e table. Is it fair to say that the online operators. Are already set up. To. Implement. 2502. Subsection one. A B D and F. Yes. And so would it be a compromise? And this is to my fellow commissioners. To. For now. Put C and E in the parking lot. And move this regulation forward. With the exception of those two subsections. As well as the elimination of 255. For the notifications section. And then. Do a little bit more homework. And then we'll see you at the end of the session. I'll see you at the end of the session. We'll see you at the end of the session. We'll see you at the end of the session. We'll see you at the end of the session. But just the changes that Dave just already mentioned that we discussed earlier. Yes. I'm at that. But the added change would be eliminating. C and E from 255. 021. Right. I'm fine with that. What do you think about that proposal. And then any adaptations? Because it looks like there's some references to. The the implementation, just because I feel like. Again, keeping the momentum is better. If it's all together as one thing, as opposed to a couple of stuff we've plucked out. But I leave that to Mark. If he feels like it's better to have that, those sections in place. Now. Thank you commissioner. Brian. Now operators currently have. Limit setting. In place. And I don't see that changing when they, when they launch in Massachusetts. I think. There are specific. Philosophical approach that. We've adopted it in Massachusetts. I think. Needs to be implemented or reflected in the current play. Management or limit setting technology. And so I do. And would really appreciate a. Or prolonged process to kind of. Figure. Figure that out. And what makes. What makes sense. What makes sense. What. What is feasible. What we need to be working towards. So commissioner Brian. To your point. I do like a little bit of fire. Under myself and our operators to. To push this discussion. I mean, not to keep pulling it back to, to play my way. It was a good process, but there, there wasn't the fire under our feet of a regulation. Which was a different, a different experience than this. So. I want to. I would love. To. Push this out. And make sure that there. Are limit setting features in place that are consistent in Massachusetts. And I think. That's probably in place right now. I would like to continue to evolve this, this type of tool to make sure that we're. Improving this practice in collaboration. With, with our operators and come to a regulation. That works for everybody. So mark, I have to say, I'm not sure exactly what that means. Does that mean that. You need. You'd like some time. To kind of. Do on it. And then. We visit it with us. And. Implement. The regulation. That works. So mark, I have to say, I'm not sure exactly what that means. Does that mean that you need. That works and works for the. Operators. What are you asking? I'm sorry. Actually, after I stopped talking, I realized I wasn't all that clear. I. Two things I could either go. I could. I think commissioner of Brian's recommendation. That. I'm not sure that. Or carried carries recommendation that we adopted. We have a full, a full three months in order to come up. Get feedback, revise this, this. Regulation and come before the commission. At a later date so that it's something that. It is. It's more complete. Or if we wanted to put it in the parking lot. I guess I would just ask the commission to have some. To come up with some type of time table. And accountability for. For our staff, for me and my team. And our. I pledge that I pledge that I can. I will give you a short timeline. You know, I'm not thinking of putting this down months. I'm thinking. Come back in a couple of weeks to us and educate us about the policy. We learn more about the landscape. And then we get. You know, We learn more about the landscape. You know, The reg. Maybe it's an amendment to the reg that commissioner Skinner is just proposing. And, you know, put it in and it might. Evolve differently with a little bit of. You know, the commissioner is really being able to give good input and get some more input from the. The online operators and the chaos. So I just. Think you might get a better. We saw. But I'm not thinking. You know, it's going to be very high. It's going to be a short. A short, short parking time. I'm looking at our GLI experts. Joe and Mike. Yeah, I just, I just want to reiterate that. I double checked and.  And. We've already tested. In other jurisdictions that have the, if not exact near same language and adopted regulation. So it's only C then. It was C and. E to some extent. Okay. So still see any. Yep. And so it's already there. In fact. We're going to be testing it. Of the two. In multiple markets and multiple other markets, and we'll be actively testing it. Now for Massachusetts. So what about the O four then 255, Oh, four that. Oh, four is. Massachusetts. And the requirement for notifications. Would be. Specific to mass. And a little bit more cumbersome or. to put in place. In a short time frame, considering they're aligning to launch in a new market, I would say that is a extreme ask. All right. But the MISCA. Okay. And then Mike had his hand up, but maybe he took it down. Went back to the back of the row. Now we've got Dr. Van was up to support Joe. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Mike. Director Vandalinden. Yeah, I think the notifications is a perfect example of something that I would like to continue to work with our, you know, with the industry, with our operators on. I think that's a perfect example philosophically. I really like the idea that we're providing people with advanced notification before they actually reach whatever limit or budget that they have set. But clearly as GLI pointed out, there's some issue with implementation. But I think that it's something that we may be able to work on and get to a solution with time. Okay. That sounds good then. What do we think about this? Sorry, go ahead. One thing I want to bring up with notifications, unlike play my way, you know, with sports wagering is if it's tied to a player, account the player has a full transaction history available at all times, deposits, withdrawals, wagers, they can review responsible gaming limits, their balance is clear cut on the screen. So it's not a, oh no, I forgot I spent $100 last week. And, you know, in cash, like on a slot machine, it's all reported in the system and available for the player to see. That page does give that and that's universal, right? Yes. Yeah. And it's required by your regulations already to have an account balance, you know, to have the account history. It's actually a requirement of GLI 33 as well. Mark, I think you were probably imagining it was real time notifications of some sort, but I think the nature of sports wagering makes it difficult with those future bets, et cetera, right? Well, it makes it difficult for specifically, and note that .04 calls back to 02. And it makes it specifically difficult on the technical side for C. And as noted, A and B already exist. Now, the notification layer is certainly an ask and will require additional development. C might be just flat out really complicated logically on the technical side because of the lack of velocity in sports wagering, meaning a bet is placed and it's not instantly verified or well, yeah. A win-loss doesn't happen right away. It's as simple as that. Okay. I'm being really cognizant of time now, guys. It's almost three o'clock and we've got some work to do. So, commissioners, where are we? Do we have a consensus in terms of how to approach this? Commissioner Skinner came up with a good compromise to maybe go forward with what could be implemented and then we could revisit it. We could put this as a side in a very short-term parking lot to have Mark come back and educate us a bit and then see if we want to adopt a regulation, some sort, if we didn't do Commissioner Skinner's approach. Well, we could adopt as is, but I think we're hearing that that's really an implementation challenge. I mean, other than taking kiosks, I think we all recognize kiosks are off the page. So, Commissioner Maynard, are you? Oh, Commissioner Maynard, I'm sorry. Were you leaning in? I couldn't tell who went first, sorry. No, I just think I think the better approach maybe, since this is the first time we're talking about this and it's not critical to launch that we go out on this a little bit and by a little bit, I mean like a week, 10 days, something like that, so that Mark, they can get a better sense of, you know, is C just not realistic? That sort of thing. And then it's still on track. We're not losing it in terms of momentum, but then we're not, we're ideally just doing it once and it may be the reg is done not for emergency, which then even then would bake in once we have a better sense of what it is. I just feel like this is the first time that we're diving into it. So I'm not so sure on it. Today makes the most sense, since we don't need it for launch. Commissioner O'Brien, I think that your, maybe my term parking lot was confusing. It really was short term parking. So probably we're in alignment there. Commissioner Maynard? Madam Chair, I think I would go with the Commissioner Skinner model on this and push through what we can agree to push through that's already being done on the industry and then in a short period, as you've said, revisit these other issues. That's how I would do it. Right. That works for me too, because it's just the issues that are complicated that we've taken out of Commissioner Skinner's proposal. So then the rest stands, right, Commissioner Skinner? So we would, yeah, we'd be putting into the short term parking those the items that are harder to digest. Commissioner Hill? That would be fine. Okay. Commissioner O'Brien, what about that, if we moved on something? That's fine. I feel like we keep getting these things like, by the way, this is duplicated in this, this is already covered with that. So I feel like we're going to be cleaning this up a lot and the vote today wouldn't advance anything that needs to get advanced today. But if everybody else wants to go that way, I'm fine with it. That's why I was wondering if there's any other stuff that would advance the, you know, an introduction. Maybe we ask legal, which is easier for you for us to act on a on a scaled down version pursuant to Commissioner Skinner? I mean, it would be, I think, very easy for us to make just really just two additional edits on top of what Kerry showed on the screen a few minutes ago. We just delete 255.02c and we delete 255.02e. Obviously, I have to change some cross references and stuff. But if we did that on top of the edits that Kerry showed, then I think that would comport with what, what I'm hearing the Commission's intentions are. We're not voting on, I mean, if a vote took place, it wouldn't be to file as final, right? Is this would just be to go out for public comment? Is that right? Was this going to be by emergency? You could do whatever you prefer. You could vote to just begin the ordinary promulgation process, which we wouldn't, you know, nothing would be filed, nothing would go into effect. It would just begin all the notice requirements and go out for public comment if you were to choose to do that today. Do I have a motion? I can try to pull one together to spare with me. Can I, before we do that, I mean, I don't know that we got through the rest of the document. So I guess I'm not comfortable making a motion at this time. I think we do need to continue on with the remainder of 255. Madam Chair, I'm going to once again recommend that we table 255. Do you want to make a motion? I would move at this point to table 255 and to bring it back at some point in the very near future. I would agree with that. I think we table it for, you know, a couple of weeks until we get more information on it from GLI and the licensees and mark. Do I have a second? I had to call the discussion guys. Are we moving formally or just talking about it? No, Commissioner Hill just made a motion. Commissioner Hill made a motion. I second it. I say I'm just asking to put a date specific on it. So I was just asking for a two-week date. 14 days. Yeah. 14 days. Bring it back in 14 days. As long as I want to give Mr. Director VanderLinden the time to be able to fully develop his ideas and come back, it's driven not by us, but by him at this point. Yeah, so whatever he thinks is reasonable. That's right. We have an agenda setting. Yeah, I mean, there's a lot happening. I think that we'll let's put it out for 14 days and I'll do the best I can to bring back to the commission as much information as I can. And I guess you can decide if that's enough and how to proceed. Right. That's my only hesitation of putting a date. I want to make sure not. I think I'm hearing Mark say he wants to make sure it's teed up nicely. So we've got a motion to put it on hold. Commissioner O'Brien and I think then, Commissioner Skinner, we can revisit it in its entirety. Again, just to move us along. So I've got a second. Is there any further discussion? Commissioner Skinner, what do you think? Okay, Commissioner Maynard. Okay. Good. So and I vote so we have an all five yeses, correct on on that motion. Thank you. Five zero. All right. Before we move to Sterling Company, I think it is a very related discussion for us to go to temporary prohibition from sports wagering and that's on 254. Number five on three item three. The reason why is because that indicates an amendment that was came out of discussions we've had with the applicants. So why don't we turn to that? Maybe we just put up the language in case somehow. Maybe everybody has it on there. Yes. The packet page 38 contains the proposed amendment to the cooling off reg and it should be provided in red. And so I'm happy to this is fairly straightforward. And we received comments from an operator who expressed concern about providing advanced notification of the expiration of cooling off when we had originally presented this draft, this regulation to the commission. And as it was approved, patrons who signed up to cool off were provided advanced notification of the expiration of cooling off that advanced notification would let them know cooling off is set to expire in 24 hours or 72 hours depending on how long you had signed up for cooling off. And that notification also provided patrons instructions on how to renew cooling off or how to apply to have their name added to the VSE list. And so we heard feedback from at least one operator who expressed concern that providing advanced notification of the end of cooling off may unintentionally create a sense of excitement in a patron to be able to engage in sports wagering again to address this potential externality. We are proposing an amendment here that allows an individual to choose whether or not they'll receive that advanced notification. So if I sign up for cooling off and I think that I am someone who might be susceptible to getting really excited that cooling off is ending and that's going to backfire on my sort of the reason I signed up for cooling off. I can say I don't want to receive advanced notification of the expiration. I would still get notification of the expiration of cooling off after cooling off has completed and that notification will still prompt me to ask if I want to renew cooling off or if I want to add myself to VSE but I don't get the advanced notification that someone might get that would essentially prompt them to just renew it ahead of the expiration. Happy to answer any questions. Commissioner Maynard. I think I have a question around so it sounds like it's a menu out of options. We heard a lot of discussion when we were doing our evaluations where most operators maybe if all and I'm sure GLI would correct me said, hey, we really take an approach where we don't want to notify them to kind of wet the appetite to perhaps tempt them into coming back into the market. I hear you saying, Annie, that it's a sort of multiple options. Is that something that's being done in any other jurisdiction? Are there any, much to the two hour conversation we just had, are there any restrictions on operators or operators doing this already? It's just going to be hard or easy to implement. So, Commissioner Maynard, you're correct that what we're suggesting here is to again give the consumers more options. If they want to receive advanced notification, if they don't think that's going to tempt them into sort of getting excited for the end of cooling off, they can get that advanced notification. If they think that it could backfire, then they could say, I don't want advanced notification. I am not myself aware of any other jurisdictions that do it this way or any operators who allow for the choice of options. I will allow market GLI to answer that question more thoroughly. Annie is correct. No other jurisdictions. Can I ask a question on that in terms of, would this also be a heavy lift in terms of implementation? The technology is almost the same as the other discussion. Not almost. It technically is the same. Yeah, that's why I said it. Same challenges. Yeah. Can I ask you something? Commissioner Maynard, are you reading it? I'm sorry. Carrie, if you're... No, I was just going to point out that we haven't received any comments from operators on this one. This has been posted since December 15th. Just wanted to let you know that. Well, Carrie, I did, I want to follow up because we did interview applicants and because we spent so much time on this notice provision, I affirmatively asked all the operators, do you give notice? And I stopped asking because their response was like, oh no, that would be an RG problem. Oh, no, I apologize. I didn't mean that we haven't received comment with respect to RG. I meant with respect to their ability to build up implementation like this. Yes. Oh, thank you. Thank you. But I'm hearing GLI say technically it's got the same challenges. So Mark and I had a chance to just speak briefly because Mark said that this is quite consistent with the BSE and I want to put words here Mark, but I'll turn to you to provide notification of the advancing exploration of the BSE. But I did note to Mark and Mark confirmed, I said, is it with the BSE that the communication comes from an RG specialist? This would come from the operator themselves. And I think the operators are uncomfortable with that, that they're pinging someone in the space where they're in a cooling off period. So Mark, if you want to just discuss, I'm just wondering if this is another one that maybe requires just a little bit more chewing on because one, it might be hard to implement anyway. And then we could treat it like we just treated the other one. Yeah. I actually stand by this recommendation for the following reason. I think one, if somebody isn't entering into a cooling off, they're very likely at high risk of gambling related harm. And so the opportunity to provide these individuals with information about extending cooling off, voluntary self exclusion, limit setting features seems like it's a prime opportunity to deliver some information. Delivering it to them in advance of their cooling off period ending makes a lot of sense. It's before they're one step away from being able to place their next bet. So they're still in a state of mind where they can't actually make that bet and may make the decision in a different state of mind to continue that cooling off period or enroll in the voluntary self-exclusion program. And Madam Chair, it would never be our intention to trigger somebody to trigger them. And one, I think, one, this is voluntary to enroll in this notification. And two, I think much like the notification that we send out, the voluntary notification we send out in advance of the end of the voluntary self-exclusion period, it's a carefully worded message that I hope that we would have the same process with our sports wagering operators to carefully word this in a way that would minimize that risk to the degree possible. Can I follow up on my initial question? I just need a hand. I can't see who's speaking. I'm sorry, Commissioner Maynard. So would that, Mark, I'm a little confused with the, because the language of this looks one way, but what you're saying sounds another, like would it be someone from your team reaching out to the patron? Or would it be the operator reaching out to it? Yeah. Commissioner Maynard, I appreciate that question. That is an important distinction. At this point in the voluntary self-exclusion program, it is a message that comes from the gaming commission. For cooling off, this is because cooling off is a function of each individual operator. It seems like it would come from the operator, but I think that the content of the message is what is ultimately important. So my initial reaction to that, Mark, would be I would be more comfortable putting that burden on the commission and us with information provided probably by the operator than I would putting it on the operator and yeah. That's an interesting idea. So this is kind of a question for GLI and something to throw out to my fellow commissioners and Mark. Rather than advanced notification that it's coming up, is it easier to build in a delay and getting off of it?  Would it be more doable to have that you'd have to try to affirmatively go in and do that, but you still have to wait 24, 48 hours before you could do it? That doesn't exactly get to what you're looking for, Mark, but yeah, it does feel a little bit different. It is a little different, but I just thought in terms of them being uncomfortable with sending out a message that would be seen as triggering. Quite honestly, I do, you know, I understand a message coming from the operator about the sort of the sunsetting of a limitation, but I just I go back to I think that there's a way in which if it's coming from the customer care team, or if it's coming from the commission, it's somehow an email that when you enroll, I guess it could be an email when you enroll in the limit setting, if you wish to receive an advanced notification from the MGC that your limitation is going to end, that we would have to have a system in place to deliver that message, which perhaps is a solution as Commissioner Maynard said yesterday. I just want to note that that might also, well, that will require a technical challenge for the individual operators to be able to get that data in a timely manner to the commission to implement that ask. Unless they had a form of what we approved saying, please have this be your notification. Well, it's it's because of the rolling nature of the the exclusion.  So knock me out 30 days, but then someone else says that the next day and the next day and the next day and next is like a it's gonna be a rolling says always going to be like, hey, these these people are coming up in the next week, or whatever, two days, one day, whatever you guys align that to be notified. So it's kind of a Joe, doesn't it feel like it could be somewhat automated? I mean, certainly there would be new names coming in that's kind of what I'm deluding that that is. Yeah. Yeah. The technical challenge. Yeah. I think he's saying it's a challenge. It doesn't mean it can't be overcome. It just will take some time, right? Yeah. I had an exciting idea or thought that builds on Commissioner Maynard's idea that this is perhaps if we can get over that technical issue, it's an it's an excellent opportunity for game sense to be involved with information about RG, who, you know, extending cooling off voluntary self exclusion, etc. But again, there's a technical challenge there. But I do there's a concern about the trigger from an operator. The game sense is an incredibly neutral sort of pro RG solution. So I have a question for Joe, I guess, I would ask, could it be even simpler than perhaps what we're thinking? And again, I'm not saying that I want this to go running out today before launch, Madam Chair, I actually would. My preference is to in so much that things need to be tinkered with that they're tinkered with after launch, because I think a we'll have a lot of data, you know, and we'll have some action, but the I think we're getting smarter every day. But Joe, would it be possible to even make this even simpler, like a link to an MGC website that contains a form that would then go to Director Vanderland's team. And if they elect to touch that link, and they elect to put this information on the form, then we get the data. Like, could it be that simple? Ultimately, that decision would be up to the commission. But what you did start off with was something very similar that I'll note that Kevin said earlier. We, you know, this possibility that we need time to find out what works and what works best. Adding a link to an app or a web web application is a much simpler ask. Technically, and I don't like speaking like that, as you can tell through this whole conversation. On behalf of the operators, but yeah, what that link does after that is is a separate issue. But I will I can confidently say that. Joe, if it makes you feel any better, I knew the answer to that question before. I had a feeling of so. Just to be clear, Joe, right now, implementation would be the same kind of challenge as what we just got done discussing. Could we could we take the same approach with this regulatory change? And to be clear, I guess it came to maybe legal through a comment that I don't know if I ever saw that I might have missed it. But publicly, we did ask for this read to be reviewed because of the input we were getting from the applicants. So I would be wanting to hear more from them as to their involvement and their level of comfort of having to contact someone an account coming off period. Before I adopted this, I liked their input because their reaction was pretty clear. When we asked, Oh, you know, that that didn't ring true to them in their in their good work toward responsible gaming efforts. And so we'd want to make sure we're all aligned philosophically and why it worked. Just imposing on them. Sorry, Terry. Yes. Oh, no, I'm sorry. I just to make a suggestion. So this regulation is currently in effect by emergency. And we had brought it today just to discuss this possible change in case we wanted to put it out for public comment in advance of the public hearing. It will ultimately be coming back to you on February 9th for vote. So what you could do is put this updated language out for comment so that, you know, the non updated version is what is currently in effect, but you could put this version out for comment leading up to the public hearing and up until the ninth so that we do receive that comment from operators. And if, you know, we're not comfortable with the language when it comes on the ninth, we could strike this paragraph when it comes for final vote. But we still would have received some of that comment on the issue. Right now it's written that you can't tell who's sending that notification. Maybe it's if I read it up the top, it would be clearer. And then the other problem right now that I see is it's restricted to 72 hours prior to the expiration of that two week, three week or four week temporary prohibition period. I think we've seen from other, you know, the applicants and now anticipated licensees that they have more flexibility in their coming off periods in that structure. There's no defined unless we unless we're limiting it to 72 hours or one week periods two, three or four. I think one cut up to 365 days or something. We did. And the rationale that we had was to to simplify it to simplify the enrollment process. Yeah, we didn't bring that up to the one of one of the recommendations that I think that we received at the roundtable was let somebody define whatever date it is if they want it and but I think that the concern about that is that there's almost that with that many options with that much there, perhaps it would disincentivize somebody from the program. It would disincentivize what? It would disincentivize them if it becomes too complicated to enroll to come or some and perhaps it would discourage them from the role. So we're we're we're we might be limiting an operator from allowing for up to one year coming off period. Right. Well, I'll tell you when I thought it was coming back, I thought it was going to be to eliminate the notification because of our feedback we got. And now I feel like we're sending an even more complicated reg. So I'm struggling a bit with this. Commissioner that I don't know how you feel, but I'm hearing Kerry say we put this out and get the feedback from them. I think the real problem is too is the implementation and I know Kerry says that we haven't heard I'm going with GLI's best bet though here that they wouldn't they would have a hard time implementing this just like I'm going to restrict for our last one but when we get feedback like next week or something Kerry. Yeah, so sorry. No, go ahead, Joe. I would say I would certainly default to the operator feedback if they're like, yeah, we're okay with it and they're okay with it. So the public hearing right now is scheduled for February 7th, so comments usually close on that day though, you know, it's possible comments would come in afterwards. The only reason I suggest putting this updated language out for comment is so that the operators are aware it's something the commission is considering rather than striking it right now and updating the version that's posted for comment, you know, without any notification requirements in there, but we can certainly do it either way. Again, we don't need a final vote on this right today, that wouldn't come until February 9th. And then I can I stand correct that the second line makes clear that it would be the operator who would be expected to and that would stay. Okay. Director Vandalini, do you want that to stay? I think that it would be I would welcome feedback. Again, I think it's it's the content of this message is is ultimately what's very important. No matter who it comes from, I could absolutely see it coming from Game Sense, putting it outside of the control of the operator. If it comes from the operator, perhaps it still contains Game Sense information and resources that you could link to. And you would imagine you'd say notify you're imagining it's an email and not a notification on the app itself? Yes. Do we need to say that? I would recommend that we say that. Shall email the individual rather than notify? I think that's a technical issue, as well as a communication issue. And yeah, I mean, what if what if they tell us it's easier to do it in the app than an email? Just to be clear, you're going to get in the app, you're going to get the the patron will get a notification with the branding and everything. What's the licensee? Madam Chair, Commissioner Hill used this line earlier and I just feel this way that there's a primetime issue here and that I think all these ideas are great. And sitting here thinking about Mark, when we can sit down and talk about these things further even. But I'm worried about it not being ready for primetime. So therefore, I would what I would do is get more information, get smarter, get information from the applicants about why they gave us the responses they did over the course of the the deliberation periods and then come back to it. Commissioner Maynard, I just want to remind you that this regulation is in effect right now without this amendment. So I think we're sort of saying the same thing in terms of getting feedback. That's why I was just suggesting that, you know, the operators sort of have a sense of what we're looking for feedback on if we were to update the language in the version that's posted for comment. And then when it came back on the 9th, you could strike this paragraph in its entirety and hold on, you know, however you wanted to handle this issue while you get more information on it. Just a suggestion, but we will have to, you know, do something with respect to this regulation when it comes on the 9th for final vote. I guess I would just say we can go ahead with that process, but I just want to be on the record that I'm not necessarily, I'm not there yet in terms of, you know, a yay for it. We can explore it, but I'm not necessarily prepared to adopt this in light of what I've learned. I need more information. And if we're, you know, as long as it's not implicit that we're going forward now with this to get feedback that, do we need a motion to do that today, Carrie? Yes. I don't think you need one. You have one, but, you know, we've been posting these regulations throughout the process for comment even before they've come to the commission. So however you'd like to handle this is perfectly fine. We can leave the version that's posted as is. We can update the version that's posted either way. It's completely fine. And then we'll, you know, sort of tackle how the commission would like to handle this paragraph on February 9th, but it was just a suggestion in terms of comment. Without affirmatively voting for this language that's in red, that wouldn't appear for public comment. It would still be what was there before. Is that what you're saying? No, I'm saying I don't think you need to vote to just change the version that's posted on the website for comment, because we've been posting, you know, all of these regs for comment throughout the process. I just had included a motion, you know, if you felt that you wanted to. So the red language could go. Yeah, because if nothing would be happening, you know, formally with it, it would just see that we changed the version that's posted on the website for comment. The version in effect would remain the one without the red language. Thank you. Very helpful. Thank you. Mr. Hill. I think that's a great suggestion. Leave as is, but put up change with the red line up on the website. Let's get some feedback. And on the 9th, we come back and we deal with it. Okay. Do we need, do we have a consensus on that? Yes. I'm going to dare to speak. Commissioner Skinner is chiming in now. Thank you. I saw you, you said yes, Commissioner Skinner. Yes, I've been here. I've been paying attention. Just had a slight setback. And I knew you were here. I just needed your yellow box to show up. That's not interesting. Thank you. I want to make sure you referred. Thank you. So we've got a lot of us agreeing with that. Excellent. Thank you. Oh, just the one, perhaps that one change that we just changed email, notify to email. Sure. And I guess the other, the other changes that were, oh no, we didn't have any other changes, just that one. Okay. I don't know how long the withdrawal of an application will take, commissioners, but we have time time also with respect to hearing on our sports wagering catalog. I think we can go forward. Yeah, I don't think it's very long, but if you wanted to push it to the 24th, I think we can also do that. It's, it's not urgent that it happened today. It's, it's short. I didn't know if commissioners had, I'd love to take care of business if we can commissioners, do you want to just go for it on it? Or do you want to send it to the next day? I'll take feedback. Madam chair. I'm going to be the skunk at the garden party here and I apologize for that. I unfortunately have to leave this meeting at four o'clock, which is fine that there'll still be a quorum. And I really did want to look at the sport list, if possible. Let's turn to the item, item number four. Thank you. Thank you. Madam chair, may I, may I ask, should we keep a hand for that rag? Are you planning to come back to it? Or is it moving to the 24th? Can we see, I know that you probably would love to skedaddle and don't ask me how to spell that, but commissioners can remain know how to spell it. Can we see how the discussion goes on items four and see if we can circle back? Absolutely. Commissioner Skinner and I share that as apparently a favorite phrase. So, all right. So I may need to leave by five, so you'll still have a quorum without me, but there's a chance that three of you will just deal with that. Right.  We're not going to be here till five as well. Let's go to celebrate yesterday. Let's go. Okay. We're turning to item number four, and we have second director Wells is going to lead us with a great team. Karen. Yes, ma'am. I'm going to turn it right over to Sterling Carpenter, who is going to go through the events catalog with you. Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. So as we spoke last Thursday, I believe on the 12th, we're here to present the catalog of acceptable wagers events that you will approve for wagering in the Commonwealth. So as you've received several items, this is very long and detailed. I will do my best to keep it very brief and rolling along so that everyone has a firm understanding of what we've gone through prior on the 12th. So what we're looking for here is I'm going to break it down into three sections. I'm going to ask for your approval on wagers, and we will go through all of the wagers that are being brought before us from our licensees. So the licensees placed a request and they asked that the wagers of single game bets, teasers, parlays, over-unders, money lines, pools, exchange wagering, in-game wagering or in-play wagering known as next occurrence, proposition bets and straight bets. All of these were touched in 23N of the statute in the definition of sports wagering. To go along with these, they requested point spreads, pleasers, round robins, cashouts, three ways, spread and handicap totals. I apologize, my cursor of course has just gone away from me. Player game and team props, futures and outrides, yes no wagering and win place each way. So on our catalog and our guidelines, that would fall under section two and we are asking the commission to approve these types of wagers. So these wagers, if approved today, would fall under categories of statistical ways of categorizing and then also you would not be able to use these wagers on any unapproved event. So before we go forward with events and categories, we want to make sure that the wagers are approved. So also I want to highlight that disapproved wager types is any wager that meets the criteria detailed in the section of disapproval in cases of conflicts between the disapproved wager type and an approved wager type above the disapproved one sells supersede. So what I mean by that, if we find the conflict of whether they think that their wager that they're offering meets this criteria, if it doesn't fall under one of these specifically, then it would be considered not allowed. So statistical actions of coaches, officials, referees, like the number of timeouts that would be called on a game, the number of yellow cards issued in a soccer game would not be allowed. The inherent objectionable outcomes, like how many times a player would suffer an injury in a game, would not be allowed. The actions of a person participating in entertainment, how long Lady Gaga will sing the national anthem, not allowed. Any outcome determined solely as a coin flip, any kind of like card game or dice game would not be allowed. The clothing in which the coach would come out wearing wouldn't be allowed. So those are kinds of the outlines of the disapproved ones. We want to look at most of our wagering is must be performed on the field of play. So any awards, which are voted on by a league, you will be asked as a commission, whether to allow or not. Awards of specificity, which awards can either be voted on by the public or by the media are sometimes called into questions, or awards voted on by, you know, any body could be considered subjective, as opposed to other awards like are based on pure statistical output of the performer. So an example of that would be who would rush, receive the rushing award for the most yards in a football game through the entire season. That ward is cut pretty straightforward.  So we go through these wager types and the operation operators must receive MGC approval to offer new events or wager types. So I want to distress this one point in which if you approve or disapprove any wager today, an operator can ask for a wager to be reconsidered through petitioning the commission, or the commission itself could find that one of these wagers is not suitable and have it removed from options. Either way can also be determined at any point in the future. So I wanted to stop here and ask if the commission would like to consider all of these wagers as one or go through or if you would like to just pick and choose if there's any questionable wagers in which you want to talk about. So can I just ask one quick clarify? Absolutely. Maybe it's Todd. The way the operators come, it comes to us, right? The commission, we have to vote affirmatively to change, to expand or reduce this catalog. That's my understanding, but I of course defer to Todd. Yeah, I think that's right. I'm just going to try to pull up the regulation to make sure we have a success. While he's looking at that, I also fail to mention that the operator did ask for one other wager, which has not been offered or placed in the catalog, only due to discussions between GLI and us, that the virtual option that they asked for really bordered on a RNG type of slot machine type setup and not really a sports wager, and it bordered on eye gaming. So we wanted that if they wanted to ask us that they would have to go through you with a great deal of information on how they're going to assure this is not a RNG slot machine. And to be clear, virtual is different from eSports. Correct. Which is also down the line we're going to get to. Joe, did you have something? Interesting. That's right. No, I was just going to climb in and say, yeah, eSports is completely separate from what would be considered a virtual sporting event. There is a stipulation that I think it's electronic. By the way, Todd, I think you're actually looking for 247.01. Yep. Thanks, Joe. And I do have that. When you're done, we can maybe start with that. There is a stipulation that the commission could allow a virtual event to where that RNG would be tested by an ITL. I'd have to go find that immediately, but yeah, they're completely kind of, they're honestly computer-generated sporting events where the goals or moves or points or whatever is determined by a computer RNG. So I'll talk to you. So I guess maybe go ahead. I'm sorry. No, go ahead. Thank you. I was just going to say, in response to your question, Madam Chair, as Joe mentioned, so you start in 247.01 and that's the regulation that covers a lot of sports wagering specific related activity. And it says that the sports wagering operator may offer sports wagering only for those sporting events and wager categories authorized by the commission and posted on the commission's website. And then it goes through a series of things that they can't do and other things similar to what Joe just described. My understanding of what you're doing today is instead of taking in a request from each individual operator, you're looking at commonly allowed wagers and categories and just approving them all holistically. And presumably any operator could come in independently and say, oh, well, thanks for that catalog. Here's another one I would like to be able to offer. And then you would have the ability to do that. But as a threshold matter, it seems to me that anything you approve as part of this catalog, any operator can automatically offer. They don't need separate approval. So that's why it's important. And we talked a little bit about the better issue yesterday. And so to the extent you wanted to carve any of these out for an individual operator, I think you'd want to do that as part of this process. But I think that issue with better was resolved. So you don't necessarily need to carve anything out. But hypothetically, if there were some concern with a specific operator relative to any of these offerings, you would want to say, well, this applies to everyone except for them. I don't believe that's the case. But just to kind of set the foundation here, I believe that's what you're doing here today is you're approving all of these specific wager events and categories for everyone. I see Bruce is nodding up and down. They put it in as a group of request taught all three properties together. Okay. So is this just for category ones? Yes. Okay. Now, this is just for category ones until we apply. So until the category threes and category twos come in in our license. So they're already approved. So when we get all of their up and running, this will also apply to them. So my understanding is then our fandals, our draft kings wanting to add Bandy will then say, can we please have Bandy and we'll follow our regulations to apply to the commission and a request to add Bandy as an event or a wager. Just to finish, I know they're applicable to everybody. These are applicable to everybody once you vote on them. I think the best way to think about it is like, here's your starting point industry. These are the events, the wager types and events that are allowed in Massachusetts and go look at the regulation and petition us for anything additional. That's like, here's your core starting point. And they can choose not to offer. That's correct. Right. Yep. So we can anticipate, I think, let's drill said is that this is our launching pad that we got good input for the three and then we'll get more input and perhaps there'll be collective input from them depending on how they want to approach it to the online operators or individual, figure that out when it comes. Correct. Okay. So for wagers, are there any questions? I hate to. Sorry. No, I don't have to rate. I'm raising my hand. I'm so sorry, Sturrell. No, I apologize. It would be really helpful for me as you, just as a reminder, what did we keep out from very fast with the only? Yeah, the only thing with wagers right now, wagers. So the only thing left out from wagers is the virtual RNG wager. They have asked. Yeah. So we have a memo and I think it's important for us to get this clarity. We have a memo where it says wager types and market types and virtual is under market. I think I understand the difference, but I just wonder, do you have that memo? Yes. So Joe is probably best at explaining that they're kind of, in my understanding, market and wager type is pretty much interchangeable. And they use that. So when you're doing that, you can look at just the individual wagers as they're presented in those definitions. And, you know, you can see where they would have pleaser and teaser. So play on words. They're also very similar, right? They're just like, they're the, technically, the same, just different offerings, right? Yeah, the odds on the on the on the pleaser, hence the name, right? Yeah. So think of it like this, where a wager type is the mechanism of the bet. I want to bet straight up on the Patriots. I want to bet the Patriots to win by 10. I want to bet on Mac Jones throwing over 346 yards. I want to bet on the Celtics to win the NBA Finals, which might be a good bet right now. Sorry, my message is coming through. And then the actual event is the NBA Finals. The actual event is the NFL football game and or league. Those are the mechanism of placing a straight bet can be used across all those events. I think that's probably the best way to, you know, a wager is placed on events, a wager type that is. Yeah, Joe, the chair was also stating those that they submitted their wager types, but also listed sometimes as markets. And they were pretty much interchangeably using a market versus in the wagers. So yeah, I'll be honest. When that was shared with GLI, the and a bit of it was frankly a little confusing. So I would stick with what Sterl has brought forward. Okay, so that means I should be looking at the spreadsheet and not the memo. Well, to the memo lists every single one of those wagers and markets together, right? Okay, and then everyone is just defined. Okay. Okay, excellent. So if there is, if we look at it this way, we all know that the first 11 are all by statute and have been invested that the Senate and House would like those as wagers. So we're good with and I was thinking we could accept all wagers unless there was a problem with any wager that anyone felt there was a problem I could explain or if there was any questions on what our future was or totals or. Yeah, I'm sorry. I don't feel any more prepared to have this discussion than I did last week when it came up for us for the first time. So and I apologize if it's probably just me, but I don't I don't even know what the science is behind any of this. It had it, you know, and so if we can kind of start from there, you know, where this information is coming from why you're recommending it and not other wager types or sports events in the like, I just sure I can try right. So the first 11 that I read off. Can you just point us to the page, because I'm when you say 11 I don't see what one through 11. So page is a page. It's page 2915. It's also on the spreadsheet. Yeah, it's also on the spreadsheet, right? I'm using I'm using the spreadsheet, but you but you guys can it's also on page what Commissioner O'Brien was it. It was 5050. Well packet page 48 has permitted wager and market types. And then 50 starts the catalog of the list. Right. That's that's what I'm that's what I'm looking at. So and I'm looking at that. Is that what was those the items Karen that were that the operators when they came to you and stir on Bruce and all those were the ones that because I know there will only be some why I still I think you're looking at different document but those it says approved wager types include the following and then approved market types include the following that's that's our I believe the page you're looking for is the we use the word approved in the hopes that they would be approved of course if you want to disapprove any one of these is your is up to you that's actually really helpful because I was thinking I don't think we actually approved anything yet but that's today's job right exactly um and so and I'm also hearing you sterl say they kind of combine them wait wager and market so of that list there's one two three four five six seven eight nine ten one there's about 20 some 21 yep 21 so and the one that you are right now the only one you're recommending is to take out the virtual matchups yeah the virtual matchups so in the memo in the original memo where they're all there defined the virtual matchup one was actually folded and read meaning that we did not recommend it at that time because outcomes from each match are generated by a computer of an algorithm that picks a winner on a non-biased way I absolutely remember that discussion so so I could go through the wager types and explain each one if we wish as well totally up to the commission commissioners yes okay so starting from the beginning we have a single game wager is a wager you place as a single bet on a single outcome or event so let's say you see a game and everyone wants to bet on the patriots a single game wager would be for the patriots to win you can do these also when we can when when we get into detail these wagers could be one of two ways the uh traditionally you'll be offered what's called a money line which I can explain now under this or a point spread so that comes as point spread and money line your point spread means we will we will use current terms so the eagles right now are favored by seven and a half over the giants so in this if you're betting the point spread if you place a wager on the eagles the eagles must beat the giants by eight or more points if they do not the wager loses of course every every wager has the mirror of the opposite right so in terms of the giants the giants can beat the eagles to win the wager on the giants or lose by no more than seven and a half points so some operators use this sometimes lines are seven sometimes lines are seven and a half the explanation of this wager is there will definitely be a winner on all point spreads wagers on the giants versus the eagles because they're using a point five which will not happen in regular football okay so for the money line they take that and they take those odds and now if you just place a straight wager on a winner the giants will pay you more money than you wager and in a plus value so if I can explain that a little better if the money line for the giants that you place and you place a hundred dollar wager you could receive three hundred and fifty dollars for that wager if they win opposite you know what sterile I'm going to interrupt because I'm a little bit nervous about this approach in terms of our timing that mission is getting I know we're going to lose Commissioner Hill and now I am I'm a little bit worried about our timing you know we I want to be really respectful of the learning curve here too but by much of this we we did have I just want to be clear on the record we you know we we have had training on this Commissioner Skinner it is constantly you know I'm always and I'm sure you're doing the same thing it's all a reminder for us because we had our GLI training do you want to go through this um at this level is this is this necessary right now for for you to vote I just want to make sure we're all aligned because going through the little will bring us definitely up past the five o'clock hour so Commissioner Skinner yeah I mean just you know I would like to continue on in this vein I mean I need the education I need a refresher acknowledging take the GLI training acknowledging the conferences that we've attended I still feel like in the context of the discussion about what to approve it makes sense to be to have a refresher you know I I can do that you know I just won't vote today that and unfortunately because I don't feel as though I'm ready for that right now right and I'm still respectful of that and Karen where are we in terms of our um our legal team where are we in terms of the need for the Kevlon did you I said Kevlon and I'm not sure the timing of the catalog when does the catalog need to be approved yes so um yeah I'm just looking at the schedule for next week I mean we could sort of put the vote on for Tuesday my concern is that we already posted the meeting notice and I'm not sure this is on the notice so Todd can we theoretically add it to the 24th for Tuesday yeah we could amend that if we should do it today if we're going to do that if the other commissioners are still won't be available to do that just so the right that's just do you know I support that you need it I need two more time to digest this I had more questions than some of the sports themselves but um this is a pretty big vote for us to feel comfortable with and so I think since we can do it on the 24th and amend the notice so that you get what you need I get what I need everybody gets what they need that would be what I would want and I have and I feel very strongly this is a five person vote you know yeah Commissioner Skinner um in Tuesday works or I we can get the amendment would that work and then maybe and I'll tell you uh the tutorial you know we don't get to practice right so it's all mental it's all in our our heads you know it's not reinforced by um being able to practice it's forbidden so um maybe we can all try to figure out how we can be comfortable on the various aspects I've got different questions you've got a refresher and maybe sterile can spend some time with you um Nikita um and then Eileen in terms of the questions on the sports maybe um Sparrow and Bruce can help on that in advance when we can all get some good self-education done we haven't had a chance to breathe and let's acknowledge that you know we're turning to this big piece of work that we really couldn't turn to earlier so in the interest of time and to be fair Commissioner Hill has left I think um thank you I think um I I think we need to just give ourselves that ability to get comfortable and turn to this uh early on on Tuesday's agenda it's not there because I also Commissioner Skinner it's so late in the day if if you're like me trying to still do the mental exercise and we're taking notes from sterile it's not there to either you or sterile but even try to digest it so does that work for you Commissioner? No it does and in the meantime um I can you know I have some availability on Monday hopefully sterile and maybe GLI uh has some availability and I can just get a quick tutorial because it's not I have questions on the actual sports I have questions on the marketing types you know just like soup to nuts I'm looking for you know some education right and and I think another advanced question that I think probably all of us will want to know is just as Commissioner Skinner what was the what's the the rationale for of course why something was excluded and you know the virtual one makes great deal sense we've already excluded that and but anything in terms of games or whatever um questions that we should focus on for next Tuesday commissioners other than that Mr. Hill, Mr. Maynard any particular questions that you want sterile and team to address I think I want to ask for your help or something I'm still no I am still here and I've been working with Bruce and sterile over the last few days so I'm comfortable thank you Madam Chair okay great Mr. Maynard I think I just have an overarching question um Director Bann and sterile um are you comfortable with the types of wagers and what's going to be wagered on I did see the document that had all the pictures of the sports and I appreciate that um and do you feel like you have adequate staffing to oversee it those are my two biggest questions I think those can be answered right now so I can skip them on Tuesday I think for our staffing it's a work in progress right now so that will be developed over the next week or so okay and do you feel comfortable with everything that was given to you so far yes thank you and sterile you too right yes chair I am very comfortable with all the wagers that we I put forth with the help of GLI for approval um I would I would just ask and I know Commissioner O'Brien wants to say something but I would ask that if we're going to table this once again that I at least point out some things that I need to point out to the commissioners to think about on the game on the tab before our next meeting as well but that sounds great okay thank you for that sterile Commissioner O'Brien so to follow up on Commissioner Maynard's question my follow-up to it's a work in progress is if we sign off on the statutory requirements in terms of what absolutely has to be available is the answer to that yes we're ready or is it still a work in progress you mean for as far as the department the book in terms of the book if our catalog is the statutory minimums are you good to go or is it still a work in progress I think we're be a go with that but I think the casinos wants other wagers that are important as well yes no I appreciate that I'm just trying to get a gauge on where the work in progress yeah I I think we're in a good spot right now and I think we can finish this catalog next week and we'll be being really good shape okay thanks okay so sterile if you want to just go over the points that you'd like for us to chew on thank you sure so the catalog will have a guidelines page which will pretty much say what is also available to be wagered on and what will be approved and not approved the first section states that all exhibition preseason regular season all star games all star contest and post season vetting is permitted for the league as long as that league is approved so just remember that when we're approving an event we're approving all of their games right so NFL preseason you don't have to have a separate one it's part also the post season all right sorry start to introduce you in the excel spreadsheet you're speaking to correct where are you looking in the very first tab it says guidelines in common okay what line what row the very top one okay right so I when I say row or if I'm referring to the number it's not the excel row but the big bold number right so in two is what I we were just discussing prior to just those are all the wagers that you will be voting on what I wanted to stress is that when you get down to section four this has to do with accepting of wagers on a draft this will be brought to your attention on whether you wish to accept a draft as in the NFL draft the baseball draft to be wagered upon and then if so we put stipulations there that either you can say yes that we agree that these should be the stipulations voting should stop at a certain time if we approve drafts at specific rounds or even picks before I would I just want to stress that a draft is not a statistical basis of in the box score that the statute spoke about but it is being requested that it be bet on so I you know I really wanted to bring that to your attention that it's up to you to decide whether we will allow it or not so are you raising the possibility that's outside the statute it could be interpreted that way or it could be interpreted as a sporting event since these are all athletes that are going to go into the NFL and participate into sports as opposed if I could just be clear as opposed to allowing somebody to wager on the academy awards which in the definition of sports wagering has no bearing in my opinion as a sporting event hence it's an academy award and it's voting so it's legal Todd um I think Councilor Grossman wants to weigh in on that Commissioner O'Brien because he's looking at the statute I was mine that was my next question yeah please uh Todd I would so whenever this type of question comes up I always look at the definition of sports event or sporting event that's what Sterl was just referring to and it includes a lot of the familiar things but it also I in my opinion injects some discretion on the part of the commission into the calculation so it includes professional sport or athletic events collegiate sport or athletic events a collegiate tournament motor race events electronic sports events so esports like we've talked about and then it says or other event authorized by the commission under this chap and then it gets into the things you can't wager on like these sports from the college sports involving teams from the commonwealth so there is some discretion in there as to what an event is it doesn't say it has to be a sports event so the draft could be included for example they don't seem to be requesting things way outside those bounds but we should kind of consider how far from sporting events we could go eventually they've asked for drafts though did they ask for the academy awards and so the academy awards is not nearly not a sporting event but under that definition would be could fall in that last cause right it seems to me that it would unless there's something else in the statute and I do have to go back through and double check that that would restrict how far a field you could go but I don't remember seeing anything so I think it's just any event that's authorized by the commission presumably that you can ensure the integrity of the process for I mean that's obviously a key part of the the calculation and then with esports last time we spoke about this there's something that we need to do affirmatively to approve the governing body that's right before we could act on that one that's specifically called it here so did we just throw a wrench into the where does that add some clarity this is this is this is why I brought it up these are things that you need to think about because they were requested by the licensees and I'm just presenting to you that they want drafts and I put it in the selection and I can easily hit a button and delete that whole cell so there's no wagering on drafts it's totally up to the commission now also to point out just real quickly is I've placed in here so everyone who goes to the catalog can see the prohibited sports wagering events and wager categories just as an easy uh see a location for them and then impermissible wagers which I read earlier is also listed here for for ease and then of course the box is here by statue is the ncaa sports now we've placed division one and we say the licensees say ncaa sports it is um up to the commission if you want to go past division one once once it becomes really vague I would have to turn to gli in their experience but right now I've looked at other jurisdictions and they distinguish division one is usually what they recommend so I have placed it here but of course that is also up to you but there is no choices on allowing wagering on massachusetts teams it is not allowed by statue unless they are participating in a sporting event in a tournament in which there is a tournament style where they are not the only uh teams playing um so that was pretty much one I wanted to bring up except one final thing since we spoke of the awards but that there is the awards box in section nine is highlighted in red that was that was for you guys to look at if you do awards it lists out the the league's integrity policy it's it's when it's when you're approving awards we have to decide on whether we want it to be pure statistics or if you want it to be subjective I think that's an important thing for the commission to vote on and segregate as you know is it just purely statistics where there is no outcome that's not determined by stats or do you want it to be subjective and then of course the final the final box I'm sorry to cut you off chair if you are speaking with the final one is pool wagering which was discussed previously and how that would be one of the ones where you not only have to look at pools them and those in turn will have could possibly have people that are in the commonwealth going against people outside the commonwealth and how they divvy up their gross gaming revenue in reporting which Derek of course could speak more to would have to be looked at Richard is there a follow-up question that you may have for sterl now or anything that you'd like him to look into and have the team look into before they return to us on tuesday um oh sorry commissure or Brian go ahead so just as a follow-up to your research sterl when you said you were looking at other jurisdictions and how they treat specific things were there other jurisdictions that did um tranches in terms of roll out that did a certain cluster of sort of more established or known so it's and then and then went into like the draft and that you know or did they roll out at once if you have a sense I understand what you're saying um I am oh it's very hard to go backwards and see what they've had previously in speaking personally with Arizona they rolled everything out um I know Colorado was also one that was um looked at by a lot of jurisdictions as being very um progressive in in in that they were listening to the operators and taking it all in and then just putting it all out but they might have started limitedly but they're very extensive wagering in Colorado Joe would probably be more better at the uh answering of that I do know that it's very difficult to find pinpoint go back exact amounts yeah well there's a bit of the just straight up nature of things the repeal of paspa was june of 2018 and you kind of have this rolling across the state's operators and therefore vet types and event types uh continues being added and as the snow wall of events uh moves forward through the uh the different states there's you know a copycat nature happening so you know here we are um that's an in your experience where is it typical for people to start with us with a smaller book and then add in some of these things or is it my experience they did this next day to launch kind of takes their book maybe adds on to it number two number two okay yep I'm sure it can be oh sorry sorry mission me my question was I think you said this earlier but it informs the way I think about this over the weekend the cat threes have not been consulted at all right so there could be what I'm asking is there could be additional types that we're we're not seeing yet um I will note that your cat ones are tied to some tether to some mobile operations and when it comes to the events and the risk management departments the cat one and cat threes that are the same company are the same the same as the same the the amount of data uh in events that they have in their own personal uh uh uh text stacks uh will be the same across uh retail and and in mobile so while technically you've only heard from the cat one operators that narrative is more than likely uh coming across the full catalog and I will note that the ask um that it aligns with both retail and mobile if it's also helpful uh commissioner manorn pretty much mgm the mgm and barstool sports were the ones who or I'm sorry pen entertainment were the ones that submitted this request so you are getting these online platforms providers and I understand that and I understand that joe I was just wondering if you know you're off mute but you're off mute right my computer just got taken away so I am now without my my scrolling document because the very helpful spouse who has served me coffee tonight is now making sure my my home computer gets on next to the property so thank you for your tolerance sorry about that now I just want to make sure that you um that you know that I was on mute but maybe not anyway we're just talking about my sister sorry to interrupt but I was listening um um commissioner manor did that answer your question yeah I just I'm just wondering if we should expect an untat untethered category three who's not in a relationship with a category one to come in and ask for additional yes that's coming already actually I they're already because they're not they're bandy as a sport I guess they put in their catalog as we were testing and I'm like you didn't put that in as a request so it's not and I think we've got an open invitation for them to come in as a as a group or individually so I think we're good on that um Bruce are you leaning in right now uh yeah I I you know I'm getting requests with things all the time but in as new ones start to come online there's nothing that prohibits them from coming and ask us to add additional sports so madam chair can I just ask I'm just curious myself now everyone of course is familiar with the nva nfl nhl and all the familiar leagues I was just kind of scrolling through the tabs and I landed on the biathlon tab and I see that it suggests that the international biathlon union is the official sanctioning body what type of review is like who decided that that is the governing body for biathlon that the commission should recognize only except waiters there I'm not let's go to darts then maybe you're less familiar with darts it's the same question there I was like I am less familiar with yeah I mean how do you how do you know that that is a body with integrity that we should rely on and I'm again I take your answer as far as building up from other jurisdictions and I think that is persuasive but I was just curious where when the who makes the decision as to whether that is the official sanctioning organization so what we did is we requested but I researched all the ones that I could find of their jurisdiction or if we are familiar with the nfl and the shield as they call it right and we are familiar with even FIFA right with all of soccer but when you get down into these other ones we are relying on the operators to provide that they have reviewed and have assured that it has oversight with their games and these governing bodies have I've placed a link to their web page and it will sometimes show their actual organization some are run by presidents some are run by committees some are run by it's different setups so we use those tabs and those links to find it but to to answer your questions specifically we are relying on these operators to assure that these events are on the up and up and we have and each operator all has integrity monitoring by statute and by oversight by regulation that requires all of these events to be monitored and we've actually gotten an alert on Chinese basketball just last Friday so these leagues to be approved one we have to we we rely on the operators a lot and then of course if we have if the commission has any reservations they can X-NAI anything that they want I think X-NAI I don't know if anyone likes that word but it was okay for me very helpful could I ask if maybe we could to the extent you have the chance could explore um now that we know the awards that are outside sporting that's if the operators asked for them just if you could just brief yourselves a little bit on them was it more than the Academy Awards that they asked for? Yes like Nathan's hot dogs and a few other you know the eating contests and so they had they had two eating events and what the Academy Awards I believe and the one final note that we had in that other that I wanted you to just be cognizant of is under the events the operators have asked for chess, cornhole, esports, high-lie and then of course special events including Nathan's eating event and the Academy Awards so those are those things I would really like to bring your attention to um so my follow-up would just be still to um so that we can be prepared to you'll know we're going to ask questions as to if we're keeping them out why is it that we're keeping it out is that you know is there a risk analysis what it is so that we understand our governing body issue or you know just so we understand if we're keeping them out of us got to make sure his follow-up questions on that um because those may not have been in minds of splirting events but certainly within our discretion according to Todd today that we could consider the eating events as long as if we're participating in the eating events we can't have betting on them I just I do want to make sure though that Sterling team have time to answer my questions and commissioner Skinner's questions and all that without adding in you know we can always circle back this is my question I'm just saying I'm just saying the expectation is to vote on all that stuff I don't know we might be well I think the lot to consume no pun intended no but commissioner brian I think the vote is to exclude the academy award so I guess I'm just wondering you know that analysis that's all so it's not adding in it's just to let them know is it an affirmative to say it's not allowed or we just wouldn't necessarily put it in this first catalog so so just to be clear you you can say no to everything you want and then it just doesn't go in the catalog and then two weeks later though you're they're going to come back and ask they'll come back maybe more information I'm just I'm just letting you know yeah yeah then draftings is or any of our other six operators will come back and say we want x y z to be considered yes yep and I only listed those chair just because it's I want to bring attention to it you it's you know up to you look at as a commission to vote on any of these as a yes or no and and I wasn't introducing the academy awards independently they asked for it and so I think your proposal excludes it so that's if it were before because we thought it wasn't included in the statute now I think there may be a complexity that it's included in the statute so why would we exclude you know what would be the next reasoning we were trying just to include sporting events and our recommendations that Todd I think clarified that a little better for us so right so there may be another rationale why you would still want it to be excluded through so that's all I'm asking so thank you can I think about yeah commissioner this back and forth if they could come back march 12th is the academy awards well so throwing that out there yes also there's a great documentary on Nathan's hot dogs that I watched last week on the history channel to build America so if you're interested I heard and I'd like to I'd like to add just that I mean it's it's public record you you can see it actually on the catalog that's published publicly where the academy awards are actually in a rejected category and the Nathan's hot dogs contest is actually in the septic category so and one would argue if it's a sport or not but you're more than welcome to try to eat 74 hot dogs in 10 minutes and see how you do and then you'll quickly find out that there actually might be a sport to it behind that all right so do we have everybody I'm going to take a pass on that one yeah okay exactly everybody has some homework they want to do and then it's just some questions from clarifiers any other questions that anybody has for sterile to address or Bruce's team to address I think we've heard from okay I think what what public facing documents will this discussion culminate in I mean is it the is it this Excel spreadsheet that will ultimately be the catalog for operators to go and see what's approved and what's not both operators and patrons so the patrons can see what they can wait around as well and what's included and excluded and and the intent is right so the intent is also to include excluded events in this document no I don't I don't think that yeah I think it's um we're getting briefed as to what gets excluded from the operator's request just the few things that they're taking out and I don't think there's many that are recommended but I would like to understand the rationale for excluding but I don't think because the universe is so loud you know large I don't think it means it's excluded forever either because they could come back to us uh with that request and you know Bruce to Commissioner Skinner's first question because she asked it last time it's a really fair question right now we have the spreadsheet ultimately does the catalog convert into um some kind of a catalog or a word document or pdf what does it look like I'll I believe they they put it on the kiosk corrects girl the but what they can vote uh uh bet on and stuff and that is what uh uh their selections are oh is no so the this this excel sheet will stay in its form yeah granted um chair to Commissioner Skinner's point if just so that we don't confuse anyone and I've asked the operators as well we don't want chess on here if it's excluded from the way for wagers so I will delete that tab before yeah Mills posts it to the website so only approved events will ever show if there is not an event on our tab it's not allowed in there so it's pretty easy to see for the uh both operator and the patron yep so we'll always stay in an excel format and that's typical that's typical yes it's it's typical in other jurisdictions but if you prefer it in a pdf or a word it just it just reads a little easier for the user if I that's why I kind of broke when when I'm presenting this to everyone I break it down into word documents for understanding but when somebody's familiar with this it's much easier to scan and use the the index that I've created it will jump to any sport that they want to see on what's available and then back to the guide an index so they can hop around the entire document with ease as opposed to scrolling scrolling scrolling scrolling scrolling if it was a pdf that's all so yeah that that makes sense that makes sense but um I'm back to my my original conundrum and and it's actually a request and I think the chair has already made it if we can have a little justification for the next discussion as so you know why you're recommending certain sports and events and not others that would be really helpful okay okay and we will be coming back Tuesday is that plan or coming back on Tuesday okay we're going to amend someone who's going to help amend the agenda to reflect that in our right hand and Crystal Bushman is attending to a family or okay anything further on this item should we turn to I think at this point we will have to um table the withdrawal of an application see amir I want to let our legal team go on that fall commenters I see you're still there thank you so much and uh to um Caitlyn and Carrie and and Judy thank you so much um that makes sense correct commissioners should we go a little however to our floor plan I don't know how mom that let me anticipate that Caitlyn thank you madam chair yes madam chair so at this point at this point I am going to step away from the meeting um I want to thank everybody for all the information that they gave us today um and I look forward to the further discussion of all the issues that we couldn't get to today but are so important to what we're doing so at this point I'm going to step away uh and thank you all thank you commissioner hill we'll be ending shortly um the floor plans I don't know if I think commissioner hill may be actually quite well versed in this I'm not sure if he's been brought up to date but I have done yes thank you I thought so commission hill because you've been working closely on this part of the process um commissioners do you want to um house to stay looking I don't have the agenda in front of me now without Caitlyn um I mean not Caitlyn the crystal pretty lengthy I'm playing it up here madam chair thank you so are we moving to the floor plans we're just deciding commissioners should we go ahead with floor plans I see Jordan saying yes I'm sure Brian yeah I mean I have the agenda for the 24th and yeah the volume of the volume of the descriptions on the page is any indication it's long I know some of these are just final vote on rags but since we're rolling over the book I think we should just get through whatever we can get through in this half hour I don't think this will take real long for you I'm going to actually share my screen on this you see we're right here I'm sure um oh Brian just as Bruce is and is okay though to table the um the one I just suggested I think I'd like withdrawal of an application I'd like to let the team yeah yeah thank you yeah thank you to the legal team I'm sorry we couldn't get to the withdrawal of an application I appreciate you're staying around but I think you should schedule now and have a great weekend okay now we are here we are Bruce you've got our full attention great great I'm going to start with uh ppc floor plan they have 20 kiosks on the gaming floor and five windows uh what I did is you're not getting the view of the whole entire plan because a lot of these include cashier cage areas so I kind of cut these out uh this area let me just make sure I got it okay this is actually near the rendezvous uh bar and on each side of it you can see that they have four kiosks here on this side can you see my cursor we can okay you have four kiosks on this side and four kiosks on this side and then this is right next to the food court and this is where their sports book is there's five windows right here and then there's 10 kiosks along this wall it's pretty straightforward and then when you come in this is where the garage is right here there's one kiosk here at the end of this slot bank and one kiosk there for a total of 20 kiosks in five windows any questions at all on that can you come back to the gesture the memo part of the sure of course one of the windows is ADA acceptable and this what I'm showing you is a temporary counter their their big plan is to build one in fluties but we don't have the floor plans for that yet we'll be coming back to you later when that is all they have all the permits and designs approved so sorry we're gonna hit Mr. Skinner the floor plan that you presented is it those standalone kiosk I guess I'm just trying to understand which which portion of that is temporary it's pretty much the booth but it could affect I doubt if it will affect these kiosks because they haven't submitted the new plan Commissioner Skinner I don't know what they will be moving that will be in the new plan when they had their final sports book their final sports book is going to be over in fluties which will change the seating because that that will be like a complete viewing area and everything with that and I'd be presenting that when we have the new plans so with the five windows are there though Bruce that's what's being built yeah that is is I believe complete at this point but it is that temporary structure they they sent it to us just where it says five yeah and this one's an ADA handicap window built right in there and then the wall with a 10 kiosk that's just that wall existed and they're putting in the kiosk along yeah that's right against the wall this like I say is the food court area that they have okay and this is the the bar lounge in here so this is all seating in here total of eight kiosks and combined they have 20 kiosks on the floor and and all of it's on the existing casino floor yes any questions at all about that commissioners that one's pretty straightforward and commissioner maynard you'll be going down and viewing that in person and look forward to it they're looking forward to having you there so okay the next we go to mgm they have a total of 18 kiosk and seven windows okay they this they have no kiosk off the casino floor okay this is in the high limit area if you remember where that is it's right up uh in the elevated section of the casino floor they have two units right along the slot machines right up there then we go over to uh excuse me uh near the main k cage they have three kiosks along this wall near the main cage right at the end of pit three they have one kiosk near the high limit slots area which is right here four kiosks near the slot bunker in slot zone one okay and this is their uh slot uh excuse me their their sports book area they uh these are their their windows right here they have seven windows this is uh one of their lounges they have four kiosks here this is their uh one of their bars here four kiosk here this is the viewing area with the screen wall to watch sporting events i think that's kind of it right there in the ada one is in the uh ada ones right here actually commissioners questions are you able to orient yourself yeah if yet you want to know where anything is of course this is the uh back corner the main street is actually right out here on this side uh there are restaurants right down on on this side their cashiers cage is down this way bruce any of those walkways um some of the open walkways the the walkways go here but there's nothing really down this way except atm or or so no i'm just worried i know this is a more porous facility than the other two yeah i'm just let me look back here uh these are pretty much in the middle of everything commissioner uh we'll just see if there's any now uh these are more in the middle of the casino okay so you would have to go pretty much uh in you have to go deep into it to get to it yeah uh this is well that's the only walkway that i i kind of seen right in here so you're pretty much in the middle of the casino any questions on that at all i guess my only question is how's compliance been in terms of underage on their floor lately good uh not the best for the last month huh okay i might circle back on specifics with you on that one because we're getting quarterly reports in february right yeah i yeah i think he was supposed to follow up with us after the last one there was some concern to them gm on the last one yeah i think there was an ied report that might be coming your way okay then with on court this also includes uh some square footage changes okay they have a uh on deck they're adding 111 square feet and b1 parking garage they're adding 832 square feet uh over near the elevator lobby they're removing 162 square feet where they're adjusting uh uh where you come in on the elevator to get more space uh to to move some of the machines around atms and so on uh this changes the gaming area from 211 thousand 190 square feet to 211 971 square feet i will kind of show you where this all is they have 118 kiosk and 10 bedding windows uh for their sports book this is b1 uh with parking outside with b1 they will have a guard placed outside here for their quick parking in all time they will also have a guard placed right in here this is uh the the sports uh bedding area in uh the growth in level b1 with 20 kiosk in here anybody that comes into this area will be id through uh their id machine okay this is 800 and this is the same thing 832 square feet of added space this is the elevators to go up okay uh this is right near fratellis and this is where they're removing 162 square feet of casino floor space where they can adjust some of the machines that were causing uh congestion there for patrons coming in and out okay now in the second level this is memoir right here they have uh i think it's eight machines here these machines will not be uh turned on whenever memoir is open this was a request by the state police with uh on court agreed to so they will be non-operational whenever memoir is open i'll show you where's memoir the memoir is all this over here can you see oh it's over near the burger place yeah yeah uh we see if uh i get you a better better one this is actually uh the sports bedding bar the current place which we actually approved maybe a year ago this area is casino floor space uh these are kiosks in here and i actually forgot to write down how many they were but everything that's brown here is a bedding kiosk this are the 10 bedding windows right in here okay more bedding kiosks this is their high uh high roller section and they're all nice comfy seats in here that let you watch the huge uh screen this is another bedding area with all kiosks in here okay this is uh if you on the other side of the casino where the uh uh area is to sign up for uh rewards cards they've changed out the uh automatic games to all bedding kiosks there's uh i believe 40 kiosks in here in that section and that's over near uh game sense actually not too far from there okay uh this is uh upstairs near the poker room you have four kiosks there excuse me i take that back this is near the high limit salons salon one there's four machines up there this is high limit slots up here there's two machines in there this is uh memoir over here and these are the machines that they will be turning off when memoirs open it's right at the top of the escalator right in here and that's actually they're adding i think it's 122 square feet of casino floor space for those machines this is actually already casino floor space but this is outside the poker room and this is gaming space that they haven't been utilizing it used to be part of the poker tournament area but they've added bedding kiosks in here any questions on that that's a lot any of any of that impact the poker offerings no it doesn't really affect them at all just puts kiosks and makes it more convenient for the poker people and have they i'm assuming they've already started construction in the parking garage area i'm i'm just a little dubious on that we needed to do that it's all locked off because we're doing the inspection today but the area is all locked up and everything pending whatever way you guys vote okay i kind of wanted to see that before i voted on it but it's there to see whenever you wanted to go over okay yeah i actually looked at it pretty well today and uh it's not glass enclosed it's actually wall enclosed and great camera coverage in there and it actually looks like part of the building not part of the garage okay and you know how many cars and all that i'm sorry i didn't miss you ryan were there any safety concerns first uh msp ge in terms of the cars being so readily accessible to where people might be walking in with cash and that sort of thing uh you know i i ran this by a couple all the quarry rose who's in charge of the property now and uh you know two of the other g u people everybody was fine with it uh okay that there are no safety concerns with that okay no guaranteed gli will attest to this there were a lot of machines to inspect today so uh i guess i don't know where everyone stands on voting or we do want to vote today right um uh i imagine three separate separate votes sir and and just to remind me because i um let me just to look at encore the it's the it's just the garage area that is not on the gaming floor yet uh that and the uh machines across from memoir oh okay the bird yeah that's right they're not on there's keeno there but there's no other there's nothing nothing else there it's just like that little just bring us to that uh yeah that's right that is not gaming for yeah it's just kind of this right here and you go right down to the gaming floor these elevators go right to the casino for our escalators are they in the bar no what's that are they in the burger bar right here is it in the burger bar or uh no these it's just a sign to where they did i guess they couldn't put them out here but all these are outside the burger bar and then remind me again about 21 and up access to that area how do you get in there yeah pretty much yeah it is except well everybody goes in memoir has to be 21 and everybody up here is 21 there's nothing that uh they don't allow anybody in that area that's not 21 so that burger that burger um when a restaurant can't serve families yeah they they don't allow anybody up in this area at all it's not of age because you have to go through the casino floor or up to the poker floor to do that so 21 and over um i'm sure brian for that it looked i thought it was going to be more a family but it's not yeah so it's it's right in the the hallway area yeah this would this right here would be the smoking deck out here if you can orient okay yeah so it's you know right where you'd go out or go down but you know they get a lot of the poker players walk down this way or you know i guess for the smoking deck more than anything and that burger um i keep on saying that burger i should know the name of it i'm so sorry i should too but is it like it's be burger or something like that or and they have um they have sports events it's all television camera on the wall and everything else yes right so it makes sense that they would want that there yes and when memoirs open those would be closed down correct okay commissioners are you prepared to move on on this i know that we don't have commissioner hill he's authorized us to move ahead like i said i was really hoping to get more visuals on the parking garage area i may just step stain on that one and by the way somebody just texted me and said that's the burger bar that's what i couldn't oh i wasn't far off that i kept on saying the burger place okay the burger bar all right yes the commissioner and brian would you want to move separate on each of these would that be helpful i think you said separately yeah what they're written as one in there oh is it that's that you know what i i lost my i lost my notes i'm so sorry um madam chair i moved the commission approved the floor plan submitted by um the category one sports wagering operator um mg on springfield actually let's start with plain ridge park since it was the first one he's going back uh plain ridge park casino as included in the commissioner's packet and discussed here today second commissioner skinner i want to ask if you have any discussion you think by you and i was just going to make my comments right before i voted i it's not ideal to be doing any of this uh based on pdx and but i you know we have a time constraint and you know based on ieb's recommendation um you know i'm okay with with taking the vote today which was going to have to ask i didn't quite hear it's not ideal based on the pdf of the floor plan i mean you know i'd love to to visit each of these locations for direct um you know i can i can to be fair to ieb and to bruce we have voted on expansion of gaming plans but in this way without going there or um on visuals just to be clear this is yeah i think it's true but this is brand new um it's sports wagering it's something that we're launching in messages for the very first time i would feel better if i had the time to actually go out and visit each of these locations but again um i'm going to rely on the recommendation of ieb um you know especially since you know g e u has kind of signed on it i'm i'm comfortable with moving forward with the vote today but once again doing it in this manner without having the time to go out and see for myself uh it's not ideal i have to say that in the course of my various visits i have had the benefit of sort of knowing where these might go today i i learned you know precisely where they would go um but but you're right that wasn't part of the overall plan uh i don't know um uh but do you have any follow-up questions for bruce on plain rich to give additional clarity i want to make sure you're comfortable no i'm comfortable as i said given that ieb is is is recommending the approval of the four plans i am comfortable taking the vote okay excellent all right so i have a motion in a second um i will there's no further edits and no further discussion i'll go ahead with the vote with respect to plain rich thank you so much commissional brough hi mr skinner hi mr maynard hi and i go yes before zero thank you bruce thank you okay i can make a motion but i want to make sure that no one has any i want to i want to go through the discussion first um if you could just bring it up a little bit a little bit further um commissioners with respect to um mgm 18 and of course we've had this it was presented to us when we you know information my my only concern with mgm and this is just something that i think i i'd like ieb to get follow-up on or maybe i can talk to somebody directly but i you know we have had some issues with the under 21 and how porous the the floor plan is there and so um i'm comfortable moving forward with it given that it's contained within basically their existing area but i would like updates on how they've been doing with the um the under 21's getting on their floor yep we'll make sure that director lilios updates us i'm just asking executive director wells is there anything that additional but anything you'd like to add right now i don't have like i don't have eyes on the crowd so i can't see who's available eyes on the box is this yeah eyes on again i don't have eyes on the crowd i can't see if you're available oh yes so no i don't know if you're able to hear but there were some concerns that we hadn't had the ability to go out and and see the areas but um i i do maybe bruise too you can say whether there's any change from what was proposed when we approve the application for category one license this is a visualization right and now you've been able to be as recommending and have seen the setup in the surveillance yeah i i think things are uh to approve this application are fine uh i i can just say i know that there's uh some things in the works that i'm not at liberty to announce here today that you should speak with director lilios about coming up this week but i don't think it has effect on what you're approving here today well um to be clear what i'm hearing commissioner brian you asked the question about how's your compliance with liners and and so to be clear um is there anything further that you would recommend bruce uh i respect to the plan to assure that um underage individuals are not able to access kiosk do we at one point you had said there would be ids and and and folks i i think i think for what they're proposing here that they will be fine for underage uh uh you know just like they work hard for their cable games and so on director lilios i see you're here you want to chime in i'm trying to um get on video here but i'm having some trouble but i take it you can hear me is that yes i'm not really well yeah um look at my apologies no no problem um uh so it's no i know it's no surprise to you that mgm has reported in the past some of its issues around minors on the floor uh some of it attributable to the uh design of the property and our chief enforcement council team has uh pivoted uh after the license issuances just the other day to start looking at some of the pending uh reviews that we were trying to do and had had a meeting with mgm today about some of its uh compliance around minors on the floor uh so we are working through some of that now but they have you know i'm very encouraged because they are committed to putting up uh additional i don't know exactly what what it will look like but additional barrier you know they put the knee wall up at one point a couple years ago so there will be some additional um you know structural stuff to address the open floor plan aspect of the property which is attributable which contributes at least in part to some of the problems they've been having so this is an active issue that uh you know heather and her team have just turned their attention to since they've been you know able to uh after what we've been working on for the past uh month or so um you know as i said conversations with mgm again today and they did make that commitment around uh around the structural piece and there may be other commitments uh that make sense uh here um i think everybody's putting their heads together uh on that so i hope that's helpful to you i am familiar with uh some of the floor plan uh stuff that bruce is presenting uh to you today and you know to me i see it as part of the uh same floor that they're working with now and uh you know i don't have any specific reason to say but you know you need to put us hold on and hold on that okay thank you laura yeah okay but um thank you i i um appreciate bruce to you adding that the the same safeguards that we discussed as we were going through the uh category one applications that those will be put in place bruce those will be put in place the same ones that you yes often when we review the applications that those are going to be in place to ensure you know commissioner brian and all of us have had a concern about making sure the underage population can't access the the kiosks and staff is is currently monitoring it very closely so i i think we're in a good spot what uh this request is and then of course there's the kyc additional barriers to get over um correct yeah okay so with this respect to this floor plan they're up to eight i think it was eighteen in the application at the end um and they stuck with that plan and there's no expansion of the gaming plan here so do we have a motion with respect to mgm and might have directed a little else's report and bruce's update and i'm chair i can move at the commission approved the floor plan submitted by the categories one sports wagering operator mgm springfield as included in the commissioners packet and discussed here today second thank you any further questions or discussion or yes all right mr. brian hi mr. skinner hi mr. main hi and i vote yes now with respect to uncle okay with uncle you have a change in the square footage of their floor space uh v1 and the uh space right outside of uh the uh bar there or the nightclub and this is consistent with their application as well correct so is there any change okay yep that this is what they requested so it's a change in overall square footage and and the two additional spaces there questions if um are uh commissioners no i don't have any questions but just to put a finer point i mean i i did express my interest in seeing or at least seeing photographs of the area in the garage in that area and i i hear the g u has not raised any concern i b has not raised any concerns but the nature of the schedule being what it is did not afford me the opportunity to go out there so without those in the photographs i'm just gonna have stan linda vote comes around i actually i disclosed um that i was going to an event there and uncle and i did go to an event there a few weekends ago um i'm hoping that it was because it was a saturday night and that there was an event in the event space but i had a really really difficult time finding parking and i noticed that a lot of parking spaces were taken up by construction on the b1 level which i assumed because of our positions uh had to do with probably the expansion of the square footage so um i'm going to move today and i am going to vote in the affirmative but i hope that encore is thinking about the patron experience of losing those parking spaces especially at high volume traffic times commissioner skinner um are you prepared to vote today my my concern would be uh if folks need to see it and commissioner maynard did have the opportunity to see it then um i think that there needs to be a visit go see it um um in the affirmative now jean you're you're fine um and again we've heard from geu that um doesn't present any and i think director lilios though not feeling well can attest to that too that i don't believe we've had any i don't believe that bruce would be here advancing this if there were any concerns correct i think that was your point commissioner skinner yeah and that's good enough for me under the circumstances but you know i don't need to reiterate i you know but i will i would feel comfortable having seen uh having performed a visual inspection personally okay um and i'll entertain the motion i don't chair i moved the commission approved floor plan submitted by the category one sports wagering operator on core boston harvard has included in the commissioner's packet and discussed here today second any further edits or discussion all right and the one thing i can say is that if there's anything that we we um don't like going forward or there are problems that occur around safety or surveillance our geu team and our gaming division will be on top of it and reporting to us and we will revisit this so commissioner brian i'm staying okay commissioner skin bye commissioner maynard hi and i vote yes so thank you and thank you for the good work to our i e b you've been working all along and i do know that mr hill has been working along with you so um i appreciate that as well commissioner brian i know you're gonna have an opportunity to see it so um you know this is uh implementation of the application at work so thank you very much thank you bruce have an excellent weekend i think you're at on core right now aren't you i'm at on course we speak we've been here for those tests so we should have had you do face time walk over to the garage i i don't like to drive and have you walk over and walk around i got it yeah well i know that's how you and i both see grandchildren sometimes exactly all right all right so um that concludes today's agenda it's quite late five ten on a friday i appreciate everybody's the full attention i want to turn to sector director wells and council grossman do you have anything else for us and thank you bruce anything else for us today not for today okay so the one item we rolled over is on the um the withdrawal of an application we got a lot of work done today thank you everybody um and and thank you to the team who stayed on including trudy thank you so much and um we'll start work on on monday with a around table i think it's late it started noon okay commissioners have an excellent weekend do i have a motion to adjourn move to adjourn thank you thank you commissioner um have some fun enjoy yourselves commissioner bryne hi mr skinner hi mr maynard hi and i vote yes thank you everyone four zero have a great week