Fronted money because there was not going to be The ability to commit on their side because money was going to build in Which was later returned as agreed upon To to the gaming commission Which is some of the seemingly large variability numbers towards the end of that chapter Of that chart, but they should be taken together and that was a way again To make sure that The partners at dph had the ability to commit contracts Because the money they anticipated to receive Were going to be realized through the course of the year The other thing that I might Add is that The team who's here and and director lennon are very Careful and very judicious in budgeting looking for Efficiencies and being Making sure that we are not in a negative cash flow situation Which is why we often Is a good practice come with a slight Credit every year after year Which just reverts back to the next assessment from from licensees Very thorough report any questions? Thank you commission. Thank you director lennon will be here for the next quarter Which is forthcoming? You know in a future meeting No vote needed today. Thank you We're moving on to our last substantive item Catherine blue legal division you have regulations today We have attorney teresy and attorney lilios here to present on those items for you Yes, good afternoon So you have two regulations in your packet today and we're looking for a vote to begin the promulgation process So the first one is 133.05. That's the voluntary self exclusion rag. This is a companion rag to the junket regulation Which you voted on last month to begin the promulgation process on that one So if you remember in that regulation, we require the licensees to Provide a no marketing list to junket operators and the list includes People who are on the voluntary self exclusion list in addition to people in a number of other categories So this regulation really just closes the circle and essentially adds the same language to the bse reg Do you have any questions on that one? No, we did have a chance to meet and fully Digest the work that's been done the rationale behind it. So I do not have questions So you should have a small business impact statement on that as well. So we're just looking for votes on both So madam chair, I move that the commission approved the small business impact statement for the amendment to 205 cmr 133.05 voluntary self exclusion As included in the packet second All those in favor I opposed Five zero. Thank you I further move that the commission approved the version of the amendment of 205 cmr 133.05 voluntary Self exclusion as included in the packet and authorize the staff to take all steps necessary to begin the regulation promulgation process second All those in favor opposed Five zero. Thank you. And then the second set is changes to our licensing regulations So deputy director lilios will run you through that. Good afternoon I have a request for a number of updates to 205 cmr 134 The regulation pertaining to licensing and registration of casino employees and vendors In total there are six provisions in 134 that are being brought before you today five of them are in the nature of housekeeping matters Those which I'll address first Reflect prior commission votes and current practices of the licensing division and the iub We're looking today to correct some inadvertent errors in the final printing and that's why i'm referring to them today as housekeeping matters The first one is reflected in your packet is 134.07 which is the regulation on application forms And as you'll see subsection five Included the word identified identified twice. We're looking just to omit the Incorrect duplicate word The next sub section is 134.09 Which outlines the procedure whereby the iub and licensing division work To approve or deny or revoke Applications or registrations and the language as reflected in your packet Indicates that the bureau approves denies or revokes key license applications gaming employee applications And service employee registrations and that the bureau in conjunction with the licensing division Notifies the applicant in writing of the specific reasons for any adverse action And includes written instructions on how to appeal any adverse action And again this reflects current practice in a prior vote 134.10 and point one one are two companion sections point one oh sets forth the licensing standards for Key employees gaming employees and gaming vendors and point one one sets forth the Registration standards for service employee registrants and non-gaming vendor registrants The red lines Parallel one another which is why I'm mentioning them as companion Regulations and the subsections that are being stricken in both of them are repetitive Either of prior provisions in the same regulation Or as for the final stricken language in each one repetitive of language that appears now in our hearing regulation Which is 205 c mr. 101 Turning to 205 c mr 134.14 that is the regulation on administrative closure looking again to Make some corrections here This regulation out allows the bureau and the licensing division to administratively close applications When the individual or the vendor is not responsive to requests for required information The regulation reflects a 14 day window for individuals to respond a 21 day window for Vendor companies to respond before there is authorization for the division or the IEB to administratively close This again is an administrative closure. It is not a denial or revocation on the merits It allows persons or companies to reapply with no waiting period So long as they provide the information that they neglected to respond to in the first instance Finally, there is some new language that we're proposing for 134.13, which is the regulation on Fingerprinting we would like to specifically insert a sentence here Indicating that each person who appears for fingerprinting shall provide Identification at the time of fingerprinting in the manner required by the bureau We'd like to be explicit about that information now in this in this particular regulation You should know that the procedure is that the licensing division does Send the individual who has an appointment to come in for fingerprinting written instructions on the types of Identifications that will be Accepted so that they are prepared when they do appear and also the final red line in that section Asks for two sets of prints. We don't need three in the instances where for good cause shown The IEB would accept Fingerprint cards rather than requiring the person to show up in person and that good cause could include something like The fingerprints were taken within say the past year or The individual is a foreign individual that makes appearing impracticable Those are the Amendments to 134 that I'm requesting at this time any questions Even though they're Mostly, you know housekeeping as you mentioned Will we still have to have a hearing? Is this a regular promulgation process? Yes, we'll have to follow the regular process And and we thank you for your vigilance these um housekeeping matters Happen and it's important for us to continue to monitor the final product. So thank you for taking care of that Hmm And there's a couple of substantive I don't know ones that will go through the same process. So We'll stay tuned Um Sure, madam chair. I moved the commission to approve the small business impact statement for the amendments to 205 CMR 134 licensing and registration of employees vendors chunk of representatives in labor organizations. That's included in the packet Second All those in favor Opposed 5-0 Madam chair a further move that the commission approved the version of the amendments to 205 CMR 134 Licensing and registration of employees vendors junk at representatives and labor organizations As included in the packet and authorized the staff to take all steps necessary to begin the regulation process second All those in favor aye Opposed 5-0 Thank you. Thank you. Thank you I think we've come to that part of the meeting where we have our commissioner updates if there are any further ones Briefly, do you want to mention? Your latest conference. Yes, I briefly mentioned it earlier attended last week the international gaming regulators conference Very substantive good information Um, we will be hosting next year um Director Wells has been appointed has been Has been appointed and then confirmed by all the delegates to be a member of that board. That's quite an honor She's one of just a couple of Members of the board that are from the united states So, uh, I think she'll do a tremendous job and I had great value But I was paying close attention to all the detail work because we will offer our support as the host agency next year for this for this conference And I already mentioned the accolades regarding responsible gaming and And the tools in our framework that were mentioned and highlighted actually at the conference. So again very Very good details The other thing we were very instrumental in is the statistics committee really What does every agency do throughout the world so that there's a resource if you're doing something new? And um, we were an active member of that as well as providing the translation. I want to Come in commissioners Zuniga who? Volunteered to actually Translate and make that document Um A spanish version of the document that has been utilized by some of our The neighboring countries in south america and around the world spanish speaking so We have provided great value and I think it's important that we continue to be part of that and we certainly will with director wells as a participation leadership position Yeah, it's a it's a great occasion. Um, I think I look forward to that next year It's probably going to be around the same time, right? Yes that third week in september all that will be posted shortly. Yeah, um the maria copley It was a bid process. I want to also commend, um, janice riley for her I mean janice carried this project frankly. She really um is excellent at this At many many things but in particular this piece And it was really keeping two different organizations that will become combined with imgl keeping them on track Getting them to understand that we needed to respond quickly in order to obtain Uh, a hotel here at a at a price that is affordable for regulators. So a lot of that Work was done by janice and keeping the The folks on track to to really move forward with that whole bid process. So that got done and There'll be some other hurdles along the way not hurdles, but um, They're just opportunities for us to To assist in the planning with the conference I I perhaps should mention that There's there's no cost that comes to the commission or the licensees as part of these current But I know conferences like these do rely on the help from people on the ground And our agency which is which they value deeply and I think it's it's great that we can offer that Because we will also benefit from the exposure To this group and so will boston and the commonwealth. You have a chance to showcase our region And it brings great business. So it's a real honor to be selected And with the recognition it does take the hands of many to still make it happen. So thank you janice. Thank you gail Looking forward to caron's work. So thank you, but it's exciting for For boston. How many people how many do you expect? Well There were over 200 delegates this year, but we're anticipated well over 300 next year because of the combination and A great interest in regulators from around the world in coming to boston, frankly that is This is one of those cities that people really If they haven't been look forward to it and if they have been they look forward to coming back. So I did a little I beat the drum a bit and And got the group interested and I believe Lots of folks said we'll see you in boston next year. So I believe that we'll have it'll be well attended And it's such a diverse group from around the world of regulators that it's really It's good to learn from one another And I think I might add it's also a great great time We were asked initially when we first were conceived if we wanted to be considered as one of the of the Cities to host these these these conference and we were we had not even Awarded any of the licenses and that was certainly going to be a Hardship I might say on the staff that was working On on a lot of other important issues, but now that three licenses three licenses are open That we've gained As you as you correctly point out. I think the timing is also really good for that conference. I agree. Thanks Any other updates? Okay, moving just on to item 10 for anything else that might be reserved. I don't I have not anticipated anything anything else that we have missed Then do I have a motion to adjourn so moot second All those in favor. Hi. I opposed five zero. Thank you. Thank you everyone. Thank you austin Good