1 BEFORE THE MISSOURI GAMING COMMISSION

2 STATE OF MISSOURI

3

4

5 MONTHLY MEETING

6

7 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

8

9

10 December 12, 2003

11 9:00 a.m.

12 Missouri Gaming Commission

13 3417 Knipp Drive

14 Jefferson City, MO

15

16

17 COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:

18 Commissioner Floyd Bartch, Chairman

Commissioner Jack Gant

19 Commissioner Judith Sutter-Hinrichs

20

21 REPORTED BY: Monnie S. VanZant, CCR, CSR, RPR

Associated Court Reporters

22 714 W. High Street

Jefferson City, MO 65102

23 (573) 636-7551

24

25

1

1 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

2 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll.

3 MS. ANGELA FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

4 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Present.

5 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

6 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Present.

7 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

8 COMMISSIONER GANT: Present.

9 MR. KEVIN MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, if I

10 might, before we -- is this on?

11 MS. FRANKS: Yeah.

12 MR. MULLALLY: Before we begin into

13 the business in the Commission book, make a

14 couple of comments, some observations I was

15 able to make last week. As you know, I was a

16 presenter at the National Center for

17 Responsible Gaming's Fourth Annual Conference

18 on Problem Gambling in Las Vegas earlier this

19 week. And one of the things that was rather

20 stunning, frankly, about that conference was

21 that in almost every -- I think, save one,

22 every presentation that I attended --- and

23 there were a number -- and this was a

24 collection of about 450 people I think were

25 the number of attendees at this conference.

2

1 This year, they had a business in government

2 track. So, traditionally, it's a track that a

3 lot of academics and clinicians that deal in

4 the problem gambling, either treatment and

5 research and some regulatory and industry

6 members. But this year, much -- much larger

7 representation from industry and from the

8 regulatory community.

9 In every one of those presentations, save

10 one, Missouri was prominently mentioned as a

11 standard of excellence in some manner or

12 another. And not just in the areas of problem

13 gambling. The new compliance directive that

14 we've come up with came up in one of the

15 sessions. Some of the things that we've done

16 in the way of starting a new discussion on

17 performance measurement for regulatory

18 enforcement agencies came up. And -- and it

19 was not that we were mentioned in a laundry

20 list with a whole bunch of other states.

21 These comments were made almost to the

22 exclusion of the other state regulatory

23 bodies.

24 So for an agency that's only been around

25 for -- we just had our 10th anniversary. To

3

1 have achieved that level of stature versus

2 other states that have been around for decades

3 like Nevada and New Jersey -- and even the

4 Midwestern states have been around

5 significantly longer than us such as Iowa and

6 Illinois and Mississippi. I thought it was

7 quite remarkable and worthy of comment and

8 very indicative of the quality of the work

9 that folks have done here and -- and the

10 policies that this Commission sets forth and

11 your predecessors.

12 So I was -- I was quite proud of that.

13 Probably even more gratifying was the opening

14 of the Argosy Casino Wednesday night and the

15 work that our staff did there. Person after

16 person after person that was associated with

17 the opening of that property came up to -- to

18 Steve Johnson and I and mentioned the

19 professionalism and competency of our staff

20 and how hard-working they were and -- and how

21 dedicated they were. I mean, we have people

22 that have given up the past several weeks and,

23 in many cases, months of their lives. Larry

24 Buschjost has been there -- has lived at that

25 property. Todd Nelson and Blaine Preston are

4

1 two technical people that handle a lot of the

2 slot equipment things have been there as well.

3 I mean, you know, Larry's a grizzled old

4 veteran. And for him to be away from home, his

5 wife is just eating ice cream on his side of

6 the bed. But Blaine and Todd are both one

7 year or less newlyweds with beautiful young

8 wives. And so for them to be away from home

9 I'm telling you, is a giant sacrifice. And

10 you know, the entire --

11 MAN IN CROWD: Well, Larry's about

12 -- over 40.

13 MR. LARRY BUSCHJOST: I'd just like to

14 know if he's been at my house.

15 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Ask him what

16 flavor it was.

17 MR. MULLALLY: The new one or the

18 old one, Larry?

19 MR. BUSCHJOST: Either.

20 MR. MULLALLY: But the -- the entire

21 Patrol contingent, Lieutenant Bob Zubeck

22 and Sergeant Eric Tilford and his entire unit

23 there did a great job. Eartha Taylor, the

24 auditor that was assigned to that project, did

25 an outstanding job. And there's a whole bunch

5

1 of other people that I'm leaving out, but

2 those were the principal folks and really an

3 outstanding effort and worthy of comment.

4 So --

5 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS:

6 Congratulations to all.

7 MR. MULLALLY: They did a good job.

8 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Certainly.

9 Congratulations. And, you know, Kevin, I'm

10 relatively new at this business as the other

11 Commissioners are. And I would say this, that

12 of all the comments that -- that I've had in

13 the last year or so, they've all been positive

14 about the Gaming Commission. They've all been

15 good and how hard everybody works and the

16 things that are being done. So that

17 reputation is well-deserved by everyone.

18 Thank you.

19 COMMISSIONER GANT: I've heard a lot

20 of people say she really keeps you on the

21 ball.

22 MR. MULLALLY: If you hear it a lot,

23 it's usually accurate. Mr. Chairman, there

24 are three sets of minutes in Tabs A, B and C

25 that start the action here.

6

1 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I'll move

2 that we approve the September 12th minutes.

3 COMMISSIONER GANT: Second.

4 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Please call the

5 roll.

6 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

7 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approved.

8 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Henrichs?

9 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.

10 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

11 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approved.

12 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

13 adopted the September 12, 2003 minutes.

14 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I'm just --

15 I'm on a roll here. Move that we approve the

16 October 9th, 2003 minutes.

17 COMMISSIONER GANT: Second.

18 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll.

19 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

20 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approved.

21 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

22 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.

23 MS. FRANKS: Commisisoner Gant?

24 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approved.

25 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you have

7

1 adopted the minutes of the October 9, 2003

2 minutes.

3 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move that

4 we approve the October 28, 2003 minutes.

5 COMMISSIONER GANT: Second.

6 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

7 please.

8 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

9 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

10 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

11 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

12 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

13 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

14 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

15 adopted the minutes of the October 28, 2003

16 meeting.

17 MR. MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, the

18 next item on the agenda involves Sallie Lane.

19 As you may recall, at an occupational licensee

20 hearing -- who had some proposed discipline

21 issued against her. And we brought it up at

22 the last meeting and were unable to resolve

23 the issue and tabled it. Mike Bushmann has

24 prepared a memo for you and is here to make

25 the presentation.

8

1 MR. MIKE BUSHMANN: Good morning,

2 Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. At the last

3 Commission meeting on October 28th, you

4 considered the hearing officer recommendations

5 in the case of Sallie Lane. That

6 recommendation was to suspend Ms. Lane's

7 temporary license for two weeks and then to

8 grant her a Level II license.

9 Director Mullally questioned whether or

10 not the Commission has the authority to do

11 that, and you requested that that issue be

12 researched and then brought back up at a

13 future meeting.

14 My purpose here today is not to recommend

15 what kind of decision that you should reach in

16 that case because that would be improper. But

17 I'm only here to explain what I think your

18 options are in getting to that decision. In

19 your books, I provided a memo citing a statute

20 and administrative rule which lead to my

21 conclusion that the Commission is not

22 authorized to suspend a temporary license in

23 the manner suggested in the hearing officer

24 recommendations.

25 Ms. Lane is an applicant for a license,

9

1 not a licensee. Therefore, the Commission has

2 two options, either to approve or to deny Ms.

3 Lane's license application. Also, in your

4 books, there are two resolutions for you to

5 choose between. Resolution 03-087 denies a

6 license. And Resolution 03-088 grants a

7 license.

8 The hearing officer findings attached to

9 the resolutions have also been amended by

10 changing paragraph 19 only to correspond to

11 the proposed outcome. My suggestion would be

12 to weigh and balance the facts of the case

13 and then to choose between the two proposed

14 resolutions.

15 MR. THAD MCCANSE: Mr. Chairman,

16 respectfully, the -- I think it's agreed that

17 she has a temporary license. I don't think

18 that anybody has raised that question. I did

19 some looking, and while the rules initially

20 provide for a temporary license for a

21 supplier, they do not provide for a temporary

22 license for a licensee. However, one rule

23 does say that the temporary licensee may renew

24 the license. So by inference, they must

25 recognize the fact that a -- the Commission is

10

1 authorized to grant temporary licenses. As a

2 practical matter, it's in excess to do so

3 because it takes time to investigate people

4 and to put them on hold, so to speak, until

5 the investigation is complete.

6 The statute that I think applies, then,

7 assuming that there is such a thing as a

8 temporary licensee, is Section 313.805,

9 subsection 6, which authorizes the Commission

10 to assess any appropriate administrative

11 penalty against a licensee, including, but not

12 limited to, suspension, revocation and

13 penalties, monetary penalties. That's pretty

14 broad. And if there is such a thing as a

15 temporary licensee, it would seem to me that

16 under that statute the Commission would be

17 authorized to suspend a temporary license as

18 well as a permanent license. I don't see any

19 distinction.

20 I haven't seen a copy of Mr. Bushmann's

21 memo. The -- the statutes of the river --

22 concerning the riverboat do not speak to

23 temporary licenses in any manner. So it's by

24 rule that we have produced under the

25 assumption that you can have a temporary

11

1 license. And I think it's conceded that she's

2 wearing one now. So the question is, under the

3 facts of this case, should she just be denied

4 or should she be found suitable or should she

5 be punished in some respect?

6 My conclusion was that due to her own

7 confusion and the way it came up where they

8 said that there would be no record of this

9 when she was arrested some ten years before

10 the hearing that a person of her background,

11 not a legal background, could be confused as

12 to whether or not she had been arrested or

13 whether she should list it. You don't have to

14 adopt that position. I found that she would

15 be suitable because for the past ten years

16 she's had no other record and she's been

17 working -- apparently the casino doesn't have

18 any problem with her work as a cashier.

19 Of course, the Commission can decide on

20 their own whether or not the facts

21 indicate a deliberate refusal to answer the

22 question or whether there could be a

23 misunderstanding on her part, which could be

24 punished, but not to a revocation of her

25 license.

12

1 So I -- I had thought -- and as I say, I

2 had done some looking at some of the statutes.

3 I suppose I'm trying to justify my own

4 actions. But I really believe that since the

5 sanctions that I just quoted refers to a

6 licensee, if there is such a thing as a

7 temporary licensee, then you can suspend,

8 revoke or impose a monetary penalty on that

9 person.

10 COMMISSIONER GANT: I don't want to

11 get too logistic, but I'd ask a question of

12 you, Thad, but is she here today?

13 MR. MCCANSE: She was at the last

14 meeting. She's from the St. Louis area. She

15 was present at the meeting in St. Charles.

16 But I don't know that -- apparently, she's not

17 here today.

18 COMMISSIONER GANT: All right. I'll

19 ask you -- since you heard the -- what

20 concerns me in this -- this matter isn't --

21 actually, I guess we've got three options when

22 you adopt what your recommendation was.

23 We can deny or approve, I guess the three.

24 What concerns me on it is that if the police

25 did tell her that -- and I guess her husband

13

1 turned State's evidence and agreed to do it.

2 If they did tell her that if they turned

3 State's evidence and there would be no record

4 of this or that she was not arrested as such

5 and then it shows up on the books later on --

6 I think if I read this -- I re-read it the

7 other day. But I think she had a hard time

8 even trying to find her record.

9 MR. MCCANSE: She couldn't. She

10 couldn't get a copy herself.

11 COMMISSIONER GANT: And I -- I guess

12 that concerns me, if the police falsified to

13 her that there would be no arrest record or

14 anything to get her to turn State's evidence,

15 then that's not playing fair, I don't think.

16 And that's the main concern, I guess, that I

17 have is that she was arrested -- if she -- was

18 -- I guess she was technically arrested. I

19 think all three of the Commissioners don't

20 like the way the wording is in that particular

21 question. And even though it might seem clear

22 to me as a judge, it might not seem clear to a

23 layman who is reading it as to such -- and if

24 the police had told me that I would just get

25 out of here, I'd be -- if I turned State's

14

1 evidence, or my husband did, then there would

2 be no record of this, you know, there's no way

3 -- cause for you to expunge it. And I've

4 always had the question if a record's

5 expunged, do they still have to put it down on

6 that questionnaire situation? So -- but in

7 your hearing of it -- was that your

8 understanding, that the police had told her

9 that?

10 MR. MCCANSE: Yes. That was the

11 evidence. And I think even the Sergeant

12 said that he believed her when she said, I

13 thought everything had been dropped, that he

14 thought she was being truthful. I can see

15 what happened, if they say, look, you help us,

16 there won't be a record, it will be dropped

17 and you can go home. I don't want to say

18 that they misled her because that's true. But

19 they maybe didn't explain the ramifications.

20 And at that time, in '93, I'm not sure the

21 statutes give the Commission authority to get

22 closed records, which is how this came up.

23 But to anyone else, it was closed and the

24 evidence was. And I think that was true that

25 once the fingerprint check came back, the

15

1 highway patrolman at the casino said, Hey,

2 this is -- this shows an arrest. And she

3 changed her application to list it. And he

4 asked her to get a record. She tried to and

5 couldn't because it was a closed record.

6 The public can't get it. So I -- I can see

7 where technically she should have listed it

8 because at one point, she said, yes, I was

9 arrested. But I can also see where there

10 could be confusion on her part as to -- as to

11 how to answer that question. So, in effect, I

12 was willing to give her the benefit of the

13 doubt on that issue. And, again, no question,

14 but what she should have listed it. I think

15 if she had listed it, there would have

16 been no problem. I don't think a ten-year-old

17 arrest without a charge and without a

18 conviction would have kept her from getting a

19 job with the casino.

20 It was the failure to list, and the

21 seriousness of the failure is to deliberately

22 refuse to list an arrest, to knowingly refuse.

23 And we've found that in some past cases as a

24 basis for denial of the license. And I don't

25 quarrel with that because -- and I think the

16

1 statute provides that if the person knowingly

2 makes a false statement on the application

3 that they will not be allowed to apply for any

4 job in a casino in Missouri in the future. So

5 the question then to me and the -- where I

6 decided that -- to give her the benefit of the

7 doubt of the confusion that existed in her

8 mind was that she -- yes, she was arrested,

9 but there wasn't going to be any record of it

10 and she thought it had been dropped. So it's

11 -- at least that was my conclusion from the

12 hearing. And I think when she appeared in St.

13 Charles, she also said, I -- you know, I

14 thought everything had been dropped and I

15 wouldn't knowingly lie.

16 COMMISSIONER GANT: Were they really

17 after her husband, too? Was that -- was that

18 ever --

19 MR. MCCANSE: Her husband -- there

20 wasn't any evidence from her husband at the

21 hearing, except that she mentioned that her

22 husband -- she didn't have to testify, but her

23 husband did. So she didn't have to turn

24 State's evidence. But she agreed to

25 cooperate, so they dropped it. And I don't

17

1 think there's any quarrel with those facts. I

2 think those are established. Mr. Bushmann --

3 I haven't seen the memo, and he may be -- his

4 point may be taken. But I'm looking at this

5 broader picture. Can you discipline a

6 temporary licensee without denying them the

7 job? And my conclusion was, yes, the

8 Commission should be able to do that. And --

9 COMMISSIONER GANT: What other --

10 MR. MCCANSE: I can respond if you

11 like. I don't --

12 MR. MIKE BRADLEY: Mike Bradley. I

13 respectfully disagree with it -- his position.

14 You have before you an issue of whether or not

15 she should get a license. And under our

16 licensing system, by statute, the applicant

17 has to prove his or her suitability. And the

18 hearing we had was an attempt to allow her to

19 prove her suitability. And if you found that

20 the omission of this arrest on her application

21 was inadvertent, then she's met her burden and

22 has proved her suitability. If you find that

23 it was not inadvertent that she should have

24 done it, then she's not suitable and should

25 not have a license. And that's your decision.

18

1 I mean, the facts are there. She admitted on

2 the record that she knew she was arrested, but

3 she also said that she didn't think there was

4 a record of it. So that's -- that's the facts

5 and that's the factual determination that you

6 must decide.

7 Where I disagree with Mr. McCanse,

8 though, is on the discipline of the temporary

9 license. And the reason I disagree with it

10 was for the reasons Mike Bushmann stated.

11 Plus, an additional reason is that the

12 discipline on the temporary license was never

13 at issue at the hearing. The issue at the

14 hearing was whether or not she could prove she

15 was suitable. We did -- we did not have an

16 alternate count saying, you know, if you are

17 suitable to receive a license you should be

18 suspended for a certain number of days. That

19 was never plead and it was never an issue at

20 the hearing. And I don't believe that it --

21 it falls within an administrative similar to a

22 lesser included offense like you'd have in

23 criminal law or an amendment of the pleadings

24 at the trial like you sometimes have at civil

25 law.

19

1 The reason I disagree with that and agree

2 with Mike Bushmann is under the way this case

3 was plead, irregardless of whether or not you

4 can discipline a temporary license, she never

5 had the opportunity to defend the discipline

6 of a temporary license. I mean, that was not

7 an issue at the hearing. It was not plead at

8 a hearing. And I think you have problems if

9 you come up later and say, you know, you're --

10 you're not guilty of what you're charged, but

11 you're guilty of something else, a criminal

12 charge that you weren't charged. I really

13 have a procedural problem with that. So I

14 think the issue really is whether or not to

15 give her a license or not give her a license.

16 If you find that it was inadvertent and she

17 knew she was arrested but didn't think she had

18 to put it down because she was told, you know,

19 there's no record of it, then you would give

20 her a license. If you don't, then you would

21 deny the license.

22 COMMISSIONER GANT: I --

23 MR. MCCANSE: Well, again, rebuttal

24 to Mr. Bradley, he doesn't make any mention of

25 this statute that allows the discipline of a

20

1 licensee. Also, the hearing -- the initial

2 finding of the Commission was that she should

3 be found in -- unsuitable and she appealed.

4 She asked for a hearing. And in the hearing,

5 why, she -- this evidence came out. It's not

6 a question. Now, she didn't make a pleading

7 as such. The only pleading was done by the

8 Commission in their letter of -- intention to

9 impose the discipline of the finding of

10 unsuitable and then her request for a hearing.

11 And I think in her request, if I'm not

12 mistaken, Mike, she said that she didn't think

13 she had a record.

14 MR. BRADLEY: Yeah. Right.

15 MR. MCCANSE: As far as pleading is

16 concerned, it's not like a -- a trial in a

17 court. If -- I gather what Mr. Bradley is

18 saying she's either unsuitable or suitable,

19 you should either deny her license and -- or

20 give her one if I -- find her -- that's she's

21 suitable. The position I took was failing to

22 list an arrest is a serious matter. And as

23 far as the precedent is concerned, it should

24 carry some punishment for failure to do so

25 even though there may have been some

21

1 confusion. And there's a distinction between

2 deliberately failing to answer a question and

3 having some misunderstanding about it.

4 Now, if -- if -- for my point of view,

5 after seeing her and heard the evidence, if my

6 only choice is to find that she's suitable

7 or unsuitable, I would have recommended that

8 you find her suitable as indeed I did.

9 Because I said that once she has been taken

10 off the job for two weeks, in effect, then she

11 should be given a license. The only question,

12 then, is should she be denied a license?

13 Should she be punished?

14 COMMISSIONER GANT: I have a --

15 another -- of course, probably either one of

16 you can answer it. I think the last hearing

17 we discussed this. My concern was, too, that

18 if she reapplies if this automatically is

19 going to be held against her because she has

20 been refused a license at the time. What if

21 we disagree on this and don't adopt anything?

22 You know, that's the problem with the three

23 member Commission. What's her status at that

24 time? Is she still a temporary license

25 holder?

22

1 MR. BRADLEY: Yes, sir.

2 MR. BUSHMANN: Yes, sir.

3 COMMISSIONER GANT: And how long can

4 she be a temporary licensee?

5 MR. MCCANSE: The rule allows for a

6 renewal of a temporary license. They don't

7 put a lid on it.

8 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: It could be

9 permanent. Permanently temporary?

10 MR. MCCANSE: I think it's kind of

11 like that or a presidential appointment. It

12 might last forever.

13 MR. MULLALLY: I suspect that since

14 the director is the one that issues the

15 temporary license, that the director might

16 have -- might -- arguably, we haven't

17 researched and haven't -- might arguably be

18 able to revoke it or not renew it. However,

19 having said that, I would be very

20 uncomfortable doing that if I didn't have the

21 majority of the Commission decide that. So I

22 probably wouldn't do anything.

23 There's one other issue that came up at

24 the last meeting that I think needs

25 clarification. And it -- and it's a -- you

23

1 know, words mean things. And we keep focusing

2 on this issue of arrest. The question that --

3 I have her application right here just to make

4 sure because we have a new version of the

5 application. I wanted to make sure I had the

6 right one. The question is: Have you ever

7 been arrested, detained, charged, indicted,

8 convicted, pleaded guilty or nolo contendere

9 or forfeited bail concerning any criminal

10 offense? And then it goes on to talk about

11 some other things. But I think one of the

12 things that gets -- entering into this

13 discussion is, does a layperson have a

14 technical definition of arrest? And I think

15 that is a valid argument if that's what we're

16 talking about. Clearly, she was detained. So

17 regardless of whether they told her this isn't

18 going to show up as an arrest on your record

19 or whatever, she was clearly detained.

20 MR. MCCANSE: For half an hour, I

21 believe.

22 MR. MULLALLY: Yeah.

23 MR. BRADLEY: She admitted on -- at

24 the hearing that she knew she was arrested,

25 but she stated because -- and she was released

24

1 without any charges being filed. And she

2 stated that she was told that there would be

3 no record of it. And there's no criminal

4 record that would show up as a criminal,

5 you know, conviction or even a plea of guilty

6 in court because there's no charge filed.

7 But law enforcement does -- every time

8 somebody is arrested, law enforcement knows

9 that, just by statute. And she -- she claimed

10 she couldn't get her records. But those

11 records, even though they're closed to the

12 general public, are always open by statute to

13 the individual. And I can get my records.

14 Anybody else can go get their records.

15 COMMISSIONER GANT: I read about

16 your traffic tickets.

17 MR. BRADLEY: I haven't had any

18 traffic tickets. Not saying I haven't been

19 stopped. I'm saying I never had a traffic

20 ticket.

21 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Technically,

22 do you have to report that?

23 MR. BRADLEY: I would report it

24 because -- I remember them. I mean, it is

25 something that I -- that makes an impact on

25

1 me.

2 COMMISSIONER GANT: What if the

3 officer said, but I'm going to have your

4 record -- there will be no record of all this?

5 What would you have done?

6 MR. BRADLEY: Well, there is no

7 record of them. For a normal traffic stop

8 along the side of the road, there would be no

9 record, but I remember it.

10 COMMISSIONER GANT: You got it

11 fixed?

12 MR. MCCANSE: Of course, you could

13 have been investigated as a suspicious person,

14 in which case it wasn't an arrest.

15 MR. BRADLEY: If I had been

16 handcuffed and taken to the police station,

17 there's an arrest. There's a whole body of

18 law with regard to that because it involves

19 Miranda rights, whether or not a person was

20 arrested, whether or not Miranda had been given.

21 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: As the only

22 person who has no affiliation with law

23 enforcement, I can understand how -- excuse my

24 voice. I can understand how someone who is

25 told there's no record essentially would

26

1 think, okay, okay, wipe that off, it's gone,

2 it never happened.

3 MR. BRADLEY: Right. Right.

4 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: And because

5 someone said there's no record, I would

6 assume, okay, it's gone, it's not there, and

7 -- and I would probably think the same way she

8 did, which was -- there's no record, there's

9 no record. So --

10 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Well, and I think

11 it's probably fairly obvious she thought --

12 thought that. But she also thought we

13 couldn't find out since there wasn't any

14 record. You know, that's the bottom line, is

15 she didn't think that we would find out that

16 -- so why mention it because they're not going

17 to know. And -- but it's also clear that she

18 knew she had been detained.

19 MR. MULLALLY: Yeah. And the --

20 just to -- to amplify that fact is that the --

21 the new application, which essentially is a

22 written record of what we -- it is our

23 practice to do verbally, so I think there's

24 good evidence -- you know, there's no absolute

25 evidence that this is what happened but it is

27

1 our general practice to have done this

2 verbally at the time she would have applied is

3 to explain to them that -- and this is in the

4 new application -- that arrest includes any

5 detaining, holding or taking into custody by

6 any police or other law enforcement

7 authorities to answer for the alleged

8 performance of any offense. In addition, we

9 add these instructions. Answer yes and

10 provide all information to the best of your

11 ability, even if, A, you did not commit the

12 offense charged, B, the charges were dismissed

13 or subsequently downgraded to a lesser charge,

14 C, you completed a pre-trial intervention or

15 equivalent diversionary program in another

16 jurisdiction, D, you were not convicted, E,

17 you did not serve any jail or prison time; F,

18 the charges or offenses happened a long time

19 ago; or G, if any records relating to a charge

20 and arrest or conviction have been expunged or

21 otherwise officially sealed in Court by a

22 government agency; H, you have an SIS; or, I,

23 pursuant to 313.004, the Missouri Gaming

24 Commission has access to both open and closed

25 records. When in doubt about disclosure of a

28

1 closed record, seek legal counsel. And that's

2 in the new application. And there's certainly

3 reason to believe that that explanation was

4 provided to her.

5 MR. MCCANSE: The problem with that

6 -- and I don't deny that those are the facts.

7 That part of the application was not presented

8 at the hearing. That isn't -- I did not have

9 any chance to consider that at the hearing.

10 No part of the application was presented.

11 COMMISSIONER GANT: Obviously, this

12 is causing us all a lot of -- lot of concern.

13 I could say one thing, if the officers told

14 her there would be no record, there's nothing

15 to expunge to start with on it. And I guess,

16 you know, none of us want to set precedents,

17 but we've got to -- we've got to base our

18 decision on the facts in each particular case.

19 Mike, what do you say the burden of proof is

20 in these hearings? Is it a preponderance of

21 the evidence or is it -- it's not beyond a

22 reasonable doubt?

23 MR. BRADLEY: It's not beyond a

24 reasonable doubt. It's preponderance of the

25 evidence.

29

1 COMMISSIONER GANT: The burden

2 shifts to the --

3 MR. BUSHMANN: It's clear and

4 convincing. They had clear and convincing

5 evidence.

6 COMMISSIONER GANT: Clear and

7 convincing. That's like punitive damages,

8 which is a higher burden.

9 MR. MULLALLY: She has an

10 affirmative obligation, as do all licensees,

11 to show by clear and convincing evidence that

12 they are suitable to be licensed. The whole

13 purpose of that is to avoid an argument that

14 there is any property right in these licenses.

15 It's clearly a privileged license.

16 COMMISSIONER GANT: Okay.

17 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: In truth, we

18 really have two choices, either approve or

19 disapprove.

20 COMMISSIONER GANT: Right.

21 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: And one is 087 and

22 the other is 088.

23 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: If we want

24 to make a decision. Eight is letting her off.

25 Seven is denying; is that correct?

30

1 MR. BUSHMANN: That's correct. 087

2 denies. 088 grants.

3 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: The second

4 one grants. The first one denies.

5 COMMISSIONER GANT: So what did you

6 say, Judy?

7 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: The second

8 one grants her approval, and the first one

9 denies her.

10 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: 087 denies.

11 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Do we need

12 to vote on both of these resolutions, or can

13 we just vote on one?

14 MR. BUSHMANN: We just need a motion

15 and vote on whichever one you choose.

16 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Well, I

17 guess I'll step up to the plate and move that

18 we approve Commission Resolution No. 03-088.

19 COMMISSIONER GANT: Is that the one

20 that approves or denies her?

21 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approves.

22 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approves her

23 license?

24 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Uh-huh.

25 COMMISSIONER GANT: I'll second it.

31

1 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Any other

2 discussion? Call the roll.

3 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

4 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

5 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

6 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

7 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

8 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

9 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

10 adopted Resolution No. 03-088.

11 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Does this

12 lady know how much we've gone through in order

13 to do this? Has she any idea?

14 MR. MCCANSE: No. I doubt that --

15 MR. MULLALLY: She was notified of

16 the -- of course, she was at the last hearing.

17 She was notified of this proceeding today.

18 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: So she has

19 not been suffering through this the way we

20 have?

21 MR. MULLALLY: And, of course,

22 certainly, she was given the encouragement,

23 frankly, that -- to seek counsel. But --

24 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: You know, I think

25 that we've made a decision that could cause us

32

1 grief down the road in other cases. And the

2 fact of the matter is that she knew and she

3 decided not to disclose it. And, you know,

4 that's -- that will probably cause us -- this

5 Commission grief down the road in making

6 another decision. And that's just the bottom

7 line.

8 MR. MULLALLY: Well, certainly, we

9 can note on the record the fact that we are

10 limited to three Commissioners, that it does

11 take three votes to pass anything and that

12 that might serve as some explanation should

13 future events -- this -- this issue come up

14 again.

15 COMMISSIONER GANT: And it's the

16 Christmas season.

17 MR. MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, the

18 Commissioners, the next item on the agenda is

19 another hearing officer recommendation and

20 Hearing Officer McCanse is here to make it.

21 It's under Tab E.

22 MR. MCCANSE: I just trust this one

23 won't be as agonizing. It's somewhat

24 straightforward. This lady was arrested and

25 charged with the disorder -- well, first, she

33

1 was charged with assault on a police officer

2 and resisting arrest, and it was reduced to

3 disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. And

4 she received a suspended imposition of

5 sentence and was placed on probation for two

6 years. She admits that she did something

7 wrong and ought to be punished. Her only

8 excuse for not being punished is that it would

9 be a hardship on her and her son, except that

10 it wasn't her son. And it's -- it's a pretty

11 confusing situation.

12 She also violated a protective order to

13 keep her away from the person who brought the

14 charge in the first place. And both of them

15 apparently ignored that. The lady did say

16 that she has a bipolar condition and that

17 she's taking anger management classes and so

18 on. But -- and she did list the offenses as

19 she's required to do when she is arrested. I

20 -- the Commission recommended 30 days

21 suspension. I could find no reason not to go

22 along with that. I could have -- could have

23 theoretically said that she ought to be

24 punished perhaps even more severely, but I

25 thought that the 30 days would be reasonable

34

1 and that it should be noted that her probation

2 is still in existence. I think she has

3 another year to serve before she's clear in

4 the suspended imposition of sentencing.

5 So all over -- so my recommendation is to

6 affirm what the Commission recommended, and

7 that would be 30-day suspension of her

8 license.

9 COMMISSIONER GANT: I have a

10 question. I don't have any problem with your

11 recommendation. The question I had is that,

12 if these under Circuit Court of Clay County

13 with the protective order, which is, what, a

14 Class A misdemeanor?

15 MR. MCCANSE: Misdemeanor.

16 Right. And that wasn't charged in the initial

17 letter giving cause for the punishment. Or

18 the penalty. The initial letter just

19 mentioned the arrest in it, which is not a

20 crime. The misdemeanor in Clay County was a

21 crime, the misdemeanor. She did list it. And

22 for some reason they --

23 COMMISSIONER GANT: My question

24 would be is if she's -- of course, in your --

25 your conclusion, you stated that -- you know,

35

1 that these are city ordinances. But if the

2 Judge found her in violation of the class A

3 misdemeanor, what does that do to her -- does

4 that take a different -- I don't know if that

5 even came up at the time. Does that change

6 things when she has a misdemeanor conviction?

7 MR. MCCANSE: And I don't know

8 whether that would make any difference in her

9 probation. But I think it was all part of the

10 same transaction, as I understood it, that the

11 misdemeanor conviction was connected with the

12 -- well, that may have led to the arrest,

13 which gave rise to the city ordinance

14 violations. So it was -- really all came out

15 of the same situation.

16 COMMISSIONER GANT: Well --

17 MR. MCCANSE: And I -- I did not

18 consider that point, Judge, as to whether the

19 misdemeanor conviction would affect the -- the

20 suspended imposition of sentence. I -- I

21 think that -- and I don't remember the date,

22 whether the misdemeanor conviction was before

23 or after.

24 MR. MULLALLY: I think that it's all

25 part of the same transaction. And I think the

36

1 other thing that was taken into consideration

2 here with the 30 days that she's been working

3 for six and a half years so -- with a clean

4 regulatory record. So it's not as if we don't

5 know anything about this person. She's been

6 working under our regulatory structure for

7 quite a while – without significant

8 incident.

9 COMMISSIONER GANT: And expect,

10 Kevin, after being a judge for 27 years I've

11 never had to do a protective order adult abuse

12 situation, so I believe those have got to be

13 under cruel and unusual punishment. But I

14 think somebody should warn this lady that if

15 she doesn't work -- because I knew she worked

16 there for that long time that she could be

17 getting in trouble -- you know, if the Judge

18 does decide to do something to her, I don't

19 know how it would affect her license later on.

20 But, you know, realistically, she better shape

21 up and not do these things in the future. But

22 -- so I -- in any event, I agree with your --

23 your recommendation, and I just was curious

24 about maybe somebody ought to warn her that if

25 she -- because what's a city ordinance is a

37

1 lot different than what's the state statute

2 situation, whether it's a misdemeanor or

3 felony. So that's all I have.

4 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Do we have a

5 motion to approve 092?

6 COMMISSIONER GANT: I move that

7 Resolution No. 03-092 be adopted.

8 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.

9 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

10 please.

11 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

12 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

13 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

14 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

15 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

16 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

17 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

18 adopted Resolution No. 03-092.

19 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Thank you.

20 MR. MCCANSE: Thank you all.

21 MR. MULLALLY: They're -- the next

22 item on the agenda is the consideration of the

23 relicensure of Isle of Capri at Boonville.

24 The procedure that we follow on these matters

25 is to first hear from the applicant. The

38

1 Commission also likes to hear from the home

2 dock governing body, which in this case would

3 be the City of Boonville. Then it is

4 generally our practice to call -- to open the

5 floor to any members of the public that would

6 like to offer any comments they might have in

7 regard -- regarding the relicensure of the

8 applicant. We have not been contacted by

9 anyone, but we generally at least make that

10 offer, and then finally to hear a presentation

11 from the background team from the Missouri

12 State Highway Patrol regarding their

13 relicensing investigation. So

14 Kim Hardy and Roy Evans are here from the

15 company unless you have any preliminary

16 questions.

17 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: No. Go right

18 ahead.

19 MR. MULLALLY: And Tom Campbell.

20 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Good morning.

21 MR. TOM CAMPBELL: Good morning, Mr.

22 Chairman, Commissioners, Director Mullally.

23 My name is Tom Campbell. I'm with the law

24 firm of Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, which serves

25 as regulatory counsel for the Isle of Capri

39

1 and its two subsidiaries in the State of

2 Missouri. We are here today for a renewal of

3 the class A license that has been -- that the

4 IOC Boonville, Inc., entity has been

5 operating under since the first license.

6 To my left is Kim Hardy, who is the general

7 manager of the Boonville facility.

8 And before Mr. Hardy provides any

9 presentation for license renewal, I would like

10 to note that the Mayor of Boonville is -- is

11 present today along with Tracy Walkup from the

12 -- from the City of Boonville, as well. And

13 I'd like to introduce someone that none of you

14 have met, I met for the first time, because he

15 is in a new position, Roger Deaton.

16 Roger is the regional vice president for Isle

17 of Capri. You may recall Tom Carr held that

18 position previously, and Tom has been advanced

19 in the corporation. So Roger is the regional

20 vice president covering Missouri. Mr. Hardy?

21 MR. KIM HARDY: Good morning,

22 Commissioners, Chairman. I would like to make

23 a -- a few more introductions here before we

24 get started. I also brought with me Barry

25 Richter. Barry's our marketing guru. And

40

1 also Mike Tamarelli ,who is our operational

2 person. Roy Evans at the computer of Finance.

3 So between all of us, hopefully, we can put on

4 a good presentation for you this morning. The

5 way I think this is going to fold out, it will

6 take about five minutes to show you some

7 slides. Then we'll give some time to the

8 Mayor and the City Clerk of Boonville.

9 COMMISSIONER GANT: Can somebody

10 turn the lights out?

11 MR. HARDY: What you're seeing here

12 is just some over shots of the interior and

13 exterior of the property. Can I assume that

14 you all were given packages of the

15 presentation?

16 COMMISSIONER GANT: Yes.

17 MR. HARDY: The first slide is that

18 we have complied with the development

19 agreement with the City of Boonville. And

20 this will probably be touched on a little bit

21 more by Tracy Walkup. Our gaming revenue,

22 aggregated gaming revenue for 2003 projected,

23 was $68.1 million. The actual is $63.4 million.

24 The projection for 2004 is $65 million. We're well

25 on our way to exceed that projection so far

41

1 this year. Admissions again are 3.4 in 2003.

2 2.7 actual and with projections of 2.8 for

3 2004, which we'll also exceed. The initial

4 capital project was $75 million, the actual

5 coming in at $68 million. 2003 actual capital

6 spending was $3 million and 2004 projections are

7 $3.1 million, and we'll achieve that number.

8 Employment, September 2002 was 629. In November

9 of this year was 623, and we anticipate

10 for the following or the fiscal year of 2004

11 610 to 630 employees.

12 The minority actual 7.5 with Boonville

13 being 13 percent. Female actual is 53.1 with

14 Boonville representing 53 percent. All of our

15 employees are residents of Missouri. Our

16 employee turnover rate is 61.8 percent. And

17 it should be noted that's down 5 percent from

18 last year. We've limited several programs to

19 try to lower that moving forward. September

20 unemployment, 2001 was 5.2. 2002, 4 percent.

21 And 2003 is 3.2 percent. Contributions,

22 $210,000.

23 New businesses in Boonville, 13. Closed

24 businesses, five in the last -- the last year.

25 The crime rate per one thousand, 2001 was

42

1 21.6. 2002 is 32. And 2003 is 26.4.

2 Columbia down at the bottom of reading from

3 2001, 29.3, 23.3 and 22.1, which indicates

4 there was no surge in crime.

5 The problem gamers, we have several

6 programs that we have in place, not only at

7 the Boonville property but as the Isle of

8 Capri company. Some of those are being a

9 member of Missouri Alliance, continued

10 training, compulsive gaming awareness,

11 responsible gaming week, several seminars and

12 having the 800 Bets Off -- or the 800 number

13 Bets Off on all of our collateral. Underaged

14 gamers, we have a strict identification policy,

15 training at orientation, Bounty Hunter, which

16 is a monetary program that we have for our

17 employees for catching false I.D.s, bad I.D.s

18 and such. And we have training that we

19 utilize from the MGC folks. This, associated

20 with a strict identification policy, complete

21 list of DAPs, identification checked and cross

22 referenced on taxable jackpots. And we check

23 DAP at check cashing.

24 Community services, we're involved in

25 YMCA, blood drive, United Way, Heart

43

1 Association, Special Olympics and many others.

2 Help that we give to different projects,

3 neighborhood assistance programs, Muscular

4 Dystrophy, Unlimited Opportunities, Cooper

5 County Food Pantry and Friends of Historic

6 Boonville. And our company and property

7 mission statement, Isle of Capri Boonville is

8 to be the best gaming entertainment company in

9 our market for its employees, communities,

10 guests and investors. And with that, I'll

11 turn it over to Tracy? The mayor.

12 MR. CAMPBELL: Unless you have some

13 questions.

14 MR. MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, the --

15 I just have a question about the mission

16 statement. Aren't you the only gaming

17 entertainment company in your market?

18 MR. HARDY: Make the statement true.

19 MR. MULLALLY: Okay.

20 MAYOR DANIELLE BLANCK: We do have Bingo.

21 We do have non-Isle of Capri bingo in Boonville.

22 And they do a better job.

23 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I have a

24 couple questions. The -- the 13 businesses

25 that -- that opened and what was it --

44

1 MR.HARDY: Five.

2 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Five closed.

3 Can you attribute any of those new businesses

4 to having opened because you existed in that

5 community?

6 MR. HARDY: Commissioner, I don't

7 know that I can answer that. But I'm sure

8 that Tracy probably can. No? We did --

9 MS. TRACY WALKUP: They are not directly

10 attributable to the boat, neither of the

11 closings.

12 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: They have

13 nothing to do with that then.

14 MR. HARDY: We did some comparisons

15 on that over the last couple weeks and

16 couldn't find really any correlation to us

17 doing that.

18 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: And other

19 funds that you provide for the community, do

20 any of those -- or have you considered or do

21 any of them go to social service agencies that

22 address addictive behavior, gaming problems,

23 employment issues? Roy?

24 MR. HARDY: Roy?

25 MR. ROY EVANS: I can't think of

26 anything -- the way would be -- they -- they

45

1 address a wide assortment of issues.

2 MR. HARDY: I didn't bring our

3 complete list, either. There's probably some

4 fingers that go off, but there's not one that

5 I can recall that is targeted to anything you

6 just asked for.

7 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: And how do

8 you determine which organizations you're going

9 to give money to?

10 MR. HARDY: We -- I've been there

11 since this last April. And since we're a

12 brand new property, I don't know that that's

13 really been established yet how that's going

14 to continue forward. But we're looking at --

15 for our fiscal 2004 year to get with the City

16 and try to develop a committee, if you will,

17 that would certainly get together and meet and

18 decide exactly where we need to put our money

19 that's going to get the best -- the biggest

20 bang for the buck for the community.

21 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: For the

22 community. Okay. So -- it appears that --

23 that past givings probably were more

24 determined by someone's personal interest in

25 an agency or possibly the exposure within the

46

1 community rather than addressing specific

2 issues? Is that -- that the direction you

3 intend to pursue or --

4 MR. HARDY: In the past, I don't

5 know that anybody's been refused. It could

6 be, but I don't think there has any. Sara

7 Gallagher for the City is the one that's going

8 to be heading that up from the City of

9 Boonville so --

10 MR. CAMPBELL: Commissioner

11 Hinrichs, I would like to point out that Isle

12 of Capri is unique in that it matches United

13 Way contributions by employees 100 percent.

14 MR. HARDY: 100 percent.

15 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: You agree

16 that it's 100 percent?

17 MR. HARDY: There's 100 percent

18 match. 25 percent goes to a scholarship. 75

19 percent goes into the United Way. I wasn't

20 going to argue with the attorney but --

21 MR. CAMPBELL: Nor I with my client.

22 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Don't argue

23 with an attorney. All right. Thank you.

24 MR. HARDY: Mayor?

25 MAYOR BLANCK: I would like to address that

47

1 donation policy. I think most of the

2 donations that Isle of Capri has made have been

3 because of direct requests from an

4 organization within the community rather than

5 -- and the fact that they are not giving to

6 the specific social service organizations is

7 because they've never asked you for the money.

8 And that's their fault. And I -- well, I

9 mean, they -- you know, they should. And I

10 will pass that on to them. And I have a

11 feeling they will. So -- as the mayor, I

12 would tell you that Isle of Capri is an

13 excellent member of our community. They are

14 supportive of all of the organizations that

15 request help. They are vitally involved in

16 the community. Their management team is

17 involved within the churches, within

18 organizations within the community and they

19 have indeed become citizens. They're not just

20 a business that is there.

21 I think in the packet you were given, it

22 indicates that we also share our revenue from

23 the -- from the casino with the surrounding

24 counties with their sheriff, with the

25 prosecuting attorneys, et cetera. We have --

48

1 we have requested that those counties

2 communicate with us as to how they are using

3 the money. We encourage them not to use it in

4 general revenue, but to buy new police cars or

5 some new equipment, et cetera. Some of them

6 have gone along with that. Some of them have

7 put it into their general revenue, which we

8 are very sorry about, but that was their

9 choice. And I think you have that information

10 in your packet as to how the money was broken

11 down. We also indicated in the letter, we --

12 we are buying out our LAGERS -- our long-term

13 employees LAGERS retirement at a cost of

14 $841,000, and this money is being used from

15 the casino money.

16 We also bought the Kemper Military School

17 last April with casino money at a cost of over

18 $533,000. We have sold the presidential home

19 and are actively looking for usage for the

20 buildings. The Kemper Military School

21 organization is still attempting to open a

22 school. We are certainly supporting that.

23 But we are also looking for other ways in

24 order to use those buildings and update them.

25 You also have another list. We did a --

49

1 an intersection reconstruction of one of our

2 major problem roads. We have taken five

3 blocks of a -- of very poor quality street and

4 are just now finishing rebuilding that, moving

5 all of the utilities so that they're

6 accessible. We are building a new police

7 department. We are furnishing that, of

8 course. We plan in the future to expand our

9 fire department, buy a new ladder truck.

10 We have done an airport expansion. We

11 have a wonderful small airport, and we intend

12 to continue improving that. We are looking at

13 annexation, which, again, is expensive. You

14 have to provide utilities, et cetera. And all

15 of those things, we are planning to use casino

16 money to do that as well as some vehicle

17 equipment for the City. We do not use it for

18 general revenue. We are all committed to

19 using it for capital improvements.

20 Do you have any questions of me? I think

21 they've done a great job. They are very open

22 to listen to us. I think Kim was the one who

23 suggested this kind of ad hoc committee that

24 will not only screen requests to the casino,

25 but we're going to try to get it to -- to look

50

1 at all of the organizations that ask for

2 financial support from different organizations

3 within the community so that we don't have

4 overlap. And I -- I have to compliment him on

5 coming up with that idea. I believe it worked

6 where he was before. And we hope that it's

7 going to work in Boonville so that we do not

8 have duplication of efforts.

9 So, again, they're -- the Isle is being

10 very responsive to our community and we

11 appreciate it.

12 MR. HARDY: Thank you.

13 MAYOR BLANCK: Any questions?

14 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Thank you, Mayor.

15 MAYOR BLANCK: Do you want to ask Tracy

16 some questions, our money lady? Okay. Thank

17 you.

18 COMMISSIONER GANT: I've got just a

19 couple general questions. All right. I was

20 -- maybe I haven't noticed this before. And

21 it's just for my curiosity. It appears that

22 your number of assaults and your number of

23 stealing incidents have run about the same

24 every year. Or at least from December 2001 to

25 2002, it was assaults 140, stealing 257. 2002

51

1 to 2003 is assaults 157 to 228. Well,

2 dropping one or more. What are you

3 determining is an assault? Are these actual

4 fights, or are they shouting matches? Or what

5 do you determine under this that you have to

6 provide as an assault?

7 MR. HARDY: I'll have to defer that

8 to Tracy.

9 MS. WALKUP: I think that you're

10 looking at statistics from the Boonville

11 Police Department.

12 COMMISSIONER GANT: Yes.

13 MS. WALKUP: I believe in order to

14 be determined an assault, one person has to

15 touch another person.

16 COMMISSIONER GANT: That would be an

17 assault. Okay. But there is actual touching

18 then?

19 MS. WALKUP: Yes, I believe so.

20 COMMISSIONER GANT: Okay. I was

21 just curious. Thank you. I had another --

22 and, Kevin -- well, let me ask you all

23 first. You've got two lawsuits pending,

24 apparently for $10 million and $12.8 million.

25 What's the status of those and how -- if you

52

1 would lose those, how would that affect your

2 operations?

3 MR. CAMPBELL: Which lawsuits are

4 those, Mr. Commissioner? Are those -- those

5 aren't Missouri lawsuits?

6 COMMISSIONER GANT: Well --

7 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: What page

8 are you on?

9 COMMISSIONER GANT: You've got a --

10 MR. HARDY: Arbitrations in St.

11 Louis, Missouri something.

12 COMMISSIONER GANT: It says issue an

13 award and title for $4.8 million and it's in

14 connection with the lease and real estate

15 located near Jefferson City, Missouri. That's

16 in Missouri. Then the County of Jefferson

17 instituted a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of

18 Jefferson, the County.

19 MR. CAMPBELL: Yes. Yes,

20 Mr. Commissioner. Thank you for -- the four

21 and a half million, was that one of the -- the

22 numbers you mentioned?

23 COMMISSIONER GANT: That was one

24 that was -- the last one was $10 million and

25 the first one was $4.5 million.

53

1 MR. CAMPBELL: The $4.5 million was

2 an arbitration award. The Isle of --

3 COMMISSIONER GANT: Binding

4 arbitration?

5 MR. CAMPBELL: It was binding

6 arbitration. It related to a dispute among

7 the landlords of a piece of property in

8 Jefferson County, which the -- had been

9 prioritized by the Missouri Gaming Commission

10 for development. And these are -- due to a

11 whole lot of different factors, the

12 development did not take place. Landlords

13 under the lease requested arbitration.

14 There was a hearing and an award was made by

15 the arbitration panel against the Isle of

16 Capri for $4.5 million.

17 The second lawsuit you mentioned -- and I

18 -- forgive me. I -- that wasn't at top of

19 mind because my firm is not handling that

20 lawsuit on behalf of the Isle. That is a

21 lawsuit that -- involving the County of

22 Jefferson. Jefferson County has brought suit

23 against the Isle of Capri for breach of a

24 development agreement also arising from the

25 proposed casino development in Jefferson

54

1 County. That case is pending in Circuit Court

2 in Jefferson County and is just -- I believe

3 just now entering the discovery phase. And

4 that is -- that is a -- that lawsuit is being

5 handled on behalf of the Isle of Capri by the

6 law firm of Groves & Gray out of Washington

7 D.C. And there is also local counsel.

8 COMMISSIONER GANT: Just out

9 curiosity, on the first one, it was binding

10 arbitration. It says this case has now been

11 moved to the state court. You can only set

12 aside binding arbitration unless there's fraud

13 or improper action on the part of the

14 arbitrators.

15 MR. CAMPBELL: You're absolutely

16 correct, Mr. Commissioner. Let me update --

17 that suit, which was brought by the Isle of

18 Capri, to overturn the award, that has been

19 settled and dismissed with the payment of four

20 and a half million dollars award.

21 COMMISSIONER GANT: That was part of

22 what was confusing me. I have one other

23 question. And I'm not picking on you all.

24 But, Kevin, where are you?

25 MR. MULLALLY: Right here.

55

1 COMMISSIONER GANT: I noticed that

2 they've had two violations where fines were

3 issued by the Commission in the last nine

4 months. Is that a normal -- or -- I haven't

5 been on the Commission that long, so I'm not

6 sure what the historical -- is that an unusual

7 number for a casino to have? Or is that --

8 we've fined another one a couple times since

9 I've been on it but --

10 MR. MULLALLY: No. That's not

11 unusual.

12 COMMISSIONER GANT: Okay.

13 MR. MULLALLY: It's not an

14 abnormally high number. You know, things --

15 it's a complicated business. There's a lot of

16 rules.

17 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Stuff happens.

18 COMMISSIONER GANT: Okay. Well,

19 your reports are good with the community. You

20 get along well with them. They seem to be

21 happy with everything, the prosecutor and the

22 sheriff and the mayor and everybody else. So

23 I wasn't picking on you on those questions.

24 I just -- the arbitrator probably caught my

25 attention.

56

1 MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you, sir.

2 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Any other

3 questions? Thank you very much.

4 MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you,

5 Mr. Chairman.

6 MR. HARDY: Thank you.

7 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Next presentation.

8 COMMISSIONER GANT: One very -- yes,

9 keep working with the community because I

10 think that's extremely important to co-exist

11 with each other. And if everything goes well,

12 everybody profits by that.

13 MAYOR BLANCK: We won't let them off the

14 hook. Don't worry.

15 MR. MULLALLY: All right.

16 Mr. Chairman, I do think it is worthy of note

17 to mention when a community really gets it,

18 and Boonville does. They've done a very

19 admirable job of developing a system to share

20 this revenue with the -- with the greater

21 Boonville community, and not just keep it in

22 Boonville. They've done a -- as far as we can

23 tell, a nice job in identifying very targeted

24 projects to use gaming money on that are going

25 to help transform Boonville. And I think in

57

1 ten years you're going to see a rather

2 substantial impact that -- that gaming has had

3 on that community because of the wisdom that

4 the city government is using in -- in

5 utilizing these gaming funds, and not only

6 just for Boonville but for the surrounding

7 communities as well.

8 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: And -- and you

9 know, Kevin, you're absolutely right. They

10 are an example to behold. And, certainly, the

11 -- the wisdom they've had to share with the

12 surrounding community has been -- been very

13 good. And we wish that was happening

14 state-wide.

15 MR. MULLALLY: That's right. As you

16 well know, we have some -- some communities

17 that want to hoard it. And over the long term

18 -- over the short term, I'm sure that it is of

19 great benefit to their local municipality.

20 But over the long term, it may cause the

21 General Assembly to take another look at how

22 -- how they distribute this gaming money. So

23 I think Boonville really gets it and it's good

24 to see that.

25 This is the point in the proceedings

58

1 where we traditionally ask if there are any

2 members of the public that would like to

3 comment on this relicensure application.

4 Again, we have not been contacted by anybody.

5 But if someone would like to step forward --

6 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Is there anybody

7 in the audience that would like to comment?

8 If not, then we will --

9 MR. MULLALLY: Sergeant Ed Aylward

10 is here to make the presentation from the

11 background investigation team.

12 SERGEANT ED AYLWARD: Good morning,

13 Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.

14 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Good morning.

15 SGT. AYLWARD: An investigation was

16 conducted by the Jefferson City background

17 team to determine suitability of Isle of Capri

18 Boonville, Incorporated, for the license

19 renewal of its Class A Riverboat Gaming

20 License.

21 IOC-Boonville was incorporated in the

22 State of Missouri on May 16, 2000. On

23 December 6, 2001, they were granted a Class A

24 gaming license by the Missouri Gaming

25 Commission for the purpose of operating a

59

1 riverboat gambling operation in Boonville,

2 Missouri.

3 Credit and criminal background checks

4 were conducted on IOC-Boonville Key and Level

5 I personnel. Background checks included, but

6 were not limited to, checks with federal,

7 state, county, and municipal law enforcement

8 agencies where the individuals live, have

9 lived, worked or frequented. No discrepancies

10 or concerns were noted.

11 The City of Boonville and Cooper County

12 officials were contacted regarding concerns

13 with the operation of IOC Boonville. There

14 were no issues, concerns or negative

15 information discovered.

16 The Missouri Department of Natural

17 Resources, Missouri Department of Health,

18 Cooper County Department of Health and ABS

19 Consulting, Incorporated were contacted

20 regarding concerns with the IOC Boonville

21 operation. And, again, no concerns were

22 noted.

23 The investigation conducted did not

24 produce any information that would preclude

25 IOC Boonville from relicensing by the Missouri

60

1 Gaming Commission.

2 Do you have any questions for me about

3 the report that you have?

4 COMMISSIONER GANT: No.

5 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Do you?

6 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Huh-uh.

7 COMMISSIONER GANT: Thank you.

8 SGT. AYLWARD: Thank you.

9 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Anything else,

10 Kevin?

11 MR. MULLALLY: No. Mr. Chairman,

12 based on the investigative report and

13 information you heard today, the staff

14 recommends that Isle of Capri Boonville be

15 relicensed.

16 COMMISSIONER GANT: I move that

17 Resolution No. 03-089 be approved.

18 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.

19 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

20 please.

21 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

22 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

23 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

24 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

25 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

61

1 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

2 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

3 adopted Resolution No. 03-089.

4 MR. MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, under

5 Tab G is a consideration of the licensure of a

6 supplier, Western Missouri -- Western Money

7 Systems, and Sergeant Steve Akridge is here to

8 make that presentation.

9 SERGEANT STEVE AKRIDGE: Mr. Chairman

10 and Commissioners. Investigators of the Missouri

11 Gaming Commission conducted a background

12 investigation of Western Money Systems,

13 Incorporated. The investigation included

14 criminal, character and financial inquiries

15 into the background of Western Money Systems,

16 Incorporated, and the following key persons:

17 Bernard Boyle, president and joint owner,

18 Kathleen Boyle, vice president and joint

19 owner. Western Money Systems is the designer,

20 manufacturer and marketer of coin changers,

21 scales, bill accepters, coin and currency

22 dispensers and various ticket and money

23 exchange products.

24 A financial background investigation of

25 the corporation included, but was not limited

62

1 to, the examination of corporate tax returns,

2 the source and application of funds, the

3 examination of loans to and from the

4 corporation, cash flow analysis and bad debt

5 write-offs and review of all corporate

6 litigation. The financial background

7 investigation of the key persons included, but

8 was not limited to, examination of individual

9 tax returns, the examination of bank and

10 brokerage statements, the examination of all

11 sources of income including all non-taxable

12 income and the examination of executive

13 employment agreements.

14 The criminal and character background

15 checks included, but were not limited to,

16 federal, state, county and municipal law

17 enforcement agencies where the individuals

18 have lived, worked and frequented.

19 The findings of the investigation

20 including the financial review disclosed no

21 discrepancies or concerns that would preclude

22 licensing the applicant as a supplier in the

23 State of Missouri.

24 COMMISSIONER GANT: I have no

25 questions.

63

1 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Do you have any?

2 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: No.

3 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Do we have a

4 motion?

5 COMMISSIONER GANT: I just got a PS.

6 Does he need to redress that? All right. I

7 move --

8 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Do you have

9 anything else, sir?

10 SGT. AKRIDGE: No, sir.

11 COMMISSIONER GANT: Well, I move

12 that Resolution No. 03-090 be approved.

13 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.

14 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

15 please.

16 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

17 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approved.

18 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

19 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

20 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

21 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

22 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

23 adopted Resolution No. 03- 090.

24 MR. MULLALLY: Under Tab H, you'll

25 find materials regarding the consideration of

64

1 the licensure of Level I and key

2 applicants, and Lieutenant Rick Wilhoit is

3 here to make a presentation.

4 LIEUTENANT RICK WILHOIT: Good morning,

5 Mr. Chairman. A background team conducted

6 investigations of four Level I and two key

7 person applicants that included, but were not

8 limited to, criminal, financial and general

9 character inquiries. The following

10 individuals have been investigated and found

11 to be suitable for licensing by the

12 Commission: Robert A. Sobczyk, vice president

13 of slot operations at Ameristar Casinos, Inc.;

14 Peter Carl Walsh, key person of Ameristar

15 Casinos, Incorporated; Jeffrey Snyder Burge,

16 vice president of Finance at Ameristar Casino,

17 St. Charles, Incorporated; Arnold Lee Block,

18 key person of Argosy Gaming Company; Theodore

19 A. Bogich, senior vice president and general

20 manager of Harrah's North Kansas City, LLC;

21 Michael C. Grey, vice president of Finance of

22 Harrah's North Kansas City, LLC.

23 Additionally, one business key person

24 entity was submitted by the staff for your

25 consideration. IOC Services, Incorporated

65

1 business entity key person of IOC Boonville,

2 Incorporated, and IOC Kansas City,

3 Incorporated.

4 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Any questions?

5 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to

6 adopt Resolution No. 03-091.

7 COMMISSIONER GANT: Second.

8 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Somebody move?

9 It's been moved and seconded? Okay.

10 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

11 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

12 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

13 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

14 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

15 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

16 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

17 adopted Resolution No. 03-091.

18 LT. WILHOIT: Thank you.

19 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Thank you.

20 MR. MULLALLY: Under Tabs I through

21 K, we have three proposed disciplinary

22 actions, and General Counsel Mike Bushmann is

23 here to make a presentation.

24 MR. BUSHMANN: Case No. DC-03-101 is

25 against Isle of Capri, Kansas City, Inc. It

66

1 involves failure to immediately notify the

2 Commission of violations of law that occurred

3 at the casino. On September 14, 2003, at

4 approximately 5 a.m., a female casino patron

5 reported to the security supervisor, Reginald

6 Bracy, that her purse was missing. Bracy

7 initiated an investigation of the incident and

8 by approximately 7 a.m. had identified a

9 person through the use of surveillance

10 videotapes who had been suspected of stealing

11 the purse.

12 However, Mr. Bracy did not notify

13 Commission agent on duty at that time of the

14 stealing incident. He waited until 11 p.m.,

15 about 18 hours after the incident had

16 occurred, to notify the Commission.

17 Commission rules require that all

18 licensees must immediately report illegal acts

19 to the Commission, but Isle of Capri's

20 employee failed to do that. Commission agents

21 frequently rely on information provided by the

22 casinos so that they can try and prevent

23 illegal activity from occurring. In the past,

24 the senior casino management has been informed

25 about the importance of notifying Commission

67

1 agents when events like this occur. They

2 failed to sufficiently communicate this to

3 their staff and failed to realize the

4 importance of this responsibility. For that

5 reason the staff recommends that Isle of Capri

6 Kansas City, Inc., be fined in the amount of

7 $120,000.

8 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Suggestion?

9 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Is this --

10 is this the normal amount that is -- does this

11 happen elsewhere -- has it happened elsewhere

12 and is that the routine fine? Or how did you

13 come up with $120,000?

14 MR. BUSHMANN: The Discipline Review

15 Board considered factors, including that there

16 were two pending cases against this same

17 licensee for the same type of conduct. The

18 first case, which is still pending and not

19 final was for $50,000. The second case, which

20 occurred a few months later was for $60,000.

21 So this is a -- a substantial increase in the

22 amount of fine from previous amounts.

23 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Jack?

24 COMMISSIONER GANT: I'm trying to

25 find -- what's the number of the resolution?

68

1 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Under I.

2 COMMISSIONER GANT: 03-101 or --

3 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Yes. 03-101.

4 COMMISSIONER GANT: Okay. I move

5 that the DC-03-101 -- that the recommendation

6 be adopted.

7 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I second.

8 COMMISSIONER GANT: And approved.

9 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

10 please.

11 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

12 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

13 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

14 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

15 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

16 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

17 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

18 adopted Disciplinary Action DC-03-101.

19 MR. BUSHMANN: The next case is

20 DC-03-102, and it's against Harrah's North

21 Kansas City, LLC. This involves denying a

22 patron the right to play a card game and

23 requiring that a wager be withdrawn after the

24 first card has been dealt.

25 On January 7, 2003, a casino patron,

69

1 Jerry Bauer, was playing blackjack at

2 Harrah's Casino. After playing 17 hands,

3 Mr. Bauer placed a proper bet and the dealer

4 began dealing cards to Mr. Bauer and the other

5 players at the table. After the dealer had

6 dealt two cards to the other players and one

7 card to himself and Mr. Bauer, the table game

8 supervisor stepped in and stopped the game.

9 The supervisor refused to allow the dealer to

10 deal a second card to Mr. Bauer to complete

11 his hand even though he allowed another player

12 to be paid who was showing a blackjack.

13 Mr. Bauer was behaving properly and was not

14 being disruptive.

15 One of the Commission's rules states

16 specifically that no casino may deny a patron

17 the right to play a card game which is offered

18 to the general public, such as blackjack,

19 unless the patron is engaged in unlawful or

20 disruptive conduct. In addition, Harrah's own

21 internal control standards state that no wager

22 may be withdrawn after the first card of a

23 round has been dealt. In this case, the

24 supervisor improperly denied Mr. Bauer the

25 right to play blackjack and required that he

70

1 withdraw his bet after the hand had started.

2 For these violations, the staff

3 recommends that a fine be imposed against

4 Harrah's North Kansas City, LLC, in the amount

5 of $15,000.

6 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Did we -- was we

7 able to determine why he did that?

8 MR. BUSHMANN: Based on the

9 statements in Mr. Bauer's complaint to the

10 Commission, it's probable that he is -- was an

11 advantage player that was being tracked by

12 the casino. He admitted freely that he

13 uses card counting and betting strategies to

14 try and increase his odds. And it's also

15 common for casinos to -- to be aware of those

16 persons when they enter into a casino. There

17 are certain legitimate counter measures that a

18 casino can try and even the odds when an

19 advantage player is playing at the table.

20 But denying play and stopping the hand in the

21 middle of a round is not one of them.

22 MR. MULLALLY: Yeah. That's one of

23 those industry terms that, frankly, the

24 industry created for their own benefit.

25 Advantage player. Why don't you just call

71

1 him a good player? He's not got any advantage

2 over anybody else other than he's smart.

3 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Better than most.

4 MR. MULLALLY: Yeah.

5 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Is there a

6 customary amount?

7 MR. MULLALLY: There was -- last

8 August, you imposed a fine against Ameristar

9 for a similar type of incident, and that was a

10 $25,000 fine.

11 MR. BUSHMANN: And the Discipline

12 Review Board considered that. But that case

13 involved three separate incidents of denial of

14 play where, in this case, it was a single

15 incident, and that's why the lower amount was

16 being recommended.

17 COMMISSIONER GANT: Mr. Chairman, I

18 move that DC-03-102 be adopted and approved.

19 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.

20 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

21 please.

22 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

23 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approved.

24 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

25 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

72

1 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

2 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

3 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

4 adopted Disciplinary Complaint DC-03-102.

5 MR. BUSHMANN: The last case today

6 is DC-03-103 against Harrah's Maryland

7 Heights, LLC. On October 1, 2003, some

8 Harrah's employees were conducting a soft

9 count drop, which involves removing bill

10 validator acceptor boxes that contain money

11 from slot machines and replacing them with

12 empty boxes. The bill validator is the device

13 that allows a player to feed currency

14 into the slot machine in order to obtain

15 credits for play. Those bill validator boxes

16 are required by casino internal control

17 standards to be locked inside a locked

18 compartment.

19 On October 1st, the soft count employees

20 noticed that one of the slot machines was

21 missing a lock on the bill validator door.

22 The employees notified security and guarded

23 the slot machine until a lock could be

24 installed. At some point in the past, a

25 Harrah's employee had removed the lock and not

73

1 replaced it, failing to properly secure the

2 assets inside the bill validator acceptor box.

3 And for that violation, the staff recommends

4 that a fine be imposed on Harrah's Maryland

5 Heights in the amount of $5,000.

6 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Again,

7 that's the customary fine or --

8 MR. BUSHMANN: There wasn't another

9 case that was exactly on point. There was a

10 prior case in April of 2002 where there was a

11 whole bank of slot machines where they had a

12 broken lock for a period of time. In that

13 case, it was $20,000. But in this case it was

14 a single incident of a single machine.

15 COMMISSIONER GANT: Mr. Chairman, I move

16 that DC-03-103 be approved and adopted.

17 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.

18 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

19 please.

20 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

21 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

22 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

23 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

24 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

25 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

74

1 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: By your vote, you

2 have adopted Disciplinary Complaint DC-03-103.

3 MR. MULLALLY: Thanks, Mike. The

4 next item on the agenda is the consideration

5 of the relicensure of bingo manufacturers and

6 suppliers, and Sergeant David Booker is here

7 to make the presentation.

8 SERGEANT DAVID BOOKER: Mr. Chairman, Members

9 of the Commission. Today I'm going to present several

10 companies for relicensure as either suppliers or

11 manufacturers of bingo products which are for

12 sale in the state of Missouri. You

13 will probably notice that some of the

14 companies will be mentioned twice as they hold

15 a dual license as both a manufacturer and a

16 supplier. The primary difference in

17 relicensing a manufacturer and a supplier is a

18 bond requirement which is incumbent upon the

19 suppliers in the state as they are responsible

20 for paying the tax on the products sold.

21 So we'll begin with the relicensure of

22 suppliers. It includes, but is not limited to,

23 the following checks that we do of the company

24 and its key persons: The bond requirement,

25 federal and state tax checks, customer and

75

1 product lists, corporate organization charts,

2 gaming license checks with other jurisdictions

3 as well as the following checks on the key

4 persons: NCIC and MULES checks, credit checks

5 and IRS tax checks are completed on these

6 people. The following companies have applied

7 for relicensure of their suppliers license:

8 All American Bingo, Inc.; Bingo Brain, Inc.;

9 California Concepts, Inc.; MMG, Inc., doing

10 business as Bingo Supply Center; Game Tech

11 International, Inc.; and Games Galore.

12 The relicensure of manufacturers includes,

13 but is not limited to, the following -- also

14 the following checks of the company and its

15 key persons: Federal and state tax checks,

16 customer product lists, corporate

17 organizations charts, gaming license checks in

18 other jurisdictions as well as the checks on

19 the key persons including, but not limited to,

20 NCIC and MULES, credit checks and IRS tax

21 checks.

22 The following companies have applied for

23 relicensure of their manufacturer's license:

24 Arrow International, Inc.; Bingo Brain, Inc.;

25 California Concepts, Inc.; Douglas Press,

76

1 Inc.; Game Tech International, Inc.;

2 International Game Co., Inc.; Universal

3 Manufacturing Company; Video King Gaming

4 Systems, Inc.; and Western Bingo Supplies,

5 Inc.

6 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Do we have

7 that here as two different resolutions?

8 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Yes. I think we

9 need to approach both of them, don't we,

10 Kevin?

11 MR. MULLALLY: Yeah.

12 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move that

13 we approve Resolution No. 03-005-B.

14 COMMISSIONER GANT: Second.

15 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

16 please.

17 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

18 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

19 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

20 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

21 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

22 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

23 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

24 adopted Resolution No. 03-005-B.

25 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move that

77

1 we approve Resolution No. 03-006-B.

2 COMMISSIONER GANT: Second.

3 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

4 please.

5 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

6 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

7 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

8 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

9 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

10 COMMISSIONER GANT: I thought you

11 were changing your mind. I also approve.

12 MS. FRANKS: By your vote --

13 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: She can hear

14 me. That's the important thing.

15 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've

16 adopted Resolution No. 03-006-B.

17 MR. MULLALLY: Thanks.

18 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Thank you.

19 MR. MULLALLY: Chairman, at Tab N is

20 the consideration of revocation of bingo

21 license. And Mike Bradley is here to make

22 that recommendation.

23 MR. BRADLEY: Thank you, Kevin. This

24 is dealing with an organization known as

25 DeSoto Elks Lodge No. 689, of course, in

78

1 DeSoto, Missouri. And just a brief

2 explanation. In the bingo discipline, we have

3 a two-part procedure. The first part is we go

4 before the Administrative Hearing Commission

5 and have a hearing on it as to whether or not

6 grounds for discipline exist. And if the

7 Administrative Hearing Commission finds

8 grounds for discipline, then the organization

9 in bingo has a right to have a hearing in

10 front of the Gaming Commission's hearing

11 officer as to the extent of the discipline.

12 And the original proposed discipline in

13 this discipline was a revocation of the

14 license. DeSoto Elks asked for and received a

15 hearing in front of the Administrative Hearing

16 Commission, and that is in front of you.

17 After the hearing of the Administrative

18 Hearing Commission, we alleged three things.

19 One, that the DeSoto Elks, during the

20 investigation, delayed the investigation

21 because they had to wait for about an hour

22 after they got there.

23 The second thing we allege is they had

24 three machines that were, in essence, slot

25 machines on the premise of their bingo

79

1 organization.

2 And the third thing we alleged is that

3 this organization tampered with the evidence

4 because by the time the investigators were

5 able to go and do the investigation and see

6 the three machines, the machines had been

7 tampered with. And these machines, these

8 Cherry Bonus machines that they found there,

9 are pretty much essentially the same as a slot

10 machine which is now essentially a computer.

11 What they found when they got there is

12 that the machines' cabinets had been opened

13 and the mother board type thing on the

14 computer had been removed.

15 We had a hearing in front of the

16 Administrative Hearing Commission. The

17 Administrative Hearing Commission found

18 discipline on our second and third count that

19 these were three slot machines and a violation

20 of the law, and, second, that they did tamper

21 with the evidence.

22 But because the inspection occurred

23 before the organization had opened, they said

24 that there was no violation for the hour delay

25 in getting the inspectors in. So they did

80

1 find grounds for discipline. The DeSoto Elks

2 at that point decided they did not wish to

3 proceed as to a hearing on the amount of

4 discipline.

5 And I actually talked to their attorney

6 yesterday, and he confirmed that that was

7 their wish. So what you have before you

8 today is a resolution requesting the

9 revocation of their license.

10 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Is DeSoto Elks

11 Lodge here?

12 MR. BRADLEY: I called their attorney

13 yesterday just to confirm that we were having

14 this on the agenda, and he's aware of it.

15 COMMISSIONER GANT: Well, I --

16 they're not here. So I move that 03-007-B be

17 approved and adopted.

18 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.

19 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll,

20 please.

21 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

22 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

23 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

24 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

25 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

81

1 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

2 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you have

3 adopted Resolution No. 03-007-B.

4 MR. MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, we have

5 no other business for closed session other

6 than to approve some closed minutes, so I

7 would propose that we defer that just so we

8 don't have to generate another set of closed

9 minutes and say that we approve the closed

10 minutes until a time when we might have some

11 other business for. There's no urgency in

12 that matter.

13 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: So we have no

14 other business?

15 MR. MULLALLY: Other than if you --

16 I know that in times past we have asked for

17 anybody in the audience that would like to be

18 recognized or make a brief statement if you

19 would like to.

20 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: And I certainly

21 agree with that. Is there anybody in the

22 audience that would like to make a statement

23 and be recognized?

24 MR. RON UPTEGROVE: Yes, Mr. Chairman,

25 Commissioners.

82

1 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Why don't you come

2 on up?

3 MR. UPTEGROVE: I'm Ron Uptegrove,

4 and I reside in Arnold, Missouri. And we have

5 a couple members from ABC, Against Barnhart

6 Casino, here. Just representing those citizens

7 of Jefferson County who would rather not have

8 a casino in their county. Thank you.

9 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Thank you. Anyone

10 else? Is there any other business?

11 MR. MULLALLY: No, sir.

12 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Make a motion?

13 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move we

14 adjourn.

15 COMMISSIONER GANT: I second.

16 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Call the roll.

17 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?

18 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approve.

19 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?

20 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approve.

21 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Gant?

22 COMMISSIONER GANT: Approve.

23 (The proceedings were concluded at 11:15

24 a.m. on December 12, 2003.)

25

83

1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE

2

3 STATE OF MISSOURI )

)ss.

4 COUNTY OF OSAGE )

5

6 I, Monnie S. VanZant, certified Shorthand Reporter,

7 Certified Court Reporter #0538, and Registered Professional

8 Reporter, and Notary Public, within and for the State of

9 Missouri, do hereby certify that I was personally present at

10 the proceedings as set forth in the caption sheet hereof;

11 that I then and there took down in stenotype the proceedings

12 had at said time and was thereafter transcribed by me, and

13 is fully and accurately set forth in the preceding pages.

14

15 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and

16 seal on January 6, 2004.

17

18

19 ______________________________

20 Monnie S. VanZant, CSR, CCR #0539

21 Registered Professional Reporter

22

23

24

25

84