Good morning Call to order public meeting to 56 as as a note We are not Able to have closed captioning today, but the meeting is being streamed First call is the approval of the minutes commissioner Stebbins Sure madam chair. Thank you the minutes from the November 8th 2018 meeting or in your packet and I move the commission approved those minutes subject to correction for any type of graphical errors or other non-material matters Further discussion. I do have Point that I'd like to make maybe a small correction, but At the time of 1112 at the end of that section Which is which begins really in in page four There is a mention that That I was not in favor of the application in light of the pending plans for demolition And I'd just like to mention that my opposition was In light of the fact that I did not believe it maximizes That the application did not maximize the benefits to the Commonwealth Which is one of the criteria for Approving the application We can make that change. Did you want to strip out the plans for demolition language? No, no I think I think that's that's one factor, but the bigger the bigger theme was that My feeling was that it just didn't maximize the benefits. So we added that yep Everything else is I think appropriately summarized All in favor with those additions Hi, hi 4-0 Approve the minutes next we have our administrative update Executive director Progerosian Good morning commissioners morning morning as we Near the end of the year one update you on Sort of stats every day activities our gaming agents game enforcement Licensing folks continue to regulate player Plain Ridge Park casino and MGM Springfield I want to thank our horse racing staff As you know, we have a large seasonal staff and they just literally ended their Harness season last week. So thank them for Another successful season Also, staff is helping me prepare for the what I think I called the 90-day reports from MGM Springfield concerning So-called crosswalk designation in the MGM Springfield floor In the plaza beverage license They anticipate presenting these matters to the commission at the next tentatively scheduled meeting Which would be December 20th and would be out in Springfield I also hope to report on the MGM Springfield opening. Oh, I'm sorry opening process at that meeting On item 7 The community mitigation fund application guidelines I just want to tell you Joe Delaney will be substituting for John Ziembo cannot be here today finally The wind suitability review you will see item 9 an executive session During which you will be briefed by our general counsel and outside lawyers on the implications of recently filed Legislation of that on our process for a getting to an adjudicatory hearing I can say that I think absent this litigation I would have anticipated that the commission would have been in the adjudicatory process at this point So I mean you'll learn more about the litigation obviously in the executive session and Interim chair Cameron.   I am thank you behalf of the Commission You know, I'd like to acknowledge the Commission and his staff are facing a complex set of circumstances and must balance consideration for due process The investigatory Requirements related litigation and the overall integrity of the process I'm also well aware of the intense and ceaseless effort that has been undertaken by MG MGC staff IE be in particular since January. I want to thank you for your continued hard work perseverance and dedication I'd also like to take this opportunity as the interim chair to reiterate the Commission's role as an adjudicatory body and Repeat the standards by which we are legally bound to preserve the integrity of the process and ensure the impartiality of the Commission's decision-making The gaming law is explicit in its mandate that the investigations and enforcement bureau must be allowed to investigate matters without Commission influence the law further stipulates that the Commission shall not place any restrictions upon the IEB's ability to investigate violations under the gaming act and pertaining to any of our regulations When the IEB investigates a matter that could impact the rights of a gaming licensee such as the wind suitability Review the Commission is required to hold an adjudicatory process Chapter 30a which outlines the conduct of the adjudicatory proceedings by Commonwealth agencies Requires that a party impacted by an agency decision have the opportunity to a full and fair hearing as a reminder under 23k the gaming law in matters affecting a gaming licensee the Commission the commissioners sit as the administrative judges to hear the matter Both IEB and the licensee will hopefully soon present evidence Orally or in writing and the commissioners will then have unrestricted opportunity to ask questions of both the IEB and the licensee Since the commissioners the four of us it is the judges in this adjudicatory Proceeding we must make our decisions impartially based solely upon the evidence before us. We must not in any way Have access to investigations materials prior to the adjudicatory process and So that the reason we do this so there is an appearance there is no appearance of pre-judgment of this matter as Further reminder the law requires that the separation between the investigators and the judges us in this case Clearly that is clearly mandated in the gaming law Having said all that we are profoundly mindful of the public interest in this matter and fully appreciate the scrutiny of our process Since the launch of this investigation, I believe we have consistently done our best to transparently provide status updates and our most thoughtful Estimates about timing which is a challenge giving the nature of an investigation That being said I'm keenly aware of our shared Frustrations over the dot desire to finalize this matter, which is now further complicated by litigation in Nevada My fellow commissioners and I are ready to adjudicate this matter and eager to assess the findings Identifying a viable way to bring the investigation to a close is an urgent priority The next step toward advancing this process is for the outside counsel our outside counsel to thoroughly brief the commissioners about Litigation strategy during an executive session and that will happen later today You know, thank thank you for those. I was on ask something that you addressed at the end and Let me simply tell me that it might be addressed later if that's the case, but you mentioned If it weren't for this late litigation File in Nevada we would be in a position to have been conducting by now an adjudicatory proceeding like we estimated So it's fair to say that the investigation and report are substantially Complete. Is that is that a first statement? So I don't want to lock The process into a particular time frame and sir saying nothing can happen after that process and certainly it can But I would have anticipated Absent this litigation that we'd be in that adjudicatory process, which doesn't mean that you know If someone looks at whatever comes out down the road, there might not be something that happened from, you know, this date forward because We're at this point But yeah, we would have been in a adjudicatory process And it's also for to say that we don't know the time frame that this could take based on A number of things that could happen relative to that litigation we cannot When when we might be looking at an adjudicatory process at this point I can't I think you'll learn more about the legal process and in the strategy in the executive session Well, I look forward to that update. I Think we all do. Thank you Okay Moving on response research and responsible gaming director Vanderlinden it Let me yeah, I'm sorry to jump back to one subject matter Let me let me just say this and sort of emphasize this And and to feed off what the interim chair Cameron said And I try to emphasize this believe me staff Wants this done We we there are a lot of folks who've worked really really hard I know there are a lot of really important stakeholders here But staff really wants this done also So if there is a way to get it done which complies with the law and all our responsibilities staff wants this Good morning commissioners. Good morning. I'm joined Today by dr. Rachel Volberg dr. Rob metanus metamity and newly dr. Within the last couple weeks so congratulations So in 2013 the Massachusetts gaming commission selected a team from the University of Massachusetts Amherst to lead a key component of an extensive research agenda that was mandated by section 71 of the 2011 expanded gaming act This is widely accepted as the first of its kind study called sigma or the social and economic Impacts of gaming in Massachusetts and it's being carried out by a multidisciplinary team of internationally recognized experts in their respective areas Over the past five years they've collected Extensive baseline and follow-up data on the social and economic changes in Massachusetts related to the introduction of casino gambling a Summary of impacts has been that have been observed as of July of 2018 has captured in a report that will be presented to you today and released to our website immediately after This is the first in a series of reports that will analyze changes in Massachusetts social and economic Landscape after the introduction of new gambling venues A couple a couple key points We're largely looking at changes as a result of the opening and operation of plain-rich part casino And what we're really looking at not only at what is captured in this report, but also understand this As as a framework of where we are going in the future as we begin to to explore What are the impacts of other casinos that open in Massachusetts? Following the presentation of this report. We're excited to Share with you ten back sheets, which are one page briefings that summarize the findings of the social and economic impacts of gambling in Massachusetts and these are these are I think great because they're they're really for for anybody to read and Can be easily digested with a variety of different types of stakeholders So with that I will turn it over to Rachel. Thank you. Thank you Good morning commissioners. Good morning, Rachel It's always nice to be back in Boston. Although I must say the traffic this morning was quite a challenge But it's always good to be back Okay So you may have already noticed that instead of Mark Melnick We have another great member of our Donahue team with us Rod It's fine. I'm a research manager at the economic and public policy research unit Donnie Institute Mark is our director and it's in Chelmsford unexpectedly. So I am here filling it So and and you've you've met Rod before and Rod before and he's presented. So I'm just going to plunge right in So seven years ago Governor Deval Patrick signed the expanded gaming act as you all know permitting casino gambling in Massachusetts and The act established three regions as shown on the map and allowed one slot parlor that was not geographically restricted The expanded gaming act is unique in the United States in establishing a robust research program to help maximize the benefits and minimize the harms of casino gambling in Massachusetts and the research agenda that's contained in section 171 of the act has three important elements. These include a comprehensive impact study a Baseline survey of problem gambling and a review of services before any of the casinos opened and The third element is other research Intended to maximize the benefits and minimize the harms of expanded gambling in Massachusetts This slide presents a timeline of the Commission's process and setting up the research agenda I'm not going to walk you through the steps. We all pretty much lived through them But after extensive consultation The Gaming Commission selected our team basic the UMass Amherst in the School of Public Health and Health Sciences To carry out jointly the first two elements of the research agenda namely the baseline survey and Setting up a system to monitor the social and economic impacts as those rolled out over time Sigma is based on an approach proposed in a 2011 study Funded by the Canadian consortium for gambling research Not many people realize how many impact studies have actually been done of gambling over the last 30 to 40 years And how few of them actually are of any empirical value whatsoever So the the Canadian consortium study actually identified approximately 500 impact studies that had been done looking at different kinds of gambling and their impacts They Determined that only about 200 of those studies were actually empirical studies and not intended for political purposes And they deemed seven of those To have used what they called an excellent methodology So a surprisingly small amount of research on which to build the program that we wanted to build in Massachusetts So fortunately for us Rob Williams at the University of Lethbridge is the lead author of this theoretical framework That was proposed based on this review of the literature and he is a lead member of our team as well This slide highlights some of the principles that guide our work to understand the impacts of casino gambling in Massachusetts the important thing to understand is that the ability to attribute changes to the introduction of casino gambling can be tenuous for many variables and so Essentially what we try to do is Look very systematically at all of the different types of evidence that we are gathering and We deem an absence of change to be reasonable evidence of no impact When there is a change in the expected direction That's temporally associated with the introduction of casino gambling We tried to be careful to say only that the change is consistent with a potential impact. We we Are reluctant to Make attribution directly to Casino gambling unless we're able to triangulate the information With the presence or absence of analogous changes in other variables that are theoretically related to gambling and when other sources of Information pertaining to the same variable Make more attributions possible that is when people in our surveys for example say yes I experienced a bankruptcy and yes that bankruptcy was due to my gambling. That's a directly attributable impact So the focus of our inaugural impact report, which we are launching today is primarily on Plainville and the slots parlor and that's because all of the data are from prior to the opening of MGM Springfield But we are very excited to finally have a report to share with you. That's a summary report We feel that this moment is an important milestone Because we are looking back At baseline conditions prior to the introduction of casinos in Massachusetts We're looking at changes Related to the introduction of the slot parlor, but most importantly I think we are providing a framework or creating a template for what we may see and be able to monitor going forward So this is sort of the framework that we're going to be following Over the next several years as we produce reports Looking at the impacts of MGM Springfield and then of Encore Boston Harbor I'm not going to spend much time at all on this slide You've seen it many times before But it summarizes our project activities with the various research activities across the top the calendar years on the left side and the phases of the study on the right side and essentially the The essence of this slide is that we are moving from the baseline phase and into the post opening operational phase Rachel just looking at the chart and across the top. Could you just remind me? About the focus group element what that consists of what you're looking for I know you do the key informant interviews, but just remind me again with the focus group pieces. So the focus groups are planned Not not so much for Plainville because we did we didn't feel that there were enough impacts to really sort of Merit focus groups related to that Further out when we are Looking at the full introduction of casino gambling in Massachusetts We proposed in our original plan to do focus groups with people who gambled and with people who had Problems with their gambling and also with community Representatives from the communities to try and understand from their perspective and in a qualitative way what they felt the impacts were both positive and negative Thank you So again on on this slide you've seen it many times before and I'm sure you're all too familiar with it This just shows the officially designated host and surrounding communities Which are the focus of our regional work? And I just want to sort of as we move into this next part of the presentation Indicate that the template that we've developed is to look at state level impacts first and then the same impacts, but at the regional level second And in the case of the regional impacts the challenge is sometimes to get the data down to The the lowest Geography possible in some cases. That's the host and surrounding communities but in some other cases as you'll see it's the counties within which the the casino operations are located and a kid and in the case of the economic Remy modeling it's actually a six region area of map of the of the state of Massachusetts So that said The for the most part in this part of the presentation focusing on the health the social and health impacts I will only be talking about areas where we actually identified changes all of this material and much more is Available in the full report and we're excited to at the end of this presentation We've had some hard copies made of the report. So we have one for each of the commissioners To carry to your office and use as a weight of some kind But hopefully to open and and and get more detail There's even greater detail available in the many other reports that are posted on the sigma website Given the time constraints. I have not included a list of the reports here But it is available in the in the summary report and on the sigma website as well So this is a table that shows you the main areas of social and health impacts that we are monitoring These are primarily impacts that are non monetary in nature We rely on many different sources of data to assess social and health impacts Primary data that you probably are already familiar with Include the baseline general population survey the baseline online panel survey The targeted surveys in the host and surrounding communities and our key informant interviews and eventually the focus groups that we plan to do We also use a lot of secondary data much of it comes from government agencies here in Massachusetts But some from further afield the US Bureau of the Census for example and various Federal agencies and then the crime data we actually rely pretty heavily on the work Being done by the gaming commission's crime analyst Christopher Bruce So just very quickly At the state level there is no compelling evidence at this time that negative impacts related to problem gambling have increased as a result of Casino introduction for example this slide shows that statewide admissions for treatment for problem gambling have continued to decline This slide shows that there has been no Detectable increase in statewide personal bankruptcy filings since the opening of the slot parlor This slide shows similarly that there has been no increase in statewide divorces restraining orders or cases of child welfare involvement all of these things are considered to be Related Indicators to problem gambling. They're quite common when you when you talk to problem gamblers in treatment These are the kinds of things that they are concerned about and experiencing Rachel can I just go back a little bit to the problem gambling services acceptance I've seen this graph before and I Always sort of wonder the numbers are Rather small compared to Compared to the indices and and at risk a population that we know is is out there from the baseline population survey, but Could you speak a little bit as to whether the other people whether people who are Diagnosed or diagnosable as problem gamblers, maybe seeking help elsewhere or Not seeking help but diagnosed and How does that play into the analysis? Yeah, so from a big-picture perspective Problem gambling or people who have gambling problems experience not only a lot of stigma from outside, but also self or internalized stigma it's one of the Mental health disorders that people find very hard to Actually admit that they have and to seek help for so there's a lot of Not a lot of literature, but there's there's research to show that only between about three and ten percent of people in Jurisdiction that would be diagnosed as having a gambling disorder Actually seek out help for that disorder Now that's not to say that they're not receiving help Because many of them have other disorders the depression anxiety Substance use disorders are the are quite common amongst people who have gambling problems and so there's no doubt that People with the gambling problem in Massachusetts are seeking out help but they may not be seeking or they are clearly not seeking help specifically for a gambling problem and the the concern Is that even if they are seeking out help for another disorder if they're not screened for the gambling disorder if they're not Asked any questions about the gambling It remains sort of undetected and it can actually affect their ability to Achieve recovery from the other conditions that they're also seeking help for so there's a number of reasons why these numbers in Massachusetts are quite low. I think both the self stigma and the the high level of comorbidity are Contributing but I think there's also it's important to understand that the way that treatment provision in Massachusetts Happens for people with a gambling disorder is that these numbers are only people who don't have any other way to pay for treatment and so they apply to the Department of Public Health for Funding that's not covered by say an insurance Plan that they have So these are people who have no health insurance and I think the decline in numbers may actually also be related to The introduction of of universal health insurance coverage in Massachusetts Yeah, we have some we have some data from another source looking at the all-pair claims data which informs on People who do receive a diagnosis of pathological gambling or disordered gambling in Massachusetts But I it's very technical data and Academically published We'd be happy to if there's information on that in the report, but in the in the Interest of time I sort of felt that we just wanted to sort of give you a High-level snapshot of what we were doing and remind me about that all player all pair claims data is the inside essentially the same that Treatment has been declining or has that been no actually Diagnoses have been quite steady between 2009 and 2012 There's about the same proportion of people each year that have that diagnosis And but the interesting thing or I felt on the interesting thing is that they average between one and three or more Other diagnoses as well. So they are quite complicated cases in many in many cases and teasing out, you know, what the Contribution of just their gambling disorder is is is quite complicated Thank you Okay, back to where I was So plunging down to the regional level We have evidence from the baseline and follow-up targeted surveys that were conducted in 2014 and 2016 in Plainville and surrounding communities and what this table shows is that there has been no significant change in the rate of problem gambling in The host and surrounding communities subsequent to the opening of Plain Ridge Park Casino You can see that the at-risk rate edged up a little The problem gambling rate edged down a little But the p-value on the right-hand side indicates that it's not a statistically significant difference This is an excerpt actually from an email that we received In response to a query about attendance at gamblers anonymous meetings in these Plainville and surrounding communities area They reported that there had been no change in the number of meetings or in the number of people attending the meetings Similarly, there has been no change at the county level in bank personal bankruptcy filings in Norfolk County where Plainville is situated Nor has there been an increase in divorces restraining orders or cases of child welfare involvement at the regional level Turning to crime at the state level There is no evidence that the introduction of a slot parlor in Massachusetts in 2015 had any impact on violent crime or property crime rates At the regional level there has been an increase in crime at Plain Ridge Park Casino However, this increase in crime at the slot parlor itself Does not appear to have resulted in an increase in overall crime in Plainville and surrounding communities Christopher Bruce's work did identify an increase in credit card fraud reports of lost property and Suspicious activity in Plainville that he deemed likely to be attributable to Plain Ridge Park Casino But that has abated in the second year after the opening In terms of attitudes This is again from the from the the regional Surveys at the regional level. There is some evidence of changes in attitudes towards gambling Perhaps not surprisingly. There's a decrease in the proportion of people who think gambling is not available enough and an increase in the Proportion who believe it's fine There's a decrease in the number of people or percentage of people who think that casinos are beneficial to Massachusetts and an increase in people In the proportion of people who believe they are neither beneficial nor harmful Finally in terms of the environment at the regional level This is a quote from one of our Plainville key informants as you can see from from the quote There were some noise complaints in Plainville associated with the construction of the slot parlor But there haven't been any Complaints since the construction was completed and so the operations seem to be quite smooth Finally, this slide shows five years of data from the five traffic Stations closest to Plain Ridge Park that have continuous information on two-way traffic and based on this data plus Some information from Christopher Bruce We've concluded That Plainville has experienced an increase in traffic volume And an increase in traffic complaints, but that's probably not a surprise Since they have a lot more traffic right around where the casino or where the slot parlor opened I'm going to turn it over to Rod at this point so he can give you some insights into the economic and fiscal work Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. Same caveats apply to my section as Rachel's. This isn't everything that's in the report It's just the highlights more details are available So I want to first start Much as Rachel did about laying out the framework for the economic component of the analysis We have basically three pillars that we're building our analysis on That we hope will meet the intentions the letter and spirit of both legislation and the the objectives of the MGC So the first is the economic and community impacts. You can see that includes mostly information on Businesses and the people and the real estate of the community We are using that information to produce products such as our post community profiles our match community Analysis and the real estate analysis that I think was presented just a couple months ago The next pillar are the casino impacts Which we're really defining as the information that comes directly out of the casino So that's the stuff we're learning about who they employ how much they're paid who their vendors are the construction Related to this is the lottery. We're not getting that information from the casinos, but we roll it up into our casino impact study This is producing products such as the construction operating reports that you've seen the new employee Reports that we've done similar things like that And lastly we have these special topics. It's sort of the catch-all for items that are Either too complex to be simple chapter of a larger ongoing regular products or are sort of I don't want to say tangentially related but not Directly and immediately related to one of these two other sort of pillars that would be things like horse racing we Tried to include that into the operating reports But realized it needed way more time and study and have decided to put that for later for a special topic If it went sports betting work to come that would be an example of something that we look at that way and things like tourism Workforce and job quality are some items that we want to think about as future special topics Right just to To touch on this special topic session, and you and I have had this conversation. I just want to reiterate it You know with the opening of our class one casinos, we're moving into a whole different realm different impacts These were intended as you know And you pointed out before that these are to draw tourism to not just be kind of a regional convenience And I'm hoping that we can begin to look at some of those additional topics that may hint it Whether there's an impact on tourism and it's good government data and local meals tax local hotel tax That'll figure out if one of our licensees is drawing business away from our surrounding community whether it's adding to a surrounding community, so I Know you've been thinking about this and I'm just again kind of replanting the seed that As all of you move forward that there's some different components. We want to keep in mind Definitely we address some tourism through our patron surveys. We ask people what they do outside the casino how much money They're spending and so on but more Detail analysis does need to be done such as looking at the impact of live entertainment venues And some of the difficulty we faced To you know borrow a term from the banking industry is to know your customer issues That the current Entertainment establishments have they they don't know a lot about who their customer is or was And so it'll be difficult for them to know how their customer has changed other than simple volume like we have We're selling more tickets now than we did But they don't necessarily know where their customers are coming from or whether they're local or whether they're not So that's an that's an item that we've been thinking about and we've been talking with the mass cultural It's a council commission the seas always kept me And so we've talked with them a little bit about how they could help their members And help prepare them for perhaps then us coming to talk to them and so forth. So it's a I Think this gives you a good idea of why this is a special topic There has it's a lot of threads that we need to gather There's preliminary work that needs to be done before we can even study it But it is very much on our agenda and in you know Our counterparts over at mass office and traveling tourism also pay for and collected You know a whole bunch of research data around Hotel visits hotel stops and what it's kind of doing in the region Yeah, we're hoping to develop a process in the not distant future quite soon That will help us sort of you know prioritize These special topics or deeper dives as we like to think about them and figure out a way to sort of you know Line them up so that we can start addressing them in a systematic way all right, so PPC Has very much been test case and test bed for a lot of our ideas and methodologies Due to I think it's size that it was easier to study there was Let fewer employees fewer patrons a smaller construction Simple things like fewer staff just finding the right person to talk to and to get the information all that is significantly easier With a small property like PPC So it has allowed us to develop an analytical framework that we have refined over the past few years that we are now porting forward to our analyses of the casinos in Springfield and Everett So here are the Dimensions that we are focusing on in the economic Analysis again, we're not going to talk about every single one of these here But this does give you an example of the types of information that you're going to be able to find in the reports In the big summary report and in other individual reports that we've already done and published So if you're thinking about direct economic impacts From PPC we have found direct benefits from both this construction and operation and the state and regional level While we have not done full analyses of the two other casinos We have no reason to expect that their construction impacts would not be similarly beneficial We haven't we don't have anything to say about their operations impacts yet But we have no reason to believe that their construction impacts at this point wouldn't be anything other than beneficial So the construction of PPC we focused So the number you're going to see here the 150 million that differs from the total investment number Because this is really just talking about the construction whereas total investment also includes a lot of furniture fixtures and equipment Which we did not measure as part of the construction impact. So we have 150 million dollars was spent to builds the Renovate the grandstand and racetrack build the casino the new casino building and put up the new parking garage As you can see the majority of that money was spent in massachusetts On massachusetts suppliers That's not to say that the drywall was manufactured in massachusetts But rather that the drywall supplier would have been massachusetts based um of that sum about 21 and a half million was construction wages And the big imports to massachusetts were structural steel which came from kebek A kitchen equipment which came from florida and the gaming machines themselves which came primarily from nevada in terms of employment If you counted the number of people who are on site Who were on site at least once in a given quarter and you average that out it worked out to about 554 Individuals passed through the construction site in an average quarter. That's not annualized or an fte We'll get to that in a minute, but this is just sort of account of bodies Of those people, I don't know why this isn't showing correctly. So i'll read those to you In the massachusetts is 450. That's 81.4 percent And the blue slice, that's the the big gray slice the blue slice is rhod island, which is 79 or 14 percent So you can see primarily the workers were either massachusetts residents or rhod island residents We're actually surprised in a way to see so few rhod island residents given the proximity to rhod island And the fact that at least when this was happening its construction industry hadn't fully recovered from the recession So there was a idle labor there to be had so It was they did a pretty good job hiring a massachusetts-based workers So if you take the 554 bodies And you annualize them into sort of an annual construction worker That turns into about 500 annualized construction workers if you spread them across the site Um over the two years you'll get the bottom the red part of the the bars here. So 267 and 234 If you then look at the total economic impacts of employing these people and spending 150 million dollars on construction You get the total employment Impacts which are labeled atop those columns 576 and 540 If you add it all up over two years you basically have 501 annual jobs Create an additional 615 For a total of about 1100. So for every one construction job. We found an additional one and a quarter jobs These 1100 jobs came with about 91 and a half million dollars of income and 30 percent of all these jobs were created or supported outside of crystal and orfa county. So outside of the the main impact zone so here's a Table with the gaming revenue, which i'm sure you're all quite familiar with On top of that we estimated some non gambling revenue there. You'll see in the second to right column the column second from the right What you'll find that's not entirely surprising given the amenities at the site is at the vast majority of the revenue is gaming revenue From our patient surveys, we also estimated an additional four million dollars of off-site spending From visitors on things like retail gas food Lodging etc I'm going to skip a couple slides forward because we basically talked about all of that So in just a time we'll just progress to the one with the Pie chart here direct casino expenditure and revenue So this is the sources of the operating revenue. So continuing on money flowing into the casino We have a sense of what the total revenue is and now we want to Look at where the money is coming from So where do the patrons live? What we found is basically three quarters of the patrons are from massachusetts. That's the black and the gray slices together And then Basically the remainder is out of state or unknown What's interesting to note though moving on to the next slide is just because three quarters of the patrons Are from massachusetts. It doesn't mean that three quarters of the revenue Going to ppc is being taken away from Massachusetts based activities as you all know one of the One of the things that the state was trying to achieve with legalizing the commercial casinos was to recapture money That's already being spent by massachusetts residents out of state on gambling. So this money is already in household budgets It's already factored into their Consumption so the idea is that if we can just change the geographic location of where the spending is occurring That would be net new money to the commonwealth and so what we did find is in fact of the in-state patrons Or 58 percent of the total revenue at the casino was recaptured In-state resident spending so this is money that was previously going to gambling in rodinland and kinetica primarily that has now come back in An additional 20 percent was out of state And that really only leaves about 20 percent of the total revenues at ppc Um Were dollars that were previously being spent in massachusetts that have been reallocated away from some other business To ppc. So i think we found that to be A welcome finding in terms of uh The overall economic impacts So now if you look at change our frame from money coming into the casino to money going out We uh, we found that uh ppc spent about 130 million dollars on on expenses Um a good portion of that as we'll get into in a little bit is taxes on ggr But a significant sum was also spent on vendors Payments to hosts and surrounding communities A big chunk of this was in-state which is again a beneficial and then you see about 18 million dollars going to wages Their employment base Is primarily massachusetts based but we found about a third uh live out of state And thinking about net job creation When we asked new hires What their previous employment status was we found that basically 50 percent of them were either unemployed or employed part-time Prior to accepting this job at ppc for context If my memory serves i think about three quarters of all the jobs at ppc are full time so Some of these unemployed and part-time workers are Have moved into full-time work. Just the math has to work that way um What is worth pointing out that those half that were previously Employed full-time that doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't a net job created It just means it could have been pushed down the line So if I was employed full-time at company a and i'm not ppc company a now has a vacancy that they need to advertise And fill so or they they can improve their productivity Which also in the long run will help help the economy so one way or another These are either improving productivity or helping create net jobs Expanding on to the ripple effects of these jobs. What is particularly interesting about Plain rich park that we don't expect to see In the category one casinos is this differentiation in the impact attributable to the operation of the casino itself And the impact attributable to Utilizing its tax payments As I just mentioned 49 of their gross gaming revenue goes to taxes Which is much higher than the tax rate that's going to be paid by the category one casinos and The the the statutory allocation of this tax money is considerably different all of this money goes Primarily all of the money goes into local aid which gets then distributed to cities and towns to be spent at their discretion Whereas the category one tax revenues Are allocated into many different pots with many different purposes So what we see here if you look at just the 500 or so Employees at ppc and look at the ripple effects of their of their employment and the operation We get about seven hundred and eighty total jobs So you get a ripple effect. That's not nothing but but Smaller than that total headline number will imply that 2400 That big increment comes from taking 80 some odd million dollars and injecting it into local government spending We assume that all that money gets spent And we assume that it gets spent based on The existing patterns of spending that local governments Have used in the past and that's what creates that that big total employment number It's worth pointing out that if this is roughly 50 50 Why is 50 percent of revenue creating 780 jobs and 50 percent of revenues creating 1600 jobs? The reason for that is government spending is highly labor intensive It's if you think about what government services are it's almost all people provided And so it you tend to have a lot of employees per dollar of government spending Their supply chains also tend to be highly local. So you tend to get a bit more in-state circulation of the money Moving on to lottery sales What you'll see on the right the left hand side of that vertical line Is what happened in the a plain rich park property Plainville and the state prior to the opening of the casino and then after the opening of the casino So what you'll see is that relative to it's Relative relative to when it was just a racetrack basically The casino has selling considerably more lottery products We're seeing what is that four or five six times more? Lottery products than it did Previously with no discernible reduction in sales in the rest of plainville Or the state so it seems to the data so far seems to suggest that The increase in lottery sales at the casino proper hasn't come with any related reductions in lottery sales elsewhere And lastly just to reiterate this Distribution of local aid question. So we have 166 million dollars of ggr of that 81.4 million is Tax money that's that goes into is taxed and of that the share that goes to local aid is 66 million dollars and that subtracts the share that goes to the horse racing fund And that gets distributed based on the existing formula for local aid which weights both population and what's called economic distress In deciding where the money goes. So the allocation of the taxes on ggr of ppc have nothing to do with whether cities have Whether the hosts are surrounded communities how they voted for The in the referendum for the casinos has nothing to do with their lottery sales It is it goes into local aid pots and gets distributed based on that formula Which again to reiterate will be entirely different from what we're going to see for the category one casinos And that does it for my part and i'll hand it back over to rachel to Talk to you about talk to you about our future work. Okay. We'll try and make this brief, but i'm sure you'll have some questions for us So what we want to do is First of all just sort of provide you with A graphic summary of the results Both on the social and health side and on the economic and fiscal side We divided these into statewide impacts and regional impacts And what this and the next slide summer Do is sort of summarize the types of changes Overall what this slide shows is that there have been few changes in social and health impacts related to the introduction of casino gambling in Massachusetts at either the statewide or the regional level There have been some changes In attitudes both more positive and more negative And some environmental impacts that were identified but only at the regional level It's important to emphasize That these impacts likely will be different Most certainly at the regional level when it comes to looking at springfield and everett going forward This slide shows that the economic and fiscal impacts have clearly been positive And particularly at the regional level there have been increases in statewide and regional revenues There have been improvements in employment and wages There have been no changes in real estate conditions And as rod just indicated there have been increases Both in government revenue, but also in government spending So going forward we have Quite a number of data collection and reporting activities planned for the current fiscal year This slide shows you what we are currently working on Including our first patron survey At mgm and we haven't talked about the cohort study today But we do have wave five of the cohort study planned to go into the field in march next In march 2019 We also have quite a number of reports That are going to be coming at you And we look forward to presenting those results as they come through the review process and are ready to be shared The next fiscal year fiscal year 2020 Includes again quite a lot of data collection as well as a number of deliverables in the form of focused reports We have proposed and look forward to discussing With mark van der linden and others at the commission The idea of conducting a targeted follow-up survey in fiscal year 2020 in springfield and surrounding communities We'll be doing the second wave of the mgm patron survey And the first wave of the first on-core patron survey We'll be doing key informant interviews and I Believe we also are planning to do focus groups in springfield We'll have wave six of the cohort study also in the field that fiscal year And a number of quite focused reports that we plan to produce in fiscal year 2020 One year after the opening of on-core boston harbour We will be doing a tremendous amount of primary data collection Which includes primarily the follow-up general population survey and the follow-up online panel survey We will be doing key informant interviews and focus groups And using the follow-up general population survey as a foundation We are hoping to be able to transition to A more cost-effective data collection approach to monitor gambling participation and problem gambling Going forward in massachusetts So that will be subject to quite a lot of discussion with other experts both at the gaming commission Or working with the gaming commission and within our team and amongst The scholarly community The following year fiscal year 2022 is going to be largely focused on reporting Because that's when we anticipate producing our next summary report Which will Include results from all of this work that we're going to be doing for the next few years And with that Um, we have uh A couple of places that you can go and look for more information And I think elisa now has uh some large reports to share with you It's exciting To have something in in you know, like real to hold are these autograph copies. Sorry. No, they're not autographed Too many members of the team Sorry, bruce. Thank you. Do we have questions of the team? Um, let me just comment that you know, we've we've seen Before some of the detailed reports that um that form part of this summary, but it's always not very nice to see A summary in this in this way um, I think You spoke to a couple of the The real reasons of the gaming act, uh, the recapture of the revenue Was was was very good to um to ascertain in plain rich. I really look forward to How that plays out on um on the category ones on on mgm started with mgm um And the general notion that at least uh so far The impacts the social impacts have been, you know The same or or or not really attributable to to casinos I think, um Of course, that's only predicated on a smaller operation. There will be Larger operations as you pointed out The good news in my mind is that there's mitigation money that comes to To this body and others To try to address those um what those impacts might be Um, so we are we're always eager to find out about those so that we can address those in the way to um That's that's appropriate because the whole point of doing all these research is to inform policy and policy makers And whatnot. Um, also with the caveat that some of the um that what we've learned is that social Costs tend to be lagging while economic costs are observed um quicker um as as perhaps alluded to here but The flip side of that point is that perhaps With so much Availability of gambling nearby Massachusetts these residents are somehow already adapted to the availability of of gambling Um, so there's multiple factors that operate here to the ultimate findings that you describe in this in this report quite well but If nothing else, I just want to point for the record that we're always Studying at those those factors interact With the with each other as as we continue to move forward into additional research Yeah, and and I would just like to add that um You know, it'll be really nice this report it's Speaking with and I've said this before but speaking with colleagues from other jurisdictions Everyone's so interested in this research and you know Having real-time information rather than anecdotal Is is really important. You mentioned sports betting As a as a topic for the future Which seeing that right now where everybody's speculating on what the impacts will be And the ability to to look at things This comprehensively I think is is really Really important And if I can mention just expand a little bit on a point you made Dr. Volberg and their team have been very good at and flexible at reacting at some of the Priorities that have come up from time to time I actually remember we had to because of the referendum and a number of things our original Plan that you actually Reminded us here had to shift a little bit had to be Certain things had to be postponed because you know our original assumptions just didn't pan out that way That's also happy that that has been a very good working model From from our standpoint rachel. So we thank you for that I I suspect we may have you know a couple of those In the future and we'll we'll continue we'll have to continue to address those as they as they come along I I would just like to add I mean, it's it's great work I I still harken back to the day rachel sat in front of Enrique and I and brought up this provision and Enrique and I Wow, we have to do research But you know is is we kind of continue this evolution and Is Enrique pointing out there's great information for policy makers and policy holders We collect a lot of information that's generated locally around these facilities and You know at some point it'd be great to think about how some of that information could be shared back with local stakeholders and see how they could Benefit by having a lot. I mean we collect crime information. It's great information give is given to us by the local Law enforcement agencies, but looking for those opportunities where we've got this great piece of information How can we share it back with local stakeholders and give them an opportunity to benefit by it or react to it? But hopefully, you know benefit from it in a positive way Well, I think you you actually touched on something very very important commissioner stevens is You know the the point of doing research Is is not just to find out what's going on. It's to feed into a process of assisting positive change And so, you know, we're very cognizant of the fact that this information is feeding into a policy and regulatory process But we have also been very aware all along that there's a need to Share information with local folks at the community level and increasingly to try and figure out how to engage people at the community level with Helping us understand what their research needs are and helping them conduct that research if if that is what they want to do so Alyssa has These fact sheets for example, which are very much intended to share information about key aspects of the sigma study with Folks at the community level Do we have them up here? I'm not sure anyway Yeah, thank you. Alyssa So basically, this is a set of 10 fact sheets They address the expanded gaming act itself the The organization of the project She How do they get in there? I see it's on the right It's a trick. Um, oh there we go And then the the remaining eight fact sheets that are in there address gambling participation some of the economic impacts and Then finally a summary of the first Findings from the cohort study So we thought these would be of interest to Folks who are not researchers But this is a way to sort of translate the results In a into a format that anybody can use We think that these will be of interest to legislators for example But perhaps even more importantly to people at the community level Who don't want to you know even Read Report, but just want to sort of know, you know, like what's the headline around One particular finding If I may add that that actually commissioner stephens your point is also I think captured and We're in the midst of a research strategic planning process And two areas that I think are Of focus that we'll be looking to expand upon And enhance is one is is community-driven research So working with the community let them define what the research questions are what the methods are And in collaboration with the the gaming commission collaboration with The sigma team and our partners at the department of public health To conduct that research to to to answer those questions In the second piece of it is Knowledge translation so exactly what you said, how do you take the research that's being created This this body of evidence And translated into a way that makes sense and can be operationalized into policy and practice There are very specific strategies to do that and we look over the the coming year and years To enhance that part of of the research program That's great Yeah, I know the team and others not here Members of our gaming research advisory committee and others have spent our research review committee Spent quite a bit of time giving feedback on on on this process of Creating these fact sheets as well as the knowledge translation as we go forward because in a very In a heavy dose of irony one of the Results of doing so much research is that it becomes we become to drown our own Our own research in a way because there's more Always coming and it's important to be able to leave the public and you know and Policy makers who may not have the time Or the world without to spend throughout all of the the research document Would really the key findings and And it's it's it's not it's always a straightforward, but it's I think this is a great effort Really? Sheets as well, and you know as many people communities in particular would I think be very interested in Having a pretty quick way to just assess exactly what's going on Good work. Thank you. Thank you for the whole team Okay Yep, we have a request for a five-minute break. We'll take that now. Thank you Okay, we will reconvene public meeting 256 at this time and welcome the racing division Dr. Leipam Good morning commissioners. Good morning. Good morning. Today. We have the 2017 annual report for the racing division I'd like to thank my sangalang for doing his magic on our report He's got some great pictures in it and helped format it In a nice manner. Also, uh, dago donnell and Chad Bork put considerable time in this report also Just in general for the 2017 year one of the highlights was getting new computers for all our staff out in the field I'd like to thank the it department for working on that We did a lot of cross training people that that were in the test area learned the Licensing procedures so they could help out Our test bond coordinator also did that She did some shadowing in the judges stand The One of our licensing folks out at suffix worked with dago donnell on some of the account wagering So we really tried to make it so that if anybody was out We would have coverage for everything because we're a fairly small division Also, we tried to make sure that our employees got Training to keep up with the latest Justin stem pack from the legal department and I went to the annual RCI conference to keep up with the best practices and all on the racing industry Chris miller our test bond coordinator took the racing officials accreditation program school for judges training and passed that exam South hands there one of our judges They have to renew every two years and that was his year to renew his continuing ed. So he did that also And then our state police unit Went to the organization of racing investigators conference to learn the latest investigative techniques So we're trying to keep everybody up to date So looking at our report First of all, we'll go to the page on suffix downs They increased their race days from six to eight and that You know led to an increase in number of races, which was significant. They had 29 more races In 2017 versus 16 That allowed 259 more horses to start Their average field size actually improved from 7.4 to 7.9 And they gave out about a million more in purses So that was a significant increase It's amazing what just a couple of days can do Um going on to plain rich park. They increased their number of days from 115 to 125 Their number of races went up about a hundred They're Significantly with the sire stakes They increase were able to increase their number of races and more importantly In 2016 only one of those Was a wagering race and in 2017 14 of those were wage wagering races That was a big improvement. So you can see that the Massachusetts breeding on the standard red side is really taking off and improving Where um, can you Just point to that number again. So I'm on page 16. Um, that page just gives the stats for 2017 But the numbers I've told I've compared it For you giving some of the numbers from 2016 To show how it's increased Yeah, but the breeding and the breeding piece I was interested Okay, so on that one On where it says 2017 racing stats and it says total number of races It's got 1202 And then it gives the overnights and then it has 20 mass sire stakes and parentheses on wagering And then 14 mass sire stakes wagering. Yes. So that 14 for 2017 would be compared to the one race in 2016, right? Okay Again their average field size went up from 7.22 in 2016 to 7.42 in 2017 And they gave out about 2 million more in purses Um in 17 than they did in 16. So again, um, those amounts are going went up significantly On page 17 at the bottom we talk about the um, racehorse developments funds that were distributed Um For the thoroughbred accounts, it's uh, about three and a half million the year before that it was two and a half Um, and for the harness accounts, it's 6.5 and it was 5.9 the year before So again, there was a significant increase in the amount of resource development funds that were given out So i'm on to page 18 now under licensing The um licensing stayed, um consistent, which is great to see The um number of applications was was similar. We had about an increase of about 200 um and one thing to remember with the Licensing is that we instituted the possibility of a one two or three year license being taken out In 2015. So it's been very popular at plane ridge. So a lot of the People at plane ridge may have a two or three year license So they don't actually get counted in these numbers because our system only records the financial part of the transaction So those transactions were calculated in earlier years. So this is still significant. They were still getting like a thousand people licensed In a year like that, even though a lot of people that are returning may have taken out a two or three year one But that's not the case we suffer downs. They're only like being licensed one year It's not that they have the option, but where the um Racing is a little more uncertain. Most people have only taken out a year We have had people that have taken out two or three year licenses, but it's very limited Again, our fees and number of licenses issued were very similar from 16 to 17, um, which I think is a great Testament to the interest In the racing, um, we're still issuing, you know, a thousand licenses at suffix and um, you know, we Issued a little over a thousand at plane ridge and again, you've got to remember that there's actually more people than that License at plane ridge because of the multi-year factor The troopers numbers vary a little bit just depending on whatever may Be going on at the track at the time. There wasn't any anything really Significant in a change there Going on to page 24 under laboratory services The number of samples that we took obviously went up Because there was a considerable more days of racing And there is a list of all the different either overages for therapeutic medications or positives for other drugs and It's interesting because in 2016 We had 16 overages of the controlled therapeutic medication program and 10 positives and in 17 we had 15 controlled therapeutic overages and 10 positives so it's virtually the same which is Great because proportionally we obviously we had a lot more races in 17 So the proportionally the number of drug positives and overages went down Dr. Leipam, can we attribute that to something? I'm not sure Our oversight Couldn't you? Yeah, I mean we've made a big effort to try to educate everybody. We put out a trainer's manual that's on our website. We hand it out in our office. It's in the office down in the test in the test barn and in the Paddock judges office, so it's very available. It's online To try to make sure everybody knows The therapeutic medication list now has been out there for five years and it's occasionally updated those are That was an effort to recognize that there are medications that are legitimately used in athletes Just like a human taking aspirin on a horse same similar thing You just don't necessarily want it given the day of the race and so there's Levels that are acceptable and there's some guidelines as to how those medications can be given to Make sure that you're under those and We just stress that with those I know that there would be it's it's hard to find causation direct causation but I I really believe that when when people know that we're constantly sampling Or testing the winners and randomly another horse and those samples are being kept securely and and sent to an accredited lab And there's the occasional Case that gets to what the hearing officer and gets to us about somebody who went over You know the threshold etc people people know that they need to Take all of these matters very seriously and look at the manual as you suggest and And learn about all all of those thresholds. Yes, and our lab is good They have several different programs They'll offer to the trainers if they have questions about how they're giving the medications and all And we also post all of our rulings. So it's it's very transparent once they've had the ruling the judges have made their decision It's posted in the racing building And it's also online and we keep a there's a book that we keep a binder And that's left out and the trainers have access to that. Basically anytime they can want to come into that building. So They can even go in that building when Nobody's in the building that part is open Left open and so if they want to come in and flip through those And see what rulings we've had It's right there By the way along the same lines Is it fair to say that we have A community of the same number of the same people Coming year to year because if we had a lot of new people, let's say or a lot of rotation Then you know, there would be at least more of a need for More education or or whatnot Right and and we do have a lot of new people coming in particularly at Suffolk That's a whole a lot of new people And at Plain Ridge, we also have a where the purses have gotten better We have seen a big increase in in more people coming from other track for the day and that type of thing One of the fortunate things is with rci trying to promote Uniformity between the different states and part of it's that therapeutic medication program. Yes Everybody should be on that same page You know, so if they're racing in new york or main or new jersey They should they're be under that same program some some of the States have a slightly different Thing on certain drugs. I think new york still has a difference on their clenbuterall level But the trainers are aware that you know, there's a difference In things like that and and they're aware that in massachusetts. We follow the rci rules Okay, so we couldn't really take all the credit then We can take partial credit though. I would agree that we can't I think by reading you mentioned this commissioner When an appeal does make its way to us Um, when we look at those reports, it's really apparent that Whether it be the folks in the test barn or our judges Um, you know, the work is very professional. We are following model rules and um You know, that's It's a pleasure to read those reports Due to the fact that we see that things are being done according to According to best practices. So it's a tribute to you or your staff. Oh, thank you And um, justin step back has been a great help For us he handles the appeals and um, he's does training with the judges at the beginning of the year I attend those also so that um, you know, we're all on the same page And then um, he's very good about um, if something gets appealed He follows up with us on what we need to do to help him out on His part of it. You know, I would like to attend that training when he comes up next Great. Just just to see it. Yeah, it's very and maybe learn something frankly. Sure. Yeah so As far as rulings for 2017 at suffolk They issued five rulings And um, that was mainly there was a drug positive there, which we really hadn't had drug positives at suffix got these You know the boutique meat That they've been doing And then there was an issue with a claim to or so that was You know, not a big jump, but it was a little bit of a difference from before Um at plain ridge the number of rulings actually went down slightly. There were 129 in 2016 And there were 123 in 2017 There uh, we had the same board of judges That we had in the second half of 16 Going into 17 So I think it was, you know, pretty consistent on what they were How they were Doing things one thing that we do to try to um help the horsemen out as well is at the beginning of the season There's a meeting Before the first day of racing with the trainers and um drivers Grooms anybody who's there can come down and the judges address them and um stevo tool does I do just with Some of the highlights of what's expected. Um, and if there's any new Rules that have come up over the winter We talk about that And go through that so, uh, again It's we would encourage people to follow the rules. We're not Looking to on a kind of a get you thing. We would prefer everybody just follow the rules But if they don't then, you know, they're We'll follow up with the consequences Um, I think that pretty much, um Spins up, uh The part that I'll give I'll turn it over to dago nano. We did have um something that we discovered this morning on our expenditures, um that we're going to have to go back and and um Correct those numbers. Um, as you know with um racing We operate on a calendar year and our reports are calendar year and Most everybody else goes on a fiscal year. So we had a little bit of an issue Converting from one to the other so we'll make that correction and also we've noticed a couple of typos. So, um, we'll also address those Before we make it public Okay, good morning commission. Good morning. Good morning. Um, so if we go to page 30 with the uh racing financials are Again, what alex said is it's uh based on a calendar year basis. So this is for 2017 In the total receipts for that year were 2,646,601 dollars, which is down Approximately 300,000 from the prior year, which we can discuss later in the in the report Um, as she said the expenditures we had an issue with the calendar year fiscal year So we will not be reviewing those and that will have an effect on the following page as well The program revenues are accurate, but with the additional program expenses It's going to throw off the bottom line there. So again a revision will be will be submitted to you So, um, so if we go to page 32 Handle and revenue by track Live and on track handle we had a total of 219 million 10,295 dollars and that was up From the prior year, which is approximately 209 million commission and fees Were 2,081,404 which were down a little bit from the prior year in the outs were 565,197,000 And the prior year was 582. So those those outs remained somewhat consistent Then we have commission business on page 33 if we want to go to page 35. It's a handle comparison Uh, comparing 2016 to 2017 Uh, total live handle We had an increase of 25 Which is attributable to um, the additional race days. We had um 115 at plain ridge park in 16 and 125 race days in 2017 In suffolk, we had six race days in 16 and eight race days in 17 Um If we go down the next the total import, uh, we were up 4.21 percent And on the exports you were up 20 percent, which also would be attributable to the additional race days Which gives us a total increase for all Handles of 5.8 So on the following page it'll show the handles which you just went over 5.8 percent in the commissions In 2017 you'll see the first line item there of commissions We were actually down 23 percent And that is due to the fact that the dog handle commission Was reduced last year from 2.5 percent to 0.375 percent. So that's a significant reduction That's you know, that's why the difference is there And that was that was a permanent reduction remind me, right? Yes. Yep. Yep And that was at the beginning of last year. So we saw that from the beginning difference. Yeah So moving forward analysis of purses paid 2017 we always do a comparison between 2016 and 17 As you can see in 16 the plain ridge park purses were 7.9 million and this year there were 9.9 million And suffix downs was 2.7 and compared to 3.8 for this year Doug can I go go back a little bit to the handle comparison on page 35? Yep 35 yeah on the Import help me understand the import and the export The import in plain ridge went down. Yes while suffoc went up Um How is that again suffix includes all the adw's Oh, of course So that's you know, they they did have an increase of handles there. Yeah plain judgers down moderately um And that You know that varies year in and year out. I mean they're only down 1.6 percent, but they're You can see their um their export east exports increased. Yeah, yeah, so I mean, let's see, you know, they stay within a Certain parameters in terms of what their their handles are so But but the export is Positive and I guess that's a positive development from the additional purses now our our races are being watched elsewhere Exactly with more with the south cause Better product. Yeah, right Okay Okay, so if we go to page 38 the suffix downs financial reports um Again, there are live handles up You can we also include the adw's which are They're in there Uh, and their total handle is up over 10 percent for the year Okay, and along with that their total revenues Were also up close to 10 percent 8.5 percent That's great The next page is their capital improvement trust fund And promotional trust fund they have a significant balance in their their cap fund Uh, they they started off the year with 810 000 Revenues into it with 784 000 They did have some expenditures out of there and their balance at the end of calendar year 2017 was 815 000 So again, they're you know, they're working with us and Sub submitting their rfcs for the cap fund, but We'd like to see more come in to reduce this they would too. So but it's just taking a little time In their promotional trust fund Um, they are in a deficit. They have submitted, uh Rfcs for the promotional fund which far exceed what's in there. So they are in what's what's been submitted Uh, they're in a deficit of 654 000. So is that Fund increases they will submit an RFR for us to To get that money out to them Okay, moving on to page 40. It's planarge park casino Again, you can see the overall handle is up 5.6 percent Exports have a play in that and the um, the total revenues are down once again, it's due to the um The die candle commission because that was reduced And moving forward on page 41 The their capital improvement trust fund Uh, they started off the year of 289 000. They have taken they have done some significant work there um Program revenue that went in was 185 000 and the end of calendar year 17 they had 124 000 With their promotional trust fund they started off the year in a deficit But they have put additional monies in there 58 000 and they currently have 21 000 in there now So the revenues at planarge are impacted by the dog? Yes, because they take dog signals there. They do. Yes, they do And that's primarily what the difference is Okay, so if we go to uh page 43 reigning park Uh, their overall signals were down Uh, approximately 7 percent from the prior year In the biggest impact on on their revenues was the uh commissions because the majority of their handles are from dogs So that's why they had a Big decrease in that and with wonderland Their handles are also endowed significantly and that's because Suffolk downs last year took dog handles on the suffix license Okay, so they've taken a fair amount of dog hand Signals and put them over on suffix And again, that's the same with them. Oh really? Yes, because it's now more economical Or is the market bearing that or it's sure Whatever the market bears whatever the market bears. Okay, so Okay And that shows the um again a big decrease in their in their total revenues And on page 45, I would just like to point out the smile on commissioner stevens face He was our honorary p-catcher for the day and he was carrying around to his uh his work. So We all well y'all at mgc want to thank you. I'm holding an empty bucket. It's empty It's a water bucket. It's a water bucket. It's a water bucket. So that was a prop Any kind of just industry bus? I mean Florida just went through their recent election. They are banning dog racing right going through the california market 20 that it really hasn't had an effect on us as of yet because a lot of the the the major signals Will still continue through 2020 some of the smaller tracks You know may phase out next year. We don't know but Towards the end of 2020 when that's done the majority of the signals In the tracks come out of florida.  Um number 30 at page 30, and I know there's um Expenditures that are not reflected and will correct that but in general Are the commissions and And receipts exceeding the expenditures overall they usually do the last time we had a surplus was 2012 we had a hundred and I want to say a hundred and ten thousand dollar surplus which was split between the The the purse purse accounts with the tracks From there until now we have run into a deficit, but it's last year was 135 thousand dollar deficit So it's really marginal and it's always been pretty close to that You know a couple years it's been under a hundred thousand a few over but right, okay It's great. It's great report good work questions Yeah, again, thank you to the team. I know you just finished the season And it's apparent every time we go out there how uh, every everything is working smoothly we are a model agency And um, please thank the team for their professionalism and their hard work. Thank you. We have a great group working for us Thank you guys. Thanks. Thank you all It will move on now to the legal division general counsel blue Good morning commissioners. We have two items for you today The first is the nondisclosure agreement template and I have deputy general counsel grossman here to speak to you on that And then we have some amendments to the gaming equipment regulation 205 cmr 146 So we'll start with the nda template first Good afternoon commissioners. Good afternoon. Oh, it's not quite afternoon. Good morning. Good morning. I always you're usually on late anyways I'm usually up by about noon. So never figure out. Anyway As as you're aware, we have uh, nondisclosure agreements that we Uh, typically enter into with gaming licensees Before you is the template that we use when negotiating these agreements It there was a particular issue identified in the template that We thought the commission should have a look at in order to determine whether the right policy is reflected In this, uh, nondisclosure template and as you can see it's highlighted in red on the next page Um of the the packet it's uh paragraphs eight and ten And it pertains to the commission's obligation to notify the gaming licensees upon being contacted by a governmental agency To provide certain information that is subject otherwise to this agreement Under the existing language We would notify the licensee that we had been contacted by a governmental agency seeking information that is subject to the coverage of this agreement For purposes of allowing them to seek a protective order or some other type of court intervention Perhaps preventing us from turning the information Over and there's a similar language relative to subpoenas under the The new proposed language that function would be made discretionary on the part of the commission If it were determined that the integrity of a governmental investigation could be compromised by notifying The gaming licensee It was included initially as a means to ensure That the licensees had a certain comfort level in providing us the wide variety of Information that they do some of which is required by law other is Somewhat discretionary on their part and as you'll recall Absent the nondisclosure agreement the commission does not have any means to protect From public disclosure much of the information that we do receive from the gaming licensees So it is a critical component to our ability to To fulfill our duties to oversee the gaming Industry here in massachusetts to take in as much information as possible and to be able to protect as much of it as possible So that's that's the issue that is before the commission It's ultimately really just a matter of public policy at the moment I just want to say thank you for working on the issue in terms of making sure that while we assure the licensees were also Fulfilling our role as you know an investigative or enforcement body as well and working in conjunction with You know government investigations, etc. And not compromising anything unwittingly And so I I appreciate taking you taking the time to amend the template My pleasure So you did read that Shall not be under any obligation, etc. If it determines that the integrity Is there an if there that needs to be right after the coma? And my question is more substantive than that Is it the commission us or the agency Executive director or the legal department How is that determination and use of these question is The first question I think is easier. I think the if Exists in the previous part of the sentence Yes The second part is a little more complicated typically And this does not or has not yet come up with any frequency but The legal department typically processes all requests for public records oftentimes in conjunction with other divisions of the commission And makes a call as to whether the Nda applies or it doesn't apply This would add a level of discretion Into the mix and with many other things. I would say that if it were Um A significant Matter, I think we would probably bring it to the commission To decide exactly what to do, but I think we would try to resolve it if we could At the staff level Okay My only concern with that is whether Erring in the side protecting the integrity of an investigation Is whether the judgment of general counsel's office is To disclose to the licensees that would be something that prior to doing disclosure Um, I would hope the commission would be alerted. We as the commissioners would be alerted to something like that I mean, obvious that's that's fair. Um, obviously bringing certain issues We'd have to do that in exactly an exact session or come up with a way to do it. I guess Yeah, we haven't really crossed that or confronted the issue So it's hard to say but I think your your point is is certainly noted and Um, we would make efforts, of course to do that We could like in other areas, uh, use the expertise of one commissioner to have input on this That may be appropriate and I think commissioner o'brien would be appropriate Commissioner to to deal with these matters That's fine Okay, I think it'll be rare, but if it does happen, um I think that's that's that would be an appropriate way to move forward with commissioner o'brien's Guidance in the matter or at least a notification commissioner o'brien so I I take it the commission is comfortable with the proposed language which would modify the template moving forward Yes with any nondisclosure agreements and this And this issue requires a vote Yes Do we have a motion commissioner? I move that the commission approve the template as presented today To the commission subject also to the caveat that we discussed in terms of notification To me as the designated commissioner to the extent that the discretion is not exercised I second it Further discussion All in favor I Those not in favor zero passes for zero. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you Second issue the team is coming forward Morning commissioners. Good morning. Good morning. So in your packet you have some amendments to 205 cmr 146, which are the gaming equipment regulations These changes were spurred by some issues related to Just the comfort of the patrons at the physical tables. They were fighting. They were a bit overcrowded And our regulations as they exist now are quite rigid and require a specific number of seats at each table So we've just made some amendments to allow up to that number of seats so that if it does become overcrowded The licensee can remove one of those chairs We've also made some changes just to clean up the language to make sure it's clear What terms we're using when we're talking about the player's actual seat at the table versus the bedding area on the table So do you have any questions on those changes? Yeah, what happens when there's a chair removed and of course the layout doesn't change The layout will change with them. Oh, it will. Yeah, it will go down to let's say if it required seven originally Uh, and now they want to use six their layout will will have six on it So this is something that An adjustment that they don't necessarily do on On the go, uh Yeah, I mean it's not that hard to get a new layout printed and things like that and going forward for, you know Patron comfort they they a lot of places will reduce the number of seats Yeah available. Okay I think I was missing the point that if it's overcrowded you have less seats Um, I think it's elbow room how oh, it's elbow room Yeah, if it's too close the tables are too close to each other, right? And there's they're too close and crammed in I see okay not able to um to be able to get in comfortably Because of I understand now gives the licensee discretion Thank you And previously we were prescribing bedding positions Yet, whatever the equipment pretty much you that said seven you had to have seven on there seven and Seven people might not get along with each other when I'd have a little more space. Exactly Further questions very good very straightforward Um, madam chair. I move the commission approve Uh first the small business impact statement for the amendments to 205 cmr 146 gaming equipment Is included in the packet Second Further discussion All in favor Those not in favor For zero that passes Uh Next I move the commission approve the amendments to 205 cmr 146 is included in the packet and authorize the staff to file the regulation On an emergency basis Pursuant to chapter 23 k section 5b and further to take the steps necessary to file the regulation With the secretary of the commonwealth and to proceed with a formal regulation promulgation process discussion All in favor I Not in favor For zero. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you Next we will move on to um Community mitigation Mr. Delaney will be assisting us Thank you commissioners Thank you. Thank you So i'm pinch hitting for john today But before we start um, we'd like to uh, thank all of the members of the gaming policy advisory committee The local community mitigation advisory committees and the subcommittee On community mitigation for their participation and input into this process And in particular, we would like to mention the region a chair richard caraviello representing the city of medford The region b chair jill mccarthy pain Representing the city of springfield And ron hogan from region a and carmena finandez from region b who are our subcommittee members Um Back on october 25th. We had a fairly lengthy discussion here on the draft guidelines So, um, I won't go into a whole lot of depth on a lot of them I'll just touch on some of the high points and on some of the things we may not have discussed In depth on that day For our 2019 spending targets, we spent a little bit of time on this this issue What we're recommending is A $200,000 spending target for the category two facility With 2.5 million for region a and 4 million for region b That being the the two and a half million from the original Gaming licenses plus the one and a half million that they expect to generate between august and and september Makes up that difference between region a and region b What was the spending target remind me of the? Category two 200,000 that's basically been our historic spending on that and obviously We can modify that a little bit if we for some reason received lots of applications for that area We can reevaluate that that split um One of the things we talked about was um having regional Target spending which we just went over um, and it was agreed that the money that was generated in region a would stay in region a Money in region b would stay in region b with the category two being a Combination from both of the the facilities since they don't generate any community mitigation funds themselves um Now what we also did in this we were saying that any uh money that would carry over That it was generated. We carried over for a period of up to three years and our Our guidelines reflect that When we were in all the committee meetings, there was some talk about having the carry over money being first in first out um, and we looked at that and and that kind of a more open-ended system um Could benefit a region by allowing funds to accumulate for a potential large project but also, um That accumulation could also be at the expense of some of the more immediate needs of other regions um So we are uh proposing, you know, what we did in the guidelines and that's what we're recommending to move forward with The three year carry over Yeah, three years and at the end of three it goes back to the sort of what we call a general fund that can go to either region Right, um, rather than having this first in first out means that any carryover is the first to all is spent if that region continues to um Expend less than what they're allocated What you wind up with is all of the old money being spent first in sort of larger Uh potential surpluses being generated in that area Which then the commission at some point the commission would have to come back and say well Do we want to continue to sort of hold this money or move it? Yep. This gives a little bit more, uh definitive guidelines on when that money comes back To the general fund to be split between the regions as necessary But it's only that first year money that comes back after three years, right? Not the second year comes back for the sake of argument If we said that uh the first year that was a million dollar carried over then next year It was two million that first million plus another million And so and after the 30th that first million would roll back with that second and third it'd be a whole a rolling a rolling Yeah, uh revision I guess a reversion to the And hey, he could still come back to that region frankly Yes, it just comes back to the to the we hope that it never comes to this We hope that if someone under expends one Year that they make up with that with additional expenditures the next year But we're just trying to do this sort of as a jesting case kind of thing One of the things that we were asked to look at was um The potential for additional applications to be submitted post february one Um, so there are two pieces to this the first piece is that um Our uh by statute were required to have a february first deadline So we don't think that without a legislative change that we can have sort of a general kind of rolling admission process um The second part of it is that we said that previously we had set up Reserves for the individual cities and towns what we could do Is set up a reserve That would have to be applied for by some entity, which we don't know who that would be yet um That could sort of reserve that money for potential emergency expenditures Now right now we have no language in our guidelines that allows that so if um If the commission wants to move ahead with that in any motion You would have to give us the authority to essentially write some guidelines around that and to make that happen So right now we've said it's it's a possibility, but we don't have anything written really to make that happen I think just uh to to add on to what joe Uh discussed we kind of had this question here really kind of percolated it up to the community Mitigation subcommittee, which is what do we do in this window from february first to the following february first If there's an emergency mitigation that needs to happen We can't I don't think we should be in a position of just saying Well, you don't have to wait until the next deadline. We want to I think try to be more proactive and address something um Keeping in mind there are certainly the language and host community and surrounding community agreements to Potentially deal with some of these issues Um, but my thought in in talking with with John and joe was to say we know that There's going to be some extra money available from what mgm is contributing to the pot even though there's obviously this um focus on keeping the money locally, but um Creating kind of an emergency reserve That a host community I guess in this case could apply for it would still require commission approval as we did with the with the previous reserve process that john and joe and um Mary created and that we created in past years And again to set this money aside if an emergency comes up that we need to deal with Um, we just don't want again I don't think we want to find ourselves in a position of saying we got to put you off until the next mitigation But what could come up that's an emergency that needs something That cannot be unforeseen so I can't really say Well, what has there been anything for something possibly right? Related to the casino if if the casino functioning somehow was affected You know their continued functioning based on some sort of damage or that impacts the community Yeah, I in and I not to to interject. I think We were wrestling with this question And I would suggest, you know putting it forward as kind of a one-year pilot let's See how it happened, you know see what might come up see what may not come up, but at the same time You know still giving us as a commission the ultimate authority to Approve an emergency kind of reserve application It's not just there and the community can come get it when they want to which is the old reserve process that but we still have some authority You know, we're kind of walking into some uncharted waters that Is is or I think our interest is heightened by the fact that we've always had this February 1st deadline Statute provided for it, but Should we just be a little more cautious and think of what might happen between these funding lines? I I just don't see it. I I I think if anything we could Try to allow for some retro activity If it fits within the guidelines and keep to the to the to the Such story deadline I think in the past the only thing that came up was somebody who missed the deadline and You know, if it's something that we've done in the past they could Appropriate the the communities could react accordingly appropriate the money top their own funding reserves For emergencies and whatnot and then come back to the commission at any time You know for some retroactive consideration I think creating these reserve For emergencies might just just sounds like I don't know stretching the guideline the the statutory date line in the and opening the door for a lot of I don't know requests that might be hard to manage I'd like to hear from general counsel blue with regard to the statutorily the deadline and what What our ability is so the february 1st deadline applies to the commission And applications have to be in by february 1st We would have to do some careful thinking about how to set this up because When we did the reserves to the communities the commission made An award to the community as based on a february 1st application When it came back the commission really wasn't approving the award per se. They were approving the use They they gave the money. They gave it to the community Subject to them coming back and telling us about it In a in a situation like this They would have to be an application by february 1st by some entity to put this reserve into their hands We would have to think about what kinds of guidelines we wanted to craft around that So that the entity with the reserve money could make a decision that complied with our guidelines So We can go back and craft something for the commission to look at But the february 1st application date really as far as the commission is concerned is a pretty hard and fast kind of date so I appreciate the idea of a reimbursement and that is something we should consider too But this is a little different than the reserves we set up for individual communities Yeah, I just I just don't see and again it's on it's it would be for an unforeseen condition. So I don't you know, but um I don't I don't it's hard for me to imagine the emergency that would warrant this If especially we have now an ongoing process. We have this year over year In some cases communities are not really spending the money that they have Been awarded Which creates, you know, enough of a cash flow in the fund You know to again monitor and manage and whatnot and make awards the following year I think within that context, you know Communities at any time and they have in the past can come in and say You know, can I modify my prior award? And split it for the next fiscal year or whatever whatever the case may be And again and give us the discretion at that time to make any adjustments But I think the the the funding round on the award round. I think it's important to preserve Otherwise it becomes too hard to manage Yeah, I and again and I was thinking of a motion that would certainly allow Our ombudsman and Joe to work with legal to kind of lay out this framework and Make an application available by February 1st um And just thinking initially about the idea of Giving a community a chance to come back to us and having them expend the funds um Would put us in a position of having to accept that community's definite We spent this money. We thought it was an emergency That would put us in a position of Two choices. We don't think it's an emergency. So you had to go and spend your own money as opposed to A position where maybe we're communicating a little bit more with the community to try to come together and figure out If something was an emergency purpose um As opposed to maybe finding ourselves in a position where we've stuck the community with the bill and we said We're not going to reimburse you. So I I mean again, it's it's I think it's something we all agreed. We wish we had Thought through a little bit more embedded a little bit more and got some more feedback from but um Uh but coming up in that last subcommittee meeting Again just I'm worried about us not being able to respond to again an unforeseen emergency in this You know, we adopt guidelines every year. So this may not be a guideline next year, but Uh, I'd like to think that we could Test it out for one year I actually think that changing guidelines on communities from year to year creates more of an uncertainty frankly, but I just The the certainty of the funding round deadline and what these monies are for With you know with the with the funding round review um I think should be should be you know, I just cannot cannot fathom the need for for an emergency That cannot be you know addressed in in any other in in other ways in which communities currently do You know that would be related to this fund I think for me The preliminary base open question is really talking to with the general counsel's group in terms of is there a way given the statutory structure To set up a fund either that resides with the commission that can be applied for at any point by Um the community or would it have to be the community who applies by the february 1 And then comes back and it maybe neither one is possible under the current structure It it cannot reside with the commission with an application that comes in after february 1st The money would have to be given To maybe to an organization If the commission wanted to have a sort of emergency reserve for each community as you did reserves before That would be one way to do that But I think if you're thinking this is a Fund that would cover emergencies across the commonwealth based on an impact from a casino There would have to be some other organization that applied by february 1st And the commission would have to award that money to that organization Then the next step would be how would the commission Monitor that organization giving out the funds and it There would need to be guidelines that that organization had to follow And so we could come back potentially for some sort of review But the february 1st application date kind of it makes it a little bit difficult for us to have Something that arises as an emergency after february 1st I just don't see the emergency For for something like this. I I know I know it's you know, it's hard to Say that we would never close the door to something like this. What if what if there's a real emergency? Well, we'll let's let's see it happen and you know, schedule it for the next commission meeting And and and think about it. I think designing a program like this that's As it's merits if it's If people know that there's a funding round that's Statutory and that there's guidelines that come out every year and there's going to be a review process for any one of these Requests for consideration And there's even some flexibility embedded in our whole process in which Prior awards can be rethought reconsidered like with some with some flexibility It is it is really hard for me to imagine that there would be An event that's of such magnitude that that And the mitigation the communication money is the only source That could address that for us to do something like this That's that's really only somebody can give me a concrete example Where you know these things wouldn't apply It's hard for me to go along with this suggestion. Well, it doesn't sound like it's feasible legally Is what you're saying it's it would be difficult legally I mean we would we would work to try to craft something that we would present to you for you to consider But it is it is difficult when you're trying to balance the application deadline versus the commission's ultimate control over how the funds are handed out well, I think um We need to vote on this item today, but commissioner stebbins maybe some more work for next year would be appropriate But working with the legal team, but it doesn't sound like we're at a point where we We can move forward Unless you you you have more to to give us here. Yeah, I I would Share with you and I'm not officially putting this in the form of the motion that the motion I was going to offer would Allow us to authorize the ombudsman the construction project oversight manager working with our legal department To adopt a framework and apply and provide an application for an emergency reserve of $250,000 for the host community to apply for by february 1st So giving you a sense of again not an official motion, but to give you a sense of where we could go with this I'm just not hearing enough from legal that this is that this is feasible. That's where I'm I think I am not going to assume that I know that emergency will not happen, but I'm more concerned with What we can do legally here So I think what you've proposed commissioner stebbins can be done in the current structure If a post community were to come to us and say I want to create an emergency fund If something comes up during the year then we would review that through the community mitigation fund in the normal course What it what it would require is that every community that wanted to do that would need to make an application for that Which is also fine, too. I don't I don't think you need a separate program We would probably need some guidelines to put into this document about what constitutes an emergency But you would not need to change the process I don't think if you're going to have them apply for that kind of a fund by february 1st Yeah, I'd much rather get that If if people say there's been a number of things That have come up in the past that we've had to fund Because the deadline has always passed We feel that you know, we didn't even bring it up to you guys. What about the next year? You know, could you could you do that that would be fine. It's it's the concept of The concept of creating an emergency reserve that I have A problem with Is it the emergency reserve that resides with the host community or the the creation of an emergency fund the latter the latter Because I think that opens the door for a num for a number of things that become very hard to manage There's enough for us to do that the team does, you know year-round including not In a small way all of these consultations With the local community mitigation advisory committees and whatnot And disseminating the information and embracing them of what's new and what remains That people should be generally in a good position to know what's coming There's also a finite, you know, a small number of communities really that we see from From year to year That, you know, of course given Proximity and you know, the host and surrounding communities and there's plenty of in my view Different sources to tap into from for for for things that do come up so Are we comfortable moving forward with With the idea that within our existing regulations and framework we can There may be a possibility of moving forward with your concerns. Yeah, I again, I'm not I'm I'm not sure within the frameworks We have proposed for this year. We could You know address kind of an emergency or critical situation again, and I I hear your point It's trying to think through what that could possibly be Well, let him tell us is I understand that our point is we can't really help them out Potentially for another year, which is not where I want to find ourselves or I would hope it could be a little more responsive, but that has never come up I understand I understand but we now have one Class one casino that is open and operating And potentially another one To begin operations within this current or upcoming calendar year, but again, I'm I've raised my point. I'm happy to set it aside and see if we can do some More vetting and investigation and probably give our local community mitigation advisory Groups a chance to weigh in on this kind of notion as we go forward I think that's appropriate. Yeah Thank you. And just one one more item to discuss That we didn't get to talk about too much back on october 25th All of our grant programs were proposing All of them to be the same as last year with the same amount of money As you know for maximum applications with the exception of one item. We have added what we're calling a transit project of regional significance And we're proposing to put $500,000 towards that on a statewide basis and what this would allow is Um Well a little background the genesis of this whole thing was The pedestrian bridge in everett and the ability of the commission to potentially provide some funds towards that primarily towards the head house connector and that kind of thing and Then the idea behind this is that the commission would be able to put some money towards that as long as there are You know, it's a generally a small amount of money compared to the money that's being put up by either private entities federal state or other sources of funds and as we Started looking at this we realized that this is not just for this particular project, but this is for You know down in the category two area there's been some talk of a Regional connector between Plain Ridge and Foxboro and Rentham and Great Woods and other other locations down there out in the western region There's been some talk of potentially trying to increase Service pvta for late night service and other things to help service the casino employees better. You know nothing been firmly defined at this point, but The idea is that we will put a sort of a small amount of money towards that this year Because really any kind of a project like this isn't going to really get off the ground for a little while And that there would probably only be a very small amount of expenditures Within this next fiscal year on any one of those projects So that's essentially what we're proposing on that and with that, I guess we take any other questions that you may have and You know we look for a motion On the guidelines giving us some authority to make some minor changes consistent with the guidelines and then what you want to do with the regional reserve or the emergency reserve We'll take whatever you have on that and we expect that we'll post the applications assuming you approve it early next week Again, I give a great shout out to to john and in joe and mary for In jill for the great work that they do Meeting with the local community mitigation advisory committees the community mitigation subcommittee to Kind of pull all this feedback together As long as we meet quorum, we have good meetings But appreciate the the the work that's gone into this Madam chair, I move that the commission approved the 2019 community mitigation fund Guidelines is provided in the packet subject to any kind of grammatical changes or immaterial changes Discussion so this doesn't include the Notion of the emergency piece at this point. No, it's not included in the guidelines so we can I'm Consider that for another date further discussion All in favor Not in favor hearing none the motion passes for zero Next we're on to commissioners updates. Do do we have any for today? Okay, the next item item nine is an executive session And the commission will now go into An executive session pursuant to mgl chapter 30a section 21a 3 for the purpose of discussing litigation strategy In the case of steven a win versus caron wells the massachusetts gaming commission win resorts When a discussion in an open session would have a detrimental effect on litigation Position for the commission the commission will not reconvene In open session at the end of the executive session Do I have a motion to go into executive session? second Okay, hearing second Is there any further discussion on that? I'd like to take a roll call vote of the commission to go into Executive session commission stephans. Yes Uh commissioner uh zuniga. Yes commissioner o'brien. Yes, and I vote in the affirmative as well Um, thank you. The commission is now in executive session pursuant to the open meeting law All members of the public and any staff members not involved in this matter to be discussed must leave the room I ask that all live Audio and video recording and live streaming be shut off and the doors to the room be closed. Thank you