The Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI) filed suit against the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) this week in Massachusetts Superior Court.
For you
Suit claims regulators are withholding data for research
In the filing, the group alleges that the MGC has failed to provide legally mandated casino patron date to researchers. When the state legalized casinos via the 2011 Expanded Gaming Act, the law included a provision that licensees had to supply the MGC with data relating to customer behavior to help promote and conduct responsible gambling and problem gambling research.
The suit alleges that the MGC has failed in that mandate. For example, the MGC delayed the collection of that data until 2019, once all three casino licensees were live, even though the first casino, Plainridge Park, opened in 2015.
“Due to the commission’s longstanding failure to comply with its mandatory obligation to collect and provide this data to researchers, the Petitioner and the public have been denied important evidence for understanding and developing strategies to reduce the negative health impact caused by the licensees’ products to certain gaming customers. In turn, the commission has deprived the Legislature—as well as the commission itself—of critical gaming data and analyses that these bodies could use to better regulate licensees’ products to minimize the health risks they pose to the public,” the complaint reads.
During a Sept. 24 MGC meeting, MGC Director of Research and Responsible Gaming Mark Vander Linden gave an update on the project and did acknowledge that the data has not been anonymized or distributed yet.
Vander Linden cited the pandemic as one of the major delays, as Encore Boston Harbor only opened in 2019, shortly before the pandemic began.
In his update, Vander Linden informed the commissioners the group was in the process of finalizing a provider to anonymize and store the customer data, which he expects to be finalized before Dec. 1.
While Section 97 of the Expanded Gaming Act does mandate the collection and distribution of casino customer data, it did not come with any explicit deadlines.
PHAI wants court to demand MGC to release data
PHAI requested the anonymized patron data from the MGC in 2022 but the commission did not comply. The group asked again in February of this year with the same result. PHAI claims the MGC has not made the data available to any researchers.
The PHAI is seeking an order from the court requiring the MGC to compile and release the data within 90 days of being told to do so. The group is also seeking for the MGC to cover its court costs.
“Not only should this casino data have been made available years ago, but this is exactly the kind of data requirement that should be imposed on sports gambling, which has exploded here in the past 20 months. At PHAI, we look forward to working with the Massachusetts legislature to ensure that a similar statutory obligation is imposed on sports gambling operators here in the Commonwealth.,” PHAI President Richard Daynard said in a release.
The MGC declined to comment, stating it is organizational policy not to comment on pending litigation.
Meanwhile, PHAI’s class action lawsuit against DraftKings over its advertising practices is still active. A judge denied DraftKings’ motion to dismiss in September and the case continues to move forward.