WAS A RESOUNDING GOOD AFTERNOON
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I GET
AFTERNOON WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD
AND CALL THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE
AUDIT COMMITTEE THE ASSEMBLY
GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION
COMMITTEE AND THE SENATE.
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
COMMITTEE TO ORDER THIS IS THE
HEARING THE OVERSIGHT HEARING
OF THE- ON FOR THIS HEARING
WILL DISCUSS FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS IDENTIFIED BY
THE STATE HONOR AUDIT REPORT
RELEASED IN MAY OF THIS YEAR.
TITLED BUREAU OF GAMBLING
CONTROL CALIFORNIA GAMBLING
CONTROL COMMISSION. THEIR
LICENSING PROCESSES ARE
INEFFICIENT AND FOSTER UNEQUAL
TREATMENT OF APPLICANTS WANT TO
THANK ASSEMBLY MEMBER BONTA AND
ASSEMBLY MEMBER CHIU FOR
REQUESTING THIS AUDIT. WE WILL
ALSO DISCUSS THE BUREAU OF
GAMBLING CONTROLS AND THE
CALIFORNIA GAMBLING CONTROL
COMMISSIONS PLAN TO IMPLEMENT
CHANGES IN CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
INCLUDING THE STATE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS. TO ENSURE
CONSISTENCY AND EFFICIENCY IN
THEIR LICENSING AND ENFORCEMENT
ACTIVITIES. AS YOU MAY KNOW
STATE LAW AND REGULATIONS GIVE
THE BUREAU AND THE COMMISSION
DISTINCT RESPONSIBILITIES FOR A
RANGE OF LICENSING AND
ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT ARE
RELATED TO THE CARD ROOM
INDUSTRY. THE BUREAU IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR PERFORMING
BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS OF
APPLICANTS SEEKING LICENSES
THATWILL ENABLE THEM TO OWN OR
WORK IN CARD ROOMS AND FOREIGN
FORCING GAMING LAWS AND
REGULATIONS. THE COMMISSION IS
AN INDEPENDENT BODY THAT MAKES
LICENSING DECISIONS IN
CONSIDERATION. OF THE BUREAU'S
RECOMMENDATION AND WHEN
APPLICABLE. TAKES OR UPHOLDS
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST
LICENSEES. THOSE WHO OWN
OPERATE IN WORKING CARD ROOMS
AND RELATED BUSINESSES PAY
LICENSING AND REGULATORY FEES
WHICH ARE DEPOSITED INTO THE
GAMBLING CONTROL FUND TO COVER
THE COST OF THOSE REGULATORY.
ACTIVITIES IN THE AUDIT REPORT
THE STATE AUDITOR FOUND THE
FOLLOWING. ONE BOTH THE BUREAU
AND THE COMMISSION HAVE
REPEATEDLY FAILED TO MEET
CERTAIN REQUIRED TIME FRAMES
FOR LICENSING ACTIVITIES AND
HAVE COMPOUNDED SIGNIFICANT
BACKLOGS IN THE LICENSING
PROCESS TO BOTH THE BUREAU OF
THE COMMISSION CHARGE FEES THAT
DO NOT ALIGN WITH THE ACTUAL
COSTS THEY INCUR. IN PERFORMING
OVER OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES AND
AS A RESULT THE GAMBLING
CONTROL FUNDS BALANCE IS
EXCESSIVE AND IS EXPECTED TO
INCREASE TO KNOWN TO MORE THAN
NINETY SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS.
THE BUREAU THREE THE BUREAUS
AND THE COMMISSION'S
REGULATIONS AND PRACTICES THAT
RESULTED AND THE UNEQUAL
TREATMENT OF APPLICANTS. FOR
THIS HEARING I LOOK FORWARD TO
A PRODUCTIVE AND ROBUST
DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ON A
REPORTER WITH THE BUREAU AND
THE COMMISSION ARE DOING TO
IMPROVE THEIR OPERATIONS AND
ACCOMPLISH THEIR MISSIONS. WITH
THAT I'LL TURN OVER THE MIKE TO
OUR SENATE. GEO COMMITTEE
CHAIRMAN A SENATOR DR THANK YOU
VERY MUCH CHAIRMAN SALAS I
REALLY APPRECIATE YOU ADD
CENTER GRAY FOR. IN YOUR
STAFF'S REPORTING WORK TOGETHER
FOR TODAY'S HEARING. AND THANK
YOU TO THE PANELISTS TO AGREE
TO PARTICIPATE TODAY. AS THE
OTHER REVEALED THEIR BEEN
INEFFICIENCIES WITH BOTH THE
BUREAU OF GAME WE CONTROLLED.
THE CALIFORNIA GAMBLING CONTROL
COMMISSION. I PARTICULARLY
CONCERNED THAT DESPITE
SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL
RESOURCES FROM THE LEGISLATURE.
THE AUDIT FOUND THAT THE BUREAU
HAD FAILED TO CLEAR ITS BACKLOG
OF PENDING LICENSE APPLICATIONS.
SINCE THE RELEASE OF THE AUDIT
I'VE MET WITH THE BUREAU AND
THE COMMISSION YEAH I AM
CONFIDENT THAT IMPROVEMENTS CAN
IT WILL BE MADE TO BETTER SERVE
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. I LOOK FORWARD TO
THE HEARING TODAY TO DETERMINE
WHAT STEPS HAVE ALREADY BEEN
TAKEN AND WHAT MORE CAN BE DONE
TO COULD ADDRESS THESE
INEFFICIENCIES THANK YOU. THANK
YOU SATURDAY OUT OF THE
CEREMONY ASK IF THERE ARE ANY
OTHER OPENING COMMENTS THIS
TIME FOR MANY MEMBER ON THE
DíAS. ASSEMBLYMEMBER PATTERSON
PLEASE. THANK YOU I. I JUST
WANNA LAY OUT AN AREA WHERE I
AM I WANT TO LOOK AT. HAVE SOME
SOME QUESTIONS AND SOME HAD
SOME COMMENTS HERE NUMBER ONE.
I THINK WE HAVE SOME OF. VERY
SPECIFIC RESULTS OUT OF THIS
AUDIT NUMBER ONE WE HAVE DELAYS.
WE HAVE INCONSISTENCIES WE HAVE
BACKLOGS AND UNFORTUNATELY THIS
LEADS TO THE APPEARANCE OF AN
UNFAIR TREATMENT I THINK THIS
IS A VERY SERIOUS. AREA HERE
BECAUSE I THINK THAT THESE
APPLICANTS HAVE THE EXPECTATION
OF DUE PROCESS. AND I'M NOT A
CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR BUT
THERE ARE I THINK SOME SERIOUS.
ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO DUE
PROCESS. ONE IS A PROCEDURAL
DUE PROCESS WHICH IS YOU GET AN
OPPORTUNITY TO GO BEFORE YOU
KNOW THESE THESE BUREAUCRACIES
AND MAKE AND MAKE YOUR
APPLICATION. BUT THEN THERE IS
A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER YOU
GET ACTUAL DUE PROCESS. AN
ACTUAL DUE PROCESS IS GETTING
TO A DECISION. THAT IS FAIRLY
REACHED AND IS CONSISTENT AND
SO I WOULD HOPE THAT THOSE WHO
ARE GOING TO BE PRESENTING HERE
WILL BE PREPARED TO ANSWER SOME
OF MY QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO
DUE PROCESS. WHETHER IT THEY
ARE PROVIDING ACTUAL DUE
PROCESS OR WHETHER THEY ARE
MERELY PURSE PUT UP PROVIDING A
PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS. IF YOU
IF YOU'RE NOT. ACTUALLY GETTING
TO DECISIONS IN A TIMELY
FASHION AND IF YOU AND IF YOU
CONTINUE TO. MAKE DECISIONS
THAT APPEAR TO BE UNFAIR.
YOU'RE YOU'RE NOT GETTING A DUE
PROCESS I THINK THIS IS A
SIGNIFICANT AREA THAT WE HAVE
TO INQUIRE ABOUT AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO ASKING SOME
QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS AND I'M
ASKING THOSE WHO PRESENT TO BE
PREPARED TO ANSWER SOME OF MY
QUESTIONS THANK YOU. THANK YOU
SOMEONE MEMBERS AND WE'RE GONNA
GET OPENING COMMENTS FROM OUR
ASSEMBLY GEO COMMITTEE
CHAIRMAN. ASSEMBLY MEMBER GRAY.
THANK YOU CHAIRMAN SALAS.
CHAIRMAN DIED FOR. CONVENING
THIS IMPORTANT TIMELY OVERSIGHT
HEARING. OF THE BUREAU DOWN
CONTROL IN THE CALIFORNIA. GIVE
THE COMMISSION. AS WELL WHERE
THERE WAS A STATE OUT REPORT.
LEAST EARLY THIS YEAR THAT
HIGHLIGHTED NUMBER OF
CONCERNING ISSUES. AS IT
RELATES TO DELAYS IN PROCESS.
AND BUDGETARY ISSUES. I LOOK
FORWARD TO THE TESTIMONY TODAY
I THINK THIS IS AN AREA MEMBERS
WHERE. WE NEED TO ENGAGE
PROBABLY IN OUR BUDGET PROCESS
THIS NEXT YEAR TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE'RE DOING THE PROPER
OVERSIGHT AND CERTAINLY. HAVING
A POLICY OVERSIGHT HEARING
TODAY I THINK SUPPORT STEP IN
THAT DIRECTION APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE. THANK
THE CHAIRMAN AND THE SENATE FOR
THE PARTNERSHIP. THANK YOU
SOMEONE NUMBER GRAY WILL MOVE
TO CENTER MORE LIKE FOR BRIEF
OPENING COMMENTS THAT WE CAN
GET STARTED ON PANELS AND I
BELIEVE. POSSIBLY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BONTA AS ONE OF THE
QUESTIONS OF THE AUDIT. BASED
TERMINAL SALAS AND THANK YOU
FOR A. ALLOWING US TO ENJOY
THESE MEETINGS I'M TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW WE FROM A- LOOK
AT BAKER SCHEME OF THINGS HOW
DO WE HELP THESE DEPARTMENTS IN
THE CITY JUST YOU KNOW ZOOMING
IN ON. OVER FINING BECAUSE THE
STATE AUDITOR'S FINDING
SOMETHING EVERYWHERE SHE GOES
AND SO IN ORANGE COUNTY SINCE
WE- WENT THROUGH A CHAPTER NINE
BANKRUPTCY WE TRY TO FIGURE OUT
HOW DO WE GET MORE EFFICIENT
WE- IMPLEMENTED WHAT WAS CALLED
RESULTS ORIENTED GOVERNMENT. IN
EVERY DEPARTMENT HAD TO DO A
BUSINESS PLAN IT HAD TO
DETERMINE WHAT IS IT DO. HOW
DOES IT MEASURE IT. AND HOW
DOES IT COMPARE FROM PRIOR
YEARS HOW DO YOU PLAN ON
IMPROVING. AND SO IT WAS DR
MANY WE EVEN HAD A TEN YEAR.
FINANCIAL UP BUDGET THAT WOULD
FILL INTO THAN COUNTIES OVERALL
TO IN YOUR BUDGET. I COME FROM.
A CPA BACKGROUND SO WE KEPT
TIME AND BILLING. INFORMATION
AND SO I'M JUST YOU KNOW WITH
YOU KNOW HOW MUCH. TIME IT
TAKES FOR A TASK THEN YOU KNOW
HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU NEED TO
HIRE TO GET THOSE TASKS DONE.
AND YOU CAN BUDGET ACCORDINGLY
AND I'M- I'M JUST TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT. MAYBE FROM A HIGHER
LEVEL HOW DO WE HELP
DEPARTMENTS. TO SAY HEY WE NEED
MORE STAFF IN THIS IS WHAT THEY
DO AND THIS IS HOW THEY DO IT
IN THE STYLE IT'S BEEN GOING
YEAR BY YEAR BY YEAR. THIS IS
HOW WE'RE ACCOMPLISHING OUR
GOALS. BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS
WHEN HE SHOWS US THAT SO MUCH
IS TO BE DONE AND I BUT WHERE
ARE WE GONNA PUT IT ACROSS THE
WHOLE. SCHEME SO THAT THEY
TAXPAYERS CAN HAVE MORE
CONFIDENCE ABSOLUTELY IN OUR
BUREAUCRACIES YEAH NO THANK
SENATOR WERE LIKE I THINK
THAT'S A POINT OF TODAY'S
HEARING IS HOW DO WE GET AT
THOSE EFFICIENCIES. THE AUDITOR
WILL TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS AND HOW WE GET
AT SOME OF THAT BACKLOG ALSO BE
HEARING FROM THE BUREAU ITSELF.
ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING TO
TACKLE I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE
CHICKEN PERIOD THAT THEY NEED
TO DO. LAUGHTER NOT IT IS
COMPLETED TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY'RE ON THEIR WAY TO
COMPLETING THOSE AND SO I'M
LOOKING FORWARD TO TODAY'S
TESTIMONY TO SEE HOW THEIR-
TACKLING THAT ISSUE AS WELL. SO
THANK YOU. FOR COMMENTS WITHOUT
WILL TO ASSEMBLY MEMBER BOX AND
THEN WE WILL BEGIN. AND THE
COMMISSION LIKE LAST YEAR
ASSEMBLY MEMBER AT DAVID CHIU
AND NINE WOULD TROUBLE TO HEAR
SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT MAY BE
GOING ON WITH THE BUREAU IN THE
COMMISSION SO WE REQUESTED AN
AUDIT TO HELP FURTHER
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT MIGHT BE
HAPPENING IN TO SEE IF WE COULD
CHARTER A PATH FORWARD TO
ADDRESS ANY ISSUES. THAT WERE
SUBSTANTIATED IN. WE HAD
CONCERNS ABOUT OPERATION
EFFICIENCY M. FAIR TREATMENT OF
APPLICANTS OF APPROPRIATE. USE
OF FUNDS TO TIMELINESS AND IN
PROCEDURES CONSISTENT
APPLICATIONS OF STANDARDS AND I
JUST REALLY WANT TO APPRECIATE
THE- STATE AUDITOR'S. REPORT
WHICH GIVES US A ROADMAP FOR
HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD IN A
CONSTRUCTIVE AND PRODUCTIVE
WAY. I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT I
MET WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE SINCE THOUGHT IT HAS
COME OUT. AND I JUST WANNA
THANK THEM FOR EMBRACING THE
AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS. AND FOR
THEIR COMMITMENT TO WORK WITH
US TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES AS-
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND TO AND
TO MOVE FORWARD IN A POSITIVE
WAY. TOGETHER SO I WANT TO
THANK EVERYONE FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THIS
DISCUSSION AND- TO ADDRESS SOME
ISSUES WHICH I THINK BETTER
WILL BE BETTER FOR ALL OF US
HERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIR RIGHT THANK YOU SOMEONE
MEMBER WAS GOING CALL UP OUR
PANEL THIS IS A CHEN ITEM
NUMBER TWO OVERVIEW OF THE
AUDIT. HAVE WITH US. MISS
ELAINE HOW STATE AUDITOR WITH
KILL FOR STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE
TAMMY LOZANO PRINCIPLE UNDER
THE CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR'S
OFFICE. AND MORE. WRITTEN RT. A
SENIOR HONORED WITH CALIFORNIA
STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE. MISS
HOW WHEN YOU ARE READY PLEASE
BEGIN THANK YOU. THANK YOU
CHAIRMAN SALAS CHAIRS GRAY AND
DODD FOR THE RECORD MY NAME'S
ELAINE HOWELL TO MY LEFT IS
TAMMY LOZANO MS LOZANO WAS THE
AUDIT MANAGER ON THIS
PARTICULAR PROJECT. TO MY RIGHT
IS MARK REINER DE MISTER REINER
D. WAS THE ACTUAL. TEAM LEADER
WORKING WITH THE AUDIT STAFF AT
BOTH THE BUREAU OF GAMBLING
CONTROLLING GAMBLING THE
COMMISSION. I'M GOING TO GO
OVER THE ISSUES AND AT A VERY
HIGH LEVEL AND THEN HANDED OFF
TO STAFF AND THEY WILL DRILL
DOWN IN EACH OF THE ISSUES THAT
I HIGHLIGHT FOR YOU. WE DO HAVE
A HANDOUT THAT I BELIEVE THE
SERGEANTS HAVE DISTRIBUTED.
WHEN MY COLLEAGUES. START
DISCUSSING THE PARTICULAR
ISSUES THEY WILL STEP YOU
THROUGH SOME OF THE GRAPHICS
THESE ARE EXCERPTS FROM THE
AUDIT REPORT THAT REALLY
DEMONSTRATE THE ISSUES THAT
WE'VE IDENTIFIED IN A VARIETY
OF AREAS. SO THE FIRST AREA
THAT A MISSILE IS ON I WAS
GOING TO TALK ABOUT. REALLY
FOCUSES ON FUNDING FEES BILLING
PRACTICES SO WE HAVE. THREE OR
FOUR KEY ISSUES IN THIS
PARTICULAR AREA THIS UMBRELLA
OF FUNDING AND BILLING. ONE IS
THAT THE FEES THAT THE BUREAU
CHARGES DOES NOT REALLY ALIGNED
WITH THE COSTS. SO SOME AT SOME
INDIVIDUALS ARE BEING OVER
CHARGED WHILE OTHERS ARE BEING
UNDER CHARGED FOR THE SERVICES
THAT THE BUREAU PROVIDES AND
SHE'LL GET INTO SPECIFICS WITH
RESPECT TO THAT. THERE IS A
MISALIGNMENT WITH. THE COSTS
FOR CERTAIN SERVICES AND WHAT
FEES. INDIVIDUALS ARE PAYING.
ALSO IT AS A CHAIRMAN MENTIONED
ONE OF THE KEY THINGS WE HAVE
IN THE AUDIT REPORT IS THE FUND
BALANCE FOR THE GAMBLING
COMMISSION ARE. INCREASING
SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE LAST FIVE
YEARS AND THERE IS A GRAPHIC I
IN THE HANDOUTS THAT
DEMONSTRATES THAT. THE JUDGE
THE FUND BALANCE HAS DOUBLED IN
THE LAST FIVE YEARS IN ADDITION
THERE WILL BE A REPAYMENT OR
IT. MAY HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED A
REPAYMENT TOM FROM A LOAN. FROM
THE GENERAL FUND THAT EVEN
BUMPS THAT JET THAT FUND
BALANCE UP EVEN MORE SO MORE
THAN DOUBLE. IN FIVE YEARS BUT
THEN THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT SO
THEY HAVE A HUGE FUND BALANCE
WHICH THEY COULD USE. TO
HOPEFULLY ADDRESS SOME OF THE
INEFFICIENCIES AND STAFFING
ISSUES IT CETERA. BILLING
PRACTICES. NOW THIS IS ANOTHER
AREA WHERE WE SAW
INCONSISTENCIES IN THEIR
BILLING PRACTICES AND BILLING
INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE SUBMITTING
AN APPLICATION FOR A LICENSE.
MS LOZANO AGAIN WE'LL GET INTO
SPECIFIC SPECIFICS WITH REESE
RESPECT TO THAT. ANOTHER ISSUE
RELATED TO COST IS SOMETHING
CENTER MORE LOCK YOU JUST
MENTIONED SOME OF THESE
INDIVIDUALS ARE SPENDING A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME ON
NON CASE HOURS THEY ARE NOT
SPENDING THE MAJORITY OF THEIR
TIME. REVIEWING APPLICATIONS
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT SOME OF
THE TIME SHEETS AND THE TIME
REPORTING WE'RE SEEING NON
BILLABLE HOURS AND ACTUALLY
NINE CASE HOURS. SO WE REALLY
ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS WITH
RESPECT TO THAT YOUR STAFF FOR
NOT SPENDING. MOST OF THEIR
TIME DOING A JOB THE
RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING WHICH IS
REVIEWING APPLICATIONS. SO
THOSE ARE THE FOUR KEY ISSUES
UNDER FUNDING AND BILLING
ISSUES. WHEN MR REINER HE
SPEAKS HE'S GOING TO ADDRESS A
COUPLE OF AREAS ONE IS RELATED
TO LICENSING APPLICATIONS.
THERE'S A HUNDRED AND EIGHTY
DAY TIME FRAME FOR WHICH THE
BUREAU IS SUPPOSED TO REVIEW
APPLICATIONS. IN MOST INSTANCES
THEY ARE EXCEEDING THAT
STATUTORY TIME FRAME AND NOT
GETTING THOSE APPLICATIONS
REVIEWED. OUR AS PROMPTLY AS
THEY SHOULD. IN LOOKING AT
STAFFING INCREASES THE
LEGISLATURE HAS GIVEN. THE
BUREAU. INCREASES IN LICENSING
STAFF ON SEPARATE OCCASIONS AND
ESSENTIALLY DOUBLE THE STAFF
BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE
PRODUCTIVITY UNFORTUNATELY THE
PRODUCTIVITY DIDN'T REFLECT THE
INCREASE IN STAFFING SOME OF IT
PERHAPS IS RELATED TO THE FACT
THAT THEY'RE NOT SPENDING A LOT
OF TIME. ON CASES THERE'S THEY
HAVE BEEN A LOT OF NON BILLABLE
HOURS NINE CASE HOURS SO WE
WERE EXPECTING TO SEE WHEN THE
LEGISLATURE PROVIDED THOSE
TEMPORARY POSITIONS THAT HAVE
ESSENTIALLY DOUBLED THEIR
STAFF. THAT THERE WOULD BE AN
INCREASE IN PRODUCTIVITY IN A
REDUCTION IN THE IN THE
BACKLOG. THERE HAS BEEN A
REDUCTION IN THE BACKLOG BUT
NOT TO THE POINT. WHERE IT
SHOULD BE BASED ON THE AMOUNT
OF STAFFING THAT THE
LEGISLATURE HAS HAS PROVIDED TO
THE BUREAU. IN ADDITION WE
LOOKED AT SOME OF THE
REGULATORY PROCESSES WITH
RESPECT TO DENIALS OF
APPLICATIONS. AND WE SAW SOME
SOME WEAKNESSES IN THAT PROCESS
THEY THEY ACTUALLY REQUIRE. AN
EVIDENTIARY HEARING AND WHEN WE
LOOKED AT THE REGULATIONS THE
TIME FRAMES IN THE REGULATIONS
ACTUALLY EXCEED. A HUNDRED AND
TWENTY DAY A TIME FRAME THAT
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE GETTING
THOSE THOSE DECISIONS MADE THEY
ACTUALLY HAVE REGULATIONS THAT
TAKE IT OUT TWO HUNDRED AND
THIRTY FIVE DAYS. SO THERE'S A
REAL DISCONNECTED THEY ARE WITH
RESPECT TO HOW THEY PROCESS
APPLICATIONS AND THOSE THAT GO
BEFORE THE COMMISSION. THE LAST
AREA THE UMBRELLA AREAS REALLY
WHAT SOME OF THE MEMBERS
MENTIONED UNEQUAL TREATMENT OF
APPLICANTS SO LICENSING
APPLICANTS FROM CARD ROOMS.
DIFFER FROM THOSE AS FAR AS
THIRD PARTY APPLICANTS AND
THEIR TREATMENT IS DIFFERENT AS
FAR AS- A THIRD PARTY
APPLICANTS CAN HAVE A
TEMPORARY. A LICENSE AND THEY
CAN KEEP THAT LICENSE UNTIL IT
ACTUALLY DENIED. LICENSING
APPLICANTS FOR CARD ROOMS. THEY
LOSE THAT LICENSE AS SOON AS
THERE'S THAT THERE'S A
RECOMMENDATION. THAT THEY BE
DENIED A LICENSE SO WE SAW SOME
REAL INCONSISTENCIES IN AGAIN
MISTER RANDY WILL STEP INTO A
BIT MORE DETAIL WITH RESPECT TO
THAT. SIMILARLY IN LOOKING AT
BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS THAT
ARE CONDUCTED WE SAW
INCONSISTENCIES THERE AND WE
TRIED TO REALLY DRILL DOWN AND
TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHY ARE THERE
INCONSISTENCIES UNFORTUNATELY
WHEN WE LOOK AT SOME OF THEIR
DOCUMENT RETENTION. I ASKED FOR
MATERIALS TO SUPPORT SOME OF
THOSE DECISIONS THE RETENTION
POLICIES WERE NOT VERY GOOD SO
WE WEREN'T ABLE TO SEE. SOME OF
THE EVIDENCE THAT WE WERE
EXPECTING TO SEE THAT WOULD
HELP US UNDERSTAND THEIR
DECISION MAKING PROCESS SO WE
HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS WITH
RESPECT TO THAT. AND THEN THE
LAST ISSUE ON UNDER THE UNEQUAL
TREATMENT IS IF THERE ISN'T AS
AN INDIVIDUAL WHERE THERE'S A
RECOMMENDATION TO THE
COMMISSION FOR THAT. THAT
LICENSE APPLICATION TO BE
DENIED THAT PERSON IS NOT
REALLY GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY.
TO OPT OUT AND NOT HAVE THAT
EVIDENTIARY HEARING HAPPEN.
SOME FOLKS CAN OPT OUT BUT THE
COMMISSION MOVES AHEAD AND HAS
A HEARING AND THEN PUBLICLY
DESCRIBES THE DECISION. AND IN
SOME CASES THAT'S HARMFUL TO
THOSE APPLICANTS WHERE THEY'VE
DECIDED I DON'T WANT TO.
CONTINUE IN THE PROCESS AND WE
NEED TO STOP I'M OPTING OUT BUT
THE COMMISSION GOES AHEAD AND
MOVES FORWARD WITH THAT SO
THOSE ARE THE THEY'RE VERY HIGH
LEVEL ISSUES. THAT WE
IDENTIFIED IN THE REPORT AS YOU
SAID MR SALAS WE HAVE A VARIETY
OF DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATIONS
ARE TO BOTH THE BUREAU AND THE
COMMISSION. AND AGAIN AS STAFF
STEP YOU THROUGH THE ISSUES
THEY'LL THEY'LL TALK TO YOU A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE ISSUE
WAS AND WHAT WE'VE RECOMMENDED
SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO IS
LOZANO AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU
PLEASE MISSILES ON. GOOD
AFTERNOON MEMBERS. AS THE STATE
AUDITOR INDICATED I'M GOING TO
COVER THE ISSUES RELATED TO THE
REGULATORY DUTIES OF THE BUREAU
AND THE COMMISSION IN TERMS OF
THE FEE STRUCTURE CURRENTLY
THERE'S TWO TYPES OF FEES ARE
COLLECTED IN THE GAMBLING
CONTROL FUN. LICENSING FEES
THAT ARE PAID BY THE LICENSE
APPLICANTS AS WELL AS
BACKGROUND DEPOSITS FOR THE
ACTUAL INVESTIGATION THAT THE
BUREAU CONDUCTS THOSE THAT'S
ONE AREA. UP FUNDING THAT GOES
INTO THE GAMBLING CONTROL PLAN
AND THE SECOND AREA IS WHAT WE
REFER TO IN THE REPORT AS OTHER
REGULATORY FEES AND THESE ARE
THE AND FEES THAT ARE PAID BY
THE CARD ROOM OWNERS. AND THE
THIRD PARTY COMPANY OWNERS THE
CARBON A CARD ROOM OWNERS PAY
BASED ON THEIR NUMBER OF TABLES
OR TOTAL REVENUE. AND THE THIRD
PARTY COMPANY OWNERS PAY BASED
ON THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES AND
THE USER FEES ARE PAID
ANNUALLY. SO THOSE TWO BUCKETS
ARE KIND OF WHAT IS MAKING UP
THE FUNDS ARE GOING INTO THE
GAMBLING CONTROL FUN. AND IT'S
IMPORTANT THAT THE REGULATORY
FEES THAT ARE COLLECTED
REASONABLY RELATE TO THE COST
FOR THE ACTIVITIES THAT THOSE.
FEES ARE SUPPORTING. AND WHAT
WE SAW WAS OVER THE FIVE YEARS
THAT IN TERMS OF THE LICENSING
EXPENDITURES IN THE LICENSING
REVENUE. THE REVENUE WASN'T
COVERING THE COST OF THE
EXPENDITURES I'M SORRY. WASN'T
COVERING THE COST OF THE
ACTIVITIES FOR THE LICENSING
ACTIVITIES AND SPECIFICALLY IN
FISCAL YEAR TWENTY SEVENTEEN
EIGHTEEN. THE REVENUE THAT CAME
IN WAS FOUR POINT TWO MILLION
AND THE EXPENDITURES FOR THOSE
ACTIVITIES WAS NINE POINT NINE
MILLION WHICH IS A GAP OF FIVE
POINT SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS.
AND WE KIND OF SAW THE FLIP OF
THAT FOR THE OTHER REGULATORY
FEES WHERE WERE THE REVENUE
THAT WAS BEING GENERATED FROM
THOSE ANNUAL FEES PAID BY THE
CARBON OWNERS AND THIRD PARTY
COMPANY. OWNERS. FOR SEVENTEEN
EIGHTEEN THE REVENUE WAS
EIGHTEEN POINT NINE MILLION
WHILE THE ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED
WITH THOSE. ACTIVITIES WAS SIX
POINT NINE MILLION WHICH
GENERATE IN EXCESS OF TWELVE
MILLION DOLLARS. INTO THE
GAMBLING CONTROL FUN AND WHAT
THIS LACK OF ALIGNMENT OF THE
FEES MEANS IS THAT ESSENTIALLY
THE OTHER REGULATORY FEES ARE
SUBSIDIZING THE COST OF THE
LICENSING ACTIVITIES. AND THIS
IS PROBLEMATIC WHEN YOU USE
FEES THAT ARE COLLECTED FOR ONE
PURPOSE TO SUBSIDIZE A GAP IN
ANOTHER ACTIVITY THESE FEES.
ARE ACTUALLY APPLE OPERATING
MAYBE OPERATING AS A TAX. AND
WHICH IS UNLAWFUL. ANOTHER
THING THAT THE LACK OF
ALIGNMENT IN THE FEES ALSO
RESULTED IN THE EXCESSIVE FUND
BALLOTS WITH JUST THE STATE
AUDITOR MENTIONED AND IF YOU GO
TO THE GRAPHICIN THE PACKET ON
PAGE TWO IT SHOWS THE FIVE YEAR
GROWTH GOING FROM FISCAL YEAR
FOURTEEN AT THIRTEEN FOURTEEN
IT WAS ABOUT THIRTY MILLION
DOLLARS AND AT THE END OF
SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN IT WAS UP TO
SIXTY ONE MILLION DOLLARS. AND
THEN WE ALSO SHOW THE REPAYMENT
OF THE LOAN GENERAL LOAN FUNDS
BACK TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL
FUND WHICH PROJECTS THAT THE
FUND WILL EXCEED OUR BE UP TO
NINETY SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS.
WHEN WE LOOKED AT. KIND OF THE
REASONS WHY THE FUND WAS
GROWING SO MUCH ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT WE NOTED WAS
THERE'S BEEN NO RECENT ANALYSIS
AN UPDATE OF THE FEES. THE
COMMISSION DEVELOPS PUTS THE
FEES AND REGULATIONS AND THEY
HAVEN'T UPDATE THOSE FEES SENSE
MOST OF THE FEES SINCE TWO
THOUSAND EIGHT. AND SOME OTHER
REGULATORY FEES BACK TO TWO
THOUSAND FOUR IS THE LAST TIME
THEY BEEN UPDATED THE BUREAU
FOR ITS PART. THEY THEY
ACTUALLY ESTABLISH THE
BACKGROUND DEPOSIT FEES. AND
THOSE HAVEN'T BEEN EVALUATED
SINCE TWO THOUSAND ELEVEN. SO
WE MADE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TO
THE BUREAU AND THE COMMISSION
THAT THEY DO A THOROUGH COST
ANALYSIS. OF THE ACTIVITIES ARE
SUPPORTED BY THE GENERAL FUND
AND THEN ALIGN THE FEES WHAT
THE COST. SO THAT THE FEE
PAYERS ARE BEING FAIRLY
CHARGED. WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO
NOTE IS THAT THAT NEEDS TO
OCCUR AFTER SOME OF THE OTHER
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MADE OR
IMPLEMENTED IN TERMS OF.
CLEANING UP THERE PROCESSES
MISTER RANDY IS GOING TO TALK
IN JUST A FEW MINUTES ABOUT
SOME OF THE PROBLEMS AND
DEFICIENCIES THE BE SIGNED
THEIR PROCESSES AND THEY REALLY
NEED TO DO THAT BEFORE THEY-
KIND OF UPDATE THEIR FEES SO
THAT THEY- ARE FAIR. WE ALSO
MADE A LEGISLATIVE
RECOMMENDATION THAT WHEN THE
COMMISSION AND THE BUREAU COMES
BACK TO UPDATE THEIR FEES. THAT
THEY REQUIRED THE COMMISSION
AND THE BUREAU TO UPDATE THE
REGULATIONS TO INCLUDE SPECIFIC
PURPOSES. FOR THEIR APPROPRIATE
USE OF THE FEES FOR EACH OF
THOSE BUCKETS OF MONEY. ANOTHER
AFFECT OF THE LARGE SURPLUS IN
THE GAMBLING GAMBLING CONTROL
FUND HAS BEEN THAT IS ALLOW THE
BUREAU TO ENGAGE IN BILLING
PRACTICES THAT ARE INCONSISTENT
AND PENSION CHOI AND FAIR TO
APPLICANTS. AND IF YOU REFER TO
THE GRAPHIC ON PAGE THREE IN
YOUR HAND OUT. WE SHOW THERE
THE THREE BUCKETS OF TIME WE
LOOKEDAT THE LICENSING STAFF
AND HOW THEY WERE CHARGING
THEIR TIME AND THERE'S REALLY
THREE THREE BUCKETS THAT THEY
CHARGE THEIR TIME TO. FIRST THE
BILLABLE TIME IN THE NON
BILLABLE TIME. OR ASSOCIATED
WITH THEIR CASE REVIEWS. AND
WHAT WHAT WE EXPECTED TO SEE
WAS THE NON BILLABLE TIME WOULD
BE A SMALL AMOUNT AND THE
BILLABLE TIME WOULD BE MORE OF
THEIR POLICIES REQUIRE THEM. TO
SORT OF WORK TOWARDS CHARGING
SIX HOURS A DAY TOWARDS THE
BILLABLE TIME. AND WHAT WE SAW
WAS AS YOU CAN SEE THERE ON THE
GRAPHIC IT'S 12% AND THESE ARE
THE OF THE FEES THAT GO AGAINST
THE BACKGROUND OF POSITS AND
THEY'RE ALLOWED TO IF THERE'S
NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO COVER THE
COST OF THE INVESTIGATION THEY
CAN GO BACK TO THE APPLICANT
REQUESTS MORE MONEY. AND
CONVERSELY IF THEY DON'T SPEND
IT ALL THEY HAVE TO REFUND IT
TO THE- APPLICANT. IN THE NON
BILLABLE CATEGORY THOSE ARE FOR
TIME SPENT WORKING ON APPLICANT
BUT APPLICATION BUT NOT CHARGED
THE APPLICANT IN THIS SHOULD BE
FOR. CASES WHAT THEY EXPLAINED
TO US THAT WOULD BE IN A
SITUATION WHERE LET'S SAY THE
FILE WAS. NOT LOOKED OUT FOR A
FEW MONTHS AND THEY GO BACK TO
IT SO IT'S SORT OF. A LITTLE
BIT INEFFICIENT NOT FAIR TO
THE- TO CHARGE THE. THE
APPLICANT AND SO THEY WOULD
CHARGE NON BILLABLE SO WE
EXPECTED TO SEE SMALL AMOUNTS.
BUT WHEN WE DID OUR ANALYSIS WE
LOOKED AT FORTY CASES. AND WE
SAW THAT IN TWENTY EIGHT OF
THOSE CASES AT LEAST 25% OF THE
TIME CHARGE TO THE CASE WAS NON%
BILLABLE. IN NINETEEN
APPLICATIONS THE NON BILLABLE
TIME EXCEEDED THE BILLABLE.
NUMBER OF HOURS AND IN FIFTEEN
OF THOSE APPLICATIONS 75% OF
THE TOTAL OUT TOTAL HOURS BUILD
WAS NON BILLABLE AND SO WE
LOOKED AT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
WHY THERE WAS SO MUCH NON
BILLABLE TIME AND WHAT WE SAW
WAS THE CATEGORIES THAT THEY-
WERE USING FOR THE BILLABLE NON
BILLABLE WERE PRIMARILY THE
SAME ALMOST EVERY CATEGORY WAS
THE SAME SO THERE WASN'T GOOD
GUIDANCE ON WHEN TO CHARGE
BILLABLE AND ONE TO NON START.
TO NOT TO CHARGE NON BILLABLE
AND SO WE'RE CONCERNED BY THE
LARGE VOLUME OF NON BILLABLE
TIME ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT.
SOME OF THE APPLICANTS WHEN WE
LOOKED AT THE FORTY CASES WERE
BEING CHARGED THE FULL AMOUNT
AND SOME WERE NOT AND SO THIS
KIND OF CREATES A- DISPARITY
AMONG THE LICENSE APPLICANTS
AND A SENSE OF UNFAIRNESS. AND
THEN THE LAST CATEGORIES THE
NON CASE TIME WHICH IT REP
REPRESENTING 48% OF THE A
LICENSING STAFF TIME AND THAT
WAS CONCERNING GIVEN THE HIGH
NUMBER OF BACKLOG OF LICENSE
APPLICATIONS THAT NEED TO BE
COMPLETED. WHICH MISTER RIGHT
AND HE'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT A
FEW MINUTES WE DID MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BUREAU
TO ESTABLISH POLICIES REQUIRING
STAFF TO PROPERLY REPORT AND
EQUITABLY BILL TIME. AND ALSO
TO ESTABLISH CLEAR THRESHOLDS
FOR PROPORTIONS OF TIME STAFF
CHARGE TO THE VARIOUS
CATEGORIES. THE BUREAU HAS
ESTABLISHED A POLICIES FOR TIME
REPORTING AND IDENTIFIED
THRESHOLDS FOR THE PROPORTION
OF TIME WE ARE WORKING WITH THE
BUREAU TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE
THRESHOLD THAT IS IDENTIFIED IN
EVALUATING WHETHER THE
THRESHOLDS FULLY ADDRESS OUR
CONCERNS. AND OVER TO MARK.
THANK YOU PLEASE PROCEED. THANK
YOU CHAIRS MEMBERS MY NAME IS
MARK RUNNING WITH THE STATE
AUDITOR'S OFFICE I'M GOING TO
WALK YOU THROUGH OUR AUDIT
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
WITH RESPECT TO SOME EFFICIENCY
CONCERNS WE FOUND IN THE
LICENSING REVIEW PROCESS IN
ADDITIONALLY SOME SOME
SHORTCOMINGS WE IDENTIFIED IN
TERMS OF REGULATIONS AND
INTERNAL POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO
INCONSISTENT TREATMENT OF
APPLICANTS AND CERTAINLY GIVEN
THE DISCUSSION THAT THESE
ENTITIES HAVE AND PROCESSING
AND DECIDING UPON LICENSE
APPLICATIONS IN THIS INDUSTRY.
PERCEPTIONS OF UNFAIR TREATMENT.
AS THE STATE AUDITOR ALLUDED TO
IN HER INITIAL REMARKS THE
BUREAU GAMBLING CONTROL HAS ONE
HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS GENERALLY
SPEAKING TO PROCESS AN
APPLICATION TO A BACKGROUND
CHECK. AND FORWARD THAT
APPLICATION ON TO THE GAMBLING
COMMISSION WITH THE
RECOMMENDATION OF THE GAMING
COMMISSION EITHER APPROVE OR
DENY THAT APPLICATION. FOR A
LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL
BACKGROUND I'LL BE ALLUDING TO
DIFFERENT TYPES OF LICENSE
APPLICATIONS AS WE GO THROUGH
WE ALREADY DISCUSSED THE
DISTINCTION BETWEEN CARTER AND
BUSINESSES IN THE THIRD PARTIES
THAT WORK IN THOSE CARTOONS.
BUT IT IN EACH GROUP THERE ARE
ALSO DIFFERENT LEVELS OF
RESPONSIBILITY THAT HAVE
IMPLICATIONS AND REGULATIONS IN
POLICY FOR HOW THOSE
APPLICATIONS ARE CONSIDERED AN
TREATED. GENERALLY SPEAKING
THERE'S A LOWEST STAFF LEVEL OF
LICENSE HOLDER LICENSE HOLDER
AN INTERMEDIATE LEVEL THAT IS
GENERALLY A SUPERVISOR FOR LACK
OF BETTER TERM AND THEN. THE
HIGHEST LEVEL BEING THE
LICENCES HELD BY ACTUAL
BUSINESS OWNERS AND THEIR
DIFFERENT RULES IN
CONSIDERATION FOR EACH OF THOSE
I'LL GET INTO. WHEN WE-
REVIEWED THE BUREAU GAMING AT
ALL THE DATA WITH RESPECT TO
THE TIMELINESS OF ITS
PROCESSING OF BACKGROUND
INVESTIGATIONS FOR LICENSE
APPLICANTS. WE FOUND THAT IN
THE VAST MAJORITY OF CASES IT
WAS EXCEEDING THE ONE HUNDRED
EIGHTY DAY TIME FRAME AND IN
SOME CASES BY. A REALLY
SIGNIFICANT MARGIN IF YOU
WOULD. PLEASE TURN TO PAGE FOUR
WE HAVE A TABLE THAT WE
DEVELOPED BASED ON OUR ANALYSIS
OF THAT DATA. GOING BACK THE
LAST FIVE YEARS AT THE TIME OF
OUR REVIEW. AND THERE'S A LOT
OF NUMBERS THERE SO I APOLOGIZE
FOR THAT BUT THE TAKE AWAY IS
KIND OF TWO FOLD. FIRST IS THAT
THE RED SUBTOTAL LINE AT THE
BOTTOM THERE SHOWS THAT OUT OF
THE FIVE THOUSAND APPLICATIONS
THAT A COMPLETED DURING THIS
PERIOD OF TIME THAT WERE
SUBJECT TO THIS TIME
REQUIREMENTS. THIRTY FIVE
HUNDRED ABOUT 70% EXCEEDED THE
STATUTORY TIME FRAME FOR
PROCESSING THEM. THE SECOND
THING THAT I WOULD HIGHLIGHT
FOR YOU IS THAT THERE
CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF
APPLICATIONS THAT TOOK MULTIPLE
YEARS FOR THE BUREAU TO
PROCESS. AND MOVE ALONG TO THE
GAMBLING COMMISSION FOR ACTUAL
AT. ACTION ON THOSE LICENSES.
AND THAT HAS A COUPLE OF
IMPLICATIONS DEPENDING ON THE
LICENSE TYPE. AS A GENERAL RULE
APPLICANTS ARE ALLOWED TO WORK
UNDER TEMPORARY STATUS WHILE
THEIR APPLICATION IS PENDING
AND THAT'S USUALLY. A SET TIME
FRAME THAT'S CONSIDERABLY LESS
THAN SOME OF THESE WAIT PERIOD
BUT THEY'RE ABLE TO KIND OF
PERPETUALLY RENEW THOSE
TEMPORARY LICENSES UNTIL SUCH
TIME AS A DECISION IS MADE. SO
IT BY AND LARGE APPLICANTS ARE
ABLE TO GO OUT TO WORK ON
THAT'S A BENEFIT TO THEM
FINANCIALLY DURING THIS PERIOD
OF TIME WITH THE COULD BE
SIGNIFICANT DELAYS. HOWEVER
OBVIOUSLY A HUGE PART PART OF
THE REASON FOR THIS EXTENSIVE
BACKGROUND PROCESSES TO ENSURE
THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE
PROPERLY VETTED AND THAT THEY
ARE SUITABLE FOR WORK IN THE
INDUSTRY SO LONG WAITS WHERE
FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT BEEN
FULLY REVIEWED ARE ACTIVE WE
WERE PARTICIPATING IN SHE DOES.
CREATE A RISK TO THE PUBLIC AND
TO THE BUSINESS OWNERS EMPLOY
THEM. THE OTHER THING I WOULD
HIGHLIGHT IS THAT WHEN IT COMES
TO CARDROOM OWNERS IN
PARTICULAR. TEMPORARY LICENSES
ARE NOT. REALLY A FAN SO THE
TEMP CARBON Là CARDROOM OWNER
APPLICANTS ARE USUALLY. HAVE
APPLICATIONS ARE ASSOCIATE WITH
AN ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN A CHOIR
TRANSFER OWNERSHIP OF A
BUSINESS THOSE LICENSES CANNOT
BE ACTED UPON ON A TEMPORARY
BASIS OF THOSE CONTRACTS IN
THOSE AGREEMENTS HAVE TO
GENERALLY WAIT UNTIL SUCH TIME
AS- THE BUREAU HAS FINISHED ITS
WORK ON THE COMMISSION IS MADE
A DECISION SO. THERE'S A REAL
RISK TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS
BUSINESS INTERESTS FROM THESE
DELAYS AND I WE'LL GET IN TO
SOME SPECIFIC REVIEW OF THOSE
OF THOSE OF THOSE TIME FRAMES
SHORTLY. IN TERMS OF WHY. WE
YOU KNOW SOME OF ITS THEN THE
CAUSES WE SAW FOR SOME OF THESE
DELAYS. WHEN A WHEN A LICENSE
APPLICATION COMES INTO THE
BUREAU AT THE TIME OF OUR AUDIT
YOU WENT TO A AN INTAKE UNIT.
AS IS POSSIBLE FOR COLLECTING
ALL OF THESE. APPLICATIONS AND
ASSOCIATED BACKGROUND MATERIALS
PROVIDED BY APPLICANTS. AT THE
TIME OF OUR AUDIT THAT IN
TAKING IT DID NOT HAVE ANY
FUNCTION FOR ASSESSING THE
COMPLETENESS OF THE INFORMATION
IN THOSE. IN THOSE APPLICATION
PACKAGES THEY WOULD FINALLY
JUST TAKE IT. COLLATED
POTENTIALLY STANCE ON THE
DOCUMENTATIONS FOR ANIL AND
HOUSES AT A LATER DATE AND THEN
SHELVE IT PENDING ONE OF THE
LICENSING UNITS. PICKING IT UP
AND ASSIGNING IT TO STAFF FOR
REVIEW. TWO THINGS KIND OF CAME
INTO PLAY THERE. ONE THEY WERE
NOT SET BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT
ASSESSING THE COMPLETENESS.
THEY WERE NOT GETTING BACK TO
APPLICANTS IN A TIMELY FASHION
AS REQUIRED BY REGULATIONS IN
TERMS OF WHETHER THOSE
APPLICATIONS WERE COMPLETE OR
NOT. SO IN SOME CASES
APPLICANTS FOR WAITING MONTHS
EVEN YEARS TO HEAR BACK FROM
WHETHER THEY'VE EVEN SUBMITTED
THE APPLICATION MATERIALS THAT
WERE REQUIRED OF THEM. SECONDLY
BECAUSE IT TOOK SO LONG TO
ULTIMATELY ASSIGN SOME OF THOSE
APPLICATIONS TO WAITING
ANALYST'S ANALYTICAL STAFF. WE
FOUND INSTANCES WHERE THE
MATERIALS THAT THE APPLICANTS
HAVE PROVIDED UP FRONT HAD KIND
OF AGE OUT OR WERE STILL FROM
THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE BUREAU
AND SO THEY HAD IN BOTH OF
THOSE CASES THEY WOULD HAVE TO
GO BACK TO APPLICANTS. AFTER
SIGNIFICANT PERIODS OF TIME AND
REQUEST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
A FOLLOW UP QUESTION SO THEY
REALLY CONTRIBUTED TO
INEFFICIENCIES AND CERTAINLY
WITHOUT FRUSTRATION ON THE PART
OF THE APPLICANTS ABOUT THE
ENSUING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN.
THE BUREAU STAFF AND THE
APPLICANT IN TERMS OF REPEATED
REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION AT TIMES WE SAW
REQUESTS FROM THE BUREAU FOR
FOLLOW UP INFORMATION THAT WERE
YOU KNOW UP TO A YEAR APART SO
THAT. IS REPEATED BACK AND
FORTH AND REALLY CONTRIBUTE TO
THE FACT THAT SOME OF THESE
LICENSES WERE ACTIVELY BEING
WORKED ON FOR MULTIPLE YEARS.
HOW ALSO NOTE THAT. THIS THE
LACK OF NOTICED APPLICANTS IS A
IS HAVE A COMMON THEME THAT WE
IDENTIFIED AS WELL. IN ADDITION
TO HAVING TO NOTIFY APPLICANTS
ABOUT THE INITIAL STATUS OF
THEIR APPLICATION IN
REGULATIONS. THE GAMMA CONTROL
ACT REQUIRES THAT THE BUREAU.
FOLLOW UP WITH APPLICANTS AT
THE EXPIRATION OF THE ONE
HUNDRED EIGHTY DAY TIME FRAME
IF THEY ARE NOT YET FINISHED
WITH THE APPLICATION TO.
PROVIDE AN ESTIMATED TIME OF
COMPLETION. WE SAW THAT
HAPPENING IN NONE OF THE CASES
THAT WE REVIEWED. INDEED WE SAW
IT AND AT LEAST ONE INSTANCE IN
WHICH AN- AN APPLICANT. A RICK
REQUESTED REPEATEDLY FROM THE
BUREAU. AND THAT THAT DAY AS
REQUIRED BY LAW AND WE SAW NO
EVIDENCE THAT THE BUREAU
ACTUALLY EVER PROVIDE ANY
SERVICE IN A TIME FRAME IN
TERMS OF THE INTERACTIONS BACK
AND FORTH BETWEEN THOSE.
INDIVIDUALS. I MENTIONED THE
OWNER THE OWNER APPLICANTS HAVE
TO GENERALLY WAIT UNTIL THEIR
THEIR LICENSE HAS GONE THROUGH
THE ENTIRE PROCESS. CAN ACT ON
SOME OF THEIR TRANSACTIONS OR
OTHER BUSINESS INTERESTS. AS
SUCH WE- PA VERY CLOSE
ATTENTION TO THE POLICY FOR
PRIORITIZING THOSE APPLICATIONS
OR LACK THERE OF AS IT TURNS
OUT. AT THE AT THE BUREAU. WHEN
WE LOOKED AT A SELECTION OF OUR
APPLICATIONS WE FOUND OUT WE
FIND THAT ALTHOUGH WE WOULD
EXPECT APPLICATIONS TO BE
PROCESSED IN THE ORDER THEY
WERE RECEIVED. THAT WAS
INFREQUENT THAT WAS FREQUENTLY
NOT THE CASE. I AND IN FACT
APPLICATIONS THAT CAME IN THE
DOOR. WITHIN THE SAME MONTH OR
SOMETIMES A SIGNED OUT ALMOST A
YEAR APART OR MORE SO. WE ASKED
TO THE WE ASK THE BUREAU WHAT
IT'S RATIONALE WAS FOR THAT AND
A CASE BY CASE BASIS THEY'RE
ABLE TO PROVIDE EXPLANATIONS
ABOUT WHY AN APPLICATION. KIND
OF GOT MOVED TO THE FRONT OF
THE PACK. SUCH EXAMPLES THEY
PROVIDED WHERE THAT A FAN OF. A
LICENSE HOLDER A FAMILY MEMBER
WAS ILL AND THEY WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT LICENSE WAS PROCESS
BEFORE PERHAPS SOMEONE HE- WAS
DECEASED OR- LEGAL ACTION IS
BEING TAKEN AND THEY DIDN'T
WANT AN APPLICATION TO EXPIRE.
AND SO WHILE THOSE. THOSE UP
EXPLANATIONS CAM IN A VACUUM.
MADE SOME SENSE THERE WAS NO
INDICATION ABOUT WHAT HOW THOSE
HOW THOSE. DETERMINATIONS
CONSIDERED EVERYBODY ELSE THAT
WAS WAS CUED UP WAITING. WE
ALSO GOT SOME CONFLICTING IN.
FEEDBACK FROM SOME OF THE
BUREAU MANAGERS ABOUT. SOME
ATTRIBUTED A LACK OF STAFF TO
BE ABLE TO DO IT AT THIS AT
SIMULTANEOUS TO OTHER OTHER
MANAGER SAYING THEY WERE ABLE
TO ASSIGN DURING THAT SAME TIME
HERE BECAUSE THEY HAD
SUFFICIENT STAFF SO ALL THOSE
GAVE US SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE
FAIRNESS AND EQUITY AND
CERTAINLY THE TRANSPARENCY OF
THE PROCESS THAT THE DOOR HAD
IN PLACE FOR PRIORITIZING AND
GETTING THROUGH THOSE LEGAL
REVIEWS I WILL NOTE THAT THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE HAS A
SEPARATE LEGAL DIVISION THE
INDIAN AND GAINING LAW SECTION.
THAT AT THE TIME OF OUR AUDIT
WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTUALLY
PROCESSING THE LEGAL PAPERWORK
ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE OWNER
APPLICATIONS AND WE FOUND
ADDITIONAL PROCEDURAL ISSUES
WITH THAT RELATIONSHIP IN SO
FAR AS WHEN WE SPOKE TO THE AYE
GLS DIRECTOR THEY INDICATED TO
US THAT THEY THAT THAT THE THAT
I GLS WAS BASICALLY ARE
RESPONSIVE AND DEPENDED UPON
THE BUREAU TO TELL THEM WHAT
THE PRIORITIES WERE TO SET TIME
FRAMES FOR THEM TO FOLLOW BUT
WE THOUGHT WE SAW VERY KIND OF
INFREQUENT IN ONLY INFORMAL
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE
BUREAU AND AYE GLS ABOUT THOSE
TIME FRAMES SO THERE WASN'T A
LOT OF IMPETUS. OUR OWN IS
BEING PUT ON AYE GLS FROM THE
BUREAU SIDE SO WE DID MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS AREA
THAT THE BUREAU ESTABLISH A
PROTOCOL FOR FORMALIZING A
FIRST IN FIRST OUT PROCESS FOR
ON APPLICATIONS AND DELINEATING
AND THAT POLICY WHERE
EXCEPTIONS WOULD THERE WOULD BE
EXCEPTIONS THAT FIRST IN FIRST
OUT I UNABLE TO TELL YOU. THAT
BASED ON OUR SIXTY DAY CHECK IN
WITH WITH THE BUREAU THEY HAVE
A STAT STEP POLICY THAT POLICY
LISTS THE TYPES OF EXCEPTIONS
I. DO IN TERMS OF HEALTH OF THE
APPLICANT AS AN EXAMPLE AS
POTENTIAL EXCEPTIONS TO FIRST
IN FIRST OUT POLICY. NOW WE
ALSO KNOW. THAT IT IT HAS A
STEP. SOMETHING ABOUT CATCH.
THE EXCEPTION THAT IF THE IF
THE LICENSING DIRECTOR
DETERMINES THAT THERE ARE OTHER
OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD
WARRANT IT THEY CAN TAKE AN
APPLICATION ON ORDER SO OUR IN
OUR RESPONSE TO THE TO THE- DID
YOUR AND WE HAD CONVERSATIONS
ABOUT THIS. WE STRESSED THE
IMPORTANCE THAT IF THEY ARE
GOING TO TAKE THAT APPROACH AT
THAT POLICY THEY NEED TO BE ON
A CASE BY CASE BASIS I
CONNECTING Y. DECISION WAS MADE
BECAUSE OF THE RELATIVELY
LARGE. DISCRETION IF THEY
RETAIN THAT POLICY TO TAKE
APPLICATIONS OUT OF ORDER. WITH
RESPECT TO THE ASSESSING THE
COMPLETENESS OF APPLICATIONS
WHEN THEY COME IN THE DOOR. THE
BUREAU HAS ESTABLISHED POLICIES
THAT NOW MAKE THE INTAKE UNIT
RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING THAT. HAS
SET I BELIEVE IT'S FIVE DAY
TIME FRAMES FOR THEM TO DO THAT
TURN AROUND AND INFORM THE
APPLICANT. AND SO THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT THE BUREAU HAS
PROVIDED US. HOW WE'RE
OPTIMISTIC THAT WILL HELP THEM
LIMIT SOME OF THE INEFFICIENT
BACK AND FORTH THAT RESULTED
FROM. FROM INCOMPLETE AND DATED
INFORMATION. THAT SAID AS ALL
GET INTO NEXT THERE ARE OTHER
OPERATIONAL ISSUES WE
IDENTIFIED WITH THE EFFICIENCY
AT THE BUREAU THAT STILL NEED
TO BE ADDRESSED TO ENSURE THAT
THE BACKLOG PRUDENT THEIR-
THEIR- STATUTORY FOR TIME
FRAMES ARE MATT. SO WITH THAT I
WILL ASK YOU TO TURN TO THE
FINAL PAGE PAGE FIVE. THE TOP
PART OF THIS GRAPHIC CONSIST
CONCERNS IT'S BASICALLY
INCOMING AND OUTGOING
APPLICATIONS BOTH NEW AND
RENEWALS INSTRUCTIONS AND
RENEWALS AND THEN BUT I'D LIKE
YOU TO FOCUS ON IS GUESTS TO
THINGS ONE IS THAT OVER THIS
PERIOD OF TIME IN THE NUMBER OF
INCOMING APPLICATIONS DID
INCREASE BUT IT DID SO FAIRLY
MODESTLY I WAS BUT A 5% OVER
THE PERIOD OF TIME. SO THAT'S
THAT'S A FACTOR BUT IT'S NOT A
DRIVING FACTOR IN TERMS OF THE
BEER IS AN ABILITY TO CLEAR ITS
BACK WHILE COMPLETELY THAT
BACKLOG IS REPRESENTED BY THE
GREEN BARS IN EACH IN EACH ITEM
AND YOU CAN SEE AS OF TWENTY
FOURTEEN FIFTEEN THERE ALMOST
TWENTY SEVEN HUNDRED BACKLOG
APPLICATIONS DOWN TO EIGHTEEN
HUNDRED IN THE END OF TEN
SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN I WHICH IS
THE MOST RECENT DATA THAT WE
WERE USING DURING OUR AUDIT. AS
THE STATE AUDITOR EXPLAINED
THAT A REDUCTION IN ABSOLUTE
TERMS IN THE NUMBER OF
BACKLOGGED APPLICATIONS HOWEVER%
DOES NOT COMMENSURATE THE
INVESTMENT THAT YOU AS A
LEGISLATURE NAY IN ADDITIONAL
STAFFING FOR THE BUREAU SINCE
JULY TWENTY FIFTEEN THE BUREAU
HAS RECEIVED ON THE TEMPORARILY
FUNDED BASIS THIRTY TWO
ADDITIONAL ANALYST POSITIONS
LICENSING DIVISION THAT HAVE
MORE THAN. DOUBLED TO THAT FILM
LICENSING BECAUSE OF THIS
PERIOD OF TIME. THAT DATA IS
PRESENTED BY THE VERY BOTTOM
LINE I THINK AT THE BOTTOM OF
THIS PAGE. AT TWENTY FIVE
FILLED LICENSE POSITIONS AS OF
TWENTY EIGHTEEN FIFTEEN UP TO
FIFTY NINE. IN SEVENTEEN
EIGHTEEN SO AS YOU CAN SEE MORE
THAN A MORE THAN 1100% INCREASE.
IN ANALYZING WHY OR OR HOW THAT
IMPACTED THE EFFICIENCY IN THE
PARK IF ANY OF THE LICENSING
ACTIVITIES AT THE BUREAU WE
TOOK A LOOK AT ON AVERAGE THE
NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS THAT.
THE GIVEN STAFF MEMBER FILLED
STAFF POSITION WAS ABLE TO
PROCESS IN A GIVEN YEAR. AND
WHAT DISTURBED US ABOUT THAT
ANNOUNCES WHAT IT SHOWED THAT.
THAT HAS BEEN A STEEP DECLINE
SINCE THE LEGISLATURE PROVIDED
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES. AS THE
GRAPHIC SHOWS IN TWENTY
FOURTEEN FIFTEEN ALTHOUGH THEY
HAD ONLY TWENTY FIVE FILL
LICENSING POSITIONS EACH OF
THOSE POSITIONS WAS ABLE TO
PROCESS ON AVERAGE A HUNDRED
FORTY SIX. BACKGROUND
INVESTIGATIONS SINCE AND SEND
THOSE ON. BY CONTRAST BY THE
TIME THEY GOT WE GET TO NINE
SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN. THERE WERE
FIFTY NINE LICENSING STOP EACH
OF PROCESSING LESS THAN HALF OF
THE PRODUCTIVITY AT THE
BEGINNING THAT TIME PERIOD ONLY
SEVENTY APPLICATIONS ON
AVERAGE. SO THIS SET OFF
OBVIOUS THE ALARM BELLS FOR US
WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT WHAT
ACCOUNTED FOR THIS THIS
DECREASE IN IN PRODUCTIVITY AND
HOW COULD BE ADDRESSED.
UNFORTUNATELY THAT THE
EXPLANATION SHE GOT IN THE DATA
THAT THE BUREAU HAS MAKE IT
CHALLENGING TO ASSESS WHAT THE
APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF STAFFING
IS AT THE BUREAU GOING FORWARD.
ONE REASON FOR THAT. IS THAT
THE BUREAU HAS INFORMATION ON
HOW LONG IT TAKES. ON AVERAGE
TO PROCESS THESE APPLICATIONS
BUT IT HASN'T UPDATED THE
MAJORITY. OF THAT INFORMATION
FOR SEVERAL YEARS. ACTUALLY
PRIOR TO THE TIME WHEN ADDED
THESE POSITIONS SO IF THERE'S
ANY SORT OF. DIMINISHING
RETURNS ON ADDITIONAL POSITIONS
WERE CERTAINLY SEEMS THAT THERE
ARE THAT WOULD BE KIND OF FOR
THAT FLIGHT DATA. IN FACT FOR
THE POSITIONS THAT ARE THE
TYPES OF LICENSES THAT HAS
UPDATED THAT DATA. THAT SHOW
THAT THERE BEEN SIGNIFICANT
CREATE SIGNIFICANT INCREASES
THE NUMBER OF HOURS IT TAKES
PER WHICH CERTAINLY GIANTS WITH
WHAT WE SAW WHEN WE DID OUR
OWN. ANALYSIS. ADDITIONALLY WE
HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACT
THAT THE BUREAU DOES NOT HAVE A
FORMAL PROTOCOL FOR WHICH
PORTIONS OF ITS BACKLOG IS
GOING TO TARGET AT WHAT TIMES
AND IN WHAT NUMBERS INSTEAD
WHEN WE ASKED MANAGEMENT AT THE
BUREAU ABOUT THIS TREND THEY
ALLUDED TO THE FACT THAT THEY
MIGHT WELL BE FOCUSING THEIR
ATTENTION ON DIFFERENT TYPES
ARE DIFFERENT COMPOSITIONS OF
APPLICATIONS YEAR IN AND YEAR
OUT SOME OF WHICH ARE MORE
COMPLEX THAN OTHERS AND THAT
MIGHT ACCOUNT FOR THE CHANGES
IN PRODUCTIVITY HOWEVER WE LOOK
AT THE DATA IN TERMS OF THE
ACTUAL NUMBERS COMING OUT OF IT
DIDN'T DIDN'T CONSISTENTLY BEAR
OUT THAT THESIS. FOR EXAMPLE
THE BUREAU STRESSED TO US THAT
IN SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN THEY
TURNED THEIR ATTENTION TO THE
MORE TIME CONSUMING AND COMPLEX
THIRD PARTY OWNER APPLICATIONS.
AND THAT THAT WOULD EXPLAIN THE
DECREASE IN SOME OTHER OTHER
PRODUKTIVNOSTI. ANY THIRD PARTY
OR APPLICATIONS DURING THAT
PERIOD OF TIME IN TWENTY
SEVENTEEN EIGHTEEN SIMILARLY WE
SOUTH FLUCTUATIONS IN THE
CARBON APPLICATIONS THAT WERE
NOT COMMENSURATE WITH THE THAT
SO THAT THE COMPLEXITY OF THOSE
AND ULTIMATELY A MANAGER FOR
THAT UNIT TOLD US THAT SHE
COULDN'T EXPLAIN WHY THERE WAS
THE FLUCTUATION THAT WE WERE
SEEING SO WE MADE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE BUREAU
DEVELOP A FORMAL POLICY OUR
FIRM FORMAL PLANNED BY NOVEMBER
OF THIS YEAR FOR COMPLETING
REMAINING BACKLOG APPLICATION
TO EXPECT THAT PLAN TO BE VERY
PRECISE ABOUT WHEN IT. WHEN IT
EXPECTS TO CLEAR WHICH BACK
WHICH BACKLOG APPLICATIONS WHEN
TO GET TO THAT NUMBER OF ZERO
AS PART OF THAT PROCESS WE MADE
A RECOMMENDATION THE
LEGISLATURE THAT IT EXTEND
TEMPORARY CURRENT TEMPORARY
FUNDING FOR THOSE POSITIONS FOR
TWO YEARS RATHER THAN MAKE THEM
PERMANENT BECAUSE AS AS
HOPEFULLY HAVE MADE CLEAR WE IT
WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE BEER
HAS ESTABLISH WHAT OF WHAT A
PERMANENT APPROPRIATE STAFFING
OF ALL IS FOR ALL THESE THE
MANAGEMENT AND EFFICIENCY
SHORTCOMINGS WITHIN A FIVE AND
THE LEGISLATURE ACTED UPON THE
RECOMMENDATION HAS EXTEND THAT
FUNDING SO OUR HOPE IS THAT THE
BUREAU WILL TAKE THE
INTERVENING TIME CLEAR ITS
BACKLOG DELIBERATELY AND THEN
ESTABLISH. GOOD POLICY CAN AND
PRODUCT. THAT WILL HELP IT.
STRAIGHT TO YOU WHAT A
PERMANENT STAFFING LEVEL WITH.
THAT WHICH MEANT. AND DUE TO
SOME CONCERNS ABOUT OUR- PAST
INTERPRETATIONS OF LAW AND
REGULATIONS TO BUREAU. SEVERAL
YEARS AGO PUT A MORATORIUM ON
UP I'M PROCESSING NEW GAMES
APPLICATIONS AND WHAT THAT HAS
CREATED AS A KIND OF A
BIFURCATED SYSTEM WHERE CERTAIN
CERTAIN KARDAM ESTABLISHMENTS
ARE ABLE TO OFFER GAMES THAT
OTHERS CANNOT. BECAUSE OF THE
TIMING OF THAT APPLICATION AND
SO WE'VE BEEN. KIND OF YOU'RE
DOING THE PROCESS OF OUR AUDIT
IN SANSKRIT URGING THE Và
BUREAU TO TAKE ACTION TO DECIDE
ON A COURSE OF ACTION FOR
PROCESSING ALL THIS PAINTING
GAMES APPLICATIONS. AS OF SIXTY
DAYS THEY HAVE NOT DONE SO. SO
WE WILL STILL BE A MONITORING
THAT THAT FAIRNESS CONCERN THAT
WE THAT WE DEVELOPED. TURNING
TO THE COMMISSION IN TERMS OF
THE TIME FRAMES IN THE
TIMELINESS OF THEIR APP OF
APPLICATION PROCESS. I'LL START
OFF BY SAYING THAT AT THE TIME
OF OUR REVIEW THE COMMISSION
DID NOT MAINTAIN COMPREHENSIVE
DATA ON ITS- WORKLOAD. THAT
WOULD ALLOW US TO DO ANY SORT
OF SIMILAR ANALYSIS THAT WE
PERFORMED AT THE BUREAU. SO WE
DON'T HAVE ANY FINDINGS THAT
AREA WE DID MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY HAVE A
BUSINESS NEED TO DO SO. AND AT
SIXTY DAYS THEY DID DEMONSTRATE
TO US THAT THEY HAVE PUT A
POLICY IN PLACE TO. ENTER THAT
INFORMATION AN EXISTING
DATABASE. GOING FORWARD AND
ALSO PROVIDED EVIDENCE THAT
DIRECTED STAFF GOING BACK AT
LEAST SEVERAL YEARS IN ARREARS
TO ENTER PASSED DATA SO OUR
HOPE IS THAT. IF THAT CONTINUES
IN THE SUCCESSFUL THERE WILL BE
MORE ROBUST INFORMATION ON. THE
OVERALL TIME LINES AND
PRODUCTIVITY ASSOCIATE WITH THE
COMMISSION'S ACTIVITIES. WHAT I
CAN SAY WE DID REVIEW EIGHTEEN
APPLICATIONS ON A CASE BY CASE
DETAIL BASIS FOR THE TIME FRAME
THAT THEY THEY TOOK IN GOING
THROUGH THE COULD BE GAMBLING
CONTROL COMMISSION. THERE IS A
HUNDRED AND TWENTY DAY TIME
FRAME FOR THE- COMMISSION TO
APPROVE OR DENY AN APPLICATION
WITH THAT COMES THROUGH FROM
THE BUREAU WITH THE
RECOMMENDATION ASSOCIATED WITH
IT. WE FOUND THAT IN CASES
WHERE THE COMMISSION APPROVED A
LICENSE APPLICANT IT MEANT THAT
TIME FROM VERY EASILY IN FACT
THAT AN AVERAGE OF JUST TWO.
LESS THAN UNDER UNDER THIRTY
DAYS GENERALLY SPEAKING.
HOWEVER IN INSTANCES WHERE THE
BUREAU OCT OR THE EXCUSE ME THE
COMMISSION ABSOLUTELY OPTED TO
DENY RECOMMENDATION WE FOUND
THAT MOST OF AN AVERAGE OF TWO
HUNDRED AND FIFTY EIGHT DAYS TO
RESOLVE. AND THE REASON FOR
THAT IS THE STATE ARE ALLUDED
TO IS THE INCREASED USE OF
EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS WHICH ARE
CHOISISSEZ JUDICIAL. HEARINGS
THAT THE- COMMISSION HOLDS
ANYTIME THEY HAVE A BELIEVE IT
THEY MAY DENY AN APPLICANT.
THEY PUT INTO REGULATIONS IN
TWENTY FIFTEEN THAT THAT THAT
WOULD BE A MANDATORY HEARING
FOR ANY ANY APPLICANT THAT THEY
DENIED. AND WE ASK THEM ABOUT
WHY THEY DID THAT THEY
REFERENCED TEXT IN THE GAMMA
CONTROL ACT. THAT THEY BELIEVE
REQUIRED THEM TO DO SO WE
REVIEW THAT TAX THAT WE FOUND
THAT THAT WE ACTUALLY WE AGREED
WITH THEIR WITH THEIR
ASSESSMENT OF THAT. HOWEVER WE
NOTED THAT THE GAMING CONTROL
ACT AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN.
DOESN'T DISTINGUISH IN THIS
AREA BETWEEN. APPLICATION
APPROVALS OR DENIALS SO
ACTUALLY BY THE CURRENT PROCESS
OF NOT HAVING EVIDENTIARY
HEARINGS FOR IT ALL THE
APPROVALS WHICH ARE MANY.
OTHERS THERE'S TENSION
IMPOSSIBLE A CONFLICT WITH THE
CAMERA CONTROL ACTS WE DID MAKE
A LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
LEGISLATURE REVISIT THAT THAT
TAXED. THAT LANGUAGE IN THE IN
THE STATUTE AND DETERMINE
WHETHER THEY CAN MAKE THAT MORE
CLEAR TO THE CURB THE
COMMISSION WHAT'S EXPECTED IN
TERMS OF THE RIGHTS OF
APPLICANTS AND WHEN THEY WHEN
THEY MUST BE PROVIDED HEARING
EVEN IF THEY DON'T ACTIVELY.
PROACTIVELY REQUEST ONE. THE
LAST AREA ALL SPEAK ABOUT HAS
TO DO WITH ISSUES IN IN
REGULATIONS IN IN IN IN POLICY.
REGARDING OF THE FAIR AND EQUAL
TREATMENT OF ALL APPLICANTS IN
TERMS OF THE PROCESS THAT THEY
GO THROUGH. I'LL PREFACE THIS
BY SAYING WHEN WE REVIEWED
INDIVIDUAL APPLICATIONS. AND
THE OUTCOMES OF THOSE
APPLICATIONS WE DID NOT
IDENTIFY. ANY ANY APPLICATIONS
WERE THAT WERE THAT WERE
IDENTICAL IN CIRCUMSTANCE BUT
RECEIVED. DIFFERENT OUTCOMES
THAT SAIDTHAT'S A RELATIVELY
TALL ORDER IN SO FAR AS THERE
ARE MANY MANY FACTORS THAT
PLAYING A LOT OF THESE. WHAT WE
DID FIND HOWEVER WAS A
DIFFERENT LEVELS OF SCRUTINY
BEING YOU KNOW BEING AYE AYE
ARE SORRY. APPLICANTS BEING
SUBJECTED TO DIFFERENT VARYING
LEVELS OF SCRUTINY DIFFERENT
ASK QUESTIONS DIFFERENT WAYS.
REGULATIONS THAT APPLY
DIFFERENT LEVELS OF INITIAL
SCREW NEEDED DIFFERENT
APPLICATION TYPES WITHOUT. REAL
JUSTIFICATION AND GIVEN THE
DISCRETION OF THESE ENTITIES
HAVE. I SHOULDN'T HIGHWAY THAT
ULTIMATELY THE GAMING CONTROL
COMMISSION AS YOU KNOW AS THE-
TROLL ACT STATES NEEDS TO BE.
CONVINCED THAT APPLICANTS OF
GOOD ORAL. CHARACTER GRANT THEM
A LICENSE AT THE JACK GIVES
ASSESSMENT BUT THEY THEY REACH
BY YOU KNOW EVERY INDUCTIVE
PROCESS OF DIGGING THROUGH BACK
ON INFORMATION BECAUSE OF THAT
DISCRETION WE FEEL IT'S
EXTRAORDINARILY IMPORTANT THAT
EVERY APPLICANT BE SUBJECTED TO
THE APPROPRIATE AND CONSISTENT
LEVEL OF TREATMENT THROUGHOUT
THE PROCESS TO RULE OUT THAT
THAT THAT THE POSSIBILITY OF
ANY SORT OF BIAS OR ILL
INTENTIONED SO WE DESIGN
REGULARLY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
I'LL TALK ABOUT WITH AS I GO
THROUGH THAT ARE AT YOUR-
INTENDED TO ADDRESS THOSE
ISSUES. THE FINAL GRAPHICAL
POINT YOU TO IS ON PAGE SIX OF
YOUR PACKET. AND THIS IS A
SUMMARY OF SOME KEY AREAS OF
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE SORRY
REGULATIONS. THAT THE
COMMISSION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
WHERE WE SAW. SOME SOME
SIGNIFICANT. DISCREPANCIES
INCONSISTENCIES THAT DIDN'T
REALLY APPEAR TO US TO HAVE IT
OUT WARRANTED JUSTIFICATION. AS
YOU CAN KIND OF GATHER VISUALLY
A LOT OF THESE INCONSISTENCIES
HAVE TO DO WITH IT DISK.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN KHARTOUM
APPLICANTS AND THIRD PARTY
APPLICANTS NOT HIGHLIGHT A FEW
OF THOSE FOR YOU. UNLIKE
CARDROOM APPLICANTS THIRD PARTY
APPLICANTS WHEN THEY APPLY FOR
A TEMPORARY STATUS NEED TO ONLY
UNDERGO A BASIC BACKGROUND
CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK I
DON'T HAVE TO PROVIDE ANY OF
THE MORE VOLUMINOUS OR IN IN
INVASIVE ARE INVOLVED. NO
INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION
THAT. MANY OTHER APPLICANTS IN
THE CARD ROOM SIDE TOO AND AS A
RESULT THEY'RE ABLE TO KIND OF.
WORK IN PERPETUITY WITHOUT EVEN
ACTUALLY BEING SUBJECTED TO
HAVING TO PUT THAT INFORMATION
TOGETHER AND AGAIN THERE ARE NO
REAL TIME LINES ASSOCIATE WITH
THAT REGISTRY THAT WE CALL A
REGISTRANT STATUS. OBVIOUS AIDS
IT DISCREPANCIES IN TERMS OF
THE EXPERIENCE OF THE APPLICANT
BUT ALSO KINDA UNJUSTIFIED
DISCREPANCIES IN TERMS OF A
RISK TO THE PUBLIC IF THE IF
THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROCESS IS
TO GET PEOPLE IN A TIMELY
MANNER BECAUSE THEIR
INVOLVEMENT IN THE INDUSTRY
WARRANT SAID. THAT EVERYBODY
SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME
THE SAME PROCESS OR AT LEAST A
PROCESS THAT IS COMMENSURATE
WITH THEIR AREA OF THEIR LEVEL
OF INFLUENCE OR- AUTHORITY IN
THE INDUSTRY. AS THE STATE
AUDITOR ALLUDED TO THERE'S ALSO
DISCREPANCIES ABOUT HOW LONG A
THIRD PARTY APPLICANT CAN KEEP
THEIR TEMPORARY REGISTRANT
STATUS EVEN IF THE BUREAU MAY
HAVE RECOMMENDED DENIAL TO THEN
I'LL SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION
AND IN MANY CASES THE
COMMISSION MUST HOLD AN
EVIDENTIARY HEARING BEFORE THAT
THAT APPLICANT THAT THEIR PARTY
APPLICANT CAN ACTUALLY BE THEIR
TEMPORARY STATUS CAN BE REVOKED
SO ANOTHER AREA OF ANY WHICH
EVEN A POTENTIAL. RISK FINALLY
THERE ARE DIFFERENCES AMONG
AMONG CARDROOM TYPES IN TERMS
OF WHO IS ENTITLED TO NOTICE
ABOUT THE COMPLETENESS OF
APPLICATION WHO IS ENTITLED TO.
TIME FRIEND WHOSE OBJECTIVE
TIME FRAMES FOR REVIEW FOR
CERTAIN THINGS SO THERE'S A
PATCHWORK QUALITY TO THE RECORD
TO THE REGULATIONS THAT WE
FOUND WAS UNWARRANTED INTO
COULD CERTAINLY CONTRIBUTE TO
PERCEPTIONS OF PEOPLE BEING
TREATED. DIFFERENTLY WITHOUT
WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION. WITH
RESPECT TO US SO WE DID MAKE
REVIEW A SORRY RECOMMENDATION
TO THE TO THE COMMISSION IT WAS
ALREADY IN THE PROCESS OF DOING
THIS BUT WE HIGHLIGHTED A
BECAUSE YOU THINK IT'S
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT THESE.
INCONSISTENCIES BE ADDRESSED SO
WE DID MAKE A RECOMMENDATION
THAT THEY SUBMIT DRAFT
REGULATIONS BY MAY TWENTY
TWENTY TO THE OFFICE
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. IN TO
INCREASE CONSISTENCY AMONG
THESE TIGHTS. OF APPLICATIONS
IN A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE FOR
THE PUBLIC AND FOR THE
APPLICANTS. THE COMMISSION I'M
SURE WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY'RE
IN THE PROCESS OF DOING THAT
THEY'VE THEY'VE DRAFTED
REGULATIONS AND HAVE BEEN I
BELIEVE SCHEDULING PUBLIC
MEETINGS AND I BELIEVE THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS UP
YOUR ONGOING HAS MAYBE ALREADY.
CLOSED SO THAT'S OF A WORK IN
PROGRESS WE WILL BE MONITORING
THAT. WITH RESPECT TO THE
BUREAU'S. PROCEDURES INTERNALLY
FOR HOW IT HOW IT TREATS
APPLICANTS OR HOW IT SUBJECTS
APPLICANTS TO LEVELS OF
SCRUTINY WHILE REVIEWING THEM.
WE FOUND THAT THEY HAD
PROCEDURES THAT WERE
INCONSISTENT FROM TYPE TO TYPE.
DECENTRALIZED AMONG ITS VARIOUS
UNITS AND WE'RE NOT ALWAYS
COMMENSURATE WITH THE LEVEL OF
RESPONSIBILITY THAT THOSE.
LICENSE HOLDERS WERE EXPECTED
TO HAVE IN THE INDUSTRY.
POTENTIALLY BECAUSE OF THAT WE
SAW SOME INCONSISTENCIES IN THE
LEVEL OF SCRUTINY OR TYPES OF
QUESTIONS THAT APPLICANTS WERE
ASKED. AN EXAMPLE OF THAT IS WE
FOUND ONE APPLICANT WHO. A
NUMBER OF APPLICANTS WHO WERE
CHASTISED BY THE BUREAU IN
THEIR OFFICIAL REPORT TO THE
COMMISSION FOR FILING LATE.
LATE APPLICATIONS THAT BEGUN
WORKING IN AND A CARD ROOM.
LONGER THAN THE ALLOWED PRE
BEFORE FILING A FORMAL
APPLICATION. ARE WE SAW ANOTHER
INSTANCE IN WHICH A AN
INDIVIDUAL FILED AN APPLICATION
THAT STATED VERY CLEARLY THAT
THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING IN A
CARBON FOR MULTIPLE YEARS. AND
I'M LICENSED CAPACITY AND HAVE
BEEN DOING SO WELL UNDER THE
MANDATORY AGE OF TWENTY ONE.
EITHER THAT WAS NOT CAUGHT WAS
NOT REMARKED UPON FOR OTHER
REASONS BY THE BUREAU AND THAT
INDIVIDUAL WAS BATES BASICALLY
MOVED VERY CLEANLY THROUGH THE
LICENSING PROCESS. IN THE CASES
OF ONE OF IN THE CASE OF ONE OF
THE FORMER GROUP I TALKED
ABOUT. WHO FOR WHOM THAT THE
BUREAU HIGHLIGHTED DELAYED
APPLICATION. THAT INDIVIDUAL
APPLICATIONS ULTIMATELY DENIED
BUT AS I WE TO BEFORE THERE ARE
OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED IN THERE
SO WE CAN ATTRIBUTE THE DENIAL
TO THAT. TO THAT THAT
DISCREPANCY HOWEVER AS I
STATED. WITHOUT THIS IS AN AREA
WHERE THERE'S A STRICT
MATHEMATICAL. FORMULA THAT THAT
THE THAT THE COMMISSION
FOLLOWED REGION'S
DETERMINATIONS AND SO. EVERY
PIECE OF IT NEEDS TO BE
CONSISTENT AND FAIR FROM OUR
PERSPECTIVE. FINALLY WE
IDENTIFIED A PROCEDURAL ISSUE
AT THE COMMISSION WELL WITH
RESPECT TO ALLOWING.
INDIVIDUALS TO KIND OF OCT OUT
OF THE PROCESS. ALREADY
EXPLAINED THAT THE THAT STATE
LAW AND REGULATIONS MAKE. THE
HOLDING OF AN EVIDENTIARY
HEARING MANDATORY FOR CASES OF
DENIAL. HOWEVER WE IDENTIFIED
INDIVIDUALS WHO WHILE AWAITING
THEIR EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS.
STATE VERY CLEARLY TO
COMMISSION STAFF THAT THEY NO
LONGER WANTED TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE PROCESS SOMETIMES. BE IT
VIA EMAIL ONE INDIVIDUAL
EXPLAINED THAT HE HAD CONSULTED
WITH HIS ATTORNEYS AND BELIEVE
THAT THERE WAS NO HOPE. AND
DIDN'T WANT TO PROCEED ANOTHER
INDICATED THAT THE CARD ON THE
AT WORK AND HAD BURNED DOWN AND
THEY LEFT THE INDUSTRY. SO WE
ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE FOUR
FAIRLY CLEARLY EXPRESSING A
LACK OF INTENT TO PURSUE
LICENSURE IN THE FUTURE.
HOWEVER THE BEER AT THE
COMMISSION WHEN A HAND HELD
EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS IN THOSE
INSTANCES IN THIS PART OF THAT
OPENED UP THE ADMINISTRATIVE
RECORD AND HAD. ATTORNEYS
SUBMIT EVIDENCE AGAINST THOSE
APPLICANTS SUITABILITY. SOME OF
WHICH WAS THEN PUBLISHED IN THE
IN THE PUBLIC DECISION THE
COMMISSION'S WEBSITE. WHEN WE
ASKED ABOUT THAT PROCESS THE
COMMISSION YOU KNOW JUST
RIGHTFULLY. EMPHASIZE THE DUE
PROCESS RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS
TO A HEARING AND THAT THEY DID
NOT WANT TO. DENY ANYBODY OF
THOSE RIGHTS. HOWEVER WE ALSO
DETERMINE THAT THEY DID NOT
HAVE A FORMAL PROTOCOL FOR
INFORMING APPLICANTS ABOUT HOW
TO WITHDRAW FROM THAT PROCESS.
THEY TOLD US THAT THEY REQUIRED
FORMAL WRITTEN WITHDRAWAL FROM
APPLICANTS BUT THERE WAS NO
WEAPONS AT THAT HAVE BEEN
PROVIDED AND THERE ARE NO
INTERNAL PROTOCOLS TO STAFF.
HOW DO AND SHRUGGED INDIVIDUALS
TO DO SO. WHICH WE BELIEVE
COULD HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE
SITUATIONS IN WHICH PEOPLE ARE
MAKING IT VERY CLEAR THEY NO
LONGER WANT OUR PARTICIPATE.
BUT WE'RE STILL TRYING TO THE
END OF THE PROCESS. ANYWAY AT
SIXTY DAYS THE COMMISSION DID
PROVIDE NEW VERY COMPREHENSIVE
POLICIES GUIDING STAFF ON THIS
PROTOCOL AND SO. I'M FROM THEIR
SIDE OF THINGS WE BELIEVE THAT
THE ISSUE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED
HOWEVER THERE IS STILL THIS ON
GOING ENGINE WITH THE GAMBLING
CONTROL ACT. SO TO ENSURE THAT
IT. THAT THAT. PEOPLE ARE THAT
PEOPLE ARE RECEIVING THE OF THE
HEARINGS THAT THEY WANT IF
THEY'RE ENTITLED TO. IN A FAIR
AND CONSISTENT WAY WITHOUT
CONFLICT WITH STATUTE WE- CAN
REITERATE OUR A RECOMMENDATION
TO THE LEGISLATURE TO REVISIT
THAT STATUTORY LANGUAGE FINALLY
I'LL JUST HIGHLIGHT A FEW AREAS
THAT WE LOOKED AT. THAT ARE ARE
NOT DIRECTLY RELATE TO
LICENSING PROCESS TO HAVE
RELEVANCE AND I CAN TELL YOU
WHAT WE WERE AND WE'RE NOT
ABLE. TO DETERMINE SOME OF
THOSE AREAS ONE QUESTION WE
WERE ASKED BY THE JOINT
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE WAS
ON THE ENFORCEMENT SIDE HOW
MUCH TIME ENFORCEMENT AGENTS AT
THE BUREAU SPEND IN VARIOUS.
ESTABLISHMENT AS PART OF THEIR
INVESTIGATION AND SOMETIMES
UNDERCOVER INVESTIGATION
DUTIES. UNFORTUNATELY THE
BUREAU DOES NOT CURRENTLY
TRACKED THAT INFORMATION IN ANY
CENTRALIZED AWAY. YOU WOULD
HAVE TO GO INTO EVEN INDIVIDUAL
CASE FILES EVEN WHEN WE DID
THAT IN THEIR SYSTEM. THE CARD
ROOM IN QUESTION WASN'T ALWAYS
THAT WE NEEDED TO THERE IS
REALLY NO SYSTEMATIC WAY FOR US
TO DETERMINE WHETHER IN THE
DISTRIBUTION OF TIME BUT AGENTS
WERE STANDING AT VARIOUS
ESTABLISHMENTS THROUGHOUT THE
STATE. TO GET TO THE CENTER
THERE'S ANY CONCERN ABOUT THE%
EQUITY OF THAT OR OR TARGETING
OF PLACES WE MADE A
RECOMMENDATION TO THE BUREAU
THAT THEY NEED TO HAVE A
BUSINESS NEED TO BE COLLECTING
THAT DATA SO THAT THEY KNOW HOW
THE RESOURCES ARE BEING
UTILIZED IN THAT. YOU KNOW THAT
INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE. THE
OVERSIGHT GROUP SUCH AS OUR
SELF TO REVIEW. WE ALSO FOUND
ONE ISSUE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO
IDENTIFY AND THE ENFORCEMENT
SIDE THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE
FUNDING THAT PAYS FOR VARIOUS
POSITIONS IN THE BUREAU OF
GAMBLING CONTROL AS YOU MAY
KNOW THE GIRL CAMPAIGN TO ALSO
HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR TRIBAL
GAMING OVERSIGHT TO A CERTAIN
EXTENT AND AS SUCH THEY ARE
ALSO FUNDED OUT OF THE SPECIAL
DISTRIBUTION FUNDED JUST PAID
INTO BY THOSE CASINOS THEY HAVE
POSITIONS THAT ARE SLATED TO BE
FUNDED BY ONE OF TWO FUNDS
WHICH MAKES SENSE AND IT ALSO
MADE SENSE TO US WHEN WE FOUND
THAT THOSE POSITION SOMETIMES
WORKED ON ISSUES THAT WERE ON
THE OTHER SIDE IN TERMS OF
CARDROOM VERSES. VERSUS TRIBAL
CASINO INVESTIGATIONS BASED ON
NEED HOWEVER WHAT WASN'T
HAPPENING WAS ANY SORT OF
RECONCILIATION WHERE IF AND IF
AN INDIVIDUAL WAS PAID FOR OUT
OF ONE FINE BUT WORKED IN THE
OTHER THAT THAT THAT SECOND
FUND IS MAKING THE FIRST FUND
HOLE FOR THE COST AND SO WE
FOUND THAT THERE WAS ACTUALLY A
TREND OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME
THINGS THREE YEARS THAT WE
LOOKED AT WHERE ON THE ON THE
NET THE THERE WERE THERE WERE
SEVERAL I THINK ALMOST THIRTY
THOUSAND HOURS THAT WERE
CHARGED THE SPECIAL
DISTRIBUTION FUND BUT WHERE
WERE THE WORK WAS PERFORMED. ON
CARDINAL ELECTORS THAT SHOULD
BEEN PAID FOR THE CAMERA
CONTROL FUND SO XIN TO THE.
OTHER ISSUES WE REYES FEW TODAY
THAT'S ANOTHER EXPLANATORY. WHY
BRITISH BY THE FUND BALANCES
CAM IS OUT OF HIS OUT OF
CONTROL IN TERMS OF ITS SIZE
AND SURPLUS. SO WITH THAT I
THINK WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY
ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
THANK YOU I THINK THAT WAS A
VERY THE HURDLES. OVERVIEW OF
THE ENTIRE ISSUES I THINK I
KNOW WHEN YOU KEEP SPEAKING. OR
THE TESTIMONY KEPT GOING ON
THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS FOR
THE BUREAU I THINK SO HOPEFULLY
WE CAN LIMIT SOME OF OUR
QUESTIONS AND GET TO THE BUREAU
AND- AND THE GAMBLING
COMMISSION BECAUSE I KNOW. THE
OTTER LAID EVERYTHING OUT I
KNOW WHEN WE FIRST APPROVED
THIS AUDIT. LAST AUGUST AND
TWENTY EIGHTEEN. THERE WAS
CONCERNS THE BEER THE
COMMISSION MAYBE TREATING
CERTAIN APPLICANTS. DIFFERENTLY
IS SOMETHING THAT YOU
HIGHLIGHTED IN YOUR TESTIMONY
AT. AS WELL BUT I REMEMBER AT
THE TIME ALSO THERE WERE CLAIMS
OF. THIS TREATMENTS MAY BE
HAPPENING BECAUSE OF. RACE OR
ETHNICITY WAS THERE ANYTHING
THAT YOU FOUND TO THIS REGARD.
THERE THERE WAS NOTHING THAT WE
FOUND IN THAT REGARD
DEFINITIVELY ATTRIBUTING ANY OF
THE TREATMENT TO TEN TEN BASED
ON ON ON ANY SORT OF RACIAL
CHARACTERISTIC OR ANY OTHER
SUCH CHARACTERISTIC AS WE DO
STAY IN IN THE REPORT HOWEVER
NEITHER OF THESE ENTITIES.
TRACK THAT INFORMATION ABOUT
THE APPLICANT CENTERS OR
SYSTEMATIC WAY SO THAT ANY AND
LIMIT OUR ABILITY TO SAY
DEFINITIVELY WENT ONE WAY OR
THE OTHER WHETHER ANY SEARCH
DISCRIMINATION OCCURRED HOWEVER
WEWERE CERTAINLY A TUNE TO
THAT WHEN WE PROVIDE MANY
PERFORMER IN DEPTH REVIEW OF
INDIVIDUAL FILES AND IF THERE
WERE SOMETHING THAT. STRUCK US
AS PROBLEMATIC WE WOULD
DEFINITELY PURSUED IT OKAY A
TWENTY MAKE SURE WE ADDRESS
THAT SO THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT
CAME UP WHEN THE AUDIT REQUEST
CAME BEFORE THE JOINT
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE AS
WELL SO WITH THAT WE'RE GONNA
GO TO HOPEFULLY SOME BRIEF
QUESTIONS AND THEN GET ACTUALLY
INTO THE SECOND PANEL WHICH I
KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE
QUESTIONS ON FOR THE- THE
BUREAU. IN THE COMMISSION SO
WITH THAT WILL FIRST BEGIN WITH
SENATOR MORLOCK. THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIRMAN SERENITY. THE
FEW QUESTIONS YOU'VE BEEN VERY
THOROUGH BUT TYWIN AT
APPLICATION COMES IN I'M
ASSUMING THAT THE BUREAU OPENS
A FILE. AND WITH THAT FILE HAVE
A PROGRAM. SORT OF A YOU'RE THE
THIRTY QUESTIONS WE NEED TO ASK
WERE YOU KNOW EVERYTHING WAS.
SUFFICIENT WITH THE APPLICATION
A TATTERED CENTERS YOU JUST
HAVE A PROGRAM THAT'S
CONSISTENT WITH EVERY APPLICANT.
THAT TYPE OF SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH WAS NOT HAPPENING
DURING OUR REVIEW AT THE TIME
OF RECEIPT OF THE APPLICATION
THEY WERE INDEED OPENING THE
FILE. SCANNING IT COPYING IT
PREPARING IT BUT THERE WAS NO A
CHECK AGAINST DOES THIS DOES
THIS FILE HAVE ALL THE
MATERIALS WE WOULD NEED IN
ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD THAT WAS
LEFT TO. THE INDIVIDUAL WHO
ALTERNATELY PICK THAT FILE UP
ON THE ON THE ANALYST'S SIDE TO
MAKE THAT DETERMINATION AS I
SAID SOMETIMES IT DIDN'T HAPPEN
FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME WHICH
IS WHY YOU USE THE TERM
DIFFERENT SCRUTINY. SO WE DON'T
EVEN HAVE A CONSISTENT PROCESS
FOR ALL APPLICANTS. CERTAINLY
AT. AND IN TERMS OF THAT
SCREWED ME ALSO I WE MADE
RECOMMENDATIONS TO. THE TO THE
BUREAU THAT ON THE ANALYST SIDE
ON THE BACK ON USE ACTUALLY
GOING THAT THERE ARE ARE MORE
CENTRALIZING CONSISTENT
PROTOCOLS FOR WHAT QUESTIONS
ARE GOING TO BE ASKED EACH
APPLICANT. WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
THERE MAY BE. FOLLOW UP
QUESTIONS THAT TAKE YOU IN
VARIOUS DIRECTIONS BUT THAT THE
COR PROCEDURES NEED TO BE.
CONSISTENT AND COMMENSURATE
WITH OF THE LEVEL OF INCREASE
THAT'S APPROPRIATE. FOR ANY
OUTSIDE SERVICES UTILIZED. I'M
NOT APART FROM THE I. GLS LEGAL
REVIEW THAT I DISCUSSED WHO AND
THEY ALSO PROVIDE LEGAL
REPRESENTATION TO THE BUREAU
AND IN LITIGATION AND IN. FOR
PRESENTING BEFORE THE
COMMISSION I'M NOT AWARE OF
CONTRACTED SERVICES IN THIS
AREA PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS NO
LEXIS NEXIS MAYBE NO GOOGLE
SEARCH. SO THEY SIR I'M SORRY I
MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION
SENATOR THERE CERTAINLY AVAIL
THEMSELVES OF DATABASE
ENQUIRIES. THEIR STAFF WILL RUN
DMB INCREASE CERTAINLY THEY
WILL RUN. IMMIGRATION STATUS
BACKGROUND CHECKS. SO THEY MAY
THEY MAY WELL SUBSCRIBE TO
THOSE SORTS OF TOOLS BUT IN
TERMS OF THE INDIVIDUALS
PERFORMING THE REVIEWS MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE
BUREAU EMPLOYEES. WOULD THAT
BE. SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE
TIME. SENSITIVE LIKE IF YOU ASK
FOR A IMMIGRATION STATUS WOULD
THAT BE A WEEK TWO THREE. I
THINK IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE
INQUIRY THAN SOME OF THE
REVIEWS CERTAINLY TAKE LONGER
TO GET DAY THEY'D READING TAX
INFORMATION ANY MEMOS MUCH OF
THIS INFORMATION IN TERMS THE
FINANCIAL SIDE WHICH WOULD BE
COME FROM THE APPLICANT
THEMSELVES. A LOT OF IT THE
DELAYS WE SAW OUR IN TERMS OF.
GOING BACK TO THE HAPPEN EITHER
FOR REPEATED TIMES BECAUSE THAT
INFORMATION HADN'T HAD BECOME
IRRELEVANT FROM A TIME FRAME
PERSPECTIVE. OR AGAIN THAT THAT
INFORMATION WAS IN THE SAYS FOR
COMPLETENESS UP FRONT SO THERE
ARE CONTACTING AN APPLICANT.
MORE OR LESS OUT OF THE BLUE
SOME SOME OF TIME LATER SAYING
HEY WE NEED ALL THIS MATERIALS
YOU DIDN'T PROVIDED AS
NECESSARY SO. I'M SURE THERE
ARE DIFFERENT TIME FRAES
ASSOCIATE WITH A GIVEN REQUEST
I CAN VARY BUT THE SYSTEMATIC
PROBLEMS SEEM TO COME FROM.
THOSE INITIAL ASSESSMENTS AND
HOW FEDERAL THEY WERE. SO IT'S
SORT OF A HODGE PODGE MAYBE WE
ASK FOR YOUR CREDIT REPORT
MAYBE WE DON'T. BUT WE CAN'T
TELL MANAGER HOW FAR ALONG WE
ARE ON. ON THE APPLICATION WE
CAN'T SAY WERE 50% COMPLETED OR
99% COMPLETED WE'RE JUST
WAITING FOR A REPORT FROM. YOU
KNOW BRAND AXES PROVIDING THIS
INFORMATION THE LIST OF THE
FILES DO DO CERTAINLY REFLECTS
A BACK AND FORTH WITH MANAGERS
BUT I I'M I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY
SORT OF SYSTEMATIC.
QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENT OF HOW
LONG FAR ALONG THINGS ARE
INDEED. THOSE INTERACTIONS WITH
MANAGERS COULD COULDN'T DELETE
THE INDIVIDUAL IN FACT TO GO
BACK IN AND A NEW LINE OF
QUESTIONING SO. ALL ALL GETTING
BACK TO OUR NOTION OF THE NEEDS
TO BE OF THE STATE I CONSISTENT
CORE SET OF PROCEDURES THAT
EVERYBODY'S SUBJECTED TO
INITIALLY AND THE RETENTION
ISSUE WHICH PREVENTED US FROM
DETERMINING THAT ALL THE STUFF
FOR TAKING CONSISTENTLY IN EACH
CASE IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT
THE- UREAU HAS. AS BECOME
WORKING TO RESOLVE SO WHAT
WOULD BE THE MINIMUM TIME
REQUIRED TO DO A- AN
APPLICATION APPROVAL. A WEEK. I
DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE THAT
SPECIFIC INFORMATION BECAUSE
THEY'RE IN THE FACTORS HIT WITH
WITH WHAT WE SAW WHEN THEY WHEN
THEY PICK THEM UP AND IF THERE
WERE ANY BACK AND FORTH THE
APPLE CAN I DON'T THINK I COULD
GIVE YOU A MINIMUM TIME PERIOD
DID YOU DO ANY PEER REVIEW LIKE
CONTACTING THE STATE OF NEVADA.
TO SEE HOW LONG IT TAKES
WRITTEN OR QUICKLY CAN BE DONE
IF IT WERE DONE WE DID NOT. DO
WE HAVE ANY INCENTIVES FOR
STAFF. ORDER IT WITH WHAT WE DO
TO MOTIVATE THE ENVIRONMENT. TO
GET THINGS DONE IN A IN A
TIMELY MANNER OR FASHION DID
YOU HAVE ANY WHAT WHAT KIND OF
MANAGEMENT TOOLS DO WE HAVE TO
ENCOURAGE. EFFICIENCIES. WELL
CERTAINLY AS WAS DISCUSSED
PREVIOUSLY ENSURING THAT STAFF
ARE UTILIZING THEIR TIME IN THE
AREAS OF IN PROPORTION TO WHAT
THEY SHOULD BE WE IDENTIFY A
LOT OF TIME BEING SPENT ON WHAT
THE IN THE BEER DESCRIBE US AS
TRAINING OR MEETINGS OR OTHER
ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS THAT AGAIN
EACH IN A VACUUM ARE WE
TECHNOLOGIST NEED TO HAPPEN BUT
WHEN THEY'RE HAPPENING AT
NEARLY 50% OF THE OVERALL TIME
BEING SPENT BY THE STAFF IT
BECOMES. INCREASINGLY
PROBLEMATIC AND CERTAINLY
CONTRIBUTED INEFFICIENCIES DID
YOU SEE ANY TERMINATIONS. WHILE
YOU WERE THERE WE DIDN'T WE DID
NOT SEE THAT I DID WITHIN
SPECIFIC WE TEST FOR
TERMINATIONS BUT I'M NOT NUMBER
NUMBER BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION
SO THERE WAS NO ONE THAT YOU
WERE AWARE OF OR SAID. WAS NOT
COMPLETING WORK IN A-
SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF TIME. WE
DIDN'T SEE ANYONE SUBJECT ANY
SORT OF DISAPPOINTMENTS GROUNDS
THANK YOU THANK YOU MISTER
THANK YOU THANK CENTER THOSE
ARE PROBABLY RELEVANT QUESTIONS
TO FOR THE NEXT PANEL BUT ALSO
AS WE BEGIN BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS
AGAIN NEXT YEAR THE
SUBCOMMITTEES AS WE ALLOCATED
SOME MONEY SO I'M INTERESTED TO
SEE WHAT THEIR ANSWERS ARE AS
WELL THE EXPANDED AT NON
BILLABLE HOURS AT THE OUTER
TALKED ABOUT AS WELL WITH THAT
WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO ASSEMBLY
MEMBER PATTERSON ASSEMBLY
MEMBER COOPER. AND SENATOR
ARCHULETA SO SOMEONE OR
PATTERSON THANK YOU. BRISTOL
APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU DO
COUPLE THINGS THAT ARE A BIT
TROUBLING AND I'D LIKE TO ASK A
LITTLE. BIT OF. CLARITY IN SOME
DETAIL. I THINK WE HEARD THAT.
YOU HAVE CONCLUDED THE
POTENTIAL. THAT THE MANNER IN
WHICH THE FEES ARE COLLECTED
AND EXPANDED. THAT THIS MAY GET
CLOSE TO AN UNLAWFUL TAX. WOULD
YOU EXPLAIN THAT IN A BIT MORE
DETAIL I THINK THAT'S A
SIGNIFICANT FINDING THAT NEEDS
A BIT MORE UNDERSTANDING ON OUR
PART. CERTAINLY UNFORTUNATELY
OUR ATTORNEY WHO WORKED ON THIS
PARTICULAR PROJECT IS IN HERE
BUT BUT BASICALLY WHEN YOU
CHARGE A FEE YOU'RE CHARGING A
FEE FOR A SPECIFIC SERVICE. AND
WHAT WE SAW AT THE BUREAU IS
THERE ARE LICENSING APPLICANTS
WHO ARE SUBMITTING. ARE BEING
CHARGED A FEE AND THEN THERE
ARE INDIVIDUALS FOR NON
REGULATORY TYPE ACTIVITIES OR
NON LICENSING ACTIVITIES BEING
CHARGED A FEE. AND THERE'S A
DISPARITY AND SO I'M PAYING A
FEE BUT I'M NOT GETTING A
COMMENSURATE SERVICE EQUIVALENT
TO THAT FEE. AND ON THE FLIP
SIDE I'M I'M PAYING A FEE. AND
I'M GETTING THE EXPENDITURES
ARE EXCEEDING WHAT THAT
PARTICULAR FEE IS FOR SO IF YOU
CHARGE A FEE AND YOU DO NOT
HAVE A SERVICE THAT'S
COMMENSURATE TO THAT BE. THEN
BASED ON ARE TURNING AGAINST
MISTER PATTERSON I APOLOGIZE
ARE TURNING WASN'T AVAILABLE
THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED A TAX
RATHER THAN FOR A FEE WOULD YOU
CONSIDER THIS. TO BE A AN
EXAMPLE OF THE FAILURE TO MAKE
A SATISFACTORY NEXUS TEST
BETWEEN THE FEE AND ITS USE
ABSOLUTELY YES THAT'S THE
CONCERN WE HAVE OKAY AND THAT'S
WHY WE BELIEVE THE AT THE
BUREAU NEEDS TO GO BACK AND DO
A THOROUGH ANALYSIS. OF THE
VARIOUS ACTIVITIES FOR ALL OF
THEIR DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS AND
MAKE SURE THAT THEIR FEE
STRUCTURE IS APPROPRIATE
BECAUSE THERE IS NOT THAT NEXUS
THERE AT THIS. TIME WITH
RESPECT TO THE MORATORIUM. I
FOR INSTANCE UNSETTLING.
DESCRIPTORS HERE. WITH RESPECT
TO YOUR AUDIT UNFAIR AND
POTENTIALLY BIASED. MET THAT
THAT'S TROUBLING. CAN YOU WANT
CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND THE
RATIONALE. IF YOU GET INTO A
GETTING TO A MORATORIUM ON A
MORATORIUM IS ESSENTIALLY AN
UNFAIR FREEZING OF ON EQUAL
SETS OF CIRCUMSTANCES IT SEEMS
TO ME THAT THAT DECISION TO
INSTITUTE A MORATORIUM. IS
FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR BECAUSE IT
FREEZES DIFFERENTIAL OUTCOMES
LE LET ME JUST INTERJECT THE
REAL QUICK BECAUSE I KNOW THE
MORATORIUM DISCUSSIONS PROBABLY
DISCUSSION I KNOW IS ANOTHER
DEBATE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW AND
I WANT TO ALLOW THE AUDITOR TO
FOCUS SPECIFICALLY ON THIS
AUDIT REPORTS SO. I'LL LEAVE IT
UP TO YOU WHETHER OR NOT YOU'D
LIKE TO A PINE ON OTHER ISSUES.
BUT FOR THIS HEARING I'M HOPING
TO STICK TO THE AUDIT. WELL
MISTER CHAIR WE DO HAVE SHERMAN
EXCUSE ME THE WHAT. I THOUGHT
THE PRESENTATION HAD YEAH
SPECIFICALLY REFERENCED A
MORATORIUM I'M TRYING TO
DIRECTLY TO THE TO THE RIGHT
SUBSTANCE OF THIS AUDIT CORRECT
I'M JUST TRYING TO GET IT TO
THE SCOPE OF THE ACTUAL WATER
REPORT BECAUSE I KNOW THE TIMES
I BIG PASSED BECAUSE I WAS WHEN
I WAS QUESTIONING WITHIN THAT.
WITH THAT THAT PLEASES HOW
RIGHT THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR
AND AS YOU SAID MISS PATTERSON
WE DO HAVE A DISCUSSION IN THE
REPORT ABOUT THE MORATORIUM WE
DON'T GO INTO A LOT OF DETAIL
AND I WOULD DEFER TO THE BUREAU
AND THE COMMISSION WITH RESPECT
TO THAT. WE HAVE A DISCUSSION
IN THE REPORT ABOUT WHAT. THE
CONCERNS WERE THAT THERE WAS
LITIGATION FILED AND THAT
BASICALLY AT THIS POINT THEY'RE
AT ARBITRATION SO WE DIDN'T
DRILL DOWN DEEPLY INTO. THE
DECISION MAKING PROCESS WITH
RESPECT TO THE MUCH MORATORIUM
WE DO RAISE CONCERNS ABOUT THE
AMOUNT OF TIME. THIS MUCH
MORATORIUM HAS BEEN IN PLACE
AND THAT THEY NEED TO GET THIS
ISSUE RESOLVED IN FAIRNESS TO
VARIOUS FACILITIES GARMENT CAR
RIMS THANK YOU. MISTER MY
UNDERSTANDING APPRECIATION FOR.
A TALKING TO THE DEPARTMENT
ITSELF I WILL RAISE THESE
QUESTIONS TO DIRECT AND- TO
THEM AT THE TIME OF THEIR
PRESENTATION BUT I REALLY DO
THINK UNDERSTAND. THE
COMPLEXITIES OF THE SCOPE OF
ALL THIS WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND
WHAT THE. CIRCUMSTANCES ARE AND
THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE
AUDITOR AND THEN GIVE AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR. THE TO THE
DEPARTMENT TO RESPOND BUT I
THINK WE HAVE TO REALLY DRILL
DOWN. INTO WHAT IS. EXCEEDINGLY
DIFFICULT LANGUAGE WHEN YOU
COME UP WITH ON FAIR OR
POTENTIALLY BIASED TO
DETERMINATIONS. AND I GET BACK
TO THIS WHOLE WHOLE TWO. POINT
OF DUE PROCESS YOU. EITHER HAVE
A DUE PROCESS TO GET YOU TO A
DECISION THAT'S FAIR. OR YOU
HAVE. A DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS
THIS IS FUNDAMENTAL TO THE
RIGHTS OF THESE INDIVIDUALS TO
GO BEFORE. A GOVERNMENT AGENCY
AND ASK FOR A- DECISION. AND
WITH WHAT WE HAVE TO GET TO A
DECISION THAT IS FAIR UNBIASED.
WITHOUT INCONSISTENCIES WITHOUT
DELAYS OR I THINK WE FAIL ON
THE FUNDAMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY.
OF A BUREAUCRACY TO PRESENT DUE
PROCESS. LOOKING FOR THOSE
ANSWERS AS WELL IN THE NEXT
PANEL ESPECIALLY THE ALIGNMENT
OF THE FEES I WITHOUT WILL MOVE
TO ASSEMBLY MEMBER COOPER. YEAH
WELL THANK YOU FOR YOUR PORT
VERY DETAILED. THEY'LL FORMAL
TRAINING PROGRAM OVER THERE FOR
THEIR AUDITOR'S INVESTIGATORS.
THE TRAINING OF THEIR STAFF ON
THAT'S IT WAS NOT SOMETHING
THAT WE THAT WE LOOKED INTO SO
DEFERRED OF THE ENTITY ABOUT
HOW THEY TRAIN THOSE THOSE
INDIVIDUALS. IS THERE A HIGH
TURNOVER RATE OVER THERE THAT
YOU'RE AWARE OVER AGAIN THAT
THE BUREAU EXPRESSED THEY THEY-
COULD CHALLENGE OF. HIRING
RETAINING PEOPLE TO US AT A
HIGH LEVEL OUR OUR STE OUR
STAFFING ANALYSIS FOUND THAT IN
TERMS OF FILL POSITIONS THE
THAT WAS FOR THE RIVER TO
CONSISTENTLY INCREASING OR THE
PERIOD OF TIME SO I WAS REALLY
OUR OUR FOCUS. IS HE SAID. THE
TURN OVER SOME POINT THERE'S
THERE WAS SOME TURNOVER HARD
PROBLEMS NOT SOMETHING WE
QUANTIFY I DEFER TO THEM ON THE
ACTUAL QUANTIFICATION OF THE
TURNOVER THEY- THEY HAD THEY
DID REFERENCE TO US A LINK THE
HIRING PROCESS THAT HAS TO DO
WITH. THAT THE BACKGROUND THAT
THEY'RE INDIVIDUALLY TO GO
THROUGH BUT AGAIN I WOULD TO
FOR THEM TO THE SPECIFICS WE
WERE FOCUSED ON THE FACT THAT
THEY HAD PERSON NOW. FILLING
THOSE SEATS AS REQUESTED FROM
THE LEGISLATURE. AND THOSE
PEOPLE WERE AND NOT. TO SEE TO
BE PRODUCTIVE GIVEN THE NUMBERS
THAT WE ANALYZED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. WITHOUT SEEING NO
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE DíAS
I'M EAGER TO. MOVE INTO THE
NEXT PANEL IN THE INTEREST OF
TIME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR VERY
THOROUGHLY. SETTING THE TABLE
HERE SO WITH THAT WE'RE GOING
TO MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER
THREE WHICH IS COMMENTS AND
RESPONSES. ON THE OTHER FROM
THE AGENCIES WITH US TODAY IS
STUFF NATION. SHE KNEW SHE SHE
MIGHT SERVE DIRECTOR OF THE
BUREAU GAMBLING CONTROL CC LUNA
BAXTER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR
THE CALIFORNIA GAMBLING CONTROL
COMMISSION THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE LOTS OF DISCUSSION AND
LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR TESTIMONY
WHEN YOU'RE READY PLEASE BEGIN.
A GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRMAN SALAS
CHAIRMAN DON MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE MY NAME'S DEFINITION
MASSU AND I'M THE DIRECTOR OF
THE BUREAU FAMILY CONTROL
WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. AND ON
BEHALF OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
HAVE YOUR FOR SARAH AND MYSELF
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY OPPORTUNITY TO
APPEAR BEFORE YOU TODAY. TO
DISCUSS THE CALIFORNIA STATE
AUDITOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS IN
THEIR FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO
THE BUREAU AND OUR EFFORTS
INCREASING EFFICIENCIES IN
ADDRESSING ALL THE AUDITOR'S
CONCERNS. THE FIRST I'D LIKE TO
ADDRESS WHAT APPEARED TO BE THE
MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR THOSE
WHO REQUESTED THE AUDIT. WHICH
IS THE ASSERTION THAT THE
BUREAU MAYBE TREATING
APPLICANTS DIFFERENTLY. AND I'M
FAIRLY BASED ON THE REST RACE
OR ETHNICITY AND SPECIFICALLY
THE CLAIM THAT ASIAN PACIFIC
ISLANDERS MAYBE THE FOCUS OF
UNNECESSARY INVESTIGATIONS AND
DISPARAGEMENT. WE STRONGLY
DISAGREE WITH THIS ASSERTION
AND HAVE NOT BEEN OFFERED ANY
EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEM. AND
WHILE THE AUDITOR STAFF DID NOT
FIND EVIDENCE OF THE BUREAU
TREATED APPLICANTS AND FAIRLY
BASED ON RECENT AT THIS AT THE
CITY. IT INDICATED THAT WASN'T
ABLE TO DO SO BECAUSE THE
BUREAU DOES NOT REQUEST OR
MAINTAIN THAT INFORMATION TO BE
CLEAR THE BUREAU HAS NEVER
REQUESTED OR MAINTAINED THAT
TYPE OF INFORMATION ABOUT
APPLICANTS RACE OR ETHNICITY.
I'M NOT ONLY BECAUSE IT IS NOT
A FACTOR THAT WE CONSIDER IN
THE INVESTIGATION PROCESS BUT
ALSO BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY
PROHIBITED FROM LAW. BY LAW
FROM REQUIRING THAT TYPE OF
INFORMATION. NOW THE EFFORT
ALTHOUGH THE INFORMATION COULD
BE COLLECTED ON A VOLUNTARY
BASIS I'M AT THIS TIME THE
BUREAU DOES NOT PLAN TO DO SO
UNLESS DIRECTED TO DO SO BY THE
LEGISLATURE. SINCE WE FIRST
LEARNED OF THESE ALLEGATIONS
AGAIN WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED
WITH ANY INFORMATION TO SUPPORT
SUCH CLAIMS. AS I PREVIOUSLY
INDICATED TO SOME MEMBERS.
SHOULD I RECEIVE ANY SPECIFIC
CLAIMS. I WOULD BE HAPPY
DISCUSS THEM WITH THE
APPLICANTS CONSENT. TO TALK
ABOUT THE SPECIFIC AT THE
SPECIFICS OF ANY FINDINGS. AND
THE REASONS WHY WE MAY HAVE
RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OR DENIAL
OF AN INDIVIDUAL. WITHOUT THAT
WE ARE JUST LEFT WITH.
BASICALLY BASELESS CLAIMS TO
WHICH I CAN'T RESPOND. I'D LIKE
TO SURE YOU HAVE THE RAINY
EVIDENCE OF THE BUREAU ACTING
IN A RACIST AND DISCRIMINATORY
MANNER ATTORNEY GENERAL THIS
ERA AND I WOULD HAVE FOUND SUCH
ACTIONS COMPLETELY OFFENSIVE.
UNACCEPTABLE AND WOULD ADDRESS
THEM IMMEDIATELY. I'D NOW LIKE
TO TURN TO THE ISSUE OF THE
BACK LOT CASES. AND DESCRIBE
THE POLICIES THE BUREAU HAS
IMPLEMENTED SINCE THE
PUBLICATION OF THE AUDIT. FIRST
THE AUDITOR DETERMINED THAT THE
BUREAU REGULARLY EXCEEDED THE
STATUTORY ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY
DAY TIME FRAME FOR COMPLETING
ITS REVIEW OF LICENSE
APPLICATIONS AND FAILED TO
NOTIFY APPLICANTS OF THE STATUS
OF THEIR APPLICATIONS AT. THIS
POINT IN THE PROCESS AS
REQUIRED. SECOND THE AUDITOR
DETERMINED THAT THE BUREAU
STOPPED ISSUING DECISIONS ON
CERTAIN GAMES. APPLICATIONS
WHICH PLACE SOME KARDAM OWNERS
AT A DISADVANTAGE BECAUSE THEY
WEREN'T ABLE TO OFFER GAMES
THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING PLAYED
AND OTHER CARD ROOMS. THE BILL
DOES NOT DISAGREE WITH ANY OF
THESE FINDINGS. THE BILL HAS
BEEN ADDRESSING A BACKLOG OF
APPLICATIONS IN HIS LICENSING
SECTION OVER THE LAST FEW
YEARS. AND HAS BEEN WORKING TO
REDUCE IT WITH THE ADDITIONAL
LIMITED FUNDED STAFF. THAT THE-
LEGISLATURE PROVIDED TO US IN
FISCAL YEARS FIFTEEN SIXTEEN
AND SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN FOR
NUMBERS AS OF JULY THIRTY FIRST
TWO THOUSAND NINETEEN THE
NUMBER OF PENDING APPLICATIONS
WITH THE BUREAU IS ONE THOUSAND
SEVEN HUNDRED SIXTY NINE. OF
THOSE APPLICATIONS NINE HUNDRED
OF FORTY SIX HAVE BEEN IN THE
BUREAU LONGER THAN A HUNDRED
EIGHTY DAYS. WHICH EXCEEDS THE
TIME FRAME FOR COMPLETING THIS
REVIEW WAS REQUIRED. THE BUREAU
CONSIDERS THESE NINE HUNDRED
AND FORTY SIX CASES TO BE THE
BACKLOG AND NOT THE TOTAL
NUMBER OF PENDING APPLICATIONS
BEFORE US. IT'S IMPORTANT
BECAUSE WE WOULD NEVER BE ABLE
TO GET TO ZERO BECAUSE EVERY
DAY WE CONTINUOUSLY RECEIVE NEW
APPLICATIONS. LAST YEAR THE
BEER RECEIVED ABOUT SIXTY THREE
HUNDRED NEW APPLICATIONS.
APPROXIMATELY FOUR THOUSAND
INITIAL APPLICATIONS AND TWENTY
THREE HUNDRED APPLICATIONS TO
RENEW LICENSES. OUR GOAL IS TO
COMPLETE OUR REVIEW WITHIN THE
HUNDRED AND EIGHTY DAY TIME
PERIOD AS REQUIRED. AND AS A
WILL DESCRIBE SHORTLY WE ARE
WORKING ON PROCESSES IMPLANTS
TO STEADILY DECREASE THE
BACKLOG SO THE WE MEET THESE
GOALS. AND WHILE WE WORK ON
REDUCING THE NUMBER OF
BACKLOGGED APPLICATIONS WE
RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF
ENSURING APPLICANTS KNOW THE
STATUS OF THEIR CASES. IN EARLY
APRIL WE CREATED IMPLEMENTED
PROCEDURES TO ENSURE THAT ALL
REQUIRED NOTIFICATIONS ARE
SENT. TO APPLICANTS WE ALSO
IMPLEMENTED THE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS WITH RESPECT
REVIEWING APPLICATIONS TO TRY
TO DETERMINE THE COMPLETENESS
IMMEDIATELY UPON RECEIPT. AND
THE NOTIFY THE APPLICATION
APPLICANTS OF ANY DEFICIENCIES
THAT WE FOUND. THE AUDITOR
RECOMMENDED THAT WE IDENTIFY
DELAYS IN OUR BACKGROUND
INVESTIGATION PROCESS AND
ADDRESS THEM. IF YOU'RE A
BREEZE AND IS CURRENTLY
REVIEWING OUR PROCESSES TO
DETERMINE WHERE CERTAIN DELAYS
MAY EXIST IN THE WHAT WE CAN DO
TO ADDRESS THEM. THIS MAY
REQUIRE CHANGING PROCESSES AND
ELIMINATING SOME STEPS OUR
INVESTIGATIONS THAT MAYBE
UNNECESSARY OR INEFFICIENT.
THROUGH INTERNAL BUREAU
DISCUSSIONS WE WERE ABLE TO
IMMEDIATELY IDENTIFY SOMETHING
SO WE THINK MAY BE THE CAUSE OF
SOME DELAYS AND ADDRESS THEM.
SO WE HIRED AN IN HOUSE
ATTORNEY TO REVIEW TRANSACTIONS
THAT WERE SOMETIMES DELAYED DUE
TO THE WORKLOAD BY THE INDIAN
GAMING LAW SECTION IN THE AG'S
OFFICE. WE MORE CLOSELY
SCRUTINIZED REQUEST FOR
EXTENSIONS FROM APPLICANTS. AND
WE HAVE BEEN CROSS TRAINING
ANALYSTS TO BE ABLE TO WORK ALL
LICENSE TYPES TO THE WE CAN
SHIFT THEM AROUND BASED ON NEED.
BEYOND WHAT THE OTHER HAS
RECOMMENDED WE ARE PUTTING
EVERYTHING ON THE TABLE TO
FIGURE OUT HOW WE MAY ELIMINATE
DELAYS. AS WE MOVE TOWARD OUR
GOAL OF GETTING TO THAT GETTING
EVERYTHING DONE WITHIN THE
HUNDRED EIGHTY DAY TIME FRAME.
OUR NEXT SPOTS THE AUDITOR IS
DUE NOVEMBER. AT WHICH TIME WE
PLAN TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE
STRATEGIC PLAN ON HOW TO
ELIMINATE THE BACKLOG AND BE
READY TO IMPLEMENT. WITH
RESPECT TO GAMES APPLICATIONS
AT THE END OF JULY THE BUREAU
BEGAN ISSUING TEMPORARY
APPROVALS FOR SOME GAMES THAT
ARE CURRENTLY BEING OFFERED FOR
PLAY ANOTHER CARD ROOMS. AND WE
WILL CONTINUE WORKING ON THESE
TYPES OF DECISIONS IN THE
COMING MONTHS. ANOTHER ISSUE
THE AUDITOR FOUND WAS THAT THE
FEES CHARGED APPLICANTS AND
OWNERS DON'T ALIGN WITH THE
COST OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY
THE BUREAU. WE'RE CURRENTLY
CONDUCTING ANALYSIS OF ALL THE
BUREAUS COSTS AND WORKING WITH
THE COMMISSION TO ALIGN THE
VARIOUS FEES WITH THE COST OF
SERVICES. ADDITIONALLY THE
AUDITOR INDICATED THAT WE WERE
NOT BILLION PROPERLY. AND THE
STAFF FOR SPENDING FAR TOO MUCH
TIME ON NON BILLABLE AND ON
CASE WORK. AS A JUST TO CLARIFY
WHAT NON BILLABLE TIME IS THIS
IS A TERM THAT WE USE FOR TIME
ASSOCIATED WITH THE BACKGROUND
INVESTIGATION. OF FOR WHICH
ANALYSTS EITHER COULD NOT BILL
BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY
AUTHORITY TO DO SO. OR THEY
SIMPLY DID NOT BILL SUCH AS
WHEN AN EXPERIENCED ANALYST
TRAINS A LESS EXPERIENCE
ANALYST HE WOULD NOT BILL FOR
THAT TIME BUT WOULD STILL BE
ASSOCIATED WITH AN
INVESTIGATION. NON CASE TIMES
TIME THAT COULD NOT BE
ASSOCIATED WITH A SPECIFIC
INVESTIGATION. SUCH AS ONE
ANALYST RESPOND TO GENERAL
QUESTIONS FROM THE INDUSTRY.
WHEN THEY WORK ON SPECIAL PART
PROJECTS OR WHEN THEY ARE
RESPONDING TO THINGS LIKE
SUBPOENAS AND PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT REQUEST. SO IT'S WORK THAT
NEEDS TO BE DONE BUT IT WASN'T
ASSOCIATED WITH A SPECIFIC CASE.
IN LATE APRIL THE BUREAU
IMPLEMENTED A NEW POLICY ON
TIME TRACKING WHICH ESTABLISHED
CRITERIA FOR BILLABLE NON
BILLABLE AND NON CASE TIME. ALL
NON BILLABLE AND NON CASE TIME
MUST BE PRE APPROVED BY
MANAGERS. BEFORE IT'S DONE. AND
ONE VERY POSITIVE OUTCOME WE
FOUND FROM THIS CHANGE IS THE
INCREASE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN
US AND OUR STAFF. THE ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR OF A LICENSING AND I
MEET WITH ANALYST EVERY MONTH
WITHOUT THEIR MANAGERS TO IT
TALK ABOUT THINGS AND TO GET
THEIR DIRECT INPUT ON HEALTH
THINGS ARE WORKING. EVERY OTHER
WEEK WE MEET WITH ALL THE
MANAGERS AND REVIEW EACH
ANALYST TIME. SO THIS ALLOWS US
TO MONITOR COMPLIANCE WITH
THEIR POLICY INDETERMINATE
WHERE WE MEET IN MANY TO SHIFT
RESOURCES TO CERTAIN LICENSE
TYPES. IS ALSO TIME TO HEAR OUR
POLICIES ARE WORKING OR NOT
WORKING AND HOW WE NEED TO KEEP
ADJUSTING THEM. THE OTHER
RECOMMENDED THAT WE ESTABLISHED
THRESHOLDS FOR BILLABLE NON
BILLABLE AND NOT CASE TIME
WHICH WE'VE RECENTLY CREATED TO
ENABLE US TO DETECT MORE ISSUES
QUICKLY. WHEN THE AUDITOR
CONDUCTED ITS REVIEW IT
CONCLUDED THAT ANALYSTS WERE
SPENDING 12% OF THEIR TIME ON
BILLABLE TIME 40% ON ON
BILLABLE TIME IN 48% ON NON
CASE TIME. ARE ESTABLISHED
THRESHOLDS ARE NOW SET UP 50%
BILLABLE TIME 35% FOR NON
BILLABLE TIME AND 15% FOR NON
CASE TIME. THAT'S WHAT TO
EMPHASIZE AGAIN THAT THE NON
BILLABLE TIME DOES INCLUDE WORK
FOR WHICH WE ARE NOT ABLE TO
BILL. SUCH AS WORK ON CARDROOM
WORK PERMITS AND INITIAL WORK
ON ON DESTINATIONS FOR THIRD
PARTY PLAYERS. SO ONCE WE HAVE
A COUPLE OF MONTHS OF THIS DATA
AND ARE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHICH.
WE'RE ABLE TO BILL FOR NOT BILL
FOR. WE MAY UPDATE THOSE
THRESHOLDS AND RECENTLY WILL
WORK WITH THE AUDITOR INFORM
THEM OF ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE
SPECIALS WE MAKE. THE NEXT
ISSUE THE AUDITOR IDENTIFIED
WAS OF THE BUREAU'S PROCEDURES
SUBJECTED APPLICANTS TO
DIFFERENT LEVELS OF SCRUTINY.
WITHOUT CLEAR JUSTIFICATION AND
FOUND INCONSISTENCIES IN THE
QUESTIONS ASKED ABOUT THE KIDS.
IT IS NECESSARY THAT APPLICANTS
FOR SOME LICENSE TYPE ARE
TREATED DIFFERENTLY DEPENDING
ON THE LEVEL OF CONTROL AND
RESPONSIBILITY INHERENT IN THE
LICENSEE. FOR EXAMPLE OWNERS A
CARD ROOMS IN THIRD PARTY
PROVIDER COMPANIES WILL UNDERGO
MORE EXTENSIVE BACKGROUND IN
FINANCE REVIEWS COMPARE TO
INDIVIDUALS SEEKING DEALER WORK
PERMITS OR THOSE SEEKING
LICENSES TO BECOME THIRD PARTY
PROVIDER PLAYERS. DURING THE
AUDIT WE REVIEWED OUR
INDIVIDUAL POLICIES FOR EACH OF
THE VARIOUS LICENSE TYPES YOU
DETERMINE WHICH REQUIREMENTS
MAYBE UNNECESSARY AND REMOVE
THEM. AND THEN WE CREATED A
SINGLE SET OF PROCEDURES FOR
WORK PERMITS PARTY PLAYERS AND
SUPERVISORS THANK YOU EMPLOYEES.
SO NOW ANALYSTS WHO WORK ON
THESE INVESTIGATIONS WORK FROM
ONE SET OF INITIAL PROCEDURES.
AND WHILE THERE MAY BE SOME
ADDITIONAL CHOIR MINTS FOR
THOSE LICENSEE TYPES THE
REQUIRE A MORE IN DEPTH REVIEW
NO ONE UNIT IS ABLE TO CHANGE
THE REQUIREMENTS SOLELY FOR
THEIR LICENSE TYPE. WE FOUND
THE COMBINING POLICIES
PROCEDURES HAS THE ADDED
BENEFITOF ENABLING AN EASIER
TRANSITION FOR ANALYSTS WHO MAY
ASSIST WITH OTHER LICENSE TYPES
WE MOVE THEM AROUND TO HELP
WITH OTHER LICENSE TYPES. ON IT
AND ANALYSTS USUALLY WORKS ON
THIRD PARTY SUPERVISORS IS
NEEDED TO WORK ON A CARD ROOM
WORK PERMIT. NOW THEY'RE ABLE
TO REFER TO THE SAME SET OF
PROCEDURES INSTEAD OF PICKING
UP AND TRYING TO GET ACQUAINTED
WITH A WHOLE NEW SET OF
PROCEDURES FROM A DIFFERENT
UNIT. AND WE ARE CURRENTLY
WORKING ON DOING THE SAME TYPE
OF. SINGLE SET OF PROCEDURES
FOR BOTH OWNER LICENSES FOR
CARD ROOMS AND THIRD PARTY
PROVIDERS. I THINK THAT ONE OF
THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WE
HAD TO RETHINK AND EXPRESSED TO
ALL OF OUR STAFF IS THE
PERCEPTION OF UNFAIRNESS. THERE
ARE TIMES IN THE PAST THAT FEES
WERE WAVED FROM REQUESTED BY
INDUSTRY APPLICANTS OR- A C.
WHEN ANALYSTS MAY HAVE FEEL
GUILTY FOR BILLING FOR
INVESTIGATORY WORK WHICH DIDN'T
LEAD TO A DEROGATORY FINDING.
THERE WERE TIMES WHEN
MANAGEMENT'S PRIORITIZE MATTERS
OVER OTHERS UPON REQUEST BY THE
APPLICANT WEREN'T OFFICIAL.
THERE ALSO TIMES THE MANAGERS
BEGAN ROUTINELY DIRECTING THEIR
STAFF TO ASK CERTAIN QUESTIONS
EVEN WHAT NOT REQUIRED BECAUSE
OF. THEY BASICALLY THOUGHT THE
COMMISSION TO WANT THE
INFORMATION BASED ON
EXPERIENCES HEARING THEME THEM
ASK QUESTIONS THAT HEARINGS.
ALL OF THESE ACTIONS I THINK
MAY HAVE BEEN DONE WITH THE
BEST INTENTIONS BUT NO ONE
CONSIDER THE FACT THEY
CONSTITUTED AN EQUAL TREATMENT
IN COST APPLICANTS TO HAVE
DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES WITH THE
INVESTIGATION PROCESS. SO THIS
IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAD TO NOT
ONLY OPPRESS UPON OUR STAFF BUT
UPPER MANAGEMENT AS WELL
INCLUDING MYSELF. WHEN AN
OCCASION ARISES WHERE WE MAY
WANT TO TREAT ENOUGH APPLICANT
FAIRLY UNFAIR DIFFERENTLY
ALRIGHT FOR WHATEVER REASON.
THE FIRST QUESTION WE ALWAYS
ASK IS WHAT IS THE POLICY SAY.
DEFAULTING TO POLICY RESULTS IN
CONSISTENCY AND ELIMINATES
DIFFERENT TREATMENT OF
INDIVIDUALS THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT WE STRESS IN CONTINUE TO
ADDRESS ON A DAILY BASIS.
FINALLY THE UDITOR INDICATED
THAT IT HAD TROUBLE VERIFYING
INFORMATION DURING THE AUDIT
BECAUSE OF ARE INSUFFICIENT
RECORDS RETENTION POLICIES. WE
HAVE ADDRESSES AS WELL NOT ONLY
REVISING AND IMPROVING POLICIES
THE DEFINING THESE TASKS TO
STAFF TO ENSURE THAT ALL FILES
CONTAIN CERTAIN INFORMATION AND
THAT CERTAIN DOCUMENTS ARE
SCANNED AND RETAINED. AS WITH
SOME OTHER ISSUES WE'RE FINDING
THAT WE HAVE ANY FOR SOME
SUPPORT STAFF WHO CAN ROUTINELY
CONDUCT THIS TYPE OF WORK SO
THE ANALYSTS CAN. CONCENTRATE
ON THEIR INVESTIGATIOS. WHICH
WILL THEN ULTIMATELY HELP US
REACH OUR HUNDRED EIGHTY DAY
GOAL. IN THE FUTURE WE PLAN TO
REQUEST RESOURCES TO HIRE SUCH
CLERICAL POSITIONS. AND JUST
WENT OUT TO IN TERMS OF
COLLECTING INFORMATION WE FOUND
THE PROVIDING INFORMATION THE
AUDITOR WAS SOMETIMES DIFFICULT
BECAUSE OF OUR- KIND OF ARCHAIC.
MISSING INFORMATION SYSTEM
WHICH WE SHARE WITH THE
COMMISSION. HOPING TO THE
FUTURE THAT WE WON'T HAVE TO
WRITE CODES AND SCRIPT TO. YOU
KNOW PULL THAT INFORMATION OUT
AND THEN PUT THE MANUALLY AND
SPREAD SHEETS THAT WILL HAVE A
SYSTEM THE WE CAN PROVIDE ALL
THE DATA THAT PEOPLE ASK FOR I
AM IN AN INSTANT. IT WOULD HELP
US TO WHEN WE ARE TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH TIME
ANALYSTS SHOULD SPEND IN
DIFFERENT PLACES. SO I WILL
CONCLUDE SO WE CAN. TALK TO THE
COMMISSION BUT GOING THROUGH
THE AUTO SAY WAS NOT AN EASY
TASK. AND WHILE IT IS VERY
DIFFICULT TO HEAR NEGATIVE
FEEDBACK ABOUT YOUR AGENCY. HAS
REALLY TRY TO EMBRACE ALL THE
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY
THE AUDITOR. WE HAVE BEEN
FOCUSED OVER THE PAST FEW
MONTHS ON REVIEWING OUR
PROCESSES. AND CREATING OR
REVISING OUR POLICIES. AND WE
REALIZE IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO
BE AN ONGOING PROCESS. AND WE
RECOGNIZE WE DO STILL HAVE A
LOT OF WORK TO DO BUT WE'RE
GOING TO KEEP. MOVING FORWARD.
OKAY THAT. ANSWER QUESTIONS.
AWFULLY COULD SEE THAT IS
CONSTRUCTIVE RECOMMENDATIONS AS-
ABSOLUTELY IT'S GOING TO MOVE
TO MISS BAXTER PLEASE YES GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIRMAN SALAS GERMAN
DODD CHAIRMAN GREAT AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS THANK YOU FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT TO
YOU TODAY I'M STATE FEELING A
BAXTER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
THE CALIFORNIA GIMLI CONTROL
COMMISSION AT THE OUTSET I
WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE THAT
THE COMMISSION AND THE BUREAU
SHARE RESPONSIBILITY FOR
OVERSEEING THE STATE'S GAM
GAMING ESTABLISHMENTS THE
COMMISSION SETS POLICY INCREASE
STANDARDS FOR THE REGULATED
COMMUNITY MAKES IT ABILITY TO
TERMINATIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE
OF LICENSES FINDINGS OF
SUITABILITY. REGISTRATION
IMPROVEMENTS AND ACTS AS A
DECISION MAKER AND DISCIPLINARY
ACTIONS THE COMMISSION IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING THAT
ONLY PEOPLE OF GOOD CHARACTER
HONESTY AND INTEGRITY OPERATE
WITHIN CALIFORNIA'S CONTROLLED
GAMING INDUSTRY AS IT RELATES
TO THE CARTOONS AND TRIBAL
CASINOS CARDROOM IN PLACE AND
VENDORS BEARING THIS IN MIND I
WILL BE LIMITING. MY COMMENTS
TO THE AUDIT FINDINGS ARE
RELEVANT TO THE COMMISSION. THE
COMMISSION WORK CLOSELY WITH
AUDIT TEAM AND COOPERATE
COOPERATED FULLY WITH THEIR
EFFORTS WE APPRECIATED THEIR
HARD WORK AND DILIGENCE AND
BELIEVE THAT THE RESULT IS A
REPORT IDENTIFYING AREAS FOR
IMPROVEMENT WHICH THE
COMMISSION WAS ALREADY WORKING
TO CORRECT. BUT ALSO BROUGHT TO
LIGHT SOME NEW ISSUES. IN BOTH
CASES WE ARE WORKING DILIGENTLY
TO MAKE THE APPROPRIATE CHANGES
OF THE FIVE AUDIT
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT RELATED TO
THE COMMISSION TO ARE COMPLETED
AND THE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS HAVE
BEEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED. WHILE
THE OTHERS ARE IN PROGRESS AND
OR REQUIRE CHANGE TO EXISTING
STATUTES. FIRST THE AUDITOR
RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMMISSION
IMPLEMENT PROCEDURES AND A
METHOD TO TRACK THE NUMBER OF
LICENSE APPLICATIONS. RECEIVED
EACH FISCAL YEAR AND THE
OUTCOME OF THOSE APPLICATIONS.
THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS FULLY
IMPLEMENTED IN JUNE OF TWENTY
NINETEEN AND OUR STAFF IS NOW
WORKING AS STATED EARLIER TO
ADD THIS DATA FOR PAST
APPLICATIONS. IN ADDITION TO
CAPTURING IT FOR ALL CURRENT
APPLICATIONS SIR AGAIN THIS
RECOMMENDATION IS COMPLETED.
THE AUDIT RECOMMENDED THAT THE
COMMISSION SHOULD FOLLOWING THE
NECESSARY STATUTORY CHANGES
REVISE ITS REGULATIONS TO ALLOW
THE COMMISSION TO MAKE FINAL
APPROVALS OR DENIALS OF
APPLICATIONS OUT ITS REGULAR
MEETING RATHER THAN SCHEDULING
A SEPARATE EVIDENTIARY HEARING.
UNLESS AN APPLICANT REQUESTS AN
EVIDENTIARY HEARING. AS NOTED
IN THE REPORT SUCH A CHANGE
WOULD CONFLICT WITH THE
EXISTING STATUTE COVERING THE
COMMISSION'S HEARING PROCESS.
THEREFORE THE COMMISSION'S
REVOTE REVIEWING POTENTIAL
CHANGES TO APPROPRIATE STATUTES
FOR CONSIDERATION DURING THE
NEXT LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL
SESSION. THE I ALSO PROPOSE
THAT THE COMMISSION CONDUCT A
COST ANALYSIS OF THEIR WORKLOAD
AND FEES. IN ORDER TO BETTER
REFLECT THEIR ACTUAL COST THE
COMMISSION IS CONDUCTING LIKE
WORKLOAD IN COST ANALYSIS AND
HAS REQUESTED THE SAME
INFORMATION FROM THE BUREAU. IN
ADDITION THE COMMISSION
CONTRACT CONTRACTED WITH A
VENDOR TO ASSIST WITH THE
ANALYSIS. POSE A REVISED FEE
STRUCTURE AND DETERMINE THE
POTENTIAL INDUSTRY IMPACT OF
THE PROS FEE STRUCTURE. THE
COMMISSION WILL CONTINUE ITS
BEST BEST EFFORTS TO MEET THE
AUDITOR'S RECOMMENDATION TO
HAVE THE WORKLOAD AND COST
ANALYSIS COMPLETED BY JULY
TWENTY TWENTY. THE AUDIT REPORT
RECOMMENDED REVISING THE
COMMISSION'S CURRENT REGULATORY
FRAMEWORK TO ADDRESS THE FACT
THAT APPLICATION PROCESSES AND
TIME FRAMES ARE INCONSISTENT
ACROSS LICENSE TYPES. THE
COMMISSION HAS BEEN ENGAGED IN
SUCH A PROCESS SINCE PRIOR TO
THE INITIATION OF THIS AUDIT
AND HAS COMPLETED PROPOSED
CHANGES TO ITS LICENSING
REGULATIONS TO ADDRESS SUCH
INCONSISTENCIES. THIS PAST
MONDAY THE COMMISSION HELD A
VERY PRODUCTIVE PUBLIC WORKSHOP
ON THE PROPOSED REGULATORY
CHANGES AT THAT WORKSHOP THE
COMMISSIONERS APPROVE THE
PACKAGE. WITH MODIFICATIONS TO
MOVE FORWARD AND BE FORMALLY
NOTICE WITH THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. WHILE THE
COMMISSION HAS A LOT OF WORK TO
DO BEFORE IT CAN AND- FORMALLY
NOTICE IT BEFORE THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW SUCH AS
MODIFYING THE PACKAGES AS
DISCUSSED ON MONDAY. AND
SURVEYING THE INDUSTRY AND THE
BUREAU FAMILY CONTROL FOR THE
PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACT WE WILL
CONTINUE TO WORK TOWARDS
MEETING THE STATE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDED TIMELINE OF
SUBMITTING A REGULATORY PACKAGE
TO THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW BY MAY TWENTY TEN. TWENTY
TWENTY SORRY IN ADDITION TO THE
AUDIT FINDINGS ON THE
INCONSISTENCIES AMONGST LICENSE
TYPE I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO KNOW
IT CONCERNED THE AUDIT WAS
REQUESTED TO AND DID SS WHICH
WAS TO DETERMINE WHETHER ALL
APPLICANTS ARE TREATED THE SAME
DESPITE THEIR RACE NATIONAL
ORIGIN OR GENDER PARTICULARLY
ASIAN PACIFIC ISLANDER
APPLICANTS WHILE THE AUDITOR'S.
AUDITOR'S DID FIND
INCONSISTENCIES IN THE
LICENSING PROCESS AMONGST
LICENSE TYPE IT IS IMPORTANT TO
DISTINGUISH THAT THESE
INCONSISTENCIES WERE BASED ON
PROCEDURAL DIFFERENCES SUCH AS
PROCESSING TIME LINES OR THE
COST CHARGE TO THOSE APPLICANTS
THE AUDITOR'S DID NOT FIND ANY
DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF
A NEST ETHNICITY OR OTHER
RELATED CHARACTERISTICS AS
STATED PREVIOUSLY THE
COMMISSION FINDS AN
INDIVIDUAL'S ETHNICITY NATIONAL
ORIGIN. GENDER OR ANY OTHER
PROTECTED CLASS TO HAVE NO
RELEVANCE IN DETERMINING
WHETHER AN INDIVIDUAL IS A
PERSON OF GOOD CHARACTER
HONESTY OR INTEGRITY. FINALLY
THE AUDIT PROPOSED THAT THE
COMMISSION ESTABLISH A FORMAL
PROTOCOL FOR INFORMING
APPLICANTS HOW TO WITHDRAW A
REQUEST FOR AN EVIDENTIARY
HEARING. AND GUIDANCE FOR THE
COMMISSION STOP IN
DISCONTINUING THE HEARING
PROCESS ONE SUCH A REQUEST IS
MADE. IN APRIL OF TWENTY
NINETEEN THE COMMISSION
STRENGTHENED AND FORMALIZED ITS
EXISTING PROTOCOLS ASSOCIATE
WITH INFORMING APPLICANTS HOW
TO WITHDRAW THE REQUEST FOR AN
EVIDENTIARY HEARING. AND HOW TO
PROCESS AND IS CONTINUING
HEARING ONCE A REQUEST IS MADE.
THIS RECOMMENDATION IS COMPLETE.
ONCE AGAIN I WOULD LIKE TO
THINK THE AUDITOR'S FOR THEIR
FAIR THOROUGH YET VERY DILIGENT
WORK I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
THANK YOU THANK YOU GUYS FOR
YOUR TESTIMONY I KNOW THERE'S A
LOT OF QUESTIONS A. AND I'VE
COME UP IN THE PREVIOUS WE JUST
GOT IN A START OFF LET ME JUST
ASK YOU TO THE STATE AUDITOR ME
THE MASS OF YOUR OFFERS. A THE
STATE AUDITOR MADE TENREC MADE
RECOMMENDATIONS DIRECTLY TO THE
FEAR OF JUST WONDERING HOW IS A
BUREAU PRIORITIZING THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CAN YOU
PLEASE. PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON
THE IMPLEMENTATION STATUS OF
THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS OUTLINED
IN THE REPORT RIGHT SO WE DID
SUBMIT A SIXTY DAY RESPONSE AN
UPDATE TO THE AUDITOR I THINK
THAT THEY'RE STILL LOOKING AT
THEM. AS THEY HAD MENTIONED WE
ARE WORKING TO GET THEM SOME
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
CLARIFICATION WHAT WE DID IS TO
FIRST LOOKED AT THE OTHER HAS
SET CERTAIN TIME LINES IN THERE
SO SOMEWHERE DUE JULY TWENTY
NINETEEN FOR SOME DUE NOVEMBER
TWENTY NINETEEN AND THEN IT
GOES ON TO NEXT YEAR SO WE TRY
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD
COMPLETED ALL THOSE TASKS THAT
WERE REQUIRED OF US. BY JULY
TWO THOUSAND NINETEEN AT THE
SAME TIME WE'RE CONTINUOUSLY NO
IT'S GONNA TAKE A LONG TIME
WORKING ON ALL OF THOSE EFFORTS
TO ADDRESS ALL OF THE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS SO WE'RE KIND
OF IN. IN DIFFERENT STAGES SOME
EVEN THE COMPLETED ONES WE ARE
CONTINUOUSLY MONITORING A
WORKING ON BUT ALL OF THE OTHER
RECOMMENDATIONS I WOULD SAY
THAT WE DIDN'T DISAGREE WITH
ANY OF THEM AND WE'RE WORKING
ON. YELL IMPLEMENTING THEM ALL
SOME OF THEM JUST TAKE A LITTLE
BIT OF TIME IN OTHER. WORKING
ON RESOLVING EACH DOES ISSUES
WITH IN A TIMELY. AT TIMES IT
SOUNDS LIKE CORRECT LIKE FOR
INSTANCE THAT PEOPLE TALK ABOUT
THE STRATEGIC PLAN MAKE SURE
WHAT WE CAN ACTUALLY GET THAT
BACKLOG TAKING CARE OF SO THAT
IS SOMETHING THAT DOING. SO. WE
ARE WORKING THROUGH THAT RIGHT
NOW WE- HAVE A PLAN TO THE
DOCTOR. APPLICATIONS YOU KNOW
THE AUDITOR FOUND THE CARD
ROOMS UNITS OVERALL
PRODUCTIVITY DECREASED EVEN
THOUGH THE NUMBER OF STAFF IN
THE UNITS. DOUBLED YOU CAN
MENTION IT IN YOUR TESTIMONY
BUT JUST WANTED TO EXPAND A
LITTLE BIT ON THAT BECAUSE YOU
KNOW. THANK FOR OUR
CONSTITUENTS ARE PEOPLE
WATCHING. YOU KNOW ANYTIME YOU
INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF STAFF
YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN YOU WOULD
THINK THE BACKLOG WOULD
DECREASE NOT. INCREASE. RIGHT I
THINK SOME OF THAT AND I WASN'T
HERE ALL THIS TIME SO JUST HAVE
WE'VE BEEN ASKING QUESTIONS.
AND I THINK THAT SOME OF IT
DOES HAVE TO DO WITH THE TYPE
OF CASES THAT FOLKS ARE WORKING
ON SOME TAKE MUCH LESS TIME
THAN OTHERS THE THINGS LIKE FOR
THE KHARTOUM OVER LICENSES IT
CAN BE VERY LENGTHY. WE'RE
TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT BY
MAKING SURE WE ARE GETTING
EVERYTHING WITHIN THAT HUNDRED
AND EIGHTY DAY TIME FRAME THAT
IS THE GOAL. SO WE DO HAVE TO
UPDATE ALL THE TIME ESTIMATES I
WISH I HAD AT. AT YOU KNOW JUST
A VERY CLEAR RESPONSE ON WHY
THAT IS I THINK WE JUST
RECOGNIZE IT AND REALIZE THAT
WE HAVE TO UPDATE OUR
INFORMATION AND MAKE SURE THEY
WERE KEEPING TRACK OF
EVERYTHING. IN HOLDING PEOPLE
ACCOUNTABLE TO MEET THOSE TIME
LINES CURRY. THAT'S WHAT THE
AUDIT IS KIND OF POINT OUT THAT
MAYBE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH
TRACKING OR MAYBE IT'S A
CHECKLIST. BECAUSE WHEN YOU SEE
THE FIGURES THE HUNDRED AND
EIGHTY DAYS YOU KNOW WHEN 70%
OF THE CASES AREN'T EVEN
MEETING THE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY
D. THRESHOLD. YOU HAVE TO ASK
YOUR YOURSELF WHY IS THAT. AND
WHAT IS THE BUREAU DONE TO
ADDRESS SPECIFICALLY THAT ISSUE
AND ONE I THINK UNDER US. UNDER
A STATUTE YOU HAVE TO NOTIFY
PEOPLE WHEN IS YOUR CASE GOING
TO BE RESOLVED AND THAT'S NOT
HAPPENING EITHER. SO HE COULD
DRESS OF THAT PLACE SURE IT IS
HAPPENING NOW THERE ARE
REQUIREMENTS REGULATIONS ON
WHEN WE HAVE TO NOTIFY
APPLICANTS IF WE'RE NOT GOING
TO FINISH THOSE. THOSE
INVESTIGATIONS WITHIN A HUNDRED
EIGHTY DAYS IT IS A HUNDRED
EIGHTY DAYS AS PRACTICABLE O
THEY IT DOES LEAVE SOME. SOME
ROOM IF WE NEED TO LET PEOPLE
KNOW EVER GONNA TAKE LONGER
TIME WE NEED TO LET THEM KNOW
AND FRANKLY THAT WASN'T
HAPPENING ALL THE TIME. SO IT
IS HAPPENING NOW A WITH THE
HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS HAVE TO
STRESS TO WHEN WE WERE
GENERALLY TAKING CASES FIRST
AND MOVING THEM FORWARD. IT WAS
WHEN THERE IS THAT BACKLOG THAT
THOSE LAST ONES IN ARE ALWAYS
GOING TO EXCEED A HUNDRED
EIGHTY DAYS SO IT'S REALLY KIND%
OF CATCHING UP TO. GET US WHERE
WE NEED TO BE SO EVEN THE ONES
COMING IN WE CAN FINISH RIGHT
NOW IT WAS WE WERE WORKING ON
THE ONCE YOU CAME IN BEFORE.
AND SO THE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS
JUST KEPT LAPSING FOR ALL OF.
THE CASES THAT CAME IN. AGAIN
RECOGNIZING THAT THE WE HAVE
TO. GET RID OF WHAT THE BACKLOG
IS SO THAT WE CAN ADDRESS THE
PENDING WORKLOAD IN A TIMELY
MANNER. SO HOW WOULD YOU
ACCOUNT FOR HIM A LEGISLATURE
MADE ALLOCATION SO THAT WE CAN
ADDRESS THE BACKLOG WE HIRED
ADDITIONAL STAFF. BUT STILL NOT
SEEING THE REDUCTION IN THAT
BACKLOG WHY IS THAT. I DON'T
HAVE A I DON'T HAVE AN EASY
ANSWER FOR YOU I THINK IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT
WHY DOES IT TAKE LONGER WAS AT
THE TIME THAT CASES AGAIN WAS A
TURN OVER ALL THOSE THINGS WE
NEED TO CONSIDER TO MAKE SURE
IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN. WE'RE
VERY GRATEFUL FOR THE
LEGISLATURE FOR GIVING US THOSE
ADDITIONAL POSITIONS DEFINITELY
NEED HEM BUT WE ARE REALLY
TRYING TO WORK WITH WHAT WE
HAVE AT THIS POINT AND NOT
SEEKING ADDITIONAL POSITIONS AT
THIS POINT TRYING TO JUST GET
THAT BACKLOG DOWN WITH THE WITH
THE POSITIONS LEGISLATURE HAS
PROVIDED US CORRECT YOU CAN SEE
WHY THE LEGISLATURE WANTS TO
SEE SOME TRANSPARENCY
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THAT COUSIN
WHEN YOU COMPARE THAT. WITH
SOME OF THE FIGURES LIKE FIGURE
TEN ON PAGE FORTY WORK SHOWS.
YOU KNOW. STAFF SPENDING 50% OF
THEIR TIME ON NON BILLABLE.
THINGS YOU HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF
WHAT ARE THEY DOING WITH ALL
THAT TIME IF THEY'RE NOT
REDUCING CASELOADS. AND THEY'RE
NOT SPENDING HALF EVEN HALF
THEIR TIME. ON THESE BILLABLE
THREE ITEMS YOU KNOW WHAT'S
REALLY HAPPENING. YEAH I WILL
SAY THAT WE WOULD HAVE STAFF
WORK ON OTHER THINGS LIKE
PROJECTS OF WE NEED SOMETHING
ANALYZE IF WE NEED SOMETHING.
WE REALLY TRY. TO NOT DO THAT
ANYMORE REALIZING SOME OF THE
WORKLOAD HAS TO BE DONE IT'S
REALLY FRANKLY DEFINE A LOT TO
THE MANAGERS. AND PEOPLE KINDA
LAUGH IF YOU'RE IN OUR OFFICE
WE WILL SAY A WORD YOU KNOW WE
WANT SOMEONE TO DO THAT IS A
NON CASE TIME IS THAT HUMM
BILLABLE TIME AND WE'RE VERY
FOCUSED ON. MAKING SURE WE WANT
ANALYSTS TO BE SUCCESSFUL TO
SIR TRYING NOT TO DIVERT THEIR
TIME AWAY FROM THOSE
INVESTIGATIONS REALIZING THERE
ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE'RE
GONNA NEED THEIR ASSISTANCE
WITH. THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO
ADDRESS. SO THAT'S WHY THERE IS
GOING TO BE SOME LEVEL OF NON
CASE TIME. WHEN WE ARE LOOKING
AT THE COST AND HOW TO. MAKE
SURE THE COST COVER OUR
SERVICES THOSE ARE THINGS WE
HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHICH
ONES ARE GOING TO BE COVERED BY
THE INVESTIGATION FEES THE
DEPOSITS. AND WHICH MAY NEED TO
BE COVERED BY A DIFFERENT
SOURCE I'M- A FEES BUT TRYING
TO REALLY GET THAT INFORMATION
DOWN SO WE CAN WORK WITH THE
COMMISSION. TO YOU KNOW TO THE
FEES ALIGNED PROPERLY. YEAH I
THINK THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE'S
TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS ALL OF
THIS BUT- SO WHAT ARE YOU DOING
TO ALIGN THE FEES. WITH THE
REGULATORY COSTS BECAUSE THERE
SEEMS TO BE AS OUTLINED BY THE
AUDITOR. HUGE DISCREPANCY IN
THAT IN THAT DEPARTMENT SO
WHAT'S A BUREAU DOING TO
RECOMMEND TO IMPLEMENT THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS ALONG THE
ALIGNMENT OF FEES. SO THIS IS
KIND OF AN ONGOING PROCESS
THERE ARE DOING WORKING WITH
THE COMMISSION RIGHT NOW JUST.
KIND OF DOING THE WHOLE. LOOK
AT ALL OVER COST HOWEVER
OVERHEAD ALL OVER A MINISTRY TO
COST. TO FIGURE OUT WHAT NEEDS
TO PAY FOR THE PAID FROM WHAT
FUN. AND WITHIN THOSE FUNDS
WHICH FEES ARE APPLICABLE. SO
IT'S JUST AT THE RIGHT NOW
WE'RE COLLECTING ALL THE
INFORMATION I THINK IT'S AS THE
AUDITOR. SAID IT'S HELPFUL TO
IMPLEMENT A LOT OF
RECOMMENDATIONS. SO WE CAN SEE
SOME OF THOSE INCREASED
EFFICIENCIES AND THEN HAVE SOME
OF THE DATA. UPON WHICH TO
FIGURE OUT YOU KNOW WHAT'S A
GOOD TIME THAT THE- CASE NEEDS
TO BE FINISHED HOW WHAT'S- THE
TIME ESTIMATES. FOR INSTANCE
HAVE TO BE UPDATED. BUT IT IS
IT'S- IT IS LOOKING AT ALL OF
THE COMMISSION AND THE GIRLS
COST IN FIGURING OUT HOW TO.
HOW TO CAPTURE THEM SO IT'S.
IT'S AGAIN IT'S GOING TO BE
QUITE A PROCESS AND THANK
GOODNESS THEY HIRED A
CONSULTANT TO ASSIST US WITH
THAT. ENDEAVOR TO FIGURE OUT
YOU KNOW REALLY ANNUAL FEES
APPLICATION FEES INVESTIGATION
COST HOW WE MAKE SURE THAT
WE'RE PAYING FOR THE RIGHT
THINGS. THE CITY THINK WE'LL
SEE AN ALIGNMENT OF THOSE FEES
OR- AN EXPLANATION OF HOW WE'RE
DOING THAT BY THE END OF THIS
AT THE END OF THIS YEAR DO YOU
THINK BY MID. NEXT YEAR. TURN
ANTICIPATED TIMELINE ON THAT I
BELIEVE THE AUDITOR HAD. I
THINK IT'S ON. JULY OF NEXT
YEAR THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE
A BUT WE ARE WORKING WITH THE
COMMISSION NOW ON IT SO. WE'RE
TRYING TO ACCELERATE THAT TIME
PROCESS GETTING ALL THE
INFORMATION TOGETHER WORKING
WITH THE CONSULTANT. SO I MEAN
WE'RE STARTING NOW. REALIZING
THAT THE WE NEED TO IMPLEMENT
SOME OF THE THINGS AND SEE IF
WE NEED TO UPDATE SOME OF OUR
NUMBERS. SO WE'RE WORKING ON IT
THANK YOU. YES COMMISSION TO OF
THE AUDITOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS
WERE YOU GUYS WITH THOSE AND-
ANTICIPATED TIMELINES FOR
ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING THIS. AS
STATED TWO OF THE FIVE OF THE
COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS
ARE COMPLETED ALREADY. HIDE SO
THE OTHER THREE. TO WE ARE
WORKING ON. RIGHT NOW WE START
WORKING ON THEM BEFORE THE
AUDIT REPORT ACTUALLY CAME OUT
AS A STEPHANIE MENTIONED. WE
ARE WORKING ON THE COST IN FEET
ANALYSIS. THE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION IS THE
CONSISTENCY OF THE LICENSE OF
MONTHS LICENSE TYPES. AS STATED
WE ALREADY HAD A REGULATORY
PACKAGE THAT HAD GONE OUT FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT WE HELD A
WORKSHOP EARLIER THIS WEEK. IT
IS MOVING ON TO THE FORMAL RULE
MAKING PROCESS. OBVIOUSLY THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
HAS VERY SPECIFIC. GUIDELINES
IN WHICH YOU MUST MEET. FOR
STATE COLOR NOTIFICATION.
GATHERING FISCAL IMPACT SO
THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT
STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE BUT WE
ARE ALREADY WORKING ON THAT
PROCESS. THE THIRD.
RECOMMENDATION IS THE STATUTORY
CHANGE. SO WE WILL HAVE TO
PROPOSE LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO
THOSE APPLICABLE STATUTES.
DURING THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
CORRECT AND DO YOU GUYS HAVE AN
OPINION ON THAT BECAUSE I KNOW
THE STATE OUT OF A RECOMMENDED.
THAT THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD
AMEND THE GAMBLING GAMBLING ACT
TO ALLOW THE COMMISSION TO TAKE
ACTION ON ITS REGULATORY.
WHAT'S AS REGULAR LICENSING
MEETINGS RATHER THAN REQUIRING.
EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS DC. THAT
AS A STEP IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION SOMETHING WE SHOULD
DO HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT WE DO
WE SUPPORT THAT RECOMMENDATION.
OBVIOUSLY IT'S STILL IMPORTANT
FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO STILL
HAVE THE OPTION TO ST
APPLICANTS TO AN EVIDENTIARY
HEARING IN THOSE CASES WHERE
IT'S SIMPLY THAT MORE
INFORMATION IS NEEDED. AND MORE
INFORMATION MIGHT BE BETTER
OBTAIN THROUGH AN EVIDENTIARY
HEARING PROCESS WHERE. THE DATE
THE APPLICANT CAN HAVE THEIR
DUE PROCESS. BRING WITNESSES BE
SUBJECT TO CROSS EXAMINATION
PROVIDE TESTIMONY UNDER OATH
HAS SO AS LONG AS THE
COMMISSION STILL HAS THAT
ABILITY WHICH I BELIEVE WAS THE
AUDITOR'S INTENDED AS WELL. BUT
IT IT. IT WOULD ALLOW FOR THOSE
APPLICANTS THAT DO NOT WANT TO
BE PART OF THE EVIDENTIARY
HEARING PROCESS IF THE ISSUANCE
OF THE NILE WAS MADE. TO SIMPL
FAST TRACK THAT TONIGHT RIGHT
TO THE CORE TRYING TO LOOK AT
IS TIME FRAMES AND HOW DO YOU
REDUCES TIME FRAME TO GET MORE
WORK DONE SOONER. GIVEN GIVEN
THAT'S KIND OF THE GOAL OF USER
ANOTHER WAY WE SHOULD BE
LOOKING AT THIS OR IS THAT KIND
OF. THE MESSAGES IS BY AMANDA
LANG AMENDING THE ACT WELL I
THINK THE OTHER RECOMMENDATION
THAT THE ORDER HAD WITH REGARDS
TO STRENGTHENING OUR WITHDRAWAL
NOTIFICATION PROCESS. I THINK
THAT THAT WILL ALSO HELP
BECAUSE THAT PROVIDED THE
APPLICANT EVEN MORE DETAIL AS
TO HELD A WITHDRAWAL THEMSELVES
FROM THAT PROCESS. SO WE MADE
EVEN THOUGH THAT WAS JUST
IMPLEMENTED IN APRIL OF TWENTY
NINETEEN WE STILL HAVEN'T SEEN
THE EFFECT OF THAT PER SE BUT-
HOPEFULLY. APPLICANTS THAT DO
NOT WANT TO GO THROUGH THAT
PROCESS WILL ABIDE BY THOSE
NOTIFICATIONS. TO THEM AND
FOLLOWED THE PROCESS OF A DRAW.
RIGHT TO LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH YOU ON THAT AND
OUR STAFF AS WELL. I KNOW SO
THEY'RE MORE LIKE HAS A
QUESTION PLEASE. THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR. THANK YOU MISS
SHOULD NOT TO MISS BAXTER. WAS
THE OUT OF FAIR. COMMENTS WHAT.
SEEM TO INFER THAT THAT YOU
WERE FINE WITH WITH WITH THE
RECOMMENDATION. WELL SPEAK FOR
HERS BUT YES I DO I BELIEVE
THERE FAIR AGAIN WHEN I HAD
MENTIONED THAT IT IT'S REALLY
HARD TO TAKE IN IT WAS A LOT.
OF TIME SPENT WITH THE AUDITORS
BUT THEY WERE ALWAYS
PROFESSIONAL AND COURTEOUS
PLEASANT AND THEY HAD SOME GOOD
RECOMMENDATIONS AND IT'S NOW UP
TO US TO TAKE THOSE IMPLEMENT
THEM AND- YOU KNOW COME UP WITH
OUR OWN RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL
TO MAKE THE PROCESS BETTER SO
WE'RE ALL FOR IMPROVING OUR
PROCESSES SO YEAH I WOULD SAY
WAS FAIR. I WOULD AGREE WITH
THAT THEY WERE VERY THOROUGH
THEY LIKE TO ALL OF OUR
POLICIES PROCEDURES THEY SPOKE
TO INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE PART
OF THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS
TO REALLY UNDERSTAND OUR
PROCESSES. IT WAS EXCELLENT
COMMUNICATION THROUGHOUT THEY
REALLY GAVE US AN OPPORTUNITY
TO PROVIDE OUR SIDE OF THE
STORY WHEN THEY HAD FINDING SO
YES I BELIEVE IT WAS ABSOLUTELY
FAIR. SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE
OUT. WHAT MIGHT BE THE REASON
FOR A SLOW DOWN OR SO I I'M
WONDERING HAS HAD HAVE YOU
APPROVED SOMEONE. IN THIS
PROCESS THAT TURNED OUT NOT TO
MEET THE STANDARDS THAT WASN'T
HONEST AND WASN'T. A PERSON OF
GOOD CHARACTER AND YOU GO ALL
WE CANNOT LET THAT HAPPEN AGAIN.
I CANNOT THINK OF A SPECIFIC
CASEWHERE THAT MIGHT HAVE
HAPPENED. BROWSE THE TOP OF MY
HEAD BUT IF THAT SCENARIO DID
OCCUR THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE
BUREAU GAMELY CONTROL TO REVIEW
AT THE COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCE
WHEN A SCENARIO LIKE THAT DOES
OCCUR AND THEY'RE ABLE TO BRING
FORTH AN ACCUSATION OR
IDENTIFY. THE ISSUES OF CONCERN
THROUGH THE RENEWAL PROCESS AT
WHICH TIME THE COMMISSIONERS
WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE THOSE
FINDINGS AND CONSIDER THEM AT
THAT PARK. SO I'M TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT IS IT. AN ANALYSIS
PARALYSIS OR. BECAUSE BECAUSE
THIS THIS IS THIS THIS REPORT.
SEEMS TO IMPLY A SIGNIFICANT
MANAGEMENT FAILURE AND IT SEEMS
AS IF THIS IS BEEN GOING ON FOR
YEARS THAT. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
SAYING IT'S BEEN A SLOW PROCESS
AND NOW THE NUMBERS ARE. RATHER.
FRUSTRATING TO SEE THE
PERCENTAGES OF HOW MUCH OF
THOSE THAT HAVE APPLIED IT
TAKEN MORE THAN A HUNDRED
EIGHTY DAYS AND WE'RE TALKING
SOME SIX YEARS SO I'M I'M I'M
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. IF YOU
WERE TO SAY THIS IS THE ROOT
CAUSE AND HERE'S IF I HAD A
MAGIC WAND THIS IS WHAT I WOULD
DO TO IMPROVE THE PROCESS. THEY
ALL TAKE THE HUNDRED EIGHTY
DAYS FROM STACY IS INSIDE IS A
WITH THE BUREAUS WE ARE
REQUIRED TO MEET THOSE TIME
LINES AND JUST TO CLARIFY THE
BUREAU MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS TO
THE COMMISSION. WHO THEN MAKES
DECISIONS BUT LIKE SAYS HE SAID
THAT WE ARE THE KIND OF THE
FULL ENFORCEMENT ARM AFTERWARDS
SO IF SOMEONE GETS LICENSED AND
SOMETHING HAPPENS THEN WE CAN
BRING FORWARD AN ACCUSATION TO
REVOKE THAT LICENSE. IN TERMS
OF I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S
FRUSTRATING I TOTALLY AGREE.
AND I JUST DON'T HAVE A M. ONE
SPECIFIC ANSWER WHAT WHAT
OCCURRED TO THAT. KIND OF GOT
US IN THIS PLACE WERE TRYING TO
KEEP CATCHING UP I THINK THAT
WE CERTAINLY HAVE IT WITHIN US
TO MEET THOSE ONE HUNDRED
EIGHTY TIME FRAMES ONCE WE GET
RID OF THE BACKLOG AND WE'RE
JUST DEALING WITH THE PENDING
CASES THAT COME AND- GET THEM
DONE IN A HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS.
AGAIN SOME OF THE LICENSING
OWNER ONES MAY TAKE A LONGER
TIME BUT FOR THE MOST PART THE
MAJORITY OF THEM WE CAN GET
THAT DONE IT'S JUST GETTING RID
OF THAT AND THAT'S WHY IT'S SO
IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET RID OF
THAT BACKLOG SO WE CAN THEN
JUST CONCENTRATE ON ALWAYS
MAINTAINING THAT. WITH THE
PENDING APPLICATIONS. SO I WE
HEAR YOU AND UNDERSTAND THAT
BUT- SO WHEN YOU GET AN
APPLICATION YOU SHOULD SAY
RIGHT AWAY AS A MANAGER OKAY
THIS IS GONNA TAKE FORTY HOURS.
SO THAT'S ONE WEEK OF A PERSON
FULL TIME. IT'S SO THAT YOU CAN
BUDGET HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU NEED
FOR THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS
AND YOU'RE RUNNING ONE OF THE
LARGEST LAW FIRMS IN THE STATE
RIGHT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE YOU. ALREADY KNOW HOW TO
DO TIME IN BILLING YOU KNOW HOW
TO THE SIGN WORKLOADS SO I'M
I'M WONDER FOR MANAGEMENT
STANDPOINT. WHY WHY ISN'T THAT
WHY DOES THAT SEEM TO BE
WORKING RIGHT AND SO MAYBE TO
PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION ON
HOW WE CAN DISTRIBUTE THE CASES
SO IT'S NOT A CASE COMES IN AND
THEN THAN AN ANALYST WORKS
UNTIL IT'S DONE THEY USUALLY
GET SEVERAL CASES BECAUSE ARE
IN DIFFERENT STAGES OF REVIEW
THE REQUESTING DATABASE CHECKS
OR WAITING FOR THE INFORMATION
WHEN THEY GET THE APPLICATIONS
THEY SOMETIMES HAVE QUESTIONS
FOR THE APPLICANT SO THEY'RE
WAITING FOR INFORMATION. ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT WE CHANGES
BEFORE THEY WOULD JUST
BASICALLY CONCENTRATE ON THE
ONE LICENSE TYPE WE REALIZE
THAT THERE ARE SOME DOWNTIME IN
BETWEEN WHEN THEY'RE WAITING
FOR THINGS SO NOW INSTEAD OF
WAITING OR HAVING NON CASE TIME
THEY'RE PICKING UP OTHER TYPES
OF CASES MAYBE A FIVE CARD IN
ORDER LICENSE WHICH TAKES
LONGER THEY CAN PICK UP WORK
PERMITS THEY CAN PICK UP THIRD
PARTY PLAYERS TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEIR BILLING ALL THAT THEY
CAN'T AND KEEPING TRACK SO AND
THAT'S WHEN YOU MENTION THE
FORTY HOURS WHAT WE ARE DOING
IS REALLY LOOKING AT THE TIME
ESTIMATES FOR WHAT KINDS OF
CASES. BEARING IN MIND THAT
THESE CASES DO VERY BECAUSE
SOME CAN BE VERY QUICK SOMEONE
IS EASY THEY DON'T HAVE ANY
ISSUES SOME OF THEM HAVE A LOT
AND TAKES A LOT LONGER TIME BUT
TRYING TO MAYBE TEAR THOSE AND
FIGURE OUT WHICH ONES TAKE
LONGER. HOW MUCH TIME WE CAN
ALLOCATE. TO THEN. REALLY BE
ABLE TO MONITOR THE ANALYSTS.
TO SEE LIKE IF YOU'RE REALLY
TAKING TOO MUCH TIME FOR THIS
OR THIS TYPE OF CASE. SO IT'S A
IT'S A CONSTANT THEY HAVE A LOT
OF CASES THEY'RE THEY'RE GOING
IN AND OUT. AND AGAIN WE'RE
JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT
ALL THEIR TIME NOW SPENT
WORKING ON THOSE INVESTIGATIONS
AND NOT HAVING ANY DOWNTIME. SO
MY PRACTICE DAYS IT WAS CLOSURE
I MEAN I DIDN'T FEEL
COMFORTABLE BUILDING A
CLIENTELE I'D FINISHED THE
ENGAGEMENT RIGHT. UNLESS IT WAS
LONG ENOUGH THAT I COULD DO
PROGRESS BUILDINGS BUT- HOW DO
WE ENCOURAGE CLOSURE I. I GUESS
TO CLOSE. MISTER CHAIR I LOOK
AT YOUR WEBSITES. AND I TRIED
YOU KNOW THE LEGISLATORS HELPED
ME GET UP TO SPEED YOU KNOW SO
FOR THE- BUREAU OF GAMBLING
CONTROL. I FOUND I FOUND NO
REALISTIC BUSINESS PLAN I FOUND
NO BUDGET I FOUND NO FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AYE. I DON'T KNOW
HOW YOU DO WHAT YOU DO AND HOW
YOU PAY FOR IT. AND THE AYE AYE
I COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING. TO
HELP ME MAKE ANY DECISIONS AND
PREPARING FOR TODAY. FOR THE
CALIFORNIA GAMBLING CONTROL
COMMISSION. I SAW A STRATEGIC
PLAN BUT I WOULD I. WOULD HAVE
TO TELL YOU IT'S KIND OF
EMBARRASSING. I JUST. IT COULD
BE BETTER TO BE A LOT BETTER
AND YOU NEED TO START PROVIDING
METRICS. YOU KNOW WHAT WE DO
HOW DO WE DO IT HOW DO WE GET
IT DONE. AND I THINK. THERE'S A
ROOM THERE. FOR IMPROVEMENT. I
THINK. I DON'T WANT TO ASK YOU
ALL THE SAME QUESTIONS THAT I
ASKED OF THE AUTHOR. CONTROLLER
BUT I JUST I JUST WANNA KNOW
MAYBE FOR AS A CLOSER. WHERE IS
THE LEADERSHIP. WHO TAKES THIS.
BY THE HORNS IS IT. MISTER
SERRA OR IS IT. THE TWO OF YOU
OR YEAH I THINK THAT FALLS WITH
ME IN TERMS OF THE BUREAU BUT
I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM AND
FOR ALL THE WORK THAT WE DO SO
I TAKE THAT REALLY SERIOUSLY
AND I WILL SAY THAT WE ARE
ALWAYS LOOKING A POLICIES
LOOKING AT NUMBERS A KIND OF
OBSESSED OVER THEM NOW. SO WE
REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY
WERE GOING TO GET THE WORK DONE
AND THAT THE LEGISLATURE CAN
YOU KNOW. AND THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL CAN BE PROUD OF THE
WORK HAT WE DO IN THERE
GETTING IT OUT ON TIME SO I
THINK THAT THAT RESPONSIBILITY
FALLS WITH ME FOR THE BUREAU
SITE. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME
ASK TOUGH QUESTIONS.
INTERESTING ENVIRONMENT. I
THANK YOU MISTER. THANK CENTER
WITH THIS TIME ALL MOVED TO
ASSEMBLY MEMBER COOPER. THAN TO
SOMEONE PATTERSON AND ASSEMBLY
MEMBER VOEPEL. SOMEONE NUMBER
COOPER PLEASE THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIR THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
QUESTION EARLIER I ASKED FOR
THE PANEL. THIS IS A TRAINING
ISSUE. WITH SOME OF YOUR FOLKS
I MEAN THE ANALYST WHAT
PERCENTAGE OF YOUR WORK FORCES
ANALYST'S VERSES. ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS. THAT WE HAVE WITH US
TWO HUNDRED THIRTY PEOPLE IN
THE BUREAU FORTY SEVEN ARE
SWORN OFFICERS. THEY'RE NOT ALL
FILLED BUT WE DO HAVE FORTY
SEVENS MORE POSITIONS. ARE
LICENSING ANALYSTS I BELIEVE
ARE ARE LYSINE STAFF IS A
LITTLE OVER A HUNDRED. THE
STAFF TO CONDUCT THE KIND OF
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE AUDITOR'S
LOOKED AT TOTAL FIFTY ONE. IS
YOUR FORMAL TRAINING PROGRAM
OVER THERE FOR YOUR FOLKS. YES
I MEAN THERE'S DIFFERENT
TRAINING FOR EVERYONE THERE IS
WE DO HAVE A CALIFORNIA GELMAN
INVESTIGATORS COURSE THAT.
BASICALLY COVERS ALL THE THINGS
THAT WE DO THAT THE ANALYST.
THE AGENTS THEY'LL ATTEND THE
AUDITOR'S GO TO. A LOT OF IT.
IS GETTING ONE SOME ONE ON ONE
TRAINING SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT SOME NON BILLABLE TIME WE
DO HAVE OUR SENIOR ANALYST.
WORKING WITH SOME OF THE JUNIOR
ANALYSTS WHEN THEY COME ON
BOARD TO. GET THEM UP TO SPEED
IT'S NOT. IT'S SOMETHING THAT
TAKES A BIT OF TIME TO GET UP
TO SPEED WITH. AND WE TALK
ABOUT HIRING PROCESS USUALLY
TAKES LONGER FOR US TO WHAT WE
HAVE TURNED OVER WE ARE IN THE
DIVISION LAW ENFORCEMENT THEY
DO GO. HAD KIND OF A PEACE
OFFICER BACKGROUND CHECKS SO IT
TAKES A FEW MONTHS SOMETIMES.
SO ALWAYS TRYING TO. WHEN WE
HAVE A- AN ANALYST LEAVE IT
JUST TAKES LONGER TO FILL THEM.
IN A WILL TAKE TIME TO TRAIN
THEM HOW HIGHS YOU TURN OVER.
RIGHT NOW IN THE- I'M NOT SURE
THE TURNOVER RATE RIGHT NOW OUT
OF THOSE FIFTY ONE POSITIONS
THAT ARE ASSIGNED TO THESE
CASES. THERE ARE THREE VACANT
POSITIONS. SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE
PRETTY. PRETTY WELL STAFFED
SERVER YOU PUT IN FOR BCP'S
CORRECT. SORRY YOU PREFER BCP'S
EVERY YEAR MORE OR LESS.
GENERALLY FOR DIFFERENT
POSITIONS THESE WORK STANDARD
FOR TWO MORE YEARS THOSE FIFTY
ONE POSITION SO WE ARE NOT
SEEKING ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR
THAT RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO
SEE WHAT WE CAN DO IN TERMS OF
IMPLEMENTING THE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS AND SEEN HOW
MUCH WORK WE CAN. GET DONE AND
RE EVALUATE ALL THE TIME
ESTIMATES TO GET SOME BETTER
METRICS TO DETERMINE YOU KNOW
WHAT THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF
STAFFING IS SO WHAT IS YOUR
OPINION WHY. MISTER BUCKLES
OCCURRING WAS FAR AS THE
BACKLOG IN CASES I MEAN WE'RE
HERE TWO YEARS AGO THREE YEARS
AGO WE GIVE YOU ADDITIONAL
FUNDING FOR YOUR SWORN OFFICERS
SO. WHAT IS A BACKLOG CONTINUE.
IN YOUR OPINION IN MY OPINION.
I WISH I'D I DON'T HAVE A I
DON'T HAVE AN EASY ANSWER I
FEEL LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT
WE ARE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW TO
FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CAUSES AND
TO MAKE SURE THAT IT SHOULD BE
GIVEN THE YES FOR DIGITAL
RESOURCES THREE YEARS AGO IN
THIS COMMITTEE THE GAO
COMMITTEE I SAT ON MY TALKED
ABOUT IT IN RELATIONAL FUNDING
FOR NATIONAL POSITIONS Là MY
QUESTION TO YOU TO YOU IS. WE
GIVE YOU FUNDING WE GAVE
POSITIONS SO WHY IS A BACKLOG
CONTINUED. YOU'RE YOU'RE IN
CHARGE THE BUCK STOPS WITH YOU
SO THAT'S WHY. I'M TRYING TO
ASK THAT. GIVE YOU THE TOOLS
YOU ASKED FOR SO WHAT'S YOUR
ANSWER THAT YEAH I THINK AT THE
TIME AGAIN WAS BEFORE MY TIME
BUT I THINK THAT THEY THOUGHT
THAT WAS AN APPROPRIATE LEVEL
OF STAFFING TO GET THE JOB DONE
AND AGAIN IT MAY HAVE BEEN A
MAY NOT HAVE BEEN BUT WE'RE
TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE KINDA
IMPLEMENT ALL THOSE
EFFICIENCIES AND FIGURE OUT IF
THAT IS THE RIGHT. STAFFING
NUMBER YOU GUYS ARE MAYBE NOT
MAYBE I'VE HEARD YOU GUYS TO MY
COLLEAGUES EACH CASE IS
DIFFERENT OBVIOUSLY AND LONG
FOR STILL BERKELEY CASEY MAY
BE. A TWENTY MINUTE REPORT MAY
BE A FOR OUR REPORT RIGHT
DIPPING THE COMPLEXITIES OF
THAT YOU GUYS HAVE A REALLY
ADDRESS THAT AS FAR AS YOU KNOW
A CASE IS NOT A CASE YOU CAN'T
MISS IT OKAY HERE'S A CASE
APPLICATION TO TAKE FOUR HOURS.
BECAUSE OF PEOPLE'S BACKGROUNDS
A LOT. OF OTHER ISSUES. SO. I
GO ONCE YOU MOVE THE BACKLOG BE
PROCESS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY
REDUCED. EXCEPT FOR SOME
EXTREMELY COMPLICATED CASES. SO
WHAT WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR
DISNEY BACKLOGS IN WHEN. THE
TWO MORE YEARS OR SO WE WHAT
WE'RE WORKING WITH THE SAYS
IT'S THOSE TWO YEARS SO OUR
STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WE'RE GONNA
BE SUBMITTED TO THE AUDITOR.
FOR KIND OF KNOWING THAT WE
HAVE FUNDING FOR THOSE FOR
THOSE ADDITIONAL I BELIEVE IT
WAS THIRTY TWO POSITIONS THAT
WE GOT. AND SO I'M KIND OF
WORKING BACKWARDS FROM THAT TO
SEE HOW WE CAN GET RID OF THAT
BACKLOG. I THINK THAT ONCE WE
GET ALL OF OUR DAD IN PLACE TO
HAE A BETTER IDEA OF. ON SHE
HAVEN'T BASED ON NUMBERS TO
TELL YOU THAT WHAT WE THINK IS
REASONABLE IN TERMS OF
ELIMINATING. THE BACKLOG. I
FEEL LIKE THAT'S KIND OF PART
OF WHAT THE AUDITOR WANTED. TO
DO TO IMPLEMENT SOME THINGS
THAT TAKE A HARD LOOK AT OUR
NUMBERS AND THEN COME BACK WITH
SOME REALISTIC. YOU KNOW
PROJECTIONS ON WHEN WE CAN GET
IT DONE. FOR JOHN AGO. THE
AUDIT JUST IN THE BILLING
RECORDS. THE OTHER THREE OR
SCOPE. THE TROUBLE WITH
ADDITIONAL FUNDS WERE
IMPROPERLY BUILT. ARE YOU GUYS
PLAN ON GOING FOR THAT MATTER
STOPPING AT THAT. I WASN'T I
DIDN'T CATCH THAT THE SO DOES
THE BUREAU PLAN A REVIEWER
AUDIT IS BILLING RECORDS YEARS
BEYOND THE THREE YEAR FISCAL
SCOPE OF THE STATE AUDIT. ARE
YOUR FOR INTO THE SPECIAL
DISTRIBUTION FUND CORRECT DOES
YES WE COULD ONLY GO BACK THREE
YEARS SO WE WENT BACK BEFORE
THE AUDITOR'S CAME AND WE HAD
RECOGNIZE THAT WERE ALREADY
STARTING TO IMPLEMENT THAT.
THOSE PROCEDURES TO DO THAT
RECONCILIATION KNOWING THAT AS
WAS DAUGHTERS OFFICE EXPLAINED
THAT WE DO HAVE FOLKS. AGENTS
IN CERTAIN POSITION NUMBERS
FUNDED BY DIFFERENT FUNDS THEY
DO WORK ON BOTH CARDROOM IN
TRIBAL IT WILL GO BACK AND
FORTH IT MAY FLUCTUATE FROM
YEAR TO YEAR SO WE REALIZE THAT
WE NEED TO JUST KEEP TRACK OF
INDIVIDUALS AND SO NEVER
TRACKING. TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL
THE TIME THAT THEY'RE SPENDING
IN A PLACE. THAT HER POSITION
ISN'T FUNDED FOR THAT WERE
PUTTING THAT MONEY BACK WHERE
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE. SO WE HAD
STARTED THAT PROCESS IN THE
AUDITOR'S NOTICED IT TOO SO WE
HAD GONE BACK AND- DONE THOSE
THREE YEARS SO THE LAST THREE
FISCAL YEARS. OF THE MONEY WAS
TRANSFERRED OVER INTO MY VERY
FROM YEAR TO YEAR IT COULD BE
THAT STF POSITIONS ARE SPENDING
MORE TIME IN CARDS CARTER
POSITIONS ARE MUCH. SO WE HAVE
TO THERE WAS NO EASY WAY TO DO
IT IT SEEMS LIKE WE JUST NEEDED
TO TRACK EVERY SINGLE PERSON
AGENTS TIME. ALRIGHT AND FIGURE
OUT WHERE THAT WHERE THE COST
LAYS THE NOTE THE AUDITOR'S
REPORT YOU HAVE A PATHWAY. TO
GO FORWARD CORRECT AND REDUCES
BACKLOG BUT I'M STILL GOING
BACK TO THAT POINT WHERE YOU
RECEIVE THOSE ADDITIONAL
POSITIONS. TWO YEARS AGO HOW
MANY WAS IT THREE YEARS AGO. I
THINK THERE WAS I BELIEVE IT
WAS TWENTY EIGHT WAS THE LAST.
AND I BELIEVE THAT THE
LEGISLATURE ACTUALLY TOOK IT
UPON THEMSELVES TO PROVIDE
THOSE TWENTY POSITIONS BECAUSE
WE'VE HEARD COMPLAINTS FROM
YOUR AGENCY. ABOUT STAFF AS WE
GIVE YOU TWENTY POSITIONS. AN
HOUR YOU GET A THIRTY TWO MORE
SO I'M SEEING WHAT CONFIDENCE
SHOULD I HAVE. THAT WE GOT A
SWEET POSITIONS. YOU GUYS.
DIDN'T REDUCE THE BACKLOG. SO
WHY SELF CONFIDENCE HE NOW THAT
YOU REDUCE THE BACKLOG RIGHT
JUST TO CLARIFY SO WE'RE NOT
GETTING ANY NEW POSITIONS THE
TWENTY AS PART OF THE THIRTY
TWO THAT WE FOR SECRET RIGHT
WE'RE GONNA WORK WITH THEM.
KIND OF OUR MEANS WHICH YOU
PROVIDED TO US IN THE
CONFIDENCE I THINK HOPEFULLY
WILL COME WHEN YOU SEE OUR PLAN
AND HOW WE ARE GOING TO LOOK AT
EACH CASE AND FIGURE OUT HOW
WE'RE GOING TO. REDUCE THE
BACKLOG IN THEM. HAPPY DISCUSS
THAT WHEN WE GET THOSE DONE A
WE ARE WORKING HARD ON GETTING
THOSE NUMBERS IN PLACE SO WE
CAN HAVE AGAIN. WE WANT TO I'M
NOT MORE THAN ONE FOR THE BACK
LIKE TO GO AWAY BUT I ALSO WANT
TO BE A REALISTIC AND MAKE SURE
THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO ARE JOB
THOROUGHLY. AND THAT YOU KNOW
WE'RE ABLE TO ACTUALLY. DELIVER
ON WHAT WE WHAT WE SAY WE ARE.
YOU. THANK YOU. WHAT I WANT TO
ASSEMBLY MEMBER PATTERSON. I'D
LIKE YOU TO ADDRESS ESENTIALLY
THE DESCRIPTORS OF THIS AUDIT
BECAUSE I THINK THEY ARE VERY
SIGNIFICANT. DELAYS
INCONSISTENCIES BACKLOGS. AN
APPEARANCE OF UNFAIR TREATMENT
AND THE POTENTIAL FOR BIAS. DO
YOU. ACCEPT AND UNDERSTAND THIS
AUDIT SHE EIGHT ITS FINDINGS
AND WILL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
AFFECT THE CHANGES RECOMMENDED
IN THE AUDIT. I CAN SPEAK FIRST
SO YES I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND
AND APPRECIATE THEM IT WAS WHAT
I WILL SAY SOME OF THOSE WORDS
THE DESCRIPTORS THAT YOU HAD
ISSUE MENTIONED WE'RE FIRST
READING THROUGH IT YEAH IT WAS
VERY IT WAS JUST GAVE THE AUDIT
THAT WE WERE YOU KNOW IT'S IS
DISTURBING TO READ AND IT'S
EMBARRASSING. HOWEVER ONCE WE
READ IT AND WHAT THOSE
INCONSISTENCIES IN WHAT THE IT
THE APPEARANCE OF AN FOR
TREATMENT CONSISTED OF WE
BELIEVE THAT WE CAN ADDRESS
THOSE THINGS THERE ARE THINGS
THAT IN OUR PROCEDURES AND OUR
PROCESSES THAT WE COULD ADDRESS
AND ELIMINATE THEM SO WE ARE
DOING THOSE IMMEDIATELY NOT
JUST BECAUSE OF THE AUTO BUT IF
THERE ARE PROBLEMS THERE WE
WANT TO TAKE CARE OF THEM SO WE
DO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE
AUDITOR LAID IT ALL OUT. FOR
US. AND WE CAN START ADDRESSING
THOSE SO WE HAVE. DO YOU FULLY
APPRECIATE AND UNDERSTAND THE.
AUDIT CONCLUSION. THAT THE
MANNER IN WHICH YOU HANDLE
FUNDS OF THE OF THE FEES OF
THOSE PEOPLE WHO PAY FOR YOUR-
OPERATION. THAT YOU ARE GETTING
VERY CLOSE TO AN UNLAWFUL TAX.
AT LISTENING TO WHAT THE AUTHOR
DESCRIBED I DO UNDERSTAND I GET
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FEES
AND TAXES AND I THINK THAT'S
CERTAINLY WHAT THE COMMISSION
AND THE BUREAU'S WORKING
TOGETHER TO AGAIN A LINE THOSE
COST AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY
ARE COVERING FEES COVERING FEES
COVERING THINGS BUT THEY'RE
SUPPOSED TO. I'M AND WE ALWAYS
TALK ABOUT KIND OF THE BUCKETS
WORDS WHERE DIFFERENT KINDS OF
SERVICES SHOULD FALL INTO AND
TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
APPROPRIATE FEE IS PAYING FOR
THEM SO WE DON'T RUN. ANYWHERE
CLOSE TO YOU KNOW AN ILLEGAL
TAXES ENGINE. THAT. TO ME THE
FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
A FEE AND- THEY TAX IS THE
DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN THOSE WHO
PAY. AND THE SERVICES THEY
PROVIDE. DO YOU NOT. CONCUR
THAT SIGNIFICANT FEES PAID FOR
PROCESSES THAT TAKE OVER A
HUNDRED AND EIGHTY DAYS. OUR
CALLS INTO QUESTION THE NEXUS
BETWEEN A FEE PAID BY AN
APPLICANT AND YOUR ABILITY TO
PERFORM. UP ON A TIMELY
APPROVAL. SO THIS GETS TO MY
DUE PROCESS QUESTION. SO THE
NEXUS WE'RE LOOKING AT KIND OF
SEPARATELY JUST TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE FEES SO WE CHARGE FOR
INVESTIGATION BECAUSE THOSE ARE
COVERED ALL INVESTIGATION
BECAUSE WHEN WE HAVE ANY OF
THESE APPLICATION FEES AT THOSE
ARE BEING DETERMINED BASED ON
CERTAIN SERVICES THAT WE
PROVIDE IN THOSE ARE GOING TO
COVER THOSE COSTS. CERTAINLY
THE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS IS I
FEEL LIKE IT'S KIND OF A
SEPARATE MATTER IS SOMETHING
THAT WE NEED TO. TO COMPLY WITH
THAT BECAUSE I MEAN IT'S
REQUIRED OF US OBVIOUSLY BUT
ALSO WE DON'T WANT TO KEEP
INDUSTRY WAITING THAT LONG WE
UNDERSTAND THAT THEY GET
IMPATIENT. RIGHTFULLY SO AND
IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THIS MATTER OF
CATCH UP SO WE'RE REALLY GOING
TO JUST. REALLY TRYING TO GET
RID OF THAT BACKLOG SO WE CAN
ALWAYS WE WON'T HAVE TO HAVE
THIS DISCUSSION ALL THE TIME
ABOUT THE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS
BECAUSE WE ARE MEDIAN IT. I'M
NOT SURE IF THAT. ANSWERS YOUR
QUESTION. THE STANDARD FOR
PERFORMANCE AS A HUNDRED EIGHTY
DAYS. HI I ACTUALLY THINK
THAT'S SORT OF ARBITRARY THAT
IS A HALF A YEAR. WHY CAN'T YOU
GET IT DONE IN NINETY DAYS. WHY
CAN'T YOU GET WHAT I MEAN
HONESTLY I'M I'M- ABOUT. MY
PRIVATE LIFE FOR THIRTY YEARS
WAS IN BROADCASTING WE WENT
THROUGH THE FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION.
BACKGROUND CHECKS FEES ALL
KINDS OF THINGS. AND QUITE
FRANKLY THE FCC WAS MODERNIZED
THE NINETEEN THIRTY FOUR
COMMUNICATIONS ACT WAS NOT
MODERNIZE TODAY. TODAY I CAN
GET A LICENSE IN THIRTY DAYS
APPROVED BY THE FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WITH
A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK AND
WITH STANDARDS OF UP FINANCE
AND ALL OF THE THINGS NECESSARY
I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT IN THIS.
ARENA THAT THIRTY DAYS IS
REALISTIC BUT CAN YOU CHALLENGE
YOURSELF. AND BE WILLING TO
MANAGE AN OPERATION. THAT CAN
ACTUALLY GET THINGS DONE AND
NINETY DAYS INSTEAD OF A
HUNDRED AND EIGHTY DAYS WELL I
WILL SAY THAT WERE THEN THE
HUNDRED EIGHTIES COMES FROM
REGULATIONS OF BANK STANLEY I
WILL SAY THAT SOME MIGHT
ACTUALLY THINK WE COULD GET IN
THAT TIME FRAME IT'S JUST GOING
TO DEPEND ON THE CASE SOME.
SOME CASES LIKE WERE PERMITS
TAKE A LOT LESS TIME THAN A
CARD ROOM OWNERS CERTAINLY SO I
DON'T WANT YOU TO THINK THAT
WE'RE GOING TO WAIT TO THE HUNT
USE THE ENTIRE A HUNDRED EIGHTY
DAYS SHOULD WE BE ABLE TO GET
THOSE OUT SOONER ABSOLUTELY I
WOULD LIKE TO GET THOSE OUT
IMMEDIATELY. SO I DON'T KNOW
RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST TRYING TO
MAKE SURE WE GET IN COMPLIANCE
WITH. AND I THINK THE
FRUSTRATION HERE. IS TO SEE A
SIGNIFICANT INCREASE. IN THE
NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT YOU HAVE
WORKING ON. THIS HUNDRED AND
EIGHTY DAY. COMPLETION PROCESS
AND THE MORE PEOPLE WE GIVE YOU
THE SLOWER YOU ARE. THAT IS A
VERY VERY CONCERNING. CRITICISM
I THINK EVENT WHAT ONE FOR
FINAL. I'M GONNA PUT MY MAYOR'S
HAT BACK ON MAY FRESNO FOR.
EIGHT YEARS DO YOU UNDERSTAND
AND APPRECIATE THAT THE DELAYS
THAT YOU CREATE. AT AND THE OF
DELAYS INCONSISTENCIES THE
BACKLOGS THE APPEARANCE OF
UNFAIRNESS. HAS A DIRECT IMPACT
ON THE GENERAL FUND OF. CITIES
AND HAS A DIRECT IMPACT ON THE
EMPLOYABILITY OF LITERALLY
HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF
INDIVIDUALS DO YOU UNDERSTAND
THE NECESSITY OF FAIRLY
COMPLETING THE PROCESS. BECAUSE
THE END RESULT IS SOMETHING
VERY POSITIVE FOR OUR
COMMUNITIES DO DO YOU
UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE A
GATEKEEPER TO PROGRESS. I DO'S
UNDERSTAND THAT. DOING THINGS
FAIRLY IS IMPERATIVE TO ENSURE
THAT EVERYONE HAS AN EQUAL
CHANCE TO WORK ON AND IN THE
INDUSTRY MOST OF OUR SEASON ME
UP TO HELP ME OUT BUT A LOT OF
THE FOLKS SAID WE THE COMING
FOR LICENSURE ARE ABLE TO WORK
PENDING FULL LICENSURE SO. I
DON'TWANT YOU THINK THAT'S AN
EXCUSE BECAUSE WE STILL WANT TO
GET THAT DONE BUT WE ARE AWARE
THAT AND MINDFUL OF THE FACT
THAT THOSE FOLKS CAN WORK WHAT
DOESN'T WORK IS IF THEY HAVE
BEEN WORKING FOR A LONG TIME
AND THEN WE DO AN INVESTIGATION
AND SOMETHING COMES OUT
DEROGATORY TO HAVE TO REMOVE
THAT. SO THAT'S WHY I THINK
MAKING SURE THAT WE DO THINGS
TIMELY IS SO THAT PEOPLE ARE IF
THEY SHOULD BE AN INDUSTRY THEY
SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE
EXERCISE TENANTS CAN YOU GIVE
ME SOME IDEA OF THE-
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE- HIGH.
AMOUNTS OF PROCESSING AND
APPLICANTS YOU HAVE AND THE ALL
MY GOODNESS HERE'S A CROOK THAT
NEEDS TO BE. TAKEN OUT OF THIS
PROCESS IS IT A LOT. IS IT
ROUTINE AND REGULAR. OR IS IT
AN EXCEPTION RATHER THAN THE
RULE. BECAUSE IT IS THE
EXCEPTION RATHER THAN THE RULE
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT. THAT
YOU'RE YOU'RE FOCUSING. ON A
MINORITY OF A PROBLEM THAT
SLOWING DOWN A MAJORITY OF
APPLICATIONS THAT'S MY BASIC
CONCERN HOW. WIDE SPREAD IS
THIS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU
WANT TO CALL IT A CRICKET
ELEMENT OR OF ON LICENSABLE
ELEMENT. MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN
JUST THE OPPOSITE. HARD WORKING
PEOPLE IN FRESNO CALIFORNIA
WITH VERY VERY GOOD OPERATIONS.
WHO PAY THEIR TAXES TO THIS
CITY DO IT RIGHT AND I ACTUALLY
EXPAND. AND I'M TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND. IT'S ONE THING FOR
THE SAFETY THE LEGAL CONCERNS.
BUT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
ARE YOU MAJORING ON THE MINERS
ARE MONITORING ON THE MAJORS
YEAH AND I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE
THE NUMBERS IN TERMS OF WHAT WE
MAY AND MAKE THE COMMISSION
MIGHT BUT IN TERMS OF OUR KIND
OF DENIAL RECOMMENDATION RATE I
JUST DON'T KNOW THAT SO I DON'T
HAVE THE COMPARISON OF THE
BUREAU'S TO NILE RECOMMENDATION
BUT WHAT I CAN SAY IS
APPROXIMATELY 1% OF THE
APPLICANTS THAT COME FORTH TO
THE COMMISSION. ARE SENT TO AN
EVIDENTIARY HEARING WHETHER
THAT MEANS THE COMMISSION NEEDS
MORE INFORMATION FO
SUITABILITY OR AT THE END UP TO
DIAL BUT LIKE STEPHANIE DID
MENTION. ALL BUT THE OWNERS ARE
ABLE TO ENTER INTO THE INDUSTRY
WITHIN A VERY REASONABLE TIME
FRAME WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO
WEEKS MAYBE A MONTH. AND BEGIN
WORKING WITHIN THE INDUSTRY
DURING THAT TIME OF THE
BACKGROUND PROCESS. AND IF AN
EXAMPLE OF AN APPLICANT IS SENT
TO AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING. THEY
ARE ALSO ISSUED IN TERMS
LICENSE. IN WHICH THEY CAN
CONTINUE ON WORKING IN ONE IN
THE INDUSTRY UNTIL FINAL TYSON
IS STILL I WANNA MAKE SURE I
UNDERSTAND THIS IS 1% OF
APPLICANTS ESSENTIALLY.
ESSENTIALLY THAT IS A MINUSCULE
NUMBER. AND YET IS TAKING YOU
SIX MONTHS TO GET APPROVALS
DONE. I MEAN I HONESTLY I'M
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT I
MEAN HOW MUCH HOW DIFFICULT IS
IT. TO DO BACKGROUND CHECKS TO
PROCESS APPLICATIONS IF IN FACT
YOU HAVE 1% THAT ARE FALLING
INTO THE THIS DIFFICULT
CATEGORY WHICH MEANS WHAT YOU
HAVE 99% THAT ARE GENERALLY.
APPROVAL BALL AND ABLE TO FIND
THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON
THE FINANCIAL INFORMATION I'M
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY DOES
IT TAKE YOU. OVER HALF A YEAR.
TO PROCESS WHAT SEEMS TO BE
FAIRLY ROUTINE. INFORMATION
THAT IS READILY AVAILABLE WITH
BACKGROUND CHECKS AND HISTORIC
CHECKS AND FINANCIAL CHECKS. I
ARE YOU ARE YOU ARE YOU FOR
DEFAULTING ON THE SIDE OF
SUSPICION. OP OR ARE YOU ARE OR
ARE YOU WILLING TO CLEARLY AND
CAREFULLY LOOK. AND QUICKLY
APPROVE I'M TRYING TO ME THIS
THIS IMPLICIT BIAS. BOTHERS ME
BECAUSE I'M WONDERING IF THAT
INSTITUTIONAL BIAS IS SO
CONCERNED OVER THE 1% THAT
YOU'RE PENALIZING THE 99% BUT
THESE DELAYED. APPROVALS THAT'S
A CONCERN BECAUSE YOU'RE
PENALIZING CITIES AND YOU'RE
PENALIZING HIM HONESTLY PLEASE
AND YOU'RE PENALIZING GROSS AND
AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE
COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKET PLACE
THAT THAT'S A BIG CONCERN. FOR
ME IN A MUCH BIGGER PICTURE
THIS. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT WE
DO. LIKE YOU MENTIONED
CAREFULLY REVIEW EACH OF THESE
CASES AND WE AS YOU SHOULD
RIGHT AND WE ALSO THERE ARE
CERTAIN AND I THINK THE AUDITOR
BROUGHT IT UP THAT TO BE
CONSISTENT THAT WE ASK THE SAME
TYPES OF QUESTIONS SO WE
CHECKED THE SAME DATABASES AND
SOME TAKE LONGER THAN OTHERS
MIGHT AGAIN BUT YOU THINK
THEY'LL TAKE A HUNDRED EIGHTY
DAYS SOME OF THAT CAN. HAPPEN
ON A MORE ON IT. FOR BASIS BUT
IT DEPENDS ON. I WAS AND I PUSH
IT I DON'T I WANTED BUT- IF IN
FACT. WHAT YOU SAY IS TRUE THEN
BOB BACKLOG SHOULD BE. REDUCED
SUBSTANTIALLY AND YOU SHOULD BE
A PLACE WHERE YOU HAVE NO BACK
BACKLOGS THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE.
AND SO I I'M ASKING ON ON
BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE I
REPRESENT. TO BE VERY VERY
THOUGHTFUL ABOUT THIS AUDIT IT
CHARTS A PATHWAY ARE THEN I
THINK IT'S VERY VERY
CONSTRUCTIVE AND PLEASE KEEP IN
MIND. THE SAFETY AND THE
LEGALITY OF THIS IS IMPORTANT
BUT AT THE SAME TIME IF PEOPLE
PASSED THE TEST. GELMAN
BUSINESSES AS QUICKLY AS YOU
CAN I'M I'M CONCERNED ABOUT
WHAT I THINK IS A IS A PROBLEM
WITH DUE PROCESS. THAT THERE IS
AN EXPECTATION THAT THEY PAY A
FEE THEY ANSWER ALL THE
QUESTIONS THAT A REASONABLE
PERIOD OF TIME THEY SHOULD GET
AN ANSWER. AB YOU YOU HAVE A
PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS I
UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT THE ACTUAL
DUE PROCESS. FEELS TO ME LIKE
MORE OFTEN THAN NOT IT IS A
GRADUAL PROCESS OF DENIAL NO
DECISION OR DELAYED DECISION IS
THE EFFECTIVE WITH THE NILE SO
I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO TAKE
SERIOUSLY THE- RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE AUDITOR AND IMPLEMENT
THEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AS
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE I
THINK IS A VERY. A LOT OF VERY
GOOD THAT CAN HAPPEN THROUGHOUT
OUR COMMUNITIES AND I
APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE AND-
TAKING UP THAT CHALLENGE THANK
YOU. THANK YOU WITHOUT WILL
MOVE TO ASSEMBLY MEMBER VOEPEL.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR LITTLE
BIT IN THE WEEDS HERE BUT I'M
LOOKING AT A STATISTICAL
ANOMALY. AND THAT'S KIND OF OUR
JOB IS THE- CHECK ALL THE
NUMBERS. IN FISCAL YEAR TWENTY
FIFTEEN TO TWENTY SIXTEEN. YOU
HAD ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED
AND FIFTY FOUR ABANDONED
WITHDRAWN APPLICATIONS AND I
LOOK AT THOSE AS- KIND OF A
BUBBLING POT IT IS DON'T KNOW
WHICH ONE IS COOKING OFF. IN
THE YEAR TWENTY SIXTEEN TWENTY
SEVENTEEN YOU ONLY HAD TWO
HUNDRED AND SEVENTY NINE
ABANDONED WITHDRAWN
APPLICATIONS THAT'S A 76% DROP
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT WAS
THE DIFFERENCE THERE WHAT
HAPPENED IN IT WAS ACTUALLY NOT
A BAD YEAR FOR YOU. BUT THAT
MONSTER DROP WITH WHERE PEOPLE
JUST NOT FRUSTRATED THAT YEAR
OR WHAT WAS GOING ON. YEAH I
APOLOGIZE I DO NOT KNOW OFF THE
TOP OF MY HEAD I CAN CERTAINLY
RESEARCH THAT AND GET THAT BACK
TO YOU BUT I'M- LIKE. I DON'T I
SPEAK OF I DON'T KNOW. RIGHT
BUT FULL BY AYE AYE TO ADD TO
THAT I MEAN THAT IS SPECIFIC TO
THE APPLICANT THE APPLICANT.
OBVIOUSLY PUTS FORTH THEIR
RECOMMENDATION FOR WITHDRAWAL
OR ABANDONMENT. IT'S BECAUSE
THEY'RE EITHER CHANGING JOBS
THERE ARE NO LONGER IN THAT
PARTICULAR POSITION THAT'S MORE
SPECIFIC TO THE APPLICANT
ITSELF. OKAY UNDERSTOOD BUT IF
I THROW OUT TO TWO HUNDRED AND
SEVENTY NINE ANOMALY. I GET A
THREE YEAR AVERAGE OF THIRTEEN
HUNDRED AND THIRTY TWO PEOPLE
ABANDONED WITHDRAWN
APPLICATIONS IT'S A SEEMED VERY
STRANGE TO ME SO IF YOU COULD
GET BACK TO ME LATER ON. I
WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEW
BELIEVE ARE NEXT QUESTION THE
CLIENT WILL BE JUST ASK ANOTHER
QUESTION HIS DIDN'T COME UP AND
IT WAS SOMETHING MENTIONED IN
THE PREVIOUS PANEL ON THAT WAS
HE OFTEN DOES A BUREAU AT TRACK
THE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS SINCE
THEY SAID THERE WAS NO LOGS NO
RECORDS. SEEMS KIND OF ODD TO
BE WHY THERE WOULD BE NO RECORD
OF THAT SO THE AND ARE TALKING
AND LEAVE WITH THE SPECIAL
AGENTS DO SO THEY DO TRACK ALL
THEIR TIME INTO TIME KEEPING
SYSTEMS YOU KNOW ONE THAT TALKS
ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT THEY
DO WITH THEIR CASES AND THEN
JUST WHAT THEY DO ON A DAILY
BASIS WHAT THE AUDITOR LE
STRUGGLING WITH THIS BECAUSE IT
WASN'T CLEARLY LAID OUT HOW
MUCH TIME THEY'RE SPENDING IN
EACH CARDROOM TRIBAL CASINO.
AND THAT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT
THE SYSTEMS TRACK WHAT WE'RE
DOING NOW IS ENSURING THAT ALL
OF THE AGENTS. PLACE THERE WAS.
PLACE THAT INFORMATION IN THE
SYSTEM SO THAT WE CAN. RUN HAVE
TO MANUALLY PULL IT OUT I THINK
IN THE FUTURE WE WOULD LIKE A
SYSTEM OR WE COULD JUST PRESS
THE BUTTON AND BE ABLE TO HAVE
ALL THAT INFORMATION. RIGHT NOW
WE JUST HAVE DIRECT THEM ALL TO
YOU NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR WERE
YOU WERE. SPECIFICALLY IN AND
LAID OUT WHICH CARTER WHICH OF
THIS YOU KNOW AND HOW MUCH TIME
WAS SPENT THERE. AND THE REASON
WHY OBVIOUSLY. BUT I THINK THAT
WAS IT WAS WHEN THEY WENT BACK
TO CHECK SPECIFICALLY FOR
LOCATIONS IT WASN'T. CLEAR IN
ALL CASES GOT IT SO THE
BUREAU'S LOOKING AT. BRING SOME
CLARITY OR SOME. TRANSPARENCY
IN THE LONG RUN WE'RE KIND OF
DOING SOMETHING RIGHT NOW JUST
YOU. TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION
AVAILABLE ON THE IS CERTAINLY
THE FUTURE WE WOULD LIKE TO
HAVE A SYSTEM OR WERE ABLE TO.
GET THAT INFORMATION YOU KNOW.
JUST WITH THE PUSH OF A BUTTON
SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WORKING
TOWARDS AND RECOGNIZE THAT WE
HAVE TO ADDRESS IT. SO THAT'LL
BE OF SOMETHING WILL SAVE WITH
THE CHECK INS WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS. FOLLOWING
THROUGH WITH THE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS DOUBLE TO BE
EITHER UPDATED ON OUR EFFORTS
THERE. AND THEN IN THE PREVIOUS
PANEL TO THE A TALK ABOUT. IT
AND IT CAME UP JUST A LITTLE
BIT BUT- WANTED YOU TO. KIND OF
EXPAND ON THE CHARGES THAT WERE
BEING MADE TO THE SPECIAL
DISTRIBUTION FIVE BABY. CHARGED
TO ANOTHER FIND. AND THIS KIND
OF GOES BACK TO THE WHOLE
NOTION OF THE ALIGNMENT OF FEES.
WHY IS THAT OCCURRING BECAUSE
AND YOU SEE SOME ACCOUNTS THAT
LOOK LIKE THEY'RE FLUSH. AND IT
IS TO BE LEADS TO A LOT OF
CONFUSION OF TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND THE FEES AND HOW
THEY'RE BEING ALIGNED WITH THE
REGULATORY COSTS RIGHT SO I
THINK IT'S KIND OF A LITTLE BIT
OF A TWO PART PROCESS PROBABLY
FOR BUT THE COMMISSION AND THE
BEER IN TERMS OF. THE
ALLOCATIONS FROM THE SPECIAL
DISTRIBUTION FUND AND THEN THEY
GET WE CONTROL FUN MAKING SURE
THAT THOSE ARE ARE APPROPRIATE
AND THEN LOOKING AT THE GALA
CONTROL FUND AND WITHIN THEIR
WHICH FEES RELATE TO WHICH
SERVICES SO I THINK IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WHILE WE DO OUR
COST ANALYSIS WE WILL HAVE TO
CONSIDER AT NOT JUST WHAT TYPES
OF FEES ARE BEING CHARGED FOR
SPECIFIC SERVICES BUT ALSO
MAKING SURE THAT. YOU KNOW
THERE'S APPROPRIATE FUNDING AND
SERVICES BETWEEN THE STF AND
THE G. C. F. PLEASE JUST TO ADD
TO THAT WITH REGARDS TO THE
COMMISSION WE TRACK OUR
WORKLOAD SPECIFICALLY TO. THE
TYPE OF FUNCTION IN THE
CATEGORY OF THAT FUNCTION
WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A TRIBAL
VERSUS CARD ROOM. OR THIRD
PARTY WORKLOAD. AS WE DO HAVE A
WORKLOAD DATABASE THAT
IDENTIFIES THE PERCENTAGE SPLIT
BETWEEN THE- STF AND THE CAN'T
LIKE CONTROL FUN AND WHAT WOULD
BE APPROPRIATE TO CHARGE. OKAY
YEAH I THINK THE YOU KNOW
THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF.
HARRY IS SOMEWHERE PATTERSON
HAS A QUICK QUESTION VERY VAGUE
I I'M CAPABLE OF A QUICK
QUESTION I PROMISE. DO YOU
INTEND TO LIFT THE MORATORIUM
ANYTIME SOON AND ARE YOU
CONCERNED WITH THE- CRITICISM
THAT. THE AUDIT DISCOVERED WITH
RESPECT TO WHAT LOOKS LIKE A
MORATORIUM THAT IS
INTRINSICALLY UNFAIR AND JUST
TO CLARIFY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
THEM AND MORE CHARMER WE
TALKING ABOUT THE GAMES ISSUE
THE GAME OR TORY IN THAT THAT
IS REFERENCED IN THE AUDIT AND
THAT WAS PRESENTED IN TESTIMONY
RIGHT SO IT'S THE GAME THE
APPLICATION ISSUE IN TERMS OF
WHEN GAME APPLICATIONS
COMMENDED BUREAU WAS REQUIRED
AND RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING
THEM EITHER ISSUING APPROVALS
ARE DENIALS SO THERE HAVE BEEN
OTHER ISSUES THAT IT HELD SOME
KIND OF EQUAL TREATMENT WE
STARTED ISSUING THOSE SO AT THE
END OF JULY WE I THINK WE SENT
OUT A- TO TEMPORARY POOLS. TO
ADDRESS THAT ISSUE WHEN KERR
PLAYING GAMES TO BE ABLE TO
ALLOW THOSE OTHER CARDROOM TO
APPLY FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO
PLAY THEM TO AND THERE ARE SOME
ADDITIONAL GAMES WERE WORKING
THROUGH THAT PROCESS. TO
ADDRESS EACH OF THEM BUT I
DON'T. PROVIDING IT BACK TO THE
AUDITOR ON THAT BUT YES WE HAVE
STARTED GOING THROUGH THAT
PROCESS OF ISSUING THOSE
GADGETS IT IT SEEMS LIKE A
MORATORIUM FREEZES IN PLACE
INEQUITIES. AND THE AND THE
SOONER YOU GET THROUGH THAT I
MEAN IF ONE. APPLICANT GETS TO
DO ACCENT ANOTHER GETS TO DO X.
MINUS WHY THAT'S OF THAT'S-
INTRINSICALLY UNFAIR. AND IT
SEEMS TO ME THAT YOU NEED TO
GET TO A PLACE WHERE EVERYONE
IS EQUAL BEFORE THE PROCESS. AT
IS ADJUDICATED AND JUDGED UPON
THAT FAIR PLAYING FIELD AND NOT
UNNECESSARILY PENALIZED BECAUSE
THEY HAPPEN TO FALL IN. THE
MORATORIUM. OPPOSITION AND
OTHERS ARE OUTSIDE OF THAT
POSITION THAT SEEMS TO BE
INTRINSICALLY UNFAIR. I THINK
IT'S JUST THE FRUSTRATION OF
KNOWING SOME ADVOCATES GETTING
DONE WITHIN A HUNDRED AND
EIGHTY DAYS SOME WORDS TAKING
SEVERAL YEARS WERE THAT IT
DOES. SEEM LIKE A DE FACTO
MORATORIUM TERRIBLY PASTOR
ASSEMBLY MEMBER PATTERSON
STALKING ABOUT RIGHT WITH THAT
LET ME ASK THERE'S ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS FROM THE DíAS.
HEARING AND SEEING ON WE ARE
NOW AT LIKE TWO AND A HALF
HOURS INTO THIS HEARING. RIGHT
SIR BRADFORD IN THE INTEREST OF
TIME IS GONNA. BY PASSES
QUESTIONS. IN ORDER TO GO AHEAD
AND MOVE TO THE NEXT PANEL
THANK YOU VERY MUCH I THINK
WE'RE TO MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM
NUMBER FOUR COMMENTS FROM
STAKEHOLDERS FORGET PLEASE HAVE.
AT THE TABLE TASHA SERRA. MAYOR
CITY OF GARDENA AND CHAIR OF
THE CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SELF
RELIANCE TRYING POWERS WITH
ALREADY. KYLE KIRKLIN OWNER
CLUB ONE CASINO PRESIDENT
CALIFORNIA GAMING ASSOCIATION
CLARK ROSE OWNER CAPITAL
CASINO. AND PRESIDENT
COMMUNITIES FOR CALIFORNIA CARD
ROOMS. JOE HARN GENERAL COUNSEL
BICYCLE HOTEL AND CASINO. AND
MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA
CARDROOM. ALLIANCE THANK YOU
GUYS FOR ALL BEING HERE TODAY
AND FOR LISTENING TO TODAY'S
TESTIMONY HOPEFULLY IT'S BEEN
INFORMATIVE. IF I COULD PLEASE
JUST ASK THAT. EVERYONE LIMIT
THEIR OPENING REMARKS TO THREE
MINUTES OR LESS THAT WOULD BE
VERY HELPFUL AND I KNOW THAT
THE MEMBERS UP HERE AT THE
DíAS WOULD APPRECIATE CONCISE
COMMENTS. SO WITH THAT
WHOEVER'S READY TO BEGIN.
PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON MISTER
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE I WANT TO FIRST START
OFF BY APOLOGIZING FOR WEARING
SUNGLASSES TODAY BUT I JUST HAD
EYE SURGERY I'M SENSITIVE TO
LIGHT RIGHT NOW THE MY NAME IS
TASHA SIR TO AND I'M THE CHAIR
OF THE CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR
SELF RELIANT JOINT POWERS
AUTHORITY I'M ALSO THE MAYOR OF
THE CITYOF GARDENA AND I JUST
LIKE TO THINK ASSEMBLY MEMBER
PATTERSON FOR ASKING THE
QUESTIONS AS IT RELATES TO
CITIES. I THINK THE JOINT
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT COMMITTEE FOR
REQUESTING THIS AUDIT OF THE
BUREAU OF THE GAMBLING CONTROL
AND THE GAMBLING CONTROL
COMMISSION WE ALSO THINK THE
COMMITTEE AND STAFF FOR
INVITING US TO TESTIFY AT THIS
HEARING. OUR JPA CONSISTS OF
SEVEN CITIES WHICH ARE BILL
GARDEN. PALMER'S COMPTON CUT
HAY. GARDENA WINE GARDENS. IN
INGLEWOOD. THE JPA WAS
ORGANIZED TO PROMOTE AND
PROTECT THE COMMON ECONOMIC
INTERESTS. AND CONCERNS OF ITS
MEMBER CITIES AND TO ENGAGE ON
PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES WHICH
AFFECT. THESE CONCERNS
INCLUDING THAT WHICH WE WHICH
EACH OF US LOOK WE ARE
REGULATED BY A CAR CLUBS. THE
JPA REPRESENTS THE INTERESTS OF
OVER HALF A MILLION RESIDENTS.
LOCAL BUSINESSES AND THEIR
EMPLOYEES. CAR CLUBS ARE MAJOR
INPUT OUR MAJOR EMPLOYERS IN
THE COMMUNITIES IN WHICH THEY
RESIDE THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. CARD CLUBS GENERATE
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TAX
REVENUE TO SUPPORT LOCAL
SERVICES SUCH AS POLICE AND
FIRE PROTECTION AND SOCIAL
SERVICES FOR CHILDREN AND
SENIORS. IN THE CITY OF
HAWAIIAN GARDENS FOR EXAMPLE
CARCLUB REVENUES ACCOUNT 47280%
OF THAT OF THE CITY'S GENERAL
FUND. I HAVE A LIST OF SERVICES
THAT ARE SEVEN CITIES ARE
PROVIDED WITH THE REVENUE OF
OUR CAR CLUBS LICENSING
AGREEMENTS THAT THAT ARE
GENERATED THAT I WOULD LIKE TO
ENTER INTO RECORD I BELIEVE YOU
HAVE THOSE NOW. IF THAT'S
APPROPRIATE. AFFECT THE
SURPRISES MANY PEOPLE IS THAT
ONE IN FIVE CITIES IN
CALIFORNIA PLAYS HOST TO CARD
CLUBS. RELYING ON THOSE CAR
CLUBS NOT ONLY FOR GENERAL FUND
REVENUE BUT RELYING ON THEM TO
PLAY AN INTEGRAL PART IN THOSE
CITIES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
THE ECONOMIC VITALITY OF THOSE
CITIES THAT HOLES CAR CLUB IS
INEXTRICABLY CONNECTED TO THE
ECONOMIC VITALITY OF THOSE CARD
CLUBS. WHEN THE STATE AUDITOR
FINDS THAT THE BUREAU EXCEEDS
THE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAY TIME
FRAME TO PROCESS GAME LICENSING
APPLICATIONS 470% OF THE FIVE
THOUSAND AND TWELVE
APPLICATIONS IT'S REVIEWED OVER
FIVE YEARS. BUT SOME
APPLICATIONS TAKEN AS LONG AS
SIX YEARS TO COMPLETE. IT IS
INEXTRICABLE THAT THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND NOT
KNOW THAT THESE PROBLEMS
EXISTED OR TO WHAT MAGNITUDE
THEY ARE. THIS VALUE BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND BY
THE BUREAU OF GAMMA CONTROL
MATERIALLY IMPACTS THE CITIES
THAT ARE HOSTING CAR CLUBS BY
REDUCING TAX REVENUES TO
SUPPORT SERVICES FOR CHILDREN
SENIORS AND FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
THE INEFFICIENCIES OF THE
BUREAU OF GAMMA CONTROL
JEOPARDIZE ONE IN FIVE CITIES
IN CALIFORNIA. AFTER REVIEWING
THE STATE AUDIT IT APPEARS TO
US THAT THE BUREAU IS NOT
CAPABLE OF CARRYING OUT ITS
CORE FUNCTION AND THEREFORE WE
ASK THAT THE LEGISLATOR TO
CONTINUE STATUTORY ALTERNATIVES
TO ADDRESS THIS MATTER. I'D
LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME
CONSIDERATION WE LOOK FORWARD
TO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH
THESE THREE COMMITTEES TO
ADDRESS THE ISSUES RAISED BY
THE CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
THANK YOU. THANK YOU THANK YOU
FOR A- MAKE SURE YOU REFERENCE
THE AUDITS IN THEIR IF I COULD
HAVE. ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY BUT
WITH YOU PLEASE BE CONCISE AND
TO THE AUDIT WE APPRECIATE THAT
THANK YOU. AREA MEMBERS THE
COMMITTEES THANK YOU FOR
ALLOWING THE CALIFORNIA GAMING
ASSOCIATION TO PARTICIPATE IN
TODAY'S HEARING. MY NAME IS
KYLE KIRKLAND ON THE PRESIDENT
THE CALIFORNIA GAMING
ASSOCIATION FOR TRADE GROUP
THAT REPRESENTS THE CALIFORNIA
CARDROOM INDUSTRY. OUR
MEMBERSHIP INCLUDES A MAJORITY
OF ACTIVE CARD ROOMS IN THE
STATE AND IS GOVERNED BY AN
ELECTED BOARD. OF CARTONS OF
ALL SIZES AND FROM ALL REGIONS
OF THE STATE. OUR INDUSTRY
EMPLOYS OVER TWENTY THOUSAND
CALIFORNIANS IN LIVING WAGE
JOBS AND CONTRIBUTES MILLIONS
OF TAX DOLLARS TO COMMUNITY
STATEWIDE. IN MANY COMMUNITIES
WERE THE LARGEST LOCAL TAXPAYER
IN SOME CASES ARE TAXPAYERS
COMPRISES THE MAJORITY OF THE
CITY'S BUDGET. I'M ALSO THE
OWNER OPERATOR OF CLUB ONE
CASINO IN FRESNO AND TWO OTHER
CARD GAMES IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY. WE EMPLOY OVER THREE
AND A PERSONS AND CONTRIBUTE
ONE MILLION TO ONE MILLION
DOLLARS TO THE CITY OF FRESNO
GENERAL FUND. THE OTTERS REPORT
CONFIRMED WILL MANY CARD ROOMS
HAVE LONG EXPERIENCED IN
LICENSING INEFFICIENCIES AND
DELAYS IN CONSISTENT FEES AND
PROCESSES AND SUGGESTS A REAL
IMPACT ON OUR INDUSTRY. WE
OFTEN A WE HEAR FREQUENT
COMPLAINTS FROM MEMBERS. ON THE
ISSUES I CAN CONFIRM SOME FROM
MY OWN EXPERIENCE. I WOULD OVER
FOUR YEARS TO RECEIVE A LICENSE
FOR SMALL CARAMEL WATSONVILLE
WHEN I'D ALREADY BEEN LICENSED
IN FRESNO FOR OVER SEVEN YEARS.
AND BY SELLING OFF FOR OVER
SIX. FURTHER WITH EACH OF OUR
APPLICATIONS AND RENEWALS THE
PROCESS INQUIRY AND TIMING VERY
CONSIDERABLY. WHILE THE AUDITOR
IDENTIFIED INCONSISTENT
PROCESSES DATA COLLECTION AND
DEADLINES AT THE BUREAU.
COMMISSION ACTIONS ALSO APPEAR
ARBITRARY INCONSISTENT TO THE
INDUSTRY INDUSTRY PARTICIPANTS
OFTEN LEAVE COMMISSION MEETINGS
CONFUSED BY THE COMMENTS AND
ACTIONS TAKEN. TO BE SURE OUR
INDUSTRY CAN DO A BETTER JOB IN
TERMS OF RESPONSIVENESS AN
ATTENTION TO DETAIL IN THE
APPLICATION PROCESS BUT THERE'S
A REAL HUMAN IMPACT FROM LACK
OF CONSISTENCY. OUR JOBS
PROVIDE REAL CALM OPPORTUNITIES
IN THE DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES IN WHICH WE OPERATE
A LACK OF PREDICTABILITY AND
LICENSING HURTS OUR ABILITY TO
ADD STAFF AND OFFER. EMPLOYEES
CAREER GROWTH. WELL THE OTTER
CONCLUDED THAT BOTH THE
COMMISSION AND THE BUREAU. IF
YOU'RE OPEN TO RECOMMENDATIONS
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS
DISTURBING TO US WAS THE
EXCHANGE IN SOME OF THE
TERMINOLOGY AND THE COMMENTS AT
THE END WITH TERMS LIKE
MISLEADING DISINGENUOUS MIS
CHARACTERIZES INACCURATE MISSES
THE POINT. AND WILD. THE
REGULATORY BODIES APPEAR OPEN
TO THE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
CHANGE IT WOULD APPEAR THAT AT
LEAST AT SOME LEVEL THERE SOME
RESISTANCE TO CHANGE WE
ENCOURAGE ALL PARTICIPANTS TO
EMBRACE THE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS LOOK FOR BEST
PRACTICES AND OTHER LICENSING
AGENCIES SUCH AS THE BUREAU
CONSUME AFFAIRS. OR OTHER
STATES TO REGULATE GAMING. IT'S
LIKELY TO THAT ANY LASTING
CHANGE WILL REQUIRE SUBS IN
MODIFICATION OF THE GAMMA
CONTROL ACT AND RELATED
REGULATIONS. HISTORICALLY OUR
INDUSTRIES EMBRACE THE OPTION
TO WORK WITH REGULATORS ELECTED
OFFICIALS. CAN BE ADVANCE AND
SUBSEQUENT ATER WOULD FIND
DRAMATIC IMPROVEMENTS TO THESE
CONCERNS RAISED TODAY. THANK
YOU AGAIN FOR ALLOWING THE
CALIFORNIA GAMING SOCIAL GAMING
ASSOCIATION THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PARTICIPATE TODAY THANK YOU
THREE TESTIMONY ADDITIONAL
TESTIMONY PLEASE. GOOD
AFTERNOON MISTER CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS MY NAME IS CLARK ROSA
PRESIDENT OF THE CCC. AND OWNER
OPERATED OF CAPITAL CASINO HERE
IN SACRAMENTO. THE CURRENT WIFE
FOR GATED REGULATORY SYSTEM WAS
ENACTED OVER TWENTY YEARS AGO
THE AUDIT RESULTS HAVE
DEMONSTRATED THAT GREAT
STRUCTURAL CHANGES ARE
NECESSARY. EVERY REGULATORY
SYSTEM NEEDS STRUCTURES CHECKS
AND BALANCES AND PROPER
TRAINING TO PREVENT IMPROPER
INFLUENCE OF DECISIONS.
PROTECTING THE DECISION MAKING
PROCESS IS CRITICAL IN GAMING
REGULATION BECAUSE OF THE BROAD
DISCRETION GIVEN TO THE BUREAU
AND THE COMMISSION. THERE IS A
WIDESPREAD BELIEF THEY ENFORCE
POLICIES IN AN ON EVEN MANNER
WHICH IS UNFAIR TO THE
APPLICANT THE GAMING INDUSTRY
AND THE LEGISLATIVE BODIES THAT
HAVE ENTRUSTED THEM WITH THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF REGULATING
THE INDUSTRY. THE ON IT
HIGHLIGHTS THERE IS A LACK OF
POLICIES AND A FINE PROCESSES
WHICH PERMITS IN EQUITY AND
INEFFICIENCY TO PROCESS. THE
BUREAU AND COMMISSION DISCUSS
VARYING LEVELS OF REVIEW FOR
DIFFERENT LICENSE PLAYERS TYPES
HOWEVER NO WHERE IS THERE ANY
SPECIFICATION FOR WHAT THOSE
REVIEWS ENTAIL ALSO THERE IS A
LACK OF CLARITY ON WHAT IS THE
OBJECTIVE OF THE REVIEW AND
WHETHER THE QUESTIONS BEING
ASKED ARE MATERIALLY RELATED TO
THE LEVEL OF REVIEW AND THEY
DETERMINATIONS THAT THE BEER ON
THE COMMISSION ARE BEING ASKED
TO MAY. WHEN EVALUATING THESE
APPLICATIONS THIS LACK OF
CLARITY HAS CREATED THE BACKLOG
AND EVER INCREASING DELAY IN
REVIEW BECAUSE THE ANALYSIS IS
GOING FARTHER INTO THE
INDIVIDUALS HISTORY WITHOUT ANY
ARTICULATED STANDARD FOR WHY
THE BUREAU AND COMMISSION ARE
ASKING THESE QUESTIONS. SORRY.
THE COMMISSION IN RURAL CANNOT
MEET THEIR STATUTORY MANDATE
FOR TIMELY ISSUING LICENSE AND
INDUSTRIAL WERE SIDE. THE
AUDITOR FOUND SIGNIFICANT
DUPLICATION AND EFFORTS AND
INVESTIGATIONS INTO RELEVANT
FACTS WHICH HAVE RESULTED IN
DELAYS AND SERVICE BACKLOGS IT
CONTINUE TO CREATE ON
REASONABLE AND ON WARRANTED
HARDSHIP FOR THE CARD ROOM AND
ITS EMPLOYEES EVEN THOUGH THE
INDUSTRY IS HALF THE SIZE IT
WAS IN NINETEEN NINETY SEVEN
WHEN THE GAMBLING CONTROL
COMMISSION WAS ENACTED. IT IS
TIME TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE
GAMBLING CONTROL LACK SHOULD BE
REVISED TO BETTER AND MORE
TIMELY SERVE THE INDUSTRY AND
PROTECT THE PUBLIC. THE
GAMBLING CONTROL ACT PRAGUE
WILLING GATED REGULATIONS AND
INTERNAL POLICY SHOULD BE
VETTED TO ENSURE ELIMINATION OF
UNNECESSARY AND PUNITIVE
REGULATORY BURDENS ON THE
INDUSTRY. THE INDUSTRY SEEKS A
CLEAR PROCESS THAT ALLOWS
TRANSPIRING STE TRANSPARENCY
AND THE ABILITY FOR THE
REGULATORY AGENCY TO KEEP THE
INDUSTRY FREE OF CRIMINAL OR
CORRECTIVE ELEMENTS. ALL
REGULATORY AGENCIES ANY CLEAR
AND REAL REALISTIC DIRECTIVES
THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO HIRE
QUALIFIED EMPLOYEES WHICH WE
KNOW THEY HAVE. AND PROVIDE
THEM WITH PROPER TRAINING AND
TOOLS THE INDUSTRY WELCOMES THE
ON A BIT TOO NEEDY TO WORK WITH
THE LEGISLATURE TO AMEND THE
LAW AND THE REGULATORY BODIES
TO DEVELOP WRITTEN REGULATIONS
THAT WILL MITIGATE ARBITRARY
AND ON REASONS DECISIONS BASED
ON UNDEFINED OR NON EXISTENCE
POLICIES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME APPRECIATE IT. Q. I THINK
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS PLEASE CONTINUE
TO TIONAL TESTIMONY. GOOD
AFTERNOON CHAIRMAN SALAS AND
MEMBERS THANK YOU VERY FOR
INVITING CALIFORNIA CARTER
MILAN'S TO PARTICIPATE IN
TODAY'S HEARING MY NAME IS JOY
HARD I'M GENERAL COUNSEL FOR
THE BICYCLE HOTEL AND CASINO
AND WE ARE A MEMBER OF THE CCA.
THIS YEAR'S MEMBERSHIP INCLUDES
SEVEN OF THE LARGEST CAR ROOM
STATEWIDE WHICH COLLECTIVELY
HAVE OVER EIGHT HUNDRED AND
THIRTY LICENSE TABLES. PROVIDE
THOUSANDS OF WELL PAYING JOBS
INCLUDING BENEFITS ENABLING
EMPLOYEES TO SUPPORT THEIR
FAMILIES. AND IN MANY
COMMUNITIES WE ARE THE LEADING
CONTRIBUTOR TO THE TAX BASE.
SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE
GAMBLE CONTROL ACT THE INDUSTRY
HAS CONTINUED TO GROW AND
DEVELOP AND CHANGE BUT THE
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
DESIGNED TO REGULATE LICENSE
HAVE NOT KEPT PACE. WE SEE THE
AUDITOR'S REPORT AS A GUIDE TO
ADDRESS PROBLEMS AND FIND THE
MOST PRODUCTIVE AND EFFECTIVE
PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES TO
FULFILL THE AGENCY'S
LEGISLATIVE MANDATES. WHILE
ENSURING TRANSPARENCY FAIRNESS
AND EFFICIENCY FOR THOSE BEING
REGULATED. OUR CARDROOMS HAVE
FRONTLINE EXPERIENCE WITH THESE
PROCESSES AND ARE VALUABLE
PARTNER COMMITTED TO MEETING
FOR REGULATION AND BEST
PRACTICES TO IMPROVE LICENSING
AND OVERSIGHT. WE ALSO FEEL THE
REAL LIFE IMPACT OF THE AUDIT
FINDINGS FOR OWNERS AND
OPERATORS WHO WERE WAITING
YEARS TO OBTAIN A LICENSE.
THOSE DELAYS A QUITE TO LOST
OPPORTUNITIES TO INVEST IN AND
GROW THEIR BUSINESSES DEVELOP
MUCH NEEDED JOBS AND PROVIDE
TAX REVENUES. ALL NEGATIVE
IMPACTS WHICH COULD AND SHOULD
BE AVOIDED. MORE THAN MERE
TINKERING WITH THE STATUS QUO
HOWEVER IS REQUIRED. WE
ENCOURAGE THE LEGISLATURE TO
WORK WITH ALL PARTIES AN
UNDERTAKING A COMPREHENSIVE
RESTRUCTURING OF THE OVERSIGHT
AND LICENSING PROCESS. WE
ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF
STANDARDIZED LICENSING
PROCEDURES THAT WILL ENSURE
AFFECT EFFICIENCY FAIRNESS
CONSISTENCY. AND FOCUS ON THE
INFORMATION TRULY MEANINGFUL TO
DETERMINING SUITABILITY THEY
SHOULD REVIEW INCLUDE A REVIEW
OF HOW THE PROCEDURES ACTUALLY
FURTHER AT THE LEGISLATIVE
PURPOSE OF EACH AGENCY. INITIAL
MATTERS THAT SHOULD BE
ADDRESSED INCLUDE THE NEED FOR
STREAMLINED LICENSING PROCESS
FOR EXISTING LICENSEES TO
INCLUDE CREATING PORTABLE UNDER
LICENSE SIMILAR TO WHAT EXIST
FOR KIA LICENSEES. A
REEVALUATION OF THE RENEWAL
PROCESS THAT CURRENTLY REQUIRES
AT RENEWAL EVERY TWO YEARS
RECORDED REQUIRING UNNECESSARY
PAPERWORK AND A DRAIN ON
LICENSING STAFF. WHEN OTHER
JURISDICTIONS ISSUE EITHER
INDEFINITE LICENSES SUBJECT TO
DISCIPLINE OR SIMPLY LONGER
LICENSES. WE UNDERSTAND THE
COMMISSION HAS INDICATED A
WILLINGNESS TO JOIN IN
NECESSARY LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
IDENTIFIED BY THE AUDITOR AND
THE CCA IS PLEDGING TO WORK
WITH THE BUREAU COMMISSION AND
LEGISLATURE TO ACHIEVE THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AUDIT.
FURTHER CREATE A REGULATORY
STRUCTURE THAT ENSURES ONLY
SUITABLE PEOPLE ARE LICENSED
AND ELIMINATE UNNECESSARY AND
INEFFICIENT PROCESSES. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.
THE TESTIMONY PRE SHEET YOU
GUYS BEING HERE LET ME JUST ASK
A GENERAL KIND OF THRESHOLD
QUESTION FOR EACH OF YOU. DO
YOU FIND THE ART IT. FINDINGS
TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING. YES I THINK THAT
THE AUDIT FINDINGS ARE
CONSISTENT WITH MOST OF THE
EXPERIENCE OF AS OF THE
APPLICANTS THAT I'VE WORKED
WITH. GOT SO AND THE WILL TO
LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF
FRUSTRATION BUT I WOULD IMAGINE
YOU GUYS ARE PROBABLY HEARING
THAT FIRST HAND. AND TERMS OF
THE BACKLOG WE WERE LOOKING AT
THE BACKLOG OF THAT WAS THE
DISCUSSIONS WILL EARLIER. BUT
OF THE AUDITOR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS IS THERE. DO
YOU AGREE WITH ALL THE OTHERS
RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE ASK THE
QUESTION THAT WAY. YES I%
CERTAINLY DO AND SOME OF THESE
BACKLOGS AND THE RAMIFICATIONS
ON THE PARTICULAR CLUBS. OUR
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND AFFECTS
A LOT OF LIVES I MEAN. I THINK
THE AUDITOR'S DID A EXCELLENT
JOB THEY HIT IT HEAD ON ALL
EVERYTHING IS A 100% CORRECT.
DO YOU FEEL LIKE THERE'S
ANYTHING THAT'S NOT IN THE
AUDIT REPORT THAT WILL HELP. I
WOULD PROBABLY BE. HELPFUL AS
WELL OR DO YOU THINK THE AUDIT
WAS THOROUGH ENOUGH THAT IT. IT
OUTLINED A LOT OF
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE I THINK IT
OUTLINED MYSELF PERSON HE'S OUR
OWN. A LOT OF THE PROBLEMS BUT
I THINK THE BIGGEST PROBLEM.
BEING A BUSINESS OWNER MY
ENTIRE LIFE IS EFFICIENCY. AND
YOU CAN TAKE THE SAME AMOUNT OF
PEOPLE. AND YOU CAN MAKE THEM
EFFICIENT AND PROBABLY TRIPLE
WHAT GETS DONE WITH PROCEDURES
AND POLICIES. BUT SOMEBODY HAS
TO OVERSEE IT BECAUSE WHEN YOU
LAY DOWN THINGS TO BE DONE YOU
GO BACK IN TWO WEEKS IT CHANGES
SOMEHOW. SO SOMEBODY HAS TO BE
ON IT ALL THE TIME BUT I THINK
EFFICIENCY IS THE BIGGEST
PROBLEM YEAH AND I THINK THERE
WAS A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS FROM
LEGISLATORS A UP HERE CONNECT
GEARING TOWARDS THE EFFICIENCY
AND THE ACCOUNTABILITY AND
TRANSPARENCY. WITH MOVING
THROUGH PLACE YOU'RE GONNA
MENTION KYLE KIRK ON I WOULD
SAY THAT OF THAT OUR MEMBERSHIP
IN THE CGA WE CERTAINLY HERE A
LOT OF THAT THE TYPES OF THINGS
THAT THE AUTHORS MENTIONED
OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T HAVE BEEN
CITED EVERYONE OF THEIR-
APPLICATIONS I CAN TELL YOU
FROM MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
SOME OF THOSE THINGS WERE
CONSISTENT. I SAY OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE AUDIT.
IS CERTAINLY A GREAT START BUT
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT AND I
THINK ONE OF THE AUTHORS
REFERENCE TUTOR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS QUESTION BROADER FORCE
WAS THE OPPORTUNITY LOOK FOR
BEST PRACTICES ANOTHER SORT OF
LICENSING AGENCIES WHERE
THERE'S THE DEPARTMENT. OF
CONSUMER AFFAIRS OR IF IT'S AN
OUTSIDE JURISDICTION OR FOR
IT'S A SOME OF IT NEVADA FOR
EXAMPLE LOOKING FOR THAT BEST
PRACTICES ON HOW THEY HANDLE
LICENSING IN BACKGROUND CHECKS
AND EFFICIENCIES AND THREE
FIGURING I'M HERE OR CAN
MEASURE OURSELVES FOR
PERFORMANCE. I'D LIKE TO SEE
THAT CERTAINLY MAKES US FEEL A
LOT BETTER ABOUT THE WHOLE
PROCESS. AND UNDERSTAND WHAT
WE'RE GOING THROUGH. GOT IT
YOUR SAID. PLEASE THANK YOU UP
WE WERE SATISFIED WITH THE
AUDIT. ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT WERE MADE. AND YOU KNOW I
CAN JUST SPEAK FROM FROM A CITY
PERSPECTIVE THAT WE'VE HEARD
FROM CASINO SAID. YOU KNOW THE
TIME FRAME WHEN I WAS A LONG
TIME BUT I'M IT JUST REALLY
SADDENS ME THAT THEY WEREN'T
TAKING CARE OF THEIR CORE
OBJECT IS AND- INSTEAD YOU KNOW
PROBABLY WAS BEEN THEIR TIME TO
ANOTHER THING SO. SATISFIED
WITH THEM WITH THE AUDIT HAS
BROUGHT OUT. AND I'M SURE THERE
WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE HAPPY STAY
LONGER. THANK YOU YEAH I THINK
THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT A
LOT OF MEMBERS ARE FOCUSED ON
WAS HOW DO WE CREATE THOSE
EFFICIENCIES OR WE'RE LOOKING
AT THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS
OUTLINED BY THE AUDITOR WHAT
NEEDS TO BE DONE POSSIBLY
STATUTORILY OR WHAT WE NEED TO
DO PROBABLY EVEN AS WE MOVE
FORWARD WITH BUDGET DISCUSSIONS
FOR NEXT YEAR AND THE
ALLEGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE
MOVING FORWARD CENTER BRADFORD
I KNOW YOU HAVE QUESTIONS
PLEASE. THANK YOU FIRST LET ME
WALK ON MY MAYOR SIR YOUR TODAY
I'M JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED AS
TO THE REPORT IN THE REPORT
SUGGESTS THE CONTINUATION OF
FUNDING OF ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL
DESPITE THE SURPLUS IN THE
GAMBLING FINE IN THE FACT THAT
THE ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL THERE
STILL A BACKLOG SO DO YOU GUYS
SUPPORT. THE CONTINUATION OF
THESE ADDITIONAL POSITIONS
DESPITE NOT ACHIEVING. AGO ARE
GETTING THE BACKLOG REDUCE I
SHOULD SAY. WELL I THINK THAT
IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE BACKLOG
THEY'RE GONNA NEED THE BODIES
TO GET THAT DONE AND AS WE
TALKED ABOUT TODAY GETTING THAT
DONE AND GETTING THESE PEOPLE
LICENSES CRITICAL NOT ONLY TO
THE INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES BUT
THE CITIES THEY SUPPORT. SO I
THINK PART OF THAT PROCESS IS
ALLOWING THEM TO CLEAR THAT
BACKLOG I WAS HAPPY TO HEAR
COMMENTS EARLIER TODAY BY
MISSION MAZU THAT ONE OF THE
THINGS ARE LOOKING AT IS NOT
JUST HOW LONG IT TAKES TO DO
WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY DOING.
BUT TO ENSURE THAT THE PROCESS
IS THERE ENGAGED IN TRULY ARE
DIRECTED TOWARD WHAT IS
MEANINGFUL TO DETERMINE
SUITABILITY. SO I THINK ONCE
ONCE THEY WORK MAY BE GIVEN AN
OPPORTUNITY TO WORK THROUGH
THAT PROCESS AND CONTINUE THE
WORK THEY'RE DOING WILL BE A
GOOD TIME TO RE EVALUATE. WHAT
THEY'RE WHAT THEY'RE NEED IS
AND WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN GOING
FORWARD. THANK YOU WITHOUT WILL
MOVE TO CENTER MORE ON. I'M
SORRY PLEASE I JUST WANT AND
ADD TO THAT CERTAINLY KEEPING
THE PERSONNEL ON INTO WHAT
DIRECTOR SHE MATSU SAID WHERE
THEY'RE ACTUALLY WITH THE
RESULTS OF THE AUDIT PAYING
ATTENTION YOU KNOW DIRECTLY TO
HOW MUCH TIME FOLKS ARE
SPENDING ACTUALLY ON THE UP.
APPLICATION PROCESS YOU KNOW
LIKE TO GET A CHANCE TO USE THE
RESOURCES. INTO BENEFIT THE
INDUSTRY WHILE THEY HAVE A.
WEEDING CORROSION TO CONTINUE
THAT. YOU'RE ENCOURAGED TO
CONTINUE FUNDING ON THOSE
POSITIONS DESPITE TO SURPLUS
WOULD JUST BE WORLD SHE WOULD
DIRECT SOME OF THOSE FUNDS TO
DO SO I WOULD SAY I WOULD SAY
THIS AND WE'RE NOT REALLY IN A
POSITION TO POINT TO THAT I DO
THINK THE HAVING A LOOK AT
WHERE THE FILE ON THE FEES ARE
AND WHERE THE COSTS ARE GETTING
THIS MORNING ALIGNMENT WERE A
100% IN SUPPORT OF THAT WOULD
LIKE TO SEE IT AS WELL. MAN TO
THE QUESTIONS WELL. I DON'T
SUPPORT GIVING THEM MORE MONEY
I MEAN YOU DON'T REWARD AN
ORGANIZATION FOR NOT GETTING
THE JOB DONE. IF THEY'RE NOT
HANDLING NOW THEY'VE HAD A
COUPLE YEARS TO GET THIS DONE
SO IF THEY CAN HANDLE I SUGGEST
MOVING IT TO A DIFFERENT
ORGANIZATION. IT'S OBVIOUS IN
THE AUDITOR'S REPORT. I THINK A
ANOTHER DEPARTMENT WOULD DO A
BETTER JOB WITH THIS SO THAT'S
MY SUGGESTION. GOD I FEEL
WITHOUT. ALL THE POLICIES THAT
HAVE TO BE CHANGED AND TO MAKE
IT THE OPERATION MORE
EFFICIENT. FOR PEOPLE COMING
IN. YOU DON'T WANT TO JUST
BRING IN MORE PEOPLE. ON THE
SAME POLICIES AYE AYE I COULD
SEE GIVING FUNDING FOR MORE
PEOPLE ONCE ALL THE PROCESSES
AND PROCEDURES ARE IN PLACE AND
THEN YOU SEE IT OPERATING GREAT
NOW YOU CAN BRING IN A FEW MORE
PEOPLE. TRAINED THEM PUT THEM
IN WITH THE OTHER PEOPLE AND
THEN MOVE FORWARD BUT TO BRING
A MAN NOW. THE END OF THAT
WOULD BE NO HELP AT ALL. THANK
YOU YEAH NO I THINK THAT WAS
SOME OF THE DISCUSSION EARLIER
TO WRITE WAS THE EFFICIENCY.
AND ARE WE SHOWING THAT
EFFICIENCY AND I KNOW WILD I
KNOW THAT WAS HIGHLIGHTED IN
ONE OF. THE GRASS IN THE AUDIT
WAS BRINGING ADDITIONAL.
INDIVIDUALS ON BOARD BUT NOT
SEEING A GREAT REDUCTION IN. AN
ACTUAL CASE LOADS. AND NOT
SEEING THE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR
BILLABLE HOURS. SO WE'LL KEEP
THAT IN MIND MOVING FORWARD
WITH THAT I DO WANT TO MOVE TO
SOUTHERN MOROCCO AS A QUESTION
THANK YOU MUCH LATER ARE TRYING
TO ASK THOSE THE QUESTION IT
SOONER BRADFORD **** BUT FROM A
DIFFERENT ANGLE. DO YOU BELIEVE
THAT YOU ARE TO REFUND. WELL
NOT. IT WOULD BE HARD TO PIN
DOWN WHERE A REFUND WOULD COME
FROM BECAUSE EVERY PARTICULAR
CLUB STARTED KYLE DIDN'T MEAN
TO INTERRUPT MU BUT YOU TURN IN
SO MANY FORMS AND PAPERS OVER
THE YEARS I'VE BEEN IN THE CARD
ROOM BUSINESS IN SACRAMENTO FOR
TWENTY SEVEN HERE'S AN AD I
WOULDN'T EVEN START TO GO BACK.
FOR REFUND. HAD HOW ABOUT IT
THE REDUCTION GOING FORWARD.
WELL IT IT I MEAN THAT WOULD
HELP BUT IF IT WOULD HELP. I
WOULD DECLINE MY REFUND OR
LOWER PRICES IF THE EFFICIENCY
AND THE JOB WAS DONE THAT
NEEDED TO BE DONE I DON'T WANT
TO CUT ANYTHING BACK AND HAVE
IT GO BACKWARDS BECAUSE OF
FUNDING. SO THEN IN THAT REGARD
WHAT IS THE MOST COMMON
QUESTION THAT YOU'RE ASKED BY
THE AG AS YOU'RE GOING TO THE
PROCESS YOU KNOW YOU'RE WAITED
A COUPLE MONTHS AND ALSO NAY
CALLED ASK A QUESTION WE NEED
X. Y. WHAT WHAT IS THAT ONE OF
THE ASKING FOR THIS WELL KYLE A
HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT
BECAUSE HE HAS A CARD ROOM IN
WATSONVILLE THAT TWO PM FOR
YEARS TO GET A LICENSE. AND I
DON'T KNOW WHAT THE QUESTIONS
WERE. MY GOD JUST DON'T TALK
ABOUT TWO THINGS ONE ON A IN
GOING THROUGH THE AUDIT AND
SEEING SOME OF THE THINGS ARE
BROUGHT UP UNSERVED TIMING IN
PROCESS OR WHATEVER REFLECTING
ON MY OWN EXPERIENCE. I WOULD
SAY THAT THERE YOU KNOW WE
SOUGHT WAR OR DIFFERENT AUTHORS
TO ASK DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THE
PROCESS WASN'T NESTLE SAME NOW
EVERY APPLICATION WE HAD IS
DIFFERENT RIGHT IN EVERY
COURTROOM IN JURISDICTIONS A
DIFFERENT ORDINANCE AND WHAT
HAVE YOU SO THERE ARE
DIFFERENCES. BUT WASN'T REALLY
CLEAR THAT THERE IS SORT OF A
CHECKLIST OF A PROCESS TO GO
THROUGH THAT HAS CHANGED OVER
TIME I'VE BEEN LICENSE FOR OVER
A DECADE NOW SO THE PROCESS IS
CHANGED A LITTLE BIT. BUT IN
TERMS OF CONSISTENCY OF
QUESTIONS WHAT WAS ASKED
MATERIALS PROVIDED CERTAINLY
APPLICATION WAS CONSISTENT BUT
THEN THE FOLLOW ON WORK THAT
WAS DONE AFTER THAT BY THE I'M
COUNTY INVESTIGATOR THAT THE
PERSON WORKING THE FILE. WAS
SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT AND IT
WASN'T CLEAR AT ALL HOW IT WAS
ON THE TIME FOR TO WORK THROUGH
THE PROCESS IS CERTAINLY. IN IN
MY EXPERIENCE DIDN'T FOLLOW ANY
KIND OF PRESCRIBED DEADLINES SO
IT'S A UNIT TO JUST WE
CERTAINLY HEAR COMPLAINTS FROM
THE INDUSTRY ON THAT AND I
WOULD TELL YOU YOU KNOW WE
ROUTINELY WITH OUR- OUR OWN
EMPLOYEES HAVE TO CHASTISE THEM
TO RESPOND TO DEADLINES AND GET
THE INFORMATION OUT TO BE
ACCURATE AND WHAT THEY'RE
DOING. HELP THEM READ THROUGH
THE QUESTIONS TO GET TO WHAT
THE BUREAU IS ACTUALLY LOOKING
FOR SO SOME OF THAT FALLS ON
THE INDUSTRY AS WELL BUT FROM
MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND
SAYING OKAY IF I CAN FILTER
THROUGH. THE NOISE WAS IT
CONSISTENT WELL I WOULD SAY IT
WAS A LOT OF CLARITY
PREDICTABILITY AND ALL THAT
LACK OF PREDICTABILITY
DEFINITELY HINDERS SOMEONE'S
WILLINGNESS TO GO FORTH AND ONE
INVEST MORE TIME ENERGY MONEY.
IN THESE OPPORTUNITIES. ARE ON
THE STATE. THANK YOU AND. A
SETTLEMENT PATTERSON BROUGHT UP
FRIENDS BUT I HAVE BEEN
FASCINATED WITH THE CITY OF
HAWAIIAN GARDENS. THAT 76% OF
ITS REVENUES WOULD COME. FROM
ONE CARD CLUB AND THAT'S THAT'S
A LITTLE SCARY TO ME AND I CAME
UP IN A I SERVED ON BUDGET
FISCAL REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE FIVE
WHICH IS CORRECTIONS PUBLIC
SAFETY AND JUDICIARY AND I MY
REVIEW A LOT OF COMPREHENSIVE
ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORTS OF
CITY SCHOOLS EVERYBODY. AND SO
THIS WAS A VERY. SHOCKING KIND
OF. DISCOVERY IN SO DOING A
LITTLE RESEARCH ON THE GARDEN
CASINO I YOU KNOW GOOGLE THEM
AND THEY DON'T COME UP IS THE
POSTER CHILD OF VIRTUE EITHER.
SO THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE MORE
DICEY AND I'M WONDERING. WITH
YOUR ASSOCIATIONS ARE YOU SELF
REGULATING. ARE YOU AN
ORGANIZATION THAT SAYS WE'RE
NOT ONLY TAKING YOUR DUES BUT
IF YOU'RE STEPPING. BEYOND
CERTAIN BOUNDARIES WE WILL CALL
YOU ON IT. SO SPEAKING FOR THE
CJ WE SPEND A FAIR BIT OF TIME
ENCOURAGING COMPLIANCE WITHIN
YOUR ARE AMONG OUR MEMBERS IT'S
IT IS A WIDE RANGE OF MEMBERS
ANYWHERE FROM THE LARGEST CARD
FROM THE STATE TO HONOR SEVEN
TABLES THE COMMERCE CASINO ALL
THE WAY DOWN TO ONE TO TWO
TABLE CARD ROOMS. WHEN WE HAVE
OUR ANNUAL MEETINGS WE PRESSED
FOR COMPLIANCE AND EDUCATION WE
CERTAINLY ON A MORE NOT A
POLICING BODY BUT- DEFINITELY
BELIEVE THAT HEY LISTEN. THE
MORE THAT WE STAY IN LINE THE
BETTER IT IS FOR THE INDUSTRY
AND BETTER IT IS FOR EVERYONE
OUT THERE. SO. IN A CERTAINLY
THE INDUSTRY'S RAISE AWARENESS
SOMETHINGS LIKE TITLE THIRTY
ONE COMPLIANCE NON BANK SECRECY
ACT. MANY OF YOU KNOW
CERTAINLY. HOW WE PRESSED FOR
PROBLEM GAMBLING GAMBLING
EDUCATION THE USE OF THE
RESOURCES OUT THERE FRIDAY
PEACHY AND OTHERS. ARE REALLY
ENCOURAGING OUR MEMBERS TO. YOU
KNOW PLEASE STAY IN COMPLIANCE
AND FRANKLY TO THEIR JOB. THEIR
PART OF THE PROCESS. THANK YOU
THANK YOU VERY MUCH THANK YOU
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER
PATTERSON. JUST A VERY QUICK
OVERVIEW OF THE CALIFORNIA
STATE AUDITOR SUMMER OF RECORD
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS. AND
BY THE WAY I THINK YOU REALLY
LOOK. SO THE UNDER RECOMMENDS
ACTIVITY BY THE LEGISLATURE. BY
THE BUREAU BY THE BEER IN THE
COMMISSION AND IF YOU LOOK AT
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND I
JUST. QUICKLY POINT TO IT GOOD
VERY QUICKLY THE LEGISLATURE
SHOULD NOT APPROVE ANY REQUEST
TO MAKE PERMANENT FUNDING FOR
THOSE THIRTY TWO ADDITIONAL
POSITIONS SO THERE'S SOME
FAIRLY CLEAR. THAT ADVICE HERE
DELAYS IN THE UNNECESSARY USE
OF RESOURCES THE LEGISLATURE
SHOULD AMEND THE GAMBLING ACT.
TO ALLOW THE COMMISSION TO TAKE
ACTION AT ITS REGULAR LICENSING
MEETINGS RATHER THAN REQUIRING
TO HOLD EVIDENTIAL HEARINGS I
THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING.
STREAMLINING EFFORT WITH
WITHOUT THE- ELIMINATING THE
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE THAT
YOU LICENSE APPROPRIATELY. THE
BEER SHOULD ESTABLISH A FORMAL
PLAN. TO COMPLETE ITS REVIEW OF
THE REMAINING PENDING
APPLICATIONS LET'S GET THIS.
BACKLOG COMPLETED THE BEER
SHOULD ESTABLISH AND IMPLEMENT
POLICIES THAT REQUIRE STAFF TO
PROPERLY AND EQUITABLY REPORT
AND BILL THE TIME. THE DAY
EXPAND CONDUCTING SUCH
INVESTIGATIONS AND TO BETTER
ALIGN THE REVENUE IN THE
GAMBLING FUND WITH THE COSTS OF
THOSE ACTIVITIES THAT THE FUND
SUPPORTS THE BEER IN THE
COMMISSION SHOULD CONDUCT COST
ANALYSIS. ACTIVITIES AND THEY
SHOULD ADJUST THEIR FEES TO
REFLECT THE ACTUAL COST. OF THE
OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES THEY
PERFORM I'M ASSUMING YOU CONCUR
WITH THESE GENERAL. OF
RECOMMENDATIONS. YES YES AND I
THINK TO THE MEMBERS HERE THIS
PRESENTS PRETTY GOOD. PATHWAY
TO YEAH GETTING TO SOMEBODY'S A
DEFINITELY A GREAT START OKAY
YOU SEE THAT THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. HEARING AND SEEING NO MORE
QUESTIONS FROM THE DíAS THANK
YOU FOR BEING HERE THANK YOU
FOR PROVIDING TESTIMONY WITH
THAT WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND
MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE
WHICH IS PUBLIC COMMENT SEVERAL
COME OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME IF
YOU'RE AFFILIATED WITH THAT
ORGANIZATION PLEASE STATE THAT
IF YOU'RE NOT AFFILIATED WITH
THE ORGANIZATION YOU CAN
MENTION THE I COUNTY YOU RESIDE
IN PLACE AGAIN. JOHN LEVEL I
REPRESENT PLAYERS POKER CLUB IN
VENTURA ALSO ANOTHER POINT IN
MY LIFE I WAS CHIEF DEPUTY LA
CITY CONTROLLER SO HAVE SOME ON
THE GROUND EXPERIENCE WITH
AUDITS AND I CAN TELL YOU BASED
ON THAT EXPERIENCE THE AUDIT
YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU REVEALS
FUNDAMENTAL DYSFUNCTION MISTER
PATTERSON GOT IT RIGHT WHEN HE
TALKED ABOUT THE COGNIZABLE ARM
THAT IS BEING DONE TO
BUSINESSES AND TO CITIES AND WE
BELIEVE I BELIEVE THAT THE
MAYOR OF GUARDINO HAS IT RIGHT.
THAT THIS ENTIRE FUNCTION
SHOULD BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO
THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER
AFFAIRS WHERE THEY HAVE
EXPERTISE. AND EXPERIENCE WITH
THE LICENSING FUNCTION. THANK
YOU. MAY I ASK IF THERE'S
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS.
HEARING AND SEEING NINE OF RIO.
WORKING THEIR WAY TO THE
MICROPHONE. GOOD AFTERNOON MY
NAME IS LORETTA TOOL T. E. L.
L. AND I AM WITH TO A LAW I'M
ALSO HERE ON BEHALF OF CIVIL
THE BANNING SEND YOU AN IS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND ONE OF
THE THINGS YOU ASKED EARLIER TO
THE PANEL WAS SO WHAT IS THE
REPORT TRIGGER IS THERE
ANYTHING THAT. THAT CAUSES YOU
TO THINK THAT WE NEED TO DO
SOMETHING WRONG REGARDING THE
REPORT I ONE OF THE THINGS OF
THE TRIBES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT
IN PARTICULAR THOSE TRIBES THAT
ARE PAYING INTO THE STF THE
SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION FUND IS
THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE AUDIT
ABOUT. OVERSIGHT AND
ACCOUNTABILITY ENTRANCE
TRANSPARENCY AS TO WHERE THOSE
FUNDS ARE HOW THEY'RE BEING
EXPENDED AND SO WHAT WE THINK
IS TRIGGERED AUTOMATICALLY IS
THE DESIRE TO FOLLOW UP WITH A
FINANCIAL AUDIT ON ACTIVITIES
AND WE WERE VERY HAPPY TO SEE
THIS MORNING ABOUT ANOTHER
HEARING THAT YOU HAVE SCHEDULED
ON AUGUST TWENTY EIGHT. ABOUT
POTENTIAL ISSUES THAT NEED TO
HAVE AN AUDIT AND WE THINK THAT
INHERENTLY IN THIS REPORT THE
SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION FUND HAS
BEEN RAISED THE ISSUES ABOUT
ACCOUNTABILITY HAVE BEEN RAISED
AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME
SORT OF FINANCIAL
ACCOUNTABILITY. AUDIT DONE ON
STF THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IT'S
TIME I ASK THERE'S ADDITIONAL
PUBLIC COMMENT.OKAY PROBABLY
GONNA PEOPLE LINE UP IF THEY
WANT TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT
PLEASE. SUSAN JOHNSON EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE CALIFORNIA
NATION'S INDIAN GAMING
ASSOCIATION I WOULD JUST LIKE
TO SAY AND DID A- TO LORETTA.
THIS IS STATION FEELS THE SAME
WAY PAGE FIFTY FIVE OF THE
AUDIT. TOUCHES ON STF AND WE
HAVE SEVERE CONCERNS THANK YOU
THANK YOU. RIGHT IT'S TIME WE
ASK IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL
PUBLIC COMMENT. HEARING AND
SEEING NINE HIGH WILL RETURN IT
BACK TO MEMBERS ON THE DíAS
OKAY WITH THAT I'M GONNA GO
AHEAD AND SEE IF ANYONE HAS ANY
CONCLUDING REMARKS IF NOT I
WILL PROVIDE SOME CONCLUDING
COMMENTS. RIGHT SAY MAN. SO I
WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR AN
INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION TODAY I
THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE. ON THE
IMPORTANCE OF ENSURING THAT THE
BUREAU OF GAMBLING CONTROL THE
CALIFORNIA GAMBLING CONTROL
COMMISSIONER EFFICIENTLY AND
EFFECTIVELY CARRYING OUT THEIR
STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES
RELATED TO LICENSING AND
REGULATED CARD ROOMS IN
CALIFORNIA. THE OTHER REPORT
CLEARLY IDENTIFIES CHANGES THAT
ARE NEEDED AT THE BUREAU ON THE
COMMISSION TO IMPROVE THEIR
PROCESSES FOR LICENSING AND
REGULATING THE CARDROOM
INDUSTRY. I VIEW THIS REPORT AS
A POSITIVE STEP TOWARD
IDENTIFYING DEFICIENCIES AND
FINDING CONCRETE SOLUTIONS THAT
WILL ELIMINATE DELAYS AND
INCREASED UNIFORMITY AND THE
LICENSING PROCESS. AND ENSURE
THE FEES CHARGED APPLICANTS ARE
REASONABLE AND FAIR. AS CHAIR
OF THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT
COMMITTEE I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT
THE COMMITTEE WILL CONTINUE O
MONITOR THE BUREAU COMMISSIONS
EFFORTS IN IMPLEMENTING THE OUT
OF RECOMMENDATIONS. I'D LIKE TO
THANK MY ASSEMBLY AND SENATE
COLLEAGUES FOR THEIR
INFORMATIVE DIALOGUE HERE TODAY
I'D LIKE TO TAKE SENATOR DODD
AND ASSEMBLY MEMBER. GRAY FOR
THIS JOINT INFORMATIONAL
HEARING. I ALSO WANT TO THANK
THE STATE AUDITOR AND HER STAFF
FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTION TODAY AS
WELL AS THEIR THOROUGH WORK ON
THE END UP ON IT AND FOR THEIR
THOUGHTFUL RECOMMENDATIONS.
ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND
THANK THE REPRESENTATIVES FROM
THE BUREAU OF GAMBLING CONTROL
ON THE CALIFORNIA GAMBLING
CONTROL COMMISSION I THANK YOU
FOR YOUR ATTENDANCE AND
TESTIMONY TODAY. THAT FINALLY I
WANT TO THE COVER OF INDUSTRY
REPRESENTATIVES FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY AND FOR THE RECORD I
DO WANT TO THANK EACH OF THE-
MEMBERS THAT WERE HERE TODAY
THAT WAS DINNER ASSEMBLY MEMBER
RATE CENTER MORE LOCKED IN YOUR
GONZALEZ ASSEMBLY MEMBER RUBIO
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BONTA ASSEMBLY
MEMBER COOLEY. SENATOR ARCHER
LET US SENATOR JONES
ASSEMBLYMEMBER AGUIAR-CURRY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER REGINALD BYRON
JONES SAWYER IN YEAR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER LACKEY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER GALLAGHER ASSEMBLY
MEMBER RIVAS SENATOR NELSON.
SOMEONE MEMBER VOEPEL ASSEMBLY
COOPER SENATOR BRADFORD IN SOME
MEMBER. SAID WHAT THAT WE WILL
GO AHEAD AND CONCLUDE THIS
HEARING THANK YOU