Poker superstar Phil Ivey has received preliminary approval for A las vegas medical marijuana dispensary license in Nevada.
Phil Ivey isn’t smoking something, but his future clients may be: Ivey received one of 26 license that is preliminary for the medical cannabis dispensary from the Las Vegas City Council earlier this week, potentially making the poker superstar among the first operators within the town to offer pot to consumers.
You can find even more steps necessary before Ivey gets final approval to open such a business, but his approval does mean that the city 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 preliminary approval from the town will now have to also be approved by the state health division.
The City Council will fundamentally hold a suitability that is final for all approved by the state before awarding a small number of licenses which have been set aside for Las Vegas.
This means that Ivey still has a way that is long go before getting a final go-ahead to dispense medical cannabis in Sin City. But as he makes pot-sized bets at the poker table if he can make his way through the various licensing stages, Ivey might end up slinging weed just as prolifically.
Council Separate on Licensing Process
There’s been a whole lot of debate over just how Las Vegas has handled the pot licensing procedure, though which has more regarding procedural concerns than such a thing Ivey or some other licensee that is potential done.
Councilman Bob Coffin introduced a motion to wait the proceedings until after Nevada regulators weigh in on the suitability of each of the applicants week that is next. He worried that making public opinions on applicants before the state made its own recommendations could possibly lead to lawsuits, and that waiting could let the city to approach the problem with an ‘unbiased eye.’
But that motion ultimately failed, as a vote in the issue completed in a 3-3 tie. Councilwoman Lois Tarkanian and councilman Ricki Barlow also voted to delay the procedures, while Mayor Carolyn Goodman, spouse of infamous ex-mayor Oscar and mother of an applicatant herself, abstained from the vote.
Among the numerous applicants that had been approved were developer James Hammer, restaurant owner Michael Morton, and political consultant David Thomas. Nuleaf, a Las Vegas-based company that is owned by a group that operates dispensaries in Ca, had been denied for a permit.
‘I believe waiting might have made a difference,’ Nuleaf spokesman Bradley Mayer said. ‘We feel confident that the state will find we have been a very qualified applicant.’
Ivey Headliner of the 12 Months
This might be simply the newest in a set of headlines made by Ivey that have nothing at all to do with his prodigious skills at the poker table.
Probably the biggest headlines have been made in their various cases that are edge-sorting Crockfords as well as the Borgata. Ivey already destroyed the Crockfords instance in britain’s tall Court of Justice, costing him over $12 million in winnings. a comparable instance 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 used in the games usually do not constitute cheating, while the casinos, perhaps not surprisingly, disagree.
Last Saturday, Ivey also shut down the Ivey Poker website, ending operations just 18 months after the Facebook poker program launched. However, the poker legend said that the closed down ended up being just a change for the product.
South Africa Online Gambling Ban Stirs Debate
South Africa is considering a ban on online gambling, also stronger regulations 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 National Gambling Policy Council, which features users 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 has the capability to enforce regulations on gambling, and that it really is unclear how many jobs are created by the web gambling industry. It could also hardly be an unprecedented move, as numerous other jurisdictions throughout the world have outlawed Web gambling in the past.
Democratic Alliance Favors Regulation Over Ban
But though some government officials were enthusiastic about the prospect, the notion of an outright ban was strongly denounced by the opposition Democratic Alliance.
‘That is really a very, very bad decision,’ stated DA trade and industry spokesperson Geordin Hill-Lewis. ‘we fiercely disagree with that view. Its completely shortsighted to say that it is better for Southern Africans never to be permitted to gamble online if you find demand that is patently significant the country to do that. It is for government to facilitate that into 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 full ban, Hill-Lewis said, would price far a lot of in resources to enforce.
But Department of Trade and Industry Deputy Director-General Zodwa Ntuli stated that the specific circumstances in South Africa meant that a ban would be good policy that is public. She pointed away that the division’s proposal was made after recognizing that South Africa had a relatively high degree of problem gambling and debt contrasted with many countries.
Electronic Bingo Terminals Will Be Limited
In the event that department’s recommendations were to become law, it wouldn’t trigger a ban that is widespread of gambling tasks in the country, but would rather restrict exactly what will be allowed of this old-fashioned types of gaming which can be already contained in South Africa. There would be further controls placed on electronic bingo terminals, which are currently allowed by provincial governments, https://slotsforfun-ca.com/quick-hits-slot-review/ 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 further licenses for the machines. The new recommendations would see a cap on the amount of machines allowed nationwide. It would also attempt to get a handle on the ease of access to these machines, with officials saying that gambling shouldn’t be allowed in departmental stores, for instance.
This new regulations would have a framework for allowing the government to higher oversee the horse rushing industry. A process by which the government could affect change in the industry while few details were available, it appeared that the most significant changes there would come in the issuing of licenses.
Gambling legislation in Southern Africa resembles that for the united states of america and Canada, at minimum when it comes to the interplay between federal and local governments. While the federal government sets national policy, it is as much as individual provinces to determine how each will issue licenses and collect revenues from gambling activities.
Tuesday Massachusetts Casino Repeal Vote Takes Place
Despite long odds, anti-casino forces remain hoping for a triumph in Massachusetts. A ‘yes’ vote means ‘no casinos’. (Image: Repeal the Casino Deal)
A vote that will either lead to Massachusetts casino repeal or to your matter being put to sleep for good is coming on Tuesday, though it would simply 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, a proposition that could put a final end to the 2012 legislation that is allowing the state to license gaming houses throughout the state.
In line with the survey that is latest by the Western New England University Polling Institute, 59 per cent of likely voters within the state plan to vote ‘No’ in the ballot question, meaning ‘yes’ to appropriate casinos. Only 35 % plan to vote ‘yes,’ in benefit of the repeal. Those figures 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 has been some success in efforts by religious leaders to get parishioners to oppose the casino law, with regular churchgoers being more inclined to vote ‘yes’ than their non-attending counterparts. But also Catholics who attend mass every are opposed to repeal by a 17 percent margin week. In reality, Protestant voters who worship regularly make up about the only real demographic that favor repeal, doing this with a 55-45 margin.
Meanwhile, the advertising efforts by casinos and their allies may actually have been helpful. Support for the repeal in Western Massachusetts happens to be reduced notably compared to in prior polls, maybe because of advertising that touted some great benefits of the planned MGM casino in Springfield.
Battle Over Benefits and Consequences
But while anti-casino advocates may be facing long chances on Tuesday, they’re nevertheless fighting into the final moments to get their message out. Groups like Repeal the Casino Deal believe that the casinos offer little benefit that is economic the folks of Massachusetts, while increasing criminal activity and gambling addiction.
‘ The money isn’t coming to the social people of Massachusetts,’ said Al Cabot, an anti-casino advocate. ‘This is in fact 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 little bit differently. According to MGM Springfield President Mike Mathis, his business’s casino will produce 1000s of jobs and bring tens of millions of dollars in economic stimulus to the community.
‘We’ve seen exactly what 25 years of no casino can do,’ Mathis stated. ‘we want the possibility.’
Mathis also disputes the concept that casinos would simply be taking money that is already invested in Massachusetts and moving it to spending at his company’s resort.
‘A third of our customers are coming from Connecticut,’ Mathis said. ‘This idea that cash is falling through the sky or we’re cannibalizing the market that is local just inaccurate.’
Casinos in Massachusetts: Pre-Election Status
So far, three licenses were granted to create gambling venues in Massachusetts. Combined with the MGM casino in Springfield, Wynn Resorts had been the champion of the higher Boston license, beating out a competing plan by Mohegan Sun at Suffolk Downs in Revere. A license ended up being also awarded to Penn National to create a slots parlor in Plainridge.
While casino opponents may come up short at the polls, just getting the question on the ballot was one thing of a victory. Although campaigners collected more than enough signatures to put the casino concern up to a referendum, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley originally rejected the relevant question, forcing a showdown in their state’s Supreme Court over whether it might ultimately show up on this season’s ballot.