Tuesday, March 31, 2009

PLCB consulting contract questioned

and the beat goes on......


Consultant married to state store regional manager
Tuesday, March 10, 2009

When it comes to teaching its employees good manners, the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board is keeping it all in the family.

The PLCB recently awarded a $173,000 contract to Solutions 21, a West End consulting firm whose president is married to the PLCB's Western Pennsylvania regional manager. The contract prompted demands for an explanation from two state senators despite assurances from an PLCB spokesman that the bidding process was entirely above board.

Buddy Hobart, president of Solutions 21, which is located at 152 Wabash Ave. in the city's West End neighborhood, is married to Susanne Hobart, the Western Pennsylvania regional manager for the state store system, the PLCB spokesman confirmed after the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette received an anonymous tip about the relationship.

Neither Mr. Hobart nor Mrs. Hobart returned calls for comment, but Mrs. Hobart "had no role in the procurement process," said Nick Hays, a spokesman for the PLCB. Five companies bid on the contract, he added, with the lowest submitted by Solutions 21, whose Web site describes it as "a national organizational and strategic consulting firm providing business advisory solutions in a rapidly evolving marketplace."

The Liquor Control Board was aware of Mrs. Hobart's relationship to the consulting firm when it unanimously approved the contract earlier this year, Mr. Hays said.

As one of three statewide regional managers, Mrs. Hobart will sit in on training sessions conducted by representatives of her husband's company, Mr. Hays acknowledged, but so will the system's other two regional managers, 29 district managers and 620 store managers.

They will then work with the state store system's approximately 3,000 employees to improve courtesy, friendliness and knowledge about the store's wines and spirits.

"The agency is under a mandate from Gov. [Ed] Rendell to operate the store system like a business rather than a government agency, and our goal is to offer the same level of customer service that you get at a really good specialty retailer," said Mr. Hays.

Reaction to the contract from the PLCB's critics was swift and sharp.

"It's business as usual," said state Sen. Rob Wonderling, R-Montgomery County, who unsuccessfully pushed legislation last session to privatize the state store system.

"This latest contract is an example why it's not fitting that this activity remains under public control," he said, adding he was planning to reintroduce his privatization bill again this session.

"As long as the public remains quiet on the notion that state stores are OK and sweetheart deals are OK for employees, nothing will get done."

State Sens. Jane Orie, R-McCandless, and John Eichelberger, Jr., R-Blair, wrote to the PLCB's chairman yesterday saying they were "troubled with this apparently imprudent expenditure" at a time when the state faces budget deficits "of historic magnitude," demanding a review and an explanation of how the contract was rewarded.

While employees will be trained to greet patrons upon arrival and thank them upon departure, "such elementary skills of etiquette should be prerequisite for any candidate for a customer service position within your stores," they said in their letter to Patrick J. Stapleton, who chairs the PLCB's three-member board.

Such criticism was to be expected from longtime critics of the PLCB, countered Chuck Ardo, a spokesman for Mr. Rendell. "The LCB decided their retail staff needed some training to ensure courteous service," he said. "If the LCB were to find a cure for cancer they would find a reason to criticize it."

Mr. Rendell, when asked about the customer service training contract at a news conference, said it was the first he'd heard of it -- and of the relationship between the consulting firm's president and an PLCB manager. "If it's true, it's something that should be corrected," Mr. Rendell said.

But the governor made that comment before he had all the information about the contract, Mr. Ardo said.

"He is not calling for the contract to be rebid," said Mr. Ardo. "He answered instinctively [because] the way the question was asked it seemed there might be a problem, but once the details unfolded it was clear there is no problem."

The "good manners" project won't be wasteful, Mr. Hays added, noting that customer surveys conducted recently by the PLCB have yielded "a level of satisfaction that varies widely."

Focusing on such fundamentals as customer interaction will provide store employees with a critical sales tool that could lead, ultimately, to increased revenue, Mr. Hays said.

"We want to get to the point where everyone can talk to customers with some confidence" about the store's products, he said.

"At the end of the day that one-on-one interaction by that store staffer is more important than anything else we do."

An unscientific survey of two state stores yesterday yielded no evidence, however, of bad manners from any employees.

At the Premium Collection Store at the Eastside shopping complex, which straddles East Liberty and Shadyside, a staffer named Jordan conversed knowledgeably and pleasantly about French dessert wines, while at a regular state store at the Penn Hills Center shopping plaza, another employee courteously answered repeated questions about the store's inventory.

When pressed for advice about which Beaujolais represented the best bargain, however, he shrugged.

"I don't have a clue, ma'am. I don't drink French wines."

But he was smiling when he said it.

Correction/clarification (published March 10, 2009) -- The last name of PLCB spokeman Nick Hays was misspelled in the original version of this story.

Mackenzie Carpenter can be reached at mcarpenter@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1949.
First published on March 10, 2009 at 12:00 am

Saturday, March 28, 2009

HB169 vote 1APR09

HB 169 is scheduled for a committee vote on April 1, at 3 PM. Earlier that morning, the Senate Finance Committee will vote out SB 211 and SB 212. Obviously they won't be identical, the idea is to get vote counts in both chambers, then work out the details. Please get the word out that all clubs need to support these bills in committee. The members of the House Gaming Oversight committee can be found here

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/cteeInfo/cteeInfo.cfm?cde=54&body=H

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/cteeInfo/cteeInfo.cfm?cde=17&body=S

SMOKING BAN

Smoking Ban 28AUG08

Smoking will now be prohibited in essentially all public places,

including hospitals, schools, sports facilities and all restaurants. Smoking

will also be banned in taxis, trains, buses, and bus and train stations.

What are the exemptions?

• Drinking establishments where food is 20 percent or less of annual

sales.

• A designated outdoor smoking area at a sports or recreation facility,

theater or performance establishment.

• A private club can opt to be exempted from the ban provided

the club takes a vote of its officers to address smoking in its facilities.

Private clubs include fire, ambulance and rescue companies and fraternal

organizations.

• Smoking in private clubs will be available to members only and

will be prohibited at all club activities which are open to non-members

and all club activities which are open to the public.

• Non-club sponsored events leased for private events must be

smoke free.

• Up to 25 percent of the rooms in a lodging establishment like a hotel or motel, and all rooms at full-service truck stops.

• Up to 25 percent of a casino floor, and up to 50 percent if a casino can prove to the state Department of Revenue that the smoking

ban is harming its business. (A Philadelphia law bans smoking in any city casino.)

• Nursing homes, adult-care facilities, drug and alcohol treatment facilities and mental health care facilities.

• Private residences and private vehicles, unless the residence or vehicle is being used for the provision of day-care or adult-care

services.

• Cigar bars that are connected to a tobacco shop or where tobacco-related products total at least 15 percent of annual sales.

• Tobacco shops; manufacturers, importers and wholesalers of tobacco products; manufacturers of tobacco-related products.

• Tobacco promotion events or fund-raisers for nonprofit and charitable organizations where cigars are featured.

If you have questions about the legislation, please contact my office. You may also log on to the Pennsylvania Department of Health

Web site and click on CleanIndoorAir to have your questions answered

Source of above: http://repmiller.com/uploads/Miller_NL-8-08-2.pdf

Frequently asked questions

Writings

OK , lets get to the meat of it shall we? Your either here because your club got busted or your worried your club will be busted. It's inevitable , your going to have a visit from the LCE sooner or later. We here at YCR have talked to numerous clubs that have been cited by the LCE. In all the cases we have looked into , there is one common denominator. They are targeting the gambling aspect of the club. Now I don't want to get into the legalities of it, but in all the cases we have looked into , all the clubs have been cited for the same thing. The ever popular $5000.00 payout limit. In case you don't know what that is, it's simple. You cannot pay out more than $5000.00 in one week, period! Just to make myself clear. Thats not profit , thats payout! Now, I'm figuring the average profit from gambling is 30% ( easy does it, it varies from jar to jar and board to board ) . That means that you can only profit $1500.00 in one week from gambling. Pretty difficult to do seeing is that your food and drinks are at an extremely low gross profit margin and these items are not getting any cheaper on a wholesale level, not to mention the raise of the minimum wage. In this portion of the site, I along with my team will try to cover why this is happening, and how you can make a difference.



Q.Why do you keep mentioning the "LCE"?

A. The LCE ( Liquor Control Enforcement ) enforces law for the LCB. If you address a LCE agent as LCB , he/she will be quick to correct you.

Q. Why is the LCE targeting so many clubs?

A. Well that's based a lot on opinion. Some same it's the bar and tavern owners that are pushing the state to regulate the clubs more. They cannot have gambling to subsidize their food and drink. If they can get the clubs income on gambling down , that means the clubs will have to increase prices on food and drinks therefore making a level playing field. Others say "It's the slots" . Meaning that Mr Rendell and his slot deal want all the gambling monies to go into the casinos. Instead of a club getting the gambling revenue, it will be left for the slots to take. The author of this Q&A section believe the first opinion, and have stuck to it for a long time, but as we dig more I may change that. I have had LCE agents share the same opinion as I have. It's going to get worse due to the fact that people are being educated about what a club can and cannot do. By this I mean that an angry patron, spouse, etc., can now call a complaint in with details.




Q. What can I do to protect myself?

A. Thats simple , follow the rules. Ahh the rules, if you only knew the rules. Don't feel bad. I have called the LCB several times with the same question and received several different responses. LCB/LCE agents will even tell you there are a lot of gray areas in the laws. Now ask yourself this. Can you afford to follow the rules? Could your club survive by abiding by these rules? Now granted , there are some rules that have been being broken for many years, we just feel they need to be updated. The $5000.00 per week rule being one of them.


Q. What can I do to change things?

A.Well if your reading this, then you have taken the first step. The internet has made it possible to give power to the people in so many ways. Send a email to us , let us know what you think.



Q. We give all our monies to charity, the LCE won't come after us... or will they?

A. Yes, one of the many rumors out there being spread by mis-informed club managers ( and patrons of course ) , is that as long as your giving the money to charity the sky is the limit. Not even close. The LCE does not care what your doing with the money you make , unless your mis- appropriating the funds. That's a whole other web page in itself. In a nutshell, you better have your organization setup correctly, or you will get cited for your profits going to wrong place. Most times, this can be an easy fix , but it should be done.




Q. So we get a $2000.00 fine, we can make that up in a few days, why should we be worried?


A. Thats true, but the LCE knows this and threatens the closing or even more the criminal proceedings for the board members. They are aware that the fines did nothing to stop the clubs, so they stepped it up. Very similar to a speeding ticket in that if the fine is only $10 for speeding, you will take that chance. Jack it up to $200.00 and 3 points and you will think again.



Bottom line is that they are on the hunt. This will not only hurt the clubs, but it will help the people who receive monies from the club. It only takes one pissed off patron to call the LCE, and NOW he knows what to tell them to get them in. People hear what others are being cited for and they use that for their gain.




In closing, we have the utmost respect for law enforcement, and for the most part all the LCE agents we have talked too are decent people just doing there job. We really believe that they think this is wrong as well but they are being ordered by someone above them. They are very fair. They will not trump up charges or set you up for failure. In all the dealings we have had they are very professional people that want to see your club comply and will help you in whatever way to make that happen. We need to unite and go to the Lawmakers to have these outdated laws updated.


HELPFUL HINTS AND TIPS

With some clubs having difficulty making ends meet nowadays. We here at YCR have decided to compile some things that may just help you put some more money in your pocket.

Let me start by saying that if you manage a club and you don't know how many oz are in a keg of beer, or a 750 ml bottle of spirits, you better start looking into it. If your an officer, and you ask the manager this, you may want to ..........well you get my point. The days of easy money and unlimited gambling revenue is over for now. With the enforcement of the current laws, we will see what separates the "men from the boys" or women from the girls" when it comes to managing.


I will try to stay with just facts on this page with a splash of opinion. Just remember , don't feel guilty because your club makes money. The people that complain are the same people that don't care if the walls fall around them , as long as they get their cheap beer. Sad but true.


One of the first things you should do is go around to local pub,taverns, other clubs and see what they are charging. How big are their glasses and what are they charging for food, spirits, draft beer, bottles/cans. Grab a menu on the way out. if you can. It doesn't make much sense if you are selling a draft for $.75 and everyone else is at $.95. That's called leaving money on the table!! O , and if you are the one leading the price increase, the others, when they find out will be soon to follow. It's economics 101.

It appears the LCE is out in full force once again. Get your books ready. Looks like Bill 1857 is the next one to keep your eye on.. Click on the icon

Pennsylvania Court Rules Poker Is a Game of Skill

Poker And The Law by I. Nelson Rose filed under Top Story on 2009-03-01 [Originally appeared in the Feburary 16, 2009 issue of Poker Player]
I. Nelson Rose
I. Nelson Rose

In the first important legal decision of 2009, a trial judge in Pennsylvania dismissed criminal gambling charges against the operator of a garage poker room and his girlfriend dealer, holding that Texas hold ’em is a game of skill.

Columbia County Judge Thomas A. James, Jr. filed his written Opinion on January 14, 2009. Walter “Buzz” Watkins and Diane A. Dent had been charged with 20 counts of violating Pennsylvania’s anti-gambling statutes. Prosecutors alleged they unlawfully solicited and allowed “persons to collect and assemble for the purpose of unlawful gambling.”

Judge James dismissed all charges.

Buzz had set up poker tables in a rented garage. The only game spread was no-limit hold ’em. Antes were $1 or $2. There apparently was no rake or drop. Instead, winners were expected, but not required, to tip the dealer; the larger the win the bigger the tip.

In August and September 2008, an undercover vice cop sat in on several of the games. Charges were filed in September. Defendants quickly filed for a writ of habeas corpus.

Habeas Corpus is Latin for “you have the body.” But a better translation in practice would be, “You, jailor, bring this person to court, together with proof on why you should continue to be allowed to hold him in prison.” It is also called the Great Writ, because it is the fundamental right of anyone accused of a crime to have a judge decide whether they should be set free.

In this case, Judge James had to decide whether Buzz and Diane could be guilty of the crimes charged.

The case was made somewhat easier because both the state and defendants agreed, “that the controlling issue is whether Texas hold ’em is ‘unlawful gambling’ under the Crimes Code.” The Pennsylvania statutes, like many in the U.S., have no definition of gambling.

So, the first thing Judge James did was to turn to dictionaries. These were not much help.

Next, he looked at prior case law. Pennsylvania courts, like almost all others, have held that gambling has three elements: “consideration, chance, and reward.” “Thus,” the Judge wrote, “the controlling sub-issue is whether Texas hold ’em is a game of skill or a game of chance or, if both, does skill trump chance or vice-versa.”

There are disputes about how much skill is necessary to make a game not gambling. Judge James adopted the majority test: “If skill predominates, it is not gambling.”

Courts have developed many different tests for skill. Judge James decided to apply these four, whether: 1) each player has sufficient data available to make informed choices; 2) each player possesses and has the opportunity to exercise skill; 3) skill sufficiently governs the outcome; and 4) the standard of skill is known to all players.

Judge James’ conclusion could be extremely important, because it is the first case to look at recent literature and current scientific studies. Judge James cited articles from 2007 and 2005, including from the Gaming Law Review, of which I am co-editor-in-chief. He looked at the many “how-to” books, including the 2008 edition of Mike Caro’s Caro’s Secrets of Winning Poker. And he examined a statistical study of online poker published by academics in Sweden. Virtually every author and expert agreed, of course, that “in the long run, good players will win money and bad players will lose money.”

According to the Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania Press Enterprise, Buzz thinks the whole thing was a waste of money, especially the undercover cop.

“The funny part is, there was no need to send him in there. I get three or four police officers who play regularly in our games now.”

Professor I Nelson Rose is recognized as one of the world’s leading experts on gambling law. His latest books, Gaming Law: Cases and Materials and Internet Gaming Law, are available through his website, www.gamblingandthelaw.com.

American Legion ticket machine scam


American Legion ticket machine scam:

On 04/15/08 two white males entered an American Legion in Upper Hanover Twp., Montgomery County and manipulated the ticket machine. The suspects were able to have the ticket machine dispense tickets without paying. The suspects then cashed the tickets in for money, depriving the legion of approximately $1130. The suspects also attempted this same scam at an American Legion in Lansdale Pa. however, the machine was turned off, They are believed to be operating a black, unknown make or model, extended cab pick-up truck.