NEW MEXICO GAMING CONTROL BOARD
One-Day Regular Board Meeting
April 15, 2008
MINUTES
The Board of Directors of the New Mexico Gaming Control Board (Board) conducted a one-day Regular Board meeting at Gaming Control Board Headquarters, 4900 Alameda Blvd. NE. Chairman David Norvell called the meeting to order at approximately 9:05 a.m., on Tuesday, April 15, 2008. Due notice was published in accordance with the Gaming Control Act and the New Mexico Gaming Control Board Open Meetings Resolution and Chairman David Norvell declared a quorum. Present were: Commissioner Arnold Rael, Commissioner Don Dutton, Chairman David Norvell, Commissioner Demesia Padilla and Commissioner James Peterson. Executive Director John Monforte, Deputy Executive Director Greg Saunders and General Counsel Frank Baca were also in attendance.
· Approval of Agenda
Chairman Norvell asked Mr. Monforte if there were any changes to the agenda. Mr. Monforte noted there were no official changes to the agenda but all the PNG items would be put together for presentation during closed session.
1 Closed Executive Session. Chairman Norvell entertained a motion to go into closed executive session. (Closed pursuant to section 10-15-1(H), NMSA 1978): D. Padilla. Second: D. Dutton. Vote: 5-0. A roll call vote was taken and all voted to go into closed executive session: A. Rael, D. Dutton D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
2 On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 at approximately 1:40 p.m., roll call was taken. Present were: Commissioner Arnold Rael, Commissioner Don Dutton, Chairman David Norvell, Commissioner Demesia Padilla and Commissioner James Peterson.
With quorum being present, Chairman Norvell certified the only matters that were discussed in closed executive session were tribal matters, licensing matters, issuance of finding of suitability on key and affiliated persons, pending administrative and enforcement matters, pending and threatened litigation and limited personnel matters as detailed in the agenda.
3 Board Chairman Announcements.
· Board Meeting Schedule:
Tuesday, May 20, 2008 – Albuquerque, NM
Tuesday, June 17, 2008 – Farmington, NM
4 Pending Administrative and Enforcement Actions
· Consideration of approval of Settlement Agreement; SunRay Park & Casino; Cause No. 07-039-EA. Commissioner Rael moved to approve the settlement agreement with SunRay Park & Casino and that all matters in this case be dismissed. Second: D. Dutton. There was no discussion from the Board or members of the audience regarding this issue. Vote: 5-0. All voted in favor of the motion: A. Rael, D. Dutton, D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
· Consideration of approval of Settlement Agreement; IGT, Inc. Cause No. 07-046-EA. Commissioner Padilla moved to approve the settlement agreement and the motion and order to dismiss. Second: A. Rael. There was no discussion from the Board or members of the audience regarding this issue. Vote: 5-0. All voted in favor of the motion: A. Rael, D. Dutton, D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
5 Licensing
Renewals of Gaming Licenses for 2008
a American Legion Post #25 (Clovis, NM)
b. American Legion Post #77 (Logan, NM)
c. Atronic Americas (Scottsdale, AZ)
d. B.P.O. Elks #1717 (Artesia, NM)
e, B.P.O. Elks #1897 (Alamogordo, NM)
f. Loyal Order of Moose #1517 (Albuquerque, NM)
g. Loyal Order of Moose #2080 (Chaparral, NM)
Commissioner Rael moved to approve the renewals for the 2008 gaming licenses with no conditions for those listed as read by Chairman Norvell. Second: D. Dutton. There was no discussion from the Board or members of the audience regarding this issue. Vote: 5-0. All voted in favor of the motion: A. Rael, D. Dutton, D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
· Miscellaneous Licensing Matters:
a. New Application for PNG Holdings, Racetrack License
Commissioner Dutton moved to approve the gaming operator license for PNG Holdings LLC to operate Black Gold Casino at Zia Park subject to the following:
1. Closing of the PNG holding Acquisition of Penn National Gaming Inc. and
2. Payment of all licensing and investigative fees and cost arising out of fees of the gaming license application within 30 days of receipt of the final accounting of such fees and costs from the Board or its designee, and
- Execution of the settlement agreement between the NMGCB, Penn National and PNG Holding as to gaming machine licensee fees.
Second: J. Peterson
Chairman Norvell asked if there was any discussion from the Board.
Discussion:
Commissioner Padilla: I would like to get some clarification on the link from Penn National to on-line casino sites?
John Finamore, Penn National: I will stand for any questions in regards to that.
Chairman asked if they preferred to be in closed session for that.
Mr. Finamore: Open session is fine.
Commissioner Padilla: My questions are: do you have any, are you receiving any benefits from the links? Do you have any ownership interest on the on-line casino? Also, I was made aware today that even the link to the horseracing is not legal in the State of NM.
Mr. Finamore: I think I can answer your question in two fold here. Actually I believe what you are referring to is account wagering and account wagering has been legal in NM in I can’t tell you how long. But with account wagering in NM it’s legal on site. In other words if you want to put $500 in an account for you yourself to place wagers off of that is legal and that’s by statute. That’s the form of gaming that I guess you’d say account wagering that is legal in NM and I believe what you’re referring to is it says account wagering on the web-site for Penn Gaming and actually shows NM as a track that it is legal at. As far as internet gaming no, two fold in your question, no we do not receive any funding from that nor do we allow internet gaming in NM. This goes back to history with TVG and when TVG first started their product it’s actually US wide horseracing, viewing channel as youbet.com is. People outside of the State of NM can wager on our products but people within the State of NM cannot wager on a product and they’re made aware if you were to link up, call, let’s say you got past the link, then once you gave your address, then it’s going to kick you out, you cannot wager from the State of NM, internet wagering.
Commissioner Padilla: Is that on the horseracing or is that if I follow your links to the, cause I can go from your link not directly but a few little clicks and later find myself with a menu of probably twenty or thirty off shore casino sites. What’s your association with that link?
Mr. Finamore: I’ll have to refer to someone else on that link, I can’t answer that question.
Mr. Blackburn: I don’t think that, if there’s an issue we’re more than willing to look at this and report back, if there’s a problem because obviously we want to follow the statutes, but I think that once they go to a certain link and they have to go for an account they have to be able to establish residency, etc through those other links so that would preclude them from doing that in violation of our because this came up with TVG, this came up, I was looking for Julian Luna because we just had talked to him about this before, this came up previously when TVG had their sites here with the racing commission and actually some of the tracks were doing that and they were allowing that for a while but then it was shut down. But it was the difference between the internet gaming and the account wagering and that was the difference and I think if you go that link it talks about account wagering.
Commission Dutton: If I were to amend my motion and I would maybe submit some language like this in addition to the conditions that I just mentioned that within X number of days of written notification that neither Penn National nor PNG Holding directly or indirectly would benefit from any prohibited online wagering. Would that, how would you respond to that. Here is exactly what the wording would be that subject to submitting within blank day’s written document that neither Penn National nor PNG Holding is directly or indirectly benefitting from any prohibited on-line wagering.
Mr. Blackburn: Absolutely, we have no objection to that and we can work with the staff if there is some issue, that’s fine.
Commissioner Padilla: You all seem a little surprised about this second link. Is that a true statement on the one that takes you straight to the off-shore casinos?
Chairman Norvell: Mr. Saunders can you add any enlightenment?
Mr. Saunders: The only enlightenment that I could possibly provide would be the demonstration that we would have in the conference room next door where I have a site up and running with a link out to those to show and demonstrate where those go.
Chairman: If this language is adopted.
Commissioner Padilla: I’d feel comfortable with that.
Commissioner Dutton: I would amend my motion. Let me withdraw that motion. Second: A. Rael.
Commissioner Dutton moved to approve the gaming operator license for PNG Holdings LLC to operate Black Gold Casino at Zia Park subject to the following:
1. Closing of the PNG holding Acquisition of Penn National Gaming Inc.
2. Payment of all licensing and investigative fees and cost arising out of fees of the gaming license application within 30 days of receipt of a final accounting for such fees and costs from the Board or its designee, and
3. Submit within (90 days from closing) written documentation that neither Penn National or PNG Holdings is directly or indirectly benefitting from any prohibited on-line wagerings, and
The approval of and execution of the settlement agreement between NMGCB, PNG Holdings and Penn National as to the gaming machine licensing fees in New Mexico.
Second: J. Peterson
Mr. Blackburn: The vote is contingent upon all these happening forthwith I assume. I didn’t know what your motion was.
Commissioner Dutton: Subject to the closing of PNG Holdings acquisition of Penn National Gaming Inc.
Mr. Blackburn: What we want to do is we want.
Frank Schreck, Regulatory Counsel Penn National: I wasn’t sure on the newest condition on PNG Holding to submit that letter to you. It sounded like it was within 90 days after closing, I don’t think we want to have a condition, we’ll submit as of today.
Mr. Blackburn: We want to be able to move forward obviously with the closing as soon as possible.
Commissioner Padilla: The sooner you get that to us, it will get corrected. If you want to bring it to us in 10 days.
Mr. Schreck: We’ll bring it sooner.
Frank Baca: Commissioner Dutton, if we could set a period of time or a date, either by May 30th or May 31st, or sometime before the date of closing.
Chairman Norvell: Substitute motion from 90 days from closing to May 31st.
Mr. Blackburn: We can sign the settlement agreement and release today and I have no objection to that language. There was one other issue that I had talked to Mr. Monforte about and I think that the Board recognized when we were here before concerning findings of suitability on other individuals but I think we all understand where we were at on those. That is going to be resolved also but the language that I have just been shown that included two sentences that I had not submitted before is fine with us. We have no objection to that.
Commission Dutton: For the record the language simply is stating that the New Mexico Gaming Control Board statutes and rules do not seem to contemplate a change in ownership such as the Penn National acquisition by-out, etc.
Vote: 5-0. All voted in favor of the motion: A. Rael, D. Dutton, D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
· Miscellaneous Licensing Matters
b. Consideration of final 50% Acquisition of Atronic Group of Companies by GTECH Corporation.
Commissioner Dutton moved to grant the approval of the acquisition of the final 50% of Atronic Group of Companies by GTECH Corporation. Second: J. Peterson. There was no discussion. Vote: 5-0. All voted in favor of the motion: A. Rael, D. Dutton, D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
c. Consideration of Hearing Officer’s Recommendation; Gaming Control Board vs. Deloss Craig Smith; Cause No. 07-014-EA and Gaming Control Board vs. Wayne Doug Thompson; Cause No. 07-015-EA.
Discussion:
Mr. Blackburn: We submitted some documents for your review. Both Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson could not be present today. I just wanted to indicate that, obviously they were present for every hearing. Mr. Smith has a family emergency and Mr. Thompson is unable to attend due to the new job that he received. I just did not want you to think that they were not present in the audience today that they did not take an active participation throughout these proceedings. Other than that all the arguments were presented to you.
Commissioner Padilla: Is his job in the gaming industry.
Mr. Blackburn: No.
Chairman Norvell: Is there any further discussion?
Commissioner Dutton: I would move to accept the recommendation of the hearing officer in the case New Mexico Gaming Control Board vs. Smith and Thompson.
Commissioner Padilla: Weren’t we going to hear from Peggy?
Peggy Hardwick, Senior Staff Counsel: The hearing officer in making his recommendation does state as part of his relatively short suspension that he’s recommending that the failure to report was not a malicious, purposeful and intentional intent to avoid their employment and administrative responsibilities and Mr. Blackburn made a great deal of that in his post hearing to the Board. I’d like to point out that the hearing officer himself made some findings that were wholly inconsistent with that. Further, on in the recommendation on page 15 of 16, the hearing officer finds or states Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson took the change that the surveillance failure would never be found and they got caught that suggests a deliberate and intentional intent to hide something from the Board that they took the chance the surveillance failure would never be found and they got caught. The hearing officer further stated that he believes that Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson in their failure to report did so because of concerns it might cause with their employer and perhaps more directly with Mr. Blanchard given the formal pending complaint relating to the Roger Marline incident. So, despite the fact that the hearing officer earlier stated that it was not malicious, purposeful or intentional he makes two subsequent statements that seem to indicate that it is. I think the record in this case clearly shows.
Commissioner Dutton: Pardon me just a moment, Peggy, you’re not addressing the last minute motions that Mr. Blackburn filed because he did not present those and we’re really not going to do that unless you have something that pertains to the motion I’m ready to accept the recommendation.
Peggy Hardwick: I apologize, I misunderstood. I thought that I was being given my fifteen minute opportunity to make argument to the Board so if that is not the case I will simply stand on the record.
Commissioner Peterson: I think she should have fifteen minutes if she wants to but not to go over the motion, she can’t.
Commissioner Dutton: If there’s something about the hearing officer’s recommendations.
Peggy Hardwick: That’s what I was discussing was the hearing officer’s recommendation.
Commissioner Dutton: I apologize; I misunderstood what you had said to being with. I thought you were addressing the motion.
Peggy Hardwick: No, I’m addressing the hearing officer’s recommendation where he made some inconsistent statements concerning the intent of these individuals. I think that his findings of fact are inconstant with any finding that this was not intentional and not an attempt to avoid responsibility an active attempt to cover up this violation by Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson and without going into too much detail because the record is voluminous I would point specifically to the findings of fact 9-14, 15 through 17 which discussed Mr. Pesina’s missing of the drop and the fact that Mr. Thompson first directed Mr. Gardner to write it up in a corrective active form which is the standard operating procedure of the Downs and Mr. Gardner was subsequently directed by Mr. Smith and Thompson to delete that disciplinary action so that there was no record of it and there would be no paper trail that there had been a violation or that Mr. Pesina had been disciplined. All of the witnesses that testified on this and there were four or five of them, testified that they were very surprised that there was no written discipline, that this would have been standard thing for such a serious violation. Mr. Pesina himself testified that he fully expected to be fired instead they deleted the disciplinary action. I would further point to testimony and evidence that Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson left the tapes in circulation knowing because they were told by Mr. Gardner that they would be recorded over after thirty-one days. These tapes would have been recorded over on or about August 14th. Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson first became aware that Mr. Gardner was making his allegations of a cover-up on August 10, 2006 so that would have left them with a window of approximately four days in which had they fully investigate had they wanted to report this matter to the Board they could have gone and looked for those video tapes in circulation, they never did that which one would have expected a reasonable manager to do. Despite the fact that Mr. Blanchard specifically directed them to get everything over to the Board those were there words that was their directive from Mr. Blanchard. They gave one paragraph statements that made no mention of the fact that surveillance had failed to capture the drop, they admittedly backdated their written statements to the Board to make it appear as though those statements had been written very shortly after the actual violation as opposed to being written in mid-August when they were attempting to cover-up their cover-up I believe the evidence shows that. In their interviews with Board agents they made numerous and misleading and inconsistent statements I think one of the most striking that they stuck with through the testimony itself at their hearing was that they believed that the drop had only failed to capture one machine and therefore that machine since it had not been dropped it was not a violation and I think the testimony of all of the uninterested witness in this case shows that that story is preposterous because the drop doesn’t record one machine at a time. The drop records banks of machines and yet they stuck with that story. Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson they both changed numerous aspects of their statements during the course of their interview with Vickie Duran and Mark Radosevich and so the inconsistent statements to the Board clearly are an intent to mislead the Board and evade responsibility. I believe that the hearing officer, to the extent he suggests that there was no intent to mislead agents of the Board or no intentional cover-up is incorrect. I believe his own findings of fact don’t even support that conclusion. I believe that all the evidence would have supported a finding that would have upheld charge 2 of the complaint which was misleading agents of the Board and obstructing and impeding activities of Board agents by giving misinformation and hiding evidence and destroying evidence or at least standing passively by while evidence would have been destroyed in the form of the video tapes and I believe that the evidence that was presented in the five day hearing is more than adequate to warrant the suspension of these individuals licenses or revocation but certainly a long suspension of their licenses.
Mr. Blackburn: The Board I know is required to go back and look at the entire transcript, read everything that happened in this case. I know that previously having sat on the Board that sometimes the executive director would ask each person to certify that they have done that. This was a long and contentious hearing process that started in March of last year. The hearing officer had numerous hearings, numerous motions to dismiss and then we took five days of testimony the week before Christmas, even having gone over on a Friday afternoon in a snow storm to do an onsite inspection of the machines at the Downs at Albuquerque. There’s points in the recommendation where the hearing officer basically goes on and Ms. Hardwick didn’t read the rest of the statement where in the recommendation it said “this is the situation where the Downs through Mr. Smith in self-reporting first got a pat on the back from the Board through Agent Sanchez which then rose to a level of a written warning and finally was memorialized into a formal complaint after all if you get too many speeding tickets, does your insurance go up? Similarly does it appear to the owners and the Board that Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson are not running a tight ship so let’s just be….” The hearing officer heard everything, the hearing officer made his recommendations that’s in front of you now, we submitted numerous findings of fact, conclusions of law there was written closing arguments and I think that’s in front of you. I think the hearing officer basically said that he had never been in a hearing of this magnitude, it was an issue of first impression that there were issues that occurred in here that he had never contemplated before and that he basically with all due respect did the best he could and threw it back to the Board. We could sit here and go on for days about the testimony of all of these individuals but you’ve read the record and I just rely upon what went on.
Commissioner Dutton: Mr. Blackburn I’d like to comment that all of the Board members did receive several volumes of the transcripts as well as the exhibits and we went through those. And again, for the public and this will be public record, the hearing officer in addition to other things recommended a suspension of the licenses of Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson for a period of eighteen months with credit for time served which is approximately twelve months so the licenses will be suspended for an additional six month period of time or however much is necessary for the eighteen months. The entire document will be available later and so my motion is to accept the recommendation of the hearing officer with respect to Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson. Second: J. Peterson.
Discussion:
Commissioner Peterson: Do you like the eighteen months, Arnold:
Commissioner Rael: I don’t really like the eighteen months, but they’ve already served twelve months and I feel that is sufficient. I feel that twelve months is sufficient but then we have to vote on it.
Commissioner Padilla: I don’t think that the eight months is really what they’ve served since they were, as I understand, receiving compensation during that time, so it’s almost as if they were getting paid for being on vacation because they didn’t suffer any economic consequences from their actions.
Commissioner Peterson: I think they’re probably suffering it now.
Commissioner Padilla: Now that they don’t have jobs. One of them anyway.
Commissioner Dutton: I also think that the fact of the matter that this was brought to the public’s attention, that the gentlemen’s names appeared in the newspaper on several accounts, is in fact a punishment of sorts as I mentioned earlier in our closed session what concerned me originally was I wasn’t sure that the hearing officer understood for our process to work, for the Board to work, for our regulatory scheme to work we need self-reporting and the hearing officer paid a great deal of attention to the fact that Smith and Thompson self-reported as if it were to ameliorate or mitigate in some way the actions that they did or alleged to have done. I re-read and re-read the hearing officer’s report and that is my conclusion today what concerned me was is the action, the enforcement action sufficient enough so that Mr. Thompson and Mr. Smith if they were presented with the same situation, factual situation would they behave differently than they did or if someone, a licensee who were in the position of Mr. Smith or Mr. Thompson had that occasion to arise would they act differently based upon what occurred to Smith and Thompson and without addressing the first part I will address the second. I think that this type of public censuring if you will is ample punishment for what was done and that’s not to take what they did lightly but I think that it will stop and prevent, stop to people to have a second thought if they’re confronted with a similar fact situation.
Chairman Norvell: I agree with the recommendation of the hearing officer. The only problem that I’ve had with this case from the outset was born out by the hearing officer’s of fact No. 24 where he said that on July 21, 2006, Mr. Thompson’s office, Mr. Gardner was asked by Mr. Smith what they should do concerning the July 14, 2006 surveillance failure by Mr. Pesina and Mr. Gardner’s suggestion was that it was a can of worms and they might not want it opened and Mr. Gardner further suggested that it was nearly seven years the Board had only asked twice to see the tapes of the drop and that if the tapes remained in the regular cycle they would be recorded over in the normal course of the tapes thirty-one day rotation and of course what happened after that is that Mr. Smith and Mr. Thompson did exactly what Mr. Gardner suggested and got a get out of jail free card.
Chairman Norvell: Any further discussion?
Commissioner Peterson: The length of time does bother me. They’ve had significant experience already. I think its an example of anybody else that wanted the same circumstance, I don’t now that another four or six months of that is going to gain anything more out of it. They have a black mark already. I’d be inclined to not add that extra six months. I’ll make a motion to that affect. See if we get a second.
Commissioner Rael: It bothers me very much. I would second that.
Commissioner Padilla: Don’t we have to vote on the first motion?
Commissioner Dutton: Mr. Peterson, with all due respect I would not accept the.
Commissioner Peterson: Excuse me I’m looking for a second to my motion.
Commissioner Rael: I second it.
Commissioner Dutton: It has to be an amendment to my motion and I with due respect do not accept the amendment to my motion.
Commissioner Peterson: Since it’s up for discussion, feel free to talk.
Chairman Norvell: I think that you would have to consider Mr. Dutton’s motion first and then if it failed then I think you could then make a motion. Is there any further discussion on Mr. Dutton’s motion?
Chairman Norvell: All those in favor of the motion. Roll Call Vote:
A. Rael, No
D. Dutton, Yes
D. Norvell, Yes
D. Padilla Yes
J. Peterson, No
Vote: 3 yes, 2 no,
The motion to adopt the hearing officer’s recommendation is adopted.
- Issuance of Findings of Suitability on Key and Affiliated Persons
1. New Application
a. James N. Damon – Assistant Gaming Manager – American Legion Post #7 (Carlsbad, NM)
b. Patsy Jones – Assistant Gaming Manager – American Legion Post #7 (Carlsbad, NM)
c. Jack Bryan – Gaming Manager – B.P.O. Elks #969 (Roswell, NM)
d. Jesse Alvarez – Gaming Manager – B.P.O. Elks #1244 (Clovis, NM)
e. Mark Allen – Gaming Manager – Fraternal Order of Eagles #4101 (Alamogordo, NM)
f. Christopher D. Weaver – Casino Services Manager – IGT, Inc. (Las Vegas, NV)
g. Jeffrey H. Aronson – Principal – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
h. Peter L. Briger – Principal – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
i. William B. Doniger – Board of Managers – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
j. Wesley R. Edens – Principal – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
k. Mark T. Gallogly - Principal – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
l. Robert I. Kauffman – Principal – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
m. Randal A. Nardone – Principal – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
n. Michael E. Novogratz – Principal – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
o. Steven Price – Board of Managers – Penn National Gaming, Inc. (Wyomissing, PA)
p. Ann M. McGovern – General Manager – Ruidoso Downs Racetrack & Casino (Ruidoso, NM)
2. Renewal Key Persons
a. Lauralyn L. McCarthy – President and Member – New Mexico Gaming, L.L.C. (Albuquerque, NM)
b. Bruce M. Rimbo – President – Ruidoso Downs Racetrack & Casino (Ruidoso, NM)
3. Key Person Update:
a. Taurino J. Trevino – Assistant Gaming Manager – American Legion Post #7 (Carlsbad, NM)
Commissioner Padilla read the renewals listed and moved to grant the renewals of the gaming licenses for 2008 with no conditions. Second: J. Peterson. There was no discussion by the Board and there was no one present to address the Board on these issues. Vote: 5-0. All voted in favor of the motion: A. Rael, D. Dutton, D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
6 Policy & Rulemaking Matters:
Consideration of Approval of Internal Control Procedures.
Commissioner Rael moved to approve the delegation of authority to determine whether proposed internal control procedures meet or exceed the minimum internal control standards.
Commissioner Dutton: Delegates to the Executive Director?
Commissioner Rael: That is correct.
Commissioner Dutton: I would second that.
There was no discussion. Vote: 5-0. All voted in favor of the motion: A. Rael, D. Dutton, D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
7 Public Comments. There were no public comments.
8 Tribal Advisory Opinion
Georgene Louis, State Gaming Representative: Referred to Tribal members present as to whether or not they would like to go into executive session for this matter.
Chairman Norvell: Asked if any Tribal representative present wanted to discuss the advisory opinion that was issued.
Charlie Dorame, Chairman of the NM Indian Gaming Association: Requested to meet in closed executive session.
Chairman Norvell entertained a motion to go into executive session. D. Dutton moved to go into executive session for the purpose of handling a Tribal matter. Second: A. Rael. Vote: 5-0. A. Rael, D. Dutton, D. Norvell, D. Padilla and J. Peterson.
9 Adjournment
/s/David Norvell, Esq. Date Approved: 05-20-08
Chairman