Poker superstar Phil Ivey has received approval that is preliminary A las vegas medical marijuana dispensary license in Nevada.
Phil Ivey is not smoking something, but his future clients may be: Ivey received one of 26 initial license approvals for a medical marijuana dispensary from the nevada City Council earlier in the day this week, possibly making the poker superstar one of the first operators into the city to provide pot to consumers.
You will find even more steps necessary before Ivey gets final approval to start such a company, but his approval does suggest that the town found him qualified to go on in the licensing process.
This week to plead their cases for medical marijuana licenses about 50 potential operators went before the City Council. Those that got approval that is preliminary the town will now have to also be approved by the state health department.
The City Council will fundamentally hold a last suitability meeting for all approved by the state before awarding a small number of licenses that have been set aside for Las Vegas.
Meaning that Ivey still has a long way to go before getting a final go-ahead to dispense medical marijuana in Sin City. But if he could make his way through the various licensing stages, Ivey might end up slinging weed just as prolifically as he makes pot-sized bets at the poker table.
Council Split on Licensing Process
There has been a great deal of debate over just how Las Vegas has managed the pot licensing process, though who has more to do with procedural concerns than such a thing Ivey or any other potential licensee has done.
Councilman Bob Coffin introduced a motion to wait the proceedings until after Nevada regulators weigh in on the suitability of each of the candidates next week. He worried that making public opinions on applicants before the state made its own guidelines could potentially lead to lawsuits, and that waiting could let the city to approach the matter with an ‘unbiased eye.’
But that motion ultimately failed, as a vote on the issue finished in a 3-3 tie. Councilwoman Lois Tarkanian and councilman Ricki Barlow also voted to wait the procedures, while Mayor Carolyn Goodman, wife of infamous ex-mayor Oscar and mother of an applicatant by herself, abstained from the vote.
Among the numerous candidates that were approved were developer James Hammer, restaurant owner Michael Morton, and consultant that is political Thomas. Nuleaf, a Las Vegas-based company that is owned by a team that operates dispensaries in California, had been denied for a license.
‘we believe waiting might have made a difference,’ Nuleaf spokesman Bradley Mayer said. ‘We feel confident that their state will find we have been a very qualified applicant.’
Ivey Headliner for the Year
This might be simply the most recent in a set of headlines made by Ivey that have nothing to do with his skills that are prodigious the poker table.
Possibly the biggest headlines are made in his various cases that are edge-sorting Crockfords therefore the Borgata. Ivey currently lost the Crockfords instance in the UK’s tall Court of Justice, costing him over $12 million in winnings. a comparable case against the Atlantic City casino is still pending, although in that case, it’s the casino that is pursuing recourse to have its payouts returned. Ivey contends that the tactics he found in the games do not constitute cheating, while the casinos, maybe not interestingly, disagree.
Last Saturday, Ivey also shut down the Ivey Poker website, closing operations just 18 months after the Facebook poker program launched. However, the poker legend said that the closed down was just a transition for the product.
Southern Africa Online Gambling Ban Stirs Debate
South Africa is considering a ban on online gambling, also stronger laws for land-based wagering, such as electronic bingo terminals like these. (Image: OnlineCasinoArchives.co.za)
South Africa’s government is proposing a ban on a range that is wide of activities, including all forms of online gambling and other activities such as dog racing. That proposition is being discussed by the nationwide Gambling Policy Council, which features people from both the national and governments that are provincial as well as the Department of Trade and Industry.
Based on department officials, the federal government believes it gets the capability to enforce regulations on gambling, and that it’s unclear how jobs that are many created by the online gambling industry. It could also hardly be an unprecedented move, as numerous other jurisdictions all over the world have outlawed Web gambling in the past.
Democratic Alliance Favors Regulation Over Ban
But though some government officials had been enthusiastic about the possibility, the idea of an outright ban was strongly denounced by the opposition Democratic Alliance.
‘That is a very, really decision that is bad’ said DA trade and industry representative Geordin Hill-Lewis. ‘I fiercely disagree with that view. It’s completely shortsighted to say that it is better for South Africans never to be permitted to gamble online if you find patently significant demand in the country to do that. It is for government to facilitate that in the safest way possible.’
The DA position is that online gambling is better controlled through regulation, rather than an outright ban in other words. a complete ban, Hill-Lewis said, would cost far excessively in resources to enforce.
But Department of Trade and Industry Deputy Director-General Zodwa Ntuli said that the specific circumstances in South Africa meant that a ban will be good policy that is public. She pointed down that the department’s proposal was made after recognizing that South Africa had a relatively high level of problem gambling and debt contrasted with numerous countries.
Electronic Bingo Terminals Could Be Limited
In the event that department’s guidelines had been to become law, it wouldn’t trigger a ban that is widespread of gambling tasks in the nation, but would rather limit what will be allowed for the conventional forms of gaming which can be already contained in South Africa. There would additionally be further controls placed on electronic bingo terminals, which are currently allowed by provincial governments, despite the fact that there is certainly no policy that is national the devices.
That conflict caused Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies to issue a moratorium on any licenses that are further the machines. The recommendations that are new notice a cap on the wide range of machines allowed nationwide. It would additionally you will need to get a grip on the ease of access to these machines, with officials saying that gambling must not be allowed in departmental stores, for instance.
The brand new regulations would also include a framework for allowing the federal government to raised oversee the horse rushing industry. While few details were available, it appeared that the most significant changes there would come in the issuing of licenses, a process by which the federal government could affect change in the market.
Gambling regulation in South Africa resembles that of this usa and Canada, at minimum when it comes to the interplay between federal and governments that are local. While the federal government sets national policy, it is up to individual provinces to decide how each will issue licenses and gather revenues from gambling tasks.
Massachusetts Casino Repeal Vote Takes Place Tuesday
Despite long odds, anti-casino forces continue to be hoping for a victory in Massachusetts. A ‘yes’ vote means ‘no casinos’. (Image: Repeal the Casino Deal)
A vote that will either slotsforfun-ca.com lead to Massachusetts casino repeal or to your matter being put to sleep forever is coming on Tuesday, though it would just take a major upset for anti-casino advocates to get their way on Election Day. Those seeking to defeat casinos are confusingly looking for voters to vote ‘Yes’ on Question 3, an idea that will put end to the 2012 legislation that is allowing the state to license gaming houses throughout the state.
Based on the latest survey by the Western New England University Polling Institute, 59 percent of likely voters in the state plan to vote ‘No’ in the ballot question, meaning ‘yes’ to appropriate casinos. Just 35 percent plan to vote ‘yes,’ in favor of the repeal. Those numbers represent a gain that is major pro-casino forces, since a September poll showed just an 11 percent advantage for ‘no’ voters.
Of course, that’s assuming voters don’t get completely bewildered by the unintuitive ‘yes/no’ phrasing of the ballot effort itself.
Religious Voters Support Repeal
The numbers reveal that there’s been some success in efforts by spiritual leaders to get parishioners to oppose the casino law, with regular churchgoers being more inclined to vote ‘yes’ than their counterparts that are non-attending. But also Catholics whom attend mass every week are in opposition to repeal with a 17 % margin. In reality, Protestant voters who worship regularly make up about the actual only real demographic that favor repeal, doing this by way of a 55-45 margin.
Meanwhile, the advertising efforts by casinos and their allies seem to have been very effective. Support for the repeal in Western Massachusetts happens to be reduced dramatically compared to in prior polls, perhaps because of advertising that touted some great benefits of the planned MGM casino in Springfield.
Battle Over Pros and Consequences
But while anti-casino advocates may be dealing with long chances on Tuesday, they’re still fighting in the final moments to get their message out. Teams like Repeal the Casino Deal believe that the casinos offer very little economic benefit to the individuals of Massachusetts, while increasing unlawful activity and gambling addiction.
‘ The money isn’t coming to the social people of Massachusetts,’ said Al Cabot, an anti-casino advocate. ‘This is definitely money that’s going from one or two casinos in Connecticut to three casinos in Massachusetts.’
Unsurprisingly, those within the casino industry see things just a bit that is little. According to MGM Springfield President Mike Mathis, his company’s casino will produce a large number of jobs and bring tens of millions of dollars in economic stimulus to the city.
‘We’ve seen what 25 years of no casino may do,’ Mathis said. ‘we want an opportunity.’
Mathis additionally disputes the concept that casinos would simply be taking money that is already spent in Massachusetts and shifting it to spending at his company’s resort.
‘A third of our customers are coming from Connecticut,’ Mathis said. ‘This concept that money is falling through the sky or we’re cannibalizing the regional marketplace is just inaccurate.’
Gambling enterprises in Massachusetts: Pre-Election Status
So far, three licenses have been granted to build gambling venues in Massachusetts. Along with the MGM casino in Springfield, Wynn Resorts had been the winner of the higher Boston license, beating out a competing plan by Mohegan Sun at Suffolk Downs in Revere. A license was additionally awarded to Penn National to develop a slots parlor in Plainridge.
While casino opponents may come up short at the polls, simply getting the question on the ballot was one thing of a victory. Although campaigners collected plenty of signatures to put the casino concern up to a referendum, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley originally rejected the relevant question, forcing a showdown in the state’s Supreme Court over whether it would ultimately show up on this present year’s ballot.