Okay Good morning. This is a convening of the messages. It's gaining commission We're holding this meeting virtually so we'll do a roll call. Good morning, Commissioner Frye Good morning. I'm here Good morning, Commissioner Hill. Good morning. I'm here And good morning, Commissioner Skinner. Good morning. Good morning, Commissioner Maynard. Good morning, Madam Chair Okay, we're gonna get started much of the meeting is a bit of a continuation from our last meeting on Thursday March 23rd, but this is We do have one item. This is public meeting number 445 and of course today is March 27th in Monday morning. I will start with Our single item other than the regulations. Good morning, Director Lillios Good morning, Chair and commissioners, and I am going to turn this right over to Chief Enforcement Council Heather Hall Who can brief you on this matter? Thanks Loretta. Good morning, Chair and commissioners. As you are aware, the IEB has assessed administrative penalty in the agreed upon amount of $20,000 upon memoir, which is a nightclub that operates in the Encore Boston Harbor casino The assessment stems from two incidents of alcohol over service one that occurred last August and one that occurred last September Since that time the IEB has been in regular communication with memoir and the chief of the alcoholic beverage control Commission Which has been maintaining a presence in memoir and in communicating with memoir staff memoir has been working to apply with the required corrective actions that stemmed from earlier incidents of non-compliance and The IEB has seen improvements in memoirs approach to alcohol service over the last several months And I also note that Encore Boston Harbor is also aware of these matters The IEB will continue to monitor and will continue to keep the lines of communication open with the ABCC Memoir and EVH with the goal of keeping compliance and public safety in mind In closing, I just want to thank Senior Enforcement Council Kathleen Kramer Who was unable to be here today for all of her work on these matters as well as Attorney Zach Mercer and Brittany Costello The IEB also appreciates the ongoing communications with the ABCC and memoirs Happy to take any question if anybody has any Questions for Heather Commissioners Mr. Hill, I'm just gonna ask if you're all set As you get your video back on I am on there you are There you are. Oh Were you able to hear Heather's presentation? Great. Yep. Do you have any questions? I have no questions. Okay Other commissioners now that he's back All right Just a measure of the excellent report. Thank you Heather. Thank you chair Okay, and we're going to turn right to item number three on the agenda there are number of Regulations that are cited, but we resolved them at our last meeting this agenda had been posted Appropriately before our third or Thursday meeting so in order to make The 28-hour posting requirement. So as I understand Caitlin We're all set except for item D and J Others we voted on and they moved forward Yes, 205 CMR 202 authority and definitions and 205 CMR 256 sports wagering advertising or the two regulations that we'll be discussing today So should we turn to who should we turn to next take one? I would hand it right over to Mina Good morning Mina. Good morning, Madam chair and good morning commissioners So we'll get we're gonna go back to 256 this morning and Once we have resolved that we'll do the final Vote on 202 so far. We're not anticipating any changes to 202, but we'll see So just to recap where we were on 256 when we Last spoke on Thursday. We Had talked through the entire packet of changes we we got some of your feedback on On the changes we have suggested up to that point. We had also previewed the Attorney General's Written comments and line edits, which we had received on Wednesday the day before that and had promised to to take a closer look at those and provide additional Recommendations on on on the AG's language There were also a handful of questions that came up from that call that At the direction of the Commission We did reach out to the Attorney General's office that some of the folks at on first assistant AG Moors team to talk through You know sort of make sure we understood their comments correctly and so we have that feedback in mind The Commission has in its packet Starting on page 10 a revised draft of 205 CMR 256 To that packet that excuse me that draft has a number of items highlighted in yellow Which are the items that have changed In some way from our conversation on Thursday the other red lines and track changes in that document are ones that Have That were we had discussed on Thursday, but I think we're all set with so I won't recap those So I'll be focusing on the highlighted changes this time around if that works for everybody So without further ado, I think we're starting off with with a Was substance right away 256 oh one One This is an addition requested actually we're not this is a smaller addition requested by the Attorney General's office to make clear that The The Responsibility for the actions of affiliates or vendors Extends not to just a contract by any other agreement this avoids someone calling it something other than a contract so That is a fairly small change and made sense. So we added it here for to avoid any doubt Assuming no questions on oh one I'll go right to oh three Which I think we do want to get the Commission's feedback on the final language If you recall on Thursday, we had noted that the Attorney General's office had in their prior March 7th comments and their Verbal comments of the Commission advocated for keeping the original version of 250 6 oh one three which appears on page 10 in the struck out text That's a second version of that We Discussed how you had since that time or right around that time. I don't remember the exact chronology had gone Through the roundtables on this issue I had received input from the marketing affiliates and their counsel the Sports broadcasters group as well as the operators on this issue and then further and obviously the further input from the Attorney General We did speak with the Attorney General's office just to confirm that they had also had some of that background understood the distinctions between the different models That Exists for affiliate marketing and understood that the Commission has a policy Decision to make and so their their preference is as they stayed on March 7th to restore the language In full, but obviously it is a Commission's call ultimately To try to balance all of the information you received to that end one of the suggestions I mentioned and I think we previewed on Thursday was Language that tracks in large part the changes you made to 205 CMR 234 regarding vendors and licensee vendor licensees and registrants that attempts to That would not be an outright prohibition on all of Agreements where there is with a third party where the Consideration is tied or the compensation is tied to the volume of patrons or wagers placed But but some form of that I'm going to for the purposes of today's discussion resist Call you're sort of displacing this too broadly into revenue sharing and CPA because I think there are subcategories within it That may not necessarily be helpful may have been helpful when you were reviewing the language for 234 and For the purposes of figuring out who gets vendor licensing versus registration It sort of follows a New Jersey framework that I know we've all talked about a lot Rather, I think what's important here is to keep in mind what this particular provision does and that is To at the at the as drafted and there are portions of this that could be tweaked as discussed the other day As drafted this would prohibit an operator from entering into an agreement with a third party To conduct all of the realm of advertising marketing etc In exchange for a percentage of net Sports wagering revenue that language and I think commissioner Brian you asked why net that that comes from the Licensing scheme use the same language and also New Jersey uses the same language. That's sort of the focus on it Earned from users at the third party directs or causes the causes to be directed was added just to make clear that it's Just in case there's sort of a step in between but it's it's clear that it goes that way There are gradations of this right now. This is This would only prohibit the This is both broader than what could be and what a narrower. It's It's broader than prohibiting just users that actually place a wager on On an operators platform The language could be tweaked to to only prohibit that it's narrower than I think one of the suggestions That we discussed on Thursday Where it would be simply an exchange for percentage of net sports wagering revenue Period in which case it wouldn't matter whether or not the the revenue share was tied to the number of patrons that That are directed by a particular affiliate in other words a Operator could pay could have a deal where if they Make x revenue in a year all of their third-party marketing affiliates get x percentage regardless of who actually drove traffic to the site So that would also that will be prohibited if you take out the words starting You know aren't from users, etc So there's sort of three different gradations that we you could you could think about this one is a sort of middle one I Will say one of the things that we did want to clarify with the Attorney General's office is the rationale that they had provided In their letter was the ability of a concern, excuse me a concern about third-party marketing affiliates acting as both Drivers of you know customers and patrons to an operator, but also holding themselves out in other contexts as experts or tip givers to To patrons who might place wagers that is at the core of their concern here is a sort of ability to benefit from that behavior That is addressed in part by this prohibition We also are as we get later into the rag. We're going to we are suggesting some tweaks on the language regarding the provision of advice to patrons by an operator or or a vendor including a marketing play So that's that's I believe where we are on the lay of the land for this one and I'll open it up madam chair to discussion Okay commissioners questions from you know, who wants to go first Michelle Brian So mean I'm just trying to gauge where this compromise language lands so AG prefers to have The CPA at rev share bar retained in its entirety. Is that their ideal position? Correct. Okay, and then this comes from It's almost the hypothetical of well, assuming you can't get that then what do you suggest? Is that where revise three comes from? Correct Commissioner Brian, although I am certainly not trying to forecast one way or another but listening to the feedback the other day We want to start with the language. I think I promise that we'd start with essentially the language that I shared before or on Thursday, excuse me and so That's what this is with the small addition of causes to be directed as just a slight gloss on it. Okay And I have a broader question in terms of commissioner Maynard had brought up a couple times Connecticut moving away from our initial language Has anyone gotten any further information? I tried to look that up and what I saw was legislation pending any Connecticut considering banning promos altogether in terms of advertising Is there any information on if Connecticut is in fact doing it? And if so, why? That's not something I am aware of but I that's not to say that it's not happening. I don't know if others on the call Can weigh in Commissioner O'Brien, if you don't mind I actually received a call from the Department of Consumer Protection in Connecticut on Friday and they said that was actually not the case that they were not that that would Be a right change and that has not been in their pipeline just yet Okay, that's I actually reached out to the Friday. I didn't hear back. That was consistent with what I was seeing But I just wanted to confirm. Okay. Thank you Adam chair Yes, so you know how I am madam chair. I like it cut and dry black and white Mina You and I had talked last week and I just want to know with the language that you proposed We're allowing third parties no revenue sharing for the most part, but CPA is that what this language does Correct and and the only reason I'm hesitating with those categories categories at all Commissioner Hill I understand but but to be fair. Yes, it is you would be allowing CPA would certainly be allowed if it's In the sense that if any clicks on the site, that's that's completely fine This particular language However, would cover the form of CPA that if you call it that and I think that if you look at the New Jersey Sort of framework they do kind of split it into into both revenue sharing and CPA on this CPA in the form of percentage revenue based on A user signing up that would be prohibited here as well So the fact that they signed up Even if they don't place a wager, there's some percentage that goes that way, right understood. So madam chair just a thought For the last couple of weeks, if not a few weeks This is what we've been talking about and I think this was the consensus that the Commission actually came up with is that we would allow The third parties we were apprehensive about revenue sharing, but we seem to be okay with the CPA So if this is what that that does then I feel very comfortable moving forward with the language that has been put forth By our legal counsel today short suite to the point. Yeah, I would I Appreciate that commission help because it was my question to Meena I think there's just a bit more nuance in that current state of our reg does allow for rev sharing with a heightened Licensure process, but not the reg through our Directive that suspended this license through a April 14th, so You I would agree with you almost entirely that was our position Commissioner Hill so I guess for me The part of the RAM share that you're carving out What the part of the CPA that's carving out I like to understand that better because I Don't I don't know how the industry will will feel about that And madam chair I should just be maybe a little bit clearer than I was in response to Commissioner Hill So the language is a percentage of net sports wagering revenues. I I I may have over I said this a little too broadly a moment ago In if someone does not in theory put any money into their account they open an account And then say you know what I don't want to do this. It's not The whatever percentage the operator has agreed to pay the third or excuse me, whatever Amount the operator has paid has agreed to pay the third marketing third-party marketing affiliate for that activity It would not be prohibited because it's not coming for as a percentage of net sports wagering revenue It's the overall revenue that's generated from that user So they would really have to place money into the account and the end and so in a sense It is just on the wagers so that makes sense Yeah, is it just is it very specific to percentages or does it also include? You know a flat fee amount but say $50 Is is paid to the third party When a patron uploads Funds into their account would that be permitted under this language? That would be permitted. What's what's prohibited is exchange for a percentage of net sports wagering revenues So it's a contingency fee arrangement of sorts Okay Can I ask a clarifying question? When our roundtable Convened and I did review the roundtable discussion again over weekend They said 90% you know, I'll remember this, you know a bit of And more even I think some said a hundred percent of their arrangements are CPA And then rev share was distinguished and they didn't slice it In maybe the way that we are here Are they going to Is this going to affect that the industry or is what you're saying the rev share because I need to understand it like commissioner hill proclamation might is that Are considered rev share from the perspective of our roundtable discussion Me like in other words is 10 percent of their CPA Or 50 percent of their CPA include what you're inhibiting them or Is it part of rev share in their mice? We know so the way I I understood the marketing affiliate industry to be describing um The distinction between CPA and revenue share In part had to do with the timing um Of when they're paid, uh, I guess Madam share the reason I'm just pausing is I want to make sure of my recollection of Of how they might think about it. I you know, I don't want to speak for The industry itself obviously, uh, but What this the only thing this would prohibit I guess just to go back to that would be if they are earning a percentage from um the bets actually, uh, placed and That would seem to be revenue sharing That it is. Yes. No, it is sharing of revenue. Yes. Oh, I would assume it. It's in that Right that that spice then of course, um What worries me Is oh commissioner skinner your um audio is off right ahead Oh, I just hadn't turned it off Turned it off again. Madam chair. I was just waiting. I'm I'm listening before I respond I I just want to make sure like you and and the other commissioners that I understand exactly what this language is proposing to do If I'm correct Just based on my review, uh of of all of the material we've received thus far I I think that this would allow revenue sharing agreements to continue um again as long as The compensation model isn't based on a percentage of net sports wagering revenue but instead on something like the frequency of visits To a platform over time And that's just as one example and that's the way I understand the compensatal compensation models to work. I Think there was some confusion and then I resulted in my own confusion from thursday's discussion that um, you know, whether the third party affiliates are receiving compensation based on the amount wagered so When a patron or the higher a patron wagers the more compensation The affiliate Receives and I don't think that that's the way it works Like Mina. I'm not speaking on behalf of the industry. I'm just Reciting, you know, I'm just relaying my interpretation of all of the material and just discussions that I've had recently with A number of folks. Um, so I think just I'm okay with this language You know, I have to continue to digest it a little bit during the course of this meeting But I think I'm okay with this language just based on my This would allow, you know the the smaller third party affiliates like gaming society that heard from an around table to continue to have a A chance in the market to continue to be to be competitive in the market of the third party affiliates I want to confirm that that's the case Mina Because I'm hearing commissioner Skinner say say that and I think both she and I have been concerned that It would still allow for Grab sharing I understand. I guess I was first concerned. Does it mean some subset of CPAs are decreased? That was my first question. I think you I've got clarification on that But does this allow for revenue sharing except for the exception of what you Sure. So so madam chair. I'm I'm looking So my own Notes a little bit. I found the new jersey advisory bolton that I think I was discussed a lot during the roundtables are very helpful and Without belaboring it. I want to just go through the categories there So the ones that the things that are still allowed under this the cost per click Certainly allowed cost per impression or cost per view certainly allowed Sponsorship deals which new jersey defies its gaming platforms pay a flat fee to an entity to be their partner fine Cost per action flat rate deals as a category affiliate gets paid based on upon a defined user non gaming Action also fine that includes sign-up fees deposit fees download fees betting fees all flat fee Then they had sort of three other categories They call this it's called cost per action That's a slightly different cost per action where an affiliate gets a certain percentage of the deposit for every coded user it signs up um And then there's what if the only thing referred to as revenue share in the new jersey model is Affiliate is paid a percentage of net gaming revenue of a coded user. It's that category that's prohibited that last one What is a little difficult? Because we we are not looking at each agreement At the moment it to to figure out is where that net comes from But right and so the reason you know, so I can't say that no Affiliate would have to change their behavior as a result because right now During your the waiver that revenue share it is allowed as you mentioned Um, I don't know if anyone is doing it. It sounds like it at most. It's a very small part of the industry We we might be a little I wondered if they could find that fact out Because I wondered uh, I'm turning to Todd now wouldn't wouldn't um, they have to be now seeking that higher license to um Arrangement would we have would I eb or licensure be able to tell us if anybody has sought higher licensure Okay, I don't think I'm back and just check on that. That's it. That's an interesting question. Um, I'm not exactly sure So that would be Karen question maybe for Millios and in Um Whether or not anyone is seeking that higher licensure so that they could engage in wrap sharing And that might help me to know like what The arrangement is Trisha Skinner. Do you want to help me out here? I can try. Um, I need help myself still madam chair I think based on the new jersey guidance any compensation model that that that is akin to The three Ladder Models laid out in this directive under the current language those would not be prohibited Right is that is that I'm sorry. They would be they would be prohibitive They would be prohibited. Yes. And so anything above that Would would be okay. So to the extent that there are um affiliates that engage in the ladder three uh compensation models then they they Under this language, they'd have to adjust their agreements to the extent that that's allowable They'd have to adjust those agreements To come up with a different compensation model either the cost per impression or you know cost per visit to the site Um or platform that kind of thing. That's my understanding. Is that correct Nina? Commissioner Skinner, I think that's correct. So to use the the easiest example, um, if their cost per action currently is a deposit fee and right now they get 10 of the deposit so if a Patron puts in a hundred dollars. They get ten dollars and I I'm making up raw numbers just for ease here But if they put in a thousand dollars they get a hundred dollars um They could still get paid for deposits But instead they would have to be in an arrangement where they get Either 10 or 100 or 50 or whatever it is every deposit no matter the size and the operator then takes Bears the risk as opposed to the affiliate marketer That they're paying what they're paying for gets them the deposits that they want to see And the difference is instead of the percentage Of net sports we during revenue. They're just getting paid a flat amount That's dollar amount. Okay That's in line with my understanding of how those agreements work again not seeing an actual agreement just you know based on the discussions that I've had You know again, I want to go back to the smaller entities that will be affected by a flat out ban on revenue share agreements and I think This language is a good compromise to allow those entities to continue to compete in the market My other question is whether There was a reference earlier to the licensing structure whether we would be requiring a higher license for um third-party marketing affiliates engaging in revenue share Or I think is that the language that exists in the regulation now? If it is would we continue to require that higher level of licensure since There is you know still we would be we would be continuing the ban on on payment As a percentage of the net sports way during revenue. So then if that's the case is the higher licensure even necessary I'm just seeing uh It it may not end up triggering anyone commissioner skinner uh with with this because the Revenue sharing advertisers are defined in the current vendor regulation as a person who promotes or directs patrons Uh to sports wagering on mobile applications or platforms Uh, or hire someone to do the same in exchange for percentage of net sports wagering revenue, right? So if it is prohibited to collect net sports wagering revenue, you know percentage of net sports wagering revenue You shouldn't be seeing someone who needs that licensure going forward I think we'd have to we'd have to revise that language because it's not it's I mean we shouldn't have anyone it's not allowed so Right the language needs to be adjusted correct and that was anticipated that this was uh the solution in at the moment in between When you came back to this right if you were to take the section three out all together Um, you would still need this language if you were to adopt the language before you today You probably would need to go back and revise 234 It's one of the reasons we didn't add for instance in tool It's actually one of the the reason we're holding 202 is depending on what happens here. We may or may not Uh at a later time want to revise 202 to include those kind of definitions But one of those will have to change. That's right Richard Skinner Yeah, I mean, I think that makes sense. I just you know, I'll just sum up by saying, you know, I started I think this conversation I think a couple of us did expressing, you know Uncertainty as to the difference between PA and revenue share And you know just based on, you know, what I've been able to ascertain over these last several weeks I I don't think that there is much difference. Um, we received, you know clarification That there's more of an upfront payment associated with the CPAs versus the Over time payments associated with the revenue share But I think effectively they work they operate In in much of the same way So I think I'm okay with this language. Um, and and I would like to see I would like to see this language included in the final version of 256 Richard is crucial Brian So Mina my question is my only concern with this language is one of the things they also I think the the rg people in the lobbyists make clear is the The most sort of predatory and push advertising comes from pay-per-click And I just want to make sure that we're not rewriting this in a way That incentivizes pay-per-click um Under this language you still would be allowing pay-per-click Um commissioner bryan, whether it is a preferable method. I think it's a little harder for me to To say, um, you know, whether that incentive is there Uh to the extent there's sort of two things I could say one Is that that mitigate that one is if the the pay-per-click violates other portions of this or excuse me that the call for Clicking violates other portions of this rag. Then you might then you still have You still have those guardrails there. It can't be unfair deceptive. It can't Can't be targeted at a particular audience, etc Um, so that that's one protection The other one is the one that is in the works and is is ongoing conversation With the attorney general's office as well is how data is used And putting the safeguards around the operators being able to Get to their third-party marketing affiliates. For instance data on who may be most vulnerable To to a pay-per-click. So that those would be the kind of guardrails around it. But uh, yes as as drafted this would certainly allow um A pay-per-click model Yeah I mean, I like the move toward the compromise. I I still my preference is still the original language um, if there's a way to Rain in that risk I'm more on board with it in terms of the data usage the um Think we've talked about doing this in another reg putting an obligation on them to use the data They do have to look for signals of risk, etc to intervene that to me um Going with this language and allowing any kind of rev share for me Is contingent on really Wanting to make sure that we look at what the data usage is allowed And putting an onus on them also to be more proactive in terms of intervention and rg messaging as we go forward So that's where that's where I am right now Which are maybe you have want to contribute now or I'm happy happy to um First I'm glad we officially heard from Connecticut. Um, where they stand on the third party advertisement I did say scuttlebutt Because I've not seen any proposed regs To accompany those rumors and I'm always happy to stand corrected And I furthermore apologize to my colleagues in Connecticut. We've probably got a few uh calls. Um, just because of of My repeating that rumor um Second, you know, I want to go back to what meano first said um You know if you're if you're giving tips on the outcome of an event Um, there should be no renumeration in any way shape or form tied to that that tip, right? Like that's a that's a to me a no-brainer here, right? I just can't it's fraught with issues from the start Um, finally, you know, I agree with commissioner hill I'm okay with cpa moving forward Because I believe that it will actually curb the onslaught of general advertisements that that people are seeing and Actually will will target those who are seeking out information To to play in the market or to actually make wages But I am somewhat concerned about an unrestricted Revenue sharing at this time. Um, just you know a pure unadulterated revenue sharing I do think that it will probably have some negative impacts to To some startup businesses and to to some folks who try who are trying to enter that market um So I think that if we can find some compromise language that will allow them in And then perhaps look at how it's going um That we may get to the right spot on this reg. Um, maybe if we have to revisit it even on that piece We do have to weigh benefits and harms and You know the attorney general's office cared enough to not only send a letter but to show up and they they obviously see a harm with this and So at the end of the day, that's that's how i'm weighing this is that you know, um I think that we have to be very sensitive to the fact that if people are being paid Um, by how many how much money they're driving to someone's door You know, we should put as many guardrails around that as possible. I don't know who used the word guardrails but as possible and You know my only Um, the the real issue that flipped me on this all together On on this entire third-party marketing You know two reasons one is it will help stop the onslaught of general advertisements And and two it will allow us to regulate Those who are in this space and i'm really worried about Who's going to buy the ads if it's not someone that we are regulating And and reviewing and watching So that's where I stand on this madam chair Really helpful Other commissioners want to weigh in I guess i'm i'm still sorting things out. So thank you for your patience. I'm reminded You know, I respect so much the attorney general's office giving us so much of your time and um And also submitting the extensive edits Which we've gone through And I um understand their their preference and that's where we started We did start with as you can see in it's uh now Uh Redlined out, but we learned that this arrangement of Compensation really does help The good players be able to Allow them to compete with the offshore and illegal market And I wanted to remind everybody of that important part of the discussion grand was very helpful um as a responsible gaming consultant to be able to confirm that uh that they're that These third party affiliates that have represented to us and and in so many ways really represent the the industry and its entirety Those who are who are um working with regulated operators Have indicated that without this arrangement Uh will be hard to compete With the um offshore and illegal market because they'll be doing it. They'll be going to space the other part i'm struggling with and um As I reminded that Um forgive me. I don't have her name, but she um was speaking on behalf of Kevin Garnett's association that mr. Garnett submitted the letter that she indicated that um for their purposes as trying to Be able to inform new betters um How to do so in a responsible way and how to understand the gaming world If they're going to enter into it That will involve Small operators small affiliates and she said for small um Billiards this their new entrance to the mark. They just don't have the I think they don't really have the Uh patron list to be able to compensate compete with a larger affiliates on a cpa model So the rev share is the only one that allows them to start to come to um develop their Business so again And that was why I thought well it might make sense for us to have rev share portion So on behalf of small uh smaller companies Um on behalf of mbe's on behalf of wbe's bb's just to make sure we don't somehow shut them out But then on balance I was also concerned But if we have the additional licensure, that's another barrier But we learned at the Round table that that that would be an arrangement that they were used to and they just decided they're jersey moral um So I guess My question Mina is Or care katelyn What language are we operating under right now with respect to To see p a's and rev share because I'm having a hard time understanding If we're banning rev share all together or for banning a portion of it And then I would go back to commissioner skinner's question, which is if there is rev share available Maybe you're not speaking about the licensure piece because it's in a different brand You know, but I would also If I heard commissioner maynard, right, I would probably say if we do have rev share in any form available I would still air on those additional card I'll defer to Mina on the specifics, but you know right now because of the waiver um Everything is allowed the cpa's and the rev share allowed, but that's what we're talking about right now is um How to deal with the final reg so whether it's louder or not So we haven't had any questions from our licensure it says to understanding the rev share first because we did have the additional licensure requirement I haven't heard anything about questions coming through related to this Yeah, so that's where I when I was trying to Understand katelyn if we had given any kind of direction to them because Understand was it this language, but we never got to that right, you know Correct madam chair. So effectively what's in place because uh through mid april Uh because of the waiver is what appears on page 10 as a If you were to take just a strikeout language, there essentially be no paragraph three Um, the question before you is whether to do that uh to restore or to restore some or all of it. Um, which is the Um And so the compromise this is going to help me Yes, again for being patient the compromise language. How does it differ? than what we decided When we lifted this So when you lifted this uh for the purposes of waiver all revenue sharing Um all types of revenue sharing, uh would have been allowed allowed with with the increased licensure um Now if you adopt the compromise language, uh the sort of three not struck out, uh You would not be allowed you would be prohibiting Revenue sharing based on uh a percentage of revenue Where it's a a particular user tied to a particular Uh marketing affiliate you would not ban general revenue sharing, you know a sort of rising tide lifts all boats kind of revenue sharing or a flat fee Flat fee payments in a sense Okay, so that does clarify everything for me very helpful So from my perspective commissioners, I would say I'm too uncomfortable with the compromise language provided that we Still have a robust discussion around patent licensure um Mentor do you say you're too uncomfortable or you too? I would be comfortable as long as we i'm not comfortable yet not taking down the guardrails all together Um, and that hasn't I don't believe that's being proposed yet It's just that we don't have that reg in front of us But I think we would need to have this conversation again Correct. I think commissioner skitters pointed a commissioner skitter can correct me if i'm wrong was that Some portions of that reg may no longer it may sort of be a null set of Things going forward uh given this language and I think that's correct That's right. That's our madam chair. I think if you take the position that eliminate, you know eliminating the ability for affiliates to engage in the percentage compensation model um Likens them more to a cpa um affiliate if you will then the revenue share agreement then I think you know It's a good question. You know, do we need that? Heightened level scrutiny and if we do I think that would apply to cpa affiliates as well as the revenue share affiliates because Again, this language just kind of puts them on more of a level playing field So far as compensation goes that's just the way I see it and granted the licensure discussion is a separate one, but I'm just trying to think ahead and Really trying to you know, think of the two together Can we um, could we see the new jersey language, please? because I I'm stuck you're talking about the new jersey. Um, you know Explanation that yeah, give me one second. I'm going to uh, make sure I close my inbox system Um Nobody's working and I think I understand but you never but you know Here we go So I believe you should be seeing now the pdf from from new jersey Okay So really this is the categories I was going through the cost per click. This is everything is still allowed cost per click Uh cpc or ppc cost per impression or per view Sponsorship deals flat rate cost per action. These are the three categories I think commissioner skinner was referring to earlier that get uh that are implicated by this language the first one Is it's a it's a little bit tricky to say exactly what it's it's involved or not technically what you're banning is number two here but if the revenue is sort of the deposit from a The deposit is part of the revenue. So it's sort of hard to to say that they're Uh distinguishable, but in any event it's these three categories that where you're talking about a percentage Uh, based arrangement These three are What what are what? These are sorry cost per action revenue share hybrid the hybrid is would be disallowed simply in the sense that you You would have to do just the flat fee and not have the percentage um you could um the The issue the the change is that you would you would no longer be allowing payment based on A percentage of the money tied to a particular user So, I mean one b would also be off the table, right? It is all three all three would be yes. I what I will say I I don't want to you know, this is where I might um, I find the new jersey guidance not quite as helpful is Uh, I think the language of number two Includes with in it Number one uh one a and b if that makes sense. I think I that's that's one egg. We we were defining it as um Cost per acquisition not cost per action Right, which seems to be one a which I don't think is barred by the rev share It's not well, this is the distinction um commissioner bryan between The the the differences there's sort of different kinds of cost per action Yeah cost per acquisition. You see there's a flat rate Right and that that's why I find yes, exactly I so I find the new jersey model or an explanation of it a little confusing because they they distinguish They still call it cpa even if it's at least as of when this was written in 2014 called it cpa for Uh percentage based of the action, but Realistically that percentage is part of the neck of the revenue that is being Collected right Can you um show me other examples of obliques rev share? They don't they don't use the word rev share anywhere above. I I guess yeah But what we're we're understanding that there's still revenue sharing arrangements that would be permitted and I guess I'm trying to understand that Based on sure mr. Garnett's representative's expectations um So I'm not sure that this this document at least madam chair provides one of those examples If revenue share is meant in the sense that and an operator agrees to share 5% of its marketing revenue of excuse me of its net revenue with all of its affiliates Or you know after it hits a certain certain threshold. That's a model that exists in some some industries I'm not sure that certainly applies here. That's a form of revenue sharing But it's not percentage based and Commissioner skinner you would want that to be Still require an additional licensure or no I think to the extent that Those affiliates can be distinguished from the cpa affiliates Yes But I don't I don't see how I don't see the difference at this point between the two the only difference Just based on again what I've digested is the Is when the compensation is made One is up front and the other is over time So if is that a distinction that warrants revenue share affiliates? Required being required to Have a higher license I think that's still up for discussion I agree. So I guess Does anybody else need the new jersey language? I'm sorry if I needed it. Thank you. Thank you. We can take it down something still looking at it Madam chair just before I do the very quick thing is just to highlight what 234 currently does and I know we're not talking about the changes to it today At the moment the way that 234 is worded it requires a heightened licensure for this category revenue share Um, you know where you know sort of uses the same exact language And that would now be the prohibited category, so I just I think that gets back to what that was my question earlier Yeah, okay. So that was my question earlier. Um where I had asked our guidance that we give them so Very helpful me. Thank you. And I think you would reference that earlier the definition But I wasn't putting it all together without the um record read So for prohibiting it then in fact We would just take that out and then there would be nothing else that we were pro that we were expecting higher licensure on the any case Correct, you could certainly take it out unless you were and again, I don't want to get too far down into the weeds of that conversation um to the extent that the comments uh several commissioners made about Guardrails for things that you are still allowing if you wanted to use that as a guardrail You would have to shift the language to capture those as opposed to capturing What it does now, which is the thing you're prohibiting So commissioners, is it okay if Mina if we do shift for that discussion a little bit because it's all wrapped in together Do you want to go down that? um heightened licensure Process Does it make sense even though I know it's not a break in front of us they are A discussion was certainly integrated When we lifted this break How do you want to proceed commissioners? So I guess my question is it still remains on the books. So we put this language in place Do we have anybody and maybe nobody here from licensing can answer this question anybody here who would still need to be licensed There's Cara Good morning Good morning So we do have uh, essentially five applicants under the Revenue the traditional revenue share where there are Net revenues that have signed up for the increased level of licensure All of the other marketing affiliates that we've received are under our registration level Including the cpi currently I I do remember by having looked at the roundtable too. We had um well And I don't know they ended up applying but I do know that windbats said that they would need the rep share As soon as Robert Roberts, I think it was Who gave that example, but that is part of their Um Yeah work And their arrangements um Okay, so we have five And so it would eliminate their ability to do that all together It would yes, it would uh my understanding is that it would eliminate that particular type of agreement and Therefore they wouldn't necessarily need that heightened level of licensure because even if they are operating Under the different agreements If we take away one of those agreements, let's say they have a cpa with one And a revenue share with another the revenue share goes away. They're still operating at that cpa level Really helpful input Cara questions for Cara commissioner brian No, thank god Is it appropriate for us to um Learn about the size of those Um, or if there are a licensee, I mean, is there appropriate for us or is that Because it's under consideration inappropriate. I'd need some help from legal um from my perspective, um unless Cara or uh, Todd or Caitlyn you or Cara you tell me that the information itself Is somehow confidential I don't think it's inappropriate as a matter of process. In fact the apa and the The processes around reviewing regulations urge Agencies to look at the size of businesses affected. So I don't think it's it's a problem to ask from that perspective I would just defer to others on whether the information You know what information they can't share Well, I said if you're asking about the specific specifics to the Entities who have applied for licensure Um, I think that could be sensitive information if you're talking about general information as to typically how large these types of deals are That that certainly sounds Okay, um, obviously the closer we get to specifics relative to one entity The more heightened the The interest is But we can we can look into it if that's if if I'm understanding the question correctly we can kind of see what the information looks like because we I think to um meanest point we are We have to vote on the small business impact, but I'm not sure if that's small business Massachusetts only I don't know Well, that's a good question. I I don't I don't think the law is that specific as to whether it affects small businesses in Massachusetts I think it's just in general, but um, no, so I guess again just to reiterate It's a it's a great consideration But if we're trying to tie it to the specific operators, that's where It could get a little bit sensitive measures questions Well If I understand correctly then we have five who have applied For the heightened registration because they want to engage in the revenue sharing arrangement that Are our new language would now prohibit So they would no longer need that heightened registrant. They if they were to do Have a compensation arrangements that differ from that They would go through the registrant process And what we have dealt the cpa um arrangement only um What we don't know right now and perhaps I'm one of five Who's interested on the impact of the small but I don't want to speak for anyone else on the small businesses um I'm I'm not I'm not sure if um You know how I would perceive It's five out of how many Caitlyn Do you know How many um are going you with Kara? Sorry. Oh, I said Caitlyn. I met Kara. You two are right next to each other and I'm looking at Kara and saying Caitlyn. Sorry So let me just see if I can't see of roughly how many we are looking at in terms of um all of the affiliates So so you can get the percentage um My apologies Um, it looks like we have around 30 Not including the revenue share So five out of 30 If no one else is interested in finding out the size of them, uh, not the details is Todd You know cautions us about that then I'm fine proceeding Um, but if it is I'm something of interest then to the extent Kara can give us that Let's give her some direction. Am I seeing no interest commission over I am I mean if it's something that's relatively readily available then yeah, I mean Madam chair if I may um, so we're Um Can give care if if that is something of interest Obviously, we're going to need to go through the rest of the reg before a vote anyway Suggest if that's the only remaining question on this particular section We could discuss the rest of the reg Um, and then once and I promise to circle back to this and then if that information is available We can share it, but if it's not Um, it's not but it also I think will give you a sense of What else is in the reg that gets at some of the same issues? Um, to do that. So but I don't want to I don't want to skip any other questions on this, but if that's the only one Commissioners do we want carrot to go through that exercise is to help? I don't want to put her through that work unnecessarily Commissioner of ryan said yes, if it's not too much work if it's available commissioner skinner The specific information you're requesting is the number of small businesses that have registered or applied for license No, I'm asking about the nature of the five that um have triggered the height See are they you know, are they big businesses? Are they small businesses and we do have that obligation to Vote on the small business impact. So I'm thinking about that piece of work uh But I also don't want to be the if I'm the only one but commissioner brine is suggesting if it's not too onerous and then we can move on Yeah, I'd like to take a look at that information. It would be an interesting data point And if I may specifically we're looking for the uh, essentially the size of the business in terms of Um employees, uh, do they identify as a small business things like that? Okay, I'm not sure that we have that information on file, but I can certainly look and report back. Thank you Madam chair that was that's kind of my worry is who's defining small business versus medium size versus large business And and and how how's you know, how's care going to pull these? Um, that's kind of what I'm saying you're thinking sounds like a Sounds like an interesting task without identifying who they are especially in a public setting You know, um, how can we get this information? Is there a way to see if any of them are nbe wbe vbe um, andro should have the range of employees Like do we want to know if they have greater than 50 and or do any identify as any of those? You know Okay, I was just thinking there might be a way to narrow it maybe to get some of that information as a data point So I do not yet have the applications memorized, but I do believe if they are minority women or veteran owned businesses We do Ask for those Certifications, so I can certainly take a look at that So it's 50 is that what the secretary of state asks us to look at? Please Through that out there as a I wondered I yeah, yeah, I don't I don't know that there's really any to to commissioner Maynard's point. I don't know that there's any official definition of what a small business is Or say and that's what makes it difficult, but we can we'll take a look and Oh I know, you know, well, it's there's a lot of nuance to that question But um, I the law itself. I don't believe defines it. I know the executive branch over time has come out with different definitions and things like that, but You know, I think why don't we maybe give Cara an opportunity and I can check in with her just to kind of see what we have and try to Call out whatever information might be helpful to address that question Thanks everyone for your patience it I feel That it's just a piece of impact I want to make sure that I understand it and that's not That's somehow we're not inadvertently impacting those. Thank you. All right. Let's move on and unless there are other questions for Mina I'm the one who's held everybody up Okay, let's go Right. Thank you, madam chair. So I will move on to 250 601 for a little bit of new language here some of the some of the language The language I was added here was following the comments And follow up with the attorney general's office as I mentioned part of their concern is Transparency with the relationships between folks doing marketing or advertising and operator so this language is intended To be a broad statement that if you are going to Advertise or promote sports wagering You need to disclose the way we worded it for this purpose is whether a financial relationship exists So we were cognizant of not wanting to necessarily have every ad explain. This is how this endorsement deal is structured that may be too intrusive But to make sure that if someone is going to Be speaking or promoting a sports wagering operator, that's clear that they are That if they have a financial relationship with them, I like I like the language I think it's a step in the right direction any other input Also Let's continue I think thank you madam chair 2506021 the new language here This was one of the questions that I believe we had following thursday. I just want to confirm with the attorney general's office the concerns Regarding whether to reference 93a and other consumer protection statutes specifically or by inclusion as sort of all other laws We we agree that Referencing all other laws Makes sense here. We didn't want to accidentally omit anything but we did add language at At the verbal request, although they had not reviewed this language specifically Specifying that not only do you have to comply with all other laws But that this is not intended to supersede or replace any more stringent laws which is a concern born out of 93a defense practices, I believe and that have come up over the years So we we think that issue is now addressed sufficiently Any issues with that? Okay, thank you. That's that's an issue only lawyers could love so I'm happy to go through it quickly 2506044 On page 12 This language has Largely been in place. There were some tweaks to it again One of the core concerns from the attorney general's office reflected in a few places Excuse me Is the issue commissioner maynard touched on a few minutes ago the idea that an entity That is involved in marketing could also be giving advice A couple of things Here one was making clear upfront, especially with Increased focus over the last couple of weeks on third-party marketing entities that whether that they are part of what's referenced here Those required to be licensed or registered pursuant to 234 as well as any other sports wagering bender So we included that here So that's really just a change in my category of who's covered And the Suggestion to remove the word individual That was actually not a specific recommendation from the attorney general's office But it is something that we are recommending on from the legal team For two reasons one is this This is a portion of the language that prohibits an entity from From giving advice on what to what bet to place it it does not prohibit And this was language we had added and talked about thursday. It does not prohibit Hey, the patriots are playing tomorrow. That would be a thing you could consider betting on It it would prohibit the patriots are playing tomorrow. You should bet on the paths So that that's that initially was limited to an individual. So it would be a targeted ad or an ad of sportsbook A an employee saying that to a patron The reason we're suggesting removing individual is that the concerns we heard from the attorney general's office as well as In the discussions here seem to be Focused on the practice in general of advice giving And other measures as we'll get to as we move through the reg That attempt to get at that same behavior For instance What what canon can't be said in a sports broadcast? And in regulating it that way are much more difficult to police and enforce Whereas a clear expectation upfront that sports operators and their vendors marketers, etc should not be Engaged in the giving of advice Is a much clearer standard in our view. So that's that's how we would like to Suggest addressing that broader issue Is removing the word individual The other piece of this That the other additional language at the end of this i'll just cover and then open it up for discussion is A slight tweak. I think there was a Request from some of the operators to make sure this like I said does not bar the You ought to you know, there's a Patriots game tomorrow a Celtics game tomorrow that will be worth betting on You know will be of interest to you That's not restricted and also they've wanted to make sure that if there was a particular promotion that required certain terms they Obligations to be transparent about what is needed To do to meet the promotional offer And this restriction didn't conflict. So we made that clear here. So it would not be prohibited to say And I You know should be the last person to make up any promotion, but if you bet x you could win y That that does not get misconstrued as We advise you to bet x So they just want to be clear that they're able to to still do the The that That you know information giving if it's not advice giving All right, thank you The next Section is at the end of 250 604 this is 250 604 Six new l On page 13 of your packet Uh, this is uh similar to the last concern uh also came from The input from the attorney general's office in part, although we I will explain what we did and did not take from it Um, the attorney general's office again is concerned about uh individuals providing reported expertise We're seeming to be experts in uh, you know having some inside knowledge that then gets translated to um Um The to a patron as as sort of Better advice because of who it's coming from so that is listed in the prohibited or limited activities The attorney general's office had uh Encourage sort of a slightly different language or suggested slightly different language That both captured one individuals affiliated with teams Clubs, etc They had not used the terms to court's governing body. We did because I think we're familiar with it as opposed to just saying leagues, um They also had suggested um sports broadcasting networks Where there may be a tie with the with the team That Language as I mentioned a couple minutes ago seems uh to us to be more difficult to enforce and and to police However, with the change above that you just heard about We think the the message is clear to operators that they should not and cannot Be sponsoring for instance You know the giving of advice on a particular on the placement of a particular bet in one in one direction And so we we are comfortable that the intent here that this sets of adequate guardrails without some of the um Enforcement difficulties that might come up with with the Just tweaking this this language Madam chair, can I just ask mena? Something about this so mena just so I am clear about it So for example locally we have uh nessen Which is owned by the boston redsox What or that ownership group when you say that And they have on their uh channel Shows that have uh folks come on and suggest how people should bet Moving forward not necessarily on the redsox, but whatever Whatever the game of the day is How does any of this affect that and and sports net has also Has shows on It's it's a good it's a good question Commissioner hill the the way I would think about this is if you go back up to the language of of and who's within your jurisdiction in the first place if an operator is Using that Platform if that show is a you know, I won't single out operate operator x's show or they Clearly are are then compensating the network for doing that That may trigger this this problem right because they are paying Through someone who is working on their behalf to provide advice and to provide input on what you should bet and The concern there is That a member of the public If especially if they don't know that how the particulars of that relationship Um, there's sort of an inherent temptation at least for the operator and the the marketer to to make more money in by getting bad bets However, on the other hand if it is a simply a show that is um being shown by nessen and nessen is not Um Is not the money is not coming through the operator to them Um It should not Capture that because that is sort of a broad statement I think each operator and each broadcaster will have to determine Where the line falls, uh, we intentionally used in the new section 250 604 4 on page 12 the language A third third party marketing or advertising anyone required to be licensed or registered Generally speaking under your vendor Registration like regulation excuse me 234 Broadcasters are not considered that unless you're engaging in more direct You know partnership advertising directly, uh, right as as a vendor. So so in another in other words if the nessen Post or show or nessen itself is acting like a vendor Um, and then it may fall under this if it's acting like a broadcaster it should not um the um So and and and again in l this version of provision we're talking about now um This is again all under the umbrella of no advertising marketing branding et cetera the the normal list Uh by or on behalf of any sports ways you're an operator shall Use individuals right so that so there is this sort of limit there too that it's one thing for Nessan to even have a show about betting on baseball That may be one thing if nessan and mlb are okay with that under retsox are on the other hand If it's an operator or a group of operators on their own behalf Paying for that show to run that would be an issue Or in the purpose of that show saying the best line today is on operator x's platform I think you do have a concern there too and so but neutral advice. Here's what we think is going to happen Who's going to hit a home run who's not? How the red sox are going to win 90 games et cetera No, but that clarifies it for me. Thank you. Meena. Thank you madam chair Thank you Any other questions Okay Let's move on and me. Thank you Thank you madam chair 250 605 for A and B the related salt just take them together Um, this is a slight tweak. We have provided some language I think we described it Christina and I described it on thursday as At the time our sort of best effort at what we thought the attorney general's comments would say in light of having their red lines We tweaked it a little bit further and we're trying to capture the best of both worlds I think as we were describing it So there's sort of a two-part here This has to do with media outlets and and youth related or underage related sports wagering prohibition obviously for a In media outlets were 25 percent, which is the standard you've been using of the audience is reasonably expected to be underage You simply may not market unless adequate controls are in place to make sure That the underage folks are not seeing those ads or not getting the ads So that that's if you believe a or if you have a reason to believe a particular social media platform or Television program is is is targeting underage Individuals then that is the limitation You you basically have to be able to show that you're somehow keeping it out of that This out of you in all other media outlets The requirement within this this is the language from the attorney general's office The operator needs to use all available methods to exclude underage individuals But this one is sort of understanding that there may be a feasibility limit And this is a distinction. I believe I I was getting out the other day between for instance a generally available television program like us like a sports broadcast where some amount of underage Viewers are expected to see it But it is not targeted at that audience. It's not expected to be more than a quarter of that audience all available methods should be used to limit but it It is understood that there still may be some Some exposure whereas in media outlets that target or that who's prime prime? More than 25% are underage in the audience You you do need to Exclude it all together if you're going to use ads on that platform That's That mean it just we seem to be using like if you go down to see it says We're 25 or more of the audience. Are we missing the or more? In a you could just say we're 25. Yes. I'm sorry. Yes, certainly. Yes. Yeah, I would not want someone to say Ah, we've got 26. We have 26. Yeah, no, no, I'm sorry. That is yes. Thank you for that catch It is 25 or more is the intention there Okay No, I like it. I really like it too. I was just going to say the same thing kind of show Brian Yeah, I think in the I like how it's distinguished distinguished in this reg here. They would be very very strong Cheers Okay all right Madam chair 25 2560662 This is on page 15 of your packet This is there's not really much of a change but I highlighted because I think we were not Excuse me done with the conversation After thursday, so I just want to make sure The final wording was What the commission would like This has to do with the What language is required in advertising? As worded right now, let me just describe what it does and then I don't know Todd or Karen or others have any further input on it executive director wells, too will be addressing this appearing comment. Okay. Great. Yeah, so so as worded on in your packet now The commission would retain the authority to Adjust the responsible gaming messaging over time and It would it could include a combination of things it could come in include problem gambling helpline language provided by the department of public health and sort of call that a It could include just that it could include that that plus additional messaging from the commission That it wishes to use or just separate messaging from the commission All of those a a plus b or just b could be Could fall under the gambit of this. It does not tie you to any one of those positions By regulation that's not to say that you would It would sort of allow you with further consultation With dph to continue to refine what makes sense for the marketplace so Director wells or Todd if if you have anything to add Thank you Karen so I Commissioners skinner requested at the last meeting and we reach out to dph because I identified their concern about adding language beyond just the Information provided by dph They're not they're not Going to be coming today. They require growing up the chain and authorization. So we don't have that For you today So You know the way things stand as I indicated at the last meeting that that had been a request. I did a review for Mr. Ortiz who is the director of their responsible gaming program that The statute requires on the platform that the Number for the dph Hotline and their website be on the platform, but that the statute is silent with respect to advertising and that Commission's working on that through the regulation, but that authority best with the commission so from an operational standpoint We just need to know what to tell the operators that they need to put on the advertising because we're getting questions and they're advertising and we need to make sure that There is a clear message about what the requirement is so that Can enforce if there if there's an issue So at this point it would be helpful a for the commission to make a determination on the language and then also to give us Some feedback because the way this In is a way this reads the or It does say uh or such other responsible gaming information required by the commission So it seems that the commission would have to sign off on what language We would communicate to the operators needs to be on their advertising You know and what advertising because part of it, you know is billboard different from uh print media or Some other types of advertising where there may be More space so and I think mark is on as well. So if you have any questions for him we can Ask him as well Madam chair So just to be clear again, and I'm sorry. I'm go. I only have one screen today. So I have to pop back and forth Um from the language to the screen. So bear with me So Karen or mark As I as I understand it with the new language That's being proposed in the um highlighted area So it says provided by the department of public health or such other responsible gaming information now the department of public health Is mandated as you just said on the platform Their phone number correct the phone number on the website. Yes But not on an advertising so on A newspaper or my facebook or things of that sort um, I wouldn't necessarily See that is that accurate Well, the commission is not required to do that Obviously, there is some value in the hotline number for people in crisis. So that may be something that the commission Would want to have on every piece of advertising, but it's the commission's call What's going to be required on the advertising your correct? So let me just Madam chair if I may I want to offer my Insight as to what I would love to see on all all platforms advertising things of that sort And I want to preface this conversation by saying We have three entities that are helping us in this endeavor. We have dph We have the council. We have game sense. That's just my thinking three prompts And all three are great at what they do And all three should be working together To ensure that when a phone call comes in whatever that number is we now know we know what it is dph That a conversation is taking place not only with dph programs But with council programs and game sense programs I I don't know what this is happening and i'm only surmising That it could be happening where and i've been in this game long enough to know there's turf wars And I don't think we have a turf war going on But I want to make sure whatever our language is that we're not creating a turf war, but that we're all working together What I envision which is what I saw over the weekend by one of our operators Is I saw the 1 800 number And at the very end I saw a game sense emblem I would assume and I and I know I think I heard Karen Say at one point during a discussion That there could be confusion between the 1 800 number and game sense I hope that's not happening But if it is happening, I would hope that whoever is at the other end of the 1 800 number Is explaining what game sense is if somebody is calling about what's the game sense to the 1 800 number Which is the dph number two different entities So I want to ensure that whatever language we do come up with that we're working all three Entities together If one should get a call That's not necessarily Going to like for example the 1 800 dph number Isn't game sense But I want people to see the game sense because it is so important to what this commission has been doing It's clearly before I got here, but since I've gotten here the great work that they're doing Commissioner Hill can I just Ask Karen to remind us That the word confusion first started I think when Director or teacher brought to our attention Language on the platform It was on the platform Karen where there were a couple phone numbers. There was language about dph language about game sense and two phone numbers and there was confusion over that Then I and then I think Karen you may have used the word confusion again But perhaps I don't want to attribute it to mr. Ortiz unfairly to him Right, but I want to make sure that I heard confusion initially because we got that the operator's language so Then mr. Ortiz presented a A Proposal which I think today He's not here because it hadn't necessarily been vetted fully or something. I don't I don't know if I understood that correctly correct, correct, so Yeah, so that's why I want to be careful not to speak for mr. Ortiz or speak for dph Uh, it's because I want to make sure they Present their ideas at you know, accurately Um, but the concern was sort of mixing this mixing messaging is that there are distinct opponents and mark can explain there's Yeah, the value in what dph is doing and how it differs from what for example voluntary self-exclusive and the approach and how They complement each other and I think both dph and mark are an agreement that they're complementary type of endeavors, but mark, oh, I'll defer to you If I could just set the stage a bit more Karen because again in the reg as proposed now The commission would be able to determine Responsible gaining messaging uh commissioner health so at the end of the day We can give direction and I think when you and I see because I think I see the same billboards Really is that clear phone number and the games the logo But I think mark will explain that there is he's proposing some additional language as well to the numbers where Where it's appropriate. I think billboards are unique because of the size of the font in that real estate But I think you and I are agreement. We see those two things really pretty clearly on on many of the billboards So so mark with that And again, you did a really good job the other day explaining the distinction It might be helpful to repeat that and just because we've had a lot to think about so. Thank you And so and social media madam chair, not just the yeah Well, yes. Oh, absolutely. Yes, but and All messaging of advertising through social media But the real estate piece where it's limited to that is I think mark, correct me if I'm wrong addressed pretty much just in the billboards issue Okay, I can thank you madam chair and I'll do the best I can here, but please feel free to ask questions. So There are currently two two numbers that are that are out there I completely agree that we need to be clear and if we can Whittle our way down to one number that would be the the best case scenario But there are some challenges here and but I think we can get there So the Massachusetts problem gambling helpline It's that I'm just going to say it's the number that in 50 50 It provides information about up-to-date information about problem gambling resources treatment community-based resources that are available in massachusetts The other number the the gambling which I'm going to say it ends in one two three four originally Years ago. It was it was the problem gambling helpline, but When that contract changed from dph It was rebranded at the gambling and it and it became the number that primarily people use to enroll in the voluntary self-exclusion program remotely And during cobit Very important for people to be able to to enroll in the volunteer self-exclusion program Through a remote process and in certainly with sports wagering mobile sports wagering It's it's important to But the one two three four number In addition to enrolling in the voluntary self-exclusion program It's operated Answered by game sense advisors 24 7 It provides information about responsible gaming including You know they they know each of the operators platforms and what responsible gaming tools are available and can provide information To people about how to control their gambling. They're not interested in in the mass problem gambling Helpline in the services or the connection to community-based resources If people are interested in in community-based resources through the Through the one two three four number There is a warm handoff that can happen to the Mass Massachusetts problem gambling helpline and that's a really important piece that warm handoff That if somebody wants to get community-based resources, they can't one of the challenges that We have though is that while the mass problem gambling helpline will refer to community-based resources um a conversation that we had with big board peas is that They're they weren't really referring to the voluntary self-exclusion program That's something that's a hurdle that I think that that we would need to get over When somebody's looking for help in addition to community-based resources, perhaps they're not quite ready to move in that direction Perhaps there's something else that they would like the voluntary self-exclusion program Like play management settings from one of the operators platforms are cooling off or a host of other other things I think that the full spectrum needs to be there um so You know if we can get over that hurdle and and perhaps some If if we can get over that hurdle, I think that we would be okay not promoting the one two three four number On advertising But that there needs to be assurance that people can easily access the voluntary self-exclusion program And the knowledge and information that game sense advisors offer If that's what the individuals would choose So mark you had told me that you had a recommended tagline That we could perhaps use as reasonable Responsible gaming messaging for the purpose of this rag Well, what would you recommend today for us? well, so my recommendation would be that if That the commission retained the authority for for the messaging we would We we would Use the massachusetts problem gambling helpline But that we would engage with dph to assure that there is appropriate information um available about voluntary self-exclusion and about the the resources responsible game resources through through game sense that we would um in terms of game sense tagline that it would Stay very brief and very short with the game sense logo play it smart from the start um game sense ma dot com Just the website not the phone number. I want to reduce. I I agree. We need we should really only be promoting one Number that would be out there And that in terms of the Could you just say that language? I'm just Well, if you if the commission directs responsible gaming language messaging language today Mm-hmm Your recommendation for today. No conditions attached right now It would be play it smart from the start game with the game sense logo and the game sense And not include the dph's number No, could you just say the entire yeah everything the whole Responsible gaming messaging could include the 1 800 number under the late messaging The reg is set up. So what would be Everything that you would recommend Madam chair, I don't know if I'm ready to make the recommendation in part because I would want to work with the department of public health To make sure that it's a tagline that that works for for both entities and I just I haven't done that um with with dph or with victor or p director wells Mark didn't didn't deep I guess the question is I think there's Six pieces. There's the For dph to three pieces. There's the phone number the website and their tagline And then there's the gaming commission logo website and tagline. So those are the six components that we discussed So I think that uh dph provided what they wanted for a tagline. Is that correct mark? I think Do you know I've hand what that is I can look it up. But well, no, I do have it right here And and the reason why I would say that we would want to work closely with dph is that In my work with each of the operators the tagline Even if we just use dph's tagline, it's quite it would be quite long And so we would need to work with dph to be able to shorten it but get to the point So over the weekend, I already said this earlier in my comments I saw one of our operators put out an ad on tv And at the bottom it said hope is here. It's the gambling helpline dot org or call the 1800 327 5550 5050 For 24 seven support and then at the end of that is the game sense um emblem And as I was reading this this is exactly what I would envision That we would see on an ad Uh moving forward, but I'm hearing mark say that we also need a tagline for game sense But that's here nor there at this point. We need to talk that out with dph on what we would want to see moving forward But in that particular ad that I saw I get a I get a website I get a phone number And I get a game sense emblem and it looks awesome So as we're reading our regs today, how does that continue to happen? I think madam chair and commissioner hill, there might be one point of clarification though because unfortunately the emblem Isn't going to give an access point to game sense because the 5050 is not going to direct them to the seer game sense. So without A website on there A website on there I think part of the conundrum is that is as it stands Visually it might be satisfying Functionally it doesn't get you over to the vse in the game. So my so with my comments earlier Understanding that my hope was that if someone calls what's game sense that we're going to have a great conversation taking place But I understand that may not happen Right and so then the conundrum what do you do, you know, is there a way to put the website on there such that there is an avenue in While that's being worked out I I agree with commissioner o'brien, but I'm hoping for today because Director Wells has said our operators are looking for immediate guidance So we I know that mark ideally you would like to Have you know meet other conditions and those are conversations that should be going and I think Director Wells has indicated that you know that they're underway dp H couldn't make it today commissioners Skinner had you know, it was the right request to ask and they just couldn't be here so Mark I think that you had kind of a tagline that might help get both The dph. What was the immediate frame phrase? Commissioner hill that you read hope is here, right? Hope is here Game sense has another tagline Yeah, so hope is here in the phone number and their website and then Your art line right with the website That would still be a lot, but it would be Clear or maybe but what was your can I know that you Yes, can I ask one up one other technical question? Yeah, but this would only work for Social media it wouldn't work on a billboard it wouldn't work on a newspaper and But is there any way that if I'm on a social media That I can click on the gambling helpline or I can clip up click on the game sense and it brings me right to game sense That's what we should use that. What is it called mark the Q source, right? I'm sorry say that again. What is the um and qr code? Yeah, the yeah, so everybody just take a Correct, send it directly to us Yeah, I in madam chair. I think that is that is absolutely something that that we should explore How we would use that how it would be integrated definitely. I like that idea a lot In fact, I had a conversation with with somebody on Friday about about what that would look like and what it would lead to So I I would like to pursue that Yeah, I mean madam chair I did I did pull up so the current guidance that exists with operators is it's either Hope is here or if you are a loved one that's experiencing problems with gamble called 1-800-3-2-750 Or game sense or gambling helpline ma.org for 27 For the game sense um Let's see it's uh play it smart from the start game sense ma dot com And then and then it was the the 1-2-3-4 number. I want to use one phone number I want it to be a one-stop shop if you no matter what you want. I want it I want there to be information that you can Get to where you want to go. I think that if I I believe that that would be dph's desire as well I I'm sure that's the desire of our commission But how do we I think it just will take a little bit to to get to that point to make sure that that is happening So it sounds like I'll be here. I thought that it was happening and has been happening over the last year and I've learned that it wasn't So where today we have to make a decision um and commission health, what are you thinking in terms of the language So I think mark you just put it all in a nutshell for me I want to be able to call one number And get as much information as I can possibly get With the community based resources and game sense resources How do we get to that point? But that's an I guess from what i'm hearing now That may be an ongoing discussion for today's purposes And a reminder commissioner hill that in the statute Correct avoid confusion The operators on the platform must use the dph number. Correct As my understanding is there was a procurement that was done for this number and for these surfaces dph Works with another organization to have that 1 800 number. That is in the statute for For the operators. It's just not in the statute for advertising And Our Our regulation as written now really allows us to retain discretion over what should be Responsible game messaging for right now, but we could tweak it because it I assume that this would be something that we would just do by policy right Todd responsible gaming messaging could change In october or in august if if we gave mark direction at a public meeting what it means, right? Yeah, I think that's right. I think we just want to have clear direction as to the commission's intention for today Madam chair may I just um express one question about the way that it's currently drafted Is that it calls a responsible gaming message and if you talk to dph and you talk to the helpline They would not define that as responsible gaming messaging They would call it problem gambling messaging There is a clear distinction between what between the two So Madam chair just on that that is a term we try to create because it comes up in a couple of places You'll see a reference to problem game gambling helpline Or other responsible Gaming messaging Frankly, we could we could tweak that term if the commission feels that's appropriate But it's really just for the sake of being able to repeat it in a couple of places in the advertising rag um, so that's We you know don't don't mean to limit by any means what could go there in that section My mind is turning madam chair and I do see commissioner skinner wants to add something so maybe Thank you. Thank you I understand and respect Mr. Ortiz's limitations in not, you know, and in the parents today, but I was really hoping to engage in a dialogue a meaningful dialogue with representatives from dph so that we can Um collaborate and cooperate and come to some mutually beneficial language to direct the operators to include in their advertising Like a couple of you most of you probably all of you. I am a little disturbed by the The fact that there is not a referral process in place at dph for individuals that they come across who might be in need of game sense services requesting to be put On the vse and it's my position that they shouldn't have to request to be put on the vse list or request information about vse services if there is if dph is the access point for individuals who may need further services and resources to address an issue That is information that I believe the game sense information and vse information. That's information I believe that should be readily pushed out to those individuals and you know, I am again disturbed that that's not already being done I Commission or brian reference the access point and that's missing right now in what commissioner hill Observed over the weekend. I do think that that is important. We do need to be We need to be able to receive information, you know, those patrons who are looking for something more than what dph has to offer And so I would be looking to have at least The contact information on the game sense for game sense in the advertising in addition to what's required on the platform I think we have the statute that to speak only to the platform I don't think it's a bad idea to have the dph Problem gambling hotline on all of the advertising. I just think that the key is going to be a mutual agreement between the two agencies so that Each agency's interest is addressed Really the interest of the of the general public in folks in need of assistance Thank you. Thank you commissioner skinner. I think I'd like to point out one one thing And I don't have and mark we've had a lot of discussions about this The vse when game sense our materials hand out What number do we give them to vse? If you want to on the game sense and on the floor if they call online What number do we give People speaking to be on the voluntary stop exclusion list It would be the one two three four number for a remote enrollment and right and if I actually just receive some some data from long About half of our enrollments at this point are our remote enrollments coming in through the one two three four Right, so we don't give The one eight hundred number to them It was just one minute one minute. We don't on our vse materials at game sense We don't give the one eight hundred number We give the one eight hundred number for problem gambling, but for specifically for vse's we give the one two three four number Correct, right if we list listed the helpline it would wouldn't be channeled through there We do divide the helpline number in a variety of ways. Yes Yes, we absolutely do and that's on treatment, but I guess I just want to make sure because You know mr. Skinner's pointing out pph isn't here. Um, I do think um I had understood when the number changed that there was a Center and everything was going through the one eight hundred number and then going Directly to game sense advisors somehow I missed that the one two three four number was still being used And I learned this just during this discussion that in fact The one eight hundred number is really where we refer folks for From gambling treatment, but to mark's point. They also need um To be able to refer to vse's and I do know that dph has engaged in vse training Because mark's and his team has arranged for that But somehow and it you know, they may not be making as many referrals to vse That we would anticipate And that's what I think needs to be clarified But in the meantime, we should all know that there's another number that is being used and that's the council's number For vse's and that's how all of that is going So, uh, I think that's a really important clarification to understand that You know the swarm handoff That and I think of as a technical issue more than anything else about telephone numbers that That they should be forwarded that may not be happening in a way. I certainly understood but um, I I guess I just want to make sure that Um, you know, we recognize that there's continued collaboration and and clarification that needs to happen here Among the three entities which commissioner hillan used at the stage beautifully saying everybody is working hard on these issues so back to today's issue In commissioner skinner. I appreciate too that we don't have dph here, but I'm wondering if we Um, and we help director wells out today or do we need to wait till wednesday for this? But I do think We need we need to give the operators clarification because They're looking for it and I it is for the commissioner the commission asked the five of us to decide and get director vandal and Um guidance, so Where are we so can I ask one last question on the language mina? and I know this was brought up the other day and I know in the legislative speak a shall or a may make a very big difference So tell me the difference between an and or an or in this particular case because I think what I would like to see is an and Not an or but tell me why I'm right or wrong on that Sure. So the or which is what it has now allows for The commission to choose to include the problem gambling helpline Any additional messaging the commission wants to add to that Or just the additional messaging The commission has and not to include the problem gambling helpline The and would require the problem gambling helpline as a minimum And any and any other additional messaging if any that the commission wants to add to that Nina can I just interject just to clarify because I'm just reading the language the first parts requires the The helpline I guess the link which would be the website and the helpline But it does say using language provided by the department of public health So it seems to me that first part would give the department of public health by reg the sort of the say in what the tagline is And then correct for the helpline in the leg correct. Yes, correct correct. And then then it's the and the or Okay but But the on the latter phrase it doesn't mean that We couldn't but however the language we use the defined term of responsible gaming messaging could and include The first clause correct, correct And I understand mark's distinction saying well responsible gaming It's not doesn't typically include Problem-dueling treatment. So maybe we can come up with a different defined term or We're just, you know Keep it was a public gaming messaging commissioner skinner One of the things that we've talked about in the past, but it didn't come up today yet is the confusion factor having information from both entities and depending on how much information we're talking about still six Points Karen the website the phone number the tagline for dph and All three for game sense and and mgc It is going to be confusing To to a patron or potentially confusing to a patron and I know we're being asked today madam chair to Make a decision, but I don't know how realistic it It would be To do that without having a visual of what, you know, whatever recommendation mark comes up with Does it make sense to? You know have something Prepared so that we can see it To see what you know effect it might have on that confusion factor. I'm just You know I'm not not I just I want to make sure that we're thinking about this practically And it's kind of hard to envision what something might look like with all six of those points Six of six of those pieces on an ad without actually seeing What it looked like because that's a lot of what it looks like excuse me because that's a lot of information Director wells So it may helps to sort of to narrow this a little bit No, it seems as if both dph and mark You know are indicating that the dph 50 50 number should be there. Is that right mark? Yes, there should be I would I limited to one number So dph phone number and then also the dph website Should they have the dph website on the messaging? Um, yeah, but Okay, so there's two so then putting the tagline aside on the My understanding your position was that what would be helpful was be the game sense logo and the game sense website as well Yes, is that your recommendation? Correct, it you know, it would be great to have the tag game sense tag line in there too Okay, but at a minimum sort of for the actual information would be the dph number the dph website In the game sense logo and the game sense website So that's sort of the the bones of it and then what we're really it sounds as if we're trying to figure out What's the what's the tag line? Is it one tag line for both? Is it two different tag line? Like how do you how do you work that out? So that's see that's what I'm hearing is where the So the decision point is but I don't want to speak for the commission because um You know any one of those four things you could you have the discretion to do what you want for advertising For example market indicated for billboards You know, you saw billboards differently than the other you may just want The phone number and the game sense logo required on billboards, but other advertising you might want all of these So I'll defer to mark on that Right. I mean, it's one of the key pieces of game sense has been increasing brand awareness um You drive by a billboard and it's you know, it's it's difficult to pick up too much information And we've held that as long as the game sense logo is present that that that would be fine for me um I'm fine. If I just go back. I really agree that there should be one number here I I just want to make sure that there's adequate that if there's one number there's a warm handoff to uh to a game sense advisor to do or to You know game sense advisor to do voluntary self-exclusion um And that warm handoff what that means is either on a phone tree You're pressing one to be connected to somebody from uh, the massachusetts problem gambling helpline for information and resources For treatment in the community To to enroll in the voluntary self-exclusion program or when And or when you're talking with either a game sense advisor or a helpline specialist That you can you can have a warm handoff meaning a tran a tran direct transfer to somebody from One of those resources So where then it would be anybody for vsc would go The one 800 number and then be transferred And then um and and the one the two one two three four number would no longer be used They would know Well, I mean it would work in the background. I mean it gets After it goes but everybody would go to the one 800 state come from dph number And then if they're seeking bsc There would be a warm handoff to use your words and you can And then and then for problem gambling and other services Our treatment I mean from Then that would be dph, but dph would have the technical mechanism to transfer right to the council's game sense number game sense for the purpose of I'm I'm definitely for the purpose of advertising and the disclaimer that happens on any advertising I would support that it that it goes to the 50 50 the mass problem gambling helpline as long as Um, it's really clear that people are able to easily access the voluntary self exclusion program Ideally that happens through a phone tree much like it happens on the one two three four The council's line right now press one if you want to be connected to the massachusetts problem gambling helpline press two if you want to be connected to a gamesense advisor, that's It's uh, it's a way to assure that people are triage to the service that they need And if they're not if you're talking with a gamesense advisor and it should be transferred They warm transfer to the problem gambling helpline I want to make sure that there's easy flow that you can call you can call this one number and you're assured to get the information they need But mark can I just clarify but The commissioner we can't assure the commissioners today that that's going to happen today or tomorrow That's that's sort of a project so I guess my question is Are you recommending today for us sending? What's your recommendation today that we still just do the one dph number? You're not recommending. We put both numbers on the Thing today. That's what i'm hearing but I hear what you're saying You know in the ideal situation We work it all out before everything gets launched, but we're just not in that situation and we need to prioritize What's best for the the the public? so I don't want somebody to fall through the cracks right now that wants to enroll in voluntary self exclusion program And I don't know if there's some way that we can if there's language they can be A transition language as we work with I want to work with dph in order to come up with the one number solution that exists as well as As messaging that would not be confusing to anybody that's dancing at at the I would like to see as as a transition sort of compromise here because Because we don't have that warm handoff process agreed with with dph yet. I think I would be looking to see That we we we comply with the statute and that is to Fire the problem gambling helpline be included on the platform and then And and that's it With with perhaps, you know the game sense logo. I don't know mark. I could take your recommendation there But then all other advertising Not include the problem gambling helpline, but instead include the game sense Uh, uh logo Website phone number tagline, you know, just so that we ensure that at least in those mediums we do Get folks who are interested in the hot lot in the um vsc We do get those routed those folks routed to the appropriate place And in the meantime The discussions with dph Continue because you know Madam chair you you you said it you thought this was happening already It's not happening already and it's my understanding that it's not due to any technical issue It's just that dph is unwilling to do it not not that they're unable to they're just unwilling to do it and that's That's my understanding and so that's not correct and I you know, please someone correct me But I just the point is the point is I think we do need to make sure that we have adequate resources available on the bsc side for patrons seeking them Yeah, I think uh, if I may madam chair my concern though, uh Based on what and I'm being educated by mark and and everyone on the on that side is that if someone's In crisis and the phone number isn't out there the bsc response Wouldn't be the correct response for someone that really needs immediate help So there's you know, this is how mark's explained it to me is that the Sort of the helpline is really people in crisis mental health real serious Potentially suicidal positioning they're they're able to help there So I guess the concern is if you don't have that 5050 number someone who's in that position is not going to be Helped in that respect. I don't know mark if you have any comments on that and I get it from You know having two Quote unquote helpline numbers in the commonwealth is uh, his mark is indicated is not helpful. So that's where we're getting some confusion Madam chair. Yes I just saw commissioner o'brien has I did but I'm actually more interested and mark was kind of leaning forward I didn't know if he had anything to say add to Karen's comment Could I just pause for a second? I could really use a break there's a lot of A lot of statements being made and I am I just use a 10 minute break and Use the ladies room and come back and and we can all pause and think where we're going to go with this because Again, we don't have dph here Um, we're looking for a solution the good news is the solution isn't set stone So if everybody could just reflect breathe actually It's 1220 How much longer do we have should we be taking a little longer to get something to eat rather than 10 minutes? So we can plow through when we come back. Yeah, and I think I've let people know I do have a hard stock today around three The latest 315 Just throw that out there. Do we want to do lunch now and then come in for the afternoon or I I think if everybody can pause and think about this because I want we've got to get to us all Maybe we can also continue on rest, but I didn't mean to interrupt everybody. I just thought I at least need a break Um, all right, so what do you want to do to go to quarter up? Does that make sense is that enough time? Oh 50 would be perfect 50. Okay. Okay. Great. Thanks so much Jordan They only see the top of your head Well, I didn't see you at all Until you just No, when you were um in the middle of the meeting when you were I I almost said I had Are you taking notes? I couldn't tell I take notes and and I read at the same time because I It's hard for me to look up at my screens. I got it, but I was just like just now you were looking down. I go I got everybody For scanner black and let's see. I got a scroll. Oh, yeah, there she is Nina's back. Okay. I think the Karen is wait for Karen Thanks everybody for that break My dog. Thanks you as well, madam chair I'm going to turn to you first Richard Hill because I interrupted and I think um mark and Commissioner Brian were lined up I'm glad the dogs are happy already. Um, I think we can get started. I think Karen will be joining and mark will be joining this is um A reconvening of the Massachusetts gaming commission And there We started off this morning at 10 o'clock with public meeting number 445 or holding it virtually. So I will do a roll call Good afternoon. Commissioner Brian. Good afternoon. I'm here Good afternoon commissioner ill. Good afternoon. I'm here Good afternoon commissioner scanner afternoon And good afternoon commissioner me Good afternoon. I'm here Okay, and um and director wells and director vandalin and our back We've got Mina. Uh, we were Meena on page 15 of our public packet And I can't tell what exact Is the highlighted one on page 6 of the red And last I left I think commissioner hill had a point that he wanted to make and then I believe Either director vandalin and our um commissioner brian were up next. I'll let them sort that out Richard hill So madam chair, thank you um For the newer commissioners I just wanted to enlighten you on something that happens In other state agencies So in my former life, I would get a call from a constituent who had an issue either with housing domestic violence food and securities And we would have to call five or six different agencies in order to be able to get them the help that they needed So what ended up happening over the last few years of my career at the state house Is that we created a hotline called mass 211 Where a constituent or a citizen of the commonwealth could call that number And they could get help In regards to child care Uh runaway assistance transportation food and securities housing and shelter And it has worked very very well here in the commonwealth where we have a one stop shop For people who are in need And it's something I was proud of to support during my time at beacon hill Now we come to today where we're having a discussion Where we have citizens or constituents. I still call them constituents madam chair, and I will till the day I'm no longer on this commission. I'm sorry about that um consumers Who may be in need of help when it comes to responsible or problem gaming We're talking about a regulation That I had hoped and I do hope moving forward That we'll be able to call one number And for today's purposes that number is 1 800 and the 50 50 number Where they're going to get uh an operator 24 7 And they're going to be talked to about community based resources And in the future I hope We're working together As I know we all want to do and have done Pretty good in my opinion with fantasy sports Casino gambling We've all come together All agencies whether it's the gaming commission whether it's the department of public health Or our friends over on the council and game sense the three prongs that I talked about very early on In this discussion For today's purposes I think madam chair you asked us early to give your opinion about the language That was put forth by mina and mina God bless you For listening to five different opinions and then other outside sources and coming up with language that I think Gets us to where we want to go today But then knowing mark we have further discussions that need to take place with dph the council and others involved And i'm very thankful. I asked the question early on madam chair about what's an and And what is an or And everybody has been very articulate As to what an and would do for us and what an or would do for us and I am now of the Feeling that obviously it should be or Um in the language so My hope is the one eight hundred fifty fifty number Gets a person To be able to get the help they need today With discussions with what I love is the warm handoff. I love that phrase And i'm going to use it again and again whenever possible That they get a warm handoff and they understand not only community based resources But the voluntary self exclusion program And other things that they may need to get the help that they uh that we all hope they'll get So I wanted to just bring the attention of the mass 211 program to my newer commissioners who may not Have been aware of that program and how successful it has been for the citizens of the commonwealth of massachusetts I think we're trying to create a similar number For those who uh need responsible gaming or problem gaming help Um, so with all that said madam chair the language that mena has forwarded to us I'm okay adopting today Or when we should take a final vote So on this regulation and thank you for allowing me the few minutes to share my view We have something in our email box Is that what it is of a language that keeps forwarded to us for the responsible gaming We know Madam chair unless mr. Hill, I think I think he means the language in your packet Yes, the proposal on page 50 Of my apologies Thank you for the clarification Because I'm not sure if mark has seen it It's the actual language of 256 that mena proposed Oh the language he's proposing but not the actual messaging Okay, I'm Come up with some messaging language. Okay. Oh, no, no that is not my job. No Fast I'll do it, but that's uh, there's enough good people working on that. It sounds like I think the messaging Language that we're talking about madam chair is going to be forthcoming I'm not sure it's something that we have here today But in sense of putting something forward in our regulations The proposal that is on page 15 is something I could be very supportive of today Okay, so to be clear. Okay. So just a point of clarification I'm going to turn to director wells because um So we're looking at the red language which we need we need to either give a green light Me not but I think director wells is looking to get the operator's actual clarity about what responsible gaming messaging is um and responsible gaming messaging may be need to be tweaked as a defined term but um, so Mr. Hill Unless we say we can't do it Director wells that that language isn't going to be here. She is I think karen I thought you were looking to get some more guidance. So Yeah, so I think uh, and mark and I were just chatting at the break. Um I think that the recommendation for billboards is the tth Number and then the game sense logo. Is that acceptable to the commissioners? Okay with the required font that's in our reg that works Injection to that and and I don't think I don't think um Okay, and then so that I'm sorry. I'm sorry billboards the game sense Contact information in the logo The logo just the dph helpline number for people in crisis And and the um in the game sense logo For billboards that's simple and then the question was could we have proposed the proposal of The dph phone number and their website with the language, you know, if you're What was the language mark that you have in the current guidance? Uh for the mass problem gambling helpline Yeah If you were a loved one is experiencing problems with gambling call 1-800-3-2-7-50-50 For gambling helpline ma.org okay And then to address dph is concerned that there's Conflation of the two programs you could put the language for the um If you're under 20, you know for only for over 21. What's the little over 21 language mark? Do you have that? Yeah, um It just I think it just must be 21 years or older to participate or something something like that But it's it's pretty standard across all Okay, and then Then it would be playing smart from the start the game sense logo and the game sense website correct That's on everything except billboards. That's that's the question Okay, Karen, can I make a point of clarification about billboards, please? Madam chair, sorry Um, I think that it's important not to I think that if we just have the game sense logo and just the Problem gambling helpline number we we may run into the same issue of confating the two. So I think Um, I support the idea There's a lot going on in a billboard to just have the game sense logo just sort of to build brand familiarity You need more of a take line for billboards regarding the health So what did what? What's out there right now or mark? Do you remember? But I have I have again one of our operators over the weekend had done some advertising on tv And what they had put down is hope is here gambling helpline mass dot org But ma I should say not mass dot org or call the 800 3 2 7 50 50 for 24 7 support period and then the game sense I think they might use hope is here calling the phone number on billboards and and Yeah, I think that's their, you know, play smart from the start. That's their counterpart to that I feel like But we could we've given them right now. I um, I don't know the status of the bag Then So can I Hold on one momento Must be our ups man So just to throw a uh fly in the ointment We had a discussion earlier And I apologize. Hold on one momento problem. We can hear you. We can hear you He usually doesn't bark So if we were to put The language in today that says gambling helpline mass dot org or call the 1 800 number for 24 7 support period for now And this is the fly in the ointment for now And then have our discussions with dph and the council Uh, moving forward. I believe I was told earlier that we could come back and With with new protocols put into place once mark and dph and everybody's had their conversations Um to put forth but for today's purposes to tell our operators what we need Maybe we should make it Simple for now until we have that full fledged discussion on what we want to see move forward, which Is not going to happen today because it's we need all all present for that discussion to take place Just a thought not how I feel but a thought commissioner skinner Oh, I just wanted clarification from karen So on everything except billboards You're proposing or marcus proposing or you both are proposing dph phone number the website in their tag line as well as The game sense material play it smart from the start that tag line And the website of the logo in phone number in website. Yes No phone Okay So three things three things from dph would be the And this is sort of the The menu so you can pair it down as commissioner hill said you could you have complete discretion on what you want to do But this would be sort of the ask from Of the six pieces the dph phone number the dph website and the dph tag line Also the game sense tag line the game sense website and the game sense logo Could we have the language for the tag the tag line please? Mark i'll defer you of that so for The department of public health problem gambling helpline If you are a loved one experiencing problems with gambling call 1-800-3-2-7-50 or gambling helpline ma dot org for the responsible gaming messaging it would be The game sense logo play it smart from the start game sense ma dot com in order to minimize confusion between the two there would be the 21 plus language that would separate And that language would be Um, I don't have i don't have that exact language, but it's something like must be 21 years or older to play And so need to be some real estate between Um dph and the rg line um our rg language game sense language And I ask that because I think I saw In one example where the the sentence is just run together So i'm not sure You know the 21 the older language Would just look like more language Or if it's just real estate and I say real estate because I also Wanted to ask well Karen and mark about the implications of our font size for this if they've heard any feedback on that What the manager isn't that what prompted some of this discussion as well as the operators you're saying there's so much here that it it Restricts the ability to advertise I thought that's what prompted the issue on the font size On the one on the font size But I mean that was on billboards initially was you know to make sure it could be seen because I think we went so big that Yeah, it took up the whole And the uh, I got information from crystal some of the operators they just put 21 plus as their Information regarding the age restriction Yeah, so they're looking for shortcuts, right? So Can I further what did you what what did what was you're saying commissioner hill? Putting what in the further complicity things putting what in the uh In the lot why they would Say again, I think you said the fly in the ointment. Yeah that Um, just a reminder too that we have the statutory requirement about The platform but we don't have an associated break. I don't think on that I think It's all good So we I know that somebody said maybe just the Platform would just be the 1 800 number and the website as required by statute, but we could Add rg on the platform too if we want but I think also on all of the platforms. There's an rg button And I'm hoping that Our game sense program is in there mark is going to look into that program But anyway just another fine way Madam chair, I would just add There could be unintended consequences with all this verbiage that we're trying to put on and we really should have a discussion with the operators as well as um, some of the folks who would be advertising And I would hope that those discussions would take place with mark and again dph and the council so that we can Really understand what can be put on and add that would be helpful to people If we start putting all this information on I can guarantee you the font's going to get smaller And we're not going to see the messaging that we hope to put out there food thought So that's a good point. Will the font get smaller or will the font stay static because of our reg and then it becomes an issue of real estate for the advertisers Which was an issue that they brought up So on yeah We're just gonna Madam chair, I feel the same way. Um, we started this A couple weeks ago the language was and so the problem gambling helpline and The responsible gaming messaging and so that is what drew a lot of comment from the operators And and they cited, you know, their inability, I guess to accommodate You know, both of those things and still Have a successful advertisement So so I do agree with commissioner hell that it would be beneficial to hear from the operators About this proposal, but I also want to thank commissioner hell for the reminder of the 311 mass 311 and sort of Communicating the origins of it. I do remember mass 311 and 211. Excuse me. I'm confusing the city of boston's 311 line But and that's how it should be right the commonwealth Collective should be working together to ensure its Um residents and citizens have what they need in terms of available resources. So You know, it's it's that's my intent is that the two agencies can work together But as you pointed out commissioner hell, we don't have that today. So I think um, you know, the Next best thing right now is is to is is to, you know, solicit comment from the operators I guess again to find out what that will do because I do think that's a lot of information You know both the dph the three items on the dph side and then the three items on the mass Gaming commission side It's a lot of information. Um, you know, and I'm okay with that. I just want would want You know, I wouldn't want to Uh produce any unintended consequences as commissioner hill pointed out Madam chair to be clear. I think you asked our opinion And I want my I want to be very clear in what my opinion is for today's purposes And for today's purposes, uh to executive director wells Is we need the 1 800 50 50 number for sure We need the website for sure A little tagline for sure That would be the bare minimum of what we should be asking our operators to have In place on their advertising Then moving forward They should know and acknowledge That this is subject to change Once we have a discussion With the and I keep saying three two or three Entities of what we would like to see as a commission because that's going to come back to us for an approval I would assume Since we will have the ultimate yes or no Say on this, but for my opinion today the 1 800 50 50 the website And There was one other thing that I Yes, the the tagline the whatever that tagline that dph uses at the bare minimum But letting them know very clearly That that's going to change very quickly once we have these discussions That's my opinion Madam chair Thank you, madam chair. I think you know I never want to lose the force for the trees right like at the end of the day This is about people trying to get help and we got to meet people where they are and people are at different stages Right people need different levels of help and I appreciate Director Mandolin and for for calling me last last weekend and and having that conversation that you know people are at different places, right? And you know taglines and branding and all this stuff is very Interesting to us because we live it and breathe it every day For the patron that just needs help right now, right? They just need a clear easy way to get the help and I think that like all my other all the my colleagues The perfect idea is one number that trees off Into into various places where people can can get the help but while we're Negotiating what that looks like or having conversations with dph who does a great job a fantastic job of doing what they do And we appreciate them and and they're willing us to partner here Um, I think you know kind of leave it as is right like the the guidance that mark has given as is is is working As as good as it can today I think we leave the or in that gives the commission the flexibility it needs to do the changes commissioner hills talking about Over time and hopefully the change won't be too to onerous on on the operators That's hopefully the change is just adding information to a number to a tree, but um, I think where I am today is um, obviously have the number on there for dph And then and then as much information as we can reasonably put put on an advertisement Uh to help people get what they need and at the end of the day that should be the aim Let's help people get get the help they need Michelle brian want to chime in? Yeah, I mean, I think we're all on the same page and um, I'll put a different fly in the ornament for later Um, which is I think as we move forward on this I'd love to know Particularly the younger group that ages into this activity and the mobile activity. What's the best way to reach them? Is it really a mobile access or a phone number? Because what I'd really like to prioritize is also just the most effective way of getting people help, which I think Might be different depending on the demographic it would be I'm going to turn to me for a clarifying question Margaret I guess written but I think I've already mentioned that commission can include in for the second clause Everything that's in the first clause should be so chips um What do we need to do? Um To to give content to that defined term today Um today today nothing. Um, this can all happen the the idea of this is that it would continue to be set by commission policy with the ability To to change over time and evolve over time as you learn more about the industry in the market So what is our what is our policy right now? so As captured in the reg it would be That It's not necessarily Just what's captured in the reg. It's it's a discussion that you just had which if um, I'll defer to others if they heard this differently, but as I heard it was Simple one phone number plus game sense, I believe and And as little other information, but excuse me as much other information as you could put on without overwhelming a particular at Karen or mark. I don't know if I got that right, but the reg is intended to lead flexibility As you continue to work with dph If you want to further refine that in the future So if somebody wanted to make a motion on it at some point It would be pursuant to 256.06 up section two section the second clause And solely the second clause The gaming commission directs director vandal menden to There was something like that Correct, and it's not necessarily just solely a second clause, but because because it's how you're interplaying the two together, but but yes Well, that's why these um, if we're not clear On that we want to control the messaging and i'm hearing that from different Nobody's being terribly precise because we're sort of being appropriately flexible um The way it's also framed dph could be confused because We're thinking of shortening the language that they have actually given and to us in the first clause The language is longer So that's why you know, that's why I actually am looking for a little bit more firm direction so that We're clear and then it can be It can evolve with discussions with director wells and director vandal menden and his team and dph but right now You know dph has provided language. That's I think Wordier than what commissioner hill just said So karen, I think probably i'm trying to help you here to give you just a bit more um So that crystal can answer when they ask what do we put in here and so um, I'm I'm looking I'm looking for some certainty about what we're going to advise I know I'm not all in agreement That's what i'm not clear on so my understanding is it seems as if everyone is in agreement for the dph phone number Is that correct anyone okay? And the dph website Okay, and then the uh language Or that would be as brief as possible So it would be shorter than what dph already provided to mark But the hope is here or some It uh, the commission wants that to be as short as possible. Is that correct? I see nodding has we need to just give some um verbal direction here First question hope is here. I think we've seen mark. Has that ever been provided by dph to you? Yeah, I believe it has Can I make a subject? I mean Thinking about sort of keeping each as brief as possible Simply included that dph Focus here gambling line logo And phone number website for game sense I have smart from the start Game sense logo Game sense website. I think that it would definitely save on some space from what I What I mentioned just a bit ago Could could you say it again, please mark? So for dph Read it out like what it would be dph problem gambling um helpline logo um, hope is here phone number website for game sense Game sense logo Play it smart from the start game sense ma.com Did you include dph's website? Yes Did you say for or and mark? I thought I did you say for and Okay Sorry commissioners get it. No the question is good because I just I was I've been looking at you and I I I don't think that you had recommended only using the ph material on the advertising So I'm just I'm glad you clarified that for me Because when we're talking about is their agreement In a direction. I didn't think there was So you're not okay with having dph material exclusively Not dph material exclusively. I believe that we should pain our the game sense information All right, so then we stick with and That's what I'm here because otherwise. Yeah, it's we don't have any control over which one goes in there I I'm sorry. Christopher. I might have missed your point He's talking about the reg I'm talking about the reg. Yeah that if we if we have or Um, we don't know which one of those would necessarily appear. So if the request is to have both it would have to be in Now my understanding is that on the second clause after the award that allows the commission just to have complete discretion Which could include the phone number and website and everything from dph as well So say the or and then the approved message that we're going to authorize today Yeah, is is essentially an and correct Exactly what we've taken out maybe dph to be able to use all of its language and I think Exercising discretion around the real estate and the implications of advertising. Yeah Yeah, and also just the practicalities. I think one of the things I didn't comment on is there is no direct relationship Right, so we have the direct relationship. So in terms of us controlling that message in this context makes sense to me Okay, the wrinkle though is that even though we're saying or Um, the operate to the operators. It's in the end. So we're back where we originally started Where you know, no because we Will give them the clarity on what the message is but that clarity is going to be dph problem gambling Yes, yes, so right effective. It's the end which led us this right to begin with I don't want to go be circular, but that's the reality of it. Yeah, that's where I said it's effectively We're keeping or in the reg Practically speaking. We are telling them it's and but we are using the discretion to make that decision. Yeah If that's the way we vote So I think that you're both raising the confusion that was rais