Opposition to a proposed casino 1/2 mile from the Gettysburg NMP
Gaming Board States
Reasons for Rejecting Appeal
The words experts and the Gaming Board are using to describe the appeal filed 6/7 by the would-be Mason-Dixon
Resort and Casino are downright unfriendly.
The Gaming Control Board could barely contain its irritation at this useless suit. On Wed they met for an hour
and in an icy atmosphere, http://www.abc27.com/video?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default... rejected it. http://nocasinogettysburg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/summary-of-june-8...
Without any evidence that supported M-D's request to reconsider the PGCB had no choice but
to dismiss the request.
On Friday 6/10 the Gaming Board released their reasons for doing so. Their PDF “Order states:
The Board held a public meeting on June
9, 2011 to consider the Mason-Dixon Petition
on an expedited basis as requested. Counsel for Mason-Dixon appeared and
addressed the Board in relation to the Petition. Mason-Dixon
Resorts did not present any witnesses or other evidence but instead
relied exclusively upon its petition and its attachments
in support of its request for reconsideration….
the suggestion that the Board should have known of and actually addressed
items mentioned in the Grand Jury Report in advance of and before it was published by
the Office of Attorney General certainly is without basis,…
they have simply cast a reckless allegation without any evidence to support that contention…
Of course Mason-Dixon is wrong in that
the vote was 6 to 1 and, therefore, not unanimous, and the dissenting vote was for Bushkill,
not Mason-Dixon Resort… Moreover, any suggestion that the
information was not reviewed by BlE and OEC and reported to the Board is simply disingenuous….
without any facts or substantive evidence of misconduct in this licensing proceeding being produced, the Board finds
that these speculative allegations of Mason-Dixon provide no reason to reconsider
the Category 3 license decision which is at issue…
We do not minimize the work of the Grand Jury or the
report it issued. We do believe however that it is imprudent for Mason-Dixon to utilize that Report as the basis to
assign possible improper action to this Board without any evidence to support the disparaging
…the Board has given Mason-Dixon the opportunity to
fully express and argue its position and, upon a thorough review of Mason-Dixon's
stated concerns, the reasons asserted for reconsideration are insufficient. No new facts or evidence have been
presented, there is no error of law identified in this matter, and certainly no manifest
Mason-Dixon. Moreover, each of the items mentioned by Mason-Dixon as an alleged
ground for reconsideration could have been raised and objected to by Mason-Dixon prior to the adjudication…
A qualified majority of the Board remains as convinced
today as it was prior to the Report that when
considering cumulatively all of the various factors relating to each of the Category 3 applicants,
Nemacolin Woodlands is the best suited
applicant to fulfill the legislative intent of creating a well-established
resort hotel casino as an amenity of that facility. Because the Board did
not err in the handling of this matter, no
valid substantial reason exists for the granting of reconsideration.
On Sunday Friday 6/12, editor Frank Legato of Global Gaming
Business Magazine is quoted in the Evening Sun http://www.eveningsun.com/ci_18255378
that the failed applicant was fishing for evidence on which to appeal.
"If they don't appeal, this was kind of a totally useless exercise in
public relations," Legato said. "I mean, why else do you do this?
It would make sense that they're looking for fuel. Otherwise they're just
paying attorneys." …And if an appeal comes, Legato said the gaming board would likely have an easy decision
turning Mason-Dixon down….Legato speculates Mason-Dixon is using the
grand-jury report to form the basis of an appeal. But he called the strategy
"totally bogus because the report had nothing to do with Mason-Dixon or the license."
An appeal would NOT change the outcome but could delay the opening of Nemacolin’s
casino, possibly by several years. Mason Dixon could not benefit from this, but
David LeVan’s former partners who run the rival Meadows casino might. The Meadows
strenuously objected to Nemacolin, and the Meadows and Mason-Dixon share the
same PR spokesman, Dave La Torre. Is the Meadows planning to pay for the
expensive Supreme Court appeal and is Dave is going along with them? Or is Dave
desperately looking for some vindication, some proof that he was right all
along, and therefore wronged? We just don’t know, because there seems to be no
reasonable explanation for this waste of time and money.