New Gaming Oversight Chair: “Board’s conduct is unbecoming.”

The continuing hissing match between State Treasurer Rob McCord and the state Gaming Control Board (GCB) reached a new phase Thursday with Mr. McCord asking Commonwealth Court for an injunction allowing him to attend GCB executive sessions.

The court on Dec. 15 unanimously overruled the GCB’s preliminary objections to Mr. McCord’s attending executive sessions. Mr. McCord is, by law, an ex-officio member of the board. He cannot vote but has been allowed to participate in public board hearings.

Mr. McCord, a Democrat, claims the GCB still has not allowed him in their executive sessions, despite the preliminary ruling. The GCB said Mr. McCord refuses to sign confidentiality agreements requested by the board.

Labeling the continued refusals and legal maneuvers of the board as a waste of taxpayer money and time, Mr. McCord asked, “What are they trying to hide?”

“Every time the treasurer accuses the board of being secretive, the public should be asking some pointed questions of him in order to better discern his motivation in this matter,” Gaming Control Board Chairman Greg Fajt said on behalf of the entire Board. “All we have ever asked of the Treasurer is that he abide by the same rules that all the Board members abide by and then he is able to attend executive sessions.”

Mr. McCord said the GCB’s continued attempts to obstruct his access was unacceptable in light of the Commonwealth Court ruling.

“The Gaming Board is not a private club; it is a public agency that is expected to act in accordance with the Gaming Act. Its conduct is contrary to the law, the Commonwealth Court’s decision, and the public interest,” said Mr. McCord.

State Treasurer Rob McCord

Mr. Fajt suggested Mr. McCord may have political motivation for wanting access to the board’s dealings.

“We only wonder what his real political motivation is here, given that Treasurer McCord has previously stated that he wanted to get this resolved before Tom Corbett becomes Governor,” Mr. Fajt said. “Maybe the Board’s concern of the Treasurer’s political motivation is not unjustified.”

Mr. McCord said the GCB wants to prohibit his designee from attending board sessions involving “contested matter(s)”; prohibit the treasurer from naming more than one designee and sign a statement saying he has not accepted contributions from representatives of the gaming industry nor engaged in outside conversations regarding GCB matters.

The seven-member GCB is appointed entirely by elected officials.

State Rep. Curt Schroder (R-Chester), new chairman of the House Gaming Oversight Committee, agreed with Mr. McCord. While saying the court ruling was not a final ruling, he said the GCB’s segregation of Mr. McCord’s activities “is not their call.”

“It is my view the statutory language is clear. He [Mr. McCord] or his designee has a right to attend those meetings. They [the GCB] cannot just ignore the statute,” said Mr. Schroder.

Mr. Schroder said if the GCB has problems with the law, “they should come to the General Assembly and ask for a change.”

“The board’s conduct is very unbecoming,” Mr. Schroder said.