1 1 STATE OF NEW JERSEY 2 CASINO CONTROL COMMISSION 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 5 PUBLIC MEETING NO. 07-09-19 6 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8 9 Wednesday, September 19, 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 10:37 a.m. to 11:37 a.m. 15 16 17 Certified Court Reporter: Darlene Sillitoe 18 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19 20 ATLANTIC CITY COURT REPORTING, LLC 21 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS AND VIDEOGRAPHERS 22 1125 ATLANTIC AVENUE, SUITE 416 23 ATLANTIC CITY, NEW JERSEY 08401 24 (609) 345-8448 www.accourtreporting.com 25 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 DANIEL J. HENEGHAN, PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER 7 OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL: DIANNA W. FAUNTLEROY, GENERAL COUNSEL/EXECUTIVE 8 SECRETARY MARY WOZNIAK, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL 9 STEVEN M. INGIS, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL DENIS CORBETT, SENIOR COUNSEL 10 SETH H. BRILIANT, SENIOR COUNSEL LON E. MAMOLEN, SENIOR COUNSEL 11 BERNADETTE T. FRIGEN, PROGRAM SUPERVISOR CLAIRE FRANK, PROGRAM SUPERVISOR/SENIOR EEO 12 COORDINATOR 13 DIVISION OF GAMING ENFORCEMENT: DEPUTY ATTORNEYS GENERAL 14 JAMES ARMSTRONG, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL TIMOTHY C. FICCHI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 15 JAMES FOGARTY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 A P P E A R A N C E S : 2 ITEM NO. 4 DENIS J. CORBETT, SENIOR COUNSEL TIMOTHY C. FICCHI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 3 FREDERICK CUNNINGHAM, ESQ. FOR: HARRAH'S OPERATIONG COMPANY 4 ITEM NO. 5 DENIS J. CORBETT, SENIOR COUNSEL 5 JAMES ARMSTRONG, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL MARK RODDY, ESQ. 6 FOR: WAYNE J. MOLOSKY 7 ITEM NO. 8 MARY WOZNIAK, ASSISTANT COUNSEL JAMES FOGARTY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 8 TIMOTHY LOWRY, ESQ. FOR: HARRAH'S OPERATING COMPANY 9 ITEM NO. 9 CLAIRE FRANK, PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 10 JAMES FOGARTY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL TIMOTHY LOWRY, ESQ. 11 FOR: HARRAH'S OPERATING COMPANY 12 ITEM NO. 10 SETH H. BRILIANT, SENIOR COUNSEL TIMOTHY C. FICCHI, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL 13 FREDERICK CUNNINGHAM, ESQ. FOR: TRUMP TAJ MAHAL ASSOCIATES 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 1 AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING NO. 07-09-19 2 SEPTEMBER 19, 2007, 10:37 a.m. ITEM PAGE VOTE 3 1 Ratification of the minutes of 8 9 September 5, 2007 4 2 Applications for employee and casino 9 9 service industry licenses 5 Bradley S. Rowlette 10 11 3 Stipulations of settlement and 6 consent agreements: a) Sergio H. Alfaro a/k/a Jose Antonio 11 12 7 Osorio-Rivera) (06-0278-RC) b) Richard L. Graham (06-0612-ER) 11 12 8 c) David E. Mathis (06-0565-RC) 11 12 d) James M. Reese (07-0394-EA) 11 12 9 4 Stipulation of settlement in State 13 15 v. Trump Marina Associates, LP (d/b/a 10 Trump Marina Hotel Casino) and Richard Olita (07-0229-VC) 11 5 Initial decision application of 48 62 Wayne J. Molosky (06-0578-EA) 12 6 Petitions for early reapplication: a) Harvey J. Helmandollar, III 15 22 13 (07-0129-EA) Sworn 17 b) Steven P. Hill (07-0370) adj. 14 c) Darrian L. Hudgins 23 34 (07-0371-RA) Sworn 24 15 d) Amneris Rodiguez (07-0372-RA) 35 36 7 Applications for suspension: 16 a) Brydell A. Brittingham (07-0536-RC) 36 37 b) Dominga A. Roman-Almonte (07-0539-RC) 36 37 17 c) Annamarie Donall (07-0505-RC) wdrn. d) Jose G. Prado-Ramirez (07-0538-RC) 36 37 18 e) Glorymar Rosario (07-0537-RC) 36 37 f) Beatris Valentino (07-0557-RC) 36 37 19 g) Lu Wang (07-0558-RC) 38 42 Sworn 39 20 William Wong, Translator, Sworn 40 8 Joint petition of Harrah's Operating 43 45 21 Company, Marina Associates, Atlantic City Showboat, Inc., Bally's Park Place, Inc., 22 and Bopardwalk Regnecy Corp., for waiver of qualification of an officer (Dean McBridge) 23 (PRN 2430703) 24 25 5 1 CONTINUED AGENDA 2 PUBLIC MEETING NO. 07-09-19 SEPTEMBER 19, 2007, 10:37 a.m. 3 ITEM PAGE VOTE 9 Petition of Harrah's Operating Company, 45 47 4 Inc., (HOC) Marina Associates, Atlantic City Showboat, Inc., Bally's Park Place, 5 Inc., and Boardwalk Regency Corp., requesting permission for Christopher Chang 6 to perform the duties and exercise the powers of Vice President, Innovation and 7 IT Strategy for HOC pending plenary qualification (PRN 2500710) 8 10 Petition of Trump Taj Mahal Associates 63 65 (d/b/a Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort) for 9 an amendment to its operation Certificate to expand and reconfigure its gaming floor 10 (PRN 2500708) 11 Proposed adoption of amendments to 65 66 11 NJAC 19:47-8.2 and 8.3 (Minimum and Maximum wagers; Additional Wagering Requirements) 12 12 Proposed adoption of amendments and new 66 67 Rule for three-card bonus wager in 13 Let it Ride poker 13 Proposed adoption of amendments for 67 68 14 total card wagers (4-5-6) in baccarat-punto banco and minibaccarat 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 6 1 E X H I B I T S : 2 ITEM NO. 2 DESCRIPTION EVD 3 4 EL-1 Remand for hearings 13 license X applications 5 EL-2 Grant 11 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 7 1 (Public Meeting 07-09-19 was commenced 2 at 10:37 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 8 ITEM NO. 1 1 Allegiance. 2 (The flag salute was recited.) 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Good morning. 4 MR. NANCE: Good morning. 5 Matters in closed session -- the masters 6 discussed in closed session were: Employee 7 enterprise license matters. 8 The Commission approved the September 9 5th, 2007, Commission minutes. 10 Litigation update regarding: Warren 11 Lackland and Lewis M. Springer, Jr., versus the 12 State of New Jersey and Casino Control 13 Commission; 14 Gloria Ford versus the State of New 15 Jersey and the Casino Control Commission, et 16 al. 17 And Husan versus Casino Control 18 Commission, et al. 19 Item No. 1, ratification of the minutes 20 of September 5th, 2007, public meeting. 21 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Move to 22 approve. 23 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 25 made and seconded. All in favor? 9 ITEM NO. 2 1 (Ayes.) 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 3 (No response.) 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 5 MR. NANCE: Item No. 2, application for 6 employee and casino service industry licenses. 7 This agenda item will be entered as Exhibit 8 List 1 and 2. 9 Exhibit List 1 consists of 13 10 applications for initial and/or renewal of 11 casino key and casino employee licenses. 12 The Division has objected to licensure. 13 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Chair, move that we 14 remand these matters for hearing. 15 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 16 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: 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: Motion carries. 23 MR. NANCE: Exhibit List 2 consists of 24 11 applications for initial and/or renewal of 25 casino key and casino employee licenses. 10 ITEM NO. 2 1 Staff and the Division have recommended 2 had these licenses be granted. 3 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to grant 4 applications. 5 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 7 made and seconded. All in favor? 8 (Ayes.) 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 10 (No response.) 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 12 MR. NANCE: For consideration is the 13 qualification of Bradley S. Rowlette in 14 connection with the gaming related services 15 licenses of Midwest Gaming Supply Company 16 pursuant in NJAC 19:51-1.14(B)(h). 17 Staff and the Division have recommended 18 that this application be granted. 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I move that we find 20 Bradley S. Rowlette plenarily qualified in 21 connection with the gaming related CSI license 22 of Midwest Game Supply Company pursuant to NJAC 23 19:51.14(B)(h). 24 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 11 ITEM NO. 3 1 made and seconded. All in favor? 2 (Ayes.) 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 4 (No response.) 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 6 MR. NANCE: Item No. 3, stipulation and 7 of settlement and consent agreements. When I 8 call your name, please come forward, stand 9 behind this middle table, spreading across the 10 room so that you may be seen: 11 Sergio Alfaro, Richard Graham, David 12 Mathis, and James Reese. 13 Mr. Ingis? 14 MR. INGIS: The staff has nothing to 15 add, and I don't see anyone coming forward. 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Anyone whose name was 17 just called? 18 FROM THE FLOOR: Yeah. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. We need you to 20 come forward. 21 Why don't you stand right behind that 22 second table right there. Thank you. 23 We're going to vote on your stipulation 24 of settlement which you've agreed to with the 25 Division of Gaming Enforcement. I'm going to 12 ITEM NO. 3 1 ask at this point if you want to be heard on 2 your matter. You do not have to say anything 3 if you do not want to. 4 Is there anything you'd like to say? 5 MR. ALFARO: No. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. 7 MR. INGIS: I'd just like to have him 8 give his name. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Sure. Give your name 10 for the record, sir. 11 MR. ALFARO: Sergio Alfaro. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you, Mr. Alfaro. 13 Mr. Armstrong, anything to add? 14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Chair, the Division has 15 nothing to add. Just ask that the stipulations 16 be approved. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 18 Any questions? 19 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 20 Madame Chair. 21 Move to approve the stipulations. 22 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 24 made and seconded. All in favor? 25 (Ayes.) 13 ITEM NO. 4 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 2 (No response.) 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 4 We've approved your stipulation. Thank 5 you very much for coming. And good luck. 6 MR. ALFARO: All right. Thank you, too. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You're welcome. 8 MR. NANCE: Item No. 4, stipulation of 9 settlement in State versus Trump Marina 10 Associates, LP, and Richard Olita. 11 Mr. Corbett? 12 MR. CORBETT: Chair, Commissioners, in 13 this case, the casino licensee admits to 14 regulatory violation and agrees to a penalty of 15 $20,000. 16 The individual Respondent agreed to a 17 three-day suspension and a letter of reprimand. 18 Mr. Ficchi is here for the Division. 19 Mr. Cunningham for the casino licensee. The 20 individual's attorney advised us that she would 21 not be able to be here today due to scheduling 22 conflict, but she asked that the matter 23 proceed. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 25 Good morning. 14 ITEM NO. 4 1 MR. CUNNINGHAM: Good morning. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Cunningham? 3 MR. CUNNINGHAM: Simply rely on the 4 papers, and we have reviewed the stipulation of 5 settlement and are in full agreement with it. 6 And would ask the Commission to approve it. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 8 Mr. Ficchi? 9 MR. FICCHI: Good morning, Chair, 10 Commissioners. The Division also asks that you 11 adopt this resolution with regard to the -- 12 both the casino and to the individual. 13 Just for clarification purposes, with 14 the individual because the attorney's not here, 15 he had agreed to a three-day suspension of his 16 registration, but he had -- was suspended for 17 three days by Trump Plaza for his activities. 18 So we would ask that that be done concurrent 19 with that so that there is no further loss of 20 income to himself or any other detriment. 21 Thank you. 22 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Any other 23 questions? 24 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Madame Chair, 25 move to approve the stipulation of settlement 15 ITEM NO. 6 1 and assess the following penalties for 2 violation of Commission regulations regarding 3 alcoholic beverage service to an underage 4 person: A, impose a civil penalty of $20,000 5 against Trump Marina Associates LLC; and, B, 6 issue a letter of reprimand and suspend Richard 7 Olita's casino service employee registration 8 for three days with credit for time already 9 served. 10 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 12 made and seconded. All in favor? 13 (Ayes.) 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 15 (No response.) 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 17 Thank you. 18 MR. FICCHI: Thank you. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: We're going to skip 20 over to Item 6. 21 MR. NANCE: Item No. 6, petition for 22 early reapplication for Harvey Helmandollar, 23 III. 24 Steven P. Hill has been adjourned. 25 Darrian Hudgins, and Amneris Rodriguez. 16 ITEM NO. 6 1 Miss Frigen? 2 MS. FRIGEN: Good morning. Madame Chair 3 and Commissioners. 4 The first case is Mr. Helmandollar. I 5 would ask him to have a seat. 6 Commissioners, for your consideration is 7 Mr. Helmandollar's petition seeking permission 8 to reapply early for a license registration 9 and/or noncredential hotel employment. 10 You may recall that this matter was 11 originally scheduled for consideration at the 12 Commission's meeting in June 6th. Given the 13 Division's objection to this petition, the 14 Commission requested that Mr. Helmandollar make 15 an appearance before, notwithstanding he was 16 living out of state, and he is here today. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 18 Mr. Helmandollar, is there anything 19 you'd like to say today? 20 MR. HELMANDOLLAR: No, not -- 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: We need to swear you 22 in if you do. 23 MR. HELMANDOLLAR: Sure. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Please stand. 25 17 ITEM NO. 6 1 HARVEY J. HELMANDOLLAR, III, having been 2 first duly sworn to tell the truth, testified 3 as follows: 4 5 MR. NANCE: Please state your name for 6 the record. 7 MR. HELMANDOLLAR: Harvey James 8 Helmandollar, III. 9 MR. NANCE: Thank you. You may be 10 seated. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you, Mr. 12 Helmandollar. 13 What would you like to tell us this 14 morning? 15 MR. HELMANDOLLAR: I just feel that I've 16 served my time and would like to reapply for a 17 license. My family is elderly. My mother is 18 in a nursing home, and I want to move back to 19 New Jersey. My wife and daughter who are both 20 right here with me right now also would like to 21 move back to New Jersey. 22 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Mr. Armstrong? 23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Madame Chair, 24 Commissioners. You have our letter of April 25 10th of this year. We recommended you deny 18 ITEM NO. 6 1 this petition. Your order found him 2 disqualified on February 16th of 2005 after 3 adopting an initial decision that found he 4 committed the disqualifying offense of 5 aggravated assault, third degree. The order 6 calls for a five-year period of disqualified. 7 As of this point he's only disqualified for two 8 and a half years. We see nothing in this 9 record that he should be granted to reapply 10 early and not serve the full five years of the 11 disqualificiation. 12 Thank you. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Let me ask if 14 any of the Commissioners have any questions? 15 Commissioners Epps? 16 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yes. Again, I think 17 we again could get into the philosophical 18 debate that we've been in a few times on this 19 issue. Again, you seem to suggest that because 20 he went to a hearing he could not have 21 establish -- he cannot establish rehabilitation 22 but for serving five years out -- of -- five 23 years away from the industry. 24 Is that your position? 25 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. Not necessarily. 19 ITEM NO. 6 1 My position is that he litigated this matter 2 before you. All right? And you -- the 3 Commission found him disqualified. Your order 4 calls for him to be disqualified for five 5 years. He's presented nothing, at least in my 6 opinion, in this record here this morning that 7 would indicate that your order should be set 8 aside and he should be permitted to reapply. 9 COMMISSIONER EPPS: The issue is whether 10 or not he can reapply early, but he would still 11 have to establish his rehabilitation at the 12 time that he reapplies; correct? 13 MR. ARMSTRONG: Presumably. Yes. 14 COMMISSIONER EPPS: So -- 15 MR. ARMSTRONG: He's already been found 16 disqualified, and the disqualification period 17 is for five years. So why should he be 18 permitted to come in before that five years is 19 up and have another chance to show he's 20 rehabilitated? He's already had that chance, 21 and he's failed. 22 COMMISSIONER EPPS: But isn't the issue 23 whether or not he can establish his 24 rehabilitation at the time of the hearing? 25 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, he didn't. 20 ITEM NO. 6 1 That's -- he was found not rehabilitated. 2 COMMISSIONER EPPS: But what I'm saying, 3 in an effort to reapply early, doesn't he 4 have-- isn't he entitled to establish that he's 5 rehabilitated then? 6 MR. ARMSTRONG: You mean at this time? 7 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Right. 8 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, that's -- that's 9 entirely your call whether or not you grant the 10 petition for permission to reapply early. And 11 presume that we object again, and we go back to 12 a hearing, then basically you're giving him 13 another chance to show he's rehabilitated 14 within that five-years period of 15 disqualification. And it's the Division's 16 policy that we don't think you should. The 17 order should mean something. Five years of 18 disqualification, then he should serve the full 19 five years. 20 Then, otherwise, you open the door for 21 everybody that -- not to say that somebody 22 shouldn't avail themselves of the hearing 23 process. What -- it's counterproductive to the 24 settlement process. If someone can take a 25 hearing, lose at the hearing, then come back a 21 ITEM NO. 6 1 year later and be granted a petition for 2 permission to reapply early and get another, a 3 whole other bite at the apple showing 4 rehabilitation. 5 That's our position. We don't think he 6 should. The order says five years. You should 7 enforce your order. 8 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Mr. Armstrong, 9 isn't it -- isn't it the policy of the State to 10 allow when people get -- employees get into 11 these situations to reapply early for their 12 license? That's not something we haven't done 13 in the past. 14 MR. ARMSTRONG: It's entirely your 15 decision. 16 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Isn't it true, 17 also, that they have an opportunity to come 18 before the Commission to state their case as to 19 why they should be allowed to be relicensed or 20 reregistered or whatever? 21 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's correct. And 22 that's -- 23 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Isn't that what 24 we're doing here this morning? 25 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's correct. 22 ITEM NO. 6 1 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Nothing 2 further, Madame Chair. 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Commissioner 4 Fedorko? Any questions? 5 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: No. I don't have 6 any questions. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Do we have a motion? 8 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I move that we grant 9 Mr. Helmandollar permission to reapply early 10 for a casino employee license, a casino service 11 employee registration and/or to obtain 12 employment early as a noncredential hotel 13 employee. 14 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 16 made and seconded. All in favor? 17 (Ayes.) 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 19 (No response.) 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 21 We are going to grant your petition, Mr. 22 Helmandollar. So this will allow you to 23 reapply early for your casino employee license, 24 for your service employee license, or to obtain 25 employment as a noncredential hotel employee. 23 ITEM NO. 6 1 That means you'll next go to -- we're going 2 allow you to apply early. That means you have 3 to go through the process. 4 MR. HELMANDOLLAR: Sure. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Most probably another 6 hearing. 7 MS. FRIGEN: Depending on the Division's 8 position. Yeah. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: At that time you need 10 to talk about what you've done to rehabilitate 11 yourself. So that will be a very important 12 hearing for you. Okay? 13 MR. HELMANDOLLAR: Okay. Okay. 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: All-right. Thank you 15 for coming. Good luck. 16 MR. HELMANDOLLAR: Thank you very much. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yup. 18 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. Next we have is 19 Darrian Hudgins. Mr. Hudgins? 20 You can have a seat, Mr. Hudgins. 21 For your consideration is Mr. Hudgins' 22 petition seeking permission to reapply early 23 for an casino employee license. Let's see. 24 Okay. 25 I would note that Mr. Hudgins presently 24 ITEM NO. 6 1 has permission following a plenary hearing to 2 work in the hotel capacity, so at this point 3 the juncture is just consideration for 4 reapplying early for license. By letter July 5 19th, the Division has interposed no objection 6 to this petition. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 8 Mr. Hudgins, is there anything you'd 9 like to say today? 10 MR. HUDGINS: Yes. Yes, ma'am. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. We'd have to 12 have you stand and swear you in. 13 14 DARRIAN L. HUDGINS, having been first 15 duly sworn to tell the truth, testified as 16 follows: 17 18 MR. NANCE: Please state your name. 19 MR. HUDGINS: Darrian Lamar Hudgins. 20 MR. NANCE: Thank you. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 22 Mr. Hudgins, what would you like to tell 23 us today? 24 MR. HUDGINS: Good morning. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Good morning. 25 ITEM NO. 6 1 MR. HUDGINS: Several years ago I had 2 made a bad decision regarding my situation. 3 And I just want -- I'm here to say I'm 4 extremely, extremely apologetic for my actions. 5 My passion got the best of me at this time. 6 That's not who I am. That's not who my mother 7 raised. And I'm totally embarrassed for, 8 numberone, my family. Number two, the 9 Commission. And that's not the person I am. 10 I'm a very passionate person. I'm a very 11 hard-working young man. I have a wife. I have 12 a kid. I have a sick son that's been in the 13 hospital for a year. And I just want to chance 14 to move on with my life. Because I am working 15 two jobs, and I'm not home to take care of my 16 sick son. My wife is working two jobs, and I 17 just want to -- excuse me. I just want to get 18 back into the casino business, something I love 19 to do. And I realize the mistake I made, and 20 it's not right, and I'm not sitting here saying 21 that it's right. It was wrong. And I know it 22 was wrong. And I feel as though I served three 23 years. I'm just here to let you all know that 24 if you do grant me back my license, I will not 25 let you down. And I'm extremely apolgetic for 26 ITEM NO. 6 1 my actions several years ago. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Thank you. 3 Mr. Armstrong? 4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Chair, Commissioners. I 5 don't want to belabor that same argument I just 6 made. You have the letter of July 19th. It's 7 the same argument. Again, Mr. Hudgins had a 8 hearing before the Commissioner. He was found 9 disqualified. The Commission adopted that 10 initial decision, found him disqualified, shown 11 he hadn't rehabilitated. 12 Again, your order calls for him to be 13 disqualified for five years. He's only been 14 disqualified since June 23rd, 2004. I don't 15 see anything in this record why he should be 16 granted a petition for permission to reapply 17 early. I'm going to ask you to deny it. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Questions? Mr. Epps? 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Just one question. 20 In this process where does early reapp, 21 in your estimation fit? Or should we just not 22 have that? If there's an order -- if there's 23 an initial decision that puts somebody out for 24 a year, you seem to suggest that there is no 25 provision or reapplication. There's no place 27 ITEM NO. 6 1 for that in this process. 2 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, the law also calls 3 for a disqualification of five years, and why-- 4 that's routinely. 5 COMMISSIONER EPPS: That's not my 6 question. Reapplication is something that we 7 have in our process. But you -- you constantly 8 argue against it. It's as if we shouldn't have 9 it. 10 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's not always 11 necessarily the case. In these two cases here 12 this morning, both of these people came before 13 the Commission and had a hearing and were found 14 after a record was made that they were 15 disqualified and not rehabilitated. Then they 16 come before you a year or two three years later 17 with this petition to reapply early after you 18 have already found them disqualified and not 19 rehabilitated. It's our position that I don't 20 see anything here in the record this morning 21 that would indicate that you should change your 22 mind and find him now rehabilitated. And 23 that's what you're going to do if you 24 eventually grant the license. 25 COMMISSIONER EPPS: But here's two 28 ITEM NO. 6 1 things -- two things I have difficulty with in 2 this whole process. The first is that we're 3 talking two different points in time. And what 4 you're suggesting is that if somebody was not 5 rehabilitated three years ago, you don't fathom 6 how they could possibly be rehabilitated today 7 or how we could establish that they've proven 8 then they're rehabilitated at the time of a 9 hearing that was likely to occur shortly in the 10 future. That's what you seem to suggest to me. 11 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. 12 COMMISSIONER EPPS: That they could 13 possibly establish that and -- 14 MR. ARMSTRONG: I wouldn't presume to 15 know whether or not they could. 16 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Well, what you -- 17 MR. ARMSTRONG: What I'm saying is they 18 had the opportunity to. They availed 19 themselves of the hearing. 20 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Three years ago. 21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. Three years ago. 22 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Something in the 23 interim could haveoccurred which would have -- 24 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's perfectly 25 possible, but your order also calls for a five 29 ITEM NO. 6 1 year period of disequalification. 2 COMMISSIONER EPPS: But there's also a 3 provision that allows people to reapply early. 4 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's correct. There's 5 nothing in the record to indicate now, three 6 years ago later, two years later, we're going 7 to change our mind and find them rehabilitated. 8 COMMISSIONER EPPS: No, we're not. We 9 are not finding rehabilitated today. We're 10 giving him an opportunity to establish his 11 rehabilitation sometime later because, 12 certainly, there would be will be an objection 13 in the hearing. And during that reapplication 14 process, he'll have an opportunity. But 15 there's still a likelihood or possibility that 16 they could fail to do so at that hearing and 17 then later be denied. 18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: All these people are 20 being granted is an opportunity to establish 21 that they've been rehabilitated short of that 22 five-years period, and I don't see there's 23 necessary a problem giving him an opportunity 24 to have another hearing. It doesn't mean we're 25 putting them back in the industry. We're 30 ITEM NO. 6 1 giving them that opportunity. I'm sure you'll 2 prepare a case if you feel strongly about it, 3 that they shouldn't be granted that 4 opportunity. And somebody sitting in judgment 5 will make a determination as to whether or not 6 they should. But to avail themsleves an 7 opportunity for another hearing is not -- it 8 doesn't seem to offend justice or the Act or 9 anything of that nature. In my opinion. 10 MR. ARMSTRONG: In my opinion, I think 11 your order should have some teeth. And if 12 they've had the opportunity to show 13 rehabilitation and failed, then they should be 14 disqualified for five years. That's the 15 Division's policy and position in this. You 16 know, it's obviously up to the Commission, and 17 the Commission has every right and authority to 18 grant the petition. 19 I just think -- if I may elaborate. 20 We're going to go to the trouble to give 21 someone a hearing. I mean, we have the 22 settlement process. We just took care of four 23 cases this morning where people avail 24 themselvess of this process. Somebody's going 25 to say I want my hearing. My day in court. 31 ITEM NO. 6 1 Okay. You go to have the hearing, and they 2 fail to carry the day. I mean, it's really 3 going to be counter -- if this trend continues, 4 it will be counterproductive to the settlement 5 process. Because, quite frankly, if I was in 6 their shoes, why not take the hearing, if I -- 7 I'll take the chance that I might win. And if 8 I lose, why not come back in a year and ask you 9 guys if I can have an another hearing? 10 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I think that's 11 disingenuous to the hearing. Because not every 12 case that comes for early application is 13 granted early reapplication. I think we do 14 consider the nature of the circumstances, and 15 we deny a fair share of early reapplications 16 because they're just not in a posture or in 17 matter that we feel he should grant 18 reapplication on. So it's not that we do these 19 things willy-nilly and just grant reapplication 20 on every one. I think that we take some time 21 to consider the matters and the underlying 22 actions and whether or not we should grant 23 reapplication, case by case. 24 But there's -- I don't think -- but your 25 position seems to be there's just a blanket 32 ITEM NO. 6 1 rule. If it's five years, it's five years. We 2 shouldn't even consider the nature or the 3 underlying circumstances. And I don't think 4 that that's fair. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Hudgins, let me 6 ask you. Are you -- you've completed your 7 anger management therapy? 8 MR. HUDGINS: Yes. Several years ago. 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Are you undergoing -- 10 still undergoing random urine screenings? 11 MR. HUDGINS: No. I was on probation. 12 I passed. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You passed through 14 that. 15 MR. HUDGINS: Any time they came to my 16 house. Yeah. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Let me ask if 18 there are any other questions? 19 Commission Fedorko? 20 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: I don't want to 21 belabor this point but, Mr. Armstrong, what's 22 wrong with giving somebody a second chance? 23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Nothing. Nothing at 24 all. That's not my position. My position is 25 that you had a hearing. You have an initial 33 ITEM NO. 6 1 decision. He was found disqualified and not 2 rehabilitated. Your order says five years. 3 That's all. A person comes before you in less 4 than five years, they should be required to 5 make a pretty strong showing that at this point 6 in time they're going to be able to demonstrate 7 to you now that they're rehabilitated before 8 you go and give them all the time and money it 9 takes up to have a hearing. They've already 10 had their hearing. 11 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: But that's not 12 going to be done here. That's going to be done 13 after he reapplies. 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Right. 15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. He's going to 16 have that opportunity without -- the five years 17 comes and goes, and if the person has no 18 problems with law enforcement, we're not going 19 to object. They've already been disqualified 20 for five years. That's all I'm saying is 21 it's-- let me put it in this perspective. You 22 found him -- Mr. Hudgins, you found him 23 disqualified, and it's less than five years 24 since you found him disqualified. Aren't we -- 25 more or less, our hands are tied that we have 34 ITEM NO. 6 1 to object because your last order found him 2 disqualified. This order this morning is only 3 going to give him permission to reapply. So 4 we're going to have to object. You're going to 5 have to have another hearing and make another 6 determination as to whether or not they're 7 rehabilitated. 8 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Of all the people 9 that I've seen come in here and ask for to 10 reapply, I mean, here you got a man who's 11 obviously looks like he's done something with 12 his life. I mean, I -- I don't see any problem 13 with giving him -- giving him another 14 opportunity to reapply. 15 MR. ARMSTRONG: It's entirely your 16 prerogative. 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Would you like to make 18 the motion? 19 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: I'd like to make a 20 motion to grant Mr. Hudgins permission to 21 reapply early for a casino employee license. 22 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 24 made and seconded. All in favor? 25 (Ayes.) 35 ITEM NO. 6 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 2 (No response.) 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 4 Good luck. 5 MR. HUDGINS: Thank you. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: We wish you every 7 success. 8 MR. HUDGINS: Thank you. 9 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. With respect to Miss 10 Rodriguez, who is here today, she is seeking 11 permission to reapply early for noncredential 12 hotel employment pursuant to settlement terms 13 that were reached in earlier proceedings. 14 In this case the Division hasn't object 15 to do the petition. 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 17 Miss Rodriguez? Is there anything you'd 18 like to say today. 19 MS. RODRIGUEZ: No. Thank you. 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Mr. Armstrong? 21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Chair, Commissioners, 22 you have our letter of July 18th, and the terms 23 of the stipulation of settlement. You have the 24 Commission order of Miss Rodriguez. She is 25 permitted to ask permission for this petition. 36 ITEM NO. 7 1 So we have no objection. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 3 Any questions? 4 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Madame Chair, 5 move to grant Miss Rodriguez permission to 6 obtain employment early as a noncredential 7 hotel employee. 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: Motion carries. 15 Thank you very much for coming. Good 16 luck. 17 MS. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you. 18 MR. NANCE: Item No. 7 -- oh, okay. 19 MS. FRIGEN: Yes. 20 MR. NANCE: Item No. 7, application for 21 suspension for Brydell Brittingham, Dominga 22 Almonte, Annamarie Donall, Jose Ramirez, 23 Glorymar Rosario, Beatris Valentino, and Lu 24 Wang. 25 Miss Frigen? 37 ITEM NO. 7 1 MS. FRIGEN: Good morning, Madame Chair, 2 Commissioners. 3 For the record, I would just note that 4 based upon the outcome of the criminal case, 5 the Division has withdrawn the application for 6 suspension regarding Annamarie Donall. 7 I'm also aware that Mr. Wang, Lu Wang, 8 7g, is present. 9 Let me ask for the record whether there 10 is anybody else here who is present or 11 represented today? 12 Okay. Apparently not, with the 13 exception of Mr. Wang is here and Miss Donall. 14 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Madame Chair, I move 15 the suspension -- I move to suspend Items A 16 through F. 17 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 19 made and seconded. All in favor? 20 (Ayes.) 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 22 (No response.) 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 24 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: We'll now do Mr. Wang. 38 ITEM NO. 7 1 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. Mr. Wang. 2 I will also note that Commission staff 3 member William Wong is present. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: To assist in 5 translating. 6 MS. FRIGEN: Thank you very much. He 7 came in at the last minute. 8 Mr. Wang, you can have a seat. Will, 9 you can help assist as I talk. 10 I'm going to ask the Division to first 11 go forward to provide why they're seeking 12 suspension. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Mr. Armstrong? 14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Chair, Commissioners, 15 you have our complaint we filed on September 16 6th. Mr. Wang was arrested by our State Police 17 Casino Enforcement Unit charging theft. He was 18 videotaped stealing while dealing poker at the 19 Tropicana. On August 23rd he was convicted of 20 this offense in municipal court. Conduct in 21 violation of Section 86c(2), and we ask that 22 you suspend his license while this matter is 23 pending before you. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 25 MS. FRIGEN: Could we just give Mr. Wong 39 ITEM NO. 7 1 a chance to -- 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Sure. 3 MS. FRIGEN: Explain. Interpret that to 4 Mr. Wang. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yeah. 6 (Conferring.) 7 MR. WONG: Please proceed. 8 MS. FRIGEN: Thank you. 9 Now would be Mr. Wang's opportunity to 10 address the Commission if he wants. You can 11 translate that to him. 12 (Conferring.) 13 MS. FRIGEN: Before he starts, both of 14 you will have to be sworn in. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Sworn in. 16 17 LU WANG, having been first duly sworn 18 through an interpreter to tell the truth, 19 testified as follows: 20 21 MR. NANCE: Please state your name for 22 the record. 23 MR. WANG: My name is Lu Wang. 24 MR. WONG: Lu Wang. 25 MS. FRIGEN: And I think we also have to 40 ITEM NO. 7 1 have -- no? Okay. 2 MR. INGIS: It's up to the Commission's 3 discretion whether you want to swear in the 4 employee. 5 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. And Dianna is 6 recommending that we probably should just to 7 cover our bases. 8 CHAIR KASSEKERT: All right. We're 9 going to swear you in, too, to make sure you 10 translate -- 11 MR. WONG: I thought we just did. 12 MS. FRIGEN: That was for him. 13 14 WILLIAM WONG, having been first duly 15 sworn to tell the truth, translates as follows: 16 17 MR. NANCE: Please state your name. 18 MR. WONG: William Wong. 19 MR. NANCE: Thank you. 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Now we can proceed. 21 Very good. 22 What would you like to tell us, today 23 Mr. Wang? 24 (Conferring.) 25 MR. WONG: Mr. Wang said he was really 41 ITEM NO. 7 1 tired when he was in that moment, and he 2 involved in an auto accident prior to that, and 3 he was not himself when he was doing what he 4 was doing, and he would like to ask for another 5 opportunity, and that's about it. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: I guess my concern 7 about this case, unlike the cases that we just 8 dealt with with the early re-apps, this case 9 deals with activity that happened at the 10 casino, and Mr. Wang was convicted -- and 11 correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Armstrong -- of 12 theft. 13 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's correct. Yes. 14 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. So my concern 15 would be, you know, understanding that he was 16 tired, and there are these other issues, but he 17 was convicted of theft. I mean, is there 18 anything he'd like to say with respect to -- 19 MR. WONG: Well, nothing further except 20 that, yes, he admitted he did it. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. All right. 22 Mr. Armstrong? Anything else to add? 23 Let me ask if there are any questions 24 from the Commissioners. 25 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 42 ITEM NO. 7 1 Madame Chair. 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there a motion? 3 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Madame Chair, I move 4 to suspend the credentials. 5 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 7 made and seconded. All in favor? 8 (Ayes.) 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 10 (No response.) 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 12 Can you tell him that we have suspended 13 his credentials because this was an activity 14 that occurred on the casino floor and in the 15 course of his job which is, you know, which 16 touches -- you know, very close to the Casino 17 Control Act. 18 MS. FRIGEN: And I'd ask Mr. Wong to 19 stay, and I will assist him. 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thanks. Thanks, 21 Bernadette. 22 MS. FRIGEN: Okay. He is not here yet. 23 We can check. We'll put a call into his 24 office, see where he is. 25 MR. NANCE: Okay. 43 ITEM NO. 8 1 Item No. 8, joint petition of Harrah's 2 Operating Company, Marina Associates, Atlantic 3 City Showboat, Inc., Bally's Park Place, Inc., 4 and Boardwalk Regency Corp., for a waiver of an 5 officer. 6 Miss Wozniak? 7 MS. WOZNIAK: Good morning. 8 I have distributed a draft resolution to 9 both parties and Mr. Lowry is here on behalf of 10 the Petitioners and Mr. Fogarty on behalf of 11 the Division. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Lowry? 13 MR. LOWRY: Good morning, Madame Chair, 14 Commissioners. Tim Lowry on behalf of Harrah's 15 Operating Company and the four casino 16 licensees. 17 We rely upon the papers. Nothing 18 further to add. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Are there any 20 questions for Mr. Lowry? 21 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: That's it? 22 MR. LOWRY: Well, I believe the papers 23 demonstrate a compelling argument under the Act 24 why the relief should be granted, and I don't 25 want to belabor the point. I know you 44 ITEM NO. 8 1 Commissioners have many things to do today, and 2 I don't want to hold you up any more. 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Commissioners Epps? 4 Do you have any questions of Mr. Lowry before 5 we hear from Mr. Fogarty? 6 COMMISSIONER EPPS: No. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Sommeling? 8 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 9 Madame Chair. 10 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Fogarty? 11 MR. FOGARTY: I don't have any questions 12 for Lowry. I'm pinch-hitting for Deputy 13 Attorney General Dorothy Turi. She wrote you 14 all a letter on September 13th, 2007, not 15 opposing the application of Mr. McBride for the 16 position indicated, and we have seen the draft 17 resolution, and we have no objection to its 18 entry. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 20 Any questions for Mr. Fogarty? 21 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Madame Chair, 22 move to adopt the draft resolution and waive 23 the qualification requirement pursuant to NJSA 24 5:12-85d(1) as to Dean McBride in his capacity 25 as Vice President, Enterprise Surveillance for 45 ITEM NO. 9 1 Harrah's Operating Company, Incorporated, 2 subject to the condition stated in the 3 resolution. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there a second? 5 COMMISSIONER EPPS: 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: You're just lucky, 19 kid. 20 MR. NANCE: Item No. -- 21 MR. LOWRY: Sometimes that's all we 22 have, Chair. 23 MR. NANCE: Item No. 9, petition of 24 Harrah's Operating Company, Inc., Marina 25 Associates, Atlantic City Showboat, Inc., 46 ITEM NO. 9 1 Bally's Park Place, Inc., and Boardwalk Regency 2 Corp., requesting permission for Christopher 3 Chang to perform the duties and exercise the 4 powers of Vice President, Innovation and IT 5 Strategy for HOC pending plenary qualification. 6 Miss Frank? 7 MS. FRANK: Good morning, Chair and 8 Commissioners. 9 A draft resolution on Mr. Chang's 10 temporary qualification has been distributed to 11 the parties. Mr. Lowry is here for Harrah's 12 and Mr. Fogarty for the Division. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 14 Mr. Lowry? 15 MR. LOWRY: Again, Chair, Commissioners, 16 we rely upon the papers and nothing further to 17 add. I thank you again for the opportunity. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Any questions before 19 we hear from Mr. Fogarty? 20 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 21 Madame Chair. 22 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Fogarty? 23 MR. FOGARTY: The Division has no 24 objection to you temporarily qualifying 25 Christopher Chang in the position of Vice 47 ITEM NO. 9 1 President Innovation and Information Technology 2 for Harrah's Operating Company. 3 I've seen Miss Frank's draft, and we 4 have no objection to the entry of that 5 resolution. 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 7 Any questions for Mr. Fogarty? 8 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 9 Madame Chair. 10 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Madame Chair, I move 11 that we adopt the draft resolution and find 12 Christopher Chang temporarily qualified and 13 authorize him to assume the duties and exercise 14 the powers of Vice President Innovation and IT 15 Strategy for Harrah's Operating Company, Inc., 16 subject to the conditions contained in NJAC 17 19:43-2.7, which among other things, require 18 that he file a PHD MJ and New Jersey 19 supplemental by October 4th, 2007. 20 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion is made and 22 seconded. This is a roll call vote. 23 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Sommeling? 24 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Yes. 25 MR. NANCE: Commissioner Epps? 48 ITEM NO. 5 1 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yes. 2 MR. NANCE: Vice Chair Fedorko? 3 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Yes. 4 MR. NANCE: Chair Kassekert? 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. 6 MR. NANCE: The record will reflect that 7 the motion is unanimous. 8 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 9 MS. FRANK: Thank you. 10 MR. LOWRY: Thank you. 11 MR. NANCE: For your consideration, Item 12 No. 5, initial decision, application of Wayne 13 J. Molosky. 14 Mr. Corbett? 15 MR. CORBETT: Chair, Commissioners, in 16 this matter you have the initial decision of 17 Commissioner Fedorko's finding the Applicant is 18 not disqualified and that he is qualified for 19 licensure, recommending that the casino 20 employee license be granted. 21 Mr. Roddy is here for the Applicant and 22 Mr. Armstrong for the Division. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 24 Mr. Roddy can you enter your appearance, 25 please? 49 ITEM NO. 5 1 MR. RODDY: May it please, ladies and 2 gentlemen, Commissioners, Mark Roddy on behalf 3 of Mr. Molosky. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 5 The recommended action here is for the 6 adoption of the initial decision. I think we 7 hear from the Division. 8 MR. CORBETT: Yes. They filed 9 exceptions. 10 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Mr. Armstrong? Hum? 11 I'm sorry. 12 MR. CORBETT: They filed exceptions. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Yes. Mr. Armstrong, 14 you can proceed. 15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Thank you, Chair. 16 Commissioners. 17 You have our exceptions from August 27. 18 Quite frankly, we were surprised by the Vice 19 Chair's finding of fact in this matter that the 20 evidence that we put in the record of Mr. 21 Molosky's trying to hide more than six ounces 22 of marijuana along with over $1100 in cash was 23 not sufficient to prove that he possessed 24 marijuana with the intent to distribute it, 25 third degree. 50 ITEM NO. 5 1 Our exceptions are twofold. First, the 2 rest of the Commission agreed with the Vice 3 Chair's finding of fact that this evidence was 4 insufficient to prove that Mr. Molosky 5 possessed that marijuana with intent to 6 distribute, third degree. 7 Mr. Roddy's argument in it was -- he 8 called himself, I believe, the Costco's, BJ's 9 defense where in their argument was Mr. Molosky 10 purchased larger quantity of marijuana because 11 he got a better price and he lessened his 12 chance of detection by the police. I thought 13 his argument was disingenuous. I understand by 14 the Vice Chair he bought into the argument 15 itself. If he was, in fact, buying in bulk to 16 save money and to avoid arrest, then why wasn't 17 the marijuana all in packages? Why was it all 18 in 15 separate packages? And what was the 19 $1100 doing in the safe at home? If you have 20 that much cash at home, why don't you have it 21 in the bank? 22 Nevertheless, the full Commission agrees 23 with the Vice Chair's findings of fact in this 24 matter, then so be it. Then we failed to carry 25 the day. We failed to prove he committed the 51 ITEM NO. 5 1 disqualifing offense. 2 Nevertheless, we still have the second 3 issue, and that's the main part of our 4 exceptions, is the issue of good character, 5 which is a burden placed on Mr. Molosky by the 6 Casino Control Act. Section 90 of the Act says 7 any applicant for a casino employee license 8 must prior to the issuance of any such license 9 produce sufficient information, documentation, 10 and assurances to meet the qualification 11 criteria contained in subsection b of Section 12 89 of the Act. Section 89b(2) of the Act says 13 that each applicant for casino employee license 14 shall produce such information, documentation, 15 and assurances as may be required to establish 16 by clear and convincing evidence, an 17 applicant's good character, honesty, and 18 integrity. Such information shall include, 19 without limitation, that obtained through 20 family, habits, character, reputation, criminal 21 and arrest records, business activities, 22 financial affairs, and business and 23 professional associations, covering at least 24 ten years before immediately preceding the 25 filing of the application. 52 ITEM NO. 5 1 Again, Commissioners, the burden was on 2 Mr. Molosky to establish his good character in 3 light that all of the evidence the Division put 4 on the record, regardless whether or not that 5 evidence was sufficient to prove that he 6 committed a disqualifying offense. 7 In response to this issue Mr. Molosky 8 presented no evidence, no affirmative evidence 9 of his good character. 10 The initial decision cites the lack of 11 additional negative evidence, in particular 12 that there was no negative evidence presented 13 by the Division with regard to Mr. Molosky's 14 gaming industry employment. But I would 15 present to you that that's not proof. That's 16 not affirmative proof, there was no affirmative 17 evidence presented by Mr. Molosky that he does 18 possess the requisite character, honesty, 19 integrity and for required for licensure. The 20 record in this matter, again, regardless 21 whether or not you believe that he only 22 possessed the marijuana for his own personal 23 use. The record in this matter still presents 24 a picture of a person's who's -- his character 25 is challenged, and he was challenged to present 53 ITEM NO. 5 1 evidence that in spite of his record that he 2 was a person of good character, he can still -- 3 he's still on probation. He's going to be on 4 probation until the end of this year. He was 5 convicted of CDS, and it was also proven at the 6 hearing and found by the Vice Chair that he 7 assaulted his girlfriend. You have conduct 8 here that's impugning someone's character 9 significantly. 10 And in response to this, you have 11 absolutely no evidence, no affirmative evidence 12 in the record that he demonstrated his good 13 character. And it's our position that based on 14 that, based on his failure to demonstrate his 15 good character that the initial decision is 16 flawed in that sense, that he shouldn't have 17 found that he demonstrated his good character. 18 And I ask -- the Division asks? That 19 the rest of the Commission reject the initial 20 decision, find Mr. Molosky has failed to 21 demonstrate his good character in light of the 22 record presented at the hearing, and deny his 23 application for licensure. 24 Thank you. 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Let me ask if any of 54 ITEM NO. 5 1 the Commissioners have any questions for Mr. 2 Armstrong at this point? 3 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 4 Madame Chair. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: You know, I would just 6 ask, Mr. Armstrong, you wouldn't find some of 7 the things that Commissioner Fedorko found in 8 the record, the fact that he had paid off his 9 child-support arrears, or the counseling with 10 his daughter to resolve some of the family 11 problems as indicative of -- you would define 12 that as, perhaps, rehabilitation but not good 13 character? 14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Not necessarily, Vice 15 Chair. But that was actually just his 16 testimony. There was no affirmative evidence 17 offered of any of that. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: But obviously -- 19 MR. ARMSTRONG: He also -- the initial 20 decision also found that he's now stopped 21 smoking marijuana. Again, there was no 22 evidence entered in the record that that's, in 23 fact, true. 24 CHAIR KASSEKERT: But I guess it's 25 why -- 55 ITEM NO. 5 1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Other than Mr. Molosky's 2 testimony. 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Sp I guess that's what 4 the job of a hearing officer is, is to listen 5 to the testimony, find out what's credible. 6 And, obviously, evidence and credibility all 7 sort of come into making that determination. 8 You don't think? 9 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, not just -- not 10 merely -- that's why I cited -- I cited -- I 11 read into this record this morning those 12 sections of the Casino Control Act that deal 13 with good character. That, you know, it's 14 requiring the person to demonstrate it. To 15 submit to you affirmative evidence. Actual, 16 real evidence. If Mr. Molosky, along with the 17 case in chief presented six character witnesses 18 that testified about how he has changed, turned 19 over a new leaf, you know. He's gotten anger 20 management counseling and drug rehab. Clean 21 and sober, I wouldn't have -- I would have just 22 taken the lumps. 23 I thought the evidence proved that's 24 what the -- the trier of fact finds, not only 25 you didn't make your case, okay. I'm a big 56 ITEM NO. 5 1 boy. I can take my lumps here. But the 2 initial decision finding that he demonstrated 3 good character, I thought -- at the end of that 4 hearing, I thought it was in the bag for me. I 5 thought I proved the disqualifying conviction. 6 And at the end of the day, even if I didn't, he 7 presented no affirmative evidence of good 8 character. He still had that there, and it's 9 our position that that was not overcome. He 10 hadn't demonstrated his good character. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Commissioners Epps? 12 COMMISSIONER EPPS: I have two 13 questions. First -- well, let me ask the first 14 question first. 15 The intent to distribute, was there a 16 criminal prosecution on that? 17 MR. ARMSTRONG: He was charged. He was 18 indicted for it. Yeah. 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: But not -- 20 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Not. 21 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Ultimately -- 22 MR. ARMSTRONG: He worked out -- he 23 received a plea agreement. He pled to one 24 count of possession of CDS. 25 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Okay. So it was 57 ITEM NO. 5 1 pled away. So we don't know whether it would 2 ever have been proven? 3 MR. ARMSTRONG: Again, it would have 4 been before -- if he -- 5 COMMISSIONER EPPS: It didn't go to 6 trial. It was a matter of -- 7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. 8 COMMISSIONER EPPS: That was the first 9 question. 10 Second question is with respect to good 11 character. Was the -- were the subsequent drug 12 screenings or drug tests submitted? 13 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. 14 COMMISSIONER EPPS: No? 15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Mr. Molosky, I think, 16 testified about it, but there was no evidence 17 of it. 18 COMMISSIONER EPPS: They weren't 19 actually submitted? Okay. 20 MR. ARMSTRONG: He's still on probation. 21 So, presumably, that's part of probation, he's 22 still undergoing drug tests. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Let's hear -- if there 24 are no other questions, let's hear from Mr. 25 Roddy. 58 ITEM NO. 5 1 MR. RODDY: Thank you. 2 I think what the State fails to 3 appreciate in this world is that intelligent 4 with reasonable minds can differ on a lot of 5 issues. And, actually, that's good because if 6 they didn't, it would be a pretty boring place. 7 This is one of those cases where the State 8 always assumed that my position was not 9 reasonable, and I assumed that theirs was not 10 reasonable. When that happens and you can't 11 come to an amicable resolution, which is what 12 everyone tries to do, and you have a hearing. 13 And at a hearing, the gloves come off. 14 Everyone presents their best case. We're both 15 experienced trial litigators. We had a level 16 playing field. There's evidence presented. 17 People testified. There's documents that are 18 submitted. 19 And the one thing that is different 20 between the State as an advocate and myself as 21 an advocate is that there is a hearing 22 examiner. And the hearing examiner acts as a 23 judge. And the judge is impartial and has no 24 real prior knowledge of the case and carefully 25 considers the witnesses, takes copious notes. 59 ITEM NO. 5 1 And in this case they were especially copious. 2 And occasionally asked questions himself. 3 Those eyeball to eyeball with the witnesses, 4 forms their own conclusions as to who's being 5 credible, who's not being credible. What 6 sounds truthful, what doesn't sound truthful 7 based on their own personal life experiences. 8 And at the end has to render a decision. And 9 the decision can go either way. And this is a 10 case where reasonable minds, obviously, 11 differed because we couldn't resolve this thing 12 prior to a hearing. 13 Which leads me to the final point. This 14 is a 13-page carefully reasoned opinion that 15 reflects a lot of thought and deliberations. 16 There is nothing in this written opinion that 17 isn't based on testimony at this hearing, facts 18 that were elicited at this hearing, or 19 documents that were presented in this hearing. 20 I thought it was probably one of the 21 better opinions that I have ever read because 22 it was so carefully thought out. And there 23 were one or two extensions so that the hearing 24 examiner would have an opportunity to write it 25 in the way in which he wanted and carefully do 60 ITEM NO. 5 1 it in a way in which he wanted. 2 I don't think there's anything in this 3 opinion that would warrant any kind of 4 alternative decision. Both of us as litigators 5 know that when we open an envelope on any 6 hearing, the decision can go either way. I 7 mean, that's just the nature of adversarial 8 proceedings. The State's primary complaint is 9 that they don't agree with it. That their mind 10 is still, we're the reasonable minds, and 11 anyone who disagrees with us, can't possibly 12 have a reasonable mind. I don't see anything 13 in this opinion that isn't founded on testimony 14 or documents or credibility findings that took 15 place at this hearing. And this hearing took a 16 little while to do. 17 So I would think that unless they can 18 say to you something other than, well, we still 19 think we're the reasonable side, and anyone 20 that disagrees with us can't be reasonable, I 21 don't think there's one thing in this opinion 22 that isn't based on good, solid evidence that 23 was elicited at the hearing. So I would 24 appreciate if you would reaffirm the decision 25 that was made. 61 ITEM NO. 5 1 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 2 Any questions? 3 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 4 Madame Chair. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Commission Epps? You 6 look very thoughtful. 7 COMMISSIONER EPPS: No. I don't have a 8 question. I just got to -- 9 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Do you need a break? 10 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Yeah. Can we take a 11 break? 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Sure. 13 We're going to take a short recess. 14 (A recess was taken from 11:25 to 11:30 15 a.m.) 16 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. We'll go back 17 on the record. 18 Are there any questions? 19 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 20 Madame Chair. 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Mr. Armstrong, 22 is there anything else you'd like to say? 23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Just that reiterate, 24 Chair, Commissioners. Ask that you reject this 25 decision and don't lower the standard here. 62 ITEM NO. 5 1 It's our position there wasn't enough evidence 2 of good character or there wasn't any evidence 3 of good character. He should be denied 4 licensure for that reason alone. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Mr. Roddy, 6 anything else you'd like to say? 7 MR. RODDY: No. 8 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. Is there a 9 motion? 10 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Madame Chair, I 11 move to adopt the initial addition and grant 12 the application for a casino employee license. 13 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Is there a second? 14 I'll second it. 15 All those in favor? 16 (Ayes.) 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 18 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Madame Chair, while 19 I accept that the hearing examiner believed the 20 credibility of the witness, and I do not move-- 21 I mean, I do not intend to substitute my 22 judgment for his, I still feel that, even given 23 credible testimony, the record was not 24 sufficient enough for me to establish good 25 character. So, therefore, by the sparsity of 63 ITEM NO. 10 1 the record, based on the sparsity of the 2 record, even given the testimony, the light 3 favorable to the Petitioner, I have to vote no. 4 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Okay. The vote is 5 three/one. The motion passes. 6 Thank you. 7 MR. RODDY: Thank you. 8 MR. ARMSTRONG: Thank you. 9 MR. MOLOSKY: Thank you. 10 MR. NANCE: Item No. 10, petition of 11 Trump Taj Mahal Associates for an amendment to 12 its certificate to expand and reconfigure its 13 gaming floor. 14 Mr. Briliant? 15 MR. BRILIANT: Good morning, Madame 16 Chair and Commissioners. 17 Mr. Cunningham is here on behalf of the 18 Petitioner. Mr. Ficchi is here on behalf of 19 the Division. 20 We have circulated a proposed 21 resolution. And the parties have indicated it 22 is satisfactory to them. 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 24 Mr. Ficchi? 25 Mr. Cunningham? I guess. 64 ITEM NO. 10 1 MR. FICCHI: Chair, Commissioners. The 2 Division have reviewed the draft resolution. 3 We have no objection. We've inspected the 4 areas in question and reviewed the blueprints 5 and advised blueprints of the areas in 6 question, and we have no objection. 7 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 8 Mr. Cunningham? 9 MR. CUNNINGHAM: I have with me the 10 Scott Molino who is the Taj Mahal Director of 11 Slot Operations in the event the Commission has 12 any questions for him. 13 We would just simply ask that you adopt 14 the proposed resolution. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 16 Any questions? 17 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 18 Madame Chair. 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Madame Chair, move 20 that we adopt the draft resolution and approve 21 the petition of Trump Taj Mahal Associates for 22 an amendment to its certificate of operation 23 and casino hotel alcoholic beverage license to 24 permit the reconfigure and expansion of its 25 floor subject to the conditions in the 65 ITEM NO. 11 1 resolution. 2 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 3 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 4 made and seconded. All in favor? 5 (Ayes.) 6 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 7 (No response.) 8 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 9 MR. CUNNINGHAM: Thank you. 10 MR. MOLINO: Thank you. Pleasure. 11 MR. BRILIANT: Thanks, Fred. 12 MR. NANCE: Item No. 11, proposed 13 adoption of anmendments NJAC 19:47-8.2 and 8.3. 14 Mr. Briliant? 15 MR. BRILIANT: Madame Chair, the 16 proposed amendment which is now before you for 17 final adoption would permit a casino licensee 18 to establish additional wagering requirements 19 that are consistent with the rules of the game, 20 such as a requirement that a table game wager 21 between the posted minimum and maximum wagers 22 would have to be paid in specified increments. 23 The notes of adoption were published in 24 the New Jersey Register on June 18th, 2007. 25 Public comment period expired on August 66 ITEM NO. 12 1 17th. We received one comment from the 2 Division of Gaming Enforcement which indicated 3 that it did not object to the adoption of the 4 proposal. 5 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 6 Any questions? 7 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 8 Madame Chair. 9 Move to adopt as published. 10 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Second. 11 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 12 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 13 made and seconded. All in favor? 14 (Ayes.) 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 16 (No response.) 17 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 18 MR. BRILIANT: Thank you. 19 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you, Mr. 20 Briliant. 21 MR. NANCE: Item No. 12, proposed 22 adoption for amendment and rule for three-card 23 bonus wager in Let it Ride poker. 24 Mr. Mamolen? 25 MR. MAMOLEN: Good morning, Madame Chair 67 ITEM NO. 13 1 and Commissioners. 2 This is before you for final adoption as 3 well. It is a side wager whereby it's just 4 basically the three cards, whether a player has 5 a lack of a pair or better with pay-outs -- 6 progressive pay-outs for the quality of the 7 hand of the player. 8 It was published. I believe there were 9 no comments received on this one, and it's now 10 before you for final adoption. 11 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 12 Any questions? 13 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 14 Madame Chair. 15 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: Motion to adopt as 16 published. 17 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Second. 18 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 19 made and seconded. All in favor? 20 (Ayes.) 21 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 22 (No response.) 23 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 24 MR. NANCE: Item No 13, proposed 25 adoption of amendments for total card and 68 ITEM NO. 13 1 wagers 4-5-6 in baccarat-punto banco and 2 minibaccarat. 3 Mr. Mamolen? 4 MR. MAMOLEN: Another matter before you 5 for final adoption. The side wager is for the 6 two games, baccarat-punto banco, which is the 7 only baccarat game in Atlantic City, and 8 minibac. It's, in essence, the total number of 9 cards consumed in a round of play by both 10 bankers and players' hands. 11 The Division was the only comment after 12 the publication, and it did not interpose an 13 objection. And it's before you for final 14 adoption. 15 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Thank you. 16 Any questions? 17 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: No questions, 18 Madame Chair. 19 COMMISSIONER EPPS: Motion to adopt as 20 published. 21 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Second. 22 CHAIR KASSEKERT: The motion has been 23 made and seconded. All in favor? 24 (Ayes.) 25 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Opposed? 69 1 (No response.) 2 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Motion carries. 3 MR. NANCE: In accordance with 4 Resolution No. 06-12-13-20, the next closed 5 session of the Commission shall be held on 6 Wednesday, October 3rd, 2007, at 9:15 at the 7 Commission offices. 8 It is now time for the public 9 participation portion of the mere meeting. 10 CHAIR KASSEKERT: Seeing no one in the 11 audience, I will now consider this portion of 12 the meeting closed and entertain a motion to 13 adjourn. 14 COMMISSIONER SOMMELING: Motion to 15 adjourn. 16 VICE CHAIR FEDORKO: 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: Motion carries. 23 Thank you. 24 (Public Meeting 07-09-19 was adjourned 25 at 11:38 a.m.) 70 1 2 C E R T I F I C A T E 3 4 5 I, DARLENE SILLITOE, a Certified Court 6 Reporter and Notary Public of the State of New 7 Jersey, certify that the foregoing is a true 8 and accurate transcript of the proceedings. 9 10 11 I further certify that I am neither 12 attorney, of counsel for, nor related to or 13 employed by any of the parties to the action; 14 further that I am not a relative or employee of 15 any attorney or counsel employed in this case; 16 nor am I financially interested in the action. 17 18 19 DARLENE SILLITOE CCR 20 License No XI01023 21 22 Dated: September 21, 2007 23 My Commission Expires on July 10, 2009 24 ID No 2062871 25