 But I would like to do a roll call to confirm that we have a quorum. So commissioner O'Brien. I'm here. Good morning. Good morning. I'm here. Good morning, everybody. Good morning. Commissioner Stevens. Good morning, everybody. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. Before we get started, formally, I want to remind everyone that we are conducting this meeting using. Virtual technology. This is permitted under an executive order that the governor issued back in March. In light of the impact of the Corona virus. meeting on. We're going to get started today. A call to order today's meeting is public meeting number 315. Today is Thursday, August 13th, and it is 1001. Good morning. We'll get started with Commissioner Stevens and our minutes. Good morning, Madam Chair, colleagues. In your packet you have the meeting minutes from the June 23rd, 2020 meeting. I would move their approval subject to any corrections for typographical errors or any other non-material matters. This was obviously a thoughtful discussion. We had in advance of our licensees reopen. Any questions or recommended edits for Bruce and Sharra? I second that motion. Okay. Hearing no further comments or edits, I'll take a little call and vote. Commissioner O'Brien? Aye. Commissioner Zunica? Aye. Commissioner Stevens? Aye. And I vote yes. 4-0. Sharra, thank you. Today, our Interim Executive Director, Karen Miles, is also taking a few well-deserved days off. So we have Loretta Lilios, our Chief Enforcement Counsel and Deputy Director of the IEB. Good morning, Loretta. Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Commissioners. And Bruce Band is also, I'm sure, will have helpful comments for you on this general update of casino operations. It's in about the fifth week since the reopening of all three licensees. And similar to the previous updates, things are consistently going well. Each licensee is continuing to adhere to its comprehensive plan for cleaning, sanitization, and health measures. That includes enforcing the mask requirements for employees and vendors and guests and the proper wearing of the mask, covering the nose and mouth consistent with the commission's requirements. Also includes that there's been consistent enforcement of the requirement around beverages and that they are being consumed in a seated position while gaming and not while guests are walking around the gaming area. So that consistently has been communicated to guests and the licensees are enforcing that requirement. There's been on the patron level acceptance of these measures and adherence to these measures as well with no new reports of any issues or any trends in the wrong direction. I know the commission's been concerned rightfully with occupancy levels and I can report that none of the licensees is pushing up against the occupancy levels set by the commission. So those are well within the formula set by the commission. So generally that is the report around the COVID issues that things are continuing to work consistently with the measures put in place by the commission. All right, I will take the next thing. Both the MGM and Encore. Just one minute Bruce. I'm sorry. I have muted myself. I just want to make sure there are no questions for Loretta on this general update. Madam Chair, just one quick question and Bruce may address this too. When it comes to occupancy, obviously weekend nights are busier than others. Are they still staying, still have some breathing room between the occupancy limit and the crowds you're drawing on say Friday and Saturday nights? They're well below the occupancy level, just a little over half at best. Excellent. So no further questions. Loretta, thank you for that. And again, oh, it looks like Commissioner Zuniga. Yeah, same thing. Maybe Bruce was going to speak about this, but how is that occupancy fluctuating? Besides some of what we could expect in terms of weekend, are you seeing big variability in terms of occupancy, critical times or hours? Of course, during the evenings, the numbers go up somewhat, but it's never really reaching them, you know, close to the maximum levels. Really at any time. Burke might be able to speak a little better to that. Have you seen anything, Burke, that would alarm you? No, I think you're right. I think we understand the Monday through Thursday sample size that we've been getting. And then we have the weekend evenings, Friday, Saturday night sample size. And as stated, we're rarely pushing up on that 50% more. Thank you. And again, that's 50% of the commission's formula, which was a reduced number, not 50% of building occupancy, 50% of the commission's formula. Which is, of course, based on available gaming positions. Exactly. So the bottom line is that we're continuing to have strong compliance with our pretty rigid standards. And we know that that's an outcome that is based on a lot of effort from the licensees themselves, from the patrons and from our own staff. So again, we thank everyone who's everyone who's helping on that effort because it does ensure, you know, continuing sustainable operations. Perhaps that's a good segue now, Bruce, for the item number two, which I understand you'll be addressing. Right. Both MGM and Encore have put in to try and add the games of craps and roulette. We're currently reviewing their requests in light of some of the increase in COVID things at this time. We didn't really feel it was appropriate to add new games. So we're going to continue reviewing these and keeping an eye on the COVID numbers and consider that as a little later date. They have some pretty good suggestions, which we will look at and bring for you at a later date. So we're not going to vote on that at this time. Anybody have any questions with that in that regard? No, just to clarify that when you talk about the COVID number, you're talking about the statewide trend, right? Yes, correct. And I think if chair and commissioner, you certainly were cognizant of the governor's new measures and announcements. So the gaming agents team is continuing to review integrity issues around the plans for introducing the new game. So there is still work to be done on that in any event, as well as taking a look at, you know, how other jurisdictions are handling those, the addition of those games. But certainly the governors were mindful of the governor's new announcements. And so from the IB's perspective, it seems that expansion of operations at this time, following so quickly on the heels of what the administration is directing, would not be appropriate at this time. Questions for Bruce and Loretta? Yeah, it seems to me very reasonable. I think there was an assumption initially that we may have been very explicit about it, that we would open in this, in that manner that we did, and would continue to monitor the situation around us, including exactly what goes on at the casino. So while inside, there appears to be very good news in terms of adherence to the guidelines and occupancy levels. It's very prudent to continue to monitor our environment. Everett and Chelsea, for example, are identified recently as areas of, you know, particular, a small uptick, but important to monitor. So I think it's very prudent to continue the way we are and see how those weekly averages, if you will, continue to progress. I think what I'm hearing from you, Bruce and Loretta, is that your recommendation is consistent with our, how we really approach these guidelines from the start, that we would always be monitoring the public health metrics. And at this juncture, as the commission's going to dilute, it just wouldn't be prudent to expand the options right now. You have the request, you're going to be continuing to review them for, from an integrity point of view. Loretta, you'll continue to keep track of the metrics and where we are, and we can reevaluate at the, at a future date, correct? That's correct. That's correct, yeah. Commissioner O'Brien? Commissioner Stevens? No, I agree. I don't think now is the time to be expanding what we're doing. I think we're being appropriately cautious. And I think given what's going on in the state, it's not the time to be doing anything other than what Loretta said, which is you can look at the integrity of the games and suggestions that they're giving us. But I think that's, that's the only appropriate thing to be doing right now. Commissioner Stevens? Yeah, I'm in agreement. Well, thank you. I appreciate your thoughtful work on this, Bruce and Loretta, because it was very fluid. And of course, I think the governor's announcements came on Tuesday, so it is a fluid discussion and will continue to be evaluating. Thank you. Moving on then to item number three on the poker status, Bruce? Yes. We've gotten numerous inquiries from poker dealers, poker players, about the status of poker. And to update everybody on this a little bit, in order to make a poker a safe game, we could probably only allow four people at a table. In discussions with the industry, that just would not make poker profitable for them at all to have as a game. So at this juncture, we are not going to be instituting poker until a time where we could have more players at the table and do it safely. So that's kind of where we stand on poker. Questions? Bruce? Yeah, Bruce real quickly. Obviously, you know, some of our, I'm not sure with some other jurisdiction, neighboring jurisdictions are doing with respect to poker, but obviously we're mindful of the people working in those poker rooms and their positions and kind of what their opportunities are for changing over to another role or responsibility within our licensees. But what are you hearing if you're getting any communication on this? Some jurisdictions are letting them play with full tables and stuff, but that does not include you know, restrictions for taking into account COVID playing. I know other jurisdictions are doing that. That's not what I would consider a safe situation for the employees or for the players for that instance. It's poker at best is a marginal profit game for the casinos. If you were, we could probably only at best put maybe four players at a table and that is just a very, very low profit if empty profit at all for the casinos to be able to proceed with. So that's kind of where it stands. Okay. Thank you. I think either Loretta or was it Commissioner O'Brien, were you about to speak? I was going to jump in. I had heard Commissioner Stebbins and Bruce may know this more intimately, but that one of the licensees and perhaps both Encore and MGM had instituted some retraining for dealers to be able to work at other games as well. I believe that that has happened at one of the properties already. Bruce, you may know about that. 70 poker dealers have taken advantage of that. Okay. Great. Thank you. Additional questions on any matter with respect to the reopening and particular games? No, it makes sense on the poker side. Frankly, it would be also interesting to see if players could try to figure out people's tales with people wearing masks, but it makes no sense to have with such a small number of people like as Bruce articulates. Okay. Anything further than Loretta and Bruce? Not from my side. No. No. I'll set. I'll set. Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for the update. And, you know, we continue to be very pleased with the compliance and progress. Legislative update, Mr. Grossman. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair, commissioners and everyone. Just a way of a brief update as you'll recall on July 28th, the Mass House of Representatives passed House 4879, which was a bill entitled an act enabling partnerships for growth. Notably, of course, it included a section that would have legalized sports wagering and placed the regulatory authority with the gaming commission. There is also language in that bill, you'll recall, that would have required the commission to submit a report to the legislature on the status of Regent Steve. After passage, that bill was sent to the Senate where a new text was substituted and it became Senate 2842. The bill before the Senate was notably different from its House counterpart and that it did not include any language relative to sports wagering or the Regency Report. There were several proposed amendments to the Senate version that would have incorporated sports wagering, but they were all either rejected or withdrawn by their proponents prior to any action being taken on the bill as a whole. So the Senate bill was ultimately passed on July 29th at which point a conference committee comprised of three representatives and three senators was appointed to reconcile the two versions of the bill. And that's the last official entry on the ledger for these particular bills. Of course, as we know, the legislature has agreed to extend its formal session beyond the customary July 31st deadline that's set by rule so that it may continue to formally conduct its business. And with that, we'll continue to monitor the status of these bills and see if any action is taken. So that's where we stand with those two pieces of proposed legislation. Thank you for that, Todd. Any questions for Todd? Things remain fluid. Well, I know this through the press that it was at least assumed that the legislature might take this matter of sports wagering as a standalone in the upcoming session or in the extension of the current session. Is there anything that you can comment about that, Todd? There's no formal information on that. There are obviously media reports about different things, but there's nothing specific that I could comment on. Okay. I forgot the intention. Yep. The more recent to continue monitoring and as we often do, as we always do. Exactly. Further questions on this? Okay. Thank you, Todd. Thank you. And thank you for continuing to monitor. And moving on now to item number four, Dr. Lightbaum. Good morning, chair and commissioners. Good morning. Today, I have Chad Bork, our senior financial analyst with us, and he's going to talk about the local aid payments. Good morning, Chad. Good morning, everyone. So today, I have the quarterly local aid, which is payable to each city and town where racing activities are conducted. The amounts for this quarter's payment are calculated by using the handles from racing that took place in October, November, December of 2019. That said, the local aid payment for the quarter ending on June 30th is $169,456.07. And on the second page, you will see a breakdown of all the handles, as well as the distribution amounts that are payable to each city and town. Questions for Chad? Chad, just a quick question. And thank you for your good work. Because we look at these payments based on this payment actually is coming from fourth quarter of 2019, is it fair to say, because we know what first quarter of 2020, and maybe even second quarter of 2020, look like that you can kind of give some information back to those communities to give them a sense of what the revenue is they should be expecting when those payments are ready to be made. I don't know if that's something we've done in the past, but obviously local officials are looking tightly at their budgets. So being able to assist them with some of that forecasting, is that something we could consider or something that you could do? Yeah, absolutely. I couldn't go all the way up until the quarter ending, the handles that ended just in June. So I can give them, there'll be estimates because sometimes the numbers may come in and change, but I can certainly provide that. Can you hear me? Just cut out for a very brief moment. Okay. So yeah, I can provide that information for them going forward as soon as the quarter ends for June, which it did. So I can provide them with that information. Yes. Okay. I mean, obviously, you know, these are, you know, every dollar is helpful to our host communities with respect to our racing licensees, but at the same time we know some of the numbers are going to be dramatically different. Yeah. I think giving them an idea what those expectations might be, I'm sure they'd appreciate it. I agree. Thank you. Any other questions for Chad? Very comprehensive, as always. Chad, thank you. We do need to take formal vote on this matter. Do I have a motion? Sure, Madam Chair, I move that the commission approved the local aid quarterly distribution for Q2 of 2020 and the amount of $169,456.07, pursuant to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts budget and appropriation 1050-0140 and is described in the memorandum dated August 3rd, 2020 in the commissioner's package. Second. Any further questions? Okay. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zunica. Aye. Commissioner Stebbins. Aye. I vote yes, four is zero. Thank you. All right. Chad and Dr. Leibbrand, thank you very much. Are you all set then? Yes, thank you. Okay. Great. Thank you, Chad. Nice to see you. Yes, good to see you, Chair. Okay. Moving on now to item number five in our Budsman Division. Mr. Delaney, we're looking forward to hearing from you on our relicensing schedule. Good morning, Chair and commissioners. So in your packet is a brief memo that I put together outlining how we're going to move forward on the relicensing process with PPC and I'll just walk through that quickly. So what we have done at this point, we have scheduled a public hearing, which is going to be on Wednesday, September 16th, 2020 from 3 to 6 p.m. We selected that sort of late afternoon time as give a better opportunity for the public to participate in this meeting. So the purpose of this really is for the commission to get input from the host and surrounding communities, from the impacted live entertainment venues, and from the general public regarding the licensing. No decisions will be made at this meeting. This is really just for input for the commissioners' consideration in their further deliberations. So, you know, at this meeting we'll get a presentation from the licensee and they'll talk a little bit about what they did for the last five years and what their plan is for the next five years of the license. And then the commissioners will have a period of time for questions and answers and then we will open it up to the host and surrounding communities if they want to make a statement or a presentation or just want to submit some written comments. They are welcome to do that at that point. And then we will open it up to the public, for public comments. Of course, just strictly on the planer's relicensing piece. We don't want to bring in sort of other issues into this forum. So, you know, because the meeting is happening remotely, we're going to be asking people to sort of pre-register if they want to speak. We're going to use the MGC comments website to collect requests to speak and then we will program people in that way just because doing this remotely makes it a little bit more difficult than all sitting in the same room. And then after that happens we have now tentatively scheduled September 30th. We haven't set a time yet for the commission meeting to deliberate on the renewal of the license. And at that meeting there will be assuming that we have all the information that we need and are ready to do so, the commission can then vote on the issuance of an additional five-year license for PPC. And, you know, so at that meeting we expect that that will follow the same sort of format that we did for the initial licensing of MGM and Encore where all of the various MGC employees who are responsible for overseeing all of the various parts of the operation will report to the commission on, essentially on the status of compliance for the last five years and also will, if any additional conditions need to be placed on the license, they will, you know, ask for those to be added to the license at the time. And then we have included a little bit of an outreach strategy, you know, in addition to our sort of regular website and things of that nature, we also plan to do some significant outreach, you know, using our social media and so on. I worked with Sarah and Austin to just put together a little matrix that you see in the memo. And they are both here on the call if you've had any particular questions regarding the outreach strategy. And with that, I will open it up for any questions? Questions? Sure, thank you. Joe, very well done. Very detailed memo, greatly appreciate it. One thing I just want to make sure and I'm sure this is part of the plan is that the public hearing is on the 16th. You're anticipating our vote on the 30th. I think we do want to remind folks that couldn't participate in the public hearing or watch it that will obviously make it available online so people can go back and watch it and still use our MGC comments email to get their comments to the public presentation. We want to make sure that that's part of the ongoing comments that they can offer up until the meeting of the 30th. Yes, absolutely. Amike? Yeah, thank you. I question, I think it's embedded in what you wrote here, Joe, but in terms of the license conditions, which I know were many when we awarded the license, it is at least conceivable that some of them may no longer be applicable. I know there's many, the vast majority are ongoing. I'm assuming they will be for a second for a licensing period, but this would be the opportunity to recalibrate or eliminate where applicable any license conditions. Is that the case? Yes, I think we will be going through the compliance with the license conditions as part of our review and the licensee has not requested any modifications to those, but certainly if there are things that are no longer applicable or of the construction of the facility or something of that nature, we can certainly eliminate those. We should do a good scrub on any of the documents that are being generated as part of this. Right, and I know there was quite a bit of a worthy effort when we did the midterm review that was really ended up being a three-year review for these licensee, but this is again at least another opportunity in my mind to ensure that we're tracking stuff that is really applicable and necessary. Right, and we're asking PPC, in fact, I have a meeting later today with them to talk about some of those documents that were generated as part of that midterm review of giving us a little bit of an update to those documents. For example, we changed the new policy on workforce, on the percentage of local employees and so on. That's all changed from that midterm review, so we just want to make sure that the documents for this final review are updated to reflect the current status. So there have even been some changes between that midterm review today. Great to hear. Well, I look forward to, I know there's a lot of work that goes into the review of this, so I'm happy to see that it's ongoing. Commissioner O'Brien, any questions for Joe? No, I don't. I've been keeping up with what the plan is and it all makes sense. I think it's the best we can do and execute what we intended originally, virtually. So I think it makes sense. I have just a couple of logistic, more logistical questions. I see, you know, Joe, that you are anticipating having everyone sign up in advance and I understand why that's necessary given it's the virtual challenges that we have. But I'm imagining too that there could be, you know, a resident from Plainville that might at the last minute decide to, you know, wish to participate. Is there any accommodation we can make technically where if somebody joins just like in the public meeting today and they use the chat or something to ask for, to make a comment near the end? And, you know, I'm sure that you're going to be having some kind of a time measure because we do have to contain the length of everyone's comments in order to accommodate everyone. But is there a possibility of perhaps having some flexibility for those who don't sign up in advance? So I think a couple of things. One is we can use the chat function and people can ask to speak if they have not already. However, there will probably be a lot of people on the call who are just calling in and that chat function isn't available to them. So, you know, what I think you could certainly do this at the end of the meeting is ask if anyone who hasn't spoke, who hasn't pre-registered to chime in at that point. The only problem I see with that is that if you have three or four people trying to talk at the same time, you know how that things tend to break up on these virtual meetings. So I guess we would strongly encourage people to sign up ahead of time, but we can certainly try to open it up at the end just to make sure everybody's heard. Yeah, perhaps somebody from IT could help kind of in the functioning of that. And if we have that kind of interest, that's okay with me too. If it's not necessarily seamless and pretty, it's most important to hear from folks. So let's keep a little bit of flexibility, but with a reminder that it would be best if you can sign up in advance. Yeah, so it's actually just kind of interesting that I went back and looked at what we did with MGM and with Encore and actually even at those meetings, we required people to sign up ahead of time to speak even when it was in person. In the room or ahead of time? No, ahead of time on MGC comments. I thought it was kind of interesting. That is interesting. So the model work there, I have a different model in mind, but so I think that we can be a little bit flexible. I'm comfortable with that. Absolutely. Yeah, and by the way, my recollection is that, yes, most people signed in and it worked really well, mostly to manage what was then a lot of interest in speaking, but there was, Madam Chair, the occasional person that didn't sign up and they heard something and once to then chime in and they would raise their hands and that's the whole purpose of the hearing. So to the extent that we can accommodate that with the logistics that you just articulated would be ideal. I think it's important for the process. Yeah. Yeah, I've been drafting the meeting notice and actually kind of used the MGM one that we did back in 2014 just as a model. And in there, it did indicate that at the chair's discretion, you could take additional comments even if you weren't signed up and so on and I've left that language in there to account for that. But again, I think we would like to strongly suggest that people sign up ahead of time just for logistical reasons, but we can certainly open it up. Yeah, that sounds great. Then the only other comment I would have would be, and we discussed this a little bit at our agenda-setting meeting, it's that right now we do have a commission meeting scheduled for the last Wednesday of the month and we anticipate that being the date that we would address this matter formally if for any reason the public hearing reveals complexities that mean that requires more time will make that adjustment correct. Correct. Yeah. So I think yeah, I think we have a conflict with the agenda-setting meeting. Is that is that correct? I think I'm sorry. Could you say it again, please? I think on the on the 30th, I think we may have a conflict with the agenda-setting meeting, which is I think scheduled for that same day. Right, we're gonna we'll make arrangements for that. Yeah, we'll we just need to figure out a time where they don't conflict with one another. That's right. That's right. That's fine. So those are my sort of logistical matters. I think the plan is excellent. I like the outreach plan a whole lot. I am also sure that that. Kathy, it looks like you froze there. Can people hear me? I can hear you. I can hear you, Enrique. Yeah, Kathy's frozen up. It looks like the chair has some may have some connectivity issues. We'll give it a minute. Kathy, if you want to call or chat in any way and let us know. She might be trying to log back in. Well, let's let's just hold off. Oh, it looks like she's holding. She's back. You're muted still. So that must be my connection, which is interesting. I do have many more people in my home than normal visiting adult children who might be really challenging my internet connection. So good. So thank you. It was very interesting to realize that you are all frozen. Thank you. I'm sure you hear me say you're all frozen. When everybody else freezes and you're still moving, that's when you know you have a problem. But to be fair, there was not a lot of motion on those of us that were seeing you frozen. I wouldn't got a cup of coffee, you know. Thanks, Joe. Thank you again for the thorough report. I feel like we're in good shape. And that's been an excellent process. Thanks to the lot of the work that Commissioner Bryan, Commissioner Zinica did with folks early on about the relicensing process. And now it's nice to see it all coming into fruition. So thank you. Okay. Moving on then to item number six, we have a couple of elections to take care of Mr. Grossman. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I'm happy to tee these up for the commission. Just by way of background, Chapter 23K, Section 3F says that the commission shall annually elect one of its members to serve as secretary and one of its members to serve as treasurer. The commission is now due to conduct such a new election. Of course, Commissioner Zinica presently serves as the treasurer. Commissioner Stebbins as the secretary. Typically in the past, the commission has internally taken nominations for the respective positions. The individual has accepted and then a vote has been taken to elect the individual, which if I'm not mistaken, since the beginning of our existence has been Commissioner Zinica and Stebbins in these particular offices. So with that, Madam Chair, I'm happy to turn it back over to you, perhaps to take nominations or make any initial comment. I think I'm going to take the liberty and be the nominator. I don't think there's a rule against the chair making a nomination, but I would like to nominate both Commissioner Stebbins and Commissioner Zinica to continue in their roles as secretary and treasurer. But I now invite discussion from all who are not personally involved. So we'll first address the secretary's position. Commissioner O'Brien and Commissioner Zinica. I think I would second the motion of strongly support the nomination of Commissioner Stebbins. I was going to ask a technical question before you spoke, Kathy, and that was whether we could nominate somebody who was absent. But I think that that's a good point, and that we should not... Well, we could, and that would teach her, huh? We would still have to have her answer. I don't know about you, but I certainly have missed a meeting and ended up with a responsibility that I did not intend to have. But in this case, I think that she would absolutely support the nominations I've made and step aside if there were a competing nomination. So with respect to Commissioner Stebbins, any discussion? Shara and Commissioner Stebbins worked so nice together. We... No, I think it makes sense right now. You froze for a little bit at the end, Kathy. Commissioner O'Brien? I definitely... Oh, no, I think maintaining the both makes sense. But if we're talking about Commissioner Stebbins as Secretary right now, then I would... I don't know if I would move on it or second it. I don't know if the nomination... This is nominations. We do need a motion. Okay. Madam Chair, I move the Commission nominate Commissioner Stebbins for election as Secretary of the Commission in accordance with Chapter 20 through K Section 3F. I second that. Okay. I feel as though my internet is hanging on with thin hair today. We'll take a vote. Commissioner O'Brien? I... You know, I'm just going to shift everyone. Kathy, if you do without the picture, you might have better... Yeah, I'm going to also shift to a little bit closer to my internet. Let's see. Let's see if this works a little bit better. Okay. Let's just see. So, vote. Commissioner O'Brien? I... Commissioner Zuniga? I... And I vote yes, 3-0. Commissioner Stebbins, I should allow you to abstain. I'm sorry, you guys froze for about 10 minutes. Did I miss? Nothing critical. I should have allowed you to abstain. That's fine. Thank you. Thank you very much. 3-1 for abstention. Thank you. Congratulations, Commissioner Stebbins. Thank you very much. And truly, it is a chore, but it's also a critical task. And, you know, we appreciate all that you've done on with respect to that role. I'm happy to do it. And Shar is obviously a great team member. And I had a 15-minute acceptance speech, but I'll set that aside. Oh, there's one. We're fine. We're doing quite well. Oh, no. You're freezing again. Kathy, if you can hear us. Yeah, she seems to be frozen. Yeah. This is my experience. This is why I'm on data on the iPad right now. Wifi cannot be trusted in my house either. Well, let's give you another couple of minutes to see if she disconnects and connects back again. Yep. Let's just hold off everybody for some time. Maybe we can hear Commissioner Stebbins' acceptance speech while we wait. Oh, we can nominate the chair for something while she can't hear. I wonder if she's the one giving the 10-minute speech and hasn't realized. Doesn't realize? Everybody's frozen. I just texted her to let her know just in case she didn't. Now, I actually had a day I had to get on a landline because everything in my house went haywire a couple of weeks ago. Well, that was my experience the last meeting when I was away. Everything was looking fine in terms of Wi-Fi until it was time to connect to the ritual meeting. And I had to jump into the phone. Let us know, Eileen. She texts you back. Yeah, she hasn't responded yet. Nope, there's two of you. You have a doppleganger. You're muted. My apologies, everyone. We think we've corrected the problem. So I'm not sure where we were in terms of we did get the vote of Ashara and Bruce. Now we need to return to the treasure position. And while I'll be looking at my phone only because I'm going to go on my hot spot as a backup here. So Commissioner Zunagat, you accept my nomination. Thank you very honored to do that. I don't think I had that question. You weren't sure of your answer. Madam Chair, I'd move that the commission nominate, Commissioner Zunagat for election is the treasurer of the commission in accordance with chapter 23 case section three F. I think she's frozen again. I think she's frozen. Yes. I have to say she freezes quite gracefully though. Her pictures are good. Yes, very photogenic. Yeah, you're muted. You're muted. Thank you. Yeah, I was muted on purpose because I was speaking to my technical assistance here. I was commenting that you freeze very, very photogenically, by the way. Oh, really? You know what? That's probably my spell. Dream, right? She can't. Okay, back to our business. I hand everyone, thank you for your patience. So technology has served me pretty well up until today. So now I'm just going to just go to my hot spot so we don't have another disruption. Is she frozen again? Yeah. All right, this should work now because I just went out to my hot spot. Thanks. Okay. Why don't we continue with any questions about Commissioner Zuniga in his role as treasurer? Do I have a motion? Madam Chair, I move the commission nominate Commissioner Zuniga for election. It's the treasurer of the commission in accordance with chapter 23K section 3F. Thank you. Second. Second. Thank you. We'll do a vote. Commissioner Stephens. Aye. Commissioner Bryan. Aye. I vote yes. And Commissioner Zuniga. I abstain because a choice would be very, very hard to make. Would you like to make any remarks or a speech? No, thank you very much. I think it's been great working with the finance team and working on items that relate to our finances. A little challenging in the recent short pass, but great work and I'm happy to continue doing that. Well, and I know that the entire finance team very much appreciates your partnership with them and your role. It is, of course, statutorily required both of these positions. So while we are, you know, the process of election may seem like the roles are significant. So thank you. Thank you. All right. Again, I apologize for the disruption on technology. It's just kind of a quirky thing. We're going to continue on to item number seven, which is our commissioner update. And hopefully the connection will stay strong now because this is a matter of which I considerably proud of and proud of our team's efforts. So reported on our last public meeting, I convene a working group of equity and inclusion in the workplace with the goal of ensuring that MGC's systems, policies, and practices do not result in a disproportionate negative impact on people of color or communities of color. Given our agency's broad reach, the work is critically important and it must be ongoing. We recognize that sustained work and commitment against racial inequity is the most result in the most competent of dynamics and produces just a happier, more just, inclusive, and purposeful team. The working group has already been hard at work. I want wish to thank the members, Commissioner Zunika, Interim Executive Director Karen Wells, Director of Workforce, Supplier and Diversity Development, Jill Griffin, Human Resources Manager Tupi Banda, Program Assistant Tanya Perez, and Financial Investigator Paul Eldridge for agreeing to be part of this effort. I see at least one team member. Tanya has joined us along as Commissioner Zunika and me. If the other members are on, you can certainly join us visually. We welcome you to the meeting and nice to see you, Paul. And I thought I would turn it over now to Commissioner Zunika to summarize the work that we've done so far. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Your initial idea after the recent events of racial unrest, I think, was very appropriate, very timely. And we have had, thanks to your leadership, we have had a few meetings that are, in my view, a great work energizing and important, and we'll be reporting back to the commission and to the rest of the staff ongoing, because the work is off to a great start. Let me just mention that we started drafting a statement of purpose. Again, some of that, we're still working on fine-tuning some of that, those principles, but there are, as you mentioned, we remain committed to ensuring that there's non-discrimination to all protected classes, but there is a renewed effort and particular attention given all recent events to the notion of racial equity. And we are looking at a number of things, including a lot of the literature that's emerging. There's a principle that is now coined as being an anti-racist. We'll be hearing a lot more about that very soon. And that is, in a nutshell, being proactive and being intentional in ensuring that barriers, issues, topics around that result in outcomes that are unequal, based on race, are torn around or torn apart and addressed in the best way that we can. We have also talked about coming out of this initial effort, what is shaping up to be a five point plan as to the areas that we will come back and both report and ask for additional help. Because, of course, something like this is not going to be just done at the working group level. There is a clear initial notion of some training. There is a notion of regulatory review, looking at our practices, looking at some of the data. But suffice to say that we started drafting that, again, what is shaping up to be a five point plan will bring back when we're ready to start again implementing. And we look forward to reviewing, getting the input of a larger part of the agency. And again, we're off to a great start. If I missed something, I didn't want to necessarily read what we have. A lot of it is in draft of that five point plan. But if anybody from the working group thinks that I should be more explicit about any of that, please go ahead and be happy to address or let you just address yourselves. Tonya, Paul, I think that's it that I see right now. Do you have comments, Paul? I was going to say, I think that Commissioner Zuniga did an excellent job of introducing the group. I just wanted to say thank you very much for allowing me to be part of this group. It's very topical, very relevant right now. And I agree with Commissioner Zuniga that I think that we can use to flesh out the five point plan. It would be more appropriate to present at that point. Commissioner. Thank you, Paul. Actually, I should mention that Jill Griffin has also been a member. She's not attending because she happens to be attending a webinar at this very moment. But Paul had also highlighted that addresses precisely what we are looking at. And there's a lot of thoughts about having speakers come to a commission meeting at some point or to a training session in general. All of that, again, is being worked out. And there's a lot of energy, as I mentioned, around us towards this topic. And I think it's only incumbent upon us to go along with that. But yes, I would only add, Commissioner, that this five point plan will be a plan of action for the entire MGC team. The work that we're contemplating is to be able to make sure that we review and conduct our own responsibilities with a lens that really keeps in mind the important effort to make sure that our practices and policies don't disproportionately affect people of color, inadvertently, unintentionally. But we have to intentionally think about it to make sure that we don't somehow create inadvertent outcomes. So it will be an effort that will continue and will become really part of the fabric of our work and work that will continue, we hope, forever. So we thank the folks who are participating. It's been very, very thoughtful discussions. We're very lucky to have the leadership of Jill Griffin in this, and Commissioner Zunica, you know, Trupti and Tanya and Paul. Of course, Karen isn't here today too, but, you know, everyone has just demonstrated leadership and provided very important perspectives in our very, you know, we've had, I think, more meetings now. So thank you, and I'm very, very happy to be working with each of you. So thanks. So stay tuned, right? Okay, we'll move on to the other item that I have for Commissioner Update with Commissioner O'Brien. We wanted to update you on a new development with respect to the independent monitor that was appointed in conjunction with the Windmatter. We've received notice from Alejandra Adamante, the independent monitor, that a key member of the team, Preston Pugh, has decided to leave the law firm, Mellon and Chevalier, to join another D.C. law firm. We'll provide him with important individual opportunities. As you remember, Mr. Pugh brings considerable expertise and experience and perspective to the monitorship, given his past experience with monitorships, as well as his expertise in employment law. We had the opportunity to speak with Alejandra and the General Counsel and independently with Preston and Commissioner O'Brien, and I have recommended that the team of Mellon and Chevalier work to establish a contractual arrangement with Mr. Pugh, so that he could continue to be part of the independent monitor team. But they are working on that arrangement, but we, of course, said to them, we needed to come back to the commission to give an update on this matter and see if you agreed. Todd has been working also with the General Counsel in terms of making sure that there's compliance with our existing contract. Our goal is for the two firms to work the arrangements out on their own to maintain the independence that's so critical. And we've also made it very clear that we don't want any kind of a consultancy or subcontract to result in increase in fees or an increase in the budget. They are acutely aware of that priority. We've also given very high-level notice to Encore to Jackie so that she knows that Mr. Pugh was leaving in Chevalier, but given his, we recognized him as a key employee when we were, if you remember, the procurement management team met with a number of highly qualified candidates and Mr. Pugh was a very critical piece of our thinking. So it's our goal for these two, these professional teams to work out an arrangement that we'll be comfortable with. Before I turn it over to discussion, Commissioner Bryan, what do you want to add? No, I think you summed it up pretty well. I did want to remind everyone, you mentioned this, but that we did specifically structure the contract that named both Alejandra and Preston as essential employees to the contract in large measure because of their respective areas of expertise that we thought was critical to executing this in the proper way. I have been pleased with productive conversations with them that they will be able to work out the mechanism in a subcontract to make that relationship continue so that both when and we, the Commission, get the benefit of both of those areas of expertise and the team. I'm also confident it's not going to result in increased costs. As Kathy said, they're very aware of making sure the arrangement doesn't result in that. So just to reiterate what you said, Chair, I do think the best way to go forward is to continue to have them finalize the arrangement where Preston continues to be part of the team that Alejandra leads and finishes the mentorship. Questions? No, just a comment from me that while not optimal, I think it's very workable. It sounds like it's very workable under the conditions that you highlight. I suppose these things happen from time to time and so long as the parties figure out a way that essentially makes us indifferent, if you will, to the situation is a great outcome. So thank you for the Todd, did you want to add anything? Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I may just add that on top of everything, which I think you and Commissioner O'Brien summed up really well. As a legal matter, we may need to amend the contract that we have with the monitor. So if the Commission as a whole is comfortable with the plan as described, perhaps authorizing the Chair as the contract manager to execute the amendment would be helpful. Do we need any kind of formal vote on that, or just a consensus? Is that what you're seeking, Todd? Yeah, exactly. I think a consensus is fine as the contract manager. I think you can do that. We just want to make clear that that may be something that has to be done. And it would just be to reflect that now Preston's with a different firm, but we have made it clear that no resources from his firm would be used to support his efforts. He would continue to use the associates and the resources that were part of the Miller-Chevalier original team. And that will, of course, keep costs contained, as well as just making sure that the independent monitor who is identified as Alejandra is the lead and has control of those matters. Does that work? Commissioner Stebbins, how are you feeling about it? That works for me and I appreciate your and Commissioner O'Brien's work to try to structure a solution that keeps Mr. Pugh's expertise involved. Okay. So not hearing any alarms will keep you updated. Hopefully there aren't going to be any stumbling blocks along the way as the two firms figure out the logistics. And hopefully probably at the next commission meeting we'll be able to give you sort of a final report. And if you allow us, we'll decide whether we should come back formally before you, before any contract is amended or any contract is executed. But if everything is consistent with what we've said now, then would you permit us to just go ahead and allow the work to get finalized? Absolutely. Okay. I'm turning on board with that. Right. Okay, good. Okay, great. Great. Do any of my fellow commissioners have another update? Well, I must say that I have my only comment would be that I've navigated the internet challenge, the hotspot on my personal phone turned out to be a great resource. And I'm sure some of you noticed that in the middle of our meeting, a very happy dog that just returned from paddle boarding came in around and turned my computer sideways. So it's been an active morning for me technically. So I am appreciative of everyone's tolerance as we continue to WFH when you work from home. And then again, I appreciate I can see all the names from our team who have joined us today. And I know that the general public and media have been interested in today's agenda. So thank you, as always, for your interest and your consideration. So given that, I need a motion to adjourn. Move to adjourn, Madam Chair. Thank you. Second. Any questions? Okay. Commissioner Bryan. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. And I see somebody who's going to say goodbye. Thank you, everybody. Do you want to make a comment in between our motion, Eric? Or just a hello? First of all, I want to congratulate Enrique for his promotion. What a wonderful man, great choice. And, you know, I just come in here to see your faces and listen to you people. And I'm blessed that I work with you guys and for you guys. And I just wish everybody well. Love you all. God bless. And thanks for everybody replying to that song last week. Much appreciated. Thank you, Eric. Commissioner Stamins. Yeah, I'd just like to thank Eric for his congratulations too. But it's good to see everybody and I'll vote aye. Never leave you out, sir. I will never leave you out. I got a little tongue twisted there. Sorry about that. It was my internet connection, Bruce. Internet connection. That's right. That's right. Yeah. All right. I vote yes. But again, sincere thank you. And again, my apologies for the interruptions today. And again, thank you for everyone's patience. I appreciate it very, very much. Vote yes, five, four, zero. And we hope Gail's having a good break. Thank you, everyone. Enjoy your rest of your day. Bye bye. Thank you.