the question to the gaming control board when the when parks goes to it in the next weeks or months
is, is it suitable for the Category 1 licensed gaming entity to do sports wagering at Chickie
and Pete's? That's the question. Can the license it? So, of course, this is a licensed facility
because the entity involved has the license. Indeed, Mr. Chair, a piece of real estate does
not have a license the person occupying the real estate has the license even in the even in the
case of the let's say sugar house or what's now called rivers casino the license is held by hsp
gaming and the license is not held by the real estate the license for parks in ben salem is
held by green uh greenwood and entertainment uh incorporated greenwood gaming and entertainment
Inc. It is associated with a piece of property, but the property is not licensed. There's a
licensor, which is the state, and there's a licensee, which is the company. So yes, it's
affiliated with a property, but the license is with the company. And of course, Parks Casino,
I mean, they talked about a lot about Parks Casino during the first hearing. Now they're
only using the name of their subsidiary because they don't like the words Parks Casino. But
parks casino will be here at this location and they will be here with their gaming license
and that gaming license will be amended by that time to reflect their ability to do sports wagering
if it hasn't been done already um so i so i don't think there's really any dispute about it now i
have other materials, but let me mention that you have the board's job here, and I'll stop
sharing for a moment. The board's job here is to determine the use. What is the use that is
going on here? I think that it's abundantly clear from the definition that I showed you
in the zoning code, that the question is, is this a facility, a bricks-and-mortar building,
that when you step inside of it, you're essentially leaving the city of Philadelphia
and going into something that's entirely regulated by the Gaming Control Board under state law.
um everything that goes on inside that glass box that they want to put inside of Chicky and Pete's
is something that is approved and regulated and enforced by the gaming control board and we know
this Mr. Chair you know this from your days working with the commercial entertainment district
the CED you know that a casino is it's essentially like a you know an American embassy in another
country that once you walk in there you're not on your soil anymore and that is and of course
there's an addictive product being offered I don't want to get into that right now but of course
there's an and there's all sorts of controls that the state puts on it surveillance
uniformed guards to make sure that every cent and penny is accounted for that there's no skimming
off the top, that everything is videotaped, everything. And I have exhibits that I will
show you if we need to get that far, that this is treated exactly like what you imagine in your head
is a casino. That is, it's treated exactly like what's on in Fishtown at the Rivers Casino. And
that the applicant talks about it that way, and that the Gaming Control Board talks about
it that way, that yes, it's a different form of gambling, but it is the exact same form
of gambling that is in the Parks at Ben Salem. Parks at Ben Salem has a sportsbook. That
sports book is this is being replicated for 1526 park for 1526 packer in all material respects it
is the same operation that is on the casino floor in ben salem and they are taking that component
of what is on their casino floor this is not my language this is their own language that i can
show you that i will show you in documents if we get that far that is being replicated here so i'm
that is being replicated here. So I'm not asking you to conclude that this is the type of casino
not asking you to
that you would imagine in the movies or in your head or in Atlantic City or on Delaware Avenue.
I'm not asking you to do that. There's no roulette table here. There's no slot machines here. That
is what your imagination conjures up. All I'm asking you to do is ask yourself is, is there a
license a gaming license associated with this facility and it's abundantly clear by the state
law that of course it is now mr chairman there are places in the city where this can go by right
i believe um and if some neighborhood wants to fight it we'll have to see what happens but
this is not it this is the the close this is in the middle of a residential neighborhood
And I don't think, and this is something very different than a typical, quote unquote, generic assembly and entertainment use. We know that. You don't hear these proposals ever before when you consider assembly and entertainment.
And to call this merely a generic assembly and entertainment use, it does not fit. It does not fit for that. This is a licensed facility for gambling that's controlled soup to nuts by the State Gaming Control Board pursuant to the Gaming Act.
forget about the horses forget about the unlikelihood that slots will ever come
that's not the question and i'll i have a considerable amount more including some
exhibits if we get if we want to get that far but sorry chair i'll pause for now i'm sorry chair
i would like to respectfully remind the board that we have a full docket for two o'clock to
continue and then 3 30 just a reminder chair and i have given a continuance date for this case
thank you very much appreciate it excuse me this is sharon seleta if i can make a recommendation
that the hearing be resumed on march 10th for a special hearing at 10 a.m that in the meantime
the parties submit briefs going to the legal issues supporting or opposing the appeal against
LNI. The board will vote the appeal against LNI at the March 10th hearing and then depending on
how that vote goes either resume the appeal that the special exception request or determine how
to handle it if um if the appeal is okay we can do that i just have a question mr bonnie
sharon you sharon you broke up would you say that again please
yes i'm sorry i think that i confused to the um how the outcome of the appeal against
l and i would go if the appeal against l and i is granted and the board determines that it should
have been a special exception that l and i erred in revising the refusal then on at the march 10th
hearing you can go forward with the um special exception hearing you can resume that if you
deny the appeal against l and i you can then the parties can then discuss procedurally how
things should go from there just a recommendation of course
Mr. Bonney thank you for your testimony
we're not going to resolve this today but I'd like for everyone to think is there a tool
a legal way if this board were I'm fast forwarding if we get to the decision of whether or not
we approve the application for off-track betting is there a way a mechanism uh a proviso
whatever that the board would be able to entertain that would limit limit uh the the area within
chicky peach strictly for the purpose of off-track betting horse betting i know under the act that i
heard what you said about the licensee is there a way and if you don't have the answer today that's
fine i'd like for everyone because that is what i thought originally until this uh appeal against
lni or lni's uh reversal on the special acceptance acceptance versus the variance
i believe myself and my other board members were all looking at this as horse horse horse racing
betting at Chickie and Pete's not slot machines not table games not any of the other things
Not slot machines, not table games, not any of the other things that we would typically associate with a casino.
that we would typically
If I might, Mr. Chairman, again, sort of maybe modifying previously what I said before.
And again, I'm not in any way. And as you know, the city, we don't represent neighborhoods, RCOs or anything like that.
I'm just speaking for myself and for the law department.
um if the applicant were to seek approval just for parimutuel betting um that is horse race
uh well technically other things could be parimutuel but we'll say horse
uh racing bets uh taken off track at this location uh
then you know again they can just simply amend that that could be a proviso
And that we may, again, I would be willing on behalf of the city to reconsider the issue of whether or not the state would consider this a licensed facility for purpose.
In other words, I think the bottom line here is that if the state allows the sports wagering to take place at this location, the question is, is the state going to consider this location a licensed facility for purposes of how they view it?
In other words, is the state going to say, if we allow sports wagering here, are they going to allow the sports racing here at the same location where you have off-track betting?
And again, I agree, and I think Mr. Bonney pointed out the section of the law that says you could have an off-track betting location offering sports wagering, but again, because that is integrally tied to the actual applicant itself being a holder of a license to have a licensed facility, the question is, what does the state consider this?
state might not have an opinion on it the state might not have an opinion on this but again i i
think we but we we aren't talking about the question of uh whether the state is going to
the question here is like would the state allow um with this i mean the bottom line is that is
the state going to allow sports betting to take place at this location four or five blocks away
from uh philly live which just uh which just opened that's that's ultimately the question
Because, again, as Mr. Mattione points out, there are no more licenses available for gaming facilities in the city of Philadelphia.
So, you know, we would be willing to allow them to go.
I mean, again, this is all assuming that they even got the approval for a special exception.
Understood. But again, simplify it.
If they were moving the operation that currently exists at 7th and Packard, as I said earlier in my statement,
aside from the size
of that facility, if they were to
take that operation, relocate
it to Chickie and Peach
without any other type of gambling
That would be a special
exception case. That would be a special
exception, correct?
Mr. Chairman
We are a race and sports book, Mr. Chairman
at 7th and Packer. I'm sorry, what?
We are a race and sports
book at 7th and Packer and we have applied
petition to the
Sports Racing Commission
who regulates
I get that, I get that, but there's this concern
about that language about sports betting
Mr. Chairman
I think that you're dead wrong, Mr. Chairman
and we will explain again in our next hearing
as to why they're dead wrong
Mr. Chairman
I'm happy to hear that
maybe you haven't been at 700 Packer
lately, but just to clarify
700 Packer does two things
It has OTB horse racing, number one, and it also has a sports book where you can bet on the Eagles and the Flyers and the Rangers and everything.
I stand corrected. You're right. It's been years since I've been there.
That's right. And I would even add, Mr. Chairman, that in the months leading up to the pandemic, $2 million per month was gambled at 700 Packer on sports gambling alone.
i'd like to know i'd like to know how much was gambled through a bookie as opposed to a licensed
facility i don't want to go down that road but you can gamble anywhere you can gamble anywhere
all right i have a question for mr my parents were the organizers of the lottery system before
it became the lottery system so there's only we can talk all day but uh miss suletta i just want
to make sure I understand that if we submit, I'm happy to submit a legal memo in the next
couple, the next few weeks, but I assume we will also have a hearing on this issue.
But I assume we will also have a hearing on this issue.
It will.
A special hearing will be scheduled for March 10th, starting at 10 a.m.
Because I may have witnesses and exhibits that's not a legal memo that I may have evidence to present.
But would the witnesses, would that pertain to the appeal against L&I or to either the special exception or the variance?
And they will testify strictly to the legal issue presented here.
Well, it probably is mostly documents, but I may have a witness, but it's mostly documents, but yes, that's right. And I think that that needs, I think that needs to be presented in the hearing.
Okay, well, I, of course, up to the chair and the board. If you could begin the March 10th hearing by concluding the appeal against L&I.
Okay. Limited to that. The board will vote on the appeal against L&I before it proceeds with either the variance or the special exception case.
Thank you. I agree.
Leonard, I apologize if I cut you off. I'm sorry.
No, no. Again, like I said, we are certainly open to an opinion from either the Attorney General or the Gaming Commission regarding the matter.
And again, they could very well say, we're not getting involved. This is a local zoning question. That's fine.
But again, I think just in terms of how the state views the location in question and whether or not they would consider it a licensed facility, again, conceding that they may never be even allowed to offer any kind of table games or slot machines at the location.
But again, it's not clear to me that they would even allow the sportsbook here. But, you know, again, we'll see what everybody writes. I don't know if, Mr. Mike, are you going to write another memo or you just want us to respond to yours?
I made an additional memo, Leonard, to clarify the issues, and I may bring in a witness to testify as to exactly what licenses, permits, et cetera, are at the turf club that now exists and would be at 1526 Packer Avenue to make it abundantly clear that this is not a casino.
And I think that I may have to have a witness come in and testify to that effect, because that's what the issue is. And somebody from my client is probably better suited, because that is a fact question, and better suited to come in and testify as to those issues and make it clear what they are and that they are not a casino as defined in the zoning code.
this is a special exception can i ask we do can i if uh chairman if if i might i'd like to ask
mr matty any just one brief question um with respect to uh this this particular like location
i mean has an application uh to for the sports wagering certificate been applied for at this
at this proposed location of 1526 Packer? There is a petition to relocate the South
Philadelphia Race and Sportsbook from 700 Packer Avenue to 1526 Packer Avenue pending before the
State Horse Racing Commission. And does the state require you to have, say, a local zoning permit
before they will grant that license is this one of the chicken is one of these chicken or the egg
things uh where one one depends upon the other they have separate gaming council handyman leonard
i do not know the uh what what goes first okay all right thank you okay uh and again i just want
to apologize early on i did ask a question could someone tell me if there's a difference in the
operation that exists along 700 and gets moved to 1500 block of packer avenue i didn't get
an answer to that so i just assume it was straight out horse uh horse betting so with that uh
mi 2020 does zero zero one five three two one five two six pecker avenue this is a resumption case
it'll be heard on march the 10th at 2 p.m and i believe sharon we had some other excuse me chair
it's it's a special hearing so it will begin at 10 a.m oh i thought you said two i apologize so
it'll be 10 a.m. on March the 10th. And did you say something earlier that the first part of that
would be as it relates to the appeal against L&I? Yes, she'll continue hearing the appeal
against L&I and move on to the second, the special exception or variance case only after
voting on the appeal against L&I. Sorry, Chair. I apologize. This is Tanya. It should be
Sorry, Chair. I apologize. This is Tanya. It should be March 9th, a Tuesday at 10 a.m.
10th is a regular session day. Okay.
Thank you, Kylie.
So let's go through that again. MI 2020-001532, 1526 Packard Avenue.
Special hearing on March the 9th at 10 a.m.?
Correct.
Can I just make one request that you don't need to answer the question, but I would ask the members of the board or the staff of the board to consider whether in light of this month, the postponement that the applicant should post the property with the notice of this indicating that it's a refusal and send out additional notice letters to the community.
i if i would i'll say here on the record that if that is done and if and assuming i have assuming
i on behalf of the rco have this authority that we would waive the um requirement of the rco meeting
um i don't think that we can do i don't think that we can do that mr bonnie not until if the board
it's just misleading. It suggests that it's going to be, that the appeal against ONI is going to be
denied. If I could just ask with respect to that, I guess that depends on whether Mr. Mattione's
client will be, in addition to challenging the refusal, whether they will still attempt to seek
a hardship in the alternative. I think I would agree, although I'm going to defer to the board
and Ms. Zaletta, I think I agree if they are only challenging the refusal and are not concurrently
seeking a variance in the alternative that I don't think they would have to post. But again,
I'm going to defer to the board on that. And we are not seeking a variance. We are seeking
the reversal of this decision. And if our appeal is denied by the board, then we will reevaluate
what we're going to do and how we're going to move forward. I don't think it would be proper
for us to move ahead seeking a variance on a case that we believe we should seek a special exception
and put on a day of testimony under the offices of the special exception. We would need to come
back again later. I think we're all on the same page. Thank you. Thank you everyone. Thank you.
And again, one last thing, if you could get briefs in by, say, one week in advance of the next hearing, that would be appreciated.
Thank you.