00001
01 COVER
SHEET INFORMATION
02 Hearing Before
the: Missouri Gaming Commission
03 In Re: Commission
Resolutions/Approvals
04 Date Taken: December 1, 2005
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
00002
01 PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE
THE MISSOURI GAMING COMMISSION
02
03 BE IT REMEMBERED
that the above-entitled matter
04 came on for a public
hearing at the Renaissance Hotel,
05 9801 Natural Bridge
Road, County of St. Louis, State of
06 Missouri, on the 1st
day of December, A.D., 2005,
07 commencing at the hour
of 9:00 in the morning of that
08 day, said hearing
having been called by The Missouri
09 Gaming Commission
pursuant to the issuance of due
10 notice to all parties
in interest, and the following is
11 a transcript of the
record made of all proceedings had
12 during the course of
said hearing.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
00003
01 APPEARANCES:
02 Kevin Mullally,
Executive Director
03 Steve Johnson, Chief
Deputy Director
04 Chairman Floyd Bartch
05 Commissioner Noel Shull
06 Commissioner Judy
Hinrichs
07 Commissioner Darryl
Jones
08 Commissioner Ralph
Biele
09
10 I
N D E X
11 SPEAKERS: Page
12 STEPHEN J. STARK . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
13 PAUL F. LITTLETON. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
14 CYNTHIA BOLDEN . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
15 TOM CAMPBELL . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
16 KIM HARDY. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
17 DANIELLE BLANCK. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
18 STEVE JOHNSON. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
19 MICHAEL BUSHMANN . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
20 JANE RACKERS . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
21 MARTHA LEMOND. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
22 WADE HUNDLEY. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
23 CLIFF KORTMAN . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
24 MARK ANDREWS . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
25
00004
01 MISSOURI
GAMING COMMISSION MEETING
02 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: We'll call the meeting to
03 order. Angie, would you call the roll?
04 MS. ANGIE
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
05 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Present.
06 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
07
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Present.
08 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
09
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Present.
10 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
11
COMMISSIONER JONES: Present.
12 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
13
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Present.
14 MR.
MULLALLY: Chairman, the first item on
15 the agenda is the
consideration of minutes from the
16 September 28 and
October 26 meetings.
17
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I would
move to
18 approve the minutes of
the September 28 Commission meeting.
19 COMMISSIONER
JONES: Second.
20 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: So moved. Any further
21 discussion? If not, please call the roll.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
23 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
24 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
25
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
00005
01 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
02
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
03 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
04
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
05 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
06
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
07 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've approved
08 the minutes from the
September 28, 2005 meeting.
09
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move we
approve
10 the minutes from the
October 26 Commission meeting.
11 COMMISSIONER JONES: Second.
12 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: So moved. Any further
13 discussion? Please call the roll.
14 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
15 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
16 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
17
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
18 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
19
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
20 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
21
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
23
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
24 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've approved
25 the minutes of the
October 26, 2005 meeting.
00006
01 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners, we
02 have a series of seven
hearing officer recommendations, and Hearing
03 Officer Steve Stark is
here to make those presentations.
04 MR.
STEPHEN STARK: Good morning,
Commissioners.
05 If it may please the
Commission, we'll start with
06 what's been marked
with, I guess, Tab C, the President
07 Riverboat Casino,
Missouri, Incorporated. This case
08 deals with the duties
of a casino to prevent and to
09 report violations and
misconduct.
10 The facts of the
case, as presented at the
11 hearing, are that
during the morning, very early
12 morning hours, of June
29, 2004, at approximately 12:33
13 a.m., an employee of
the President Casino named Mr.
14 Terry Foerste gets into
his car, located in the
15 casino's parking
lot. Now, the parking lot is about
16 100 yards from the
casino's boat, but is still part of
17 the casino's
property.
18 Now, while Mr.
Foerste drives out of the parking
19 lot, he hits another
parked car that was located in the
20 lot. Then he runs into the metal gate, or
railing, at
21 the entrance of the
exit of the parking lot and then
22 upon exiting the
parking lot itself, he runs into a
23 shuttle bus that is
attempting to enter into the
24 parking lot, damaging
the back bumper of that shuttle
25 bus. So property damage was done to the parked
car, to
00007
01 the parking lot gate,
to the shuttle van and to Mr.
02 Foerste's car,
itself. However, Mr. Foerste continues
03 on driving without
stopping.
04 At 12:35 a.m.,
the shuttle bus driver calls into
05 the casino to report
the incident and soon thereafter,
06 two employees of the
casino arrive at the scene to
07 investigate. At 12:52 a.m., less than 20 minutes after
08 the start of this
incident, the casino dispatch calls
09 the St. Louis Police
Department. Within ten minutes or
10 so, the police arrive
at the casino parking lot, but
11 the police officer
leaves after being told by the
12 casino employees that
the casino would be conducting
13 its own investigation
as an internal matter.
14 Approximately 1:30 a.m., Mr. Foerste returns
to
15 the parking lot in his
damaged car. He speaks with
16 some of the casino
employees, admits to the property
17 damage. One employee stated in a written report that
18 was made later on that
Mr. Foerste appeared that he may
19 have been drinking, and
the employee even suggested to
20 Mr. Foerste that he
take a taxi home or let someone
21 else drive him
home. This was during a weekday, so the
22 casino closes at 4:00
a.m.
23 Then at 8:30
a.m., that same day, that same
24 morning, the human
resource director of the casino does
25 call the Commission,
the gaming agent, to report the
00008
01 incident, nearly eight
hours after it all started.
02 Now, the
Commission staff have alleged
03 violations of
Regulation 11 CSR45-10.030. And that
04 regulation actually
consists of several paragraphs, but
05 three are applicable in
this case. The first part
06 requires that the
licensee, the casino in this case,
07 promptly report to the
Commission any violation of law,
08 internal control
standards or Commission rule.
09 The second part
of the regulation imposes a duty
10 to prevent unlawful
conduct upon the licensed premises.
11 The third part
requires that the casino has the
12 licensee immediately
report to law enforcement
13 authorities any illegal
or violent acts that are
14 committed on or about
the licensed premises.
15 Now, paragraph
16 of the Preliminary Order for
16 Discipline recites this
whole regulation. So I looked
17 at all three parts of
this regulation to see if there
18 were, indeed, three
separate violations. Now, when I
19 initially made my
recommendations presented to the
20 Commission on September
28, I found that the President
21 Casino only violated
part one of the three different
22 parts of this
regulation.
23 Based upon our
discussions on September 28, I
24 further reviewed the
facts and law as presented in the
25 hearing record and now
I present my recommendations to
00009
01 the Commission that the
President Casino did violate
02 part one and part two
of this regulation. I am still
03 finding that no
violation occurred as to part three of
04 the regulation.
05 Now, if we may
look at each part of the
06 regulation. Again, part one imposes the duty on the
07 licensee to promptly,
again the emphasis on promptly,
08 report to the
Commission violations of law. The facts
09 of this case show that
there was property damage being
10 committed on the
parking lot of the casino. The
11 employees of the
President Casino had enough facts
12 before them from their
physical examination of the
13 scene, the shuttle bus
driver's report of being hit,
14 the surveillance
tape. With all this information,
15 there was reasonable
grounds to believe that a
16 violation of law had
occurred.
17 The casino did
report the incident to the
18 Commission's agents,
but waited four hours. Or excuse
19 me, waited eight
hours. Now, the casino's closed and
20 there's no gaming agent
available from 4:00 to 8:00.
21 So even if we discount
that fact that those four hours,
22 I still conclude that
the President Casino did not
23 conform with this
regulation in promptly reporting this
24 incident to the Gaming
Commission. So my
25 recommendation is that
cause does exist to discipline
00010
01 for this violation of
part one of the Regulation
02 10.030.
03 Now, for part
two of the regulation, a duty to
04 prevent violent and
unlawful conduct upon the licensed
05 premises. Again, my initial recommendation made on
06 September 28, was that
the President Casino did not
07 violate this part of
the regulation based upon my
08 conclusion that the
President Casino did not have the
09 opportunity to prevent
the property damage that
10 occurred on the parking
lot. However, I failed to give
11 consideration to the
fact that Mr. Foerste returned to
12 the parking lot within
an hour after the property
13 damage was
committed. At that time, the President
14 Casino met with Mr.
Foerste. Mr. Foerste admitted to
15 committing the property
damage. The employees had an
16 opportunity to observe
Mr. Foerste. One employee even
17 reported that it
appeared that Mr. Foerste had been
18 drinking. He expressed concern that Mr. Foerste, about
19 Mr. Foerste driving
home alone and this concern was
20 expressed after
reviewing the surveillance tape by the
21 employee. So upon further review, the -- it's my
22 conclusion that the
employees of the President Casino
23 did have the
opportunity to prevent Mr. Foerste from
24 driving again and
possibly committing unlawful conduct.
25 The employees did not
fulfill their duty according to
00011
01 this regulation.
02 Now, however,
this regulation is part two of the
03 regulation. It does have a limitation on it, which we
04 need to discuss. It says that the activity must occur
05 upon the licensed
premises. Now, in order to determine
06 whether or not this
regulation applies, we need to
07 decide whether or not
the parking lot, which is
08 approximately 100 yards
from the casino's, the gaming
09 boat's, entrance, is
indeed part of the licensed
10 premises.
11 Now, the law
dictionary did not give me a
12 definition of the word,
"upon." However, it's
13 considered synonymous
with the word "on" and the law
14 dictionary did define
"on" as meaning, "connected with
15 or attached
to." So my conclusion is that the
parking
16 lot owned and monitored
by the casino, even though
17 within a hundred yards
of the gaming boat's entrance,
18 is so much connected
with the President Casino so as to
19 constitute being upon the
licensed premises.
20 Now, the
President Casino does make a good
21 argument that the
casino or the Commission's own
22 regulations has a
definition that places a parking lot
23 with the term
"support facility," being separate and
24 apart from the licensed
premises. In reading that
25 regulation -- and let
me cite that for you. Regulation
00012
01 11 CSR45-1.090,
Paragraph 19 and Letter H. That
02 regulation actually
includes several things in its
03 definition of a support
facility, including offices and
04 river boats. So it's my belief that a support facility
05 can also be located
upon the licensed premises.
06 Also of note is
the regulation that deals with
07 making an application
for a license. Regulation 4.030,
08 Paragraph 9, actually
requires the applicant to give a
09 description of the
parking facility. So it appears to
10 me that the parking lot
is, indeed, an important part
11 of the licensed
premises.
12 So it is my
recommendation that cause does
13 indeed exist for
disciplining the President Casino for
14 its failure to prevent
misconduct when its employees
15 allowed a fellow
employee, who had committed property
16 damage with his erratic
driving, to drive away again.
17 So part two, I find a
violation of that regulation.
18 Now, as to part
three of that regulation, which
19 requires the licensee
to immediately report to law
20 enforcement authorities
any illegal or violent acts
21 committed on or about
the licensed premises, I find
22 that the evidence did
show compliance by the President
23 Casino. The police were indeed called. The police
24 arrived at the scene
and the time frame was within the
25 definition of
immediately. So my recommendation is
0013
01 that no discipline be
asserted for the violation
02 alleged with regard to
part three of the regulation
03 requiring contact with
law enforcement officials.
04 Now, the next
issue is the amount of the
05 monetary penalty. The penalty asserted by the
06 Commission staff is
$50,000. My recommendation is that
07 that amount is
excessive if we look at the preliminary
08 order alleging
violations of three separate parts of
09 this regulation and
that alleged violations of three
10 parts of the regulation
constitute a $50,000
11 forfeiture.
12 My
recommendation is that only two parts of that
13 regulation have been
violated. Therefore, it would be
14 appropriate to reduce
the proposed forfeiture amount,
15 and what I'd recommend
is that if we decide that each
16 part of that
regulation, each of the three parts are
17 given equal weight,
then for having violated two of
18 the three parts of that
regulation, it would seem
19 appropriate to take
two-thirds of the proposed penalty
20 and arrive at three,
excuse me, $33,333 as the
21 recommended
forfeiture. I found nothing that would
say
22 that any one of the
three parts of that regulation
23 deserve any more weight
than the other, and I
24 found nothing that said
that if all three parts were
25 violated, that a
$50,000 would be appropriate. But
00014
01 since one part I find
not to have been violated, the
02 forfeiture, my
recommendation, is that it be reduced.
03 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Any discussion?
04 MR.
MULLALLY: I think, first, it would be
05 appropriate to hear
from the licensee. They have
06 submitted a written
brief. If they desire to say
07 anything, then they
should do that.
08 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Does the licensee --
09 MR. PAUL
LITTLETON: If I may?
10 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Yes, you may.
11 MR.
LITTLETON: If I could be seated?
12 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Absolutely.
13 MR.
LITTLETON: Thank you. Mr. Chairman,
14 members of the
Commission, my name is Paul Littleton.
15 I'm an attorney for the
Brasher Law Firm here in St.
16 Louis, Missouri, and
our office represented the
17 President Casino at the
hearing in March of 2005.
18 It's our
position that Mr. Stark got the
19 decision right the
first time. The change in the
20 findings are not
appropriate in our view, because
21 they're not supported
in the evidence. The finding
22 that the President
Casino failed to present, prevent
23 unlawful conduct
occurring upon the premises is related
24 to the assumption that
the individual who drove from
25 the parking lot the
second time was intoxicated.
00015
01 The findings of
fact before you in paragraphs 12
02 and 13 in findings of
fact, state that Mr. Foerste
03 returned to the parking
lot a second time, and at that
04 time, had a
conversation with a Mr. Williams, an
05 employee of President
Casino. And Mr. Williams, then
06 has stated in the
proposed findings of fact, stated
07 that he observed that
Mr. Foerste appeared -- that he
08 may have been
drinking. Now, that is the basis for
the
09 unlawful conduct, the
conclusion being or the
10 assumption, that Mr.
Foerste was, in fact, intoxicated.
11 The conclusion of law
for the unlawful conduct
12 specifically refers
back to this finding of fact.
13 We don't think
the facts support that. The
14 statement in the record
by Mr. Williams is not that Mr.
15 Foerste appeared to be
intoxicated but simply that Mr.
16 Foerste appeared that
he may have been drinking. So
17 the finding of fact
that Mr. Williams stated that Mr.
18 Foerste appeared
intoxicated is not supported by the
19 facts. And that is the basis for the alleged
unlawful
20 conduct, the initial
violation that is being presented
21 to you this
morning.
22 The second issue
has to do with where the
23 violation
occurred. And Mr. Stark has explained
our
24 position that the
regulations define a parking lot,
25 particularly at a
distance of 100 yards, we think, as a
00016
01 support facility. That is the regulation that the
02 Commission has adopted
as part of its definitions.
03 That is something
different, a support facility is
04 something different
than a licensed premises. And the
05 hearing officer has
also talked about what the
06 definition or meaning
of the word "upon" is and that --
07 we agree that, that is
the, the given definition, that
08 it is somewhat
interchangeable with the word "on".
09 I see some
hesitation about my comments, but let
10 me point out that the
particular regulation with which
11 the President is
charged with violating requires
12 unlawful conduct upon
licensed premises. The following
13 regulation that talks
about failure to report to local
14 authorities incidences
of unlawful conduct, refers to
15 incidents that occur
upon or about the licensed
16 premises. The regulation that we're discussing simply
17 says upon. And Mr. Stark has talked about that.
18 But if you talk
about what's meant by licensed
19 premises, I think it's
clear that Mr. Stark got it
20 right the first
time. He concluded the first time that
21 the licensed premises
meant inside the casino facility.
22 We think that's the
proper view and that Mr. Stark got
23 the finding of fact and
conclusions of law right the
24 first time and we would
ask that the Commission adopt,
25 rather than the most
recent finding of fact and
00017
01 conclusions of law, but
the original findings of Mr.
02 Stark presented at the
September 28 meeting. Thank
03 you.
04 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Thank you, sir.
05 MR. MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman,
06 Commissioners,
Assistant Attorney General Jane Rackers
07 is here, and might have
something to add to that.
08 MS. JANE
RACKERS: I don't. Thank you.
09 MR.
MULLALLY: The only -- I think from
10 the staff's
perspective, there's one thing that sticks
11 out here was that we
believe that the failure
12 to report is a very
serious issue, has always been a
13 very serious issue, and
has been treated seriously by
14 this Commission. I don't think that we have ever put
15 such tight restraints
on disciplinary penalties that we
16 say, "Well, if
it's one count, it's $15,000; if it's
17 two counts, it's
$30,000." It's always been the
18 seriousness of the
underlying conduct. So whether it's
19 one count or two
counts, I don't necessarily think that
20 is the critically
relevant factor in determining the
21 amount of penalty.
22 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: And, you know, another
23 factor here is that I
don't believe that we're trying
24 to convict someone of
drinking while driving. You
25 know, we're simply
saying that the President had a
00018
01 responsibility when
they appeared to have somebody that
02 had been drinking was
to try to do something about
03 that, as any citizen
would have before you that someone
04 on the road, if in
fact, was drinking, that's true. I
05 don't think we are
trying to convict somebody of
06 drinking while
driving. It's a different
standard.
07 It's a different set,
and it is very critical that when
08 something happens that
they report to the Commission
09 immediately, and they
did not do that.
10 Any other
discussion from the Commission?
11
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I thought
it was
12 disturbing that they
dismissed the police. That was,
13 that bothered me that
they called the police, and when
14 the police arrived,
they said they'd take care of it
15 internally. The amount of damage that apparently
16 happened -- I haven't
had very much experience with
17 this, of course, but
with automobile accidents, usually
18 when there's physical
damage, the police get involved,
19 and I was surprised the
police were so willing to leave
20 and that they said
they'd take care of it internally.
21 That disturbed me.
22
COMMISSIONER BIELE: I'd like to
make a
23 motion that the fine be
the original amount that was
24 assessed by the
Commission of $50,000.
25
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.
00019
01 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: The motion is seconded.
02 Is there any further
discussion? If not, please call
03 the roll.
04 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
05 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
06 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
07
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
08 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
09
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
10 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
11
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
12 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
13
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
14 MR.
MULLALLY: So just to make sure the
15 record is clear, the
motion would be to amend -- I
16 should have
stopped. I think what we need is a
motion
17 to adopt the hearing
officer's recommendations,
18 however, amending the
final order to reflect that the
19 fine be $50,000, rather
than the $33,333 that is in the
20 order. I think that that's the motion that we'll
need
21 and we'll need to vote
again. Do you agree?
22
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: So we're
going
23 back to disciplinary,
what is it, DC-04-197??
24 MR.
MULLALLY: Yes. So we need a motion
25 to amend the, amend --
00020
01 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Amend 05-080.
02 MR.
MULLALLY: Well, amend the
03 hearing officer's
recommendation in Case 04-197, so
04 that the final order
now reads that the amount of the
05 penalty assessed
against the petitioner shall be $50,000.
06 COMMISSIONER
BIELE: So be it.
07
COMMISSIONER JONES: Second.
08 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Seconded. Please call
09 the roll.
10 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
11 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
12 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
13
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
14 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
15
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
16 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
17
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
18 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
19
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
20 MR.
MULLALLY: Now, we'll need a motion
21 adopting that order as
amended.
22 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: We need a motion to
23 adopt 05-080 then?
24 MR.
MULLALLY: Yes.
25 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Someone give me a motion
00021
01 for that?
02
COMMISSIONER BIELE: I will.
03 COMMISSIONER
HINRICHS: Seconded.
04 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion
05 now? Please call the roll.
06 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
07 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
08 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
09
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
10 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
11
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
12 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
13
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
14 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
15
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
16 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
17 Resolution Number
05-080, as amended.
18 MR.
MULLALLY: Isn't Roberts Rules
19 wonderful? If Hearing Officer Stark could return,
20 we'll move on to the
next case.
21 MR.
STARK: The next case is identified as
22 letter D, Mary Ann
Keller. Ms. Keller, as a licensee,
23 is employed as a count
room manager. She supervises
24 the coin room and drop
personnel. An incident occurred
25 on October 16, 2003, in
which a bill validator box was
00022
01 left in the count room
with assets still contained
02 within it. The actual value of the money found was
03 $3.50. But no one could determine who was
responsible
04 for the contents of
that validator box.
05 Now, Ms. Keller
was not present on October 16,
06 2003. She was not working that day, but the
internal
07 control standards do require
proper accounting and the
08 removal of money from
the bill validator boxes, and
09 also provides that
there should be a written report
10 with each bill
validator box. Because the proper
11 accounting did not
occur, the preliminary order
12 asserted an eight-hour
suspension against Ms. Keller,
13 who, as the supervisor,
was responsible for assuring
14 that there was proper
accounting and that her employees
15 were conducting their
work accordingly.
16 From the
hearing, I had found that the strict
17 compliance with these
internal standards did not occur,
18 that Ms. Keller was,
indeed, responsible for the
19 compliance and she
failed to insure that compliance.
20 Therefore, the
recommendation is that the eight-hour
21 suspension in this case
is appropriate. And that would
22 be my recommendation.
23 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Is Ms. Keller in the
24 audience? No.
Do you have a motion?
25
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Move to
approve
00023
01 Resolution Number
05-081.
02
COMMISSIONER JONES: Second.
03 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Further discussion? If
04 not, please call roll.
05 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
06 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
07 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
08
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
09 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
10
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
11 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
12 COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
13 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
14
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
15 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
16 Resolution Number
05-081.
17 MR. STARK: Commissioners, the next case
18 is identified as letter
E, Mr. Walter Reed. Mr. Reed,
19 as a level II
occupational licensee, was employed as a
20 tables game
supervisor. On February 19, 2004, he
was
21 inspecting a new deck
of playing cards for a gaming
22 table when he
discovered that the playing card deck was
23 missing one card, a six
of diamonds. Appropriately, he
24 did not permit that
deck of cards to be used. He
25 withdrew it from being
played on the table. He did
00024
01 write up a card
discrepancy report indicating the
02 defect in the deck of
cards. However, the problem was
03 that he did not inform
the Commission's agent on duty
04 of this problem with
the missing card.
05 He -- let me
start with a time line here. The
06 discovery that Mr. Reed
made was at 5:15 p.m. He wrote
07 up his report
immediately thereafter, but he waited
08 until 7:00 p.m. to
inform a supervisor of the missing
09 card. The supervisor, in turn, informed another
10 employee of the casino
who did not get the report to
11 the Commission's agent
until 9:15 p.m. that night. The
12 problem is that Mr.
Reed, himself, did not make a
13 report to the Gaming
Commission.
14 Now, apparently,
the casino had some type of
15 chain of command
reporting, but it's my conclusion as a
16 licensee and holder of
an individual license, Mr. Reed,
17 himself, had the
obligation to report to the Commission
18 when a missing card was
found. The discipline of an
19 eight-hour suspension
is -- I consider to be
20 appropriate and that
would be my recommendation.
21 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Is Mr. Reed in the
22 audience?
23
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to
approve
24 Resolution Number
05-082.
25
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Seconded.
00025
01 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
02 If not, please call the
roll.
03 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
04 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
05 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
06
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
07 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
08
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
09 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
10 COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
11 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
12
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
13 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
14 Resolution Number
05-082.
15 MR.
STARK: The next case is identified by
16 letter F, Mr. Gregory
Gay. Mr. Gay, a level II
17 occupational licensee,
worked as a security officer on
18 the casino floor. Part of his job was to take casino
19 tokens to fill the
casino gaming machines with these
20 tokens. He was handling on June 21, 2004, a hopper
bag
21 full of coins, or the
tokens. And at approximately
22 1:10 p.m., he and
another fellow employee misplaced one
23 of the hopper bags
containing five hundred $1 tokens.
24 Upon realizing
that he was missing this hopper
25 bag, Mr. Gay went back,
backtracked, tried to find the
00026
01 missing bag. At approximately 1:28 p.m., a patron of
02 the casino found the
missing bag, and it wasn't until
03 about 30 minutes after
locating, or after the patron
04 had found the missing
bag, that a report was made to
05 the agent on duty.
06 So again, this
is a problem of not immediately
07 reporting to the
Commission any problem on the casino
08 floor. That should have been reported
immediately. So
09 there's like a
50-minute delay in getting a report to
10 the Gaming Commission
agent. And for that, I do find
11 grounds for discipline
and the eight-hour suspension
12 recommended by the
Commission staff was appropriate,
13 and that would be my
recommendation.
14 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Is Mr. Gay in the
15 audience? Do we have a motion?
16
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to
approve
17 Resolution Number
05-083.
18 COMMISSIONER
BIELE: Seconded.
19 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
20 If not, please call the
roll.
21 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
22 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
23 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
24
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
25 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
00027
01
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
02 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
03
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
04 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
05
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
06 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
07 Resolution Number
05-083.
08 MR.
STARK: The next matter is identified
09 by letter G, Mr.
Roberto Perez. Mr. Perez is the
10 holder of a level II
occupational license working as a
11 cage chip manager. He supervises several employees,
12 but on the night of
September 4, 2004, he instructed
13 one of his employees to
manage two separate windows in
14 two separate locations
all at the same time.
15 Previous to
September 4, 2004, the situation of
16 having one employee
operate two different windows at
17 the same time was
brought to the attention of the
18 casino and the
auditors. The Gaming Commission
19 auditors had identified
that as a problem and had
20 told, apparently,
several employees. However, Mr.
21 Perez did not, was not
told by the auditors, did not
22 get the information that
it was a problem to have one
23 employee operate two
windows at the same time.
24 However, this employee
had heard that this was a
25 problem, a regulatory
compliance problem, and had
00028
01 indicated to Mr. Perez
that it was not appropriate for
02 her to be operating the
two windows at the same time.
03 Mr. Perez indicated
that she should do as she's told,
04 and that he would take
care of any problem with
05 operating two windows
by one employee. However, Mr.
06 Perez did not follow up
to find out from anyone else
07 whether this is a
problem. The employee continued that
08 night to operate those
two windows by herself.
09 The auditors had
indicated that that was not the
10 appropriate way to
protect the assets of the casino and
11 Mr. Perez -- one
argument was, of course, he didn't
12 have notice that this
was a problem. But none of the
13 regulations
specifically say, thou shall not operate
14 two windows with one
employee, which is true. There is
15 no regulation that
specifically says that.
16 However, at the
government agency, there is some
17 deference given to
interpretation and it was, it's my
18 conclusion that upon
instruction from the auditors as
19 to what activity is
necessary to protect casino assets,
20 that those instructions
should have been followed and
21 that Mr. Perez, even
though he wasn't informed by his
22 own supervisor, he had
knowledge that it was a problem
23 from his own employee
and he should have followed
24 through with some
further investigation of his own. As
25 such, I find cause
exists for discipline and that the
00029
01 16-hour suspension is
an appropriate amount of
02 discipline for this
case. And that would be my
03 recommendation.
04 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Is Mr. Perez present?
05 No? Can we have a motion?
06
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to
approve
07 Resolution Number
05-084.
08
COMMISSIONER BIELE:
Seconded.
09 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
10
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Is that
something we
11 should put in our
regulation to cover that, a definite
12 -- saying that they
should not --
13 MR.
MULLALLY: We certainly can.
14 COMMISSIONER BIELE: I'll just ask staff
15 to take a look at it
and see if it's something that
16 should be added,
something they think should be added.
17 That's all I have.
18 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any other discussion?
19 If not, please call the
roll.
20 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
21 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
23
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
24 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
25
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
00030
01 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
02
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
03 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
04
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
05 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
06 Resolution Number
05-084.
07 MR.
STARK: The next case is letter H, Ms.
08 Cynthia Bolden. Ms. Bolden is the holder of a level
09 II occupational
license. This is a case of failure to
10 update information on
the application. Ms. Bolden made
11 her application for a
license on October 29, 2001. The
12 application process
requires you to identify all and
13 any criminal offenses,
arrests in your past history,
14 but it also requires
you to update that information
15 within 10 days of any
change in that information that
16 you initially placed
upon your application.
17 Now, on
September 15, 2003, a criminal case was
18 filed against Ms.
Bolden alleging a charge of
19 misdemeanor passing a
bad check. Ms. Bolden did
20 receive a summons to
appear in court. She did appear
21 in court on November 6,
2003, entering a guilty plea.
22 Ms. Bolden failed to
report the fact that she was
23 summoned to court on a
charge of passing a bad check.
24 There was no evidence
that she informed the Commission
25 about her guilty plea
of November 6, 2003.
00031
01 She indicated in
her testimony that she failed
02 to inform the
Commission of the notification of the
03 charge of the
misdemeanor crime, but she claims that
04 she did inform the
Commission about her guilty plea in
05 November of 2003. However, there is no paperwork
06 presented, no names
given of whom she may have reported
07 her guilty plea. So my finding is that the basis of
08 failure to report is
adequate grounds for discipline.
09 And, secondly, the
crime of passing a bad check is
10 grounds by itself, as
well, for discipline.
11 In her
testimony, she indicated that it was her
12 sister that caused the
bounced check, but, however, the
13 criminal court
determined that Ms. Bolden, herself, was
14 responsible. So I find that the crime itself is Ms.
15 Bolden's responsibility. And for that, the revocation
16 of her level II
occupation license is appropriate and
17 that would be my
recommendation, that Ms. Bolden's
18 license be revoked.
19 MR.
MULLALLY: Ms. Bolden is in the
20 audience. Would you like to come up?
21 MS.
CYNTHIA BOLDEN: Yes. The first thing I need
22 to say is I'd like to
thank you for letting me take the
23 opportunity to speak on
my behalf. Early in 2001, I
24 realized that my
husband had a drug problem. After ten
25 years of being a
stay-at-home mom, I needed to make
00032
01 ways to make positive
changes in my life, as well as
02 the lives of my
children.
03 In October 2001,
I accepted a job starting out
04 as a slot
attendant. Due to the motivation and
the
05 dedication that I've
shown in my job, I was promoted to
06 a slot supervisor
shortly after that. The company saw
07 the continuation of the
behaviors and promoted me to a
08 cage -- promoted me to
a full-time cage supervisor in
09 2004. This is the job that I currently hold
today.
10 I feel that the
revocation is too harsh of a
11 punishment for what has
happened. I know that I've
12 made mistakes due to
hard times. And being a single
13 mom, revocation of my
gaming license would end my
14 career. I have worked my way into a company that
15 requires a high school
diploma, but not a college
16 education. I have made a positive impact in not only
17 Harrah's, but also in
my children's lives.
18 I ask that you please lessen this to a
19 suspension and not a
revocation. In closing, I'd like
20 to thank you for
letting me take the time to let me
21 speak.
22 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
23 Okay.
24 COMMISSIONER JONES: I'd like to know how
25 much was the check
for? Maybe she can answer that.
00033
01 MR.
MULLALLY: Ms. Bolden. Why don't you
02 ask her to tell you the
circumstances concerning the
03 bounced check?
04
COMMISSIONER JONES: The question
was how
05 much was the check
for? And since you're back here,
06 why don't you give us
the circumstances around that
07 event?
08 MS.
BOLDEN: It was for the registration
09 of a vehicle to get
back and forth to work. The car is
10 registered in my
sister's name and she said that she
11 would help me pay the
taxes on the car. It was, I
12 believe, $862. And my sister was on my checking
13 account at the time and
she said she would help me pay
14 the taxes. But she failed to put the $300 that she
15 would help me with into
the account. When the check
16 did not clear the first
time, she told me because the
17 car is in her and her
husband's name, that they would
18 assume the
responsibility and to take it upon
19 themselves to make sure
that the check cleared, but
20 they did not.
21 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any other questions of
22 discussion? Can we have a motion?
23
COMMISSIONER SHULL: I would move
that DC-
24 04-200 be amended to a
15-day suspension, as opposed to
25 license revocation.
00034
01 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Do we have a second?
02
COMMISSIONER JONES: I second.
03 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Is there any further
04 discussion? If not, would you please call the roll?
05 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
06 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
07 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
08 COMMISSIONER
HINRICHS: Approved.
09 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
10
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
11 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
12
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
13 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
14
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
15 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Then we also now need
16 approval for 05-085 as
amended. Is that correct?
17 MR.
MULLALLY: That's correct.
18 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Motion for that?
19
COMMISSIONER SHULL: I move to
approve
20 05-085.
21
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I second.
22 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
23 Please call the roll.
24 MS. FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
25 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
00035
01 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
02
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
03 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
04 COMMISSIONER
BIELE: Approved.
05 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
06
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
07 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
08
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
09 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
10 Resolution Number
05-085 as amended.
11 MS.
CYNTHIA BOLDEN: Thank you.
12 MR.
STARK: The next item is identified at
13 letter I, Mr. Rafferty
Crawford. Mr. Crawford had a
14 level II occupational license. A disciplinary action
15 was filed against
him. He requested a hearing. I
16 scheduled the hearing
for October 21, 2005. However,
17 Mr. Crawford allowed
his license to expire, the
18 expiration date being
September 30, 2005. Therefore,
19 my determination was
that there was no need for a
20 hearing, in that there
was no jurisdiction to
21 discipline a license in
that Mr. Crawford no longer had
22 a license, having had
it expire. So this case is --
23 the recommendation would
be a dismissal of the
24 preliminary order for
disciplinary action for lack of
25 subject matter
jurisdiction.
00036
01 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: You wouldn't think he'd
02 be here, but Mr.
Crawford? Any other discussion?
03 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to approve
04 Resolution Number
05-086.
05
COMMISSIONER JONES: Second.
06 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any other discussion?
07 If not, please call the
roll.
08 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
09 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
10 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
11
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
12 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
13
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
14 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
15
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
16 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
17
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
18 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
19 Resolution Number
05-086.
20 MR.
STARK: I believe that's all my cases.
21 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Thank you.
22 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman,
23 Commissioners, before
we move onto the next agenda
24 item, it has been
suggested to me that it may be a more
25 efficient use of the
Commission's time that some of
00037
01 these cases that
involve lesser penalties, eight-hour,
02 sixteen-hour
suspensions, could be handled by the
03 Executive Director with
the option of, in unusual
04 circumstances, of
bringing them before the Commission.
05 I think there have been
a couple cases, two, three
06 eight-hour suspensions
on this agenda. One of them had
07 50 to 60 pages of
material, and the other two had
08 between 35 and 45 pages
of material. There was a
09 sixteen-hour suspension
that involved you reading
10 between 75 and 80 pages
of material. And so I just
11 thought since that
matter was brought to my attention,
12 I would just throw it
out to you, as well as a
13 potential policy change
you would like the staff to
14 pursue.
15 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: You're saying that you
16 would make the final
decision?
17 MR.
MULLALLY: Yes.
18 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Instead of the
19 Commission?
20 MR.
MULLALLY: Rather than the, the
21 appeals of eight-hour,
sixteen-hour, whatever threshold
22 you decide. Certain -- I would say anything less than
23 a three-day suspension,
those matter would be -- the
24 Hearing Officer would
present those matters to the
25 Director and the
Director would dispose of those cases,
00038
01 unless the Director
determined that there were issues
02 sufficient that it
merited bringing it before the whole
03 Gaming Commission.
04
COMMISSIONER JONES: In the past,
how many
05 of those have we
had? This is the first time I've seen
06 a --
07 MR.
MULLALLY: Oh, I'd say you have a
08 couple a month that involve
eight- or sixteen-hour
09 suspensions. Wouldn't you say, Steve?
10 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: I think I would rather
11 you look at that
internally as to make a staff
12 recommendation and tell
us the pros and cons and let us
13 think about it and then
make a decision.
14 MR.
MULLALLY: It's really subject for the
15 Commission. I mean, it's the, --
16 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Right.
17 MR.
MULLALLY: I think it's the
18 determination -- the
Commission needs to tell us that.
19 Is it, for eight- or
sixteen-hour suspension, is
20 it an efficient use of
the Commission's time looking
21 through 80 to 100 pages
of material, or is that
22 something that you
would like to delegate?
23 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: I guess that it is time-
24 consuming, but I do
think that they come before the
25 Commission -- I'm not
against a recommendation by the
0039
01 Executive Director,
possibly. But the Executive
02 Director is part of
staff, and this is a separation. I
03 mean, this is a total
different entity here, and so I
04 definitely think that
the Commission needs to make the
05 final decision.
06
COMMISSIONER JONES: And it's
happened
07 today, I think, on two
of them, we've changed the
08 directions of the
different motions.
09 MR.
MULLALLY: I just -- it was brought to
10 my attention and I
thought I would raise it.
11 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Unless the Commission
12 thinks different, I
think we ought to just think about
13 it a while.
14 MR.
MULLALLY: Very good. The next item
15 on the agenda is the
consideration of the licensure of
16 Isle of
Capri-Boonville. Tom Campbell, who
represents
17 Isle of Capri, is here,
along with Kim Hardy, the
18 general manager of
Boonville, and a number of other
19 staff people. I will turn the podium over to them to
20 make their
presentation.
21 MR. TOM
CAMPBELL: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
22 Commissioners, Director
Mullally. My name is Tom
23 Campbell. I am a partner with the St. Louis law firm
24 of Gallop, Johnson, and
Neuman, which serves as
25 regulatory counsel for
the Isle of Capri Casinos in
00040
01 Missouri. We are here before you today to substantiate
02 the renewal of the
Class A license, which IOC-Boonville
03 has held for a number
of years.
04 To my left is
Kim Hardy, who is General Manager
05 of the Boonville
facility, and he will introduce his
06 staff and launch into
the PowerPoint presentation. I
07 would -- and correct me
if I'm wrong, but I believe
08 your admonition to
licenses in the past is brevity is
09 appreciated and with
the length of today's agenda, I
10 presume there would be
an admonition you will convey to
11 us, as well.
12 MR. KIM
HARDY: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, good
13 morning. Before we get started with our presentation
14 for your review and,
hopefully, acceptance this
15 morning, I'd like to
introduce some of my staff. I
16 have with me today my
senior team, Reggie Burt,
17 Marketing; Bari
Richter, Operations; Roy Evans, who has
18 been the point on this
project, in our Finance. I
19 could be calling on
them throughout the presentation.
20 Also, we have Mayor Blanck from
Boonville.
21 MAYOR
DANIELLE BLANCK: I'm not on the staff.
22 MR.
HARDY: I didn't know that until
23 today.
24 We're starting
out with some overviews of the
25 casino. This is the casino floor. This is our
00041
01 Tradewinds Snack Bar
Restaurant, our buffet. And I
02 want to bring it to
your attention that this photo
03 wasn't taken on a
Saturday night. And this is the
04 overall of the
facility, along with the construction of
05 the hotel. This is our fine dining, our Farraddays'
06 Bistro.
07 And to get with
the presentation, we have
08 combined with our
development agreement with the city.
09 When we presented last
time in fiscal 2004, which is
10 our fiscal year, we
projected we'd do 65.1 in revenue.
11 We actually ended up
doing 70.3. In fiscal 2005, we did
12 74.6, and our projected
on track for 77.8 for 2006. So
13 you can see that we've
had a good growth there.
14 Admissions. Projected was 24 or 2.4, actual was
15 2.8. Fiscal 2005 was 2.6 and our projected
admissions
16 is 2.7 for 2006. Capital investments, initial
17 investment of the
project, was $68 million. Maintenance
18 spent approached $9.8
million. Hotel and events center,
19 we have already spent
on our $17.5 million project, $8.1
20 million, for a total of
$86.8.
21 Our employment
or actuals, is 623 team members
22 of November 2, 2003, to
622 of October 2, 2005. Our
23 breakout, our
demographics for our employees, we have 7
24 percent minority. Boonville is 13 percent. Average
25 wage per pay period is
17.28. Percent of salaried
00042
01 employees in minority
bracket is 6 percent. Female
02 actuals, 51 percent, Boonville's
53 percent. Average
03 wage per pay period is
1.4 for the females, and a
04 percent of salaried
employees is 45 percent. The base
05 line for those salaries
that we just mentioned is 1.046
06 and that's the average
property-wide.
07 The residents,
most all -- the employees in this
08 case are all from
Missouri. Employee turnover rate is
09 59.8 percent. And this is something that we've really
10 concentrated on and
looked at over the last several
11 months. What we have concluded is that a third of
12 those folks don't last
90 days. So our assumption is
13 since we're not getting
any negative discharge
14 interviews, that either
the people didn't get what they
15 thought they were going
to get or they just simply
16 thought that they
weren't going to have to work as hard
17 as they were going to,
and they've left.
18 What we've done
to try to rectify that problem
19 is we've changed the
way that we hire. And what we've
20 done in the past, the
managers have done all the
21 hiring. We found out that a lot of the times, that
22 people were just hired
to do a position. So if I had
23 to work the weekends,
I'm just going to get somebody in
24 there so I don't have
to. And we've changed that to
25 the HR department doing
a full screening of our
00043
01 applicants. Then, whoever that they choose goes to the
02 executive committee,
and at least two of us interview
03 that individual
employee for hire. And we just take it
04 up another notch on
questioning to make sure they, they
05 know exactly what they
are in for. And so far, over
06 the last four weeks,
it's worked out very well. So
07 hopefully, we'll turn
that around. Unemployment for
08 Cooper County, you can
see it as it is, and it's
09 getting very, very
tight at 3.8 in 2005.
10 Purchasing, you
can see WBE is .81 percent in 2005,
11 which shows an increase
over our last licensing and
12 MBE has gone down a
little bit. I might add here that
13 we aggressively market
to the minorities and solicit
14 their participation in
our projects. We can get a lot
15 deeper than that if you
should choose to. We brought
16 some information that
kind of changes those
17 figures around when you
break out the huge purchases of
18 gaming equipment. It really does bring our percentages
19 up quite
drastically.
20 Sponsorship
contributions at $343,873. The
21 business line in
Boonville, new businesses have been
22 55, and closed businesses,
19, so we're showing an
23 increase of businesses
in the area. Boonville crime
24 rate, you can see that
we've run relatively flat from
25 2003 to 2005, with a
spike in 4.8 and I believe that
00044
01 was, the spike was
attributed to theft and some larceny
02 cases.
03 Problem
Gaming. We belong to and we
04 aggressively support
all the clubs and memberships and
05 resources that are out
there for us to use. Underage
06 gaming, it falls within
the same category, which we do
07 offer a Bounty Hunter
Program, and that program is that
08 we reward our team
members $100 for everyone that they
09 stop at the turnstile
that would fall into the gap, or
10 underage gaming.
11 The purses, the
same thing. We follow all the
12 rules. Over the licensing period, my recollection
13 doesn't show me or
doesn't -- I can't recollect the
14 incidences, but I know
that we have had nine over the
15 two-year period. Six of those were stopped at the
16 turnstile. Three of them were caught on a cross check
17 with tax at the
jackpots.
18 Community
services. This is some of the ones
19 that we really
participate in. Target issues. Once
20 again, these are the
ones that we really targeted this
21 year. And our mission statement. And I would be happy
22 to entertain any
questions that you all might have.
23
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: My first
question
24 is always how many
women do you have in management,
25 upper management?
00045
01 MR.
HARDY: Give me just a second. Did
02 you bring that?
03
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I didn't
find it
04 in here, but we've just
gotten this.
05 MR.
HARDY: I know that we've got it.
06 Forty-five percent of
the female employees that we
07 have.
08
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Upper
management?
09 MR.
HARDY: As upper management as?
10
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: As in the
upper
11 management. The people who run the place, not just,
12 not just on the floor,
but in --
13 MR.
HARDY: Out of my directors, I have
14 five directors. Two of them are female. Does that
15 answer your question?
16
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: That helps.
17
COMMISSIONER JONES: What type of
18 programs, I guess in
the -- in your purchasing from the
19 minorities and women,
you only have combined of about 3
20 percent. I see you have new construction going
on. Do
21 you have an outreach
program going on?
22 MR.
HARDY: Yes, sir. We hired a
23 contractor, Certel, out
of Jefferson City, that has
24 historically --
solicits minority groups. Right now,
25 the information that
I'm getting from the contractor, I
00046
01 think they are running
just about the same percentages
02 that we are in the
participation of the new
03 construction. They have 4 out of 40. They -- G&G
04 Mechanical, Watkins
Roofing, G&G Specialists, and Walsh
05 Insulation are all in
these that are participating in
06 construction.
07
COMMISSIONER JONES: Engaged in
the new
08 construction, as well?
09 MR.
HARDY: Yes, sir. That's correct.
10
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Four of
forty?
11 MR.
HARDY: One percent, four of forty.
12 We don't have -- you
know, we really don't have the
13 opportunity in
mid-Missouri of the companies that are
14 out there for us to
solicit. The only thing that I can
15 assure you is that we
aggressively go out there and try
16 to find those people by
the state's database and other
17 job bases throughout
the two years that we've been
18 doing this.
19
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: What's
the
20 minority population in
Boonville, as a percentage?
21 MR.
HARDY: Thirteen percent? Yes.
22
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Seven
percent.
23
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Thirteen
or seven?
24 MR.
HARDY: Seven? Seven? Thirteen in
25 the county. Seven is the Boonville?
00047
01
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
Boonville's, yes.
02 I'm sorry. It's seven, thirteen percent for Boonville
03 area. We don't have that broken down to what falls
in
04 to the class of what area.
05
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Those are
issues
06 that Mr. Jones and I
will always be looking at and it's
07 a question I ask every
time we have renewals, is female
08 participation. Now, I have a cohort who's similarly
09 interested, and we push
for the minority participation.
10 We both consider that
very important and whatever
11 efforts you can make in
order to improve those numbers,
12 impress us.
13 MR.
HARDY: As do I, Commissioner.
14 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Did you have something?
15 MR.
MULLALLY: Yes, a couple things.
16 First, Commissioner
Jones, Commissioner Hinrichs,
17 reporting
quarterly. Given those numbers, would
you
18 like a quarterly report
here on the minority issues?
19
COMMISSIONER JONES: Oh,
absolutely.
20 MR.
MULLALLY: Okay. Second issue I have
21 is, Kim, I noticed in
your projections that you have
22 admissions in your, in
your pro forma for next year.
23 However, the last
quarter of our fiscal year, 2005,
24 admissions had been
declining at a rate of about 5.8
25 percent, and in the
first four months of our current
00048
01 fiscal year, we've been
-- since July, July through
02 October, admissions are
declining at a 3.8 percent
03 rate. What factors do you take into
consideration
04 in thinking that you're
going to have admissions growth
05 with the trend really
going downward?
06 MR.
HARDY: Our thought process is that we
07 don't know the
stabilization of the past. We don't
08 know where that should
be. The new property, you have,
09 for lack of better
words, a lot of hire tricks, people
10 who just come in to see
what you're all about. They
11 might not even be
gamers, but they come in and just
12 look around and they
leave. That is one aspect of it.
13 Another one is that we
have really concentrated on
14 direct marketing this
year and not so much -- and over
15 the last couple of
years, and not so much on
16 advertising. With a new hotel in place, that
17 philosophy is going to
change a little bit because then
18 we'll be able to
utilize advertising throughout, and
19 plus our direct
mail. But when you direct mail just to
20 your customers, it's going
to take down your profit
21 because you don't have
as many, what we call --
22 MR.
MULLALLY: Customers?
23 MR.
HARDY: Yes. Or retail, our retail
24 customers. And hopefully, we're right on our
25 assessment.
00049
01 MR.
MULLALLY: The projected opening date
02 on the hotel again is
when?
03 MR.
HARDY: May of 2006. Shortly.
04 MR.
MULLALLY: Obviously, that should
05 drive volume. I'm still not quite understanding what
06 it is that will reverse
what is now a seven-month
07 downward trend.
08 MR.
HARDY: We'll be able to pull from
09 further out. We'll be able to -- we can encroach on
10 the outer cities market
from both sides, St. Louis and
11 Kansas City. We will have people, have rooms to stay
12 and people won't have
to make that drive back, one,
13 two, three hours. Let's assume for the sake of the
14 conversation, is an
hour and a half. We're going to go
15 out there, and we're
hoping that that's going to drive
16 admissions.
17 MR.
MULLALLY: So we'll start seeing this
18 marketing in
January?
19 MR.
HARDY: And, Kevin, I wish I really
20 did have a good answer
for it, but this is something we
21 look at by quarter, and
it's just -- I can't even
22 explain it.
23 MR.
MULLALLY: Well, it's not just you.
24 It's a state-wide
trend. I'm not picking on you. I'm
25 just trying to figure
it out.
00050
01 MR. HARDY: Thank you.
02 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, in terms of
03 reporting quarterly,
would you like that in written
04 form or a formal
presentation?
05 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: We've been having
06 written. Written's fine. I think written.
07
COMMISSIONER SHULL: I move to
approve
08 Resolution Number
05-087.
09 MR.
MULLALLY: I think the Mayor would
10 like to speak.
11 MAYOR
BLANCK: No, I'm not a politician.
12 Okay, Kim. As you can see, we have a very good
13 relationship with the
casino. I'm Danielle
14 Blanck. I'm the Mayor of Boonville. This is our
15 Interim City
Administrator and former City
16 Administrator, twenty
years ago. He's my driver today.
17 We are very
complimentary of the casino. They
18 have been excellent
citizens of our community since
19 they opened their
doors. The community was very
20 frightened that we were
going to have an influx of
21 traffic, crime,
whatever. Neither of which has
22 happened. The money that we have earned as a result of
23 them being there has
been very helpful in our
24 community, and I think
you can see that through the
25 financial records that
we provided you.
00051
01 We also try to share this money with the
02 surrounding counties,
and this past year, the Council
03 decided to give
additional monies to small towns within
04 our county. We didn't give them very much, a $1,000,
05 some others got $2,000,
but all of them were very happy
06 to get that because
their budgets, of course, they're
07 small. And we figure, you know, we have that money
and
08 it's nice to spread the
wealth around. Even though we
09 could spend it all if
we got a chance.
10 We also solicit
requests from organizations
11 within the community to
put together a grant, so to
12 seek a grant
application, or at least tell us that they
13 are interested in
having some of that money and why
14 they want it. They send that to the City
15 Administrator. In fact, we'll be doing that this
16 month, in December,
because we'll start our budgeting
17 time. In January, we'll start talking about
budget.
18 And then we ask those
organizations to come to our
19 budget session when we
discuss the casino money and
20 tell us why they should
have whatever they're asking
21 for. If you look at our financial statement
there, you
22 will see that we have
four organizations that we have
23 been very supportive of
in the past. And anyone -- we
24 don't support,
tax-supported institutions, or we will
25 try to make it so that
it covers the whole community.
00052
01 As you can see,
we give quite a bit of money to
02 the YMCA. We figure this provides a great service to
03 the community, and they
live in one of the, in a
04 building owned by the
City and so we figure this is
05 helping to support that
building. And we have
06 invested, we are going
to invest over the two to four
07 years -- we proposed
three million dollars in
08 preserving and updating
this historic building. Some
09 of you may be familiar
with the Kemper Military School,
10 and this is their field
house and swimming pool of
11 that facility. You know, we own all of that,
12 which casino money
allowed us to buy. We are now
13 attempting to sell some
of this building, so.
14 I can say that
the casino has been excellent
15 citizens of the
community. Whenever I go ask for money
16 or support in some kind
of effort going on, Kim and his
17 people are very willing
to help us do that, and
18 their management
personnel and other personnel are
19 involved in the
community with churches, civic
20 organizations,
participating in projects and events
21 that go on in the
community. So we believe that they
22 are excellent
members.
23 A lot of people
from Boonville gamble there, but
24 a lot of people just go
down there to eat. Their
25 buffet restaurant is
very nice and relatively
00053
01 inexpensive, and their
nice restaurant is very nice and
02 expensive, but people
go there. So they have offered,
03 you know, another
entertainment outlet for the
04 community.
05 My understanding
is when the hotel opens, they
06 will have entertainment
events that will be open to the
07 public, with
entertainers coming. And they have
08 already done that. Some of you are familiar with Sarah
09 Evans, a country music
star, who happens to come from
10 our area. She was born and raised in New Franklin,
11 Missouri, and she has
performed there. And they
12 anticipate doing more
of that, which again, will bring
13 people into the
community and entertain our citizens,
14 as well.
15 If you have any questions,
I'd be glad to answer
16 them. Yes, ma'am.
17
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: The money
you give
18 to the Y, is that
particularly designated towards
19 capital improvements,
or have you considered a program
20 that the --
21 MAYOR BLANCK: This is the Y --
22
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: -- that
the Y
23 might provide for
problem gaming? You know, I look
24 at the charities that
the gaming industry supports, it
25 should have, at least
in some part, something to do
00054
01 with helping to
alleviate problems with gambling.
02 MAYOR
BLANCK: The $69,000 that we gave them
03 last year is more for
program production. Then we have
04 additional money to do
improvements. That is not part
05 of this right
here. They do have adult
06 programs there. They really emphasize that youth --
07 have done a wonderful
job in providing programs for
08 youth. And I don't know that that's alleviating
09 gambling problems, but
maybe it's alleviating potential
10 gambling problems.
11
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: With the
12 popularity of poker
such as it is and the young people
13 getting into it now in
such a big way, it seems to me,
14 personally, that
efforts to educate young people as to
15 the problems of that
kind of gambling would not be
16 inappropriate.
17 MAYOR
BLANCK: Right. The facility,
18 physical facility, has
not allowed itself to do a lot
19 of that. But as we keep improving it and fixing
areas,
20 now they have a
computer lab where kids can come down
21 and do that. They're, you know, they're doing more and
22 more programs that
way. Yeah, they can play computer
23 programs, but I think
it's -- I think it is chat rooms.
24 But the facility,
because it has been in disrepair,
25 there are a lot of
areas that couldn't be used. We are
00055
01 slowly getting those
fixed, which --
02
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: You have
to have a
03 place before you can
have programs.
04 MAYOR
BLANCK: That's right. You have to
05 build it and they will
come. Right? And they do a lot
06 of things with the high
school students. They have
07 after prom parties down
there. I mean, they are doing,
08 I think, a lot of good
for the youth. And they don't
09 turn anybody away. And I think our $69,000 helps them
10 do that.
11 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: You know, it's very
12 encouraging to see the
casino being good corporate
13 citizens for your city,
and that's what we want.
14 That's what we want to
see happen. And to me, and I'm
15 sure the Commissioners,
also, it's extremely
16 encouraging that you're
reaching out to your community,
17 to the county, to the
small towns.
18 MAYOR
BLANCK: Thank you.
19 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: That you're sharing your
20 wealth, so to
speak. I think that's very important
and
21 particularly important
in the long run, in the long
22 range, as we help do
that.
23 MAYOR
BLANCK: Thank you.
24 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: So you've done a good
25 job with that and
that's very encouraging and it's a
00056
01 good thing.
02 MAYOR
BLANCK: I will have to tell you, if
03 you look on that
financial statement, Pettis County,
04 the sheriff and
prosecutor in 2003 and 2004, did not get
05 any money. They got money for the first year. They
06 didn't get money the
second year because we asked them
07 to write us a letter
and tell us what they spent the
08 money on and they
didn't bother. So we figured they
09 didn't really
care. So we thought, okay. So we didn't
10 give them the
money. Well, they did care and they
came
11 personally to us, but
it was too late then. So now
12 they're back on,
they're back on the docket. But, you
13 know, if you don't care
enough to let us know how
14 you're doing, then
maybe you don't care about the money
15 was kind of the
Council's opinion, and I kind of agreed
16 with that. So --
17 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: I don't think it's
18 unreasonable for them
to tell you what they did with
19 the money.
20 MAYOR
BLANCK: That's right. That's
right.
21 Because we did ask that
it not be put in their general
22 revenue. Don't ask questions you don't want to know
23 the answers to. But they're all using it. They all
24 needed the money and it
has helped them.
25 And Howard
County, which is right across the
00057
01 river from us, has
certainly seen an impact with
02 speeding and
things. Because I don't know if you're
03 familiar with the area,
but you can go from Columbia to
04 Boonville on Old
Highway 40, rather than I-70, and if
05 you drive I-70 very
much, you might want to drive Old
06 40. A lot of the Boonville and New Franklin,
Howard
07 County residents do use
Old 40 to go back and forth to
08 Columbia. So they do have an impact from, you know,
09 the casino people
coming in. But it really hasn't been
10 an impact
traffic-wise.
11 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any questions? Any
12 discussion?
13 MR.
MULLALLY: A couple more issues.
14 MAYOR
BLANCK: Thank you very much.
15 MR.
MULLALLY: An omission on my part. We
16 haven't done a renewal
in a while. We do have new
17 members of the
Commission. I probably should outline
18 the procedure before we
start it. The typical
19 procedure is that we
hear from the applicant, hear from
20 the home dock city, and
then ask if there are any
21 citizens that would
like to comment on the application
22 for renewal and then we
cover the background
23 investigation. We have not had any citizens contact
24 the staff requesting
permission to speak, but we may,
25 might open it up to the
audience. There may be some
00058
01 that we're not aware
of.
02 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: In fairness to you, I
03 forgot the process,
too. I'll open it up to the
04 audience. Any comments?
05 MR. MULLALLY: All right.
The final part
06 of the presentation is
that Deputy Director Steve
07 Johnson will discuss
and summarize the results of the
08 staff's background
investigation. That includes both
09 reports by the Highway
Patrol and our financial
10 investigation.
11 MR. STEVE
JOHNSON: Thank you, Kevin. Mr.
12 Chairman, members of
the Commission, good morning. Our
13 investigative team,
comprised of Sergeant J.L. Smith,
14 G.D. Davis, as well as
Corporal J.M. Preston and our
15 financial
investigators, have been involved in an
16 investigation into the
suitability of the Isle of Capri-
17 Boonville, for their
re-licensing as a class A river
18 boat. This property was originally licensed on
19 December 6, 2001. We subsequently renewed on
20 December 6, 2002 and December 6, 2003.
21 A summary report
detailing investigative
22 findings is located
under tab J in your reading book,
23 but is in front of you
as I speak. Our investigation
24 included, but was not
limited to, the following
25 considerations: Contacts with public officials,
00059
01 contacts with public
agencies, verification of
02 employment information,
a physical site inspection,
03 interviews with security
and emergency medical
04 personnel, checks with
other gaming jurisdictions
05 relative to the Isle of
Capri's operations in other
06 jurisdictions,
financial suitability, level I and key
07 individual license
verifications.
08 During the
course of this investigation, we
09 developed no
information that would preclude a
10 recommendation that
IOC-Boonville would be found
11 suitable and continue
licensure by you, the Commission.
12 But before we take any
questions that you might have
13 relative to the
investigation, we do find that our
14 administration, as we
look at the revenue sharing plans
15 at each of the
properties offered. And I'd like to
16 commend the mayor on a
very aggressive revenue-sharing
17 program that is
outlined in your book. I think it's a
18 very commendable
service, and it increases the good
19 will in the surrounding
community that they reach out.
20 I'd be happy to take
any questions.
21 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, based on the
22 investigative report
and the conduct of this licensee,
23 it's encouraging to see
them reinvest in Missouri as a
24 result of their
success. They've been very successful
25 in that market. You've heard the City of Boonville.
00060
01 They're very pleased
with them as a perfect citizen,
02 and so the staff
recommends that Isle of Capri-
03 Boonville be
re-licensed.
04
COMMISSIONER SHULL: I would
again
05 recommend that we adopt
Resolution Number 05-087.
06
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.
07 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: The motion is seconded.
08 Any further discussion?
09
COMMISSIONER JONES: Just general
10 information. How often does for gaming licensure come
11 up for
re-licensing?
12 MR.
MULLALLY: After their initial
13 licensure, for the
first two periods of re-licensure,
14 it's one year. So once you get your license, you get
15 your license, that's
good for one year. Then you have
16 to get it renewed for
the next, annually, for the next
17 two years, and then
it's on a two-year rotation. So
18 they will not be back
before you for -- this is the
19 last of the one year's?
20 MR.
HARDY: The next will be -- no, this
21 was a two-year.
22 MR.
MULLALLY: This was a two-year? So
23 they will not be back
before you for another two years.
24
COMMISSIONER JONES: Okay. All right.
25
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I have
one more
00061
01 question, and that is
key and level I persons, there
02 are 34 names on here,
of which only the four are
03 female. I'd like to see a change in that.
04 MR.
HARDY: Yes, ma'am.
05
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: And if
you want
06 this, you're welcome to
it.
07 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Further discussion? If
08 not, please call the
roll.
09 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
10 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
11 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
12
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
13 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
14
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
15 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
16
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
17 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
18
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
19 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
20 Resolution Number
05-087.
21 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman and
22 Commissioners, the next
items on the agenda relate to
23 consideration of
Preliminary Orders for Discipline.
24 General Counsel would
like to make their presentations.
25 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: The request has been
00062
01 made that we take a
short break, so we'll take a break.
02 MR.
MULLALLY: All right.
03 (Thereupon, a
short recess was taken.)
04 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, we'll pick up
05 the agenda with Roman
numeral five, and General Counsel
06 Mike Bushmann is here
to make those presentations.
07 MR. MIKE
BUSHMANN: The first case before you
08 is Isle of
Capri-Boonville, DC-05-223. When slot
09 machines are linked
together to offer a progressive
10 jackpot, a progressive controller is used in order to
11 regulate how that
jackpot increases over time. The
12 controller contains a
control computer chip, which
13 Commission rules
require have to be verified and sealed
14 with evidence tape to prevent
the possibility of
15 tampering.
16 For four days
last September, the casino placed
17 a bank of six slot
machines into play without having
18 verified and sealed
that control chip for progressive
19 control. After an investigation, it was found that
the
20 chip was operating as
it was supposed to and there
21 wasn't any evidence
that any tampering had been done.
22 So since nothing was
wrong with the chip itself and the
23 company did
self-report, the staff is recommending
24 that the Isle of
Capri-Boonville be fined in the amount
25 of $5,000.
00063
01 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Do we have a motion?
02
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to
approve
03 disciplinary action
DC-05-223.
04 COMMISISONER SHULL: Second.
05 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
06 If not, please call the
roll.
07 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
08 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
09 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
10
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
11 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
12
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
13 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
14
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
15 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
16
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
17 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
18 Disciplinary Complaint
DC-05-223
19 MR.
BUSHMANN: The next case is Harrah's
20 Maryland Heights. That's DC-05-224. There are very
21 detailed procedures for
how cards and dice have to be
22 stored and handled in
casinos and that's in order to
23 prevent cheating. The Commission auditors examined
24 Harrah's procedures for
cards and dice, and found some
25 problems in one pit
podium that was being used to store
00064
01 cards and dice. That pit podium did not have dedicated
02 surveillance
coverage. The log in the podium was
03 supposed to contain an
inventory of all the cards and
04 dice in that pit
podium, but it did not. And the log
05 also didn't show that a
senior supervisor had verified
06 this. So for these violations, the staff's
07 recommending a fine of
$5,000.
08 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Do we have a motion?
09
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Move to
approve
10 Disciplinary Complaint
05-224.
11
COMMISSIONER JONES: Second.
12 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Is there any further
13 discussion? If not, please call the roll.
14 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
15 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
16 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
17
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
18 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
19
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
20 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
21
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
23
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
24 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
25 Disciplinary Complaint
DC-05-224.
00065
01 MR.
BUSHMANN: The next case is Harrah's
02 Maryland Heights. That one's CD-05-225. This one's
03 about cashing personal
checks. The issue of when a
04 casino can cash checks
for its customers can be kind of
05 complicated. The statutes do allow for casinos to cash
06 personal checks, but it
also gives the discretion to
07 the Commission to
require that a sufficient account
08 balance exists in that
customer's account before a
09 casino can take any
check. But in the past, the
10 Commission has not gone
this far. It has tried to
11 balance the interests
of allowing the casino to manage
12 its own general business
affairs, while on the other
13 hand, trying to protect
the casino customers from
14 getting into serious
financial difficulty.
15 So what the
Commission did was to impose a rule
16 that casinos are
prohibited from cashing a check for a
17 person who had written
a check that previously had been
18 returned
unsatisfied. So in other words, you can
19 bounce one check, but
you cannot bounce more than that.
20 In this case,
Commission agents conducted an
21 investigation into Harrah's
check cashing practices
22 after there was a
complaint from a patron. The
23 investigation found
that Harrah's accepted personal
24 checks from five
different people who had outstanding
25 checks that had been
returned unpaid. So the staff's
00066
01 recommending that the
casino be fined in this case in the
02 amount of $25,000.
03 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: And the reason for the
04 $25,000 is that because
there were five different cases
05 in the past?
06 MR. BUSHMANN: I don't know that there
07 were -- I don't think
that that calculation
08 was used in coming up
with that number. In going back
09 and looking at previous
cases, there really wasn't a
10 whole lot that were
exactly like this one, but there was
11 a case in 1998 that was
a $25,000 fine for Boyd Kansas
12 City for cashing checks
for someone on the DAP list.
13 So it's similar in the
sense that it was someone who
14 shouldn't have been
able to cash checks, but was
15 allowed to anyway.
16 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: I think the reason for
17 the policy is to make
sure that people not get into
18 financial trouble
gambling. And so it is, it is a
19 serious violation.
20 MR.
BUSHMANN: Yes.
21 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move that we
22 approve DC-05-225.
23
COMMISSIONER BIELE: I second.
24 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
25 If not, please call the
roll.
00067
01 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
02 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
03 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
04
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
05 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
06
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
07 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
08
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
09 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
10
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
11 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
12 Disciplinary Complaint
CD-05-225.
13 MR.
BUSHMANN: The next one is also
14 against Harrah's
Maryland Heights, DC-05-226. Last
15 July, a 19-year-old
girl used an altered driver's
16 license to obtain a
players card from a casino employee.
17 And over the next six
weeks, that girl entered the
18 casino eight times
without being caught. At least one
19 of those times, she
placed a bet. She was finally
20 caught and arrested
when she tried to enter a night
21 club on the casino
premises using that same altered
22 driver's license.
23 Last September,
if you'll remember, Harrah's
24 Maryland Heights was
fined $15,000 for allowing a minor
25 to enter a casino
several times using an altered
00068
01 driver's license and
placing bets at a roulette table.
02 And so for this case,
for failing to identify and
03 prevent that minor from
entering the casino, the staff
04 is recommending a fine
of $30,000.
05
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS:
Essentially,
06 doubling the last one.
07 MR.
BUSHMANN: Yes, ma'am.
08
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I will
move to
09 approve DC-05-226.
10
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Second.
11 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
12
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: If they
come back
13 again, we make it
$60,000.
14 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
15 If not, please call
roll.
16 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
17 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
18 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
19
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
20 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
21
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
23
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
24 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
25
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
00069
01 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
02 DC-05-226.
03 COMMISSIONER BIELE: Before you go on, is
04 there anybody here from
Maryland Heights property?
05 MR. FRED
STUCKEL: Yes, sir.
06
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Is there any
--
07 having three violations
this month and all being in
08 different particular
areas, is disturbing?
09 MR.
STUCKEL: Yes, sir.
10
COMMISSIONER BIELE: It's not
just in one
11 particular area. Is there a reason for the laxity in
12 your casino?
13 MR.
STUCKEL: No, sir. We don't
14 really have a reason
right now. We will work through
15 this issue. We have stringent internal controls and
16 training in place. We just think this is a coincidence
17 of errors that we have
right now. We're working
18 through it, and
reminding all of our employees through
19 training and necessary
controls and enforcing all of
20 these rules.
21
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Because like
I say,
22 this many, it would be
really frowned upon, I think, by
23 this Commission to see
this like this again.
24 MR.
STUCKEL: It's very
25 disturbing to us.
00070
01
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Thank you.
02 MR.
BUSHMANN: The last case I have is
03 Harrah's North Kansas
City. That's DC-05-227. Back in
04 June of 2004, company
employees installed main game
05 program computer chips
for 99 slot machines in the
06 casino. And they configured those machines to accept
a
07 maximum wager of three
coins or credits. Two weeks
08 later, the casino was
notified by the Commission that
09 those computer chips
were only approved if the machine
10 was configured to
accept nine coins. But the company
11 failed to reconfigure
the slot machines or remove those
12 chips after that
notification in 2004, and that made
13 those 99 slot machines
unsuitable for use in Missouri.
14 In September of
2005, the Commission discovered
15 this problem after a
patron failed to be paid properly
16 from one of those
machines. This case is the fourth
17 discipline relating to
slot machine violations for
18 Harrah's North Kansas
City since 2002. However, that
19 company has made
improvements recently in the
20 management of the slot
department. The latest case
21 came before you just
last September. The fines for
22 those previous cases
range from $15,000 to $50,000.
23 And the staff is
recommending a fine in this case of
24 $50,000.
25 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Do we have a motion?
00071
01
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to
approve
02 DC-05-227.
03
COMMISSIONER JONES: Second.
04 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
05
COMMISSIONER JONES: Yes. So this is the
06 fifth now? This is the fifth violation?
07 MR.
BUSHMANN: This would be the fourth.
08
COMMISSIONER JONES: This would
be the
09 fourth? In how many years?
10 MR.
BUSHMANN: Since 2002. So it's been
11 over a several year
period of time.
12
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Since this
has been
13 going on, has any of
our staff from the field been
14 doing any checking on
this? I mean, it seems like
15 since this has been
going on over a three-year period,
16 I'm just wondering if
we haven't maybe, shouldn't be
17 checking a little
closer.
18 MR.
JOHNSON: Well, we are, as a matter of
19 fact, working really
closely. And as Counsel Bushmann
20 has pointed out, there
can be no argument that they
21 have made significant
improvements lately in their slot
22 department and we've
taken that into consideration.
23 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
24 If not, please call the
roll.
25 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
00072
01 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
02 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
03
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
04 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
05
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
06 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
07
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
08 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
09
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
10 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
11 DC-05-227.
12 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman and
13 Commissioners, the next
four items on the agenda
14 involve settlement
agreements with regard to cases that
15 have been in dispute
and negotiation for some time.
16 Assistant Attorney
General Jane Rackers is here to make
17 those
presentations.
18 MS.
RACKERS: Good morning.
19 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Good morning.
20 MS.
RACKERS: The first three of those
21 agenda items deal with
the Isle of Capri, and they all
22 deal with failure to
report. So we can take up the
23 first of those cases,
which is DC-02-050. And that
24 case involved a failure
to report a patron who was
25 believed to have capped
a bet, and that means adding
00073
01 more chips to the bet
after the outcome of the game had
02 been determined. An employee of the casino took that
03 patron into custody to
determine information, then
04 released the patron
without contacting the Gaming
05 Commission office. The patron was allowed to leave the
06 casino property before
the Gaming Commission agent was
07 contacted.
08 The original
Preliminary Order for Disciplinary
09 Action proposed a
penalty of $50,000. The casino has
10 proposed a settlement
for $15,000, in part, because the
11 notification of the
Gaming Agent did occur within 35
12 minutes of when the
violation was detected, and that
13 the casino employee had
obtained information, got the
14 identity of the patron,
and was able to provide that
15 information and fill
out a report. So for this matter,
16 the casino's proposed a
$15,000 penalty, and we propose
17 that to you.
18 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Your proposal is
19 $15,000?
20 MS.
RACKERS: Yes.
21
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to
approve
22 Resolution Number
05-089.
23 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Do we have a second?
24
COMMISSIONER JONES: Second.
25 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
00074
01 One does beg the
question as to why from 50 down to 15?
02 MS.
RACKERS: Well, I think in part
03 because of
consideration of the relatively short amount
04 of time from when the
incident occurred to when it was
05 reported. I believe that we were considering this case
06 in conjunction with all
the, the other two cases that
07 we had. In Columbia, I believe, they were all
08 comprised of $15,000
penalties for failure to report.
09 I believe, also, that
the individual involved in this
10 case, as well as the
individuals involved in the other
11 two cases, we've
litigated those, and those folks have
12 been disciplined. And that part of the problem has
13 been resolved. They are no longer at the casino and so
14 for a combination of
reasons --
15
COMMISSIONER BIELE: I guess the
part that
16 bothers me is I realize
it's 35 minutes, but that's why
17 we have a Gaming
Commission on-site. The person was
18 released, so the officer,
the trooper, didn't even have
19 an opportunity to talk
to this person and, hopefully,
20 that's what our people
are trained to do better than
21 the casino personnel
when it comes to this type of a
22 thing. I guess that's my beef with it, is that he
was
23 released before we even
had an opportunity, whether it
24 be five minutes or
thirty-five minutes or four hours.
25 MR.
CAMPBELL: Mr. Chairman, I'd
00075
01 be happy to address the
issue. Part of the other
02 consideration that
which we conveyed in our settlement
03 offer was that the
procedure for the casino at
04 that time is if there
was a suspicion of capping, the
05 patron would be brought
aside and, basically, escorted
06 off the property. And that's the suspicion,
07 not a knowledge of
capping. In this case, the policy
08 was followed as it
existed at that time. There was a
09 suspicion that there
had been a violation. The patron
10 was taken. Adequate information for a follow-up
11 investigation was
obtained and the patron was then
12 escorted away
immediately and the Commission staff
13 was notified. That has now been acknowledged as
14 backwards. The -- right now, even with a suspicion of
15 theft, the Commission
staff will be notified
16 immediately.
17 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Thank you. Any further
18 discussion? If not, please call the roll.
19 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
20 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
21 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
22
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
23 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
24
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
25 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
00076
01 COMMISSIONER
JONES: Approved.
02 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
03
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
04 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
05 Resolution Number
05-089.
06 MS.
RACKERS: The case found at tab 2 also
07 involved the Isle of
Capri. In this case, it involved
08 two incidents of
failure to notify. In one instance,
09 there was an
altercation alleged between two patrons,
10 where one patron
alleged that he pulled a knife and
11 attempted to injure
another patron. The patron who was
12 accosted contacted the
casino and suggested that the
13 Commission be notified,
but the casino employee did not
14 immediately notify the
Commission.
15 In the second
incident, there was a patron who
16 attempted to enter the
casino illegally by using
17 someone else's driver's
license. Again, he had -- we
18 had two of the same
people involved in all of these
19 incidents. In that incident, the supervisor of the
20 casino, the security
supervisor, was contacted and
21 looked at the
identification, did not allow the patron to
22 enter the casino, but
gave the false I.D. back to the
23 patron and sent him on
his way, and he did not
24 immediately notify the
Commission. So in that case,
25 the proposed penalty
was $60,000 and the proposed
00077
01 settlement for that is
$50,000.
02
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: For what
reason
03 was it reduced by
$10,000?
04 MS.
RACKERS: Well, on that one, I believe
05 that the consideration
was the notification, though not
06 immediately, was within
a fairly short amount of time,
07 less than an hour. But I think that was the main
08 consideration. But again, those employees have been
09 disciplined by the
Commission and are no longer
10 employed by the
casino.
11
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move
that we
12 approve Resolution
Number 05-090.
13
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Second.
14 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
15 If not, please call the
roll.
16 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
17 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
18 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
19
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
20 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
21
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
23
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
24 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
25 COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
00078
01 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
02 Resolution Number
05-090.
03 MS.
RACKERS: In the last of the Isle of
04 Capri cases, in tab R,
again, a failure to report a
05 case where a female
patron reported to the casino that
06 her purse was
missing. Casino employees began an
07 investigation, looked
at videotape, believed that they
08 had the suspect who had
stolen the purse, and a casino
09 employee then gave the
name, address, and phone number
10 of that suspect to the
patron, but did not immediately
11 notify the agent and
did not report the theft of the
12 purse to the agent
immediately. They were notified
13 shortly thereafter, but
did not report it. Given that
14 it is another failure
to report, the initial
15 recommendation for
proposed penalties were $120,000, and
16 offer to resolve the
case is for $100,000.
17
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move to
approve
18 Resolution Number
05-091.
19
COMMISSIONER JONES: Second.
20 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
21 If not, please call the
roll.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
23 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
24 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
25
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
00079
01 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
02
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
03 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
04
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
05 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
06
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
07 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
08 Resolution Number
05-091.
09 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: What begs to said here,
10 though, is that the
Commission agent has to be
11 notified. Would you address that?
12 MR.
CAMPBELL: Yes, Mr. Chairman.
13 I wanted to draw your
attention to the fact that these
14 are very old cases, and
are very old for a host of
15 reasons. In fact, the 2002 case, the first case you
16 heard, was in the year
2000. So these are old. To my
17 knowledge, I don't
believe there has been a failure to
18 report discipline since
these three disciplinary
19 matters. And that is probably the best evidence, that
20 we got the message.
21
COMMISSIONER BIELE: I also
understand now
22 why Isle of Capri left
and you stayed here by yourself.
23 MR.
CAMPBELL: Could someone
24 please remove the
arrows out of my back? Thank you.
25 MS.
RACKERS: And then the fourth matter,
00080
01 at tab S, involves the
Ameristar Casino St. Charles.
02 This is a matter
involving Ameristar's SuperLink
03 program. It was a slot machine progressive bonus
04 system called the
SuperLink. And the SuperLink system
05 was connected to
approximately 800 of Ameristar's 3,200
06 slot machines, and the
system was placed into service
07 at Ameristar in August
of 2002. The SuperLink
08 progressive jackpot
system is separate from the
09 computer system that
runs the regular jackpots on the
10 slot machines.
11 In March of
2004, Ameristar detected a problem
12 with that SuperLink
system, in that an implementation
13 of the progressive slot
machine had errors in the
14 system. The communication problems in the SuperLink
15 system apparently began
in 2002 and went undetected
16 until March of 2004,
when discovered by Ameristar.
17 Approximately 200 of
the slot machines that had the
18 SuperLink system
experienced some of the communication
19 problems.
20 It is important,
I think, to note that as the
21 patrons were playing on
those machines, when they saw a
22 jackpot on the meter on
the machine, if they won the
23 jackpot, they won the
amount that was on the meter.
24 The problem was that
the system was not correctly
25 computing what the
jackpot should be. So while they
00081
01 received what they thought
they would receive, they didn't
02 receive what they
should have. That under-
03 implementation in the
SuperLink system resulted in a
04 total amount of
$152,801.20 that was not put on the
05 jackpots over that
period from 2002 to 2004.
06 Now, as a result, Ameristar -- part of
the
07 problem here, too, is
that they did not have a
08 secondary audit process
in place that would have
09 detected the problems
in communication in the system.
10 When Ameristar detected
the problem, they immediately
11 reported it to the
Gaming Commission staff and
12 cooperated fully with
the investigation provided in
13 connection with the
gaming process. And as a result,
14 the Ameristar, with the
agreement of the Gaming
15 Commission staff, put
$152,801.20 back into the
16 progressive jackpots on
the machines at the Ameristar.
17 That's what they did
with the money that wasn't paid
18 out to the
patrons.
19 And so based
upon all the factors, Ameristar has
20 proposed a penalty of
$115,000. The Commission, when
21 it considered this
case, proposed a penalty of
22 $200,000. So this is a considerable difference in the
23 penalty proposed by the
Commission. I suspect staff
24 might want to describe
their thoughts, but I believe the
25 initial concern was
that since this was a computer
00082
01 problem, the SuperLink
system, would create a great
02 deal of distrust among
the gaming public, and it was
03 anticipated that there
would be a substantial backlash
04 in the public, and that
hasn't happened. It has not
05 been a result. And so, therefore, we propose for
06 consideration for
resolution in this case for $115,000.
07
COMMISSIONER BIELE: This back-up
system,
08 isn't it true that
they, if I can remember right, that
09 they have a back-up
system in Kansas City, but they did
10 not have a back-up
system in St. Louis?
11 MR. GREG
SILVER: That is correct.
12
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Any
particular reason
13 why they did not have
the back-up system?
14 MR.
SILVER: I don't really know
15 the reason. I think that Kansas City may have detected
16 something that they had
an issue a little bit and they
17 did put a procedure in
place that did not get put in
18 place in St.
Charles.
19
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Is it in
place now?
20 MR.
SILVER: Yes, it is.
21
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Okay.
22
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I move
that we
23 approve Resolution
Number 05-092.
24
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Second.
25 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
00083
01 If not, please call the
roll.
02 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
03 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
04 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
05
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
06 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
07
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
08 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
09
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
10 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
11
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
12 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
13 Resolution Number
05-092.
14 MS.
RACKERS: Thank you.
15 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Thank you.
16 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman,
17 Commissioners, the next
items on the agenda involve the
18 consideration of a
re-licensure of certain suppliers
19 and Chief Deputy
Director Steve Johnson will make those
20 presentations.
21 MR.
JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman, members of the
22 Commission, our
investigators have conducted
23 investigations into the
suitability of two of our
24 currently licensed
suppliers, Atlantic City Coin and
25 Slot Service Company,
and Western Money Systems. And
00084
01 this consideration is,
of course, for re-licensing.
02 The investigation into
the Atlantic City Coin and Slot
03 Service Company was
conducted by Sergeants Gary Baker
04 and Jeff Smith, and
with the assistance of financial
05 investigator Don
Krieg.
06 Our
investigation included, but was not limited
07 to, inquiries related
to the following considerations:
08 Cash flow and
operations, the reports of independent
09 accountants, key
persons in operations and other
10 jurisdictions.
11 For your
edification, the products that are
12 produced by these two
suppliers, AC Coin is the
13 exclusive sales agent
for IGT in Atlantic City, New
14 Jersey, the Caribbean,
and on Florida cruise ships, but
15 they have
proprietorship over seven slot machines
16 currently manufactured
by IGT and two table games.
17 They also manufacture
custom slot machines and produce
18 custom signage for this
industry.
19 Western Money
Systems produces machines that
20 redeem coupons and
vouchers generated by the slot
21 machines, as well as
devices that break bills for
22 patrons. They also manufacture self-service kiosks
23 that redeem tickets,
also break bills and they perform
24 custom marketing
functions for the industry.
25 In both cases,
AC Coin and Western Money
00085
01 Systems, our
investigative findings do include a
02 financial review,
disclose no discrepancies or concerns
03 that would preclude
licensing the applicants, as
04 required within the
state of Missouri.
05
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Can we do
these
06 together?
07 MR.
MULLALLY: If it's unanimous.
08
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I will
move that we
09 approve Resolutions
Number 05-093 and 05-094.
10
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Second.
11 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
12 If not, then please
call the roll.
13 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
14 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
15 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
16
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
17 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
18
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
19 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
20
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
21 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
22
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
23 MS. FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
24 Resolution Number
05-093 and 05-094.
25 MR.
JOHNSON: The next item that we have
00086
01 under tabs V and W in
the information in front of you
02 involves some facts
that our investigators conducted
03 investigations into the
suitability of the following
04 named companies as
either bingo manufacturers or
05 suppliers as noted
under the tabs I mentioned. The
06 investigators involved
in these investigations include
07 Sergeants Franklin,
Booker, Kramer and Wilkinson, the
08 Charitable Games
Unit.
09 Our
investigation included, but was not limited
10 to, the following
considerations: Tax checks,
11 registration for the
Secretary of State, out of state
12 gaming license checks,
criminal and civil records
13 checks, key persons,
federal, state, county, and
14 municipal law
enforcement agencies, financial
15 consideration to
include credit and tax information.
16 And our
investigation has resulted in the
17 discovery of no
information that would preclude the
18 licensure of the
following companies: Suppliers: Games
19 Galore, a Missouri
corporation or company; All American
20 Bingo, a Missouri
company; Bingo Supply Center, a
21 Missouri company; Game
Tech International from Nevada,
22 California Concept,
which is an Ohio based company.
23 The manufacturers
include: Universal Manufacturing, a
24 Missouri company;
Douglas Press, an Illinois company;
25 International GameCo Incorporated,
from Nebraska; Aero
00087
01 International and Game
Tech International, from Nevada;
02 Western Game Boat
Supplies, from Ontario; and Applied
03 Concepts, that was
based in Ohio; Pollard Games, from
04 Iowa; and finally,
Fortunet Incorporated, which is a
05 Nevada company.
06 If we have any,
if you have any quick questions
07 that we could answer,
our investigators would be happy
08 to take them.
09
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I will
move that
10 we approve Resolutions
05-010B and 05-011B.
11
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Second.
12 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion?
13 If not, please call the
roll.
14 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
15 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
16 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
17
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
18 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
19
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
20 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
21
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
23
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
24 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
25 Resolution Numbers
05-010B and 05-011B.
00088
01 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, the next item
02 on the agenda involves
the consideration of a
03 resolution delegating
authority to the Chairman. As
04 you may recall, last
year, we, the Commission, adopted
05 a new policy that
allowed for certain active chairmen
06 to continue certain
matters so that we wouldn't have to
07 have telephonic
Commission meetings for relatively
08 innocuous things. And you could be able to push those
09 off until the
Commission could get together.
10 It's worked
exceedingly well. Those telephonic
11 meetings were always
excruciating for the staff. I
12 imagine it wasn't much
better for the Commission. And
13 so -- but the one
provision was that it be reviewed
14 annually.
15 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: And in the provision, it
16 -- it needs to be
reported to the
17 Commission.
18 MR.
MULLALLY: Yes.
19 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: You know, when it does
20 occur. It's worked well. It's helped on the
21 telephonic
meetings. I recommend that we renew it,
22 that that was certainly
a consideration of the
23 Commission.
24
COMMISSIONER BIELE: I second it.
25
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: You can't
make --
00089
01 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Well, I can, but I
02 won't.
03
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Then I'll
second.
04 He makes the motion.
05 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Okay. Is there a motion
06 and a second here? Any further discussion? Please
07 call the roll.
08 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
09 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Approved.
10 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Hinrichs?
11
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
12 MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
13
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
14 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
15
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
16 MS.
FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
17
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
18 MS.
FRANKS: By your vote, you've adopted
19 Resolution Number
05-095.
20 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, as you may
21 recall, when the
Commission designated that Pinnacle
22 Entertainment was a
priority for investigation for its
23 two projects in
downtown St. Louis and St. Louis
24 County, there were a
couple of conditions that were
25 placed on that priority
designation. One of which is
00090
01 that they meet certain
financial conditions. The staff
02 has reviewed financial
statements submitted by the
03 applicant, and Martha
LeMond is here to make that
04 presentation.
05 Martha, I
believe you may have been introduced
06 to her at the last
Commission meeting, but she's been
07 here about a month or
so and is very, very talented and
08 has a wealth of
experience in both the public and
09 private sector, and a
variety of different capacities.
10 She's very bright and
we feel very lucky to have her.
11 So with those lowered
expectations, I'll ask her to
12 make her presentation.
13 MS. MARTHA
LEMOND: Yes, I was thinking about
14 going home before I
created a problem.
15 First of all,
good morning. I'm really happy to
16 be here. Pinnacle is an interesting situation. Their
17 net revenues continue
to increase despite some of
18 the difficulties they
have experienced with the
19 hurricanes down south
and their expansion and
20 improvement numbers of
highly diversified portfolios.
21 Before we get to
the real heart, I want to
22 indicate that my
documentation is based on SEC 10Q and 10K
23 filings, both audited
and unaudited for the most recent
24 period. It's hard numbers from actual performance,
no
25 pro forma, no looking
forward. It's what they've done
00091
01 for this quarter. We have an ongoing resolution that
02 they meet a two-times
minimum ratio. That's in
03 consideration of how
much they're earning to cover
04 their debt. The good news is it is 2.0. They say it's
05 2.1. That's just another example of you probably
have
06 a slight difference due
to the economy. It has trended
07 down some over the last
four trailing quarters, but I
08 don't think that that's
a difficulty at this point in
09 time.
10 I'd also like to
put the caveat in there that we
11 took no consideration
with their anticipated insurance
12 proceeds that they're
saying that they'll receive,
13 whether substantial or
not, of $1,100. And that's
14 basically, the gist of
all the reading and all the
15 documentation. I'm ready now to answer questions.
16 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Questions?
17 MS.
LEMOND: Thank you very much.
18 MR.
MULLALLY: Thank you. Martha's done a
19 tremendous amount of
work. I know it's a relatively
20 short
presentation. We've had a number of
informal
21 staff discussions about
it. She's put dozens and
22 dozens of hours of work
into coming to that conclusion,
23 so I appreciate
that.
24 Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners, next on the
25 agenda is Commissioner
Jones and, I think, joined by
00092
01 the rest of the
Commission, had asked for updates
02 periodically from
Pinnacle Entertainment with regard to
03 the MBE and WBE
compliance. They are submitting that
04 information to us on a
monthly basis, but we thought
05 that for this first
reporting period, it would be
06 helpful to have them
come and make a presentation in
07 person and they
are. Wade Hundley is here and they are
08 prepared to do just
that.
09 MR. WADE
HUNDLEY: Good morning, Mr.
Chairman.
10 Good morning,
Commission, staff. I appreciate the
11 opportunity to be here
to give an update on our
12 minority compliance
issues with respect to both our
13 city project and our
county projects. With me here
14 today is Cliff
Kortman. Cliff is our Senior Vice
15 President of
Development and Construction. After I
16 give an update on
minority issues, we will quickly give
17 an update on the status
of the projects.
18 I think we're
off to a very good start with
19 respect to our minority
and women-owned, business-owned
20 compliance issues. We're just at the beginning of
21 these projects, and so
we certainly realize these are
22 issues that require
daily focus. We’ve got some pretty
23 lofty goals that we
have to hit, and the only way we're
24 going to do that is if
we have daily focus throughout
25 all of us, our
organization. And I can, I can assure
00093
01 that we have that focus
right now, from Dan Lee's level
02 all the way down
through our organization. And I think
03 we've made some, some
good progress to get an
04 organization in place
that will help us with those
05 goals.
06 To date, we are
just days away from finalizing
07 our compliance plan
with the City of St. Louis. This
08 plan will meet the
guidelines of the Mayor's Executive
09 Order 28, which
requires 25 percent MBE participation
10 and 5 percent WBE. We've hired consultants at this
11 point to assist us in
our MBE, WBE compliance. Those
12 consultants are MHR
International and ADE Consulting
13 Services. They have teamed up to help us with these
14 issues.
15 I have Don
Robertson, who is in the audience
16 today, from MHR
International. They are a company
17 that's based out of
Atlanta, but they've had operations
18 and an office in St.
Louis for quite some time. And
19 then ADE is
headquartered in St. Louis. So we think
20 those two firms will
certainly have the best knowledge
21 and experience and can
help us identify minority
22 business that we can
work with and will be involved in
23 our daily operations as
we start to meet these
24 goals.
25 We are also
searching, currently, for an
00094
01 internal compliance
person, which will work daily with
02 the consultants and
will further strengthen our
03 organization.
04 We, to date, we,
as you know, have begun
05 construction downtown
and we are in the process -- as
06 part of that process,
we are meeting on a weekly basis,
07 sometimes twice weekly,
with the city general
08 contractor and Pinnacle
representatives to both look at
09 the bids that are about
to go out, to review contracts
10 or proposals that have
come in from contractors, as
11 well as to review ways,
creative ways, that we can
12 approach these bids to
make it easier for minority and
13 WBE, MBE and WBE
participation. Sometimes requirements
14 that are out there in
the typical fields makes it
15 difficult for some of
the smaller businesses to meet
16 those requirements, and
we're trying to come up with
17 creative ways that
allows to ease up those
18 contracts, creating more
participation.
19 I think we've
been pretty successful to date.
20 In terms of our
cumulative work in process, work that's
21 been completed, we are
at 32 percent MBE participation.
22 That number is a little
bit inflated because McCarthy,
23 who is our general
contractor, will perform some work
24 where the contract's
already out, and so they're not a
25 minority-owned firm,
and so that percentage will come
00095
01 down. Those percentages will go up and down as
02 we do different parts
of the project. Different parts
03 of the project are
easier to get as MBE, WBE firms out
04 there that are
available, and so our percentages will
05 go -- you'll see them
go up and down on a weekly and
06 monthly basis as we
make these reports. But at the end
07 of the day, our targets
are 25 percent, 5 percent for
08 the city project.
09 In the county,
we have, we've finalized our
10 compliance plan with
the county. That plan requires 19
11 percent MBE, WBE participation. We're just at the
12 start of that
project. Right now, we are doing our
13 environment
testing. One of our environmental firms
is
14 actually submitting its
plan. I don't have the
15 estimated --
16 MR. CLIFF
KORTMAN: Yes. They've submitted the
17 work plan and it's been
approved by the MBE office.
18 MR.
HUNDLEY: So the plan's been submitted
19 there and their
contract requires 25 percent MBE, WBE
20 participation for
actual performance of work. So
21 that's just in the
process of getting started, so we
22 don't have a lot to
report. That's why our change of
23 monies have actually
been extended in the county.
24 We have
submitted this report. I'm open to any
25 kind of comments or --
it is the first one and so, in
00096
01 terms of format or
content, do you want more or less
02 information. We'd be happy to include anything you
03 want in future reports,
but we -- this was the first
04 one and if you like
this format, we can continue this
05 or we can adjust it in
any way in the future. So
06 that's kind of the
report.
07 Just at the
onset year, the heavy focus on our
08 company. You know, this is a big issue that we have
to
09 really set the standard
here. We know that we're very
10 highly visible and I
think we are very committed and I
11 want to be an example
for all the casinos in the state
12 for their
projects.
13
COMMISSIONER JONES: A couple
questions.
14 You said that you have
that report. Is it detailed or
15 just pretty much --
16 MR.
HUNDLEY: Well, it's detailed and then
17 there's an exhibit here
that shows the work and the
18 amounts of the work as
a spreadsheet and it lists
19 the firms that have
performed the work and the amounts
20 of those, of the work
that's been completed and done,
21 and with how much, you
know, what percentages MBE, WBE.
22 MR.
JONES: Okay. That's pretty much -- I
23 was asking the question,
you said there was 32,
24 currently 32 percent
participation with the --
25 MR.
HUNDLEY: Work in place.
00097
01 MR.
JONES: -- work in place.
02 MR.
HUNDLEY: Right.
03 MR.
JONES: But you didn't give the, you
04 know, I guess on that
report, it'll have the --
05 MR.
HUNDLEY: Yeah. There's the cumulative
06 work in place dollars,
about 2, almost 2.5 million
07 dollars and $800,000 of
that, a little over that is
08 going to the minority
plan.
09
COMMISSIONER JONES: Okay. And it
lists
10 minority contractors?
11 MR.
HUNDLEY: Yes, it does. There's six
12 minority firms, so far
involved.
13
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Any of
them
14 female?
15 MR.
HUNDLEY: Female? We don't have them
16 broken down between WBE
and MBE. There has been WBE
17 work. Yes, there has.
18 MR.
KORTMAN: I don't have that percentage
19 exactly at this point,
but we will define that. You
20 know, this report is
really a first blush effort. We
21 know that you have a
requirement. We submitted it to
22 staff and we are very
open to format in any way you'd
23 like us --
24
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Could we
get a --
25 instead of getting a
monthly report that's just what
00098
01 the picture is now,
have the continuous picture so that
02 we can see it as --
03 MR.
KORTMAN: Yes. That is really the way
04 this is formatted, so
you can just add to it and you
05 can see from, you know,
by time.
06 MR.
HUNDLEY: Totals for the month and
07 then the right, the
right-hand side of the spreadsheet
08 is cumulative.
09
COMMISSIONER JONES: Do you give
the
10 dates?
11 MR.
HUNDLEY: Absolutely.
12
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Do you
think,
13 ultimately, it could be
done on a chart form so that we
14 could see how it has
improved?
15 MR.
HUNDLEY: Sure. Absolutely.
16 Absolutely. Yes.
We'll get much better at the
17 presentation of this,
but this was just roughly.
18
COMMISSIONER JONES: Okay. Now, the firm
19 from the city that is
listed, is that A --
20 MR.
HUNDLEY: Yes. MHR, which is from
21 Atlanta, and ADE
Consulting Services --
22
COMMISSIONER JONES: ADE?
23 MR.
HUNDLEY: ADE, yes. I'm sorry.
I get
24 my letters mixed
up.
25
COMMISSIONER JONES: And MHR,
they have an
00099
01 office in St. Louis?
02 MR.
HUNDLEY: Yes.
03
COMMISSIONER JONES: Okay.
04
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: I'm sure
the City
05 of St. Louis is
concerned about St. Louis firms being
06 represented.
07 MR.
HUNDLEY: Absolutely.
08
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: And I
presume that
09 you were, you were
being very conscious of --
10 MR.
HUNDLEY: Absolutely. That's our first
11 --
12
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: -- To
keep as many
13 in St. Louis.
14 MR.
HUNDLEY: -- keep them in Missouri,
15 keep them in St. Louis.
16 MR.
KORTMAN: Yes. I think to date,
17 actually looking down
the list of the work, I don't
18 think there's any
out-of-state contractors on the list
19 so far.
20 One of the other
things I might just add to what
21 Wade said,
historically, what will happen on projects
22 like these is you'll go
through a process where you get
23 all the way to the end
of the drawing, the CD's are
24 complete, and we go to
a contractor and we enter into a
25 contract with
them. They buy the job and it's
00100
01 difficult, but they buy
to get the kind of
02 participation you need
for smaller firms.
03 So what we've
elected to do is really do this
04 as, do the project as a
package-based project. So
05 we're releasing
packages. We're doing it by
packages.
06 So we're doing the
excavation and site work as one of
07 our big packages. And then we really focus on how we
08 did get maximum
participation on that package. The
09 next package is putting
in the foundation. We really
10 focus on that package
and how we can get multiple
11 vendors, qualified
vendors, to work on our project.
12 And that way, it's not
just the top guys that get the
13 work. We're trying to get more participation with
14 companies that are not
as big as some of the bigger
15 investors.
16 MR.
MULLALLY: Mr. Chairman, if I could
17 add something. You know, one of the focuses of the
18 staff as we monitor
this is to make sure -- you know,
19 we want to emphasize
that we want these things to stay
20 in Missouri and in St.
Louis, people. Our businesses
21 have still got to be
competitive and we want to make
22 sure this doesn't
become an environment for influence
23 peddling. We've watched it in other states. We saw it
24 happen when Governor
Edwards was the head of Louisiana,
25 or you know, there's
some indication that it may be
00101
01 going on in
Pennsylvania now, another state that has a
02 long political
history. We don't want it to become an
03 environment for
influence peddling.
04 So the people,
the business, we want them to be
05 Missourians, we want a
lot of minority and women on
06 business participation,
but they've got to be
07 competitive. This isn't going to be Let's Make a
Deal.
08 And so that's one of
the things that's really a focus
09 for the staff as we
watch this stuff. I think it's
10 very important to say
that in a public setting.
11
COMMISSIONER JONES: Oh,
absolutely.
12 MR.
KORTMAN: Our excavation package, as
13 you know, we broke
ground a couple months ago and we
14 really are about a
month ahead on our excavation piece
15 here. We are now between 90 and 95 percent done
with
16 the excavation
piece. We have about 150,000 yards of
17 material that needed to
come out of the city project.
18 That material has
actually been put onto the county
19 project. It's sort of two-fold win-win
situation. We
20 needed fill for county
project, so we've utilized the
21 material from the city
project for the county project.
22 As you know, the county
project is a little low and we
23 want, we want to use
that material, which is good
24 material, for that
project. So it was a win-win
25 situation. So we are about 90 percent done now with
00102
01 that excavation
work.
02 The shortening
and lightening work for the
03 basin, the tension work
that will pull the rest of the
04 dirt back and support
the roads around the project,
05 that work now is about
65 percent done. The long legs
06 of that retention
system are basically complete now.
07 We're working on the
short legs. All of that's going
08 very well. Again, as I mentioned to you, the bid
09 packages are out now,
and we just actually received
10 bids for the footing
and foundation package. We're
11 going to be awarding
that this coming week, and then
12 we'll have our
contractors on board to start the
13 footing and foundation
work.
14 In terms of our
design packages, we're complete
15 now with the frame
design, which is the high-rise
16 component of the
structure, the concrete frame. All of
17 that design now is
complete. And then each of our
18 packages, we'll just
sort of update you when we report
19 on a monthly basis and
sort of tell you what we're
20 doing and how the
packages are going out. So that's an
21 update on the
city.
22 As you know, we
broke ground in the county. We
23 submitted our work
plans to MDNR for the remediation
24 package and that has
been accepted by the MDNR and we
25 are now working on our
alleviation plan. We are
00103
01 engaging a soils
company, a company that does our sub-
02 soil
investigation. In the past, we have
used TSI for
03 a lot of our work. They were working on the city
04 project, and they will
be working on the county
05 project, as well. And they are a minority firm.
06 We're in the
early phases of the county project,
07 but it's, we're
starting to get the ball rolling on
08 that project, and we're
excited about the plans. They
09 really, I think, they
updated you a couple months ago
10 and one of these days,
we hope to make a presentation
11 to show where we
are. Do you have questions for us?
12
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Take lots
of
13 pictures of that.
14 MR. KORTMAN: You bet.
We have a website,
15 actually, where you can
see.
16 MR.
HUNDLEY: Did we mention the web
17 camera?
18 MR.
KORTMAN: Okay. We do have web cam so
19 you can see the city
project, the activity that goes on
20 every day. So you can actually get on our website and
21 then take a look and
see what's happening with our
22 project.
23
COMMISSIONER JONES: I guess at
one time,
24 you had a lot of irate
Rams fans because you took away
25 their tailgate, but
since we aren't winning, I guess
00104
01 it's okay now.
02 MR.
HUNDLEY: That's not what we wanted.
03
COMMISSIONER JONES: Right. You're good
04 to go now, I guess.
05 COMMISSIONER
HINRICHS: When you open up,
06 they'll start in
again. And they'll use your parking
07 garage.
08 MR.
HUNDLEY: We kind of expect that.
09 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any questions?
10 MR.
HUNDLEY: Thank you very much.
11 MR.
KORTMAN: Thank you.
12 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Kevin, did you have
13 someone else?
14 MR.
MULLALLY: Yes. Mr. Chairman,
15 although it's our
preference that folks contact us so
16 that we can manage our
time -- we don't want to exclude
17 anybody but we would
just like to be able to manage our
18 time. Mark Andrews had asked me during the meeting
if
19 he could have a few
minutes to talk with the
20 Commission. Mark is the President of Casino Watch. He
21 is always a very
gracious person to deal with and we
22 enjoy working with him
and you said that you had no
23 objection, so --
24 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: If you would?
25 MR. MARK
ANDREWS: I will definitely keep it
00105
01 brief.
02 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Thank you.
03 MR.
ANDREWS: And I thank you for letting
04 me speak with you for
just a moment. I was at a
05 meeting of the Missouri
Joint Committee on Gaming and
06 Wagering last week and
talked to them. They are deeply
07 considering action
about gaming in the next
08 session that's coming
up. And so I spoke to them a
09 little bit about a
trend which I'm concerned about. At
10 Casino Watch, we have
been monitoring and watching what
11 your annual reports say
every year and we've done an
12 eight-year recap of
various items in the annual report.
13 One of the ones
that we've seen is that table
14 games, the more
entertaining part of gaming, has sort
15 of leveled out and, in
some cases, even gone down. And
16 what had risen to
tremendous heights is gambling with
17 slot machines.
18 Slot machines
are the most addictive type of
19 gambling available, and
I've included a package here,
20 which I would leave
here for your consideration at a
21 later time, a report
from an Eastern university is now
22 on their second study
on the addictiveness of slot
23 machines and they have
concluded that slot machines are
24 three more times more
addictive -- a person can be
25 addicted to gambling
three times faster -- than the
00106
01 other traditional
methods of gambling.
02 And I think
Missouri has had a philosophy from
03 the very beginning of
wanting to offer entertainment.
04 It certainly had a
philosophy of regulation, which I
05 must say you've done
very well. Missouri is looked
06 upon as the regulator
of gaming across the country.
07 But it seems from the
facts now, that Missouri grows
08 the most addictive kind
of gambling and it curtails and
09 cuts back the more
entertaining type of gambling. And
10 that has to do also
with employment. If you look at
11 the charts in the last
eight years, employment has come
12 down, and so the state
will ask -- so we don't offer
13 quite the employment
that we thought might come years
14 ago.
15 I asked the
Gaming Commission several months ago
16 -- in fact it might
have been a year ago, if the pain
17 of addiction rises to a
level that is very, very
18 difficult to deal with,
will the Commission do
19 something about
it? And I think I got a very truthful
20 answer. The answer was no. We operate at the
21 direction of the
General Assembly. The General
22 Assembly says, "We
will license gambling. We will
23 regulate it, but we
want it to be competitive with
24 other
states."
25 I guess what I
would ask, or I would like you to
00107
01 think about, is would
you look at the addictiveness of
02 slot machines, and
would you make a recommendation to
03 the General Assembly
that they study it? I think in my
04 greatest world of
requests, if I could get the State of
05 Missouri to say, you
know, "We don't want to addict
06 people any more than
is, that has to happen. We do not
07 want to cause
harm."
08 Let's put a cap
on slot machines now. We have
09 17,875 slot machines in
Missouri. Our neighbor to the
10 east has 9,600. So we're almost double and we're
11 getting ready to open
two new, major casinos here in
12 the St. Louis area, and
we'll add on 5,000 more slot
13 machines. That will give us nearly 23,000 slot
14 machines that our
university studies show they are the
15 most addictive form of
gambling around. And I just
16 don't think that is
Missouri's philosophy that we
17 entered into.
18 So I'll leave
that with you, and I will leave
19 these with your
Executive Director in hopes that
20 sometime in the future,
maybe before the next session
21 opens with the General
Assembly, you'll give some
22 thought to the
addictiveness of slot machines and, and
23 just keeping it under
control the way Missouri is known
24 to be doing.
25 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Thank you.
00108
01 MR. ANDREWS: Thank you.
02 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Kevin, I think he
03 brought up some fair
issues. We're going to take that
04 under consideration and
I'll throw it back to you.
05 MR.
MULLALLY: Yes. As usual, Mr. Andrews
06 raises some interesting
points for discussion and gives
07 some good information
for us. I think it's always
08 excellent to have a
variety of perspectives as we look
09 at this issue, and he
provides a very needed one and we
10 always appreciate
talking with him. I think one of the
11 things that I think is
worthy, worth pointing out, and
12 this is not to be
argumentative. But one of the things
13 that he talked about
was that we encourage gambling
14 that curtails
entertainment, I believe is the word that
15 he used.
16 I think that one
of the accomplishments of this
17 Commission since its
creation in 1993, is that it's
18 been able to develop a
gaming market in Missouri that I
19 believe is consistent
with Missouri's values and what
20 they, at least the
majority of them, obviously,
21 approved, in that they
didn't want rampant, widespread
22 gambling on every
street corner. And if you look at
23 the quality of the
facilities, the developments, are, I
24 think, in large part
because of the gradual approach to
25 licensure that this
Commission has taken and its
00109
01 emphasis on quality
operators. When you compare that
02 to what goes on in
other states, I mean, if you look at
03 the Kansas City and St.
Louis markets and the quality
04 of those facilities,
what you see in Tunica and Biloxi,
05 which are both
spectacularly successful markets. I
06 would -- my opinion and
I believe the opinion of most
07 folks, is that those,
the quality of those facilities
08 is far superior than
most of the casinos in
09 Mississippi.
10 And my point
here is that the reinvestment rate,
11 which is something we
have pointed to as another
12 successful policy
implementation of this Commission, 60
13 percent of the
operating cash flow that has been
14 generated by the
casinos in Missouri, statewide, has
15 been reinvested back
into the State of Missouri. So
16 for every 100 million
dollars, the participants in the
17 industry have made,
made from Missouri, they've put $60
18 million of that back
into Missouri. Most of that has
19 been in non-gaming -- I
won't say most. A good portion
20 of that has been in
non-gaming entertainment amenities.
21 So that's where I
would think there's a little
22 more to that issue of
you know, curtailing
23 entertainment. It's been in restaurants, movie
24 theaters, sports bars,
hotels, meeting space, those
25 type of things, and
concert halls. All those types of
00110
01 things that are
non-gaming entertainment that bring the
02 focus of this where it
should be, that it's a night out
03 of entertainment with
discretionary income.
04 But it is a very
interesting topic, and I think
05 we will be able to put
some information together for
06 you and something that
we should consider as we go
07 about the task of next
year's annual report.
08 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Is there anything else?
09 MR.
MULLALLY: No. We will have a closed
10 meeting. We'll have to have it here, so I'll have to
11 ask everybody to
leave.
12
COMMISSIONER BIELE: I move to
close as we
13 need to receive,
discuss, and consider the following
14 matters: Legal Actions, Cause of Action and
Litigation
15 under Section 610.021;
Investigatory and Proprietary
16 and Application
Records, Information and Summaries
17 under Section 610.021,
Sub-section 14; and 313.847.1.
18 Closed Minutes or other
closed records that are
19 610.021, Sub-section
14; and 313.847.1, RSMo.
20
COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Second.
21 CHAIRMAN
BARTCH: Any further discussion? Please
call the roll.
22 MS.
FRANKS: Chairman Bartch?
23 CHAIRMAN BARTCH: Approved.
24 MS. FRANKS:
Commissioner Hinrichs?
25 COMMISSIONER HINRICHS: Approved.
00111
MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Biele?
COMMISSIONER BIELE: Approved.
MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Jones?
COMMISSIONER JONES: Approved.
MS. FRANKS: Commissioner Shull?
COMMISSIONER SHULL: Approved.
(Thereupon, the meeting was adjourned.)
00112
01 STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS
02 COUNTY OF PIKE )
03 I, Elizabeth R.
Blackburn, a Certified Court
04 Reporter within and for
the State of Missouri, do
05 certify that I was
present at the Renaissance Hotel,
06 9801 Natural Bridge
Road, in the County of St. Louis,
07 State of Missouri, on
the 1st day of December, A.D.,
08 2005; that thereafter,
a hearing was held, commencing
09 at 9:00 in the morning
of that day, that all
10 proceedings which then
transpired were
11 contemporaneously
reduced to voice writing by me, and
12 later transcribed into
typewriting, and that the
13 foregoing 110 pages are
a true and accurate transcript
14 of the record of
proceedings made by me at that time.
15 IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand
16 this 13th day of
December, A.D., 2005.
17
_______________________________
18
Elizabeth R. Blackburn #1092
Certified Court Reporter within
19
and for the State of Missouri