It's not clear whether project supporters will challenge the decision.

The state Gaming Control Board Thursday unanimously ruled the application for a slot-machine parlor on Lancaster Square was invalid because it did not include a signed bond guaranteeing the required $50 million licensing fee.

"The board considers this to be a deficient submission not rising to the level of an application," the ruling states. The submission is "statutorily ineligible to be considered."

The board also barred the group that proposed the parlor from submitting another application for this year's allotment of slots licenses.

Backers of the project, proposed for the Bulova Technologies Building on East Orange Street, said they correctly submitted the bond documents. They had previously vowed to fight the ruling -- in court, if necessary.

"The bond was signed and sealed," Manheim Township lawyer Jerome Finefrock said.

Finefrock has been the local spokesman for the project, which he and law partner James A. Nettleton Jr. want to develop with backing from investors in Connecticut, Florida, New York and New Jersey. The backers operate as Pennsylvainia Gaming Group LLP.

The group has 10 days to provide the gaming board with documents challenging the ruling. If no challenge is filed, the application will be removed from consideration.

"I'm sure we'll respond," Finefrock said, but he would not elaborate.

Finefrock also would not provide any documentation on the bonds because, he said, "the matter is in litigation."

Gaming officials said the bond document Pennsylvania Gaming submitted on the Dec. 28 application deadline was an unsigned copy and did not list a surety company.

Officials sent the group a letter, which it received Jan. 9, notifying them of the deficiency.

Pennsylvania Gaming replied Jan. 23 with a copy of another unsigned bond and a letter stating the bond would be paid pending a letter of credit -- which was not included, gaming officials said.

The board sent the group another letter Jan. 26 stating the application would be thrown out because it lacked the bond guarantee.

Pennsylvania Gaming sent the board a letter Jan. 31 requesting that its application be withdrawn, gaming officials said. The following day, however, it reversed itself and asked that the application remain active.

Although the letters were discussed at Thursday's meeting, neither gaming officials nor Finefrock would provide copies to the press.

Board members stressed they are not rejecting the Lancaster application but invalidating it because it cannot be considered without the bond guarantee.

Officials compared the bond guarantee Pennsylvania Gaming submitted to an unsigned check.

Finefrock said he would have no further comment on the board's ruling until he receives an official transcript of the meeting and a letter notifying him of the outcome.

The board Thursday also threw out two other gaming license applications for parlors proposed for Western Pennsylvania.

That leaves 22 active gaming license applications for slots parlors in the state.

"Today's decision is a win for the people of Lancaster County," U.S. Rep. Joseph Pitts said.

"Over the past few months, thousands of community members have voiced their strong opposition to this casino and the negative impact that would come with it.

"I believe this grass-roots opposition played an important role in today's ruling, and I thank everyone who spoke up against this unwanted casino."

State Sen. Gibson Armstrong, who helped collect more than 15,000 signatures from county residents on a petition opposing the project, also was pleased with Thursday's decision.

"We thought from day one that their application was not very strong, and when they didn't post a bond, it's not a valid application," he said.

"I don't know why they went through all the motions here. For some reason, they thought they had an outside chance. It didn't work out."

Although anti-gambling activist Dianne Berlin supports the gaming board's ruling, she wasn't ready to declare victory.

"We're not out of the woods yet," she said. "Three down, 22 to go." blog comments powered by Disqus