California Says No to Galaxy Gaming, But Nevada Might Say Yes
Posted by Peter McCullough on May 25, 2013
There are several “rules of engagement” in Galaxy Gaming’s guiding principles that seem to conflict with a recent ruling made against the companies CEO Robert Saucier.
The Las Vegas manufacturer of casino table games, was denied the right to doing business in California due to a lengthy and ongoing investigation calling into question several unsavory business practices that could have an unfavorable outcome of the companies Nevada gaming license.
Saucier is under scrutiny for misleading and misrepresentation of information regarding business ventures, signing unapproved licensing deals with California tribal casinos, lawsuits and even information that may have been false about his own personal past.
In 2002 Saucer applied for a gaming license with Tule River Tribe Gaming Commission, at that time the Commission began an investigation with the help of the Bureau of Gaming Control. The investigation uncovered that Saucier did not give full disclosure of very pertinent facts and what could be harmful business ventures that are very relevant to approval by the state of California.
According to the 2002 report Saucier list of information that was never disclosed included:
- Failure to mention an order to pay a $1.5 million judgment to Sherron Associates, a creditor in a hotel-casino project.
- Failed to reveal gambling taxes owed to City of Spokane in WA State by his Mars Hotel and Casino, a hotel that eventually failed.
- Misrepresented his past drunk driving conviction stating it was dismissed
- Failed to list a valid address. He filed his personal federal income tax returns in Washington, listed a condominium in Mexico as his home and had a license for a home-based business in Las Vegas.
- Failed to disclose multiple businesses: Galaxy Gaming of Nevada, LLC; Galaxy Gaming of Oregon, LLC; Bonus Blackjack, LLC; Intergalactic; and others.
- Failed to mention gaming licenses from other states, including Washington and Nevada.
- Did not reveal that he pays child support.
- Did not disclose his involvement in past lawsuits. For instance, he sued the Mars Hotel for $1.6 million in 1998. “In essence, he sued himself and received a default judgment,” Frink wrote.
- Failed to mention a foreclosed house and two personal credit card bills that were sent to collections.
- Had no Nevada business license, as required, from 2001 to 2004. He blamed the missing license on an “oversight by staff.”
- Claimed to have graduated from UNR, but he did not.
“In a highly regulated industry such as gaming, the failure to be forthcoming with relevant information was inexcusable,” commented Frink.Saucier’s case was assigned to the Attorney General’s Office in 2007 for prosecution and is still pending further investigation. Mired in lawsuits and controversy, it still seems as though that Saucier may not have to answer to his past when it comes to his Nevada.
Apparently different states in the US have vastly different laws and regulatory standards. Nevada’s Gaming Control Board chairman, Burnett stated,
“Other states sometimes have vastly different laws and regulatory standards than we do.” “There are cases when a ‘denial’ doesn’t mean the same thing as it does in Nevada. For example, in some states in the Midwest, there have been denial proceedings but they’re for various transactions and don’t necessarily relate to the integrity or the suitability of the company itself.”
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment