1 1 STATE OF NEW JERSEY 2 CASINO CONTROL COMMISSION 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 5 PUBLIC MEETING NO. 07-02-21 6 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8 9 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10 Atlantic City Commission Offices 11 Joseph P. Lordi Public Meeting Room - First Floor 12 Tennessee Avenue and Boardwalk 13 Atlantic City, New Jersey 08401 14 10:32 a.m. to 12:43 p.m. 15 16 17 Certified Shorthand Reporter: Darlene Sillitoe 18 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19 20 CIPOLLONI & ASSOCIATES, INC. 21 CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS 22 1125 ATLANTIC AVENUE, SUITE 416 23 ATLANTIC CITY, NEW JERSEY 08401 24 (609) 348-9190 25 www.cipolloni-associates.com 2 1 B E F O R E : 2 CASINO CONTROL COMMISSION: LINDA M. KASSEKERT, CHAIR 3 MICHAEL A. FEDORKO, VICE CHAIR MICHAEL C. EPPS, COMMISSIONER 4 WILLIAM T. SOMMELING, COMMISSIONER 5 PRESENT FOR THE CASINO CONTROL COMMISSION: DARYL W. NANCE, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST 6 LISA SPENGLER, PUBLICATIONS COORDINATOR 7 OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL: LEONARD J. DIGIACOMO, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL 8 DAVID C. MISSIMER, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL MARY WOZNIAK, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL 9 STEVEN M. INGIS, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL ROBERT BARNEY, SENIOR COUNSEL 10 TERESA M. NAGENGAST, SENIOR COUNSEL SETH H. BRILIANT, SENIOR COUNSEL 11 LON E. MAMOLEN, SENIOR COUNSEL BERNADETTE T. FRIGEN, PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 12 CLAIRE FRANK, PROGRAM SUPERVISOR/SENIOR EEO COORDINATOR 13 14 DIVISION OF LICENSING: RICHARD ROSS, PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 15 DORIS MANZANO, SECRETARIAL ASSISTANT (Interpreter) 16 DIVISION OF GAMING ENFORCEMENT: DEPUTY ATTORNEYS GENERAL 17 JAMES ARMSTRONG, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL BRIAN BISCIEGLIA, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 18 TIMOTHY FICCHI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL MARY JO FLAHERTY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 19 JAMES FOGARTY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL DOROTHY TURI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 A P P E A R A N C E S : 2 ITEM NO. 11 TERESA M. NAGENGAST, SENIOR COUNSEL DOROTHY TURI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 3 FOX ROTHSCHILD, LLP BY: NICHOLAS CASIELLO, JR., ESQ. 4 FOR: ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES 5 ITEM NO. 12 LEONARD J. DiGIACOMO, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL 6 JAMES FOGARTY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL FOX ROTHSCHILD, LLP 7 BY: NICHOLAS CASIELLO, JR., ESQ. FOR: MGM MIRAGE 8 ITEM NO. 13 MARY WOZNIAK, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL 9 DOROTHY TURI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL COOPER LEVENSON 10 BY: LYNNE N. HUGHES, ESQ. FOR: HARRAH'S OPERATING COMPANY 11 ITEM NO. 14 CLAIRE FRANK, PROGRAM MANAGER 12 JAMES FOGARTY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL FOX ROTHSCHILD, LLP 13 BY: NICHOLAS CASIELLO, JR., ESQ. FOR: MGM MIRAGE 14 ITEM NO. 15 CLAIRE FRANK, PROGRAM MANAGER 15 MARY JO FLAHERTY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL PATRICIA M. WILD, ESQ. 16 FOR: HILTON/RESORTS 17 ITEM NO. 17 SETH H. BRILIANT, SENIOR COUNSEL TIMOTHY FICCHI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 18 BY: FREDERICK CUNNINGHAM, VICE PRESIDENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS 19 FOR: TRUMP PLAZA ASSOCIATES 20 ITEM NO. 18 SETH H. BRILIANT, SENIOR COUNSEL TIMOTHY FICCHI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 21 BY: LEO PREVITI, ESQ. FOR: IGT 22 23 24 25 4 1 AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING NO. 07-02-21 2 FEBRUARY 21, 2007, 10:32 a.m. ITEM PAGE VOTE 3 1 Ratification of the minutes of 9 9 4 February 7, 2007 2 Applications for employee and casino 5 service industry licenses: 9 applications for initial and/or renewal 10 10 6 of casino key and casino employee licenses 14 applications for initial and/or renewal 10 11 7 of casino key and casino employee licenses Applications for initial and renewal of 8 casino key employee licenses and for qualification: 9 Michael D. Anderson, Vice President of 11 12 Hotel Operations for Bally's Park Place, Inc. 10 Francis X. McCarthy, Jr., Senior Vice 11 12 President of Finance and Administration 11 For Resorts International, Inc. John A. Ranere, Vice President of 11 12 12 Marketing Casino for Bally's Park Place, Inc. 3 Petition of Progressive Gaming 12 14 13 International Corp., for the temporary qualification of Heather Rollo, Bruce 14 Rubio, and Zachary A. Vela pursuant to NJAC 19:51-1.14B and for the removal of a 15 casino service industry license to Progressive Gaming International Corp., 16 Pursuant to NJSA 5:12-92(a) (PRN 0110706) 4 Stipulations of settlement and consent 17 agreements: a) Robert M. McNellis (07-0074-EA) 14 16 18 b) Patricia Rivera (06-0528-EA) 14 16 c) Foumba V. Toure (06-0463-ER) 14 16 19 d) Anthony Stizza (06-0274-RC) 14 16 e) Sharon R. Collins (a/k/a 14 16 20 Sharon R. Fitzgerald (06-0616-EA) f) Leon R. Josey (06-0021-EA) 14 16 21 g) Kevin R. Mays (07-00072-EA) 14 16 h) Angel Ojeda (07-0071-EA) 14 16 22 i) Paul M. Andrews (05-0749-RC) 14 16 j) Andrew M. Suppi (06-0234-RC) 14 16 23 k) Robert D. Davis (06-0391-ER) adj. l) Ramel L. Gibson (06-0420-EA) 14 16 24 m) Vikas Patel (07-0073-EA) 14 16 n) Hong D. Pham (07-0075-EA) 14 16 25 o) Jean M. Sands (06-0524-EA) 14 16 p) Amneris Rodriguez (06-0142-RC) 14 16 5 1 CONTINUED AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING NO. 07-02-21 2 FEBRUARY 21, 2007, 10:32 a.m. ITEM PAGE VOTE 3 5 Initial Decision in application of 17 57 Mohammad Y. Khan (04-0802-EA; 05-0213-ER) 4 6 Stipulation of settlement in application 58 59 of Steven L. Buckley (06-0460-EA) 5 7 Petition of Karl P. Famiano for early 59 70 reapplication (06-0625-RA) 6 8 Reconsideration of Commission Final Orders due to non-compliance of conditions therein: 7 a) Trenita Betterson (06-0536-NC) 70 74 b) Robin A. Bing (06-0545-NC) 70 74 8 c) Christopher R. Browne (06-0548-NC) 70 74 d) Amos M. Jones (06-0555-NC) 74 83 9 e) Terry A. Reed (06-0551-NC) 70 74 f) James C. Cephas (06-0543-NC) 70 74 10 9 Applications for suspension: a) Wilfred S. Black (07-0067-RC) 84 85 11 b) John W. Knight (07-0090-RC) 84 85 c) Felix R. Pluma (07-0068-RC) 85 98 12 10 Preliminary hearing concerning the exclusions of: a) Antonello P. Pietrafesa (07-0047-EL) 99 102 13 b) Christian P. Scillia (07-0048-EL) 99 102 11 Petition of Aristocrat Technologies 104 106 14 for waiver of qualification requirement of Colonial First State Investments Limited 15 (PRN 3200609) 12 Petition of MGM MIRAGE for a waiver of 107 108 16 the qualification requirement for Ricky E. Arpin as its Vice President-Financial 17 Accounting (PRN 0180704) 13 Petition of Harrah's Operating Company, 102 104 18 Inc., (HOC), Marina Associates, Atlantic City Showboat, Inc., Bally's Park Place 19 and Boardwalk Regency Corp. For waiver of qualification for an Officer of HOC (Vice 20 President Entertainment) (PRN 0380704) 14 Petition of MGM MIRAGE requesting 109 111 21 permission for James G. Dumond to perform the duties and exercise the powers of Vice 22 President-Compliance for MGM MIRAGE pending plenary qualification in connection with 23 the casino license of Marina District Development Company, LLC (PRN 0240706) 24 25 6 1 CONTINUED AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING NO. 07-02-21 2 FEBRUARY 21, 2007, 10:32 a.m. ITEM PAGE VOTE 3 15 Consideration of the qualification of 111 113 Michael J. Romano to serve as Vice President 4 of Regulatory Compliance for Resorts International Holdings, LLC, and Colony 5 RIH Holdings, Inc., Intermediary Companies of Casino Licensees RIH Acquisitions NJ, 6 LLC (Hilton) and Resorts International Hotel, Inc. 7 16 Proposed publication of readoption of 114 114 NJAC 19:43 (Casino Licensees) 8 17 Petition of Trump Plaza Associates (d/b/a 115 117 Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino) for an 9 amendment to its Certificate of Operation and Casino Hotel Alcoholic Beverage License 10 to permit a casino reconfiguration (PRN 0330704) 18 Petition of IGT to terminate the "Elvis" 117 119 11 Slot System and to transfer its progressive jackpot to the "Wheel of Fortune $.01" Slot 12 System (PRN 0360701) 19 Proposed publication of amendments to adj. 13 NJAC 19:47-7 ("Last Call for Bets" in mini-baccarat) 14 20 Proposed adoption of amendments concerning 119 120 alternative procedure for pre-shuffling 15 and pre-inspection of cards 21 Proposed temporary adoption of amendments 121 124 16 for "fire bet" in craps; authorization of rulemaking experiment for "fire bet" pursuant 17 to NJSA 5:12-69e 22 Proposed publication and temporary 124 125 18 Adoption of amendment to NJAC 19:47-20.11 (Pair Plus Wager Pay Tables in Three Card 19 Poker with Mini Royal) 20 21 22 23 24 25 7 1 E X H I B I T S : 2 ITEM NO. 2 DESCRIPTION EVD 3 4 EL-1 Remand for hearings 9 license X applications 5 EL-2 Grant 14 licenses X 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 (Exhibits retained by Commission.) 25 8 1 (Public Meeting 07-02-21 was commenced 2 at 10:32 a.m.) 3 MR. NANCE: I'd like to read an opening 4 statement: 5 This is to advise the general public 6 that in compliance with Chapter 231 of the 7 Public Laws of 1975 entitled the "Open Public 8 Meetings Act," the New Jersey Casino Control 9 Commission on October 16th, 2006, filed with 10 the Secretary of State at the State House in 11 Trenton an annual meeting schedule. On October 12 16th, copies were mailed to the Press of 13 Atlantic City, the Newark Star Ledger. 14 Members of the press will be permitted 15 to take photographs, and we would ask that this 16 be done in a manner which is not disruptive or 17 distracting to the Commission. 18 The use of cellular telephones in the 19 public meeting room while the Commission is in 20 session is prohibited. 21 Any members of the public who wish to 22 address the Commission will be given the 23 opportunity to do so before the Commission 24 adjourns for the day. 25 Please stand for the Pledge of 9 ITEM NO. 1 1 Allegiance. 2 (The flag salute was recited.) 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Good morning. 4 MR. NANCE: Good morning. 5 The matters discussed in closed session 6 were: Employee enterprise license matters. 7 The Commission approved the February 7, 8 2007, closed session minutes. 9 Litigation update regarding: Wirtz 10 versus Casino Control Commission and Division 11 of Gaming Enforcement; 12 And Tyron J. Floyd versus the Casino 13 Control Commission and the Sands Hotel Casino; 14 And Husain versus the Casino Control 15 Commission, et al. 16 Item No. 1, ratification of the minutes 17 of February 7th, 2007, public meeting. 18 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Move to 19 approve. 20 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 22 made and seconded. All in favor? 23 (Ayes.) 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 25 (No response.) 10 ITEM NO. 2 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 2 MR. NANCE: Item No. 2, application for 3 employee and casino service industry licenses. 4 This agenda item will be entered as Exhibit 5 List 1 and 2. 6 Exhibit List 1 consists of 9 7 applications for initial and/or renewal of 8 casino key and employee licenses. 9 The Division has objected to licensure. 10 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to remand 11 for hearings. 12 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 14 made and seconded. All in favor? 15 (Ayes.) 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 17 (No response.) 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 19 MR. NANCE: This agenda item will be 20 entered as Exhibit List 2. 21 Exhibit List 2 consists of 14 22 applications for initial and/or renewal of 23 casino key and casino employee licenses. 24 Staff and the Division have recommended 25 that these licenses be granted. 11 ITEM NO. 2 1 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Move to grant 2 application. 3 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 5 made and seconded. All in favor? 6 (Ayes.) 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 8 (No response.) 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 10 MR. NANCE: For consideration are the 11 following applications for initial and/or 12 renewal of casino key licenses and for 13 qualification: For Michael D. Anderson, Vice 14 President of Hotel Operations for Bally Park 15 Place, Inc.; Francis X. McCarthy, Jr., Senior 16 Vice President of the Finance and 17 Administration or Resorts International, Inc.; 18 and John Ranere, Vice President of Marketing 19 Casino for Bally's Park Place, Inc. 20 Staff and the Division have recommended 21 that these applications be granted. 22 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Motion to grant 23 initial and/or renewal of key license and for 24 qualification.. 25 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 12 ITEM NO. 3 1 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion has been made 3 and seconded. This is a roll call vote. 4 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Sommeling? 5 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Yes. 6 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Epps? 7 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yes. 8 MR. NANCE: Vice Chair Fedorko? 9 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yes. 10 MR. NANCE: Chair Kassekert? 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. 12 MR. NANCE: The record will reflect that 13 the motion is unanimous. 14 Item No. 3 Petition No. 0110706 of 15 Progressive Gaming International Corp. is 16 requesting a finding of temporary qualification 17 for Heather Rollo, Bruce Rubio, and Zachary A. 18 Vela for a period of 18 months pursuant to NJAC 19 19:51-1.14B(f) and the issuance of a casino 20 service industry license application of 21 Progressive Gaming International Corp., 22 pursuant to NJSA 5:12-92(a). 23 Mr. Ross? 24 MR. ROSS: Good morning. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Good morning. 13 ITEM NO. 3 1 MR. ROSS: This morning, Progressive 2 Gaming International Corporation, who I 3 understood was to be represented by Lynne 4 Kaufman of Cooper Levenson. And we have Rick 5 McDonough from the Division of Gaming 6 Enforcement. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Good morning. 8 Good morning. Mr. McDonough. 9 MR. McDONOUGH: Good morning. 10 The Division filed the appropriate 11 reports that you should have in front of you. 12 We recommend renewing the license and granting 13 the petitions for temporary qualification of 14 the three named individuals. 15 If you have any questions, I'll be happy 16 to answer them. 17 Thank you. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 19 Any questions? 20 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 21 Madame Chair. 22 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to approve 23 the petition and find the following individuals 24 temporary qualified to exercise the powers and 25 assume the duties: Heather Rollo as Executive 14 ITEM NO. 4 1 Vice President, Chief Finance Officer and 2 Treasurer; Bruce Rubio as Vice President of the 3 Professional Services; and Zachary A. Vela as 4 Vice President of Operations for a period of 18 5 months pursuant to NJAC 19:51-1.14B(f); 6 And grant the gaming-related casino 7 service industry license application of 8 Progressive Gaming International Corporation 9 pursuant to NJSA 5:12-92a. 10 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion is made and 12 seconded. This is a roll call vote. 13 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Sommeling? 14 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Yes. 15 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Epps? 16 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yes. 17 MR. NANCE: Vice Chair Fedorko? 18 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yes. 19 MR. NANCE: Chair Kassekert? 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. 21 MR. NANCE: The record will reflect that 22 the motion is unanimous. 23 MR. McDONOUGH: Thank you. 24 MR. NANCE: Item No. 4, stipulation of 25 settlement and consent agreements. 15 ITEM NO. 4 1 When I call your name, please come 2 forward, standing behind the center table, 3 spreading across the room so that you may be 4 seen. 5 Robert McNellis, Patricia Rivera, Foumba 6 Toure, Anthony Stizza, Sharon Collins, Leon 7 Josey, Kevin Mays, Angel Ojeda, Paul Andrews, 8 Andrew Suppi. 9 Stipulation of settlement of Robert D. 10 Davis has been adjourned. 11 Ramel Gibson, Vikas Patel, Hong Pham, 12 Jean Sands, and Amneris Rodriguez. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 14 I'm going to ask that you each state 15 your name for the record, starting with you, 16 sir? 17 MR. GIBSON: Ramel Gibson. 18 MR. OJEDA: Angel Ojeda. 19 MR. JOSEY: Leon Josey. 20 MS. SANDS: Jean Sands. 21 MS. COLLINS: Sharon Collins. 22 MS. RIVERA: Patricia Rivera. 23 MR. TOURE: Foumba Toure. 24 MR. MAYS: Kevin Mays. 25 MR. PATEL: Vikas Patel. 16 ITEM NO. 4 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: And the two ladies? 2 MS. PHAM: Hong Pham. 3 MS. RODRIGUEZ: Amneris Rodriguez. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. In a moment we 5 are going to vote with the stipulations which 6 you've agreed to with the Division of Gaming 7 Enforcement. I'm going to ask at this point if 8 any of you wish to be heard on your matter. 9 You don't have to say anything if you don't 10 want to. 11 Does anyone wish to be heard? Okay. 12 Mr. Armstrong? 13 MR. ARMSTRONG: Chair, the Division has 14 nothing further. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 16 Any questions? 17 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to grant. 18 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 20 made and seconded. All in favor? 21 (Ayes.) 22 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 23 (No response.) 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 25 Thank you very much for coming. Good 17 ITEM NO. 5 1 luck. 2 MR. NANCE: Item No. 5, initial decision 3 in application of Mohammad Y. Kahn. 4 Mr. Barney? Sorry. I didn't see you. 5 MR. BARNEY: Madame Chair, 6 Commissioners, the initial decision by 7 Commissioner Epps, it's an application of 8 Mohammad Kahn for key license and his renewal 9 application for casino employee license. 10 Mr. Armstrong is here for the Division. 11 I don't know if Mr. Kahn is here at this 12 time. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is Mr. Kahn here? 14 Okay. We'll hear from the Division, 15 then. 16 Mr. Armstrong? 17 MR. ARMSTRONG: Thank you, Chair. Good 18 morning. Good morning, Commissioners. 19 The Division filed exceptions on 20 December 22nd of last year. I want to thank 21 the Commission for additional time to prepare 22 these exceptions. The outcome of the initial 23 decision is important to the Division. 24 The Division believes the initial 25 decision is wrong, that Mr. Kahn should be 18 ITEM NO. 5 1 denied licensure because he failed, number one, 2 to cooperate with the Division's investigation; 3 two, failed to demonstrate his financial 4 stability, integrity, and responsibility; and 5 three, failed to demonstrate his good 6 character, honesty, and integrity. These are 7 all burdens that the -- that Mr. Kahn had to 8 overcome pursuant to the Casino Control Act in 9 order to demonstrate his qualification for key 10 licensure and licensure renewal. The record of 11 this matter does not support the findings of 12 the initial decision that Mr. Kahn met his 13 burden in these issues. 14 Commissioners, in 2003 Commissioner Epps 15 issued an initial decision which was affirmed 16 and adopted by the full Commission in which the 17 Commission denied a key license renewal when 18 the licensee tried to shield herself from 19 financial inquiries by the Division with regard 20 to $95,000 after she claimed that she gave the 21 money to her husband, and her husband refused 22 to cooperate with the Division as to where the 23 money went. 24 Commissioner Epps' initial decision 25 indicates of the renewal application of Muriel 19 ITEM NO. 5 1 Moy was appealed by Muriel Moy. On November 2 18th of 2003 the Appellate Division of the 3 Superior Court of New Jersey upheld the 4 Commission's initial decision in Moy by also 5 holding that the licensees must demonstrate 6 their financial stability, integrity, and good 7 character, honesty, and integrity by clear and 8 convincing evidence. 9 The decision in Moy also held that 10 licensees have a continuing burden to cooperate 11 with the Division in investigation. These are 12 all principles long settled and deemed law here 13 in New Jersey. The true law in Moy, the 14 influential decision, was licensees are not 15 permitted to shield themselves from financial 16 inquiry through a spouse. While the facts in 17 Moy and Kahn are inverse of each other, Moy is 18 the controlling law here. Moy shielded herself 19 from where money in her checking account went 20 through her husband. Mr. Kahn shielded himself 21 from financial inquiries as to where money in 22 his checking account was then wired out of the 23 country came from. Through his brother. 24 All the Division wanted to do was to 25 accomplish through its investigation -- was to 20 ITEM NO. 5 1 be able to tell the Commission that it was okay 2 to grant Kahn -- Mr. Kahn -- the key license 3 because this money came from a legitimate 4 source. Early in the Division's investigation, 5 examination of Mr. Kahn's checking account at 6 First Union Bank for a ten-month period of 2002 7 showed that Mr. Kahn made two deposits -- 8 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Kahn? 9 Excuse me, Mr. Armstrong. Mr. Kahn is 10 here. 11 Why don't you come forward and sit. At 12 the table. 13 I'm sorry. You can continue. 14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Chair, early in the 15 Division's investigation, the examination of 16 Mr. Kahn's checking account at the First Union 17 Bank for a ten-month period in 2002 shows that 18 Mr. Kahn made two deposits that were much 19 larger than his normal deposits, and wire 20 transfers to a bank in Pakistan in amounts 21 comparable to these large deposits. These 22 deposits and wire transfers were unusual given 23 Mr. Kahn's checking account records. And the 24 Division was rightly to inquire further about 25 where this money came from and where the money 21 ITEM NO. 5 1 was going. 2 Where the money was going, Pakistan, 3 made sense since Mr. Kahn was an immigrant from 4 Pakistan, and he had relatives there. It's 5 commonplace for implants to the United States 6 to wire money to their relatives in their home 7 country. It is where the money came from, the 8 source of the money -- more than $11,000, one 9 of the deposits more than $9,000 -- that gave 10 the Division concern. 11 Mr. Kahn told the Division 12 investigation-- initially told the Division 13 investigation that the money came from his 14 brother who saved it. When asked why his 15 brother didn't wire the money himself, Mr. Kahn 16 implied that his bank was faster and more 17 reliable, presumably so, than Mr. Kahn's 18 brother or Mr. Kahn's brother's bank. 19 The Division tried to determine that the 20 money came from legitimate source. We were 21 hoping to see Mr. Kahn's brother's bank account 22 to see that a number of deposits and also 23 withdrawals that coincide with Mr. Kahn's 24 deposits and wire transfers. 25 During the second interview, Mr. Kahn 22 ITEM NO. 5 1 told the Division investigator his brother 2 didn't have a bank account, that this brother 3 saved the money at home. 4 At a third interview, when asked for 5 proof of his brother's income such as tax 6 returns, pay stubs, or W-2 forms, Mr. Kahn 7 admitted that this brother didn't file tax 8 returns because his brother was working for a 9 cousin off the books and was paid cash. Mr. 10 Kahn also refused to ask his brother to 11 cooperate with the Division's investigation. 12 Because Mr. Kahn was not providing the 13 Division with anything other than his verbal 14 explanations, the Division couldn't tell the 15 Commission it was okay to give Mr. Kahn a key 16 license because the Division couldn't be sure 17 where the money came from. The Division 18 couldn't confirm that the money came from a 19 legitimate source. The Division did start to 20 become concerned that the money that did come 21 from Mr. Kahn's brother, it may have been money 22 earned illegally in that there was no record of 23 Mr. Kahn's brother making this money, and thus 24 not paying taxes on the income. 25 The Division decided to do a sworn 23 ITEM NO. 5 1 interview of Mr. Kahn. The sworn interview was 2 not productive, and the Division came away with 3 more questions regarding Mr. Kahn than answers. 4 And we still have nothing definitive to show 5 the source of the money other than what Mr. 6 Kahn was telling us, that his brother saved it 7 at home. At the conclusive of the sworn 8 interview, as followed up by a letter to Mr. 9 Kahn, the Division asked Mr. Kahn to provide 10 the Division with specific records and 11 evidence. 12 In the Division's letter sent to Mr. 13 Kahn on September 22nd, 2003, we asked Mr. Kahn 14 for, one, Mr. Kahn's additional bank records 15 for the periods of January 1998 through 16 December 2001 and for January 2003 to what was 17 the present at the time, August of 2003. These 18 records, when they were eventually provided by 19 Mr. Kahn 18 months later after the letter, on 20 March 30th, 2005, while still conducting 21 further investigation in regard to Mr. Kahn, 22 showed that there was six additional wire 23 transfers during this time period from 1998 to 24 2003. There was totally more than 14,000 -- 25 totaling $14,250. 24 ITEM NO. 5 1 Mr. Kahn's explanation in regard to the 2 source of these additional -- and the money for 3 these additional money transfers was not that 4 it came from his brother but that he saved it 5 at home. The initial decision in this matter 6 never addresses the six other wire transfers or 7 where the source of that money came from, 8 $14,250. 9 The Division also asked for two 10 particular items, the deposit slips from the 11 two deposits made for the wire transfers in 12 into 2002 when Mr. Kahn said his brother was 13 the source of that money. We were hoping to 14 see these deposit slips because they would 15 reflect that the deposit were, in fact, made in 16 cash. Because Mr. Kahn was reporting that his 17 brother was saving this money at home. We also 18 asked Mr. Kahn to get a sworn statement from 19 his brother claiming that he was, in fact, the 20 source of the money, at least for the two wire 21 transfers in 2002. 22 Commissioners, we never received these. 23 These are documents that presumably the 24 deposits during the sworn interview, Mr. Kahn 25 told us he had them. He never provided them. 25 ITEM NO. 5 1 Not in regard to our letter, not during 2 subsequent investigation of him, and not at the 3 hearing. We've never received them at all. We 4 never received a statement from his brother in 5 regard to being a source of the money. 6 Number four, in that letter we also 7 asked for a statement from Mr. Kahn's cousin 8 saying that he employed his brother off the 9 books. And we, in fact, did get that -- again 10 around March 30th, 2006, 18 months after we 11 requested it. But we also asked for his credit 12 card records, which we received 18 months 13 later. And Mr. Kahn was asked in that letter 14 and also at the conclusion of the sworn 15 interview if he would have his brother 16 cooperate with the Division's investigation to 17 determine for sure that his brother was the 18 source of the money and legal source. Mr. Kahn 19 ignored or demands in the letter and our 20 demands in the other sworn interview and never 21 provided a lot of the evidence that we actually 22 asked for. Mr. Kahn took no action at all 23 until the Division actually objected to his key 24 application and his renewal application for 25 this 21 license. He provided nothing until 26 ITEM NO. 5 1 March 30th, 2005, more than 18 months after the 2 Division requested it, and then still failed to 3 provide everything. To this day, the Division 4 and the Commission have never seen the deposit 5 slips for the brother's statement. 6 This is the first major flaw, it is the 7 Division's position, in regard to the initial 8 decision. Mr. Kahn has not fully cooperated 9 with our investigation. And other than his own 10 testimony, you have no evidence for sure as to 11 what the source of this money was. The initial 12 decision finds that it's okay for Mr. Kahn to 13 have intentionally delayed to cooperate with 14 the Division's investigation because, to the 15 effect, it might affect the brother's 16 immigration status. The initial decision says 17 this. It also concludes that he fully did 18 conclude with the Division's investigation, and 19 he never did. 20 It's the Division's position that the 21 full Commission should not on a whole have the 22 principle that it's okay for an Applicant to 23 put off cooperating with the Division in an 24 investigation. That's not fair to -- it's not 25 fair to the Division. It's not fair to all the 27 ITEM NO. 5 1 other Applicants that have come before Mr. 2 Kahn. All those other Applicants who have 3 fully and favorably complied with the 4 Division's requests for documentation. Mr. 5 Kahn never did fully comply. He still hasn't 6 to this day. 7 In cooperating with the Division and the 8 decision is a continuing duty, and it is an 9 affirmative responsibility. Applicants don't 10 get to put off cooperating for 18 months even 11 if they think, as the initial decision in this 12 matter concludes, that it was a noble purpose 13 in the sense that he was protecting or 14 attempting to protect his brother from inquiry 15 because his brother was not a legal alien at 16 the time. His brother was also not working in 17 a legitimate employment, in that he was not 18 paying taxes. 19 Mr. Kahn was found in the initial 20 decision to admittedly and intentionally failed 21 to cooperate at least for a period of time 22 during the Division's investigation. This is a 23 violation of section 80(d) under the Casino 24 Control Act. You don't get to cure 25 noncompliance with the Casino Control Act. If 28 ITEM NO. 5 1 you violate it, that's it. You don't get to 2 wait 18 months and say, all right, now I will 3 comply with you. He failed to respond to a 4 demand from the Division in regard to 5 documentation to you, the evidence in regard to 6 our investigation as to whether or not he was 7 qualified for a key license. That alone is-- 8 that's our strongest position why this initial 9 decision should be rejected. 10 The fact that you shouldn't want to tell 11 all the other applicants and licensees that 12 they don't have to cooperate with the Division 13 initial, that it's okay for you to delay it 18 14 months or even longer or forever in the sense 15 that we never did receive the bank slips or the 16 statement from the brother. 17 T H E C H A I R: I guess my question 18 right there, Mr. Armstrong, would be in a sense 19 we do that all the time when we do 20 stipulations. I mean, we get additional 21 information provided to us. We set up -- we 22 set up stipulations. I mean, how is that any 23 different? 24 MR. ARMSTRONG: This wasn't in a matter 25 involving litigation, Chair. We were still in 29 ITEM NO. 5 1 the investigation. We -- this sworn interview, 2 we sent him a letter to -- making a demand on 3 him for certain documentation. All we were 4 trying to do is try to comply with the ruling 5 in Moy. We wanted to make sure that we could 6 tell you that the money came from a legitimate 7 source. And it turns out, it didn't come from 8 a legitimate source. It came from his illegal 9 alien brother, working here in this country 10 illegal. And that he was shielding himself 11 from further inquiry through his brother -- 12 when in fact, his brother was, I believe, was 13 the source of the money. At least for the two 14 wire transfers in 2002 for the little over 15 $11,000 deposit. 16 But, nevertheless, as it turns out, it 17 actually came to full length during the hearing 18 that, in fact, his brother was an illegal 19 alien, and he wasn't authorized to work in this 20 country. He wasn't paying taxes on the money 21 he was earning, and that money was going back 22 to Pakistan. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: As you know, Moy was a 24 little different in terms of factual 25 circumstances. You were dealing with a husband 30 ITEM NO. 5 1 of a woman, and it was money derived from her 2 position. Understanding your argument that 3 there are -- 4 MR. ARMSTRONG: There's a difference. 5 Yes. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yeah. 7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. I understand 8 that. But the initial decision is full of 9 assets. It makes no mention of Moy. It makes 10 no distinctions or reconcile. If the decision 11 said that, well, Moy isn't applicability 12 because we're talking a spouse versus brother. 13 How can an applicant control what his brother 14 does? At least you would have some type of -- 15 I would argue against that because that opens 16 the door for any applicant saying that money 17 comes from my brother, and that brother doesn't 18 want to cooperate with you. 19 There are other reasons this initial 20 decision should be rejected, Chair. The 21 initial decision concludes the source of the 22 two deposits, the wire transfers in 2002 -- 23 now, remember that the initial decision also 24 ignores the six other wire transfers at the 25 time, all of them significantly over $2,000. 31 ITEM NO. 5 1 The initial decision doesn't even address that. 2 There was apparently no concern as to what the 3 source of that money was. That the money was 4 Mr. Kahn's brother. This in spite of no real 5 evidence in the record other than Mr. Kahn's 6 testimony. Nevertheless the Division won't 7 dispute this finding of fact. Mr. Epps 8 believes Mr. Kahn when he says that the money 9 came from Mr. Kahn's brother, that -- I'm 10 getting a little ahead of myself here. 11 That the money did come from his 12 brother, that is our -- another major concern 13 the Division has with this decision and why it 14 should be rejected, in a sense that, as it 15 turns out and the decision finds that the money 16 made from the brother who was here illegally 17 working in this country illegally and working 18 off the books and not paying taxes on it. The 19 initial decision alludes that he'd have to get 20 money, to come from an actual criminal source, 21 in the sense that Mr. Kahn wasn't a drug dealer 22 or robbing banks or anything of that nature. 23 But it still came from an illegal source. It 24 is still illegal to come to this country 25 illegally and work in this country illegally, 32 ITEM NO. 5 1 to work off the books and not pay taxes. It's 2 against the law to break the immigration laws 3 and the federal and state income tax laws. 4 And that's the thing that -- if the 5 money came from the brother, as the initial 6 decision finds, then it came from an illegal 7 source regardless of how -- the initial 8 decision wants to gloss over that. It still 9 came from an illegal source. If it came from 10 the brother -- at least the two deposits in 11 2002, then it came from -- that money came from 12 an illegal source. 13 And I believe I would ask the full 14 Commission reject the initial decision in that 15 sense, that you don't want to say it's 16 permissible for the key applicant to immerse 17 himself in illegal activity in that sense. Is 18 it okay? Are we going to say can an applicant 19 or key licensee involve himself in -- in where 20 money that was earned illegally goes? Are we 21 going to -- to draw a line after Mr. Kahn? Or 22 are we going to say, well, if it came from an 23 illegal alien brother, and you doesn't didn't 24 pay taxes on it, that's okay. But, you know, 25 if you're a drug dealer or embezzler or 33 ITEM NO. 5 1 something like that, then we're going to draw a 2 line because that's a more serious crime? 3 I ask this is a slippery slope that the 4 Commission is going down, if you approve the 5 decision in that sense. The money still came 6 from an illegal source. 7 The initial decision should also be 8 rejected -- at least remanded -- for ignoring a 9 lot of the Division's evidence. The initial 10 decision does not address the other deposits, 11 wire transfers, as I mentioned earlier totaling 12 $14,250. Nor does the initial decision 13 conclude that that money was from a legitimate 14 source. 15 Second, the Division offered a 16 significant amount of evidence and testimony 17 regarding two arrests in Mr. Kahn's background. 18 The initial decision does not determine whether 19 Mr. Kahn was able to demonstrate his good 20 character, honesty, and integrity or failed to 21 in light of this. The initial decision doesn't 22 do anything in regard to this evidence. The 23 initial decision just ignores this evidence of 24 these two arrests in his background. Based on 25 this flaw, the decision should be rejected. 34 ITEM NO. 5 1 We should examine these -- this was 2 evidence put in the record. It was ignored by 3 the initial decision. What makes this more 4 complicated is, if the initial decision then 5 arbitrarily dismisses the good character issue. 6 I mean, presumably because the issue says 7 before the initial decision, and Mr. Kahn made 8 no effort whatsoever to demonstrate good 9 character, honesty, and integrity. And it's 10 our position that the Division put more than 11 enough evidence, in particular Mr. Kahn's -- 12 the fact that Mr. Kahn was dealing with money 13 from an illegal source, he had the records of 14 the two arrests, and he did not cooperate with 15 the Division's investigation. And there was 16 also a point during his testimony under 17 cross-examination where he admittedly testified 18 that he felt absolutely no obligation to be 19 candid and forthright with the Division 20 investigator. And we were talking about how 21 the investigator was mislead. He was misled to 22 think that the reason that they used Mr. Kahn's 23 bank to transfer the money was because his bank 24 was faster when, in fact, this was the earliest 25 part of the investigation, the source of the 35 ITEM NO. 5 1 money was Mr. Kahn's brother who didn't have a 2 bank account because he was in the country 3 illegally. 4 This is going to be a third point here 5 in regard to this initial evidence that's 6 ignored. The Division is at a loss to 7 understand how the initial decision can just 8 arbitrarily dismiss an issue. As far as -- my 9 research is revealed, I see no authority 10 whatsoever that -- if there's a basis for 11 raising a good character issue, in which this 12 case there is. There's multiple occasions for 13 a good character issue why -- that Mr. Kahn 14 should be required to overcome. There's no 15 authority for a hearing examiner to just 16 arbitrarily dismiss it. And if Mr. Kahn fails 17 to meet that burden, then he should be denied 18 licensure for that reason. 19 But you shouldn't just arbitrarily 20 dismiss an issue. I don't understand. I 21 really don't understand where the authority is. 22 And for that reason alone, the initial decision 23 should be rejected by the full Commission. 24 For a number of other reasons the 25 Division -- the Division's supplemental letter 36 ITEM NO. 5 1 report of February 2nd, 2006, raised a number 2 of real issues regarding Mr. Kahn. One in 3 particular was while this investigation was 4 going on, Mr. Kahn files improper federal 5 income tax returns in 2003 and 2004. This 6 comes to light because this investigation 7 literally went on for years. And we audit 8 those returns and determined that he filed 9 improper returns. He was claiming exuberant 10 deductions on a Schedule A that he couldn't 11 substantiate. And when challenged about that, 12 he agreed to file amended returns, but these 13 amended returns were improper. That was 14 brought out by Special State Investigator 15 Collura and that was ignored. The initial 16 decision said says, well, he filed the amended 17 returns, so there he cooperated with the 18 Division in that sense. But we brought out 19 these amended returns were not still not proper 20 and yet the initial decision was let go. It's 21 not going to make him correct what our audit, 22 our second audit of the amended returns, 23 determined to be improper as well. 24 Finally, the Division offered in 25 evidence that Mr. Kahn accumulated bad debt. 37 ITEM NO. 5 1 This was a minor detail, but the initial 2 decision says that there's no evidence that 3 he's ignored his debts, yet we put in evidence 4 that he had nearly $20,000 in bad debt. The 5 decision contradicts itself in a sense that it 6 says you he has no bad debts. Because the fact 7 that you have bad debt means that you ignored 8 your debts. And for that reason, perhaps, this 9 matter should be at least reopened and 10 revisited. 11 And in conclusion, Chair and 12 Commissioners, I just want to make something 13 clear for the record here. Because the initial 14 decision also states that we share a policy 15 with the Commission with regard to aliens. I 16 just want to -- the Division has no separate 17 policy with regard to aliens either legal or 18 illegal. And I don't believe the Commission 19 does, either. I just want to make sure it is 20 clear if you adopt this, the decision as is, 21 that's stating something kind of exception we 22 make for aliens. I just want to make it clear 23 for the record the Division has no separate 24 policy one way or the other with regard to 25 aliens. 38 ITEM NO. 5 1 Thank you. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 3 Let me ask what's your pleasure, 4 gentleman? Do you ask questions from the 5 Division? You want to hear from Mr. Kahn? 6 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: I'd rather hear 7 from Mr. Kahn, first. 8 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You'd rather hear. 9 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Me, too. 10 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Kahn, is there 11 anything you want to say here today? 12 13 MOHAMMAD Y. KHAN, having been duly sworn 14 to tell the truth, testified as follows: 15 16 MR. NANCE: Please state your name for 17 the record, 18 MR. KAHN: Mohammad Kahn. 19 MR. NANCE: Thank you. 20 You may proceed. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 22 Mr. Kahn, what do you want to tell us 23 today? And keep in mind the Commission may 24 have your some questions for you as well. 25 MR. KAHN: I did cooperate through all 39 ITEM NO. 5 1 that time I was under investigation. Every 2 time they called for any appointment that they 3 set up with me, I never cancelled. Every 4 appointment I show up. Every document they ask 5 for, I did provide. And certain time, they 6 never give me any date to show up on such and 7 such a date. So if they give me some kind of 8 date, I will show up on any date. So I did 9 cooperate with them. 10 And my brother also show up. I'm not 11 sure if he mentioned early, he came in first 12 interview with me. But he did -- whatever he 13 ask him a question, he did answer. And he ask 14 for his tax paper, tax returns. At the time he 15 didn't have the social security. But when he 16 get his social security and green card, he did 17 file his tax. And he did work. He still 18 working on record. And I'll give my 19 sister-in-law my brother's wife, tax return, 20 all the statements. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. 22 MR. KAHN: And I should have -- he 23 should have no any reason to say I didn't 24 cooperate. I did cooperate. But that's his 25 observation whenever there was observing me 40 ITEM NO. 5 1 over the years. But based upon a record or 2 whatever you see on my file, I did cooperate. 3 And did find -- error on tax papers. I 4 did correct that. And I paid them whatever was 5 supposed to be. I paid them. And the first, 6 only was error because my wife, she was sick. 7 And the documents she had involvement in. So I 8 don't want to keep dragging her in my case, my 9 wife and my brother and my other family 10 members. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Now, but Mr. 12 Armstrong mentions that they asked for certain 13 documents with respect to bank accounts. And 14 are you saying you provided all that? 15 MR. KAHN: Yes, I did provide it. 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: I think we have a 17 question of fact here. 18 Let me ask, Commissioner Fedorko, do you 19 have anything? 20 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yeah. I do. 21 Mr. Armstrong, when I began reading your 22 exceptions, it seemed to me that you were 23 beginning to imply that something maybe is 24 going on with terrorism or something like that. 25 You didn't say that. But, I mean, wiring money 41 ITEM NO. 5 1 to Pakistan, you don't know where the money 2 came from. I mean, that's certainly a question 3 that popped in my mind. What's going on here? 4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, I have no 5 intention to imply that. 6 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Okay. All right. 7 MR. ARMSTRONG: As far as I know, 8 Pakistan is an ally in our war on terror. 9 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Well, should we 10 talk about the war on terror? 11 MR. ARMSTRONG: We can go down that 12 road. 13 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Did you question 14 Mr. Kahn's brother? 15 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. 16 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Where is he? Do 17 you know? 18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Quite frankly, I thought 19 at the least, he should have had him testify at 20 the hearing. 21 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Well, did you try 22 to question him? 23 MR. ARMSTRONG: We asked him to have his 24 brother cooperate. We did. And he never -- 25 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Where is his 42 ITEM NO. 5 1 brother? 2 MR. ARMSTRONG: His brother never 3 cooperated. 4 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Where is your 5 brother? 6 MR. KAHN: My brother came when he 7 asked -- said bring your brother. And he came. 8 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Where is your 9 brother living? 10 MR. KAHN: He living with me. 11 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: And you live? 12 MR. KAHN: I live in Egg Harbor 13 Township, New Jersey. 14 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: During the course 15 of your talk here, Mr. Armstrong, you mention 16 that you asked Mr. Kahn to get sworn statements 17 from his brother. 18 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's correct. 19 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Why is that his 20 responsibility? Why didn't you? 21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Because we were -- 22 Commissioner, alls we were trying to do is 23 show, we wanted to be able to tell you that 24 this money came from a legitimate source. 25 Quite frankly -- quite frankly, the sworn 43 ITEM NO. 5 1 interview, Mr. Kahn says, look, my brother is 2 here illegally. And he's working off the books 3 at my cousin's shop. That's his testimony. I 4 don't know how -- we certainly wouldn't have 5 had the non-cooperation issues which would -- 6 our real concern here in that sense, he didn't 7 cooperate for years, for years. He ignored our 8 demands for things. And he was deliberately 9 evasive in where the source of this money was. 10 Now, as it turns out, I agree with 11 Commissioners Epps, that he was trying to 12 protect his brother. But that's not right. He 13 shouldn't be able to not cooperate with one of 14 our investigations, I don't care if you think 15 it's a noble cause. If that's the case, work 16 in some other industry. Because we have to 17 make sure that you are a person of good 18 character, honesty, and integrity before we're 19 going to give you a key license in New Jersey. 20 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: I'm not being 21 critical, but I guess my -- the question that 22 pops into my mind is, if you're doing an 23 investigation, why didn't you guys go talk to 24 the brother? Why is it his responsibility to 25 bring the brother in? 44 ITEM NO. 5 1 MR. KAHN: I did bring him in. I'm 2 sorry. I did bring him in. 3 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: No, I'm not -- I'm 4 asking Mr. Armstrong. 5 MR. ARMSTRONG: It's more complicated 6 than that. His brother did come to one 7 conference. 8 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Okay. Okay. 9 MR. ARMSTRONG: And he presented a 2002 10 tax return. As it appeared -- I don't think it 11 was ever filed. Because it turns out the 12 brother didn't became legal until 2004. But he 13 was trying to show -- but that return showed he 14 had made 18,000 something that year. And he 15 was the source -- presumably, all his money 16 that they sent to Pakistan was supposed to be 17 reflected that his tax return. And we didn't 18 think it was -- first of all, I didn't believe 19 it was actually filed. That it was just 20 something he filled out, a tax return. We 21 didn't have -- the brother didn't have any 22 social security number on the return. 23 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: The brother -- 24 MR. ARMSTRONG: Look like it was 25 something you filled out the return, but it 45 ITEM NO. 5 1 didn't look like it was ever filed. There was 2 no other record -- 3 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: The brother is here 4 legally now? 5 MR. ARMSTRONG: What we wanted to see, 6 you know, initially was the brother's bank 7 accounts. We weren't looking to see, all 8 right. The brother is the source of the money. 9 All right. Let's see if the brother's savings 10 account, the money is being deposited over a 11 period of time, and we see withdrawals by the 12 brother's -- you know, in the brother's bank 13 account that reflects, you know, comparable in 14 time to Mr. Kahn's deposits in his checking 15 account. 16 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Is the brother here 17 legally now? 18 MR. ARMSTRONG: As far as I know, yes. 19 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: When you -- for my 20 own edification, when you do these 21 investigations like, for example, you think 22 someone is here illegally, do you talk to 23 immigration? Or do you talk to the FBI? 24 What-- in other words, what do you do to try to 25 find -- 46 ITEM NO. 5 1 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'm not sure. I'm not 2 in the investigation part of the Division. I'm 3 not sure exactly what our policy is towards, do 4 we uncover illegal aliens? We find if they've 5 been credentialed by you, the first thing we do 6 is bring actions again them, you know, deny 7 their licenses. 8 I've heard -- you know, before they've 9 had illegal aliens if they are on deportation 10 lists, we've had immigration officers show up 11 and different things over the years. 12 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Did you ever 13 establish where the money -- who the money went 14 to in Pakistan? 15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes. I was -- that 16 wasn't part of our concern. That made sense to 17 me. He was from Pakistan. He has a mother and 18 brother still over there and other family 19 members. 20 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: And it went to the 21 mother and the brother? 22 MR. ARMSTRONG: It went to a bank. 23 Yeah. He wired it from the First Union to a 24 bank in Falazaban, I think. 25 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: When you talk about 47 ITEM NO. 5 1 the illegal source of the money, it's because 2 the brother was here illegally? Is that 3 what -- 4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes. Well, yeah. He 5 was in the country illegally. He wasn't 6 authorized to work. He was employed illegally 7 and not being employed in a business that was 8 keeping him off the books, so he wasn't paying 9 any federal or state income taxes on top of the 10 all the other things. If you were legitimately 11 employed, what you would legally be paying. 12 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: And you know for a 13 fact he was here illegally? 14 MR. ARMSTRONG: So, yeah. He was. That 15 came out in the record in the hearing. 16 Because, actually, what -- we had exhibits in 17 the record, I believe it's D-25 through 30, 18 that show he didn't become legal and obtain a 19 social security card and employment 20 authorization and then permanent residency 21 until 2004. 22 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Okay. When you 23 talked about the tax returns, they were 24 improper. I was kind of confused as to why 25 they were improper. His tax returns, Mr. 48 ITEM NO. 5 1 Kahn's tax returns. 2 MR. ARMSTRONG: When he amended the 3 returns, there was -- it was pretty much what 4 the investigator testified to, was like math 5 errors that were in his favor. He was 6 transferring them onto his -- what the figures 7 were onto the amended return. He was changing 8 them, you know, the figures. And he was 9 actually paying less taxes than had he used the 10 figures that were on the original returns. 11 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Did he do them 12 himself, or did he have an accountant? 13 MR. ARMSTRONG: I don't know. Perhaps 14 Mr. Kahn can answer that. 15 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Mr. Kahn, did you 16 do the tax returns yourself? Or did you have 17 an accountant do them for you? 18 MR. KAHN: Accountant did it for me. 19 And he have his name and stamp on it. 20 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Did you talk to -- 21 Mr. Armstrong, did you talk to the accountant 22 at all to find out? 23 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. We did a 24 subsequent-- we audit the original returns, the 25 2003 and 4, and the investigator found -- what 49 ITEM NO. 5 1 it was, they were pretty high Schedule A 2 deductions to reimburse employee expenses, 3 things of that nature and medical expenses, I 4 believe, that he couldn't substantiate. So 5 that was challenged. That was challenged by 6 us. That may be improper. The law, the tax 7 code requires you to be able to prove that you 8 are entitled to these. You have to keep 9 records of what deductions you were entitled to 10 for three years at least. 11 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Let me ask you 12 this. Based on what I have heard, would you 13 feel better if you had a chance to go back and 14 reinvestigate some of this information? It 15 sounds to me like there's a lot of unanswered 16 questions here. And, frankly, I would feel 17 better, I think, if this were reinvestigated 18 again. 19 MR. ARMSTRONG: You know, I don't know 20 what more we're going to learn. I mean, we 21 have this record of the hearing. 22 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Well -- 23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, really, I don't 24 know what we're going to learn. 25 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: For example, 50 ITEM NO. 5 1 questioning the brother. I think that's 2 something you guys -- you should have done 3 that. I think. 4 MR. ARMSTRONG: We already have a 5 finding of fact by Commissioner Epps that the 6 brother was the source of the money. I don't 7 know what that would change, is what I'm 8 saying. He didn't cooperate for a significant 9 period of time. So you have that issue. 10 That's what, you know -- that's primarily what 11 we're objecting to the initial decision for. 12 And then you also have, you know -- you 13 have the finding by the initial decision that 14 the money at least the deposits, the $11,220 in 15 2002 were from the brother. And you also have 16 on the record the evidence that the brother was 17 not a legal alien at that time. He was not 18 authorized to work in the country. And you 19 also have admittedly he was working for his 20 cousin in one of the boardwalk shops off the 21 books, so he wasn't paying any taxes. So you 22 have to make a decision. Is this impugning 23 someone's financial integrity? 24 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yeah. But, see, 25 I'd be interested in knowing where the money 51 ITEM NO. 5 1 came from. Okay. He was here illegally. But 2 what was he doing to get the money? I mean, 3 that, to me, that opens up a whole series of 4 other questions. You know, he is selling 5 drugs? What's he doing? Where's he getting 6 the money from? 7 MR. ARMSTRONG: What's what I'm saying. 8 It's already a finding of a statement. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: It was a boardwalk 10 shop. 11 MR. ARMSTRONG: We have a statement. 12 There's evidence in the record. A statement 13 from the cousin. It's not sworn. The cousin 14 didn't testify at the hearing, either. But we 15 have a statement from the cousin that the 16 brother worked for him for -- from '98 to 2003, 17 I believe. 18 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: All right. 19 MR. ARMSTRONG: I real -- I don't 20 believe that Mr. Kahn or his brother, you know, 21 the initial decision says were involved in 22 anything criminal, per se. You know, that's 23 elusive. If the money's from the brother when 24 the brother was illegal and working illegal. 25 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Right. 52 ITEM NO. 5 1 MR. ARMSTRONG: I mean, it is from an 2 illegal source. 3 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Right. 4 Mr. Kahn, could you comment on the 5 non-cooperation issue that the Division is 6 talking about. 7 MR. KAHN: I did cooperate. But he 8 keeps saying my brother was here illegally. He 9 was here legally. He was not authorized to 10 work. 11 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: But they're saying 12 that you didn't cooperate with the 13 investigation. 14 MR. KAHN: I did cooperate. I 15 cooperate. All he -- almost five, six years of 16 credit reports. And almost ten years credit 17 card statements -- tax returns. Every bank 18 statement. I show up. I bring my brother with 19 me on swear interview. And I bring my brother 20 tax paper, my sister-in-law tax paper. And any 21 documents. And I bring statement from my 22 cousin which my brother was working under him. 23 I bring a letter from him, also. And every 24 time they call me, and I show up. And every 25 time they call me, and I did a response back. 53 ITEM NO. 5 1 If I don't response back the same day, I did a 2 response back next day. So I don't remember 3 any date they said me, okay. Show up on March 4 3rd or such a such a date, I did show up. 5 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Okay. I don't 6 have-- 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You know, I don't -- 8 well, I think part of your argument is not that 9 he didn't show up but that he didn't supply 10 things you asked him to supply. 11 MR. ARMSTRONG: There was a 18-month 12 gap. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Right. 14 MR. ARMSTRONG: If you count from when 15 we sent him the letter, September 22nd, 2003, 16 we were reaching out to him. You know, he 17 tells State Investigator Collura had he was 18 busy doing stuff around the house, he was 19 trying to get all that stuff together. All 20 right? 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Uh-huh. 22 MR. ARMSTRONG: We don't hear anything 23 more from him for over a year. So we file our 24 report, saying this guy, you know, he's not 25 cooperating with us. We have problems with 54 ITEM NO. 5 1 this -- the deposits in the checking account 2 that we didn't really tell you for sure the 3 source. Then we object to his key application. 4 Then he's coming up for renewal on his 21 5 license. And that's why this case is being 6 merged. 7 We have a conference with him, I 8 believe, in December of 2004. That's the first 9 time we hear from him. You know, the sworn 10 interview and the follow-up letter and the 11 follow-up telephone calls in 2003. And then we 12 don't really get anything more from him until 13 we have conferences with him over the winter of 14 2005. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Commissioner 16 Sommeling? 17 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Mr. Armstrong, 18 ultimately, did he give you all the information 19 that you require? 20 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. 21 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: In other words, 22 there's still -- 23 MR. ARMSTRONG: One of the things I was 24 asking -- we were getting stonewalled. I mean, 25 you know, he doesn't have a bank record. He's 55 ITEM NO. 5 1 working off the books. We don't have -- we 2 can't see pay stubs or W-2s or, you know, 3 anything that shows where the money and the 4 brother had enough income to substantiate these 5 deposits. I said, well, if he's -- this is all 6 true, you believe Mr. Kahn at his word that the 7 brother is here -- working here -- at the time 8 we weren't sure he was illegal or not, but at 9 least we knew he was admittedly working off the 10 books at the cousin's boardwalk shop. So if I 11 saw the deposit slips for the two deposits and 12 wire transfers in 2002, presumably from the 13 brother, and the slips showed they were cash 14 that it was deposited -- literally depositing 15 $9,250 in cash, that would add some credence to 16 his explanation. I said, well, you know, it's 17 not like you're going to see checks or anything 18 of that nature. It would actually be cash. It 19 was cash. He said his brother saved it at 20 home. It was cash. That would add something 21 to it. We never got -- we've never received 22 it. 23 Quite frankly, if Mr. Kahn -- I thought 24 it was, you know, out of line, at least should 25 have had his brother testify at his own 56 ITEM NO. 5 1 hearing. If he wanted to allay your fears as 2 to what the source of the money was. 3 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: What else did 4 you receive besides that? Besides the 5 receipts? 6 MR. ARMSTRONG: We did eventually get -- 7 we got the other bank records. We expanded the 8 investigation. We looked at '98, '99, 2000 -- 9 2001 and the rest of 2003. You know, 10 encompassing what we already looked at. You 11 know, it's part of our policy, our 12 investigative procedure to look at like a 13 year's worth, into the bank records. And we 14 looked at the additional bank records, that's 15 where we found the six other deposits and wire 16 transfers. They are out of the ordinary. He 17 has his paycheck deposited. You see deposits 18 that are somewhere, 500, a thousand, 1500. All 19 of a sudden, we're seeing deposits of 2,500, 20 3,000. You know, and seeing right after the 21 deposits, these wire transfers. 22 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No more 23 questions, Madame Chair. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Commissioner Fedorko? 25 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Madame Chair, I'm 57 ITEM NO. 5 1 make a motion that we remand this for another 2 hearing. There's just a lot of questions that 3 I have at this -- 4 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 5 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: -- that are not 6 answered right now. 7 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second the 8 motion, Madame Chair. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Commissioner Sommeling 10 seconded. 11 Motion is made and seconded to remand 12 this. All those in favor? 13 (Ayes.) 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 15 (No response.) 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 17 Mr. Kahn, we're going to remand this. 18 Mr. Barney will explain to you what that 19 process will be. But, obviously, there are 20 some further areas that we think need to be 21 explored before we come to a decision with 22 respect to your license. 23 MR. KAHN: Thank you. 24 MR. ARMSTRONG: Thank you, 25 Commissioners. 58 ITEM NO. 6 1 MR. NANCE: Item No. 6. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You can step back. 3 MR. NANCE: Stipulation of settlement in 4 application of Steven L. Buckley. 5 Miss Nagengast? 6 MS. NAGENGAST: Good morning, Chair and 7 Commissioners. For your consideration is the 8 stipulation of settlement for Steven Buckley. 9 The reason it was called separately is because 10 he will be, if you approve the stipulation, 11 fined a $250 civil penalty and impose a 20-day 12 working day suspension. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 14 Mr. Buckley, is there anything you wish 15 to say? You have to be sworn in if you do. 16 MR. BUCKLEY: All right. I don't. I 17 have nothing important to say so. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Armstrong? 19 MR. ARMSTRONG: The Division has nothing 20 to add, Chair. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: I'm assuming you're 22 agreeing to the stipulation? 23 MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. That's all I was 24 going to say. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You don't have to be 59 ITEM NO. 7 1 sworn in for that. 2 Let me ask if there are any questions? 3 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 4 Madame Chair. 5 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to approve 6 stipulation and grant Mr. Buckley's casino 7 license and impose a civil penalty of $250 and 8 a 20 day working -- 20 working day suspension 9 for underage gambling violation of section 10 119(a). 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there a second? 12 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 14 made and seconded. All in favor? 15 (Ayes.) 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 17 (No response.) 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 19 Thank you. 20 MR. BUCKLEY: Thank you. 21 MR. NANCE: Item No. 7, petition of Karl 22 B. Famiano for early application. 23 MS. FRIGEN: Mr. Famiano is present. I 24 would ask for him to take a seat at the table. 25 MR. NANCE: Miss Frigen? 60 ITEM NO. 7 1 MS. FRIGEN: Thanks. Good morning, 2 Madame Chair, Commissioners. 3 For your consideration is Mr. Famiano'S 4 petition in which he seeks permission to 5 reapply early for license registration and for 6 noncredential hotel employment. 7 By letter dated January 30th the 8 Division has interposed an objection to this 9 petition in its entirety. 10 Mr. Famiano, as I indicated, is present 11 this morning. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 13 Mr. Famiano, since this is your 14 petition, would you like to say anything to us 15 today? 16 MR. FAMIANO: Sure. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. We need to have 18 you stand up and be sworn. 19 20 KARL P. FAMIANO, having been duly sworn 21 to tell the truth, testified as follows: 22 23 MR. NANCE: Please state your name for 24 the record. 25 MR. FAMIANO: Charles Famiano. 61 ITEM NO. 7 1 MR. NANCE: Thank you. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Famiano? You can 3 proceed. 4 MR. FAMIANO: Back in 2001 I committed a 5 crime. I -- I faced the consequences of the 6 crime. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Could you speak into 8 the microphone? 9 MR. FAMIANO: I committed the crime. I 10 faced the consequences of the crime, and I 11 finished all the terms of my probation. 12 Since then, I've had a daughter. I just 13 recently got engaged, and I'd like to move 14 forward with my life back in the casino. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Thank you. 16 Any questions for Mr. Famiano before we 17 hear from the Division? 18 MR. FAMIANO: Oh, one more thing. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yeah. Sure. 20 MR. FAMIANO: And I did move back to New 21 Jersey. That was one of the things that was 22 not a requirement. I did move back to Cape May 23 County. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Mr. Armstrong? 25 MR. ARMSTRONG: Chair, Commissioners, 62 ITEM NO. 7 1 you have our letter of January 30th. We oppose 2 Mr. Famiano's petition. He was revoked just a 3 little over three years ago after a hearing and 4 an initial decision. It was affirmed and 5 adopted by the full Commission. He also have a 6 number of other arrests in his background. 7 We saw nothing in Mr. Famiano's petition 8 that would merit any extraordinary 9 circumstances or where he would be entitled to 10 any relief. I mean, the normal bar for 11 licensure is five years, and he's not five 12 years yet after having availed himself of the 13 hearing process here before you and having 14 lost. So it's our position he should remain 15 disqualified from licensure for five years. 16 Thank you. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 18 Any questions? 19 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Not right now. 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yeah. Commissioner 21 Epps? 22 COMMISSIONER EPPS: You spoke to other 23 arrests. Were those addressed in the hearing, 24 or have they occurred since the time of the 25 hearing? 63 ITEM NO. 7 1 MR. ARMSTRONG: I think they were all 2 before the hearing. 3 COMMISSIONER EPPS: So he's had none -- 4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Not none since. 5 COMMISSIONER EPPS: -- nothing that you 6 are aware of since the time of the hearing? 7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. 8 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Now, at the time of 9 the hearing, was he suspended from the event to 10 the hearing? 11 No -- no suspension? So he stopped 12 working at the time of the hearing in 2003? 13 MR. ARMSTRONG: Once the Commission 14 approved the initial decision as -- 15 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Once it was granted. 16 MR. ARMSTRONG: I don't believe he was 17 suspended -- the crime was outside the venue of 18 the Commission and the casinos. 19 MS. FRIGEN: No. 20 COMMISSIONER EPPS: So, I mean, I guess 21 what I hear from you is, you mention in your 22 statement, what you seem to be implying is 23 because he availed himself to the hearing 24 process, because he didn't stipulate a 25 settlement with you, he went to a hearing, he 64 ITEM NO. 7 1 doesn't get the benefit of establishing that 2 he's rehabilitated and he can establish that he 3 can maybe apply for an early reapplication. 4 What you're saying is because he wanted to go 5 to the full, way he's got to tow the full 6 freight, so he can't establish that he meets 7 the criteria for early reapplication. That's 8 what you seem to suggest. 9 MR. ARMSTRONG: I mean, you can't -- 10 yeah. Pretty much. My position on this -- the 11 Division's position on this is that, yeah, he 12 went before a hearing. He was found 13 disqualified. He was found not to have 14 demonstrated rehabilitation. I see nothing in 15 his petition to indicate that should convince 16 you at this time that he has obtained it. 17 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Not even his conduct 18 in his favorable completion of his probation 19 situation, his other things that he's done in 20 his life that demonstrate that maybe he's a 21 different person, or do we ever take into 22 account the fact that the nature of the 23 original crime that he was before us alleged to 24 have committed? Do you suggest that we not 25 consider the weight of those things in our 65 ITEM NO. 7 1 entire evaluation? 2 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. I'm not suggesting 3 that at all. I'm not suggesting that -- do you 4 have in his petition before you sufficient 5 evidence to -- I don't know that's the right 6 language to use -- but overturn the hearing 7 examiner's findings that he was disqualified 8 and didn't demonstrate rehabilitation? Is 9 it -- I mean, is it just the passage of time 10 that he gets another bite of the apple here? 11 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I guess the question 12 is to you, based upon position you're taking, 13 is anybody that goes to a full hearing that 14 establish that they can reapply early? 15 MR. ARMSTRONG: I mean, I believe if 16 they place a record before you in one of these 17 proceedings that would sustain that, yeah. 18 Sure. Happens all the time. 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: So then, what you're 20 saying is different than what you said earlier. 21 He's not being punished just because he went to 22 a hearing. What you're saying he went to a 23 full hearing, you don't believe that there's 24 anything that he presented that establishes 25 that he's rehabilitated such that he can apply 66 ITEM NO. 7 1 early? 2 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, it doesn't matter 3 what I believe. 4 COMMISSIONER EPPS: But that's your 5 position. 6 MR. ARMSTRONG: The Division -- 7 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Your argument 8 indicates that he doesn't; right? 9 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. We went through 10 trouble -- all of us went to the trouble to 11 provide him with a hearing. He didn't avail 12 himself of the settlement process. Why should 13 that work be undone at this point in time? 14 COMMISSIONER EPPS: See, that's the 15 place where I have a conflict with you. He 16 went to the settlement process. We -- 17 everybody had to go through whatever exercises 18 to get me to the -- I mean, to the hearing 19 process. The question then becomes, does the 20 person get the benefit of what they've done 21 between the hearing and the date that they 22 reapply early, to have that considered as to 23 whether or not they should be able to be 24 accepted early for a new license application. 25 You seem to suggest that he doesn't get the 67 ITEM NO. 7 1 benefit because he made you prepare for a 2 hearing. Or because he made us all go through 3 the process of a hearing. 4 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's not quite how I 5 look at it. The way I look at it is, is 6 incentive for people in the settlement process 7 to take a staggered period of time, that's 8 what-- you know, arguably entices them to take 9 that because they don't want to risk the 10 chances of going to a hearing and have what 11 happened, has happened to Mr. Famiano. And if 12 is he -- avails himself of the hearing. You 13 know, he rejects, I mean, presumably he 14 rejected the settlement offer, which may have 15 been provided him to be back at least 16 non-credential employment at this time. He 17 took -- went to a hearing, lost. So now should 18 he still be able to come back, you know, before 19 the five years are up? I mean, that's -- it's 20 up to you. I am just saying -- 21 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I understand. 22 MR. ARMSTRONG: I personally -- 23 COMMISSIONER EPPS: We keep engaging in 24 the same question. Can a person who goes to 25 the full hearing ever apply hearing? 68 ITEM NO. 7 1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Of course they can. 2 COMMISSIONER EPPS: The answer is yes. 3 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, they can petition 4 early. 5 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Petition early. So 6 now the question is not to petition early. The 7 question seems to be is there enough before us 8 that he should decide to get another shot? 9 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. 10 COMMISSIONER EPPS: But earlier you 11 seemed to allude that he shouldn't even get the 12 chance. 13 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's the Division's 14 position. 15 Not a chance. He certainly has a 16 chance. He has a chance by law. He has the 17 right to petition you. 18 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I mean, what you're 19 saying to us is we shouldn't give it to him 20 because there wasn't a hearing. 21 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. What I'm saying 22 here is that I didn't see in the petition any 23 significant amounts of evidence that would 24 permit him to sustain his request for relief 25 here. You know, you said, wow. Look at this. 69 ITEM NO. 7 1 We should let this guy in back early. He was 2 obviously a changed man from when he was found 3 disqualified. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: I don't know. I guess 5 I would see the same amount of evidence I would 6 see with any stipulation. For example, letters 7 indicating that he's completed his probationary 8 period. Letters from Seabrook House. Letters 9 from other, you know, individuals. So, I mean, 10 I think there's certainly information in the 11 record. 12 MR. ARMSTRONG: It's entirely, you know, 13 your decision. 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Gotcha. Right. 15 Right. 16 Any other questions? 17 Commissioner Sommeling? 18 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 19 Madame Chair. 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there anything that 21 you wish to say, Mr. Faiano? 22 MR. FAMIANO: I would like a second 23 chance. This happened in 2001 before my 24 daughter, before my engagement and everything 25 else. 70 ITEM NO. 8 1 So thank you. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Any questions? 3 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to grant Mr. 4 Famiano's petition to reapply early for a 5 casino employee license, the casino service 6 employee registration, or to obtain employment 7 early as a noncredential employee. 8 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 10 made and seconded. All in favor? 11 (Ayes.) 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 13 (No response.) 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 15 Good luck. 16 MR. FAMIANO: I get it back? 17 Thank you. Thank you. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You're welcome. 19 MR. NANCE: Item No. 8, for 20 consideration of Commission final orders due to 21 non-compliance, petition of Trenita Betterson, 22 Robin Bing, Christopher Browne, Amos Jones, 23 Terry Reed, and James Cephas. 24 Miss Frigen? 25 MS. FRIGEN: Madame Chair, 71 ITEM NO. 8 1 Commissioners. 2 I'm aware that Mr. Jones is present. 3 I've had an opportunity to speak with him. 4 Let me ask whether Miss Betterson, Miss 5 Bing, Mr. Browne, Mr. Reed, or Mr. Cephas are 6 present or represented? Okay. 7 I don't know if you want to take Mr. 8 Jones first or the other group first. Whatever 9 is your pleasure. 10 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Why don't we do the 11 other group, and then hear from Mr. Jones. 12 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. With respect to the 13 group other than Mr. Jones, they have failed to 14 comply with licensure conditions that were 15 imposed as part of the stipulations of 16 settlement. They've also failed to appear for 17 scheduled conferences to address their 18 non-compliant situation. Accordingly their 19 cases are brought back before the Commission 20 for reconsideration and reevaluation. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 22 Mr. Biscieglia? 23 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Thank you. Good 24 morning, Madame Chair, Commissioners. 25 In the case of the other individuals, 72 ITEM NO. 8 1 excluding Mr. Jones listed under No. 8, all of 2 these individuals had entered into prior 3 stipulations of settlement with the Division 4 containing provisions and conditional 5 agreements for them to report to the Division. 6 After a history of non-compliance in 7 each one of those their cases, in approximately 8 October all these individuals were reported to 9 by from the Division to the Commission that 10 they were out of compliance with the 11 stipulations of settlements. All five 12 individuals were scheduled for conferences that 13 were to take place either between December or 14 January. All five failed to show at those 15 conferences. 16 On January 24th of 2007, all persons 17 under this list were sent a notice by the 18 Casino Control Commission that their matter 19 would be reconsidered here today at this public 20 meeting. All these individuals have failed to 21 show. They've all been given numerous chances 22 to comply with the conditions of the 23 stipulation of settlement, and today at the 24 public meeting when their matter is going to be 25 reconsidered, it's really looked at as their 73 ITEM NO. 8 1 last chance to come into some type of 2 compliance with us and give us an explanation 3 for their non-compliance. None of these 4 individuals have taken the opportunity to come 5 here today and offer any explanation for their 6 continued non-compliance. 7 And for that reason the Division must 8 respectfully request that each of these 9 applicants' respective stipulations of 10 settlements be vacated -- excuse me, the orders 11 granting their licensure be vacated. 12 Thank you. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 14 Any questions? 15 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Madame Chair, based 16 on their non-compliance with conditions set 17 forth in the existing Commission orders and 18 subsequent failure to address non-compliance 19 issues after having been afforded the 20 opportunity to do so, I move that we vacate the 21 existing orders granting the license 22 applications of the referenced individuals, 23 Betterson, Bing, Browne, Reed, and Cephas and 24 deny their respective license applications; and 25 further revoke the casino service employee 74 ITEM NO. 8 1 registration held by Miss Betterson pursuant to 2 section 106(c) of the Act. 3 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 5 made and seconded. All in favor? 6 (Ayes.) 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 8 (No response.) 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 10 We'll now call Mr. Jones. 11 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. Yes. Let me see. 12 Mr. Jones, could you have a seat at the table, 13 please. All right. Let me just get his 14 information here. 15 With respect to Mr. Jones -- okay. Back 16 in August of 2005 the Commission granted his 17 license renewal application conditioned upon 18 his addressing his motor vehicle surcharges and 19 reporting to the Division proof of payment with 20 respect to his IRS obligations every six 21 months. And that reporting was to begin 22 October 1st of 2005. 23 On December 1st of 2005, the Division 24 sent Mr. Jones a notice saying that they hadn't 25 received those reports and seeking compliance. 75 ITEM NO. 8 1 We next heard from the Division in October of 2 2006 indicating that they hadn't heard from Mr. 3 Jones and requesting a conference. Conference 4 was scheduled December 5th of 2006, which Mr. 5 Jones did not attend. 6 Subsequent to the scheduling of this 7 proceeding before the Commission, we have been 8 in communications with Mr. Jones, and he is 9 here today providing an explanation for his 10 failure to comply and attend the conference. 11 I would note this morning Mr. Jones 12 brought me some records, it looks like it's 13 from his employer, indicating payments -- it 14 doesn't indicate who the payments are being 15 made to, but there is -- he has indicated to me 16 that they are to the IRS. The Division 17 indicated they will take a look at these later. 18 But Mr. Jones is here today to provide 19 his explanation personally, and I would ask the 20 Division to provide its position. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Sure. Mr. Jones? 22 Would you stand up and be sworn in, please? 23 24 AMOS M. JONES, having been duly sworn to 25 tell the truth, testified as follows: 76 ITEM NO. 8 1 MR. NANCE: Please state your name for 2 the record, 3 MR. JONES: Name is Amos Montgomery 4 Jones, Sr. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. You can be 6 seated. 7 Mr. Jones, I guess my first question 8 would be to you why -- why did you miss the 9 conference and the other things that the 10 Division has been attempting to schedule? 11 MR. JONES: Because of situations where 12 I've been moving a lot in the last couple of 13 years. I never got the notices for a 14 conference. And I was recently contacted on 15 the job, and that's why I'm here today. 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. And you've 17 provided Ms. Frigen with additional information 18 now? 19 MR. JONES: I did contact the payroll 20 officer at Harrah's and requested an 21 itemization for deductions from my payroll for 22 the IRS, which has been going on for many 23 years. And she has the printout. But, 24 evidently, it does not say this is for the IRS. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Uh-hum. 77 ITEM NO. 8 1 MR. JONES: So. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Commissioners 3 Epps? 4 COMMISSIONER EPPS: When you entered 5 into this stipulation, did you work at the same 6 place that you currently work? 7 MR. JONES: Yes, sir. 8 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Okay. So you agreed 9 that you would have a wage execution as part of 10 your stipulation; correct? 11 MR. JONES: Yes. 12 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Then why -- why 13 wasn't that information communicated? I -- 14 well, I guess ask the Division. 15 Mr. Biscieglia, is that the case? 16 Because if he was at the same employer, and we 17 establish a wage execution, wouldn't we know 18 automatically that his -- that was being done? 19 MR. BISCIEGLIA: No. There is no wage 20 execution, it appears, as part of the decision. 21 The debt was owed to the Internal Revenue 22 Service. And it is our policy that the wage 23 executions occur when debts are owed to New 24 Jersey state institutions. 25 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I'm sorry. I'm 78 ITEM NO. 8 1 looking at the Division of motor vehicle wage. 2 Was there a Division of Motor Vehicle wage 3 execution? 4 MR. JONES: That's already been 5 resolved. 6 COMMISSIONER EPPS: So the only issue -- 7 outstanding issue is the IRS, and that's not a 8 wage execution? 9 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Exactly. 10 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Okay. That clears 11 up that question. 12 Now, the question here is when you 13 entered into the stipulation, you knew you had 14 to tell the Division that you were paying the 15 IRS? 16 MR. JONES: Yes, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Why didn't you tell 18 the Division that you were paying the IRS? It 19 doesn't have anything to do with moving, 20 because that obligation is on you. You have to 21 inform them that you're making these payments. 22 Why didn't you let them know what you were 23 doing? It didn't matter where you lived. You 24 just send them a notice of some sort showing 25 that you're making the payments. You need to 79 ITEM NO. 8 1 tell us why you didn't do that. 2 MR. JONES: I don't have a legitimate 3 excuse for that, sir. 4 COMMISSIONER EPPS: See -- 5 MR. JONES: To be honest, I just -- 6 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Did you make 7 payments to the IRS, 8 MR. JONES: Yes, I did. I'm still 9 making payments. 10 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Well, in what manner 11 did you make those payments? 12 MR. JONES: It's a weekly deduction from 13 my payroll, paycheck. 14 COMMISSIONER EPPS: So you have a 15 payroll deduction -- 16 MR. JONES: I -- 17 COMMISSIONER EPPS: -- that is paid 18 directly to the IRS, and that's been in place 19 since you entered into this agreement? 20 MR. JONES: Since before that. 21 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Okay. Well it seems 22 if he got a payroll deduction of some sort to 23 pay the IRS, if he can establish that that's 24 what that's for, this might be able -- he might 25 be able to explain that he's doing what he 80 ITEM NO. 8 1 agreed to do. Does that found fair? 2 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Yes. May I? 3 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Well, I would then 4 ask if we could carry this for a cycle for you 5 to review the payroll deduction that he's 6 entered into, and if that does jibe with the 7 IRS agreement, we could resolve the matter and, 8 if not, we would be back here in a cycle for 9 some other reason. 10 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Well, if I might 11 present with a solution that the Division has 12 come up with in this matter, I would be happy 13 to acquiesce to allow Mr. Jones to have another 14 chance to present this material for us. But 15 under the very strict conditions of the 16 Division would like to see a settlement 17 conference scheduled immediately in this 18 matter. 19 I understand, I have not -- the Division 20 has not had a chance to review the information 21 Mr. Jones has provided us today, and it sounds 22 like it's from -- you're talking of it not 23 being shown that it's going to the IRS, it 24 might not to the rise to the level of what we 25 need to see. That will give Mr. Jones time to 81 ITEM NO. 8 1 secure this evidence and supply it with the 2 Division either before the date of that 3 settlement conference or on the date of that 4 settlement conference. 5 But the Division would like to be on the 6 record that at that settlement conference Mr. 7 Jones must attend, and this information must be 8 presented to the Division. If not, we will 9 immediately move for reconsideration once more, 10 and the time next time, the Division will not 11 be as willing to allow a second chance for him 12 to show us this materials. If that is a 13 satisfactory. 14 COMMISSIONER EPPS: That's fine with me. 15 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Alternative to 16 Commissioner Epps -- 17 COMMISSIONER EPPS: That probably 18 extended it longer than I was willing to, but 19 whatever you want to do. 20 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Well, just because -- 21 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Because when I say 22 we put off for the next cycle, it should be 23 something we should be able to turn around 24 quickly. 25 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Yes. 82 ITEM NO. 8 1 COMMISSIONER EPPS: We'll get it done in 2 two weeks. We'll be back here in two weeks, 3 and he either did or he didn't. 4 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER EPPS: But if we schedule a 6 conference, that conference might not be 7 scheduled before two weeks and then we'll -- 8 MR. BISCIEGLIA: I would like to see the 9 conference scheduled at a cap date. He is more 10 than able to provide us with the evidence 11 beforehand, and we can take care of this 12 beforehand. But I don't want to see a 13 situation arise where we walk out of this 14 conference today and again we're not hearing 15 anything. With a settlement conference in 16 place, we have a cap end date of when this 17 matter -- there will definitely be a date in 18 this future that we can look to this matter 19 again. 20 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Fine with me. 21 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Mr. Jones, you 22 understand it's your responsibility to keep in 23 contact with the Division; right? 24 MR. JONES: I understand. 25 MR. BISCIEGLIA: I'm sorry. I think I 83 ITEM NO. 8 1 misunderstood, Commissioner. I was hearing 2 another "cycle," I was thinking that you were 3 speaking of a schedule of conferences cycle. 4 Were you speaking to the public meeting cycle? 5 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Next meeting. 6 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Okay. I'm sorry. I 7 apologize, then, for the misunderstanding. And 8 that would be fine. We can adjourn this to the 9 next meeting, and in that time period, Mr. 10 Jones can provide us with the information. 11 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I move that we 12 adjourn the Jones matter to the next meeting 13 cycle. 14 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 15 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Yes. 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 17 made and seconded. All in favor? 18 (Ayes.) 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 20 (No response.) 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 22 Now, Mr. Jones, you understand what 23 Commission Fedorko just said, and this also 24 means that you have to -- you know, you have to 25 provide the Division with this information. If 84 ITEM NO. 9 1 they ask you to come and meet with them, you 2 have to meet with them. I'm assuming that we 3 have your current address? 4 MS. FRIGEN: I was going to say, Mr. 5 Jones can stay for a little bit until I'm 6 finished. We can accomplish a couple things. 7 We can verify his present address, a telephone 8 number, and I might ask the scheduling officer 9 if she would right while he's here, give a 10 conference notice to him and the Division so we 11 can have a firm hand-deliver it to him. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Very good. 13 Okay. Thank you. 14 MR. JONES: You're welcome. 15 MR. NANCE: Item No. 9, application for 16 suspension for Wilfred Black, John Knight, and 17 Felix Pluma. 18 MS. FRIGEN: Madame Chair and 19 Commissioners, Mr. Pluma is present. Let me 20 ask whether Mr. Black or Mr. Night are present 21 or represented. 22 Apparently not. If you want to take 23 those two matters first. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Why don't we do that. 25 MS. FRIGEN: They're not here. 85 ITEM NO. 9 1 You have before you the Division's 2 application for suspension in those two cases. 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 4 Mr. Biscieglia, are you handling 5 suspensions? 6 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Yes. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there anything 8 additional you'd like to say? 9 MR. BISCIEGLIA: To the other two cases, 10 no. You have our application. 11 Thank you. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 13 Any questions? 14 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to suspend 15 credentials. 16 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 18 made and seconded. All in favor? 19 (Ayes.) 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 21 (No response.) 22 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 23 Now we'll take the third item. 24 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. With respect to Mr. 25 Pluma, I would ask him to come forward. He has 86 ITEM NO. 9 1 asked for assistance from staff as far as 2 interpretation. Doris Manzano has offered to 3 assist in that regard. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 5 MS. FRIGEN: Before we hear from Mr. 6 Pluma, I would ask the Division to go forward 7 and provide its basis for suspension and to 8 give Miss Manzano an opportunity to translate 9 to Mr. Pluma what the Division is saying. 10 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 11 Mr. Biscieglia? 12 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Thank you, 13 Commissioner. 14 The Respondent was indicted in Atlantic 15 County, Indictment No. 06081838-C-CP, filed 16 August 23rd, 2006, for two counts of 17 distribution of CDS contrary to NJSA 18 2C:35-5B(1), third degree. 19 In addition, Mr. Pluma was also indicted 20 for -- 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Are you okay? 22 COMMISSIONER EPPS: She's translating. 23 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Oh, okay. 24 MS. MANZANO: He's understanding what 25 you're saying. If he has a question, he will 87 ITEM NO. 9 1 stop you. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. 3 MR. BISCIEGLIA: In addition, Mr. Pluma 4 was indicted for two counts of distribution of 5 CDS within 500 feet of a public park contrary 6 to NJSA 2C:35-7.1, second degree. Mr. Pluma 7 allegedly sold cocaine twice while employed and 8 working as a dealer at the Tropicana Casino and 9 Hotel. 10 This investigation involves several 11 controlled buys using confidential informants 12 by the police. 13 Thank you. 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 15 Mr. Pluma, I guess maybe we should swear 16 you in at this point. 17 MR. NANCE: Yes. Stand and raise your 18 right hand and be sworn. 19 20 FELIX R. PLUMA, having been duly sworn 21 to tell the truth, testified as follows: 22 23 MR. NANCE: Please state your name. 24 MR. PLUMA: Felix Pluma. 25 MR. NANCE: Okay. 88 ITEM NO. 9 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. 2 Mr. Pluma, is there anything you'd like 3 to tell us today? 4 MR. PLUMA/INTERPRETER: I don't know 5 anything about this case. I never been 6 arrested. I never had any problems. I worked 7 here for 13 years. I don't know where this is 8 coming from. Supposedly, they went to an old 9 address where I lived at 16 years ago, and this 10 is where supposedly they went to arrest me. 11 This address -- the complaint came to this is 12 where I live at. And this is where I get my 13 mail, and this is where I've been living at for 14 all this time. 15 These charges, I don't know anything 16 about these charges. I have a public defender. 17 I'm scheduled to go to a hearing, and I'm 18 waiting for the public defender next week. I 19 need an opportunity to keep on working because 20 I don't know anything about this case. 21 I am Mr. Pluma, but I don't know 22 anything about this case. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Commissioners Epps? 24 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Well, Mr. 25 Biscieglia, was he indicted in absentia, or was 89 ITEM NO. 9 1 he present for the indictment? 2 MR. BISCIEGLIA: For -- 3 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Because you would 4 know if he'd been indicted. 5 MR. BISCIEGLIA: For all purposes, I 6 think if you listen to what the Respondent is 7 just saying, I think what he -- and I'm 8 assuming. You think you might want to question 9 him on this. I think what he says is he does 10 not know anything about this charge, but he's 11 actually saying he did not commit this charge. 12 Because when you listen to what he just said, 13 he met with an attorney, and he has a hearing 14 scheduled -- or a trial scheduled, I believe he 15 said. So, I mean, he was indicted in the 16 Atlantic County indictment. I don't understand 17 how he could not have knowledge of these facts. 18 COMMISSIONER EPPS: No. The only 19 question -- I'm not suggesting that he wasn't. 20 I mean, what I'm asking you is whether you know 21 if he was indicted in absentia or if he was 22 present for the indictment. 23 MR. BISCIEGLIA: I don't see -- I see 24 nothing mentioning any that he was in absentia. 25 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Okay. 90 ITEM NO. 9 1 MS. MANZANO: He said I've never been to 2 court. I never been to court. 3 (Conferring.) 4 MR. PLUMA/INTERPRETER: I never been to 5 court before. I'm going -- I'm scheduled for 6 court next week. 7 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Why are you going to 8 court next week? 9 MR. PLUMA/INTERPRETER: About this case. 10 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I don't under -- I 11 don't even know what that is, doesn't make 12 sense. 13 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Well -- 14 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Was he arrested 15 subsequent? 16 MR. PLUMA: Never been arrested. 17 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Never been 18 arrested. 19 MR. PLUMA: Never. 20 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Never been in 21 the police station? Never been processed? 22 MR. PLUMA: No. All these years. No. 23 COMMISSIONER EPPS: What did you receive 24 to tell you you have to go to court? 25 (Conferring.) 91 ITEM NO. 9 1 MR. PLUMA/INTERPRETER: They came at 2 home to arrest me January 25th. I didn't know 3 what this was all about, and this is how -- 4 MR. PLUMA: I was working at that time. 5 MR. PLUMA/INTERPRETER: I was working at 6 that time. They came to my home to arrest me 7 on that date. I don't know what this was all 8 about but they came to arrest me at work. 9 (Conferring.) 10 MR. PLUMA/INTERPRETER: They went to the 11 Somers Point address, which is where I lived at 12 16 years ago. I'm now at this address, at this 13 current address for 16 years. And when they 14 told me about it, that's why I went to court 15 the next day, to find out why they were looking 16 for me. And that's when they said this about 17 this charges about cocaine and heroin. And I 18 don't know anything about that. And here it 19 says something different. It says "cocaine." 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: I think Commissioner 21 Fedorko has a question. 22 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Mr. Pluma, you were 23 arrested and taken to a police station? 24 MR. PLUMA: Never. 25 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: You just said you 92 ITEM NO. 9 1 were arrested? 2 MR. PLUMA: No. 3 COMMISSIONER EPPS: They came to arrest 4 him. 5 MR. PLUMA: No. They tried to arrest me 6 because I don't go to the court. January 18th. 7 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: They came to arrest 8 you, but you weren't there? 9 MR. PLUMA: I don't know about a court 10 because I no live in that address. I live in 11 Pleasantville. 12 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Were you taken to a 13 police station and fingerprinted? 14 MR. PLUMA: No. Never. 15 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: How do we know this 16 is the right guy? 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yeah. 18 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Because he -- first of 19 all, he's a fugitive. And the -- and the 20 active warrant. The social security of Mr. 21 Pluma that is on file with the Casino Control 22 Commission matches the social security number 23 on file with the criminal justice screen 24 showing his arrest. Yeah. It's likely what 25 happened here, there was a direct presentment 93 ITEM NO. 9 1 to the grand jury because, there was a lot of 2 undercover work in this case in looking at the 3 file. So it's possible that that Mr. Pluma was 4 not aware of the indictment but then was 5 arrested after the grand jury indictment. 6 MR. PLUMA: Never. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: But he's saying he's 8 never been arrested. 9 COMMISSIONER EPPS: He says he's never 10 been arrested. 11 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Well, I believe 12 attempts were made to arrest him, but I don't 13 think that he actually acquiesced to them. 14 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Has Mr. PLuma 15 ever been served with a complaint? 16 MR. BISCIEGLIA: And the criminal 17 justice updates for this matter has been 18 entered into, and that he's pending a status 19 conference. 20 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: What is a fugitive 21 for? 22 MR. BISCIEGLIA: For the indictment. I 23 would assume for not acquiescing to the arrest. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Inglis? 25 MR. INGIS: I'd like to ask Mr. 94 ITEM NO. 9 1 Biscieglia, do you know if he was arraigned? 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: This might be 3 arraignment. 4 MR. BISCIEGLIA: The last thing we have 5 is our indictment and the update. 6 MR. INGIS: Can you find the date of the 7 arraignment? Take a brief recess. He can 8 probably find out if -- the date of the 9 arraignment. 10 MR. BISCIEGLIA: It is obvious that Mr. 11 Pluma has some knowledge of the criminal 12 offense against him. As he has stated he was 13 arrested and now saying he was not and also -- 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: No. I don't think -- 15 COMMISSIONER EPPS: In all fairness to 16 him, this is just what I'm hearing. He seems 17 to be saying that he got some notice that says 18 he did something that he doesn't know about 19 having done, and someone came to his house to 20 arrest him. He doesn't know what they're 21 talking about. But now he got a notice to go 22 to court, and he's going to go because he got 23 a -- he now has a notice says he has to be in 24 court. And he intends to appear concerning 25 that notice. But he doesn't know, he seems to 95 ITEM NO. 9 1 be saying he doesn't know what the history of 2 this thing is. I didn't hear him say he knows 3 what he's talking about and now he doesn't. I 4 didn't hear that from him. I mean, there seems 5 to be some confusion. But if the issue is 6 whether or not he's the same person and whether 7 or not there's an outstanding fugitive warrant. 8 MR. BISCIEGLIA: I don't believe there's 9 an issue as to whether it's a same person. The 10 social security numbers from the screen -- from 11 the screens match this social security number 12 for Mr. Pluma who is on the Control Commission 13 screens. 14 MR. PLUMA/INTERPRETER: It's coming 15 from. 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Ingis? 17 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Okay. If you'd like to 18 take a short adjournment in this matter -- 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yeah. Why don't we do 20 that. 21 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: I'd just like 22 to ask a couple questions. 23 MR. BISCIEGLIA: We can verify. 24 MR. INGIS: I want to ask one or two 25 questions of Mr. Pluma before we take a recess. 96 ITEM NO. 9 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Sure. 2 MR. INGIS: Mr. Pluma, have you met with 3 a public defender on these charges? 4 MR. PLUMA: Not yet. No. I have to go 5 to the court Monday. 6 MR. INGIS: That will -- 7 MR. PLUMA: Told me I have to go to the 8 court and see her in the court. 9 MR. INGIS: You received a notice for 10 the court? 11 MR. PLUMA: For her. 12 MR. INGIS: Do you have a copy of that 13 notice? 14 MR. PLUMA: Yeah. That's his name. 15 Phone number and everything. And I received a 16 letter. 17 MS. FRIGEN: Mr. Pluma, but you did 18 represent to me when we were talking earlier 19 that you did speak to an attorney about having 20 received this package from the Commission. Who 21 did you talk to? 22 MR. PLUMA: I talked to her about this. 23 And she told me tell today to the Commission 24 about -- 25 MS. FRIGEN: So you did have like a 97 ITEM NO. 9 1 limited conversation with the attorney? 2 MR. INGIS: All right. Madame Chair, if 3 we could take about a five-minute recess, I 4 believe we could clear something up. He just 5 provided me with a document. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. All right. 7 MR. INGIS: Take a five-minute recess. 8 CHAIR KASSEKERT: We'll take a 9 five-minute recess then. 10 (A recess was taken from 11:58 a.m. to 11 12:16 p.m. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: We're back on the 13 record. 14 Miss Frigen? 15 MS. FRIGEN: This matter again concerns 16 the application for suspension regarding Mr. 17 Pluma, and have finished the recess and ready 18 for this matter to be considered. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 20 Mr. Biscieglia? 21 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Thank you. 22 During the adjournment, the Division 23 discovered that a bench warrant was indeed 24 issued on January 18th of 2007 for failure to 25 attend an arraignment. This bench warrant was 98 ITEM NO. 9 1 then rescinded a week later on January 25th. 2 So Mr. Pluma is not a wanted fugitive at this 3 time. An explanation was not given to the 4 bench warrant that was scheduled for and then 5 rescinded. He is scheduled for a status 6 conference on February 26, 2007. 7 In talking with Commission counsel, the 8 Division would acquiesce to a two-week 9 adjournment until the March 7th meeting so we 10 would have a better idea of the circumstances 11 surrounding the case at that time. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 13 I will entertain this motion. 14 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to adjourn 15 for two weeks. 16 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 18 made and seconded to adjournment for two weeks. 19 All in favor? 20 (Ayes.) 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 22 (No response.) 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 24 We're going to be adjourning this for 25 two weeks until we determine what happens at 99 ITEM NO. 10 1 your hearing on Monday. 2 MR. PLUMA: Okay. 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay? 4 MR. PLUMA: Thank you. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yup. 6 MR. PLUMA: Thank you. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You're welcome. 8 MR. NANCE: Item No. 10, preliminary 9 hearing concerning the exclusion of Antonello 10 Pietrafesa and Christian Scillia. 11 Miss Frigen? 12 MS. FRIGEN: Sorry. 13 Madame Chair, Commissioners, Mr. 14 Pietrafesa is present. I would ask him to come 15 forward. 16 Let me ask whether Mr. Scillia is 17 present or represented? He is not here. 18 You can have a seat at the table. 19 I would ask the Division to go forward 20 and provide the basis for which it seeks 21 preliminary exclusion. 22 I would note that Mr. -- and I apologize 23 if I mispronounce your name -- Mr. Pietrafesa 24 has submitted a written request that the final 25 hearing on the exclusion is to be deferred 100 ITEM NO. 10 1 until after his criminal case is resolved. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 3 Mr. Biscieglia? 4 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Thank you, Chair. 5 On March 8, 2006, the Respondent was 6 indicted in Atlantic County with swindling and 7 cheating contrary to NJSA 5:12-113A and NJSA 8 2C:2-6. This indictment was a result of a 9 October 22nd, 2005, arrest at which time Mr. 10 Pietrafesa and the co-defendant -- excuse me, 11 the co-conspirator -- and also the other 12 subject of our exclusion list Christian 13 Scillia, were trading cards during a game of 14 three-card poker. They swapped cards illegally 15 which resulted in a monetary gain of more than 16 $200. 17 The Division has attached in regards to 18 Mr. Scillia the judgment of conviction and 19 regards to Mr. Pietrafesa the order of 20 postponement regarding his PTI. 21 Swindling and cheating is a very serious 22 offense under the legislature -- excuse me -- 23 under the statute. The legislature has shown 24 exactly how important and how much of a 25 violation the cheating offense is by statute 101 ITEM NO. 10 1 NJSA 19:48.13a(4)(i). It lists five matters 2 that are listed as being inimical to the casino 3 interests. And the first one of these matters 4 is cheating and swindling. The public is 5 entitled to know that these games are being run 6 fairly and that cheating will not be tolerated. 7 The Division is aware of Mr. 8 Pietrafesa's request to defer the actual 9 hearing until he has completed his PTI. The 10 Division does not object to the request to 11 defer the hearing but does go forward with the 12 preliminary placement on the exclusion list. 13 Thank you. 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 15 Mr. Pietrafesa, is there anything you'd 16 like to say to us? 17 MR. PIETRAFESA: Not at this time. No. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. I'll entertain 19 a motion. 20 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Madame Chair, I move 21 that we grant the Division's request for 22 preliminary orders placing the names of 23 Antonello P. Pietrafesa and Christian P. 24 Scillia on exclusion list pending final action 25 on a related petition for final exclusion. 102 ITEM NO. 13 1 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 3 made and seconded. All in favor? 4 (Ayes.) 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 6 (No response.) 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 8 MR. BISCIEGLIA: Thank you, Chair. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 10 MR. NANCE: For your consideration, Item 11 No 13, petition of Harrah's Operating Company, 12 Inc., Marina Associates, Atlantic City 13 Showboat, Inc., Bally's Park Place, and 14 Boardwalk Regency Corp., for waiver of 15 qualification for an officer of HOC. 16 Miss Wozniak? 17 MS. WOZNIAK: Good afternoon. Miss 18 Hughes is here for the Petitioner and Miss Turi 19 for the Division. 20 I have distributed a draft resolution 21 which has been revised to reflect the 22 Petitioner's additional submission dated 23 February 14th, 2007. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 25 Miss Hughes? 103 ITEM NO. 13 1 MS. HUGHES: Thank you. Good afternoon. 2 I have read over the draft resolution 3 and would ask for your approval. 4 Thank you. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 6 Miss Turi? 7 MS. TURI: Good afternoon, Madame Chair, 8 Commissioners. I also have the draft 9 resolution, and subject to the revision, I have 10 no objection. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 12 Any questions? 13 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 14 Madame Chair. 15 Move to grant the petition of Aristocrat 16 Technologies, Incorporated, for -- 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thirteen. 18 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to adopt the 19 draft resolution and waive the qualification 20 requirement pursuant to NJSA 5:12-85(d)(1) as 21 to the Vice President of Entertainment for 22 Harrah's Operating Company. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there a second? 24 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 25 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 104 ITEM NO. 11 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion is made and 2 seconded. This is a roll call vote. 3 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Sommeling? 4 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Yes. 5 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Epps? 6 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yes. 7 MR. NANCE: Vice Chair Frulio? 8 Vice Chair Fedorko, excuse me. 9 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yes. 10 MR. NANCE: Chair Kassekert? 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. 12 MR. NANCE: The record will reflect that 13 the motion is unanimous. 14 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Get us mixed up all 15 the time. 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Daryl, you are in such 17 trouble. 18 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: I'll talk to you, 19 later, Dar. 20 MR. NANCE: Item No. 11, petition for 21 Aristocrat Technologies for waiver of 22 qualification requirement of Colonial First 23 State Investments Limited. 24 Miss Nagengast? 25 MS. NAGENGAST: Good afternoon, now, 105 ITEM NO. 11 1 Chair, Commissioners. 2 Nick Casiello is here on behalf of the 3 Petitioner and Dot Turi on behalf of the 4 Division. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Casiello, this is 6 your chance to pay him back for, you know, the 7 lawyer remarks, and lawyer jokes he's been 8 making. 9 MR. CASIELLO: Actually, I was going to 10 ask you: What happened to your title? 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is it gone? 12 MR. CASIELLO: It's gone. And I -- 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: I've always said I'm 14 the Chair of nothing. 15 THE WITNESS: It's interesting. He has 16 the "Vice Chair" title and you have no "Chair." 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: It's probably in his 18 desk. 19 THE WITNESS: Just quickly, I just want 20 to note for the record that since this petition 21 was filed, the holdings of Colonial in 22 Aristocrat Technologies has decreased from 23 about 11 percent to 10.2 percent. 24 Thank you. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Miss Turi? 106 ITEM NO. 11 1 MS. TURI: Yes. You have the letter 2 that was filed by DAG Adams suggesting that 3 there is no objection to the relief being 4 sought in this matter. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 6 Any questions? 7 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 8 Madame Chair. 9 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to grant the 10 petition of Aristocrat Technologies, 11 Incorporated, Aristocrat International, Pty 12 Limited, and Aristocrat Technologies Australia, 13 Pty Limited, and waive the qualification of 14 Colonial First State Investments, Limited, 15 pursuant to NJAC 19:51-1.114B(3) and NJSA 16 5:12-85(f) based on its status as an 17 institutional investor as defined by NJSA 18 5:12-27.1. 19 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 20 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 22 made and seconded. All in favor? 23 (Ayes.) 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 25 (No response.) 107 ITEM NO. 12 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 2 MR. NANCE: Item No. 12, petition of MGM 3 MIRAGE for waiver of qualification requirement 4 for Rick E. Arpin as its Vice President, 5 Financial Accounting. 6 Mr. DiGiacomo? 7 MR. DiGIACOMO: Madame Chair, 8 Commissioners, good afternoon. Mr. Casiello 9 for the Petitioners, Mr. James Fogarty for the 10 Division of Gaming Enforcement. 11 I've shared with counsel for the parties 12 a copy of the draft resolution, and I believe 13 they are prepared to consent to its form and 14 entry. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 16 Mr. Casiello? 17 MR. CASIELLO: And we do so consent. 18 Thank you. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 20 Mr. Fogarty? 21 MR. FOGARTY: The Director does -- would 22 concur in a waiver, if you all want to waive 23 Mr. Arpin. We sent a letter to you in that 24 regard dated January 29, 2007. 25 I've seen the draft resolution, and I 108 ITEM NO. 12 1 have no objection to it. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 3 Any questions? 4 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 5 Madame Chair. 6 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Chair, I move that 7 we adopt the draft resolution and waive the 8 qualification requirement as to Ricky Arpin in 9 his capacity as Vice President of Financial 10 Accounting for MGM MIRAGE pursuant to NJSA 11 5:12-85(d)(1). 12 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 13 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion is made and 15 seconded. This is a roll call vote. 16 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Sommeling? 17 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Yes. 18 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Epps? 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yes. 20 MR. NANCE: Vice Chair Fedorko? 21 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yes. 22 MR. NANCE: Chair Kassekert? 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. 24 MR. NANCE: The record will reflect that 25 the motion is unanimous. 109 ITEM NO. 14 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 2 MR. DiGIACOMO: Thank you, 3 Commissioners. 4 MR. NANCE: Item No. 14, the petition of 5 MGM MIRAGE requesting permission for James G. 6 Dumond to perform the duties and exercise the 7 powers of Vice President Compliance for MGM 8 MIRAGE pending plenary qualification in 9 connection with the casino license of Marina 10 District Development Company, LLC. 11 Miss Frank? 12 MS. FRANK: Good afternoon. 13 The draft resolution of Mr. Dumond's 14 temporary qualification has been circulated to 15 the parties. 16 Mr. Casiello is here for MGM MIRAGE, and 17 Mr. Fogarty for the Division. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Casiello? 19 MR. CASIELLO: Thank you. 20 I just want to note for the record that 21 the position of Vice President of Compliance is 22 a newly created position at MGM MIRAGE. 23 Recently MGM MIRAGE commenced steps to revise 24 and strengthen its compliance the compliance 25 plan, and as part of that process, they 110 ITEM NO. 14 1 recreated the separate position of Vice 2 President of Compliance that reports directly 3 to the Compliance Committee, which reports to 4 the Audit Committee. Also as part of that 5 process, the Compliance Committee of MGM now 6 consists solely of independent members. 7 But we have received and reviewed the 8 draft resolution, and it is acceptable to us. 9 Thank you. 10 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 11 Mr. Fogarty? 12 MR. FOGARTY: Yes. We have no objection 13 if you temporarily waive Mr. Dumond. I've seen 14 the draft resolution and have no objections. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 16 Any questions? 17 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to adopt the 18 draft resolution and authorize James G. Dumond 19 on a temporary basis prior to his plenary 20 qualification to assume the duties and exercise 21 the powers of Vice President of Compliance for 22 MGM MIRAGE subject to the conditions contained 23 in NJAC 19:43-2.7, which, among other things, 24 requires that he file a personal history 25 disclosure form NJ, and NJ supplemental by 111 ITEM NO. 15 1 March 8th, 2007. 2 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there a second? 4 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 5 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion is made and 7 seconded this is a roll call vote. 8 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Sommeling? 9 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Yes. 10 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Epps? 11 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yes. 12 MR. NANCE: Vice Chair Fedorko? 13 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yes. 14 MR. NANCE: Chair Kassekert? 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. 16 MR. NANCE: The record will reflect that 17 the motion is unanimous. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 19 MR. FOGARTY: Thank you. 20 MR. CASIELLO: Thank you, Commissioners. 21 MR. NANCE: Item No. 15, consideration 22 of the qualification of Michael J. Romano to 23 serve as Vice President of Regulatory 24 Compliance for Resorts International Holdings, 25 LLC, and Colony RIH Holdings, Inc., 112 ITEM NO. 15 1 Intermediary Companies of Casino Licensees RIH 2 Acquisitions New Jersey, LLC, and Resorts 3 International Hotel, Inc. 4 Miss Frank? 5 MS. FRANK: Michael J. Romano received 6 temporary qualification from the Commission on 7 December 13th, 2006. A draft resolution on his 8 plenary qualification has been circulated to 9 the parties. 10 Miss Wild is here for Hilton and 11 Resorts, and Miss Flaherty for the Division. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. Good 13 morning. Good afternoon. 14 MS. WILD: Good afternoon. 15 On behalf of Mr. Romano, who is not in 16 the state today -- he's actually fulfilling his 17 compliance function by flying to Las Vegas to 18 attend a meeting this week, I would ask that 19 you adopt the proposed resolution. 20 Thank you. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 22 Miss Flaherty? 23 MS. FLAHERTY: Yes, Chair, 24 Commissioners. 25 The Division report dated January 31st 113 ITEM NO. 15 1 in this year in which we had no objection to 2 Mr. Romano serving in his positions, and we 3 also have no issue with regard to the 4 resolution. 5 Thank you. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 7 Any questions? 8 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Madame Chair, 9 move to adopt the draft resolution and find 10 Michael J. Romano qualified to serve as Vice 11 President of Regulatory Compliance for Colony 12 RIH Holdings, Incorporated, and Resorts 13 International Holdings, LLC 14 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion is made and 16 seconded. This a roll call vote. 17 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Sommeling? 18 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Yes. 19 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Epps? 20 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yes. 21 MR. NANCE: Vice Chair Fedorko? 22 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yes. 23 MR. NANCE: Chair Kassekert? 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. 25 MR. NANCE: The record are will reflect 114 ITEM NO. 16 1 that the motion is unanimous. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 3 MS. FLAHERTY: Thank you. 4 MR. NANCE: Item No. 16, proposed 5 publication of readoption of NJAC 19:43. 6 Miss Frank? 7 MS. FRANK: Chapter 43 is scheduled to 8 expire on April 15th, 2007. Upon filing a 9 notice of proposed readoption with OAL, the 10 expiration date will be extended six months to 11 October of 2007. 12 The rules on casino licensees are before 13 you today for approval of the notice for 14 initial publication in the New Jersey Register. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 16 Any questions? 17 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to 18 approve -- 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Motion to approve 20 this publication. 21 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 22 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 23 made and seconded. All in favor? 24 (Ayes.) 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 115 ITEM NO. 17 1 (No response.) 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 3 MS. FRANK: Thank you. 4 MR. NANCE: Item No. 17, petition of 5 Trump Plaza Associates for an amendment to its 6 certificate of operation and casino hotel 7 alcoholic beverage license to permit a casino 8 reconfiguration. 9 Mr. Briliant? 10 MR. BRILIANT: Good afternoon, Madame 11 Chair and Commissioners. 12 Mr. Cunningham is here on behalf of the 13 Petitioner. Mr. Ficchi is here on behalf of 14 the Division. 15 We have circulated a proposed draft 16 resolution, and the parties have indicated to 17 me that it is acceptable should the Commission 18 grant the relief requested. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 20 Mr. Cunningham? 21 MR. CUNNINGHAM: Thank you. 22 As indicated, this is a petition for a 23 reconfiguration of the Trump Plaza casino 24 floor, and I would simply rely on the papers 25 submitted and ask that the draft resolution be 116 ITEM NO. 17 1 adopted. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 3 Mr. Ficchi? 4 MR. FICCHI: Thank you. Good morning, 5 Chair, Commissioners. 6 The Division has reviewed this matter 7 and found that the proposed area where the 8 slots were going to be dormant or stored, or 9 however you want to look at it, there would be 10 sufficient adequate security for them. So the 11 Division has no objection, and we have no 12 objection to the form of the draft resolution. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 14 Any questions? 15 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 16 Madame Chair. 17 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Chair, move that we 18 adopt the draft resolution to approve the 19 petition of Trump Plaza Associates to an 20 amendment to its certificate of operation and 21 casino hotel alcoholic beverage license to 22 permit the reconfiguration subject to the 23 conditions in the resolution. 24 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 117 ITEM NO. 18 1 made and seconded. All in favor? 2 (Ayes.) 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 4 (No response.) 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 6 Thank you. 7 MR. CUNNINGHAM: Thank you. 8 MR. NANCE: Item No. 18, the petition of 9 IGT to terminate the "Elvis" Slot System and to 10 transfer its progressive jackpot to the "Wheel 11 of Fortune" $.01 Slot System. 12 Mr. Briliant? 13 MR. BRILIANT: Mr. Previti is here on 14 behalf of the Petitioner. Mr. Ficchi for the 15 Division. 16 I did circulate a resolution which the 17 parties have indicated is acceptable. 18 I would indicate that there's one small 19 typo in the resolution. There's a reference to 20 the "Lucy" slot system which, of course, is not 21 relevant, and we will correct that before we 22 send it to you for your signature. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 24 Mr. Previti? Good afternoon. 25 MR. PREVITI: Good afternoon, Chair, 118 ITEM NO. 18 1 Commissioners. 2 We're here seeking the approval of 3 transfer of the Elvis system to the Wheel of 4 Fortune $.01 system. At present, the Elvis 5 system has approximately 11 games and very 6 little play. 7 We have reviewed the draft resolution 8 and would ask for approval. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Elvis will be leaving 10 the building. 11 MR. PREVITI: Elvis is leaving the 12 building. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Bad joke. 14 Mr. Ficchi? 15 MR. FICCHI: Good afternoon. 16 Last time we spoke. You have the 17 Division's letter dated February 9th from the 18 Deputy Attorney General Charles Kimmel wherein 19 the Division does not object to the relief 20 requested pursuant to the one condition about 21 the 30-day notice -- notification which is 22 included in the draft resolution, and the 23 Division does not have any objection to the 24 draft resolution. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 119 ITEM NO. 19-20 1 Any questions? 2 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 3 Madame Chair. 4 Move to adopt the draft resolution to 5 approve the IGT's request for transfer for the 6 Elvis progressive jackpot subject to the 7 conditions in the resolution. 8 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 10 made and seconded. All in favor? 11 (Ayes.) 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 13 (No response.) 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 15 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 16 MR. FICCHI: Thank you. 17 MR. NANCE: Item No. 19 has been 18 adjourned. 19 Item No. 20, proposed adoption of 20 amendments concerning alternative procedure for 21 pre-shuffling and pre-inspection of the cards. 22 Mr. Mamolen? 23 MR. MAMOLEN: This matter is before you 24 for final adoption. You have staff's memo and 25 the proposed notice of final adoption. 120 ITEM NO. 21 1 And, essentially, the only casino that 2 has tested the new procedure is Borgata, 3 although it has been over a period of about -- 4 well, almost a year, if not longer, that 5 they've been testing. So we do have a fairly 6 decent track record of how the test has been 7 going at that one property. 8 The comments and responses are outlined 9 in the notice, proposed notice of final 10 adoption. And, again, it's before you for 11 action. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 13 Any questions? 14 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 15 Madame Chair. 16 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to adopt 17 with minor substantive and technical changes. 18 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 20 made and seconded. All in favor? 21 (Ayes.) 22 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 23 (No response.) 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 25 MR. NANCE: Item No. 21, proposed 121 ITEM NO. 21 1 temporary adoption of amendments for "Fire Bet" 2 in craps; authorization of rulemaking 3 experiment for "Fire Bet" pursuant to NJSA 4 5:12-69e. 5 Mr. Mamolen? 6 MR. MAMOLEN: This is a new proposition 7 wager in the authorized game of craps. I 8 believe a number of the Commissioners did see a 9 demonstration of it several weeks ago. And, 10 essentially, what's involved here is a player 11 has to -- makes a wager on whether or not a 12 shooter makes four individual or distinct 13 separate points. These are all terms of art 14 within the game of craps. But, essentially, 15 these are rolling the dice after a come-out 16 roll and making -- and having a dice total of 17 four/five/six or eight/nine or ten, or six 18 individual points. And then rolling that same 19 number again for an individual point to be 20 made. 21 This is before you for temporary 22 adoption of proposed regulations and 23 authorization of a test. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 25 Any questions? 122 ITEM NO. 21 1 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I just have one 2 question. 3 I didn't have the benefit of the 4 demonstration. But just to make sure I 5 understand, are we talking about a come-out 6 roll and the point is four. He then makes that 7 four, and he comes out again and establishes a 8 new point? Or when he establishes a point of 9 four, he throws four shots that don't -- 10 MR. MAMOLEN: Individual distinct 11 separate points. 12 COMMISSIONER EPPS: So he has to -- 13 MR. MAMOLEN: If you make the same point 14 again, it doesn't increment the number of total 15 points you made. 16 COMMISSIONER EPPS: So he has to 17 establish a four, make that four. Then 18 establish a six, make that six. 19 MR. MAMOLEN: Correct. 20 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Wow. Okay. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: That's what we all 22 said. 23 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Okay. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Any other questions? 25 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No other 123 ITEM NO. 21 1 questions, Madame Chair. 2 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Come on, Ralph 3 Frulio. 4 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to 5 preliminary approve the "Fire Bet" for craps as 6 a new wager compatible with the public interest 7 pursuant to section 5 of the Act; 8 And to authorize publication of the 9 notice of temporary adoption which will permit 10 a test of the new wager to begin on or after 11 March 26, 2007, subject to the conditions and 12 continue for a period of time not to exceed 270 13 days; 14 And to temporarily adopt the amendments 15 contained that the notice of proposal for the 16 purpose of conducting the test to delegate to 17 the Director or the Division of Compliance the 18 authority to establish the terms and conditions 19 of a test of a "Fire Bet"; 20 And condition any test of the "Fire Bet" 21 upon the filing with and the approval by the 22 Division of Compliance of all necessary test 23 submissions for a section 69e test of the new 24 wager; 25 And further condition any test of the 124 ITEM NO. 22 1 "Fire Bet" upon the issuance of a transactional 2 waiver for Hopbet, Inc. 3 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 4 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 6 made and seconded. All in favor? 7 (Ayes.) 8 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 9 (No response.) 10 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 11 MR. NANCE: Item No. 22, proposed 12 publication and temporary adoption of amendment 13 to NJAC 19:47-20.11. 14 Mr. Mamolen? 15 MR. MAMOLEN: This is two new pay tables 16 for the pair plus wager in three-card poker. 17 It's just a small change, and they're adding a 18 different pay-out for what is known as a mini 19 royal, which is heretofore was encompassed as a 20 three-card royal flush. Just increasing the 21 pay-out odds slightly and thereby would 22 slightly decrease the house advantage. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 24 Any questions? 25 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to approve 125 ITEM NO. 22 1 for publication and temporary adoption. 2 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 3 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 5 made and seconded. All in favor? 6 (Ayes.) 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 8 (No response.) 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 10 Thank you. 11 MR. NANCE: In accordance with 12 Resolution No. 06-12-13-20, the next closed 13 session of the Commission shall be held on 14 Wednesday, March 7th, 2007, at 9:15 a.m. in the 15 Commission offices. 16 It is now time for the public 17 participation portion of the meeting. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there anyone from 19 the public who wishes to be heard? 20 Can you come forward and state your name 21 for the record, please? 22 MR. AMIRIANTZ: Yes. My name is George 23 Amiriantz. Atlantic City resident. 24 MR. NANCE: Please spell your last name. 25 MR. AMIRIANTZ: A-m-i-r-i-a-n-t-z. 126 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PORTION 1 MR. NANCE: Thank you. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 3 MR. AMIRIANTZ: Chairperson Kassekert, 4 how are you today? 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Good. 6 MR. AMIRIANTZ: And members of the 7 Commission. I'm addressing you directly 8 because I forwarded correspondence to your 9 attention about a month ago regarding the 10 possibility of -- would it be possible for a 11 municipal governing body, Atlantic City, for 12 example, in the City of Atlantic City being a 13 casino licensee? And my interest was -- I just 14 want to be clear -- would they be able, in 15 essence, to hold Bader as city-owned land and 16 be a landlord, shall we say and lease 17 property -- 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Uh-huh. 19 MR. AMIRIANTZ: -- to outside developers 20 for ownership of casinos? I wasn't 21 anticipating that the City of Atlantic City 22 would be owning or operating a casino. It was 23 not my intent -- 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. 25 MR. AMIRIANTZ: So, of course, it came 127 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PORTION 1 back to me, as you may know, through Pinky 2 Kravitz on his show that there is nothing 3 within the casino regulations that prohibits 4 the municipal governing body from holding, 5 however, the conflicts are many. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Well, it's the 7 Conflicts Law, which is not a conflict of 8 interest, but it's a provision of law called 9 the Conflicts Law. 10 MR. AMIRIANTZ: Exactly. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yeah. 12 MR. AMIRIANTZ: So my only question is 13 that since nothing precludes it from happening 14 other than addressing the Conflicts Law, if 15 those conflicts were satisfied to the -- you 16 know, satisfaction of the Division and the 17 Commission, if there were a way which those 18 conflicts could be satisfied which, of course, 19 could only come in a form of an application, 20 obviously. Then there would be nothing that 21 would prohibit it under the existing law, as I 22 understand it. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Not that -- well, Mr. 24 Missimer, is he -- oh, there he is. 25 Mr. Missimer, you want to comment on the 128 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PORTION 1 statute? My understanding is that the 2 conflicts -- it's not a question of satisfying 3 conflicts, but the Conflicts Law states that. 4 MR. MISSIMER: Well, depending upon the 5 manner in which the situation was established. 6 The Conflicts Law absolutely precludes the 7 municipal governing body of any jurisdiction 8 which has casinos in New Jersey -- which is 9 pretty limited to one city -- having any 10 interest in or ownership of a casino licensee. 11 If the City were attempting to lease the land 12 to a private owner, then I think you invoke 13 issues under the Casino Control Act because the 14 Casino Control Act says that no -- "only the 15 following persons shall be eligible to hold a 16 casino license unless otherwise determined by 17 the Commission. The concurrence, each of the 18 following persons shall be required to hold a 19 license." And then it goes into a number of 20 entities. And it says, "Any person who either 21 owns an approved casino hotel or owns or has a 22 contract to purchase or construct or any person 23 who whether as lessor or lessee either leases 24 an approved casino hotel or leases or has an 25 agreement to lease a casino hotel or" -- and 129 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PORTION 1 then it goes on to "any other person who has 2 control over either an approved casino hotel or 3 the land thereunder or the operation of a 4 casino." 5 Well, "person" is a term of art in the 6 Casino Control Act which is defined as "any 7 corporation, association, operation, firm, 8 partnership, trust, or other form of business 9 association, as well as any natural person." 10 So the Casino Control Act does not contemplate 11 a governmental entity having any either 12 ownership interest or being able to hold the 13 land and have a leasehold interest in the land 14 on which a casino hotel is built. And that's 15 consistent with -- I mean there are well over 16 200 sections of the Casino Control Act, and not 17 one of them contemplates in any way dealing 18 with a governmental entity as part of the 19 regulatory process. 20 MR. AMIRIANTZ: Okay. So, if I 21 understand that correctly -- I'm not an 22 attorney. So if it's not contemplated, does 23 that mean that it's never been addressed? Or 24 can be addressed? 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: It means it has not 130 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PORTION 1 been addressed. Obviously, you can always 2 change statutes. And the statute -- I don't 3 know if that would require a constitutional 4 amendment. 5 MR. MISSIMER: No. I don't believe it 6 would. It can be done through Statutory 7 amendments, but it would require significant 8 Statutory amendments. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Because you'd have to 10 go all through the Act and pick out what where 11 it would apply. 12 MR. MISSIMER: Yes. 13 MR. AMIRIANTZ: No. But I -- it's 14 not -- maybe misunderstanding something. If 15 something is not contemplated, does it mean it 16 hasn't been addressed? 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: It means that it has 18 been addressed, and it's not contemplated that 19 a municipality could serve in that role, so 20 therefore if it were, you'd have to change the 21 statute. You'd have to have a Statutory 22 change. 23 MR. AMIRIANTZ: It specifically would 24 require a statutory change? 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. 131 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PORTION 1 MR. MISSIMER: Correct. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Because it's not 3 defined. Under the definition of "person," it 4 does not include a municipality. So you'd have 5 to have a statutory change. 6 MR. AMIRIANTZ: Yes. If I may, could I 7 have a copy of that section? 8 MR. MISSIMER: We can get one for you. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: All right. 10 MR. AMIRIANTZ: Thank you very much. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 12 MR. AMIRIANTZ: Have a nice day. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. You, too. 14 Anyone else from the public who wishes 15 to be heard? 16 Seeing no one, I'll declare this portion 17 of the public meeting closed and entertain a 18 motion to adjourn. 19 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Motion to 20 adjourn. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there a second? 22 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 23 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 25 made and seconded. All in favor? 132 1 (Ayes.) 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 3 (No response.) 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion carries. 5 Thank you. 6 (Public Meeting 07-02-21 was adjourned 7 at 12:43 p.m.) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 133 1 2 C E R T I F I C A T E 3 4 5 I, DARLENE SILLITOE, a Certified 6 Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public of the 7 State of New Jersey, certify that the foregoing 8 is a true and accurate transcript of the 9 proceedings. 10 11 12 I further certify that I am neither 13 attorney, of counsel for, nor related to or 14 employed by any of the parties to the action; 15 further that I am not a relative or employee of 16 any attorney or counsel employed in this case; 17 nor am I financially interested in the action. 18 19 20 DARLENE SILLITOE CSR 21 License No XI01023 22 23 Dated: February 25, 2007 24 My Commission Expires on July 10, 2009 25 ID No 2062871