Thank you. Good morning, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the chair of the zoning board.
Yes. Could you give us a few minutes for people to come into the room, please?
I'm sorry. That's what I thought Jason was doing. I'm sorry.
No worries.
okay chair we can proceed
good morning everyone my name is frank di chico i'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment
i'll be participating in today's hearing along with our vice chair ms carol tenere
board secretary confessor plaza and board members mr thomas holloman and mr james snell
board administrator jason hand and our board attorney ms sharon saletta are also in attendance
for those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings i'll go through
some of the basics of what you can expect pardon me first we will be administering oaths to
individual participants prior to their testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this
proceeding is being recorded, and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement
to be recorded, and the recording will be available to the public on the web or otherwise.
For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star
nine and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat. For anyone participating by phone,
if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to
unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548 and leave
your email address and the address of the property at issue. And I'll repeat that.
To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue. And I'd also like to advise everyone,
please do not attempt to testify in the chat. Your comments should be directed to the board
Administrator, Mr. Hand. With that, I believe we can proceed. We'll leave anything out. I think
we're ready. Sharon, you want to lay out the format, please? Yes, thank you. This is Sharon
Saleta. At the end of the last hearing, we announced that this would be that the pending
appeal against L &I and the request for a special exception would be combined for purposes of the
hearing. These are still two distinct appeals that the board would consider the appeal against L &I
first, and then depending on the results of, depending on how it decides that issue,
would either proceed with the special exception case, if it grants the appeal against L &I,
or in the alternative, if it denies the appeal against L &I, discuss whether the applicant can
move forward with a variance request and what will have to be done procedurally for that.
Before we begin, I did have a few questions for the city if Mr. Reuter is here.
Mr. Reuter has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Reuter.
Please identify yourself with a record, spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Good morning, Chairman.
Leonard Reuter, R -E -U -T -E -R, Senior Attorney for the City of Philadelphia.
you you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank
you shall we please proceed um mr reuter in the memorandum that you submitted you suggested that
in the alternative the board proceed with the special exception case that was um the hearing
was started in december and that any um a decision on the special exception would render the legal
issue of whether there should be a refusal or referral moot. So there are a few things I don't
understand about the approach you're suggesting. So you are, you're suggesting that the board
So you are, you're suggesting that the board should proceed with the already started special exception hearing, despite L &I having reversed its position and in the interim issued a notice indicating that a variance, not a special exception, is required.
So, as it currently stands, the department's view is that a variance is required. Despite that, we would move forward with the special exception hearing, and we would not address the pending appeal against L &I that challenges the revision of the decision.
um the that somehow this would make the appeal against oni the legal issues moot because
quote presumably unquote someone will appeal this to the court and the court can consider
the legal issue de novo despite the issue having been presented to the board in a distinct appeal
and despite the issue being something that under the code the board is authorized to address
that we should just ignore that and let the court decide in case there is an appeal.
So some of the problems I have with this. First, can the board go forward based on an L &I position
that no longer exists? And second, what happens if it is not appealed? If the board goes forward,
if it grants a special exception, are you saying that L &I will then issue a zoning permit because
us that's what the board decided no i i think if i might um the suggestion that i had made in the
memo was really just one uh for practicality's purpose i mean i i guess i should have included
in that uh a presumption that they would simply again i i i think it's moot at this point because
it's i i would assume that the other parties wouldn't agree to it anyway at this point but
But it would have been, in effect, a stipulated decision.
Again, practically speaking, it doesn't really matter.
We can, you know, if the parties were to agree to a stipulated decision, you know, that the appeal, you know, either granting the appeal against L &I or not.
Because, again, the point being is that the issue of the appeal against L &I is strictly legal.
There are no facts in dispute.
Isn't that always true of an appeal against L &I?
No, many appeals against L &I, they're arguing that there was an error by the plans examiner.
So what would the stipulation be?
Well, again, I don't think it's going to happen, so it's probably moot. But the stipulation would simply be that the appeal against L &I, say, is denied. You proceed with the special exception case. And then the outcome of that, that's where the factual dispute is, is whether, you know, again, whether or not they meet the criteria for a special exception.
And again, this is presuming that there would be an appeal. I mean, I think to me, it seems pretty obvious that there's going to be appeal to the courts and therefore the legal issue of the appeal against L &I is going to be heard de novo because on local agency appeals, legal questions are always heard de novo by the courts.
so isn't the board obligated to this isn't well they have isn't the board obligated to consider
this on its merits why would they accept a stipulated decision by the parties in an appeal
against lni because there's no facts in dispute and it's a purely legal question that would be
heard de novo but again i i don't think i i think it's fine to just go forward it was just simply a
suggestion because again and also mind you it was my understanding at the time that the applicant
would not going to be was would not seek a variance now that now seems to be up in the air
but at the time that we submitted the memorandum last week it was my assumption and I thought
and again Mr. Matione can speak for himself but it was my assumption and my recollection that Mr.
Mattione specifically said that they were not seeking a variance. They were only seeking the
appeal against L &I. So if the special exception were denied, then the entire case is moved because
there's no variance. They're not seeking a variance. It doesn't make any difference what
the outcome of the appeal against L &I is. But I don't understand why, assuming you can stipulate
to it that the appeal against lni is denied um yeah i mean wouldn't that render the special
exception case mode no if the appeal against if the appeal against l lni is if if we stipulated
that the appeal against lni is denied then they're then then the decision stands it is a refusal
Then there then then the decision stands. It is a refusal, not a referral. And there is no special exception to be decided. Right. OK. OK. I think that the board will proceed as as planned. Consider the appeal against L and I initially make a ruling on that and then we can determine where to go from there.
And again, the other thing that I was considering was, again, if the appeal against L &I is granted, or let's say it's denied, that gets appealed, and then the court reverses, now you've got to get a rematch, and then you're going to have to go through the special exception case.
I'm sorry, because you've already had three hearings on that.
it it just that's why it seems to make sense that we would combine the two that there will
be first a ruling on the appeal against lni if the special exception um right goes forward then
you'll have both decisions same appeal period but right but we're not taking a position on this
the city's not taking any position i i'm not speaking for planning by the way i'm just saying
like you know we have the i'm not taking any position on the special exception if that you
know so again i mean i think this is all kind of moot because the other parties are not going to
agree to any of this anyway so it was just a suggestion i was trying to find a way to streamline
the process to avoid a remand but and and i just wanted to be sure i understood what you were
suggesting thank you sure and then i guess chair we can move forward with the um appeal against
l and i well i think that's still leonard correct yes all right all right because we left off i
think uh last hearing you you testified but i don't know if you concluded i um i what happened
is that um the matter was essentially continued uh we were asked to present uh briefs or memoranda
of law on the again the purely legal question of the appeal against ellen i so uh mr maddie
messrs miss matione and bonnie and i all submitted uh that uh those briefs um well i believe
everybody submitted theirs on time uh on march 2nd so again all the legal the legal issues are
preserved um so again to be honest with you uh it wasn't clear like how we were going to proceed
this morning so um you know uh obviously i think i can't see who the who's oh wait now i can see
who's in the lobby um it does appear that uh mr matione is here and mr boney are both here so
I just didn't know where, and maybe it's a, correct me if I'm wrong, Sharon, but Mr. Reuter, have you, did you, we have their briefs, all board members have briefs from all parties.
Do you need to add anything to what your testimony was?
uh no again we we want we we raised the issues last time and now i think the issues have been
fully briefed and i think with respect to the appeal against ellen i we're just i i think if
you you know again i i think it'd be fair for you know the board to say you don't need to hear any
oral argument you have the briefs you can either decide it now on the briefs or you can hold it
over for a decision or whatever if you want to have oral argument then i think it would be
um you know and an appeal against l and i um it would be mr matione i guess would go first
yes i would suggest that we allow each party to mr matione mr bonnie and mr reuter if he chooses
to um make a statement well yeah i was just gonna do you have any further uh comments um
mr reuter uh since we left off and in regards to your brief as i said i read it and sure but
the board members we spoke about this earlier we all read this uh so do you have anything else you
want to add to your prior testimony uh to the prior statements i made no if you want um argument
based upon what was raised in the briefs um you know that that would be different but i don't have
anything to add facts again there's no factual issue um on the appeal against lni everybody i
think agrees and stipulates to the um to the layout of the proposed uh paramutual and sports book uh
at 1526 packer i don't there's no facts and dispute there i i mean again i i'm just speaking
for myself i don't think there's any critical facts and dispute um uh in in terms of like how
how the place is going to be laid out and what pari -mutual betting is and what sports wagering
or sports book is. It's literally just the question of whether this constitutes a casino
as defined in the Philadelphia Code. Sharon, this is Sharon Slidig. And since
Right. I'm sure. This is this is Sharon Slidig. And since the parties have submitted briefs, but not had an opportunity to respond to each other's briefs, if we could call Mr. Mattione first and then.
the parties have submitted briefs,
I do have a question for Mr. Reuter, and maybe you can answer it. Maybe you can't. Are you aware of any other sports book gaming venues in Philadelphia?
The current Turf Club at 700 Packer since, and Mr. Mattione can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe since winter of 2019, I think, has been offering a sports book.
Other than the parks at 7th and Packer, are you aware of any other venues, sports betting venues in Philadelphia?
uh well again uh the rivers casino formerly known as sugar house has a sports book um
let me let me rephrase that not including category one licenses i am not aware of any others there
used to be a turf club in center city that's no longer in operation so i i think it was 17th and
market that's right yeah um that's no longer an operation i don't think they ever offered sports
book, because I think that changed hands into something else before sports wagering was
legalized by the state. But I'm not aware of any. But Mr. Matiani would certainly be a better
position to answer that. Can I ask one question, Mr. Reiter? The existing location,
the sports betting was added in 2019. Did that require a variance? Or should the permit be
revoked um i would we have looked into that i would say that if i'm not mistaken the paramutual
betting which has been going on there for quite some time uh that i believe was by variance
so yeah there was no new so the addition of the use that would make it a casino wouldn't require
a variance um there was no use permit there was no use permit or no application for a new use
permit or an amended use permit for second 700 packer that was ever submitted to the city so the
reality is that i don't know if uh licenses and inspections was even aware that sports wagering
was taking place at that location until this case came up um so i and i'd rather not prejudge what
was happening there the this zoning classification of that property is different also the that
That operation, if I'm not mistaken, that is the non -primary location there for off -track
betting, I believe is by variance going back, I think, to the mid -90s.
So, you know, again, I don't have all that in front of me.
I don't know all the details of what might be permitted under that variance.
So I'm not going to say that the sports wagering at that location is not lawful.
I don't know.
I just know that there was no amended use permit or no new use permit that was ever submitted to
the city when they added the sports wagering I'm not saying they had to I don't you know it would
depend upon you know it wouldn't be up to me Illinois somebody would have to look at it and
see what what fits within the permitted uses under you know again the old variants or whatever it was
that allowed the off -track betting there in the first place and again I think that goes back
at least to the mid 90s so i don't think what the city did or didn't do there
provides any precedent one way or another for the outcome of this case
well i don't know about that i mean it's not it's to me it sounds like the same argument i mean
you can make the argument that seventh and packer um if they want to call it a casino because it
has sports betting i mean that's that goes pretty much to the crux of what this argument is in my
opinion well it's you know uh you know we'll get into i'm sure we'll get into with mr money
money and mr uh bonnie uh as we did a couple weeks ago uh it requires a a a special uh exception
and um it would not allow for slot machines and table games right but but again um well two things
first, whether or not the city has enforced, like, let's say for the sake of argument, the sports
wagering would not be legal at that location at 700 Packer. The fact that the city might not have
issued a violation for some activity at one location doesn't mean that they're precluded
from issuing a violation at another location. So again, LNI hasn't gone back to look at what's
going on at 700 Packers. So it's, again, it's not a precedent. We haven't done anything about it
because I don't think the city was even aware officially that sports wagering was taking place
at 700 Packer until this case. Because no, it is clearly an additional use.
uh because no it it is clearly an additional use regardless of whether it's law it's a casino or
not it was an additional use that was different from the the the use at the 700 packer is
explicitly for that for that particular unit now again there's other activities that take place at
that location ironically the state lottery is also in that same building on the side
but for this for that unit where uh the turf club is there is a specific use for that and that is
explicitly and limited to paramutual bedding and then you know i guess accessory bar restaurant
so on that basis alone any additional use would have required a use a new use permit so the none
of that was never submitted to the city for that activity so irrespective of whether it's a you
know whether the sports wagering would or wouldn't constitute a casino on that basis alone if i had
to offer an opinion i would say that it's it's currently in violation because we don't have
sports wagering on the use permit for that location so here they've actually applied for it
do you have special assembly and entertainment on that permit it's it's i believe it's by variance
okay the and the variance is explicit to paramutual to paramutual betting uh so
um you know so again that's that's why i think that is a different situation uh at 700 packer
and you know again i don't want to be locked into saying it is a violation or it isn't a violation
l and i it's not up to me it's up to l and i they have to look at that you know and certainly i
think after this case, they will take a look at what's happening at 700 Packer. Although I think
that probably winds up being moot anyway, because my understanding is that they're closing that
location anyway. But, you know, again, it's not something that I want to lock the city into a
position on that because that is a it's a different locations, different zoning classification, I
believe. And it's also by variance. So all of those things distinguish it from this matter.
thank you for that i think mr mattione may be able to shed some light on that when we get to
him all right thank you leonard uh any the board have any questions for mr reuter no no
um what we up next is mr mattione
good morning please identify yourself for the record and i'll swear you in
sure michael mattioni uh federal reserve m -a -t -t -i -o -n -i federal reserve bank building
100 north independence mall suite 5a northwest philadelphia 19106 we're in the firm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do mr chairman thank you before you begin uh
you heard our last conversation with mr reuter yes did you shed any light what i'm getting at
is trying to figure out how 7th and Packard is operating.
Did they require a variance and or a special exception
when they began offering sportsbook betting?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Before I begin, may I also have Mark Stewart added?
He's my co -counsel, and he's beginning to cancel.
Yeah, we'll get Mr. Stewart on.
We'll swear him in, please.
Mr. Stewart, may you please raise your hand?
Good morning, Mr. Stewart.
Please identify yourself with the records by your full name.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
My name is Mark Stewart.
That's S -T -E -W -A -R -T.
my address is 213 market street in harrisburg pennsylvania thank you you swear and affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do sir thank you uh michael mr marionni
yes mr chairman in 1992 a variance was granted to allow looking at the old records are hard to read
to allow paramutual bedding in what was then a G2 industrial district.
So it was under the prior code, prior to the 2012 code,
and I believe it's an I -1 or an I -2 zoning class now there.
I'm not totally sure.
So I would have to look under the present code to see what is a permitted use there
before I could say whether I believe it's a permitted use under the present code.
But under the prior code, back in 1992, they were granted a variance to allow power mutual bedding, accessory restaurant, warehouse distribution, and a bunch of other things at 700.
warehouse distribution and a bunch of other things at that 700 Packer Avenue site.
Yeah, it's a mixed use building. Okay. Thank you. All right. Pardon me.
I'm ready to proceed. Mr. Stewart was going to handle the
argument this morning based upon the brief that was submitted.
Thank you very much, Mr. Mattione and Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
um fortunately uh with the additional briefing we've had uh the issue before the board is
actually quite narrow and the parties agree on several points first we agree that the sole
issue is whether the proposed use is a quote -unquote casino under the zoning code we agree
that the code defines casino by referencing and relying on the gaming act pennsylvania gaming act
It defines it as a licensed gaming facility authorized by the state pursuant to that act.
We agree that the Gaming Act, in turn, uses and defines the term licensed facility, and we agree that the proposed use at 1526 Packer Avenue is not a quote -unquote licensed facility under the Gaming Act.
To the extent there was any doubt that remained about that, Exhibit 21 that we submitted is from the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, a letter from their chief counsel, which states that the proposed use is not a licensed facility under the Gaming Act.
Where we diverge is that we, the applicant, contend that the zoning code's casino definition, which, as I said, expressly relies on the Gaming Act when using the phrase licensed gaming facility, means and was intended to mean licensed facility as actually used in the Gaming Act.
The city and the association, on the contrary, contend that despite the express reference to the Gaming Act, the zoning code actually defines casino differently than what's in the Gaming Act in a way that is much broader than the Gaming Act and in a way that is even contrary to what's in the Gaming Act.
And that the city council accomplished all of that by simply inserting the single word gaming into the phrase licensed facility.
As we'll also discuss later, the city and the RCO also essentially for their position to be correct, they really are asking you to change the zoning code's definition of casino.
know. They don't want it to read licensed gaming facility. They want it to read licensed gaming
activity, but we can't change the terminology and the definition, and it has to be strictly
construed, and any doubts about it have to be resolved in the applicant's favor.
The association in their briefs, you know, pointed out that they think our position is just too
simple. It's too simple. We would contend that the opposite is their main flaw. The contortions that
the association and the city need to get themselves into to piece together their position should alone
be enough to reverse LNI's decision. The simple answer here has the benefit of being the one that
is most consistent with the code and with common sense. The code's verbiage is just an imprecise
reference to a licensed facility in the Gaming Act. Interestingly, if you look at section 14 -405
of the zoning code, it makes reference to, quote, the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board Act,
end quote. Now, there is no such law in Pennsylvania as the Pennsylvania Gaming
Control Board Act. So is the zoning code referring to a statute that doesn't exist?
Is this board obligated to discard those references because the reference is to a
non -existent law? No. These are conclusions that are not reached. The clear conclusion is that the
reference to the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board Act was meant to be a reference to the
Pennsylvania Gaming Act. Likewise, when the Code's casino definition uses the phrase
licensed gaming facility as authorized pursuant to Title IV, the Gaming Act, did the City Council
actually mean to create a new term, licensed gaming facility, that's not used in the Gaming
Act? No, it did not. It did not intend to create a new term that was very, very close.
It did not intend to create a new term that was very, very close to the term used in the
Gaming Act, licensed facility, but somehow different.
Would the city have specifically invoked and relied on the Gaming Act if it intended in
the zoning code definition to create a new term that is in fact very different than the
Gaming Act's definition and much, much broader as postured by the city and the association.
And certainly if the city council had intended such a result, it would have done so in a much
clearer way and would have done much more than simply inserting the single word gaming into that
phrase. The definition would have been explicit about the broad array of uses that were being
captured and counterintuitively considered to be a casino, even though there's no slot machines
there and there's no table games there. Rather than invoking and relying on the Gaming Act,
the council would have made it clear and explicit that they were going beyond the Gaming Act and
its use of the word licensed facility, which statutorily can only be two locations in the
city of Philadelphia, and we know what they are, Rivers, former Sugar House, and Live.
And similarly, the remainder of the code, the zoning code, would include references
and other provisions that confirm and implement the city and the association's far -flung
interpretation. But in fact, the opposite is the case. The other code provisions that we cited to
in our brief, they all confirm that the reference in the definition to a licensed gaming facility
is intended to be the very same term as is in the Gaming Act when it uses licensed facility.
section 14 -405 -2b of the code it expressly refers to quote a category 2 licensed gaming facility
there's no such thing in the gaming act as a category 2 licensed gaming facility
there is after all a category 2 licensed facility
clearly and it's the type of casino that is allowed to be in the city of philadelphia it's
the type of casino that Rivers and Live are. Clearly, simply inserting the word gaming into
the phrase Category 2 does not convert it to something different than what we all know that
it is. The Code and the Gaming Act are referring to the same thing. And there's other provisions
in the Code that similarly make it clear that a casino is referring to a licensed facility with
slot machines and table games. The off -street parking requirements in section 14 -405 are based
upon the number of slot machines and table game positions that are going to be in a casino.
There's a reference to a licensed gaming facility in section 14 -203 as an entity that may extend
credit. Licensed facilities under the Gaming Act may extend credit to players, but the proposed
use and the use at 700 Packer Avenue does not involve the extension of credit. The RCO and
their supplemental brief also pointed out that the definition of casino that's currently in the code
predated the authorization or the legalization of sports betting in Pennsylvania.
I think that further bolsters our position. Otherwise, are we to believe that it was the
intention of city council to reference the gaming not to reference the gaming acts license facility
but instead merely by inserting that word gaming into the phrase to capture uses that would not
even exist for years after the new definition of casino was adopted clearly we don't think that's
the case and the city makes an equally we would consider it to be frankly a damaging admission
in their brief. It rightly contends that zoning uses are typically defined as activities.
They are not facilities. They are activities. That's what uses are. But the casino definition
in the zoning code does not follow this typical pattern. It actually defines a casino as a
facility authorized under the gaming act and that is just more proof that the code's definition was
in fact referring to the term licensed facility in the act and here is where the city and the
association want you to change the casino definition in fact they need you to change
In fact, they need you to change the casino definition.
the casino definition. Instead of licensed gaming facilities,
Instead of licensed gaming facility, they want you to change it to licensed gaming activity.
But the board can't change the code, and the code must be strictly construed in the applicant's favor.
And the change that they are looking for in terminology is what enables them to make their claim that the mere presence of sports betting at the off -track betting facility will magically convert the OTB into, or any other non -casino facility actually, into a quote -unquote casino.
know. For all the reasons that we've noted, there's no support for that analysis in the
Gaming Act or the Zoning Code. Exhibit 21, as mentioned from the Pennsylvania Gaming Control
Board, disputes this contention. And if I may, I'm going to try and share my screen.
See, I'm not the most tech savvy guy in the world, but I managed to do this.
so here is the letter from the gaming control board their chief counsel douglas sherman
if you go down to the third page there's a highlighted sentence on the screen
the ability to offer sports wagering at a non -primary location does not change the nature
of the non -primary location, but rather simply adds a second gaming option to the parimutuel
wagering occurring at the non -primary location. So there is no conversion, if you will.
And taken to its logical end, their position that there could be or should be a conversion
would mean that any activity conducted by a slot machine licensee that is regulated by the gaming
control board would be a casino. It would be a casino use. As we indicated in our brief under
the law, slot machine licensees can get a certificate to engage in a type of interactive
gaming at the Philadelphia airport. If one would do that, would the airport be converted to a casino?
No. Similarly, slot machine licensees can rent space, just office space, where they have redundancy facilities for interactive gaming.
That's activity that they engage in that's regulated by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board. Under the position advanced by the city and the association, such a use would be a casino under their view of the code's definition.
But that type of result is clearly untenable on its face.
At the end of the day, mental and legal gymnastics are unnecessary here.
The simple answer is the right answer.
A casino, a licensed gaming facility under the zoning code, is the same thing as a licensed facility under the Gaming Act.
if you add to this the standard that governs the appeal and the fact that doubts need to be
resolved in the applicant's favor, you come to the conclusion that the appeal should be granted
and L &I should be reversed. And I thank you very much for your generous indulgence for our argument.
Thank you, Mr. Stewart. I do have a question. I'm going to reference the letter that you and
mr manioni sent to mr r douglas sherman who's the chief counsel for the office of enforcement
for the pennsylvania gaming control board i'm not going to read the entire letter but i do want to
this is a question that you're asking the gaming control board parks holds all requisite approvals
for the pg pgcb to conduct sports wagering at a non -primary location 700 pecker avenue
you further go on to say in section two a primary a non -primary location is prohibited from having
slot machines and table games and that is in direct reference correct me if i'm wrong to 1526
packer avenue that would be direct reference to that correct that's correct there's neither at
700 packer avenue nor at 1526 can there be slots or table games and i just want to read this for
anyone who's listening out there who may be of the impression or may have been told by people in the
community that this is going to be a casino the way we normally would think of a casino that would
allow table games, slot machines, and other forms of gaming. You further go in your letter to the
Chief Counsel. The South Philadelphia Race and Sportsbook at 700 Packard Park is not a licensed
facility under the Gaming Act and may not operate slot machines.
under the Gaming Act and may not operate slot machines or table games.
You next point out, should the State Horse Racing Commission approve the relocation of the South
Philadelphia Race and Sportsbook to 1526 Packard Avenue, Philadelphia, the relocated non -primary
location would not constitute a licensed facilities, in quotes, under the Gaming Act.
This fact would not be changed even if parks were to secure the Pennsylvania Gaming Commission board approval to conduct sports waging at 1526 Packer Avenue.
And then finally, you ask, under no circumstances would parks be able to lawfully operate slot machines or conduct table gains at a non -primary location located at 1526 Packer Avenue?
and i will just conclude with
mr sherman's response and it's a it's a two -page letter i'm not going to read through it but his
final comment is to your and mr matty only inquiry to get clarification parks would not
be able to lawfully operate slot machines or table games at any non -primary location under
the provisions of the gaming act this is a strict provision and it gives you all the numbers which
states that an authorization to conduct sports waging under this that section may not authorize
may not authorize the placement or authorization of slot machines or table games in a non -primary
location. That seems to me to be extremely clear that whatever this board decides, and if we were
to decide to move forward and approve this application, under no circumstances would 1526
Packer Avenue be permitted to have slot machines and table games or other forms of gaming other
than the sports book and racing is that accurate that is accurate sir and I believe it's actually
agreed by the other parties okay I thought I heard you say in the beginning but for those folks who
are out there and have not had that conversation with counsel for the opposition I wanted them to
make certain that they understood there was no slot machines or any other kinds of gaming other
than sports betting and horse rating which would be permitted should the board agree approve
okay i mean i'd be too long -winded but i want to get that out there for the public to understand
okay uh all right next up mr mattione are you ready or i mr stewart um made the argument and
I have nothing further to add on this issue on this. Okay. Mr. Bonnie.
good morning mr chairman good morning sir please identify yourself on the record and i'll swear
you in my name is paul bonney uh and i'm attorney for the rco which is the packard park civic
Association. My work from home address is Three Bells Court, Philadelphia 19106.
Thank you. And your name is spelled B as in boy, O -N -I. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed.
You know, I'm tempted, Mr. Chairman. We know we've been talking about this part of society
for so long now but would you agree with me that if Harrisburg changed the law that perhaps other
forms of gambling might be allowed here in the future I can't hear I'm sorry I can't hear you
I would agree okay Harrisburg had decided to do a lot of things they may decide to issue more
category one licenses. That's right. I doubt it from my experience, but who knows? As you well
remember, when the casino law was first passed, it was slot machines only. No table games were
No table games were allowed in this Commonwealth, and it was only two years after that that the, I think it was, what is it, 572, 672, I forget the bill number, that later authorized by certificate table games.
allowed in this Commonwealth. And it was only two years after that.
In the original bill, as you might recall, the state senate bragged that no credit would be allowed when you played your slots.
You can't gamble on credit, but two years later they could.
Now we have slot machines at truck stops. We have mini casinos. We have gambling in the airport. We have sports wagering. So things change, Mr. Chairman. And I would agree with you that under current law, they couldn't do it. And that's not part of our argument. I'm just responding to what we all think is how the world will go. We don't know how the world will go.
Well, we don't know. And we don't know. And if that were to happen, and if you're talking about maybe 1526, Packer Avenue becoming one of those facilities in the future, wouldn't they still be required to get a Category 1 license? And wouldn't that not require special zoning, the CED, a commercial, I think it was commercial entertainment district, which would have to be introduced by the city council?
We don't know.
So I think we know from past experience is why Foxwoods didn't get built, because I held it up for three years until the Supreme Court stepped in.
We don't know. I'd like to get into.
Well, no, but you raised it. Anything could happen. That's right.
Thank you. So I have a. And Chickie and Pete may decide to go out of business tomorrow.
We don't know. Well, let's hope not. He may have to go out of business.
All these bars and restaurants are suffering. Well.
Thank God we have a new president. But I want to, I have a presentation to make. And as I alluded to, as I stated last time, and as I stated in our letter brief, I have some information to present.
I want to thank the board for holding this special hearing so that this special listing, so that we do have time to explore this.
I want to mention one thing about Mr. Stewart's very eloquent argument.
and it is also something that they put in their brief
that I think if, as he pointed out,
as he describes it as a narrow issue
of just a couple of words,
he does point out, and as is the fact
that elsewhere in the code,
our zoning code uses the phrase,
the much more specific phrase,
category two licensed gaming facility.
And that's in what used to be called the CED. It's now called S -P -E -N -T, Special Purpose Entertainment District. And the phrase used in that area, which is where city council wants gaming parlors to be, I would submit, that phrase is category two licensed gaming facility.
So the zoning code knows very well, as is exhibited in that phrase, that if it wants to pin down a type of gaming facility, it can make a very specific reference to a type.
And that's what it did in that section, in that S -P -E -N -T.
It refers to a specific type by using the phrase category two.
That is not the phrase used in the assembly and entertainment section.
And it's a fundamental rule of statutory construction that when there's a different phrasing used in different parts of the same statute or the same code, a different meaning is intended.
They could have said category two in the assembly and entertainment section, but they didn't.
They used a more general term, license gaming facility.
So I think on that matter alone, it's clear that the two different phrases mean different things.
And I would submit, I'm not going to go through all this in too much detail, but I would submit it that it's Parks Casino that is asking you to rewrite the code, not us.
We're fine with the code as it exists.
But I want to tell everybody, Mr. Chairman, that, you know, obviously this is something that the board is wrestling with.
Obviously, it's something that L &I has wrestled with.
Does it fit in this subcategory of use for assembly entertainment or does it not?
Well, the zoning code tells us very clearly how we're supposed to wrestle with something like that.
When you go to the beginning of the use chapter of the zoning code, there's a section that's called determination of use categories.
When you go to the beginning of the use,
And it says right here in the zoning code that when a use cannot be readily classified,
when you can't figure out, when you can't readily determine whether it should be in this category or that category,
or the main generic category or a subcategory, that LNI is authorized to determine the most
similar and the most appropriate. So you need to do the best that you can do if there's something
that cannot be readily just plugged in. And how do you do it? That you do it by looking at a number
of factors, including the types of activity that will occur, the types of equipment and the
processes, the existence and the number and the frequency of customers, and other parking and
other factors. So in other words, if you're trying to figure out what category does this animal fit
in, you need to look at the animal. You need to understand what is the nature of the use. What is
the activity that's going on here? What is happening inside this glass enclosure, as they
would have you, as they would have you look at it, this 2 ,600 square foot glass enclosure. And that
is something, Mr. Chairman and members of the board, that Parks and Chicky and Pete's have been
awfully silent about. They've hardly described what's actually going to be happening inside
inside this room. And I would argue that the materials that they've showed you have been
deceptive as to what's going on inside this room. Now, my point as I'm going to be showing you this
information, why am I going to be showing you this information? Because I think it's pretty clear.
I mean, Mr. Stewart says that this sentence in the assembly and this definition of casino
know, is a reference to a definition in state law. I'm not sure, I don't see that reference to the
definition in state law. They're not referring to a particular definition in state law. They're
referring to a licensed gaming facility that's authorized by the state pursuant to the law.
And so I think that what you need to, and what I think is behind here, and I do agree with Mr. Stewart, that the question is, what does the zoning code intend?
I think it's pretty clear, and I'm hoping that you'll agree with me after you hear my presentation, that the zoning code intends that gambling parlors, inbuilt these bricks and mortar gambling parlors.
that's regulated lock, stock, and barrel by the state is something that we should have in very
particular locations authorized by city council, the CED or the SPENT, that it's not to be just
considered a loosey -goosey assembly and entertainment use to be put into neighborhood
strip shopping centers right next to the bakery and the dry cleaner and the pizza place and where
there's thousands of row homes on all sides. I don't think that, and that's what I think that
the zoning code gets at, and I think that that's right. Back when this definition was inserted
into the zoning code, there was no such thing as sports gambling, but that's okay. You know,
that's okay. We look at laws all the time in terms of what is the drafters of the law intend,
and as society changes, the First Amendment also applies to the internet, even though back in 1776
there was no internet. That's okay. We have new facts. And the question is, what are those new
facts? And I'd like to show you what exactly is going to be going on here so that you can make
a determination whether these facts fit into this category or not. As you may remember from the first
day of the hearing, this was very much minimized by Mr. Shiraki and by Mr. Cullen and by Mr.
Mattione. They kept referring to this quote -unquote small area. Mr. Shiraki said, and I'm reading from
my notes, that quote, there's no way to know the sports book is even inside there. That's what he
said. Mr. Cullen from Parks referred to it as a miniature. It's a miniature operation. And I think
that that that really minimizes what is actually going on here. I'd like to share my screen.
uh what is actually going on here i'd like to um share my screen let me see how i can do this
and i again want to thank you that um for the time um that you're giving me and i
this is a very important matter and so um let me see what i can do here i think when you mentioned
about they referred to it as mini i think that was part of an answer to the current location at
seventh packer versus the proposed location at 1526 packer okay which is considerably smaller
thank you i think you would agree with that i would agree the square footage is smaller as i
said i think a hearing or two ago just i'm going to try and go through this really quickly
so if someone wants me to stop and spend more time but i'm going to try and go
all you're breaking up all we got an echo yes you said if anyone wants to stop me and then you
started your voice started vibrating okay can you hear me okay yes okay i hope i'm paying comcast a
lot more money these days so hopefully um things will be in good shape um i'm getting a little
animated, so I'll try and keep my voice moderate. As I stated before, there's going to be
at least $3 million gambled here on a monthly basis. These are the numbers pre -pandemic,
$3 million gambled on a monthly basis. That's not the amount lost. The amount lost is the
number below that. So let's say in December of 2019, $328 ,000 was lost at 700 Packer in the
retail sports book. I'm going to flip through the state law because we already, I think,
talked about that ad nauseum. And then I'm going to go to, these are all materials pretty much
from Parks Casino itself. This is where Parks went to the Gaming Control Board to apply for
their sports wagering certificate to get authority to do sports wagering anywhere in the Commonwealth.
And they started off by saying that their executives are from all over the world.
They're from the United Kingdom originally.
And they also talk about this something called iGaming, which I think we're going to see
in this Commonwealth very quickly, which is Parks Casino and other casinos putting slot
machines and blackjack on your cell phones.
it's always considered the same. It's always, it's usually talked about in conjunction with
sports wagering. Indeed, Mr. Cullen, one of the main witnesses from Parks is the vice president
in charge of sports wagering and iGaming. So it's, you know, they're related. And of course,
again, Parks is mentioning how much their senior executive team comes from all over the world.
but what are they saying when they go to the gaming control board they talk about
parks casino and south philadelphia turf club in the same breath and they talk about retail and
mobile app sports betting let's let's see what that parts us to say about that
in their retail launch at the end of 2018 they were proposing again both for parks casino and
the south philadelphia turf club the same exact thing and that's what this slide says it's the
same exact thing at both locations. They would have tellers, self -service kiosks, and mobile
devices. Now, self -service kiosks, we're going to talk about in a little bit because Parks
explains exactly what that is. And they also talk about mobile apps, intranet -based only.
What's the intranet? Well, the next bullet says what that is. It's limited to the building.
and so it's not the internet but it's more like an in -house internet that is only you can only
plug into if you're actually on the premises and of course at the bottom of this page something
that is key to this business is what's called in -game wagering and as you can see by this
bullet towards the bottom they're looking at the Europe evidence from Europe and New Jersey about
in -game wagering. And that's discussed here at the bottom of the slide, in -game bets and in -game
wagering. They talk about that being better for the Commonwealth. What's in -game bets? In -game
bets is if you want to bet on a tennis match that's happening tomorrow, you can bet who's going to win
that tennis match. That's not in -game betting because you're not betting in the game. But when
the tennis match is occurring, this would allow you to bet on every single point if you want to.
This would allow you to bet on every single point if you want to.
Which player, which tennis player is going to win the next point?
And of course, when you go to baseball, you know, is the next pitch going to be a ball or a strike?
Is the next hit going to be a double or a grand slam?
And these are the, you know, rapidity of the gambling that's going to be happening here.
Now, um, doesn't some of that, what you just described already exist?
Some, some, some, some of that, you can bet on a field goal.
You can bet on who's going to score the first point that already currently exists.
Correct.
It exists.
Like I can go on to fan duels or draft Kings and I can, and I can do that.
But just like, and I'll tread on this lightly, but just like many people in this Commonwealth can go on their phones and look at pornography, that doesn't mean that the zoning code doesn't dictate where gentlemen's clubs are supposed to be.
So this is a specific use that they're going to market and promote at a certain location for this activity to happen, you know, as a business.
And the zoning code regulates that.
So just because people can do things on their cell phone does not eliminate the land use laws that we have in this Commonwealth.
And so, you know, I understand people are doing some of this stuff. That doesn't mean that a bricks and mortar location needs to be in a neighborhood.
And, you know, I said I brought this up at the last hearing or one before that. You can go in any bar, but we're talking about chicken and pizza. It's called a sports bar. They could call whatever they want. It's called a sports bar.
They have numerous TVs in there with games all over the country, maybe all over the world going on at any given time.
People are on their cell phone placing bets.
I don't understand. I guess I'm having a hard time understanding.
Where does this change the nature of what is already permitted to happen now?
Well, if this gaming sports betting parlor, this 2 ,600 square foot portion of Chickie and Pete's, allow people to go in that room, sit down, watch the game and make a bet.
I don't understand the difference.
Well, the difference is I think I think what harm is being done to the community, I guess.
I think the next half of this argument, I just don't understand it.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta. Can I suggest that arguments regarding the impact on the community be considered in the second part?
I actually said that at the end. I apologize. I'm just mind blown about these arguments.
To answer your question, I think, and I won't talk about the harm to the community, Ms. Saleta, but to answer your question, what's the difference?
The difference is, I think, in the intensity and the magnitude of the marketing and the promotion.
And indeed, if this was just going on anyway, then they wouldn't want to open this. They wouldn't want to open this. They would just put out little signs on the bar that says, go to parkscasino .com rather than FanDuel's.
but they want to have a bricks and this is a very expensive location with a lot of heavy duty
equipment and as I and this this slide gets us into the type of equipment that's that's going
to be that's going to be installed that would be installed at this location this equipment
is not at any bar that has any sports bar these are over -the -counter terminals where you can use
cash. That's what this seven teller is. Now, this is at Parks Casino. I'm showing you what's at
Parks Casino because the next page shows you the same thing happening at the South Philly sports
book. And then 12 self -service kiosks. Well, what are these kiosks? So, Mr. Chairman, there are no
sports bars in Philadelphia that are allowed to have these kiosks. And that's what they're asking
you to authorize today is these are these kiosks and these over the terminal, over the counter
terminals. And this is at the South Philadelphia Turf Club, where they put in a million dollars
in renovations. And they also have these terminals, and they have these self -service
wagering kiosks. And they have security. Why do they need security? Well, that's a good question.
I'll leave that hanging. They need security, and they need surveillance. That's enhanced security
measures is the surveillance. You'll see that on another slide. And that all needs to be installed
in coordination and with the approval of the Pennsylvania Game and Control Board Bureau of Casino Compliance.
I'm going to say that again. That needs to be approved by the Pennsylvania Game and Control Board Bureau of Casino Compliance.
That needs to be approved by the Pennsylvania Game and Control Board Bureau of Casino Compliance.
And of course, no one can go into that 2 ,600 square foot area unless you're 21 years or older.
What are they going to have in these machines?
They're going to have, I'll just sort of, they have player account management where each player can have an account with Parks Casino.
that's called their core iGaming platform and then the second paragraph here is this
can be company what can be does the platform or the software and that's integrated with your
player account management and now what are the options so here's to let me ask you a question
about about the um the kiosk you mentioned the kiosk i'm going to answer the question right now
Look at the bottom of this page. What can a patron, what can a gambler do at Chicky and Pete's if this opens? What are their options? They have four options to place a bet. They can go to the live teller for an over -the -counter. They go to cash up to the counter and there's a man or a woman behind. They'll take your cash and you can place your bet. That's sort of like old school.
like as if you're at the track we could you know two to show one to place that sort of thing that
that's if it was a horse and if you want to do it uh i appear i want to bet for the eagles to win
then you can go to the self -service kiosks so you could do it all yourself you can put cash
or your credit card into a self -service kiosk and do your betting there and we're going to
see that on the next slide. Or you can do it. I can bet the lottery at CVS. They have kiosks
and CVS and other establishments. You can go in and bet on the state lottery.
And if someone wanted to put. I just want to go back up about the account management.
Yeah. That already exists. People have accounts. I have a friend of mine who bets horses every
saturday he's on the phone giving his code name and places his bets again i'm just trying to figure
out what differentiates this from what is already existing okay well let's keep going the second
i'm pardon me uh mr bonnie this is tanya sunkett if i could just make a request that you allow the
chair to get his questions totally out before you respond so we have a clear record thank you
thank you and i apologize no worries no worries okay i get a little animated when we start talking
about i do too some lottery machine in awawa which is not i don't think it's betting it's
gambling people stand in line to go up to those machines they don't go in there to buy medicine
sometimes they go in there to go bet the lottery just like they do with the newsstand outside of
Chicky and Pete's. I'm not, we're not trying to outlaw gambling. We're trying to decide whether
this is a particular use that should be in a neighborhood shopping center. So the second to
the bottom bullet, it talks about mobile apps on tablets and devices. So that's your phone and your
iPad or your Samsung tablet. And then this last one is not yet legal in this Commonwealth, but this
is strict online and mobile, which is once iGaming is launched. And of course, iGaming is
about to be launched, but it's not yet. Here's the self -service kiosk. This kiosk at Parks,
when it went to the Gaming Control Board in making this presentation, is emphasizing that
this is a Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board licensed manufacturer. So this is this kiosk.
what does it do? How does it work? What is the activity that would be happening inside this
Chicky and Beats? What's going on with that touchscreen? And this is a question, you know,
I think the chairman is asking some very good questions, like what is the difference with what
they want to do here with what you can do in any sports bar today? And I think a large part of that
answer are these kiosks with these touch screens um that they would want to install here now you
know chicken pizza has not told you about this mr shiraki didn't talk about this mr mr bonnie
this is sharon slitta i'm sorry to interrupt again but again this seems to be going more to
the impact on the community no no i'm not i'm talking i'm talking about the degree
of pennsylvania game and control board regulation over everything that happens here and i'm also
talking about the activity because i understand that i am just saying that if the distinction
is between sports wagering and whether a
sports wagering and whether a non -primary location that offers sports wagering
is a casino and if the distinction is that no card table games or slot machines are permitted
then is it necessary to get in I understand you'll get into this amount of detail if it goes
on to the special exception case but is it relevant to the legal issue of whether this
is a casino i think it is because the question is is this something that um uh city can that that
that the zoning code means when it intends when it has this subcategory of assembly and
entertainment use is this a generic assembly and entertainment use or activity or is this
something that the zoning code meant to prohibit when it talked about gaming facilities or licensed
gaming facilities, which is an undefined term. And I think that it's pretty clear under the zoning
code that when you're struggling to fit a use into a particular category, you need to look at
the use. And that's all I'm doing here. I'm not talking about the harm. I'm not talking about how
this affects the neighbors. I'm not, I agree that that's for a later part of the proceeding,
should we get to it? I'm talking merely about what is going on, what would be going on inside
this box, this 2 ,600 square foot glass enclosed. And I think it's important. I don't think the
board can, I mean, Parks hasn't told you about any of this. And I think it's important for the
board to understand what's going to be happening here and whether this should be in a neighborhood
shopping center or not next to a dry cleaners the next page is what's again parks is emphasizing is
most important because this is their cash cow the in play betting um i'd like now to show a video
of what is what would be going on um let me see if i can get this is a three and a half minute video
that talks about these, that talks about these kiosks at parks. And it also talks about the
South Philadelphia, the South Philadelphia Sports Club.
We're unable to see the video and you need to unshare and then reshare on the video screen.
Thank you.
Unshare and then reshare on the video screen. Okay.
Okay, share, yeah, I'm just trying to get down to the bottom here.
Here we go.
We'll be right back.
hey so today i'm going to tell you how to place a bet on the canby kiosk or ssbt so to start with
there are three ways to fund the session the first is cash the second is with a voucher that you can
receive from over the counter terminal or a previous bet set that you've printed before
and the third way is through a player account card which can be connected to your online account
so if we want to place an instant market we go to live right now
so as i say i've gone into live and let's select tennis so if i go into the tennis market here
and then these are the games that are currently being played so if we select
so if we select martin and imai as a market and we go down to instant betting we can see that the
martin and imai as a market and we go down to instant betting
game's currently in play uh it's 0 .7 set to game six so if i quickly place a bet on martin to win
this particular point and we go for five dollars and i place the bet as you can see that's instantly
now being placed uh your bet has been placed at those specific odds it tells you the potential
payout is eight uh eight dollars and twenty cent uh and now the odds have actually been updated
because that point uh has continued so if i close that selection and then go into the my
bet section you can see that that bet is still open and as soon as that bet is finished we'll
have the potential to pay out so if i now place my bet i'm waiting for the market to play through
and i end the session um a bet slip will print from the bottom of the terminal and we'll be
able to take that bet slip either to an over -the -counter terminal to cash our winnings or we'll be
able to reinsert it back into a kiosk to bet again and the journey begins twice.
I'm hearing an official opening of the Parcs winnings sportsbook here in South Philadelphia.
It's exciting that you can finally take a legal bet in South Philadelphia and I'm a little
disappointed that the Eagles aren't playing this weekend. We can't take bets on the Eagles,
but you guys have six weeks tonight, and we'll still be here next year when Eagles come back
and we'll make another one. Thank you very much, and we'll look forward to a lot of fun here in
the markets, race, and sportsbooks outfield. Thank you.
going to go back and finish out my presentation now. Okay. Now, what did the applicant show you?
The applicant showed you, as of course we know from last time, that they don't show you the
guards or the podium there's nothing here that there's no sign here that says 21 only
there's no kiosks in this um in this drawing in fact uh this rendering you go inside here
there's no kiosks being shown everyone here is looks sort of like the same person no one's even
looking at their phone no one has any cash out no one's even looking at their phone which you know
which is interesting. And there's no one in this picture. And there's certainly no,
oh, wait a second, right back here in the back, there's these five gray objects.
I would submit to you that that's probably the self -service kiosks where you can do in -play
bedding that certainly was not mentioned by the applicant in his presentation um so um but you
know there they are there's no one in of course there's no one in here there's no one there's no
people shown um doing anything uh so um uh i want to show you now some of the transcript that um
parks testified about, containing parks testimony
when it's category one license was up for renewal.
Their main license comes up for renewal every five years.
They talk about, and they have to brag
about how great they're doing.
And they get local officials come and say how great,
how much the local official loves the casino.
And so in this five -year annual, five -year review,
Parks says that our casino floor now has a bunch of things. Our casino floor has slots,
table games, and with the recent addition of sports wagering, 29 self -service sports wagering
kiosks. So there's those kiosks again, and Parks describes that as being part of their casino floor.
Now we have Ms. Mandarino, who's a member of the Gaming Control Board, and she's asking a question
about the turf clubs. And she says, with respect to sports betting and the turf clubs, which you
now can offer the sports betting there by way of, I believe the word of is probably missed from
this transcript, by way of your license that we're talking about today. So again, this is the five
year review of their main category one license. And the game and control board member, Ms.
mandarino says regarding the sports betting there that you that by way of your license
there that you that by way of your license I think it's pretty clear in the mind of this
i think it's pretty clear in the mind
game and control board member that sports betting is there by virtue of their license of their
license and she is your body sharon slid again can we the party stipulate that yeah I just
I'm sorry sports wagering can only be allowed by a licensed operator which is not
not the same necessarily as saying that it is a licensed facility that and that there will be
kiosks no but stipulate to that is that enough to move on with the legal arguments i can certainly
agree to that i'm sorry i'm sorry but it's not enough i and i and i'm almost at the end here
but what i think is relevant is how people talk about it how a member of the gaming control board
talks about it how parks officials talk about it i think terminology and how it's how it's used how
people talk about stuff is important because that's we're talking about what do these words
mean and i think it's it's important to see how people use them um in their own minds and so she's
saying at the end of this page she talks about what of your again she goes what are your long
range plans for the South Village. I believe that should be South Philly. I think we'll see that
pretty clearly. And Valley Forge. Those are the two turf clubs, South Philly and Valley Forge.
And here's Mr. Ritchie, RICCI from Parks, an executive with Parks. And he's talking about
the changes that will be made to allow the sports betting. And what does he say? He says it was
really not a difficult process. It was really more money spent on some physical plan upgrades.
And just putting them in a position to be overseen as a casino, as opposed to a racetrack, more surveillance, upgrades, things like that, security and surveillance.
So I don't think I need to beat that too much. It's the fact that the parks casino guy was saying that they're going to make the turf clubs be in a position to be overseen as a casino.
um let's go to there and this is of course there i'll go through this very quickly this is the
powerpoint presentation that accompanied that hearing again they refer to parks casino having
a gaming floor with the kiosks they talk about gaming taxes coming from sports betting it's not
something different they talk about the future of sports betting and they say here i'll jump down
to the bottom because I know time is an issue. They're having a mini casino in Cumberland County
and they want to give a first -class casino experience and that includes a sports book.
So Parks is telling the Game and Control Board that their new mini casino in Cumberland County
is going to have a first -class casino experience and that's going to include a sports book. I'm
going to keep going. They're going to have new casino professions including sports wagering.
It's not a different type of profession. It's a casino profession. That's how Parks refers to it itself. And of course, here's a letter from Parks Casino. This is the official name of Parks Casino. Their corporate name is Greenwood Gaming and Entertainment.
They wrote to the gaming control board years ago talking about proposed regulations. They wanted to open up the sports books at the turf club at the exact same day as they open it up at the casino. And they emphasized to the gaming control board that it's the same operation.
The sports wagering operations and internal controls at each type of land -based facility
will be similar, if not the same, in all material respects.
This is the same thing as what's happening at their casino.
Finally, we're sort of going into the homestretch here.
This is their petition to have sports gambling at the Valley Forge Turf Club.
So if they get their way, they're going to be submitting one of these things to the gaming control board for 1526 Packer. We hope they don't get their way. Let's see what they said in their petition. Okay. They talk about their license. That's fine. They talk about the fact that this is a petition.
They talk about that they're going to put a lot of money into it and that they're going to put the security and security measures, again, in coordination with the Bureau, the Pennsylvania Game and Control Board Bureau of Casino Compliance.
Finally, towards the end, we're looking at the Game and Control Board website that has links to sports wagering at the bottom, information about the sports wagering program.
And what do they talk about?
They don't talk about just sports wagering certificate holders.
they talk about licensed sports wagering certificate holders.
Again, the paramount nature of the license. I'll skip through this, but this is
again talking about, I think what Ms. Zuleta mentioned, which is it's all come
Again, talking about, I think, what Ms. Zuleta mentioned, which is it's all coming under the main license.
This is what pops up when you click that link that I just showed you.
It all comes under the main license.
And then here's also the status of the various licenses.
The Parks Casino has the main license.
Each of their principal entities, which are really their subsidiaries, the City Turf Club here, is approved for licensure.
so this entity that's before you does have a gaming license and this is just so the board can
see this is the neighborhood that the Chicky and Pete's is in the Chicky and Pete's is right here
towards the right hand side with the red dot on it these are all the row homes in Packer Park
this is the Chicky and Pete's on the left you can see the Chicky and Pete's crab logo and there's
the dry cleaners in the middle, there's a pizza place, there's a bakery. Mr. Chairman, I just
want to back to this because this is the same exact stuff that we said we would talk about in
the second part of this argument. It says nothing to do with whether the operation is a casino,
and I think we're going pretty far afield. We've let Mr. Bonny go pretty far afield,
and this has nothing to do with whether the operation is a casino. Your objection is sustained.
Okay, I'll finish off by talking about the game and control board letter and highlighting this portion of the game and control board's chief counsel letter where he emphasizes how this is everything here in this facility that has to do with sports betting is going to be regulated by the Pennsylvania game and control board.
And he says, in concert therewith, the board would not authorize the non -primary location to conduct sports wagering until satisfied that adequate internal controls are present to address the issues of security, surveillance, financial safeguards, underage and problem gambling, exclusion, and other pertinent matters designed to uphold the interests illustrated throughout the Gaming Act as they relate to sports wagering.
I'm going to stop sharing here. So I think it's clear from our presentation that this animal,
that this is that when you walk into that 2 ,600 square foot glass box, you are leaving the city
of Philadelphia and you are going into something that's the territory of Harrisburg, the Gaming
Control Board, the Gaming Act. And I believe that that is the fair interpretation of what is referred
to in this definition under assembly and use. And that it is a licensed gaming facility as authorized
by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania pursuant to the Gaming Act. I don't think, I think that's,
I think that conclusion is inescapable. And I think that it's the applicants who are asking
you to change those words and look to a definition of a different phrase. I think that this is what
city council and the mayor and our government and through our zoning code does not believe
should be by special exception. If they can do it in this neighborhood, they can do it in other
neighborhoods. And they can, and you will see these, and I think that what we're talking about
here is in the nature of something that the zoning code does prohibit. And, you know, I'll pause
there. And I'd ask you to take a look at the facts and see if that, and see if those facts
fit into this category or not. I think the city of Philadelphia has said that it does,
and I would ask you to take Mr. Reuter's opinion seriously, and I thank you for listening to
our presentation. Thank you, and before we begin, it's not for debate. I just want to point out,
you did a lot of your presentation, talked about those kiosks. If my recollection is correct,
and it's about four years ago last time i was in that turf club at seventh and packard
you don't have to go to a tele they have machines that you can place a bet uh on a horse bed so
a kiosk is a kiosk and i used cbs and i wasn't trying to be flip about that the point is cbs
and walgreens and all these other places do have forms of gambling maybe we ought to look into that
and see well i don't mr i don't know how again i said not for debate i just wanted to point that
that you you spent a lot of time on those kiosks well like there's some sort of you know foreign
foreign piece of machinery that people aren't used we use kiosks for pretty much everything
piece of machinery that people aren't used we use kiosks for pretty much everything
these days whether it's gambling or not gambling well i but i mr chairman i think if they if i
think if chickie and pete's wanted to put a lottery kiosk inside of chickie and pete's i don't think
we'd be here today so i don't know maybe we would maybe we wouldn't just what who knows i don't
think the guy who sells the lottery outside and the newsstand would be happy about it but maybe
they would maybe you should look into that and i'm going to have a question uh michael for you
or somebody about he talked about security uh and again i want to go down that path too long but
i believe that chicken pete probably does have a security system in there already
physical yes security people like most establishments do yes okay that is accurate
they have it and and mr charaki is available as well if you had any questions beyond that but yes
Okay, that was my only question for the time being, but thank you.
Square foot facility, Mr. Chairman.
Michael, you've got to speak a little closer to the microphone or you're a little bit muffled.
Michael, what are you saying?
What is the square footage at Chick -A -S and Feet's 2600?
The sports book and OTV race, parimutuel race, would be about 2600 square feet.
Chickie's and Pete's itself is around 23 ,000, 24 ,000 square feet.
And that room that we talked about that Carol's speaking to has been originally set up as part of an area for private parties and overflow dining, I believe, when the main dining room is full.
That is correct.
That accurate?
Right.
So because I know we're going to get into this whole thing about cars, people coming.
so people come to dine i don't understand what the difference is going to be but all right
please proceed did you did mr reuter want to speak because you heard from us you heard from
mr bonnie and mr reuter did send in a brief and i didn't know if he was going to speak in addition
to what he already said or if that is the end i think i did ask him that but we'll ask him again
Mr. Reuter? Yes, thank you. What I do want to point out first is that, again, the only issue
here, again, is whether the proposed sports wagering and parimutuel betting at this location
is a casino. And again, we want to emphasize, notwithstanding what I've noticed while everybody
was talking is a a uh an error typo really uh in my brief we we do agree that this proposal would
not be a licensed facility as defined by the gaming act and it would constitute a non -primary
location under the racing act what we're trying to point out though is that the city code explicitly
does not adopt the definition of licensed facility in the gaming act uh if city council at the time
had intended to simply adopt the definition of a licensed facility they could have simply just
said so uh it would have been simple casino a licensed game a licensed facility as defined by
the gaming act or whatever referring to the specific uh citation for pacs part two
they didn't do that that would have been one sentence and it would have clarified this entire
issue forever they didn't do that and i think uh mr bonnie pointed out why they didn't do that
precisely because even though at the beginning it was understood that all casinos i think
originally uh all casinos had to be attached to a racetrack initially uh but that or not
most of them were attached to racetracks i mean one of one of the the the but but more importantly
the issue is that they only had slots but it was understood by pretty much everybody at the time
that eventually you would have table games uh and as mr bonnie points out two years after uh casinos
licensed facilities were allowed in the state they did in they did then add
a new a new form of gambling and i think the intention of council at the time
was that they would be flexible that they wouldn't simply say okay we're going to we're going to
restrict mr chairman that's speculation i don't see how mr reuter could know what it's it's not
speculation because the the definition itself is clearly intended to be broader than the definition
in the gaming act because they don't simply they don't say they're not adopting the definition
in the gaming act if they wanted to do that they would have they didn't do that
they said it says a licensed gaming facility as authorized by the commonwealth pursuant to
it says a licensed gaming facility as authorized by the commonwealth pursuant to the gaming act
so again so we agree that this is a non -primary location and we all accept that the state
has in 2018 uh initially temporarily and then later uh it became permanent so to speak uh
allowed sports wagering in pennsylvania uh they allowed it in licensed facilities and they also
allowed it by um a petition at non -primary locations if the petition submitted by a
holder of a license just to have slot machines so again we everybody agrees there's not going
to be slots here there's not going to be table games here yet because here's and this is the
key point if let's say for the sake of argument if the state decides well we're going to allow
allow people to play poker for money at these at these locations because again that's something
that many people have talked about is and many states do have uh authorized just card rooms
poker rooms california said poker rooms for that's not in but that's not an issue before us
no but the point the point is what's the intention of the definition here and the point is if if the
state were to allow a poker room to operate at a non -primary location are we to understand that
city council would have had no intention to kind of restrict that type that type of gambling taking
place everywhere the point is is that the definition of casino in the city's code is
clearly broader and intended to be broader and to pick up more types of activities and including
activities that were not yet considered at the time the definition was written because everybody
knew that once you allowed casinos with slot machines that eventually they would have other
activities taking place and it's the same thing here i mean again if the state says we're going
to allow poker rooms or the state said we're going to allow card rooms in the state like many other
states do we wouldn't need another definition we wouldn't need another category because that would
be subsumed within because if it's licensed by the state as authorized and if it's under the
gaming control the gaming act it's a casino excuse me mr reuter if that's the concern here that this
the definition could eventually be expanded to include table games or slot machines as far as
this case is concerned couldn't the board simply add a proviso providing that no table games or
slot machines are prohibited no no i think i think i think that's and that's not what i'm
intending to say here i mean yes that's that's a possibility and i have no position on whether
there's going to be a provisor or something it's this this this has nothing to do you are saying
that it is broader than the um than as defined under the gaming act can i ask then if it isn't
related to the gaming hat act would a location with strictly off -track betting be considered a
casino no because off -track betting is authorized by the racing act not the game i understand but
you just said that the definition isn't limited by the language of the gaming act so why would
that not be because the definition does it it the definition covers activities that are licensed
and authorized by the gaming act so again we agree because off -track betting by itself is
not authorized by the Gaming Act that an off -track betting facility is not a casino.
The definition explicitly cites the Gaming Act. So if it's authorized by the Commonwealth
pursuant to the Gaming Act, and if it's a licensed activity, it's a casino.
Ms. Sillette, I just want to add, I don't know if this is in your mind or not, but
unfortunately, or for better or for worse, the Gaming Act actually has the phrase racehorse
in its title. But that's only because a lot of the money goes to subsidize
racehorses. Right. Actually, I was considering more
your argument, Mr. Bonney, that it should be determined by the nature
of the use. Yes. And if the nature of off -track
betting is gambling, I'm not understanding
the reasoning for not including that. Why is that assembly and entertainment
as not personal? As Mr. Reuter says, we can't ignore
the second half of the sentence and that that so things that are happening only because of the
racing act um are not referred to here um yeah and and again i i want to be clear it's we're not
saying that gambling per se is make something a casino but if it's gambling or
is make something a casino but if it's gambling or sports betting or anything along any kind of
activity that is licensed by the commonwealth under the gaming act that's what the definition
says so sports wagering is licensed by the commonwealth under the gaming act i i don't see
how this is really actually at all that confusing if this if the city had an if city council had
intended to explicit to to uh expressly say that a casino was a licensed facility as defined by
the gaming act we wouldn't be here but that's not what they did and it's pretty clear that
the council's intention was to cover more activities than just simply uh you know slots
because again at the time this was written that was the only thing that was that was out there
it was the only thing that was being authorized at the time the definition of casino but it was
clear that city council had the foresight to understand that there would be other activities
and again it doesn't say slots but again at the time the definition was written that was the only
type of gambling that was allowed in a casino was slots so why didn't it just say slot machines you
can't have slot machines or if you have slot machines it's a casino that's not what it says
it says okay it's it's again i guess i'm probably i'm kind of beating at that horse here but the
point is is that the definition says if it's a license if it's licensed by the commonwealth
pursuant to the gaming act it's a casino can i mention uh mr chairman and members of the board
we have to take a look at the assembly and entertainment section and look at the subcategories.
What is also prohibited in a CA, in a neighborhood shopping center like this?
If Chickie and Pete's wanted to sublease that 2 ,600 square foot room to a company that wanted
to put in four Ms. Pac -Man machines, that would be an amusement arcade. And that will be strictly
prohibited or if the subtenant wanted to put in three pool tables that would be strictly prohibited
i think it is unreasonable to think they'd be entitled they'd be entitled to a hearing in front
of this board wouldn't they for a variance for a variance we do that all the time well and that's
what we're asking you here for is to require a variance that for city council to say you can't
have four pac -man machines unless by a variance but this sort of thing with these bonnie you're
putting the rabbit in the hat i mean with all due respect i mean this is getting again very far
afield it's mr reuter's argument at this point not yours so respectfully mr chairman i would
ask that we you know keep it on on task yeah i guess mr reuter to uh wrap it up if you could
appreciate well again i i think again in uh you know notwithstanding the typo on the first page
We, again, concede, this is a non -primary location, concede it is not a licensed facility as defined in the Gaming Act, and yet it's clearly an activity, sports wagering is an activity that every step of the process, from soup to nuts, every single aspect of sports wagering has to be licensed and authorized by the Commonwealth,
and that licensing and authorization takes place pursuant to the gaming act it it is
without any question a casino as defined by the city's code that's it and that's why the
decision was made to uh issue an amended uh refusal uh and not a referral for a special exception
okay um this is sharon before we move on to a vote for this i should mention that um rich
demarco mr demarco is here with his hand raised um mr demarco participated in the original special
exception hearing i believe but he is not a party to the appeal against lni um if we could call him
just to get him to clarify
that he is not a party
to the appeal against L &I.
Marco?
Morning, can you hear me?
Please identify yourself
and I'll swear you in.
You're muted.
Good morning, can you hear me?
Yeah, I thank you, Sharon,
and I agree I'm not...
Richard, identify yourself, please.
You got it.
Richard DeMarco, address 2005 Market Street, 16th floor, Philadelphia.
Address, 2005, Market Street, 16th floor, Philadelphia,
10103.
I agree I'm not specifically -
You're swearing a firm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Sorry.
Please proceed.
Yeah, I'm not going to -
We adopt -
We're obviously interested parties in the appeal.
We're not parties per se.
I agree with that.
Identify what you mean by -
When you say we, please identify -
Veteran Stadium Neighbors Civic Association.
we are an rco that shares a boundary with park civic and we are within one city block of the
use and my board has voted unanimously uh to oppose the proposal i agree i'm not a party to
the appeal against lni specifically however we would certainly adopt all of paul's arguments
he represents the neighboring rco we agree i would only add and i will not um i think you're
going down yes you certainly would be if this goes on to continue the special exception hearing
you certainly have a right to testify then but i don't believe um because you're not a party in
this case okay we adopt paul's arguments thank you thank you thank you all right we're going to
everybody we're resting this we're going to get into the vote on the appeal sharon are we good to
go yes okay do i read is it the zp number or is it the mi number read the mi number
okay mi 2020 -001532 1526 pecker avenue my vote is to grant the appeal
my vote is to grant the appeal appeal granted appeal granted appeal granted
it thank you okay the appeal having been granted that means that the board um has adopted the
position that this requires a special exception there was a fairly lengthy hearing in december
on this i believe the way that it ended was that um mr matione had presented his case
mr bonnie he was going to bring his witnesses back for mr bonnie to cross -examine and also
present his own case. Is that correct? Is that memory? We did not finish all of our witnesses.
I did talk to Mr. Bonnie about this yesterday. We did not finish all of our witnesses. We have
three additional witnesses to prevent what we have everybody who testified last time
available for cross -examination and we were hoping that we were able to put on
Frederick Heron, the Director of Public Safety in Ben Salem Township, first.
I discussed it with Mr. Bonney yesterday.
I know he has a busy schedule.
I am not positive that he's on the line right now because he's got his Director of Public Safety for Ben Salem Township.
He's trying to make time for us.
If he's available now, I would love to start with him as our first witness.
Otherwise, I still have Debbie Farah, our traffic engineer, and Jerry Fretz, the director of public safety for the Parks Casino, as well as our direct witness.
I believe at the original hearing you brought, Mr. Shiroki and Mr. Davis testified.
Did they return today so that Mr. Bonney can question them?
They are both here, as is Matt Cullen, who testified.
And we have an architect, Jeremy Drummond, the original architect, has left the firm and is unavailable, but we have Marcin Skotak here, who is the architect handling the matter now, and he is here for cross -examination as well.
So we do have everybody available for cross -examination, in addition to our witnesses who haven't yet to testify.
And Mr. Perrin is available, I understand, right now, if we could go to him.
Can I ask a quick question, Mr. Mattione?
This is Tanya.
Do you have your volume all the way up?
Because you're a little faint.
I'm sorry.
Let me just move the computer closer.
I had to push back.
That's perfect.
That's perfect.
Mr. Mattione and Mr. Chairman, this is Mark Stewart.
May I just interrupt for one moment, Mr. Chairman, to request to be excused so that I may attend a funeral?
Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony.
And thanks to the board.
I'll be safe. Before we start, Mike, I know you said you have someone who's limited time.
Is the court reporter okay for another 15 minutes or so? Okay. Yes. Okay. And then once we're done
with this first witness, we'll take a break. Okay. Excuse me, Chair, if Ms. Brumbelow wanted
to testify before she left to... Okay. Sorry about that. If she chooses to, I know that someone else
will be replacing him. Mr. Brumblow, Ms. Brumblow.
Mr. Brumbelow, Ms. Brumbelow.
Paula, if you're speaking and we can't.
Sorry, Paula shouldn't be here.
We have Dave who's representing planning commission.
In that case, it's fine.
I knew that Paula had to leave early.
If Mr. Fecto has taken over for her,
then there's no need to take his testimony now.
Thank you.
All right, Mr. Mattione, call your first witness.
Director Frederick Heron.
Mr. Heron has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, sir.
Yeah, good morning, sir.
Please identify yourself in the record.
Spell your first and last name, and I'll square you in.
are you breaking up would you try that again
no you're breaking up
if so you could
We're unable to hear you.
Hold on.
Can you hear me now?
Yes, yes.
Can you hear me?
Thank you.
Yes, we can.
Please identify yourself.
First and last name?
Fred Herron, H -A -R -R -A -N, Director of Public Safety,
Ben Salem Township Police Department.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. Mr. Medellin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Heron, Director Heron,
what is your profession or occupation? I'm the director of Ben Salem Township Police Department
in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. And how long have you been the director? I've been the director for
15 years. I've been employed here 33. And in your work as director of public safety, do you work
with the Parks Casino? I do. And would you describe your relationship with the Parks Casino?
Certainly. I was director in 2006 when Parks started in December as just slot machines.
And then I continue on and director in 2010 when they have table games.
I work with them on a daily basis regarding issues within the community, anything that matters concerning Parks Casino,
working with them with a variety of functions, not only in the gaming, but the restaurants and their showroom as well.
and a lot of community events as well.
Parks is involved with a lot of community activities.
I chair many of our nonprofits in town
that I'm involved in a lot of community organizations as well.
And over the past 15 years,
since Parks Casino became fully operational,
what has happened to the level of crime
in Ben Salem Township?
So the level of crime has continually decreased
over the years.
And if you may, I have some crime statistics
that really tells an amazing story.
And I took four samples of statistics,
2017, a couple of years ago versus 2005,
which was the year before parks opened, obviously.
And for instance, our robbery,
we've shown a 44 % decrease in robbery,
a 42 % decrease in assaults,
a 63 % decrease in burglaries
and a 30 % decrease in thefts and a 66 % decrease in auto thefts.
Parks has been an amazing partner, very cooperative and very aware of the issues
that the community thought was going to arrive because of Parks,
but that never actually had an opposite effect.
Prior to opening the casino in Bensalem,
what concerns were expressed to you by the neighbors up there?
I missed it prior to the opening. Is that what you said?
Prior to the opening. What concerns did the neighbors express to you about the casino?
Sure. So in 2005 and early in 2006 as well, I was asked to attend probably 20 some odd community meetings in different areas of our township by our mayor,
our state center, our state representative, regarding potential impact of parks in the
community. A lot of the neighbors were afraid that once parks came, casino, moving into the
racetrack, you know, they feared that people would go to parks, lose their shirts, so to speak,
lose their shirt so to speak and have no way to get home so to steal a car from the neighborhood
and have no way to get home. So to steal a car from the neighbor.
to to go back to wherever they came from people would need money and go rob stores drugs would
be thrown throughout the area prostitution would be up and down street road you know all the things
that they had seen from television and other sources and I did a little research you know
with casinos in Atlantic City, casinos in Las Vegas, spoke to people, talked to our elected
officials about measures, what measures we were going to put into place. And that never happened.
None of these issues that the neighbors thought ever transpired. As a matter of fact, it went
just the opposite. And parks has just stepped up to the plate in so many facets to help the community
with a variety of of different charitable events and other things of that nature so
that's what i did in 2005 and 2006 and and now i don't really community members don't parks is a
part of the community it's a part of ben salem it's just it's a staple in ben salem and no one
complains about parks right now and based upon your experience with the parks casino and their
operations do you believe that the relocation of the otv race and sports book from its present
location to inside chickies and pete's at 1526 packer avenue will lead to an increase in crime
in that area i i can't see anything relocation or addition regarding parks uh would lead to an
increase in crime uh as again parks their uh security folks or surveillance folks director
security um all their executives uh work very well with this and if if there is a problem which
there hasn't been they get on top of it and matter of fact parks has just been very cooperative when
we have things that have nothing to do with them they've been very cooperative so um i don't see
that having impact on the city parks at all and based upon your experience again with the parks
casino do you believe that this proposed relocation will have a detrimental impact on
the health safety and welfare of the neighborhood yeah and do you have any uh michael if you can
talk a little bit again your voice i'm sorry mr chair i was looking at my notes and looking away
i'm sorry again uh will this um relocation if approved uh into inside chickies and petes have
a based upon your knowledge and experience uh as a director of public safety will this have a
detrimental impact on the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood, where would we
relocate it to? No, it will not have a negative effect. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I have no further
questions for the witness. Mr. Bondi? Yes, thank you. Mr. Herron, thank you.
The statistics that you referred to was township -wide, is that correct?
Correct. Do you attribute the decrease in those types of crimes township wide to the existence of Parks Casino?
No, I don't attribute them to the existence of Parks Casino, but what people anticipated was a huge increase. And if anything, we didn't have a two or three percent decrease. We had double digits times times three at the lowest and times six at the highest decrease.
But you don't attribute that to the Parks Casino. I mean, you guys are doing a good job of fighting crime, I assume.
Well, the thing that I would attribute to parks casino would be closures, you know, the again, their security staff is always very accessible to us when there might be an issue where somebody could be inside of parks.
But these are crimes that would have occurred outside. But no, parks has not led to any sort of increase what people thought.
So I can't say that the decrease is because of parks. I can't say that.
Okay. Approximately how many arrests are made at Parks Casino on a given month?
No, I apologize. I am not in my office right now. I don't have that statistic.
I can tell you, though, I couldn't even tell you if an arrest a month, I don't even think it might not be that high as one arrest a month, but I don't have that number with me.
OK, so you're not aware of the number of arrests on average per month at Parks Casino as the director of public safety.
And I think you said to the director of the police department, you don't have even that number at your at your disposal today, today.
at your at your disposal today today i don't have it at this moment i could get it for you in 10
I don't have it at this moment.
minutes i can use my other phone to make a call no no but you can or you can't the point is that
that's not you didn't come here to the zoning board to actually talk about the number of
arrests at the parks casino i want to um would you agree with me that um the arrests inside of
parks casino and on the premises are handled by the state police not by the local police
that's the inside of parks on the it's we as we call on the carpet off the carpet on the carpet
is handled by the state police so i wouldn't have those numbers in my computer system to begin with
i would only have numbers outside of that do you have could you um see the screen on the zoom
uh i all i see is the uh the squares of people i don't see any any other screen yeah now i see
something now we see so i pulled this i pulled this from the state website it's uh this is
arrests by the pennsylvania state police at parks casino um and i did some mathematics at the bottom
where I averaged 1 .8 arrests per month, going back to 2007. Do you have any reason to think
that this is incorrect? No, I have no reason to believe. 1 .8 a month? No, I don't believe that
would be incorrect. Thank you. I want to, before I leave this witness, you know, he's testifying,
And Mr. Mattione has asked him that because of certain externalities that exist or don't exist with the casino in Ben Salem, that that has anything to do with the types of externalities that this sports book would have in the city of Philadelphia in Packer Park.
And I thought we just spent many, many hours with the board concluding that those two animals aren't the same, that this is not the same as the casino.
So I kind of want to strike the entire evidence.
I mean, if this is not a casino, why does Mr.
Matione keep talking about a casino?
I'd let Mr.
Matione answer that.
But you raised an issue, Paul, when you said it was one is a one point eight arrest per month on average.
From the state police.
state police that's everything that goes anything that was uh occurred inside inside right not in
the parking how many thousands of people do we have do you have those numbers that go through
that casino on a monthly basis i don't know how many crimes are being committed that don't result
in arrests i mean let's stick with no no how many people are going in there that's a good question
i mean 1 .8 could be a lot based on the on the number of people who patronize it it could be
insignificant in a sense based on the number of people go into you raise it i did i think my main
i think my main point was that this public safety officer who came here to tell how fantastic parks
is didn't even have the the relevant information well he said he can get it in 10 minutes he
doesn't have what goes on inside. I think I heard that quite clear. And he certainly has the
relevant information, and his testimony is relevant, Mr. Chairman, because when before this
very large 450 -acre site opened as a casino, all the people in Ben Salem were up in arms saying
it's going to be terrible, crime's going to go crazy, etc. We're talking about a non -primary
location opening in South Philadelphia in a very small area. And when we met, hold on, Michael,
hold on. Something's going on. Okay, we saw. That was Mr. Harran. Yeah. Mr. Maniani, would you agree
to ask Mr. Harran to pull the number of crimes committed annually over the past 10 years at the
address of Parks Casino and to submit that for the record? I mean, let's see what it is. That's
the question not whether township -wide crime has dropped I mean that's I'm making a mockery of this
gentlemen gentlemen gentlemen gentlemen I think to compare Fox the Parks Casino
which probably has a capacity of thousands on a daily basis to compare that to a 2600 foot
proposed sports betting portion of of chicken pizza i don't see i don't see i agree i agree
all right so let's move on okay fine thank you mr chair my only point was
Okay, fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My only point was that they were concerned about crime
that they were concerned about crime before
before and they haven't materialized. That's why I understand that. I understand both you
and I understand Mr. Bonnie. But I think it's apples to apples. That's fine, Mr. Chairman.
And I guess we are done with Director Herring. You can go on to your next witness, Mike.
Do we need to take a break, Mr. Chairman? Taking a break. Yeah, we're going to take a break.
it's we'll be back at 12 15 10 minute break can i ask how um much time we have this afternoon
no later than 1 15. all right thank you thank you mr chairman uh this is leonard reuter uh again um
notwithstanding the position that the city planning uh will be taking in the case um i am not
i myself am not participating in the rest of this um you know again but i want to make it clear
we're not waiving the right to a appeal the decision that was made on the appeal against
lni nor are we waiving any right to appeal any decision uh that may come out of the special
exception case because again city planning and this was just decided in the uh 13 14 spring garden
case city planning is present city planning does will establish the position of the uh of this uh
of this that the city will take with respect to the special exception but i i don't need to be
here and i have a conflict coming up so uh may i be excused yes you may thank you thank you for
your testimony thank you thank you wanted to call my next witness of debbie ferraro
I'm sorry, Chair, if I could just do a court reporter check just to make sure.
I see.
Are you ready?
Yes, I'm ready.
Thank you, Charisse.
You're welcome, Sonia.
Ms. Ferreira, please raise your hand.
Ms. Ferreira, when you get on, please identify yourself.
First and last name.
Spell your last name.
And I'll swear you in.
she's been allowed to speak sir good afternoon
thank you good afternoon chairman and members of the board my name is debbie ferraro um as my
resident again it's um debbie d -e -b -b -i -e ferraro f -e -r -r -a -r -o we're going to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do thank you mr marioni thank you mr chairman
And Debbie, what is your profession or occupation?
I am a registered professional transportation and traffic engineer for over 28 years.
And could you just briefly state your, let me, rather than have you do that, I put up
a copy of your resume or CV, and is that reasonably accurate in terms of your qualifications?
Yes, it is.
And what degree do you have?
I have a bachelor's science in civil engineering.
And are you, I think we can stipulate to that unless there's an objection from Mr. Bonney.
No objection.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I just wanted to say she's a professional engineer as well.
Thank you.
Thank you.
No objection.
Were you requesting that you study the possible traffic impacts of the project proposed by
the applicant for a special exception at 1526 Packer Avenue? Yes, I will. And in simple terms
as possible, can you briefly describe what you did to investigate the project and its potential
impacts on traffic in the area around 1526 Packer Avenue? Sure. In the most simple terms,
I first calculated the anticipated reduction in vehicle trips traveling to and from the site
in the peak hours associated with downsizing the restaurant and removing 138 of the existing seats.
I then compared this reduction in peak hour trips to the vehicle trips anticipated to be
generated by the proposed parks, race, and sports book room. And what background information were
you provided about the project and that you were asked to evaluate? Sure. I was provided
with information and also a building plan. And that plan detailed the size and the seating
capacity of the proposed changes to the bar and restaurant. And again, based on that plan,
what it showed is the existing facility. Again, that's the facility at 1526 Packer.
What it showed is the existing facility, again that's the facility at 1526 Packer Avenue, will use a 2 ,600 square foot portion of the existing restaurant for the new operation, removing, as I stated previously, and reducing its dining capacity by 138 seats.
The plan also indicated that the sportsbook room will be housed within that 2 ,600 square foot space and is planned to provide 59 seats.
So the net loss of overall seats within Chicken and Pete's restaurant is 79.
In addition to that plan for 1526 Packer Avenue, we also requested and was provided size and seating capacity of the existing turf club.
And in order to complete your evaluation as a traffic engineer, what must you do with the data that you accumulated?
Well, the gross floor area of those facilities and also the number of seats are used as
independent variables in the formulas used to develop our trip generation estimates.
The first step, as I said in my summary, the reduction in trips associated with downsizing
the restaurant were estimated or calculated based on the rates provided in the Institute
of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual. And again, using the number of seats and
the size of the space removed, the proposed downsizing of the restaurant is expected to
reduce trips in and out of the site by 25 during the weekday commuter peak hour, 45 during the
weekday evening peak hour, and 29 trips during the Saturday evening peak hour. So again, as I
summarized, the next step is to compare those reductions to the trips anticipated to be
generated by the sportsbook room. And we calculated those trips based on two methodologies.
So the first methodology is we actually developed site -specific rates for the existing turf club,
and again, it's 700 Packer Avenue, based on counts that were collected at the driveways
prior to COVID. And again, these counts were conducted prior to 2019 with that change in use.
Based on the actual trips in and out of those turf club driveways, the proposed sportsbook room
is projected to generate a total of seven trips enter and exiting the site during the Friday
commuter peak, six during the Friday evening peak hour, and three trips during the peak hour on a
Saturday. And again, these are lower than the amount of trips removed from the downsizing of
the restaurant. We also included in our study, just for comparison purposes, an estimate of
anticipated peak hour trips for the sports book room using PennDOT approved rates for casino uses
within the stadium district. And one thing I do want to point out that it is not anticipated this
facility to generate traffic at the same rate as a casino. The trip rates for a casino are based on
gaming positions, but they also include so many other amenities, you know, multiple restaurants,
room for conferences, special entertainment, you know, use it also just special entertainment and
events. But again, this exercise was completed just to provide those conclusions and provide
the most conservative assumption. Based on the casino trip generation rates,
the proposed sportsbook room is projected to generate 24 trips during the Friday commuter peak,
27 during the Friday evening peak, and 34 trips during the Saturday peak hour. Again,
these highly conservative numbers show that the new facility or this that will generate less trips
during the Friday commuter peak, during the Friday evening peak, and just a moderate increase
five trips during the Saturday peak hour. And what is a trip generation statement?
A trip generation statement is a document. It's approved by both the City of Philadelphia and
PennDOT, and it basically summarizes the anticipated total number of trips
going to and from a land use in a specific time frame.
and what purpose does it serve well again it's commonly you know for the purposes of approvals
land development approvals just some other types of projects it's submitted to the city
philadelphia and also penn dot department of trans pennsylvania department transportation
just to receive concurrence on trip generation methodology
and also in cases such as this one where
And also, in cases such as this one, where the trips anticipated to be generated by the new use are equal or less than the previous, it's used to summarize potential impacts to traffic, rather than performing a full, you know, width modeling traffic study.
And did you complete a trip generation statement in this matter?
I did.
I think I just like to turn to it on the screen and just have you identify it as the
as the trip generation statement sorry about that I think that's parking first
here is this what's on the screen now a copy and it was identified and provided to the board as
Exhibit 7, provided to all counsel involved in the case as Exhibit 7.
Is this the trip generation statement?
It is.
Based upon your review and study of the relevant traffic impacts,
will this project have or cause a detrimental impact on the health,
safety, and welfare of the neighborhood in excess of what is expected from this
proposed use?
I would conclude no.
and again based on the assessments that i summarized um it's expected that the downsized
restaurant with the sportsbook room is expected to generate less trips in and out of the site
than the existing full capacity restaurant um and the reason i say that is there's only you know
that most conservative assessment of that saturday peak hour really is based on that um casino rate
And we expect the sportsbook room to generate less trips than a casino.
And in your opinion, will this project cause unexpected congestion in the public streets or on the local transportation systems?
No, I would expect the adjacent roadway network to operate similar to the conditions today.
And will this project have an unexpected burden on local parks, schools, or other public facilities?
And taking into account the 2 ,600 square feet of race and sports book with only 59 seats and the reduction in overall size at Chickie's and Pete's Bar by 2 ,600 square feet for the race and sports book and the elimination of 79 seats, do you have an opinion of the overall traffic impact on the neighborhood?
Yeah, I do not expect changes to the overall traffic operation in the neighborhood.
Thank you. I'd like to then next turn to the parking. And in your opinion,
as a professional engineer, is the parking provided adequate for the present operation?
Yes. The number of parking spaces provided exceeds the requirements of the zoning code.
Based on the zoning code, and I guess, yes, you're calling up the summary, but just to give
the summary of the results based on the zoning code the existing restaurant requires 91 spaces
the downsized restaurant requires 81 spaces and the sports book room requires 15 spaces which is
because it's one for every four permanent seats miss perrero excuse the interruption
could you scroll down because all we have is on top portion of that that would be helpful thank
you sorry miss miss ferrero that's okay there might be a i think there's a table
um i can scroll down further is there a summary table on the next
no just an occlusion i apologize yeah um so
during the peak parking demand which is after seven the restaurant with a sportsbook room
based on this analysis does require a net of five additional spaces but again during this peak time
which is after 7 p .m there's very few businesses open and you know there's an excess of spaces
within the shopping center. And will the project if approved meet all the parking requirements?
Yes, the number of provided parking spaces will continue to exceed the requirements of the zoning code, even with the increase of five.
And are your opinions you expressed today based upon a reasonable degree of traffic engineering certainty?
Thank you. I have no further questions for Ms. Ferraro.
I don't know if we want to do cross -examination now or wait until after I finish Mr. Pretz and then start.
I'd like to do, I'd like to do cross, but that's my question.
I'd like to do cross, but that's my question.
Proceed, Mr. Bonney.
Okay, thank you.
Ms. Ferreira, thank you for being here.
What data in your reports are taken actually in real life from a sports book parlor, a sports book operation?
can you repeat the question yes which of the data in your reports in your letter reports
are coming from observations of sports books
well we used yes so the two different methodologies again we provided two ends of
the spectrum um Paul the first one is um a trip generation for the existing turf club which I
agree did not have the sports book um but the second one is a casino use and the reason why
we chose it is because it was vetted through the city of Philadelphia it was vetted through the
PennDOT Department of Transportation it's for the stadium district where this new facility
you know is proposed um and it's ultimate it's very conservative so we just wanted to make sure
that we had those two ends of the spectrum in the report well you're you're saying with all due
respect you are saying there are two ends of the spectrum i'm just asking about what is the where
did the data come from so i i think it we don't know what the ends of the spectrum is until we
um until we observe and not measure the use so the turf in my in my view with all due respect
the the trip generation you got from the turf club in south philadelphia was
june of 2013 is that correct um is that what it states i thought it was 2014 but it might have
just been that's the date of the study okay well let's have been taken the year before but in the
range of that to early 2014. Okay. Well, I see on page two of your
trip generation statement, it says Pannoni conducted traffic counts at the existing
turf club site driveway in June, 2013. Okay. That's correct. Then I can verify that.
Okay. Thank you. So, and you would agree with me that that is about eight years ago, and that is
before sports wagering was legalized in Pennsylvania, which was about 2017 or 2018.
I can agree. I was on site during those counts. And I have to say that was a time when the stadium
district was very vibrant. The teams were doing very well. And, you know, just to give you a
framework of when those counts were taken. Right. But the only thing going on inside that building
was betting on horse races.
I agree.
It did not include the sports wagering,
which is why we provided
the ultimate conservative estimate,
even though it's not a casino,
but we did also provide that data.
Right.
And they start to use that
for our conclusions as well.
Right.
Well, I think the board is of the opinion
that this is not a casino,
but to indulge your report,
when and where were the casino numbers
um draw you know what what is that drawn from what year were those um that's a similar time
frame um there were a number of consultants and um we did put in applications for a number of the
casino license um so one within the stadium district it was based on actual counts at three
different um and i think we put that in the appendix um paul so the methodology was based
on actual counts at three different casinos that were very similar to the one that was proposed in
the stadium district okay so um can you tell me um what years that data is from the years
it was in the previous years of that 2014 um again because that's when the some of those
casinos were just coming online with um with more license being provided um okay but you
you would it's before 2017 which correct okay
okay um thank you uh
uh did you analyze the congestion in the public streets currently
congestion in the public streets currently in the area surrounding 1526 Packer?
No, I did not. So what is common, again, for the city of Philadelphia and PennDOT
is if you have an analysis that shows that your trips will be equal to or less than the existing
trips, it doesn't make sense to go and do an analysis of congestion adjacent to the roadway
because you know it's going to decrease with the decrease in volumes.
Well, you know it's going to decrease if you make a bunch of assumptions.
And I think I've...
Well, those assumptions are based on very sound engineering principles
from a transportation engineer.
And they're also based on methodology that the city uses and PennDOT uses.
Well, I understand.
And we can characterize that differently.
And I appreciate where you're coming from.
Yes, being a professional, being a professional transportation engineer.
Yes, but you're using data that's eight years old to a facility that doesn't have the same use.
You can't get caught up on the years and how old it is.
In the city of Philadelphia, we actually have, you have to remember that was the stadium district during a very vibrant time.
so it's not the number of years like there's not factors that change between now and then so the
factor that did change is the fact that again we included for information the methodology of the
turf club that wasn't the sole you know we didn't only provide that because of the fact that the
data was taken prior to the sports book now we were not it was not possible to update that
information because of COVID. So it didn't make sense to count it this year and do an update
because of the changes due to the closures and COVID. So, you know, what is traditionally done
is you do a very conservative estimate and base your conclusions on that.
But you could have, but the South Philadelphia sports book was not closed during the entirety of
um covet you agree but do you think would would the board have approved our conclusions when
it was during the time of covet i mean we just didn't feel that there was that we just felt that
it would be subject um because of that you know there's times where we don't take traffic counts
because it snowed um we're very careful about the data we use and we just didn't feel that we
could you know that data would be valid because of the closures during COVID right but I would
think that parks has a pretty good handle on how many people normally come into their
South Philadelphia sports book pre -COVID and how many are coming in during COVID and therefore
I mean for instance did you even make a count of how many cars are in the parking lot at 700
Packer since
they've had a sports book.
Jump in here for a minute, but there
are other businesses operating
on that and using that same parking
lot. Yes, but not at 7 at night
or 8 at night. But I agree
some judgment. I agree
with that. There is a lottery office.
There's a
industrial use. There's a lot of other uses.
I don't know about a lot of other uses,
but there are other uses.
There are other uses, but my question is, did you make a count of the number of cars in the parking lot at 700 parker?
I guess I would question what relevance that would have if we weren't going to use the data or do a traffic count there because we didn't feel it was reliable due to the COVID circumstance.
Your answer is no, you didn't do that. Is that correct?
That's correct.
Okay, thank you.
is your understanding that somebody who walks into let's say this is approved
is your understanding that a gambler that would walk into Chickie and Pete's and then back into
the 2600 square foot glass enclosed sports book to do sports gambling would stay in that
glass -enclosed room for the duration of the time that they were doing sports gambling or did you
also consider that they may come out into Chickney and Pete's proper and let's say hang at the bar
but therefore freeing up room in the 2 ,600 square.
Therefore, freeing up room in the 2 ,600 -square -foot glass -enclosed room for other people to be there.
In other words, I'm questioning your reliance on the number of seats at the 2 ,600 -square -foot glass -enclosed room as opposed to the number of people that will be drawn into the building because of this sportsbook.
Well, you have to think about the characteristics. So if the full capacity of the restaurant with no changes to the use, all of those seats would be available. The new one, you're reducing it by 79.
So the reason how we characterize the user in a sports book room is that those seats, if you think they, the seats in the restaurant traditionally turn over between an hour and an hour and a half.
If you, you know, traditionally there's a longer dwell time in the sports room.
um those patrons stay there longer which is why the trip generation is shown to be
lower than if it was a full capacity restaurant to your question of whether they leave that space
so if they left that space and went into the um into the restaurant you know what we call that
is a lot of times it's um trips that again it's actually reducing the trips to the restaurant
because suppose they left the restaurant, that would be a trip out. And then somebody new came
in and they filled the seat in the existing restaurant. So that would be a trip out and a
trip in. If the person from the sports book room decided to go into the restaurant, that's not a
trip out of the site and into the site they go into the restaurant and then there is a trip in
um if suppose if someone did take their their place within the sports book room
i don't you you're you're you're keep referring to seats now there's a lot of area you've been
into this chicken and pizza in the past i assume well i'm kind of i'm saying a seat both it could
be a sit -down restaurant seat or a bar seat. I don't, have you been to this Chicky and Pete's
previously? No, I haven't. I'm not trying to embarrass you. I'm not embarrassed. I have not
been within the Chicky and Pete's, this particular one. Okay, well, let me suggest to you that
there's plenty of room to stand, but like a, you know, typical sports bar, there's certainly seats
at the bar, but you can stand when there's not enough seats at the bar, you could stand with
your friends in a little circle or behind the person seated at the bar, sort of just like any
other bar. And so what I'm questioning is not, well, I'm not saying there's not enough parking
spots per code. We're not talking about whether this meets the code. We're talking about a special
exception and whether this is going to cause congestion in the public streets and whether
that there's enough parking. And what I'm suggesting to you is that let's say on a typical
Saturday day, daytime, middle of the day, when there's many, many college football teams
playing or the middle of a Sunday, when there's many, many NFL sports teams playing during the
day right the one o 'clock games or the 105 games um that it might be and that the addition of this
sports book here is going to cause a standing room only situation at the chickie and pete's
now i understand that will be regulated by the fire code only a certain number of occupants can
be in the building so i'm not saying they're breaking any laws but what i'm saying is that
that could be a much greater number of people in that building therefore and having you know
driving cars to get there because of this sports book that I don't see reflected in your data
unless you can point me to that and I'm you know happy if you can point me to that I guess that's
the nature of my question because you keep referring to a fewer number of seats but I'm
again expanding you to the full chicken peeps premises and i'm and i'm suggesting to you that
there's plenty of standing that places to stand and drink beer and watch the game and i and i don't
see where your analysis touches on that well i think the first thing excuse me i believe she
well i think the first thing excuse me i believe she can answer that but it's somewhere in there
can answer that but it's somewhere near the most
there must be a question i mean it was like a five minute monologue actually i have an answer
i have a question sure miss ferrera when you speak about seats are you talking about
seats at a table or are you also including seats at the bar including seats at the bar
and at a table so if the sports betting uh venue is created you talked about the reduction in seats
the bar correct me if i'm wrong uh i don't know mike you may have it the bar that is currently in
that room goes away is that correct correct correct that'd be that many based on what paul's
saying that would be that many less people standing at the bar because i think i know where paul's
going so it's strictly seating it's not standing at a bar correct but when there's seats or seats
but it's the way in which people uh participate when they go to a bar or chicken peats they're
either sitting at the bar or they're standing and that adds to the population so what i'm suggesting
is not only would the proposal be reducing the number of seats and correct me if i'm wrong it
would also be the reduced the number of people who would be standing at a barn as well that's
correct that is correct so i think remember we are if if we didn't change the use um the
the number of people standing could use the full space um they can fill in the space per the fire
code what we're saying is comparing it to the change in use where you're taking that 2600
square foot, you are configuring it. And with that, again, the characteristics of the people
in that space, they dwell, their dwell time is a little bit longer. And, you know, they may not
be able to get the density in there with the equipment that you have out in the existing
restaurant. So yes, I do not expect a change in that density, even during the full, during the
full, these, you know, sports days, which again, we study the traditional peak. So we have the
weekday commuter peak is the highest peak, again, probably on the adjacent roadway network. So if
you talk about that, we'll look at the changes there. We look at the weekday restaurant peak,
Or it would also be the peak at the casino, which, or the sports room, sorry, I apologize for that, which would be a little bit later, would be 7 o 'clock, and then the Saturday peak, which would actually be more the evening than the afternoon.
but um you know again and also to clarify my earlier response when I was talking about the
trips in and out of the site it really wasn't parking it's talking about trips coming in and
out so I was saying if somebody left the um the sports book room and went into the restaurant
then they didn't leave the site and come in like that didn't produce any additional trips or traffic
they went from one room to the other if they just left and somebody came into the restaurant
then that would you know that's actually less trips for them to go from one room to the other
than for them to leave and someone else come in yeah and it has nothing to do with the parking
it's you know when you think about congestion you think about the number of trips in and out of a
site yeah yes but i understand but that your your um factor is the number of seats whether the table
or at the bar and i'm suggesting that if a gambler goes from the 2600 square foot and went to the
standing room only of the restroom bar then that there's more people involved than you're suggesting
because more people are coming into that sports book
because they've got this overflow area.
So let me -
But they didn't come in and out of the site.
So wouldn't you rather them fill the space in the bar
than a new person coming into the restaurant?
Yes, but more -
That's actually less trips.
All I'm saying is more people are in the building
given what I'm saying.
So let me ask a question.
You're talking about traditional peak time.
The first component of that is weekly commute.
Well, are you saying that weekly commute time is particularly relevant for a sports book?
There's a couple of different timeframes we look. So we always include the peak, just what the changes are to traffic during the time when we expect on the adjacent road network traffic to be the highest.
There's a couple of different timeframes we look.
So we always include.
So the weekday, the Friday or the weekday commuter peak, although that's not the peak coming in and out of the restaurant, the restaurant is open, does have some trips. That's the peak of traffic on the adjacent road network.
If we talk about after that seven o 'clock, traffic does die down on the adjacent road network. You know, it might be a little bit greater at the restaurant. But when you when you add that to the traffic on the adjacent road network, which is much lower during that time, you know, the traffic operations, you know, are less than when you study those critical times of the peak hours on the adjacent road network.
Thank you. Thank you. Did you make an assumption as to when is the peak times for the sports? And I appreciate what you're saying is that the roads are mostly clogged, you know, when people are going to work in the morning and coming home at night and at other times during the week.
I'm asking you, for the traffic going to the sports book, do you have a, did you make an assumption as to when during the week or when during the day that exists?
Yes, we picked a Friday evening and Saturday evening times, and it is an assumption.
Okay, because there's certainly games during the daytime, you would agree, right, obviously, you don't even have to answer that.
So, and of course, what we're also talking about here is whether there's a sufficient number of parking spots in the parking lot.
And that, you know, that's not, you know, we didn't talk about that yet.
And so, did you look at how much traffic would be generated by this facility and at what time during the day?
and so let's say a saturday daytime well when we do an assessment we usually do
sort of the peak because when you're looking at traffic you want to say
during the highest peak you know what do we need for traffic so well we did two things we looked at
um uh we looked at the zoning code so we did look at the zoning code and it said that based on the
zoning code there's uh you know a five need five more spaces um and again during that peak time
it would be you know after seven o 'clock or around seven o 'clock when a bunch of the other uses are
closed so that's the thing about um assessing parking in a shopping center or that there's
multiple uses and they all are open during different times so in the evening there's
excess spaces available because a lot of the other facilities are closed. So we're showing
that an additional five spaces is required, but there's well in excess of that available during
that time. And the five is from the assembly and entertainment section or the casino section?
The assembly and entertainment section, yes, the applicable section. Yeah. I'm going to wrap up. I
have one last question um you talked about the dwell time um and i can you explain what that is
and i think you said i can hold a second and i think you said it's longer um either at the
sports book or at the restaurant or maybe i had that backwards but if you can elaborate on that
i can't but i didn't follow exactly what you're saying okay so even within the methodology
if we say a restaurant if you have a fast food restaurant you expect people to be in and out in
a half hour so the amount of trips that you expect coming in and out of a fast food restaurant
are much higher than if you said you have um uh a traditional um a high quality no i think this
one is classified as um is it a high quality um i'm sorry i'm just trying to get the exact code
so oh high turnover um this one is a a sit -down restaurant high turnover sit -down restaurant
which you would expect that um like an hour to an hour and 15 minutes you know the the trips
are turning over so that's more trips in and out of the site during an hour because the table turns
over. If you had a fine dining, they would be there longer. And so in an hour, there's less
they would be there longer. And so in an hour, there's less traffic coming in and out of the
site. And that's similar to the sports book. Traditionally for a casino use or the sports
book use, they stay within the facility longer, which means there's less traffic going in and out
in an hour. Okay. And I'm going to forgive me, but I'm going to focus in on that last point you make
because I want to understand the extent to which you're relying on statistics or data gathered from a casino
as a sort of traditional casino that has been studied in the past years, as opposed to a sports book.
And when you're saying that people stay in a casino for a long time,
I'm asking you, is that data from the sportsbook component of the casino, or is that just from the full river?
Well, again, when I'm talking about the dwell time, there's multiple data to support that.
So the first thing I just want to point out is this room is both for race and sportsbook parimutuel facility.
It's not just sports book. It also includes the race use.
So the data is based on other uses similar to the race,
the race facility and also casino uses not specific to the sports book.
okay so so some of the data comes from casinos and not specifically sportsbook and some of the
data comes from off -track betting partners is that what you're saying yes okay and where is that
referred to in your report or it's okay okay it's not but none of the assumptions are based on that
so it didn't need to be quoted i'm not faulting you i'm asking you if i can find it so no the
data is not there but um you know there's um oh much data on those two different types of uses
and uh and again um if you're just looking at the counts that were coming in and out of
um the turf club as opposed to the number of seating positions that were there at the time
when it was counted it's very clear well okay so so to sum up you're you're assuming that the sports
book um operation is similar enough to the traditional casino and the otv to draw your
conclusions yes it's conclusion based on the data okay and and from where did you get the uh some
you know did parks tell you um data about their sports book parks it i i don't know if i understand
the question like how long people are in like whether people betting on um sports are um have
a different dwell time than people betting on um the racetrack they did not okay i have no further
the questions. Thank you for your time. I'm going to apologize to my board. Does anybody on the
board have any questions? I apologize for not asking you earlier today. I guess Mr. Chairman.
No. Yes. No. Mr. Holloman. Mr. Holloman does. Yes. Yes. I was wondering if the study
took in consideration employees' parking.
Is that included in the study for long -term parking?
In the parking analysis,
the parking analysis was based on the requirements of the zoning code.
And it did not specifically address,
well, an employee parking is included in there.
It's both employee and patron in the requirements.
And does that affect your calculation?
Because employee parking, they'll be there eight hours at least all day.
Yes, it's included.
It's the parking is for both employees and patrons.
Thank you.
Any other questions from the board?
Mr. Mattione?
I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
All right.
Any other witnesses, Mr.
Marioni?
I have Jerry Fretz.
I have Jerry Fritz.
You know, again, I'm going to buy you.
You know, again, I'm going to buy you.
I guess it's not a conflict.
I'm going to buy you a better microphone.
I'm going to spend my money so I can hear you better.
I am sorry, Mr. Chairman.
I will lean off.
I'm taking a public statement, so no one accused me of doing anything more.
I'll waive any objections.
I appreciate that, Mr. Bonnie.
Thank you, Chairman.
Jerry Fretz.
good afternoon mr frets please identify yourself for the record spell your first and last name
and i'll swear you in good afternoon chairman chico respected members of the board my first
name is jerry last name frets f -r -e -t -z currently i'm sorry your address you're affiliated with
parks casino i'm the director of security thank you you swear and affirm to tell the truth the
truth nothing but the truth yes sir i do please proceed thank you thank you mr chairman i did
include uh mr pretz's cv i believe i don't know maybe exhibit seven just check i was going to put
up on the screen i don't think we need to do that but we did include his cv and he uh can briefly
touch on his background um it was exhibit eight i'm sorry exhibit eight in the materials that i
provided um and jerry just briefly explain your background to the board yes sir i'm uh i've been
a member of uh the parks casino team as a director of security since august of 2008 um shortly after
i retired from the philadelphia police department i spent 31 years i retired as a as a police
captain i also retired from the u .s navy as a commander in 2018 32 years of law enforcement
and an aid. Thank you. And are you familiar with the South Philadelphia OTB Race and Sportsbook?
Yes, sir, I am. And, I'm sorry, what procedures does the OTB Race and Sportsbook
employ to ensure that the operation is safe?
We utilize a security team and backed up by a surveillance video team.
And what procedures are employed to ensure that any undesirables are not permitted to
frequent the OTB race and sports book?
We have a procedure whereby if we do have undesirables, there's a process where they're
identified.
I take the individual in question, their paperwork, and I go forward to my superiors and present
that to them, and we opt to permanently evict them.
we can evict them for as little as 30 days or upwards of a permanent eviction.
And are you familiar with the proposal to downsize and relocate the OTB
race and sports book to 1526 Packer Avenue? Yes, sir, I am. And are we correct that this
facility will only be about 2 ,600 square feet, whereas the present facility is about 36 ,000
square feet yes sir that's correct and will what impact will the smaller size have on your ability
to provide adequate security it'll have no impact whatsoever okay um i do have to share my screen
briefly mr chairman to explain one other thing while you're doing that mr fritz first let me
thank you on behalf of very one for your years of service both to the city and our country
um have you ever had the occasion to be deployed to work at the 7th packer avenue site
sorry i've been at the 7th packer site uh i haven't been deployed there i i've gone there
to look at the operations and uh i've been in that general area as well as uh i've been uh
also in chickie and pete's uh at 15th and packer uh socially on several occasions
so you're familiar that's why i was getting it you're familiar with both sites okay thank you
Mr. Fretz, I have the floor plan of the entire Chickies and Peets facility up, and I'm circling now the 2 ,600 -square -foot area where the Race and Sportsbook will be.
And right now where I am, is this the only patron entrance to the Race and Sportsbook?
Yes, sir, it is.
and why is it important to only have one entrance from a security perspective
it's easier to control the uh the patrons who frequent the facility
and how will security handle this operation well we would have a security officer present
outside the doors um utilizing a podium we currently here at the casino utilize uh sophisticated
utilizing a podium. We currently here at the casino utilize sophisticated equipment to detect
fraudulent documents. Every person who enters that facility or that sports gaming area would be
required to present valid government -issued ID. If it passed and they were of age, they would be
permitted access to the facility.
And let me just
scroll down.
Is this the exterior of the race and sports book?
Yes, sir, it is.
And where will you have your security personnel?
If you're looking at the screen, I would station my security personnel to my left, looking at the screen.
Yes, in that general area right there, utilize a podium.
There will be a security officer present there with, like I said, the ID scanning equipment,
and would challenge individuals who appear to be 30 years of age or younger.
That's not a mandate from the gaming board.
That's just a request, and we abide by that.
Here at the casino, anyone who appears to be 30 years of age or younger is required to produce a government valid ID.
If they're unable to produce that, they're not permitted entry into the property.
If they are able to produce it and they're 21 years of age or older, they're allowed access to the property.
um in your opinion will the use of this property as proposed cause any impairment to the surrounding
community or neighborhood beyond what would normally be expected from this use
no sorry would not and in your opinion will the operation
um of the otv the relocated otv inside chickies and peats uh cause a greater impact than might
be expected from this operation? No sir I don't believe so. And will there be any likely increased
adverse impact on public health safety or fire risk beyond what would normally be expected from
bringing a race in sportsbook here if this operation comes here? No sir. And in your experience
will this type of operation cause an increased risk of criminal activity beyond that would be
expected from a race and sports book? No, sir. And in your opinion, will there be an increase
of any criminal activity surrounding Tricky's and Pete's if the race and sports book is relocated
here? No, sir. And in your opinion, will the race and sports book attract any new criminal
element to the area? To the best of my knowledge, no, sir. And who do you expect to be the typical
patron at the otv racing sportsbook typical neighborhood uh person who frequents chickies
um to go there as a restaurant it's just an added entity that they'll be able to uh to utilize the
sportsbook i don't see people coming from outside uh the neighborhood i see them going to to the
live casino that they have a bigger sportsbook there i i just see neighborhood folks utilizing
THAT FACILITY.
OH, AND I HAVE ONE LAST THING TO SHARE.
I'M SORRY, I FORGOT.
I HAVE AND I WILL PUT UP IN A MINUTE.
sorry now i'm getting dizzy to read upside down
that's what's the strategy cool yeah
um i have a letter up on the screen could you identify it to the board
Mr. Fritz. Oops, I'm sorry. Yes, sir. It's from the Citizens Crime Commission. Basically thanking
Ron Davis, who's our Director of Diversity and Inclusion here at the casino. We actively
participate in a number of events and law enforcement related as Director Haran spoke
of earlier um and so we actually sponsor um an award to uh an individual police officer
um selected by the the citizens crime commission
selected by the Citizens Crime Commission, as well as a number of other participants
to recognize their valor or their heroism throughout the year, and we actively participate in that.
A number of those individuals are actually colleagues of mine from my days in the Philadelphia Police Department.
And this was sent as a recognition of thanks by the Citizens Crime Commission to Parks?
Yes, sir, it is.
i have no further questions for mr fritz mr chairman mr fritz i have a question uh as it
relates to the security uh how does that how would that work with i assume chicken pizza already has
some in -house security how does that uh how do you guys cooperate what would be the arrangement
uh i'm again i'm assuming that chicken pete already has some security once on site
We, in order to operate in that environment under the gaming board, we would have individuals, they would have to be licensed by the by the gaming board that involves a background investigation, as well as a financial disclosure for them to be awarded a gaming license.
And those individuals would would be assigned there and they would be trained by myself or some of my some of my other managers as to what the rules and regulations were with respect to to the to the sports book and racetrack area.
And there would be, let me ask you another way. How do you guys interact? Is there some sort of a standard cooperation between your security force and the security folks that work traditionally for Chicky and Pete's?
Well, there would be a, you know, I can't speak to that because, you know, obviously that doesn't currently exist, but I can speak to the casino here and with Chickie and Peach, we have an excellent working relationship.
They typically have some managers who act as security present here at the casino. We have a good working relationship with the Ben Salem Township Police and local law enforcement.
And equally, in Philadelphia, I'm sure that we would have, based on, you know, my background with the police, the Philadelphia police, we would have an excellent working relationship with not only the Pennsylvania State Police, but the Philadelphia Police Department, if needed.
Thank you. Any questions from the board for Mr. Fritz?
Okay. Mr. Bonney?
Yes. I have a number.
I just want to remind everyone it is 1 16. We're shutting down and I'll use that. I shouldn't use
that word phraseology, but we'll be ending this hearing at 1 30. Okay. Um, thank you. Uh, you know,
Mr. Fretz, thank you. And, uh, thank you for coming to the RCO meeting. Um, and, uh, just,
Just, you know, before I dive into the nuts and bolts, does Parks Casino give any financial support to the Citizens Crime Commission?
Financial support? I mean, you'd have to talk to Ron Davis about that.
I know that we buy, we pay for the award, the trophy that is given to law enforcement officers.
I don't have that immediate information beyond that.
Okay, how about the police department in Ben Salem to provide any financial support or, you know, gifts, donations, share the, you know, cost and events, things like that.
That's above my opinion.
I don't know why it's relevant, Mr. Chair.
Yeah, I mean, I'll cut it.
I'll get into the heart of the matter.
As far as I know, parks, and I'm not sure if they still do it because I was friendly with the mayor of Ben Salem.
certain portion of the revenue that is generated goes to reduction of real estate taxes for the
residents of Ben Salem I don't know if that still still exists as far as I know it does
right I'm just asking about you know sometimes I'm not saying parks but I specifically but
sometimes you see casinos you know the money they're either making donations or it's from
the local share of the taxes that it goes to buy a firetruck or police equipment. And, you know,
look, a ton of donations are made. I think Mr. Davis spoke to a ton of donations and I'm,
you know, the Red Cross and whatnot. And I'm just asking whether the institutions that were
mentioned today are the recipients. But I understand that it's above Mr. Fretz's pay grade,
and so I'll go more to the heart of the matter. First of all, you spoke, Mr. Fretz, about evicting somebody.
First of all, you spoke, Mr. Fretz, about evicting somebody for 30 days or evicting somebody permanently.
And, you know, where are those? I don't know. I don't understand what you're saying there.
Can you explain where that, you know, what structure you're referring to?
Mattioli asked me, how did we deal with undesirables?
um so when an undesirable is brought to my attention typically a security manager unless
i have intimate knowledge of of the event a security manager would bring that to my attention
i would gather all the information and i would take it to my superiors and we would sit down
and we would decide um if we were going to evict this individual and based on what whatever they
were involved in whether it would be something as minor as 30 days or it could be something
as major as, you know, a permanent eviction.
Well, but again, I'm having trouble understanding the scenario here.
So would you agree with me that in your time at Parks Casino,
there's been, you know, incidents where a gambler has punched a slot machine
and sort of, you know, punched a slot machine.
Do you have experienced that?
we don't have slot machines at this facility i understand
i see guys punch the bar when somebody makes a field goal and cost them the bet i mean it's
people get emotional i'm asking mr frets i think he knows the answer and i'm using this as an
example to understand his eviction process please this is the this is a very important matter okay
Or if someone damages a slot machine and we identify who that individual is, we have our slot technicians determine the extent of the damage and what it would cost to repair it.
We then give the individual an opportunity to pay restitution for the damage that was done.
And quite honestly, if they refuse to pay restitution, then that would be where I would take steps to go up to my superiors and ask them, you know, if they would want them evicted.
Okay, so in an instance like that, would you consider evicting that person from the premises that day?
I would not.
You would not.
Okay, so that would not rise to the level of an addiction.
Would that rise to the level of an arrest?
Would you call the state police over and have that person arrested?
Just to be clear, typically when there's damage done to a machine, we don't recognize that damage maybe for another hour or so unless someone actually witnesses it.
So that would require an investigation.
Well, if let's say you witnessed it, come on now.
Yeah. So if I witnessed somebody that damaged the machine, then I would personally get their information.
And then I would have a slot technician determine what type of damage was done to the machine and come up with some monetary amount.
And then I would ask them to leave for the day for sure until we completed our investigation.
You would. OK, but you wouldn't necessarily refer to them to the state police for arrest.
It really all depends. The state police would make that decision whether or not it would amount to a vandalism, but I don't make that decision.
You don't make that decision. Okay. You mentioned that you have security guards. You would have security guards outside of the glass doors here at a podium.
um and you did mention that those security guards would would have to go through background checks
and get personal licenses from the gaming control board is that correct yes sir what kind of idea
are they in a uniform are they uniformed or are they in a suit and tie well they typically be in
it so we have both suit and tie and uniforms we have line level security officers who are uniform
and we have um sir i'm asking for this facility yeah you you i'm asking for this facility would
they be in uniform or not i i i can't answer that right now i don't i don't know what the superiors
have um okay i would suggest that they would be in a uniform you would suggest that they would
be in uniform so it would be recognizable okay would there be signage that says um you must be
21 or older to get in here absolutely that's a gaming board requirement okay and is and would
that be on the podium or would that be on the door I don't know where it would be posted quite
honestly it would be in a conspicuous location okay now you did mention I was going to seize
on something but I think you clarified yourself that it it's not everybody that walks in gets
It's not everybody that walks in gets carded.
discarded. Am I correct?
Am I correct that it's only people that those security guards believe that may be 30 or younger?
Yes, sir, that's correct.
Okay, so if they think they're 31, they're not going to card that person?
That's correct.
Would you agree with me that there's been numerous occasions where underage gamblers have been identified
at Parks Casino and Ben Salem.
I would disagree.
You don't believe that the Game and Control Board
has ever, well, I'll ask it this way.
Are you aware as to whether the Game and Control Board
has ever fined Parks Casino
or their parent corporation
for allowing or allowing,
I'm not saying consciously allowing,
I'm saying for allowing minors
or underage people
to bet on slot machines etc at parks casino you're not aware of that no i'm aware of it i'm
i'm intimately aware of that because i'm part of that process okay well then i i guess
different wavelengths with the previous question oh i need to ask the question mr fritz the policy
is if the security person personnel believe that the person who's trying wants to enter that that
portion of the facility doesn't appear to be 30 years old or older, then they would ask for ID,
correct? Yes, sir. That's just policy. Is that correct? Yes, sir. So there would be nothing to
prevent the policy from saying that everyone who enters or wants to enter should be carded to see
if they're of age. And the reason I raise that, I am well past 30 years old. Well past it. And
the liquor the state stores or liquor stores whatever we call them in pennsylvania i get
carded now and they said that they now is a requirement it's a requirement that everybody
get card regardless if you look like you're 21 or not so that that is i'm not putting words in
your mouth that could be a policy that could be established is that correct yes sir thank you
given that you're intimately aware with um incidents of underage gambling at parks casino
can you tell the board approximately how many times the gaming control board has fined parks for
underage gambling i don't have the statistics in front of me now but i'll give you an example in
2020 we had one incident involving an underage patron who surreptitiously entered the casino
while security officer was assisting a patron. We typically have 80 ,000 patrons a week who
enter the casino. So I stand by my security team and the statistics.
Well, but you didn't give me the statistics. So would it be 10 times in the history of parks,
at least? I'm not going to speculate. You're not going to speculate. You're the head of
security at parks oh i think he answered he said it was one in 2020 well he was are you saying it
was only one occasion in 2020 yes sir okay how does an underage um let's say someone goes into
parks and they're 17 years old and they get past the security for whatever reason i'm not gonna
let's not focus on how they got in but let's just say they got in and they're sitting at a slot
machine and they're putting money into the slot machine and they're losing and they lose $100
and they walk out and they go home. How do you, well, let's change the hype. How do you catch
that person for being an underage gambler? Sir, everyone that enters the casino and they're
card it we give them a wristband every day the wristband color has changed um different colors
different uh patterns um they're required to wear that wristband security officers as well as any
member of the parks team uh if they see someone who appears to be underage they challenge them
that's a requirement and they ask them for id um and you know we've discovered individuals on the
floor in the past who who appear to be underage and and indeed they were uh they were underage
We immediately notified the gaming board, as well as the Pennsylvania State Police, and they were arrested.
And, you know, the gaming board decides whether or not there's a fine or not.
I'm going to move on.
Thank you.
I don't want to rush you, Mr. Bondi, but it is approaching 1 .30.
we're going to have to continue this case yes but but let me let me just see
We're going to have to continue this case.
Yes, but let me just see.
give me a few seconds to review my notes just to make sure because uh um thank you while mr
bonnie's doing that the board have any questions for mr fritz no no no
i mean how much time do we have mr chairman it's already 128
28th. We were supposed to be wrapping it up at 1 15, but we got another.
Well, let me ask you, Mr. Chairman, because I have a lot.
Could we break now and I'll just finish up with Mr. Fretz next time?
Whatever works for you.
I think that works best for me.
Any objection, Mr. Mattione?
Obviously, I'd like to finish Mr. Fretz if we could, because then it's one less person to bring back next time.
but you know we don't have tanya we're out of time correct totally we are out of time
and on behalf of the board and everyone else we apologize we know that folks have been waiting
to testify this is the third meeting hearing i believe but we will have to we will have to
continue this and a notice tanya a notice will be given uh as to when the next date and timer
correct yes so the date is to be determined and mr manioni we will supply posters you're breaking up
tanya you're breaking up also
breaking up
um this is sharon saletta i i can speak for ms sunkett i believe she was going to say that this
is going to be continued to a date that will be announced and that a reposting of the property
will be required okay thank you everyone thank you mr chairman everybody stay safe thank you
thank you mr fritz thank you mr chairman all right talk to you guys bye guys okay bye -bye
is that all for today
um i believe it is yes that's it okay thank you have a good day have a good one all thank you
have a good day bye -bye