I made front-page headlines last month with some remarks about the proposed Pittsburgh slots parlor: "Mayor Claims 'Fix Is In' on Slots License" was atop the Oct. 28 Post-Gazette story. As I stated in the days that followed, I regret my choice of words and the insinuation it left about possible illegalities regarding gaming. My comments were meant to reflect the situation locally, and not intended to impugn the work of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board. I have met with some of the members and staff of the Gaming Control Board, and believe they are working hard and trust that they intend to do the right thing.

		Tom Murphy has served as mayor of Pittsburgh since January 1994.

I do not regret, however, using the bully pulpit of the Mayor's Office to demand an open, honest and transparent selection process to ensure that Pittsburgh -- not some gambling casino owner -- gets the most benefit possible from having this new industry in Pittsburgh.

My poor choice of words is a reflection of my growing frustration that we are now less than two months away from the Gaming Control Board's Dec. 28 deadline for submission of proposals from potential slots operators and that there has been virtually no public discussion about the impact of gaming on Pittsburgh. Once the proposals are submitted on Dec. 28, the die will have been cast. It will be too late to have a meaningful discussion about these critical issues.

It is no secret that I have been critical of the state's decision to force Pittsburgh to budget revenues from a future gaming hall to cover the operating expenditures of the city. Further, it is also no secret that I am very concerned over the lack of public discussion about the impact of a slots hall on Pittsburgh. That is why I established the Pittsburgh Task Force on Gaming several months ago. At the press conference announcing the gaming task force, I stated that it would be crucial that we begin to understand how a gambling casino will change the economic and social landscape of the city of Pittsburgh.

In fact, I charged the Pittsburgh Gaming Task Force with answering the following questions:

1) Who will receive the gaming license?

2) Where will the casino be located?

3) What will be the design of the casino?

4) What are the community benefits? What are the best uses for the revenues generated?

5) How many employees will the casino have? What will be their training?

6) What impact will the casino have on the traditional Pittsburgh work ethic?

I am pleased with the work the task force has done to date raising and examining these issues. The work of the Pittsburgh Gaming Task Force has been particularly impressive with regard to the "statement of values" they have developed regarding what we should and must expect in terms of what this development will look like. I strongly encourage Pittsburghers to read and review this important report from the task force, which is available online at www.pittsburghgamingtaskforce.org.

Our community has had enormous success in developing and designing high-quality structures, including the PNC Bank Operations Center, PNC Park, the Alcoa world-headquarters, our world-class convention center and other critically acclaimed projects. If we have to have a casino in Pittsburgh, we should not have to settle for anything less than excellence from a design standpoint.

However, I also conceived and started the independent gaming task force in order to shed some much-needed light on the process of selecting who will receive the Pittsburgh license. That decision -- which will determine the fate of millions of dollars affecting our local economy, thousands of jobs in our region and what the community benefits are for Pittsburgh -- is too important to be done behind closed doors. If ever a process required openness and a healthy dose of transparency, it is the selection of slots licenses.

It is my firm belief that if this process is allowed to continue in a shroud of mystery and secrecy, Pittsburgh will lose.

Gambling represents a unique opportunity to have a public discussion about what we as Pittsburghers want in terms of community benefit from a slots parlor. Do we want to fund a new arena? Do we want to invest in a fund to spur future developments? Do we want to let the casino operator take all of the profits home at night instead of investing in our community?

These are all critically important questions that will affect Pittsburgh's future. But none of them will be answered to Pittsburgh's satisfaction if the process of selecting a gaming operator is not open, competitive and transparent.

I believe that the members of the state Gaming Control Board want to do the right thing with regard to what is in the best interests of our communities. But they have to be permitted to make their decisions without political interference. The only way for Pennsylvanians to ensure that happens is for the Gaming Control Board to open all of their proceedings to intense community inspection and public scrutiny.

All that being said, I should have chosen my words more carefully several days ago when I attended a Press Club of Western Pennsylvania luncheon to discuss gambling. I should not have referred to a "fix" with regard to the selection of a slots licensee for Pittsburgh. What I intended to convey to the audience was my deep sense of frustration with the process to date.

I just hope there is still enough time to open up this process and give Pittsburgh a say in determining what gambling means to the future of our city.