.svg)
A lawsuit filed by the Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI) claims the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) has been withholding behavioral data for research into problem gambling, contrary to the terms of the state's 2011 casino law.
The PHAI lawsuit filed in Massachusetts Superior Court in Boston asks the court to issue a so-called "mandamus order" to compel the commission to meet its obligations under Section 97 of Chapter 194 of the 2011 Expanded Gaming Act.
Under Section 97, the commission is required to collect behavioral data from casino operators and share anonymized customer data with the MGC. In turn, the MGC is required to contract with a research authority to make the data available to qualified researchers.
The data should be used to analyze what casino practices are causing harm, who is being harmed, and what casino operators and the commission can do to reduce problem gambling. According to the lawsuit, the MGC has been required to collect this data since its formation in 2011 but has yet to put the policies in place to begin its collection.
“The requirement for the gaming commission to make this important research data available has been in place since the day the commission was created more than a decade ago,” Mark Gottlieb, PHAI executive director, said in a statement.
“All of our casinos have been operating for half a decade and only now, after two years of nudging from PHAI, the commission finally claims to be getting closer to meeting its obligations,” Gottlieb said.
Thomas Mills, an MGC spokesman, said Thursday (October 31) that the commission “does not comment on pending litigation, so I’m unable to provide comment on this matter.” The commission has 20 days from Tuesday to file a response to the lawsuit.
During a September 26 commission meeting, Mark Vander Linden, MGC director of research and responsible gaming, updated commissioners on the project and did acknowledge that he anticipates the selection of a partner for the project will be finalized and announced before December 1.
In 2014, prior to the opening of Plainridge Park casino, the MGC voted to delay the implementation of the project until all Massachusetts casinos were operational due to a concern about a competitive disadvantage. Plainridge Park opened in 2015, followed by MGM Springfield in 2018 and Encore Boston Harbor in 2019.
“That vote didn’t stop the responsible gaming team from commencing work on this,” Vander Linden said.
“The work involved designing a framework for data collection and storage, developing a data dictionary, refining the data use agreement … and developing policies and procedures that would [protect the] privacy of the data in accordance with federal and state law.”
Vander Linden cited the coronavirus pandemic as one of the major obstacles that created some delays.
“Section 97 is really important,” Vander Linden said. “It will help us better understand problem gambling. It will allow us to create evidence of informed polices and regulations. We are moving the project forward.”
Vander Linden’s efforts to get the program up and running were supported by several commissioners who cited the complexity of launching such a large project.
“I think sometimes people forget … that government doesn’t work overnight,” said commissioner Bradford Hill. “It takes time. If I’ve learned anything from this agency, it's we take our time and give you the best product available.”
Hill noted that the MGC has a mandate that it needs to address, and its staff are addressing the issue.
Jordan Maynard, who was interim chair at the September meeting before being appointed chair of the commission this week, reminded potential critics that the state legislature did “have the wisdom to give the gaming commission time to get this up.”
“How do we know that? There is no data certain on when this was due, understanding that the casinos would take time to get stood up,” Maynard said. “Let me remind everyone that all three of them were not here six years ago. We are an infant industry and agency in Massachusetts.”
The PHAI’s complaint did recognize that Massachusetts’ data-collection requirement “represents a first-in-the-nation commitment to compile critical data about how gambling customers are put at-risk for harm.”
The organization is also lobbying in support of the federal SAFE Bet Act, which was introduced in the U.S. Congress in September to impose new federal minimum standards related to sports-betting advertising and responsible gambling.
The lawsuit alleges that the Massachusetts Gaming Commission “has failed to comply with its unambiguous statutory obligation to collect this data from the casinos and provide it qualified researchers.”
