So I see that we've got Commissioner O'Brien. So I think we'll take a roll call first to remind her to everyone that this meeting is being recorded. Commissioner Cameron. Good morning, everyone. I am here. Commissioner O'Brien, Commissioner Zuniga. Good morning, everyone here. Vivian, thank you. We're all set to get started. Today is Thursday, March 11th. It's just on 1003. It's public meeting number 338. And before we get started, I just have a few words to share. Yesterday marked the one-year anniversary of Governor Baker's executive order in which he declared a state of emergency as the number of coronavirus cases approached 100 in the Commonwealth. It was on the one-year anniversary of this public meeting then March 12th that we were forced to suspend our ordinary business of the day. And adjourn our meeting prematurely. As news revealed, the reach of the virus was presenting potential risks to the patrons and employees of the gaming establishments. When the news hit, the gaming commission was prepared. For over a month, we have been coordinating with our licensee who could share experience in the Cal. The licensees were retaining their own public health specialists to help guide their businesses. And they were generously sharing what they were learning in real time. We were meeting with our other regulators across the United States to become better informed. We connected with other large venues within Massachusetts to learn how they were preparing. The MGC team members internally were following closely public health trends, at the same time preparing for remote work arrangements. The Secretary of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services, the Commissioner of Public Health, and the extraordinary team of the Department of Public Health made themselves personally and immediately available to the MGC to share guidance that we all know now was changing by the hour and at times by the minute. With that preparation, two days later on Saturday morning, March 14th, my fellow commissioners and I made the historic decision with the support of our licensees who were all present for this full and first remote public meeting to suspend operations of all three gaming establishments in an orderly and timely fashion. The decision had, of course, enormous implications as so many jobs were at stake. But the decision was based on extensive, thoughtful analysis with input from key stakeholders and experts to whom we again extend our gratitude. To the leadership at Encore Boston Harbor, MGM Springfield, and Plain Ridge Park Casino, your teams and your corporate parents, a special thank you for all that you did then and for your ongoing cooperation and vigilance. None of us at that time could have predicted the magnitude of the loss that would be suffered in the year ahead. Our nation has lost 529,000 individuals to COVID-19. Over 16,000 of those deaths have occurred right here in Massachusetts. That equates the population of twice that of the small town in which I grew up in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont. And the impact on businesses, jobs, our health care providers, first responders, frontline workers, school children and their parents and guardians, young adults out to college, and our nation's overall mental health can't even begin to be fully measured. But today we are sensing hope. We are hopeful. And so I ask each of you at the MGC, many of whom are listening right now, participating today, and all who have demonstrated such consistent teamwork, commitment, courage and personal resilience over the last year to take the time today on this warm winter day to intentionally pause, to mourn those that were lost, to give thanks where you are able, and reflect on all that we can be in the months ahead. And with that, we'll turn to the business of the day. Commissioner O'Brien for the minutes, please. Thank you. I can't believe it's pretty easy. But thank you for summarizing that for us today. Moving on to ministerial matters in terms of the minutes. The first minutes from November 5 of 2020, we pulled off the last meeting so that we could go back and put some more detail in that sort of thing. I did review it with General Counsel Grossman. I have one suggested typo-tifics that I didn't catch the first time I went through, which is on page 10. It just says PM instead of AM on the timestamp. So that we can just clean that up. And then the other minutes, there are timestamps at certain points. Each time we change topics, I just think that we should insert the actual timestamp. So it's just a matter of ministerially going in and adding a few more of the timestamps in the left margin. When within the topic, we then switched to a sub-topic. So if it went from Karen to Loretta, et cetera. So if there is a long bullet point in the agenda, at least somebody has a little more guidance going in. Other than that, I was pleased with the work that they did in editing it. But before I moved to have them approved, I just wanted to throw it out to the three of you to see your thoughts on that. Commissioner Cameron? Yeah, I think those are really appropriate and thoughtful changes. So I certainly would agree with those changes for this particular set of minutes and moving forward. Commissioner Seneca, are you all set? Yeah, I would just continue to make a point that's been made before in terms of workload to produce the minutes, trying to find that balance behind, nailing down the timestamp, for example, which I think is appropriate. I'm going through the minutes from, excuse me, the ones that you referenced, the second and the third ones. And it really seems like that timestamp is really missing from the big topics. I would just suggest it might not be necessary to timestamp every single sub-conversation, but I think it's a good point and I think it's necessary. I agree and I'm really going to defer to Commissioner O'Brien and the legal team for how they continue. I feel like we're getting the degree of detail that works and including our points, the commission's points. So I was really pleased with that. So thank you. So having said that, Madam Chair, I would move that the commission approved the minutes from November 5th of 2020, subject to the edits that we've discussed today and also subject to correction for typographical or any other. Okay, thank you. Sorry, I second that motion. Great, thank you, Commissioner Zuniga. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. And Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. And that's yes for me, for zero Vivian, please. Madam Chair, moving on to November 19th, 2020, other than suggesting that the topic timestamps are inserted as appropriate, I would move that the commission approved the minutes from November 19th, 2020, subject to correction for typographical error or other non-material matters. Second. Okay, Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. And that's yes for zero Vivian, thank you. And lastly, these are relatively short minutes on the 25th. I didn't really see the need to insert timestamps on this. So I would move that the commission approved the minutes for November 25th, 2020, subject to any corrections for typographical errors or other non-material matters. Second. Okay, no further questions. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. And I vote yes for zero. Thank you, moving on to, and thank you for all the good work to the legal team. I think it's a joint effort between Vivian and Tanya and the legal team, so thank you. And moving on now to the administrative update. Second, Director Wells, good morning. Good morning. We're gonna start off with the on-site casino updates. So I'm gonna turn that over to a director, Lilios, an assistant director band to give you an update on what's going on at the casino's on-site related to COVID. Thanks, Karen. Good morning, Chair. Good morning, commissioners. Kathy, thank you for those sobering but hopeful comments on this year mark. So since the last time we updated you on the COVID matters at the February 25th open meeting, capacity limits have remained the same at each of the three properties at the 40% level and all three properties have been operating well under that 40% limit. They continue to be open on a 24-7 basis. All of the COVID health and safety measures have remained in place. The hotel at Angkor has been open weekends Thursday through Sunday. It's been doing well. They are managing their checkout times in a way to spread out the exit of people from the hotel when they leave at the end of the weekend to reduce any crowding congregating at the elevators and those efforts have been successful. They transitioned their oyster bar to, you may remember the oyster bar as a small eatery into a different eatery. I think it's called cheese meat and wine. It's a small space. They've been working with reservations but the rollout of that has been successful. With respect to the hotel at MGM, that does remain open on the weekends for hosted guests and that has been operating without incident. The MGM Tap Sports Bar is open on the weekends now and the reports are that patrons are enjoying it and like the report from two weeks ago, there are no significant incidents of concern to note. I know Assistant Director Band is on the call. He may have some more details on some of the operational aspects. So I'd invite him to give you any updates and then we'd be happy to try to answer any questions you might have. Bruce, you're on mute. Here we go. That would make it a quiet update, wouldn't it? As far as capacities go, MGM's high number was on February 27th. They had 1,825 people which brought them to 23.3% and they had a special event at that time which was a BMW giveaway and that was brought in probably about 400 extra people for that date. And of course the next weekend, they opened up the hotel and taps. PPC had a high number of 1,363 or 23.5% and that was on March 6th. Encore had a high number of 3,376 on March 6th as well and that was 19.86%. All the restaurants have maintained proper spacing since the increase by the governor's orders as far as capacity goes. We also are all ready for the Daylight Savings event which in this industry is always interesting. This time of year it's not too bad but in the fall it affects all the clocks in the casino because you don't wanna send out markers and fills with the same time stamp on it when you turn the clocks back. So we don't change the clocks in the casino in the fall till after the end of the gaming day. So we're all set for that. Any questions or anything? Any questions? Oh, thank you, Bruce. Thank you very much. And so Madam Chair, the other thing I just wanted to reference with respect to the casinos being open, just to refer back to a conversation that we had at the last commission meeting when we did talk about employees coming back to work and what the casino would do when we did the quarterly report, the efforts by casinos to encourage their employees to come back and to allow them to come back. I think we've noted that this pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on women in the workforce. So I just wanted to alert the commission. We are, in fact, on a staff level, working with the casinos to get more information on the efforts that they are making to make sure that these employees are given every opportunity to come back, particularly women who may be impacted. I know this was a great concern to Commissioner O'Brien and we've been chatting about that. So we expect potentially the next commission meeting to have further discussion on this. You know, we're dealing with another issue later in the agenda about opening up some games which may impact having more opportunities for people to come back to work. So this is a really important issue. I just wanted to flag that we're looking at that and if there's any further direction by the commissioners, as we work with the licensees on this, we would welcome some input on that direction. If I could. Yes, thank you, Karen, for that update. I know you and I have been talking about this and following up. I do think it's really important to follow up with them now. There is discussion of requests to open up and change configurations. Elementary schools will be open by the first week in April at the latest. Middle schools at the end of the month. So I could anticipate there would be more amenities opening, you know, other job opportunities for recall might be coming up, particularly with the elementary middle schools going back that may open up opportunities for caregivers, primarily women, who maybe had to say no earlier on in this process. So it is absolutely the right time for us to go back and circle back with MGM, find out what EVH's policy is in terms of seniority and that sort of thing in the recall process. Because I would see someone left out right now when these opportunities are coming back and schools are going back in and maybe some after school programs are available to people. So I really look forward to having that conversation. Yeah. Commissioner Cameron. Yeah, Executive Director Wells, part of the conversation we had around this issue was having to reapply for a job that you've had, but you just weren't able to go back initially because of all of the childcare issues. Has that been discussed at all with the licensees? You know, I'll have, I think that I think, I don't know if Jill Griffin is on the call because she had been coordinating with Mary Kate Murrin over at MGM. So I think they've discussed that because I think the focus, as you've said, is how can we make this easier and how can we get people on the list so that they can get back? So my understanding is I think that discussion has taken place, but I would need to confirm that with Director Griffin. Okay. Yeah, and I would add into, let me reminder that we were able to confirm that our licensing processes won't create any additional barriers for that application. I also, you know, I think the, and I know Commissioner Zuniga joins us, but I think the three of us, perhaps as women, expressed our concerns about this particular issue, but I think we also understood that this could have this policy could have an inadvertent effect disproportionately on minority community as well. So we should keep that in mind, but the news have focused, has truly focused on the impact on women as caretakers, the primary caretakers at home. Commissioner O'Brien, thank you for leaving that conversation and keeping everyone at task. I think that, Executive Director Wells, we can anticipate an update in our next meeting. So that would be two weeks from now. So the team is working on it and then we'll get a report back. Is that going to be good for you, Commissioner O'Brien? Yes, that's my understanding from conversation with Karen. I would have loved to have been today, but I also realized logistically that just wasn't going to work out. So, yeah, yeah, let's hope it's good reports. Excellent. Thank you for staying on that, Karen. Yeah. Any other questions on the reopening or the update from Director Lillio, Assistant Director Vand? Okay. So thank you for continued vigilance. Right, thanks. You've done a great job. And a big thank you to the state police and the gaming agents who continue to work on site. You know, a lot of us in state government have been able to work remotely and they've been on site. So I did want to reiterate the thanks to those teams and we had, you know, racing had been working on site. Now they're off site because the racing season has been completed. Okay. So the next item on the agenda, Madam Chair, the communications division had been reviewing our website for just updates or things that needed to be refreshed. And we noted that under the commission's mission and the commission's responsibilities, when you read it, there may be some language in there that is a little outdated because we have moved from being an agency that was putting out the RFA-1, the RFA-2 for these big licenses for the casinos and now we're in more regulatory state. So I did include in the packet what's on the website for the commission's mission and the commission's responsibilities. The commission's mission is somewhat broad that may not need any updating, but in the commission's responsibilities, particularly in the second sentence in there, you know, they talk about hiring staff, obtaining appropriate legal and gaming advisors, some of that's outdated. So I just thought it would be a good opportunity, you know, I'm going to work with Austin on updating the language, but to get some feedback from the commissioners on what you think we should be focusing on, particularly on the commission's responsibilities and to let me know if you want any updates to the commission's mission. I do have the document here if it's easier for the commissioners for me to share the screen or if you have it already in front of you, at least feel free to just let me know what works for you. Commissioners, I'm not sure how we want to approach this. I don't think we'll probably word Smith today because of just that we have a good, rigorous, robust, I mean, agenda, but maybe we should give some of the starting points some high level thoughts and maybe today concentrate on the responsibilities versus the mission statement. Has everybody had the chance to at least think about, okay, I see commissioner Cameron, I'm going to call on you first unless you want to defer. I'm happy to speak and I credit the team for realizing this was an outdated, in particular, the responsibilities were outdated and we have in fact moved to a different stage of regulating. So I think at a minimum, updating the language, maintain rather than build an administrative infrastructure to include the appropriate staff, you know, certainly adhere to the, rather than, I mean, I'm just updating the language. The other thing I think, so all of those words could be present tense, but I also think, one of the things we do spend time on and this is a very good example of it now, we do have a responsibility to really be exploring best practices. And, you know, so I think something, you know, sports betting is a perfect example of that, how much time and effort is spent exploring those best practices in the event that it is legal and in the event that we will regulate. So I mean, I do think that's a piece that may be important to be incorporated into the present tense responsibilities. Okay. Commissioner Zunica or Commissioner O'Brien might have been reaching first. Commissioner O'Brien? Go ahead. It's like pressing the button on the. I know. Thanks. I agree with everything Commissioner Cameron said. The other thought that I had, and I did some wordsmithing Karen, I'll just send you. Oh, okay. You know, you can digest it later, but missing from responsibilities aside from tense was responsible gaming. I felt like there should be more of a conversation in there about our responsibility and efforts in terms of making sure that that's an integral part of this for the Commonwealth. So how I think that's best handled. All right, we can add some language there.  I was. That's what happens when they lean in first. Yeah. Which is totally fine. She won in the race, okay. Yeah, I was. Do you have another thought? Well, it was around the notion of focusing on player health and sustainability of the, not just the players, but also, you know, the broader gaming industry. So I can also forward some key areas where that might fit, but that's a larger thought. I would do away with, and I think this was already spoken about with the selection of proposals language that really rings to the initial mindset that we had about the licensing process, even though there's technically potentially one more license to give on the ones that we have and others perhaps subject to legislation. But anyway. Yeah, I agree with that. Yeah, I agree with all that's been said too. Commissioner Zuniga, we do want to be careful about doing it away, away the altogether. But I agree that how it's written right now would suggest the early stage versus where we are in present. To just add on to Commissioner Cameron's notion of best practices, of course, those are best practices in the gaming world. We also have an obligation to make sure that how we execute our job in all the verticals from everything from our IT practices to our responsible gaming research practices and our business practices internally need to be, you know, really such a quality to always ensure the gaming integrity. So kind of that internal environment, Karen, that's what I'm thinking of, internal operations, internal governance, internal controls. That isn't necessarily as kind of riveting in interest, but it sure, as you all know, if we don't keep track of that, we will not be able to accomplish the core mission. So I would see that the responsibilities really pointed externally, and I think it's a combination of external and internal. The other place that might be helpful to look at is just the commission's vast broad powers under section four of 23K. That might present some thoughts for a little bit of a checklist for you in Austin to think about, and certainly like, for instance, our mitigation obligations that extend beyond even responsible gaming, that's so, but also in terms of public safety and community, yeah, yeah. Madam Chair, I had one more thought. I was wondering if we could incorporate, you know, somewhere in this, the obligation and the responsibility to regulate racing, horse racing. Oh, that's good, yep. Really mention anything but gaming here, and I just thought that'd be a place to just, that's a rather responsibility we take very seriously and have spent a lot of time and effort with, so I think there's a way to. Yes, absolutely. We should include simulcasting as well, right? Yes. Okay, great. Excellent, thank you, Commissioner Cameron. Commissioner O'Brien, do you have additional thoughts? No, I'm good, thanks. Okay, Commissioner Zindiga? Okay, so it's all clear, right, Austin? So I think the plan is we'll take a stab at that, and we can, you know, bring it back for the Commission for Final Approval once we get a draft done, does that make sense? Yeah, and I would also check in with Todd, you probably are thinking of some thoughts as you consider this, you and your team. For instance, I think we have some affirmative obligation that might be with respect to, you know, external stakeholders like the lottery and the tribal interests. So again, whether we incorporate them all or reference it in the general terms, you would just wanna think about those obligations as well, responsibilities. Okay, that's the beginning of the exercise, Karen. I think that's probably a good start, and then- That's helpful. And if we have language, we can get it over to you. Okay, that sounds great, thank you. Thanks. I am all set, thank you. All right, I just have to scroll down here. I had teased at the beginning that when we encouraged Karen at our last meeting as part of her review to delegate, I didn't know that she was gonna delegate to us. Okay, item number four, this is Nakesha Skinner's first presentation since she's been hired, and only virtually, we've never met, I've never met Nakesha in person, I know some of us have. So good morning, Nakesha, and we have seen you and you've certainly spoken in public, but this is your first presentation, formal presentation, so thank you. Good morning. Thank you, good morning, Madam Chair, commissioners and everyone. The MGM position for you to consider today is the warehouse driver attendant. This position is pretty much identical to the warehouse attendant position that the commission exempted back on February 22nd, 2018, except the difference between the two positions is this one is responsible for transporting, excuse me, transporting merchandise and the other, the warehouse attendant position that was already exempted has no driving responsibilities. But like the earlier exempted position, this warehouse driver attendant has no role on the gaming floor and has no access to secure areas without a security escort. Individuals in the position do not receive or handle gaming equipment or slot machines. They both report to an SCR position, so the manager of the supervisor, excuse me, of these two individuals, in particular the warehouse driver attendant position that's before you today, is registered as a service employee. So it is my recommendation that the commission exempt this position, warehouse driver attendant, from the registration requirements as is the driver, excuse me, the warehouse attendant position. And that is all I have. If there are any questions, I'm happy to take them. Great. Commissioner, I'll shift it slightly to ask Commissioner Brad, Commissioner Cameron. Yes. You know, I think this was a thoughtful presentation looking at a very similar position and making the comparison that there are no additional responsibilities that would in any way impact our decision here because it's very similar to the warehouse position as directors can have just pointed out. So I appreciate the comparison work and the thoughtful analysis of all of the things that would give us pause in considering this. So I have no pause. I see no issue at all with exempting this position. Commissioner Zunica or Commissioner Bryan? Just Zunica. Same here. I think it's well articulated in the memo and in the remarks. So I support the recommendation. Okay. Commissioner Bryan, I'll set. Yeah, I'm all set. I think it's very similar to the one we approved most recently. So. Director Skinner, thank you so much for the thoughtful memorandum. I think that this is a recommendation does in fact reflect the intent of the statutory change to give some ease to make sure that we don't create unnecessary barriers for jobs. So I'm all set. But I do need, you need a vote. Correct? Yes, please. And Madam Chair and commissioners, I just have to make one correction. I've been referring to this position incorrectly as the warehouse driver attendant. The way it's written, it's driver attendant for warehouse receiving. So just that small clarification before you take the vote, please. Okay, thank you. And is that correction clear everyone? Okay, good. Do I have a motion then? Commissioner Bryan? Certainly Madam Chair, I move that the commission exempt the driver attendant for warehouse receiving position at MGM Springfield from the registration requirements in accordance with 205 CMR 134.03 1B for the reasons discussed and described in the commissioners packet in here today. Second. Any further questions or edits? Commissioner Zuniga, you're all set. All right, then we'll take a roll call vote. Commissioner Cameron? Aye. Commissioner Bryan? Aye. Commissioner Zuniga? Aye. I vote yes, Vivian for zero. And thank you, Director Skinner. Thank you. Nice to see you. All right. And I am looking forward to our first in-person meeting. Hopefully sooner than later. All right. Moving on to item number five, IEB Director Melios, please. Okay, good morning again. So the first item under number five asking you to consider a request from the two category one casinos from Encore and MGM. They have requested to expand the Blackjack style tables to include a fourth player position and the Blackjack style tables are used obviously for the game of Blackjack, but also for other games, notably Bakarot and Pai Gile, for example. And since the properties reopened in early July after the COVID closure, they have been operating under your requirements of a maximum of three players per Blackjack style table. So this would mean one additional seat. We did check with other jurisdictions to see what they are doing. And if we would not be an outlier either way, New Jersey allows up to six positions at Blackjack style tables. So long as they are separated by Plexi-class, North Maryland and Pennsylvania allow four positions with Plexi-class and at our last check, Rhode Island and Connecticut remain at three positions with Plexi-class. There are some suggested minimum requirements for you to consider and I think I will try to share my document here for you to take a look at. So here are some suggested minimum requirements should you determine to allow the request on the fourth player position. So positions would continue to be separated by Plexi-class, separating the dealer from the players and the players from one another. The distance between the players would now be three feet approximately from center to center of seat. And when I say now, I mean with the fourth position, currently the seats are about four feet apart. Overall capacity limits for the properties would remain capped where they are now. This would not be increasing the overall capacity limits and all the other health and safety measures would be in place. I should mention that we have consulted with DPH which we are required to do before an expansion like this is made and for the next item as well, we've done that consultation and no objections were lodged with DPH with these types of requirements attached to it. So myself and Bruce are here, we will try to address any questions or issues that you have but essentially that is the request. Okay, Loretta if we could go back to the other screen so I could see all commissioners. Sorry about that. Oh, no problem. Thank you. It just makes it easier for me. Thanks. Commissioner, who would like to go first for questions for Loretta? Commissioner Zunica. Thank you. Yeah, I can, Loretta we've spoken in the past in your updates about compliance with mask wearing and which I think is relevant but also perhaps mentioned here but if you could also expound on what we've observed relative to congregation around tables by observers, sometimes it's observers, sometimes it's companions, how people are coming to the casino in pairs or other smaller groups and whether this would either facilitate or address some of that. You know, if there's anything you can share on that aspect might be helpful. Sure, so there is an overall mandate of six feet distancing and no congregating and on the minimum requirements for the next item we have specifically included enforcement of the no congregating of observers because the game of crafts typically lends itself more to that than some of the other games but the casinos they've got in all hands on deck approach to the congregating item. You've seen that, we've talked about it in the ingress and egress, elevators, that kind of thing but it's also been one of the significant efforts on the floor so that effort would remain in place. The fourth seat, the way I understand it for these blackjack-style tables is really gives options to patrons who may be traveling in a group of three or four or two couples also gives the casino some flexibility around the dollar limit, managing the dollar limits at tables, it hasn't been explained as an effort to offer fewer tables but rather expand the options for players and expand the opportunities to manage those dollar limits at the tables. So I don't know if that address here. No, but I think Bruce might have raised his hand, I'm not sure Bruce, if you could add to Loretta or? They do an excellent job of trying to stop people from congregating around the tables. That's always happened in this industry, especially if somebody starts to bet large amounts and stuff so that they make a concerted effort to keep people moving and stuff that's also true like with roulette when people are doing that. So they keep people moving as well as I do, they do that with craps as well and they will keep people moving around that. I can add here that for Encore for instance, the fourth spot will create extra 182 positions to bet from and at MGM it creates, I think it was an additional 48 positions for their tables to gamble at. So like Loretta said, it's not closing tables or anything like that, but it's creating extra positions for people to sit at at the tables. So if you bring with friends, you are more likely to be able to sit together. Loretta, are you commissioners and again, do you have additional questions that you'd like to ask? No, that's, thank you. Right now, okay, for right now, okay. For good, this is still just on the blackjack fourth position, blackjack style, excuse me, Commissioner O'Brien. Thank you, Madam Chair. Bruce, the, we have the licensees have the ability to serve alcohol, obviously when people are actively gaming and there was a lot of discussion early on in June when we were trying to come up with these guidelines about masks up or down, pulling them up or down, what the best thing to do. And I know it's come to everyone's attention through the research that a lot of this is aerosolized transmission. So maybe some of the touchpoint concerns about moving a mask, excuse me, are not as prominent as they were back in June, but it's my understanding that when people are served their drinks, it essentially the mask will come down as you're working on your drink and actively gaming. Is that a fair description? Yes, as her seated, yes, at the table, yes. And there are new gaming positions that would be added by this, but are any other jobs going to be created in terms of adding a seat at the Blackjack table? At the Blackjack table, no, because you're not adding additional tables. Right. But there will be none, you know, lost as a result. Like I say, on Saturdays, when they get these good sized crowds, it will create extra places for people to sit and play the game instead of kind of walking around and not having a place to play. Right. I just, one of my concerns that I have is, which maybe I can save some of them for, you know, defer to one commissioner Cameron and you, Madam Chair, ask your questions. But I have some concerns about taking what we establish as the minimum space, kind of seat to seat as we set this up in June and putting people closer together. The governor's opened up a lot of things recently and there are time limit caps on some other places that are just not practical for kissing us. 90 minutes is just not practical. And I really don't see any way I've thought about it. There's no way to do that. It's just not a part of this equation. So it's really just saying, we want to put another body at a table. And I have concerns about, in particular, the mask being down in that environment, probably more likely near people that are not part of your bubble or part of your party as would be in a restaurant. I know the ventilation system is excellent. They've had excellent compliance. I have absolutely no doubt licensees would continue to do that. But I have huge hesitations right now. I may feel differently in, you know, two, three, four weeks as we do more of this opening up. But I have some concerns on the blackjack additional seat request. Commissioner Cameron. Yeah, I don't have questions, but I do have, I think my concerns are minimized by the fact that the licensees have really worked hard to keep it safe and really work hard to make sure they are adhering to all of our guidelines. And we have not seen events where the virus has spread. And also the fact that when Assistant Director Bann started his discussion today and talking about the percentages, we're still not seeing anything close to a 40% in the casino. So I think my concerns are really minimized by those facts when it comes to making a decision like this. And the plexiglass I do think is really making a difference. If I could just add on to Commissioner Cameron's point, I too, I want to remind ourselves in the public that plexiglass will continue to divide the players among themselves, if it were to become four, as well as with the dealer. The dealer's mask and shield, if they choose to wear a shield as well, are always on, correct, Loretta directing the Leos? That's right, we have the mask requirement throughout. For the dealer. And then a reminder, and this is actually something that was given to us through the public health guidance, was that on the casino floors, and this is still the practice, no one can have a drink and move around with a drink in their hand. They can only have a drink if they are seated with the protection of plexiglass and actively gaming so that their mask is down. And the idea of why the mask doesn't go back up is because they're not constantly touching their face back and forth. So there's some guidance that we relied on on that. So what really would be happening is we'd have an additional player into Commissioner O'Brien's point. They're just gonna be, they would become closer, rather than that extra foot of space between the plexiglass, I guess it would be the equivalent of six inches on each side, if it's a foot, right? That we're reducing it. Maybe my math is wrong, forgive me, but we have the idea that it's the plexiglass, it would be from the front seat, the middle of the center seat, it's a foot, now three feet rather than four feet. So it'd be, I guess, a six inch reduction on each side. I guess I was right. And now what I'm hearing is that it's a revenue driver. What I'm hearing is it's not a job driver on this particular. I'll share on that point, if I can jump in, the addition of the seat in those positions to the numbers that Bruce talked about, that does open up the opportunity for some additional needs for cocktail servers because the limits on the beverages are well-seated. So there could be, and I have some communication now with Encore that it would result in more cocktail servers because of the limit, you have to be gaming to do it. So it could result in, is expected to result in the cocktail. And did they number on that, Loretta? We'll see if we get a number on that. We're in communication now. I figured it was real time and we can continue our conversation while they give us that if they're able to. I'm sure it would be an estimate, but I think to build on Commissioner Cameron's level of comfort, given the decisions in Massachusetts, which I remain confident, continue to be data-driven decisions, my level of comfort on expanding this, these gaming positions is pretty high. We are continuing to assume a degree of risk. I knocked on wood when I, I heard how Commissioner Cameron reflect on how we have been fortunate, but I do credit the enforcement measures of our team, but also the vigilance and compliance of the licensees. Director Lillio, I assume that we're not quite hearing from Encore on the numbers. Are there other questions for Bruce or Loretta on this proposal for the expanded seat? And I can jump in now, as you said, it's real-time communication. So the estimate is that it would impact the cocktail servers and food and beverage, 20 cocktail servers and an additional 60 on the food and beverage. And we could extrapolate that to the other establishments too. You know, there would be, of course, a different scale. And is that based on food and beverages based on because they are presuming that they would then have other amenities and opening? I believe so, yes. On the floor? I believe so, yes. Commissioner Zemecki, do you wanna add in? Yeah, thank you. Like yourself and Commissioner Cameron, I understand that this is not a risk-less move, but I'm confident with the measures that and the thought and compliance that we've seen in the past. I also think of it, even though it is perhaps attempting to think that one seat will always mean one more body, I think the notion of how the hours and maybe what Bruce was talking about, the desire to offer different options is also at play here. And so we may see that just maybe now one, the same player tries two tables or comes or is able to sit with their companion as opposed to necessarily an incremental body. And I say that with all the other measures that we've been hearing about relative to how we continue to see, you know, even in promotion days, not a nothing close to the limit in terms of overall occupancy, which is another big driver and a point that Commissioner Cameron also made. So I'm in favor of approving this request and would want to continue to see the updates that we get as we have been doing this since beginning. Thank you. Commissioner Cameron, you're nodding. Do you want to add in or are you all set? I'm all set. Be happy to make a motion. Let me just check in with Commissioner O'Brien. Any other observation you want to share with us, please? No, I've expressed my discomfort with this in terms of the timing in particular, given that we just reopened. The variant that's out there, the uncertainty in the next two, three, four weeks to me, it's not an appropriate time to do this, but we can absolutely bring the motion and go. Okay. With that, Commissioner Cameron. Madam Chair, I move that the commission amend item 10B of the previously adopted document entitled minimum requirements for the initial phase three opening of gaming establishments to allow for up to four player positions at each Blackjack style table subject to the minimum requirements outlined in the memorandum in the commissioners packet as discussed here today. Second. Okay. Any further questions or edits for that particular motion? All right. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Nay. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. And I vote yes. So that's three ayes in one day, Vivian. Thank you. And thank you everyone for the very thoughtful discussion. Appreciate it. Moving on, then the reddit item number 5B. Okay. So this is a request again from Encore and MGM to reintroduce the game of craps. All of the other jurisdictions that we surveyed including Rhode Island and Connecticut currently offer craps. Let's see. The proposal and I'm going to try to share again. I think it may be helpful for the public. The proposal is accompanied by some suggested requirements that there is a maximum of six players per craps table with three players maximum on each side of the table. Players would be required to remain seated while gaming and no congregating around the tables. We already discussed that. There would be plexiglass on the tables. Players separated from one another by plexiglass. Barriers and the dealers at the table are separated from plexiglass as well. Dice would be sanitized between shooters and the IEB would approve the layout of each craps table in advance. Again, overall capacity would be capped at 40%. And there would be a change to the internal controls requiring that all bets be placed before the dice are sent out with signage on the table to that effect. Again, all the other health and safety measures and the masking, for instance, would remain in place. And we'd be happy to try to answer any questions you have on that as you continue to do deliberations. I would like to go first, Commissioner Zanica. Thank you. I do have a couple of questions, perhaps for Bruce, but I'll start, Loretta, with your surveying of other jurisdictions. Did you ascertain that layout? They have different layouts or is it typically three layers per side of table that you've seen? I think there's a variance, and I'm gonna turn it to Bruce. There's something pretty special about the plexig alternative here, but Bruce, I think you're in a better position to describe that. I would say that the layout that we had was probably the most protective, not only for the patrons, but also for the employees. Ours were probably the only ones that also slanted in somewhat that allows people to look down as the dice kind of gets thrown. Most of them are straight up and down where you kind of bang your head if you try trying to look in, but it was very nicely done. Some of the others in other jurisdictions had no glass directly in front of the players, which I didn't think was a very good setup at all with it where ours does. It was good setup. I will add in here too that when I spoke to Encore that for them to set up seven tables, it would take 110 dealers and supervisors to run all seven tables. And with NVM for their two tables, it would take 32 dealers and supervisors to do that. I don't know if they're all new employees, but essentially to run the blackjack tables and everything eventually it would include that. So I thought I should add that in the conversation as well. Thank you. I had a follow-up or not not a follow-up, but a second question that you alluded to, perhaps Loreta with placing all the bets before the throw. Is it fair to say that the game will affect it would be slower than a regular game prior to pandemic or is it not necessarily? No, it's actually... Bruce, I'm gonna take that to you. Yeah, it actually becomes a safer game. For one, verbal wagers is usually when most people take their shots at the casino as they do it right before the dice fall and they say they're gonna place it on six or something like that. This kind of protects the casino and especially with the Plexiglas there, it's hard for the dealers and everybody to hear that kind of a wager. So that was one of the big conditions that we placed on them to protect the game. So I think it will actually speed the game up, actually. Thank you. I think Commissioner O'Brien was leaning in next. Commissioner Cameron. Yeah, Commissioner O'Brien. I'm sure I'm asking too much because I can't find it, so I shouldn't be asking you guys this, but I know we saw graphics and photos of what this looks like when this sort of first came up as a possibility even back when we decided not to let it be on the floor when it reopened in July. I don't suppose anybody has those graphics. I do think it's helpful to Bruce's point you do. He's waving his hand, yeah. The show is ready. Oh, he's ready. Provided to everyone in this setup. Because it's hard to imagine, but we have seen this before, yeah. Thank you. And then in terms of saving time, Loretta, also I know the discussion about adding jobs to adding a seat at the blackjack tables, whether there would be a concomitant gain in cocktail server and or food service jobs in connection with the 110 extra at EVH for craps if you're communicating with Jackie if she might have a ballpark on that or whether it's that same number with adding a fourth seat at the blackjack table. Right, and we'll just keep in mind that when we get the numbers from Encore, we can extrapolate for MGM kind of difference. Can everybody see what I'm sharing? Yes. I will share a couple of different pictures here. So this is Encore's slide that they have currently eight craps tables. Thank you. And MGM has how many? They're going to have two tables and that if it gets passed, they wouldn't have there still the 16th. Encore would have two tables by the end of night tonight and they would have seven by, I think it said this weekend or next week, but you can see the distance between the seats. I hope that's the roulette table. So I went too far. That's okay, that's roulette. So if you could go back there. That's this landed view, right? That you were referring to, Bruce. Yeah, right here you can see and it allows, and the glasses, you can see the emblem on here, but the glass comes back pretty far in here. You can see it here, it goes all the way. So you mean in terms of separating the individual players, is that what you mean? Yes, exactly. Glass is pretty clear, but like I say, it allows the player to kind of lean in to look down the table, which is nice if you're a craps player. To see the dice. So, and it's three players on each side and remind us again, each end and remind us the distance between the end. It's four feet between each. Between each player and the distance between each end of the table. Yes, and there will be chairs all along here. I think I have a picture with, yeah. Yeah, they have to be seated. But this table is particularly long, correct? Yes, 12 foot long. Yeah, so there's a good distance between the two sets of three players. Yes. Right. And they're also separated by plexiglass because there is, you know, there is. Yes. Yeah. Right, yeah. And then Bruce, I know they've done a good job in terms of making sure people don't gather. I think you've commented on this before, we've talked about this. Craps amongst all the games usually draws the most by hand. Yeah. I know they've been really good about this, but if you had conversations about the fact this will be in a different balance in terms of, maybe... They are well aware of how much we're going to be monitoring this. And they, I'm sure we'll be on top of this because it's something they really want. And I think I said this at the last meeting. It's also the game that I get most questions about from the public. Right. And neighboring jurisdictions have, I think Loretta, you said this for the most part are allowing crabs at this point. Yes, yes. And actually with a lot more numbers than what, you know, they're asking for up with it. I wouldn't allow it right now with a lot more numbers by any means, but... So a couple of things. It's been explained to me that some players are crabs only players. So they haven't been playing in Massachusetts at all. And so it's been explained to me that this would be an opportunity to recapture those patrons in that revenue. And with respect to the question about increases in staffing, so in addition to the numbers that Bruce gave you, which are more dealer based for crabs, the cocktail server and food and beverage increases if crabs were brought back would be incremental only to the numbers that you heard previously, the 20 and the 60. Okay, thank you. Can you just remind me? I'm sorry, because my document isn't up. The number that Encore expects of new dealers if crabs is reintroduced. 110. Yeah, I thought I heard 110. I thought I heard 90 before Loretta, maybe in early discussions with you, but it's 110 from Encore. So MGM would have a very different number because they've only got a couple of tables, but obviously it's a job generator. And for a future, I don't need this now, but I think in connection with our earlier discussion about making sure that women who have these incredibly good jobs are able to be reintroduced, this is an opportunity. I'd love to know that we have a good number of women crabs dealers. Commissioner Cameron, would you have insight on that at this point? Would I have insight on that? I don't think- On women, on women. I think it's a great idea that you mentioned it though, because I think we could combine the licensees, how important this is. And I think they will pay attention, but I just think it's very important. Yeah, and this builds on Commissioner O'Brien's earliest point, which is, if this many new positions are coming in, let's make sure we haven't created unfair barriers. So, Commissioner Cameron? Yeah, I had one additional follow-up to Commissioner O'Brien's question for Assistant Director Band. In your discussion with colleagues around the country who now offer crabs, is there a challenge in keeping, because it is a spectator kind of a game, is it a challenge for them to keep those spectators from coming in and watching the game as it's being played? I can't say that every jurisdiction tries to do that. Okay. But I don't think it is that much of, there's always somewhat of a challenge to do that everywhere, but I think if you have people that walk around and keep saying, you gotta move along, I know that MGM plans to put it, to cap off the end of their pit. So that's pretty easy to keep clear and where Encore keeps their crab stables, they're all in one location in front of the cage. It's pretty easy to keep those people moving around too, because they're personnel right there. They only have one table upstairs, so. Okay, thanks. Commissioner Azunika, do you have further questions? No, no, I'd say I was able to look at a layout back last summer when they first started thinking about this and I visited Encore. And one of the staff demonstrated shooting the dice and with the plexiglass, which was hard for me to imagine before then. So it's very, the layout I think is rather creative, trying to preserve the game and insert all the precautions that we've been talking about for a while now. So I'm comforted with the request in this case. I do have to say that the challenge will come on the people that like to observe the game as a person who likes to observe the games when they go this game in particular, when they go to the casino. But I think this goes back to the emphasis that we've observed in terms of from the casino operators in terms of their compliance efforts. So again, I would be any favor of authorizing this request. Other further questions on the request to expand into crabs? No, my final comment really is just to reflex what I said earlier again, there's a lot of comfort in knowing that our enforcement measures are heightened with our gaming agents there and our GEU. And I just think we will continue to rely on the compliance efforts of the two licensees here. So thank you. You will need a vote on this one as well, Director Lillios. Correct. I have a motion. Madam Chair, I would move that the commission amendment item 10C of the previously adopted document entitled minimum requirements for the initial phase three opening of gaming establishments to allow for the game of crabs to be offered subject to the minimum requirements outlined in the memorandum of the commissioner's packet today for this meeting and discussed here today. Thank you. Thank you. Any further comments, edits? All right, commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zunica. Aye. And I vote yes, Vivian 4-0 on the crabs reopening. Thank you. And thank you to both Bruce and Reddick for really teaming that up so nicely. We appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Madam Chair, could I ask for a five-minute break? Absolutely. Before we turn it over to Kate. And of course, I do have in mind that we have one commissioner that needs to leave at one, but it looks like we're in good standing. So we will return back around 1120. Does that make sense? That's a nine-minute break. Excellent. Thank you so much. All right, I think we have everybody here. We'll just do a quick roll call. Commissioners, commissioner Cameron. I'm here. Commissioner O'Brien. I'm here. And commissioner Zunica. Yeah. And there we are, Vivian. You have us all. And before we get started, I now see that Kate, who is our senior enforcement council, will give her report on a qualifier determination of suitability. I do have a disclosure to make in accordance with our obligations under our enhanced code of ethics. Out of an abundance of caution, I filed yesterday with my appointed official, the governor, a 23B3 disclosure indicating that this particular qualifier's former employer is my son and my daughter's current employer in Los Angeles. And I was able, I learned this fact when the new director was announced publicly in November. Inadvertently, my son just happened to ask if in any way affected my work. So I learned that this gentleman had previously worked at CAA where my son works and my son had had limited, but some professional interactions with this new director. My daughter, on the other hand, did not have any interactions and doesn't know him. I also learned that my daughter-in-law had become acquainted with this gentleman and had one limited professional interaction with him. I think he might have served on a panel that she, that she, with others brought together. So I disclose that I feel that I'm one of four making a decision today. It's a decision that's important to this qualifier, but I feel given the limited interactions that were made and that I had never known of this individual, heard of this individual prior to this announcement that I can be fair and objective in my evaluation. And I have now read the report after making that filing. Todd, you have a copy of it. If you could distribute it to my fellow commissioners, that would be great. So I think that we can proceed, Kate, unless there's questions from my fellow commissioners. Okay, I've seen, no, so let's proceed. Thanks so much, Kate. And again, thank you for your presentation today. Certainly, good morning. Good morning, Chair and commissioners. It's lovely to see everybody. The qualifier for your consideration today is Mr. Darnell Strom. He's a qualifier by virtue of his position on the WIN Board of Directors. Mr. Strom has submitted all of the required forms and complied with all of the IEB's request for supplemental and updated information. The IEB was able to conduct its complete protocol for suitability for casino qualifiers and was able to confirm financial stability and integrity, review litigation history, criminal history, and also verify that no prohibited political contributions were made in Massachusetts in addition to conducting checks of open source and law enforcement databases as part of the investigation. The team of investigators who are joining me on this call was Lieutenant Kevin Murphy of the Massachusetts State Police Gaming Enforcement Unit and supervising financial investigator Monica Chang. Investigators were able to interview Mr. Strom using virtual technology on January 14th of 2021 and Lieutenant Murphy and Ms. Chang conducted that interview. Mr. Strom was noted to be cooperative and forthcoming in all aspects of this investigation. In October of 2020, Mr. Strom was appointed to the WIN Resorts Limited Board of Directors. Prior to this appointment, he was employed with the Democratic National Convention Committee from September of 2003 to August of 2004. He then worked for the Kerry Edwards Presidential Campaign from August of 2004 through December of 2004 and then the Office of Former President William Clinton and the William Clinton Foundation from October of 2006 to December of 2009. It was at that point that Mr. Strom transitioned out of politics as a career and began a career in the entertainment industry. He began employment with CAA, a talent agency based in Los Angeles and worked there from January of 2010, January of 2019. And in 2019, Mr. Strom took a position with the United Talent Agency. He's currently a partner and head of the Culture and Leadership Division at UTA. And it was while at UTA that Mr. Strom became aware of the opening on the WIN Board of Directors during the conversation with mathematics, the CEO of WIN Resorts. In his role as an independent director, Mr. Strom serves on the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee as well as the Audit Committee. As a member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, Mr. Strom and the other members of this committee are responsible for identifying and evaluating potential director nominees and periodically assessing the desired qualifications attributes built in experience of directors. Mr. Strom's duties as a member of the Audit Committee include participating in the appointment, compensation, and retention of independent auditors as well as the approval of audit engagement fees and terms. Background review was able to confirm that Mr. Strom graduated from Piedmont Health High School in San Jose, California in 1999, following high school he enrolled at Florida A&M University in Tallahassee, Florida and graduated in 2003 with a Bachelor of Science for Grand Ford Science. It's noted that Mr. Strom does not have any game related licenses of registrations. However, he is in the process of submitting personal applications to the following jurisdiction, New Jersey, Colorado, Indiana, and Michigan. It should be noted that Massachusetts is the first jurisdiction to interview him for qualification purposes in connection with his new role with Wynn Resort Limited. Mr. Strom has demonstrated to the IEB by clear and convincing evidence that he is suitable and the IEB recommends that the Commission vote to find him suitable as a qualifier for Wynn Nass LLC. Any questions? Commissioners, any questions for Kate on this particular report? Commissioner Cameron. I don't have any questions because it was such a clean report. In fact, I've read very few that are this clean. There are no need for any follow-up questions because the report was so precise and it just, no questions because it is so clean a report. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? All right, then we do need a vote. Yes. Madam Chair, I'd be happy to make a motion that the Commission issue a positive determination of suitability to down now Strom as a member of the Board of Directors for Wynn Resorts Limited. Second. Thank you. No edits or questions? Then our roll call vote. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zunica. Aye. And I vote yes, 4-0 Vivian. Thank you. All right. Just to note that I take note that Wynn Resorts does continue to diversify their Board and that was a subject that was discussed earlier and I just take note and give them credit for that. Thank you, Commissioner Cameron. It's a really important point that they're leading with that diversity today and we know that that will make it only a richer conversation at the table. So thank you. All right. Then we can thank Kate and thank Loretta Lilios for leading item number five. Thank you so much. Thank you and my thanks to the investigators to Lieutenant Murphy and Monica Chang for a great job team effort. Yeah, excellent. Excellent work and great timing too. Thank you so much. All right, moving on then to item number six. Commissioner O'Brien, you've been leading this. This is now on day two of the overall valuation in our obligation to address compensation of the executive. Thank you, Madam Chair. This was put on for this date. There was some conversation about getting historical context for some of the figures that are in the sheet that's in the packet in terms of showing what past executive directors have been paid and then salary bumps versus sort of, you know, adjustments to their base. I will start out by saying that in terms of, particularly in relation to caring which is what the vote would be for today. I think she's doing an outstanding job. I do think we should have a further conversation about where the base salary is in connection with not only past history but also other government agencies and other gaming commissions. But I do feel that given the economic situation of our licensees and the pandemic and the situation of the other employees, it would not be my recommendation that we change what her base pay is at this time. But I think it should remain and we then move forward. Knowing full well that as we recover and as we see where we are at the end of the year and we approach for next evaluation, hopefully she's still with us and hasn't decided to go off to bigger and better things that of course does not propose the option of a retroactive action. But I think at this time the salary is appropriate given the issue that I'm aware of. But I do know that Commissioner Zuniga commented on there is historical context for some of this. And so I'm also eager to hear what that was today. Commissioner O'Brien, I'm sorry if I have missed this but I'm not sure of the exact amount we're talking about was she brought up to, did we, when she became- My understanding is, and if Trippie's on the call it was 185 was what we brought her on when she was made the full-time executive director and moved away from the acting position. From the interim, I just wanted to make sure I was right on that. So as of, it was September when she was made the full-time so as of September she was paid at the 185 and prior to that when she became interim in January there was a lesser amount of, a minimum lesser amount but certainly a lesser amount. Okay, thank you. Commissioners, Commissioner Zuniga. Sure, let me follow up with the comments from last time and now my recollection of the first hire of executive director was that we were willing and in fact probably did pay a premium for what we needed at the time which was a big emphasis on regulatory gaming experience and that the fact or meant the need to attract somebody from out of state just given where we were in the arc of history of the commission. We also, to continue in the trajectory of the subsequent salaries of the executive director the instances in which we decided to give not just a bonus if you will a one-time increase in the salary I think we did that twice for Mr. Betrosian was at the time also a desire to try to manage the base compared to other state agencies as we were on the perhaps higher end of a range. And that by the way that comparison is always tricky even in the state that there's independence there's state agencies as well as executive agencies that have very different base scales even in the same context. That's by way of historical context I can move to how I feel about it now but or I can try to shed some more light. Oh, perhaps before I do that I think the comparison that's in the packet is very appropriate. I would note a couple of things which were also a bit of a factor back then when we hired the first executive director the two gaming jurisdictions that have a higher salary than where we are that are noted in the memo Nevada and Pennsylvania are the first that the largest and the second largest gaming markets in the United States with many, many casinos in the case of Nevada and at least 11 last time I looked and that was prior to the introduction of mini casinos and sports betting as well as a lot of online play in Pennsylvania again, which is a certain largest market. My recollection from our consultants conversations relative to fair comparisons or in terms of size and by the way I put that there a word in quotes because it's very difficult to do a one-to-one comparison because there's any number of things that go into the regulatory agencies from one state to the next. That's something that we struggled when we tried to compare regulatory costs versus gaming activity. It always depends on how other things are quantified and allowed in the state, et cetera. But Michigan was at the time and I think perhaps still something that in terms of size is perhaps a good comparison because there's also three large resorts. There's a relationship with a tribe in the case of Michigan, several tribes in the case of Michigan, several more. But this is where the comparison begin to be not apples to apples because of living, of course, maybe very different between Detroit, let's say, and Boston, other things begin to be worthy of notice. So I also share Commissioner Bryant's notion of trying to manage the overall budget. I was actually prepared to suggest a modest increase to both temper the need and desire to keep our costs manageable in a time of decreased activity and serious budget considerations. But I guess I was ending on the modest increase side by virtue of the difficulty of this year, Karen's outstanding job and perhaps the last time we did this was now a couple of years ago when we did an increase. I suppose that could be tempered with what Commissioner Bryant suggested that if we can come back and look at it retrospectively rather, but I would be also comfortable with offering a small increase to reflect all of those aspects. Commissioner Cameron, thank you, Commissioner Seneca. Yes, these numbers were very helpful, by the way, to take a look at it. I know many things about different jurisdictions, but I know that that's relevant here. Other than if we're looking at Karen's performance, first of all, she came in with extensive gaming background which our last executive director did not. And for that reason, one of the reasons, the second reason would be an outstanding job in a very, very trying year. But I would be in a normal circumstance, I would be absolutely inclined to raise that salary due to those factors. But in this environment, I understand and agree with Commissioner O'Brien that we should make note of the excellent work that's been done, but also be mindful of the gaming situation in our licensees situation. So I agree with that recommendation that we called at this point, but also really wanna make note of the work that's been done in a very trying time and also the fact that this is not a candidate that came in without gaming experience. So I would echo Commissioner Cameron, some commissioners in against sentiments. I think my notes reflect exactly what you started with Commissioner Cameron is that I'm acutely aware of the fact that Karen Wells came in with significant more experience than perhaps relevant experience, perhaps more so than the two former executive directors. And so I'm quite aware of the fact that even keeping her at the same amount creates an equity concern that we might not only want to address, but probably need to address down the road if we are gonna defer. I think that we are all very, and I think I can share this, we have a Karen that we're all quite aware, the fact that the environment for the casinos right now is so challenging that maybe waiting to address this compensation issue makes good sense and is fair to our licensees. I thought that the historic data was helpful. I do think that as I looked at them, Commissioner Zunica notes that the highest ones have a very different set of obligations. We in many ways are fortunate that we have up to four licensees to oversee that is a different playing field than certainly what Nevada navigates in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. We also have a different governing structure. I'm not sure if that was necessarily considered when the initial compensation was set. That might be something in the future when we arrive at that steady state that people dream of, where perhaps a future executive director if Karen takes what could possibly be a better alternative down the road, which is hard for me to imagine Karen. So we'll put that aside, but at a certain point in time that the job may look and feel very different. But given the complexities of this last year, the challenges of last year and Karen's extensive experience, as well as potential expansion of responsibilities in the near future. Again, we don't know about sports wagering. If that will happen, but if it were to happen, that would be additional significant new responsibilities for the executive director to oversee. All of those factors I would say warrant us to certainly look back with care if we were to revisit this at the end of the year in conjunction with a timely second evaluation. With that said, I would also be comfortable with a slight boost that commissioner Zunica mentioned. But again, slight is probably not the appropriate word to use in light of all the assessments we've been making in normal year, but strictly because of the economic environment right now as we are seeing a hopeful light at the end of the tunnel. So commissioner O'Brien has made a recommendation to stay. Commissioner O'Brien with the thoughts that you've heard from us. I really do defer to your lead on this. Quite frankly with all that you've discussed and bringing up the fact that there could be expansion and job opportunities and responsibilities for the executive director position if a fourth casino is coming online this year, if online gaming comes and is given to this commission, those are also other opportunities to be revisiting what would be sort of the base salary and then looking at a particular to Karen. But I think for me also the overarching and again, not in any way diminishing I think she's doing an outstanding job. I also just think also from a fundamental soundness and fairness position in terms of the finances of the licensees who pay essentially for the functioning of this office that I am staying with the recommendation that we keep her where she is for the time being that continues to be mine obviously if someone wants to make a motion to the contrary happy to hear them. And so is that in the form of a motion? I don't, I mean, maybe I should ask Todd at this point if we're not taking any further action on what she's currently making I don't know that we need to vote but I defer to the general counsel on whether we do. I think if you're not changing anything you probably don't need to take any action. What I can't recall specifically is when the salary was set whether it was done on a permanent basis or with the understanding that it needed to be reviewed and ratified or looked at. I think one thing I might have misspoke and Karen, I hate to put you on the spot but you would know best perhaps and you may not know this. I think we set it at the 185 in September when we did our final evaluation and put you into the full time position out of the interim. Did we make that retroactive back to the beginning? Okay. No, it may be helpful for me to comment there because Commissioner O'Brien and I discussed this and we're in agreement that my personal feeling is that staff right now did not get raises because of the situation with the pandemic. And I just don't think I could accept any kind of increase until the staff gets an increase. So I think your conversations are consistent with the conversations I've had with Commissioner O'Brien that I need to do the right thing with respect to the other people that work in this agency. And I'm part of that team and it's not right for the highest paid employee to get a raise when the other people haven't got raises yet. So I think that makes sense across the board and we'll just all be in this together and I'll move along together and hopefully things will get better as time goes on. And so that would be, we would revisit this in December, Commissioner O'Brien. Unless a circumstances weren't revisiting it before that which is absolutely an option. Excellent, yes. Commissioner Zinnikaya, are you comfortable with that? Yeah, thank you. Thank you for that, Karen. I think until you mentioned it, there's in our minds at least or at least in mind, there's a notion of, we said the executive director salary but then there's a trickle down if you will that what it means for the rest of the agency. There's another gauge by the way that we haven't seen in a while and I should mention it now. And that's also the adjustment that comes from time to time to the salaries of commissioners. I don't know that in my mind has also been a bit of a gauge as to what the rest of the state is thinking is appropriate for given the environment that it operates under. One of scrutiny and balance about trying to retain people and trying to do well by the taxpayers. That's just to say that I'm persuaded by your comments, Commissioner O'Brien and I'm happy to look at this at a future time even with the possibility of acting retroactive. Good. Then if there's no, we have a general consensus. I think Commissioner Cameron, you expressed your alignment with Commissioner O'Brien from the start. Thank you. And I have been as well with just some observations for us to think about as we approach this important decision the next time around. So with that said, Karen, thank you for your thoughtfulness on this. We appreciate it. And I think we're all set then. The compensation, Commissioner O'Brien will stay at 185. Okay, consensus. Excellent. Any further comments on that, commissioners? No, thank you for all the work. Other than to say that Karen's comments to you, I think also speak volumes to why we put her in the position that we did. That's exactly right. That's exactly right. I'm not sure if it speaks volumes as to her negotiation skills, but definitely as to her sense of fairness and her team leadership, it's brilliant. And that's what matters to us. So thank you. And I think that that concludes our formal items. Karen, thank you. We know that this is never a comfortable process. And we've gotten through this with you in a way that we knew would just fine. So thank you. We are now up to our commissioner updates. So commissioners, do you have something to update us on? She's sort of, Seneca. I just attended virtually a conference from the put together every year by the British Columbia Lottery Corporation of which from which we, you might remember, we licensed the game sense brand and approach. They have a responsible gaming conference every year on this time that is really good, well attended from practitioners and people from all around the world for the new horizons conference. This year it was an average program, but equally interesting as in other years, some of those presentations are gonna be available online or digitally and I will try to circulate or have Mark and Teresa who also attended circulate the ones that they might find more relevant. But if I could mention a couple of things, prominently there was a session with Dr. Richard Wood who we have had before us evaluating our positive play approach, which is something that is gaining quite a bit of traction around the world with the work that he and others have done and led, which is also very encouraging to see. There was also a panel relative to a sports betting, which is another big topic of conversation and one, you know, a couple of words of caution from people relative to some of what other places have done and some of the things that are being repeated in the United States, namely around the topic of in-game betting, which brings up a lot of responsible gaming topics because of the speed of play and so on, as well as some of the marketing that is taking place in all these partnerships between media companies as well as and then online gaming operators. The notion that sports with its interest throughout our society, really, it's everywhere, brings in a whole set of new players perhaps or new interest, especially in some groups that have been deemed higher risk from the studies in the past, you know, younger males or maybe underage, not minors, but underage. So, and the dilemma that when approving sports betting, which usually now these days has an online component, there's both opportunities and risks from a regulatory standpoint in the sense of there's now ability to track play and perhaps insert responsible gaming measures, but at the same time, it brings in the familiarity of a much younger generation, in this case, minors, who are also potentially real target of this activity. But I encourage, again, I will distribute some of these PowerPoints when made available. There were great discussions and work for checking them out. You should definitely share with Karen and Jill, and I commend the team, Karen and under with Jill's leadership their continued work to support the legislature as requested, any requests that come in on sports betting as legislation continues to percolate. So the team continues to be responsive on that front. So you should share that, Mark, I think also is keeping Karen and team pretty apprised on those developments as well. Is that fair, Karen? Correct. Okay, and then Gail, do you have any update? Thank you, Henrike. It's great, do you have any update, Karen and Gail? I do not, but I want to thank Commissioner Zuniga. That was a really informative update, and I know that we pay a lot of attention to that issue, responsible gaming, so it's nice that we're always exploring what those best practices are, and frankly, we are part of those best practices. That's right. Right, and Commissioner Zuniga, that's why I know that Jill will really like to hear the details, so if you could share it on that, that'd be great. Commissioner O'Brien, do you have anything further? I don't, no. No, I just want to also thank Victor Ortiz of the Department of Public Health who presented last, at our last meeting with respect to problem gambling awareness month. He conducted DPHs in his office of problem gambling, first listening sessions for the community stakeholders and did a nice job of we quite properly don't actually engage in with the stakeholders because of our position, but he will be providing us the benefit of the feedback. So we'll stay tuned on that, but I did attend and he allowed us to share a few words about our own community, engaged research and work, so thank you for that opportunity. So with that said, there's no other business than we can allow one commissioner to get to an appointment on time and we'll need a motion to adjourn. Move to adjourn. Thanks, Commissioner Zuniga. Commissioner Cameron. I'll second it then. Okay, there you are. Commissioner O'Brien, you moved on me. Commissioner Cameron. Aye. Commissioner O'Brien. Aye. Commissioner Zuniga. Aye. And I vote yes for zero. Thank you to everyone. As I asked, take that moment today to reflect on all that's happened in the past year and let's look forward to the year ahead. Vivian, thank you for all your help today. We appreciate it and thank you, Executive Director Wells, we thank you for your leadership. Thank you. Bye.


SDP rejects APC's win in Ekiti and we take a closer look at how NSER's protest will shape the 2023 elections. This is PlusPolitics. I am Mary-Anna Cohn. Chagorni, the Ekiti state governorship candidate of the Social Democratic Party, SDP and his Action Democratic Party counterpart, Mrs. Kemi-Elebuté Halli, has rejected the results of the Saturday election saying that the outcome of the elections will be challenged at the tribunal. The SDP candidate said that the results as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission did not reflect the true decision of the people, lamenting that the process was allegedly marred by financial inducement. Joining us to discuss this is Moses Jolayemihi, the chairman, media and advisory council of the Chagorni campaign. Thank you so much, Mr. Jolayemihi, for joining us. Thank you very much. Let's start by backpedaling a bit. Last week, just before the elections, I spoke with somebody from your campaign who had spoken about the fact that Mr. O'Neill was being targeted. He kept saying that every time you visited different places in his words, you were being targeted by the opposition. And here we are today, a few days after the elections. The SDP is saying that the results have to be contested because of certain irregularities. Paint a picture to us as to why you have rejected the results of the Saturday elections. Thank you very much. I think you started by saying that Chagorni was being targeted and all that. Yeah, it wasn't only Chagorni.  And the fact is that APC had always seen the SDP as their major problem, their major headache. So we've been doing everything possible to suppress the SDP. It was not possible. Now, going into the election, they decided to ensure that the wishes of the people, they have made attempt to trot the wishes of the people in the sham that they called election. It was a cash and carry thing. They have reduced the state to a marketplace where votes can be sold and bought. So what we saw was vote buying across the entire 16 local governments of the state and it was also mad by Thugry, Ballonbox snatching, Ballonbox stuffing, and all monies of the intimidation. And the entire process is flawed. And that's why the SDP is rejecting this election. It's a departure from the reality on ground. The wishes of people, this is not the reflection of their wishes.  They busted into some houses and where money was kept and so on. So a lot of things happened that made this election a mockery. And I think the APC also did a good job of capitalizing on the poverty situation of the Kiti people, which in any case the cost in the first place. They deliberately decided to coverage the place, I mean the people, so that they would be there for their youth every four years. And that's what we missed. So this was not an election. I'm curious to ask, as much as you've said that there was a lot of vote buying, they bought the people and of course that's how they arrived at the votes that they have. But let me start by asking. If you are alleging that there was vote buying, but then people did at least cast their votes, should INEC be the ones that we should be speaking to or should it be the people? Because again, people can be induced, but they can decide, like you said, there is poverty in the Kiti state. If it's anything to go by, should the people not be in a better position to make the choice of voting for good governance as opposed to monetary inducements? I know it's easier said than done, but is it not the people who chose to vote for those people who gave them money? Should INEC be taking responsibility for what happened on Saturday?  Don't forget that workers in the state have not been paid for several months. So the propensity for survivor, it's there. Everybody, every human, every living thing wants to survive. Even a plant wants to go towards the direction of light, sunlight to manufacture its food. So what do you say of human beings? There's always that tendency for people to want to survive any way, anyhow. So that's about that. INEC is comparable because it deliberately decided to ignore its own electoral rules and laws. It looked the other way. So to that extent, I think they are comparable. Just as the security agencies are true. I was going to ask, as much as INEC is a regulatory body, INEC is there to conduct, make sure that we have free for incredible elections, but they cannot also be playing the role of the enforcement, which is the police, which is security services. INEC cannot leave their job of trying to make sure that people vote to deal with the issue of vote-buying. I'm sure that this conversation has been had on several forums where we talk about whose job it is to deal with vote-buying. But then I want to put a direct question to the Shegorni campaign. If you have been campaigning, I'm wondering what have you been saying to Akiti people if the large majority, going by what you've said, have been induced by the so-called opposition to get their votes?  To be honest with you, it's a very, very hard not to crack when you appeal or you preach or you campaign to a very, very hungry person, not to take money. I think it's very difficult. It's very difficult. We did our best to tell the people to ignore that something called the Boko Sebe in Akiti State, which is take money, I mean vote for us, take money, and then you can cook a pot of soup. And we've been trying to tell them that a pot of soup that will not last you more than two days should not be used to mortgage your future and the future of your children. I mean, another suffering of four years, in case not taking eight years, that people should ignore that. But unfortunately, like I said, survival is the first rule for every human. So you'll be able to convince them to actually ignore that very, very tempting 10,000, 7,000. It's somehow. And you see why we feel that INEC is generally culpable here is that during the campaign and in our meetings with different stakeholders, observers, international community and all that, what we were telling them was that, look, to effectively control and discourage vote by, then INEC has a duty to ensure that the positioning of the ballot boxes and the ballot booths were such that people would not be able to display their ballot papers to the agent who were, in any case, on hand to see that, okay, look, I have done my bit, I have voted for you. And then the next thing is that the other person, the agent would not give a nod to another person standing strategically somewhere. And that person will nod to the other person who will now, it will nod to another person where the money was. So the person goes in to collect the money. I saw that in my polling unit, for example, and I complained. I asked the security agents, what are you doing? Can you see what's going on here? But they just looked at me and the guys, they just walked away. To them, what's this guy talking about? Because all of them have been taken care of, presumably anyway, because I don't have complete evidence for that. But I didn't see when they were being given money.  So the security agents nuked their way. INEG also helped in ensuring that the vote-bind paid was effectively carried out. While we were busy campaigning, you know, going to every nook and corner of making the state, all the rallies, all different local governments, you know, in my word, for example, with my place in Okimeti, meetings were being held, rallies, everything. We were campaigning, house to house, everything. Everything was just looking at us. I'm sure they would be laughing at us and just cheering at us that at the end of the day, I mean, they knew what they were going to do. And they had a plan made and they carried it out to the letter. On the day of the election, they simply rolled out multiples of millions. Every polling unit, for example, in the state, some got up to four million.  I mean, for extremely poor people, that was irresistible. So, now, this election, you can say safely that INEG, law enforcement agencies, and APC, they did a good job of ensuring that this election was not an election. This is no democracy. And that is the reason we are rejected, the outcome. This is not the outcome that reflects the wishes of the people. It's a complete departure. I don't want to argue with you, but let me put it side by side. So, in one breath, you're telling me that the people in Akiti State, in your opinion, have been impoverished deliberately by the government for such a time as this. And so, that's why they're inducements. And, of course, they cannot say no to those inducements. But then you're also saying in another breath that this is not necessarily an election that reflects the wish of the people. Where does wish come in here when I have already been paid off to vote for a certain person? I mean, I'm trying to understand how will the wish of the people come to bear if those same people were eager and happy to take inducements, in your words, from so-called opposition. Isn't this the wish of the people already? How do we, how do we even juxtapose that? Okay, okay. Let me just add this. Maybe I should have done that before. Those who were, there was another set of people, the civil servants for instance, they formed 40 percent of the entire population of the state. Those ones were mussels. They were kind of compelled to do the bidding of the ruling party. Okay? This year by three also played out there. Even if they are not taking money, you must show that you have voted for APC. Okay? Otherwise, your job is on the line. Civil servants, because there's nobody that can, it's difficult to comprehend that those who have been vote salaries for months, you know, those whose parents or uncles or aunties or whatever have not been paid their areas of gratuities and pension, will then willingly go and vote for a party that approves them, that will go and vote for a party that has continuously keep them in perpetual financial and social bondage. It's not possible. What is the, what is the scorecard of APC in the state? Tell me, what is the scorecard? What can they claim to that they have done successfully in the state for which anybody would want to vote them in? So people's hands were tied, you know, at their backs. They had no choice. So it's not like this is what they would ordinarily have done. And that tells you why that speaks to the fact that as we speak now, no jubilation in anywhere in the state. Don't forget that excitement, happiness, jubilation is spontaneous. It's not something you plan for. You don't have to set committee for you to tell people to be happy. The election result was announced. You would have expected the entire, you know, all the streets in the state would erupt in jubilation. But what you are seeing now is everywhere is calm. There is sadness on the faces of the people that what is this, what is happening to us. There is no celebration. And APC that we know, if anything, if they achieved anything, we'll be the next one minute, the entire streets are full. Everywhere is full with jubilation. But what do we have now? They are probably setting up committees, asking people to come from different local government, you know, they will pay for their transportation, to come to a break, to come and jubilate. You don't plan for jubilation. You don't plan for excitement. You don't plan for happiness. It shows and it's spontaneous. You exclude it. It comes out natural. But what do you see in the state now? There is no jubilation everywhere. I mean, anywhere. That tells you that what has happened to them, you can say there is peace now. But I liken that to peace of the graveyard. Nobody is happy about itself. So it's not a reflection of their wishes at all. I just want to push you further. I mean, this we can use it as a litmus test. We were going to obviously use equity state elections as and also state elections as a litmus test for what we should expect in 2023. And so let me ask this question. Judging from what we've seen, because of course we had seen a lot of young people, many Nigerians tripping out to INEC to get their PVCs because they're very eager to vote for good governance. But from what you have painted, the picture that you've painted, I'm sure that when we have the ABC campaign committee here, they would tell us something different. But from what you have said to us, what does 2023 hold for Nigerians? What's the guarantee that people will vote right? I mean, because this is just the state elections. And according to you, there have been inducements. There's been electoral violence. In fact, somebody said that she could have ordinarily accepted, you know, the win of Governor, Mr. Biodonye Banji. But she said, in spite of the various programs and media publicity against vote buying, she said the APC, the PDP and your party, the SDP, promoted and encouraged corruption both at the grassroots and the state levels. Now, this is also indexing you. So I'm asking a general question here. If this is what's happening in just a state election, what should we be looking forward to in the general elections come next year? I sincerely hope Nigerians would think better. I sincerely hope they will not fall for this tokenism, this 5,000, 3,000 Naira, because the presidential candidate of the APC reportedly came to a state and kind of officially endorsed the vote buying thing. He told them in Yoruba that, you know, if you don't turn print, you don't put your finger on the ballot. You cannot put your finger on the money, you know, which is a direct allusion to vote buying, okay? So that's what it came to do. I'm sure I have a feeling that that, in a way, energized the APC fellows here who felt that, okay, I mean, this is now official. So I'm going to pound with that. So I sincerely hope Nigerians will think better and look beyond this ephemeral imprint of whatever 5,000, 10,000. I don't know how much they're going to roll out in 2023. But there is a lot of danger in voting for money, because it's like you are voting to sentence yourself to another four years or whatever years of slavery.  What we're experiencing now is not something that anybody will wish for this country. The country is a, this is not what we thought. I mean, we never envisaged, we never dreamt Nigeria could be what it is now. That's why we stayed here believing that it will get better. Unfortunately, it's getting worse by the day. Alright, quickly before I let you go, I told you that the ADP candidates actually accused your party, the PDP and the APC, of vote buying My party is SDP from PDP. No, no, she, she, she indicted your party, the APC and the PDP. So all three parties, she's saying she saw a level of inducement and vote buying. I'd like to quote her directly. She said, in spite of the various sensitization programs and media publicity against vote buying, the APC, the PDP and the SDP actually, in her words, promoted, encouraged corruption both at the grassroots and the state levels. I'd like to get your response to that. And finally, what is the end game, the SDP saying they want to go to court? What do you hope to get at the end of the day? What we hope to get at the end of the day is outright cancellation of this shaft. Then on the issue of SDP joining in the corruption and inducement, I beg to disagree with the report of a bad person because we didn't have provision for that. We're not sharing money. And all along, I think APC itself used mock us and jail at us that, oh, don't mind them. The reason they are campaigning against vote buying is because they don't have money. They say she doesn't have money and all that, and all that. Yes, she has not stolen money. She has not amassed wealth, like all the other guys that have passed through here. So I think it's the only former governor who doesn't have his account with millions and he doesn't have properties thrown all over the country and other parts of the world. That's fine. But he has integrity, he has name, he has track record, and that is what ignited the interest of the people. You need to see the crowd that was following us everywhere we went, not induced, not bought. They really, really wanted a change. They wanted a reprieve. They wanted a fresh breath of life, which APC is attempting to take off them. But we are going to challenge this charm. So you're saying, just for the record, that the ADP candidate, the lady in question is lying, because I'm guessing that somebody of that caliber would not be putting out such information if she does not have evidence of vote buying. I'm just saying, are you saying outrightly here on national television that the ADP governorship candidate told a lie about the SDP, the APC, and the PDP vote buying both at state and local government levels? Well, I am not a mini-potent that couldn't have been everywhere. I voted in my hometown of Kimetsuikiti and I can tell you for free that we were not sharing monami party tickets. So you agree that there could have been a possibility that some SDP party members were inducing people at certain polling units since you were not at the other polling units?  So I'm not ready to be here on national television, feed the people who vote. What I have seen in Okimetsuikiti, the microcosm of the rest of the state, is that we did not share money. If there was money to share, I should know about it. Well, I want to say thank you. Moses Jalehemi is the chairman, media advisory council, Shagwani campaign organization. Thank you so much for speaking with us. We appreciate it. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you for staying with us. We'll take a quick break. When we come back, we will discuss how the NSAS protest might shape the 2023 general election. Stay with us.