Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Steel is rising for the Tohono O’odham (TO) self-billed “temporary casino.” This casino’s history and future are rife with technicalities.  The TO secretly purchased a piece of land, a county island within Glendale, that technically is not Glendale. The TO claimed it could do so because their interpretation of the State Gaming Compact allowed it…yet another technicality. There are many, many county islands within the Valley and the TO believe they technically have the right to plant more casinos on them. They should be extremely careful. Technicalities can come back to bite one in the butt.

There are a few “technicalities” that the TO have yet to face. They have not received gaming approval from the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs to date. I suppose the TO consider that as just a minor technicality. The Arizona Department of Gaming has not approved a gaming license for the TO’s new casino. It could take quite some time for the department to clear the Tohono O’odham for that precious state gaming license. Technically, all tees have to be crossed and all eyes dotted and the state will not grant a license until every stipulation is satisfied. This action is not a mere technicality. In the meantime there is still federal legislation introduced by Senators McCain and Flake. This is another action that cannot be considered a mere technicality. The bill will come to a vote and the expectation is that it will be approved.

This temporary casino could become a ghostly, unused testament to The Tohono O’odham’s overreaching use of technicalities. Don’t be surprised if this casino never opens…due to a technicality.

© Joyce Clark, 2015

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Recently a blog reader sent me the following study produced for Fort Wayne, Indiana as it considered allowing casinos in 2009. Here is the link: http://www.ipfw.edu/dotAsset/174199.pdf . He said he believed the study to be reasonable and objective. It was commissioned by the City of Fort Wayne and written by the Community Research Institute of Indiana University/Purdue University. Apparently the 38 pages of information produced did not deter the officials in Fort Wayne and two non tribal casinos are now in operation: the Fraternal Order of Eagles 3512 casino and the Canterbury casino. There are several major differences between Fort Wayne’s casinos and the proposed Glendale casino. No reservation land was created as these are not tribal casinos; local, county and state taxes are paid and revenue sharing deals were implemented. Here are a few highlights of the study.

  • “When fiscal costs were included as well a multiplier effects, most of the options which were calculated results in costs exceeding benefits.”
  • “However, the averages wages are less for casino employees compared to the overall average wage.”
  • “For 5-10 miles, there was an average loss of $195 for all industries…businesses located 10-30 miles away lost $243.”
  • “…casino ‘undercut’ local bars, restaurants, and lodging by subsidizing their on-site casino facilities.”
  • “In 2007, gambling industries (the majority of which are casino employment) had an average wage of $28,148 while the average national wage was $44,458.”
  • “Wichita State (2007) states that 50 percent of new jobs will come through substitution of existing jobs.”
  • “…one negative would be more traffic, more accidents, and more DUI arrests.”
  • “Rose (1998) identifies sewer and road maintenance as a drain on communities, as well as costs of increased crime and crime prevention.”
  • “…approximately 41 percent of the patrons lived within 20 miles, approximately 27% within 20-60 miles, and approximately 32 percent traveled more than 60 miles.”
  • From Wichita State (2007) annual spending per person living 0-10 miles from a casino is $528; 10-25 miles from a casino is $234; and 25-50 miles away is $115.”
  • “Research shows that proximity to a casino increases the likelihood of problem gambling…and most pathological and problem gamblers lives within 50 miles of a casino.”
  • “Strong evidence is produced that there is a correlation between crime and casinos…It has been suggested that after time, the pathological and problem gamblers may resort to crime to cover gambling related debts (bad check, check forgery, theft from employers, tax evasion, tax fraud, loan fraud, embezzlement, larceny, bookmaking, hustling, fencing stolen goods, confidence games, pimping, prostitution, selling drugs, and others.)”
  • “In a 2004 study done b the Department of Justice pathological or problem gamblers were arrested a rate 3-5 times higher than that of the general population.”
  • “Different studies have found ranges which are substantially higher for problem gambling in adolescents.”
  • “Substance abusers appear to be particularly vulnerable to gambling problems.”
  • “Studies indicate that casino employees may also be at higher risk for pathological gambling.”

The Community Research Institute made clear that it had no dog in the fight and was merely compiling research from a vast amount of available material. Their bibliography is extensive. Even an seemingly non-biased study such as this one raises red flags about the long term effects of casinos – tribal or non tribal.

Two of the major reasons supporters advocate for the Tohono O’odham casino in Glendale are: 1. historically we have treated Indians poorly, subjugating and placing them on reservations and therefore we, the United States, owe them; and 2. Glendale will benefit financially from a casino in its community. Questions arise. How far back does this nation have to recall history in paying for past sins? 50 years? 100 years? 150 years? The U.S. government has acknowledged its historical ill treatment of indigenous Indian people and has paid and continues to pay vast amounts of money in reparation.

 Glendale, despite the monies being offered by the Tohono O’odham, will suffer financially. It will be tasked with installing new and upgraded infrastructure to serve the casino and its associated development. It will strain an already strained public safety system and the casino will remove sales tax dollars from nearby businesses through unfair, untaxed, subsidized competition.

The action taken by the Glendale city council to bend over on the casino issue will, in the future, be just as detrimental financially to the city as the infamous arena management deal and the Camelback Ranch Spring Training Facility. It will become just another sink hole draining dollars that could be used to provide amenities that enhance the quality of life of Glendale’s residents.

There is still hope that the casino can be defeated. The General Election of November 4, 2014 produced a Republican majority in the Senate. I suspect that now it may be far easier to get a bill passed that stops the Tohono O’odham in their tracks. Perhaps that is why, even though they had a major ground breaking event a month or so ago, not one shovel full of dirt has moved on the TO site. This may signal the most prudent decision they have made to date. Actually starting a multimillion dollar development while congressional legislation remains a threat would be fool hardy indeed.

I never have and do not now bear any ill will to the people of the Tohono O’odham Nation. The Tohono O’odham people have suffered financially for many years. Where do the annual millions of dollars earned by the Tohono O’odham’s three current casinos go? Apparently not to the people of the Nation. However, I do believe that the actions of Ned Norris, Jr. and the Tohono O’odham Legislative council with respect to violating the State Gaming Compact and attempting to plant a casino in Glendale have been incredibly imprudent, greedy, selfish and self-serving. I do not wish them well in this endeavor.

 © Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Sadly, real life should not be played like a Monopoly game although it often is, especially in politics. Horse trading deals seem to be a way of life for many politicians.  Councilmember Gary Sherwood penned a My Turn article entitled, Barrett is wrong, Franks is right: Casino means trouble for the Arizona Republic on April 20, 2013. Eighteen months ago he said:

    •  “Tohono O’odham’s massive casino is too close to residences and schools.”
    • “It denies tens of million (sic) of dollars of future development, construction and sales-tax revenues to our state and local community.”
    • “The casino will have a massive impact on Glendale’s already overwhelmed infrastructure – our police and fire departments and our roads — forever.”
    • “Crime is already up. Does anyone believe that putting a mega-casino in a neighborhood will improve the situation?”
    • “Franks is doing the right thing, and he is not alone.”
    • “The tribe has disregarded our city’s well-being and wishes for years. Now we should simply trust them?”
    • “Sadly, the Tohono O’odham Nation deliberately misled the public and even other tribal nations about this project and their casino-expansion plans for years. What kind of community leaders would willingly welcome such an unwelcome kind of neighbor?”                           

What caused Sherwood to do his flip-flop? Eighteen months ago Gary Sherwood was opposed to the Tohono O’odham casino. Sherwood has been asked repeatedly why he changed from anti-casino to pro-casino. His answers have been all over the place from, I was misinformed by others to Glendale staffers didn’t do their homework.

On September 17, 2014 Gary Sherwood testified at the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. In his testimony he said, “I was stunned to learn that the prior Glendale administration had failed to make any effort to learn more about this proposal before it rushed to oppose it.” When questioned further by Senator McCain on his change of stance he said, “Umm, when I campaigned I had campaigned against this proposed based on information I had and I had read deal…quite a bit of information on it. Umm, the thing that was distressing to me though, that in the very beginning there was a half hour conversation when the city first found out about it in April of 2009 and that was the only conversation the previous administration had and I was, was always quite upset by the fact that we didn’t have the dialogue.” His reasons for changing his position are not only weak but mainly fantasy.

The city first learned of the casino project in January of 2009 when the TO simultaneously issued a press release and appeared at City Hall to reveal their plans. City staffers tried mightily at several subsequent meetings to get meaningful information from the Tohono O’odham about their plans. The TO repeatedly offered their conceptual plans but offered no concrete facts about their proposed project.  They were arrogant and their position was that they were coming and there was nothing the city could do. If Sherwood couldn’t get the date correct about Glendale’s learning of the TO’s plans, how many other statements of his that day played fast and loose with the facts?

His reasons for doing a 180 on his casino position should not be considered as satisfactory. Sherwood’s position remained opposed until the fall of 2013 when at several city council workshops he suddenly supported Alvarez, Hugh and Chavira in their call for “dialogue” with the Tohono O’odham. What other dynamic could have occurred?

Gary Sherwood and Sammy Chavira took office as councilmembers in January of 2013. Sammy ran on his opposition to the casino deals that had been presented to the city prior to his taking office. He said in an October, 2013 campaign mailing, ““Too many sweetheart arena deals for out-of-state corporations have left us deeply in debt.” Sammy outdid himself in supporting not just an out-of-state corporation sweetheart arena deal but out-of-country owners (mostly Canadian) sweetheart deal. He was opposed to any proposed casino deal. He went on to say publicly and repeatedly, “The city needs to be a tough negotiator, making smart planning decisions that preserve Glendale’s future.” Sammy, while running, was in no mood to accept any Coyotes deal. Inexplicably, after 6 months in office he becomes the 4th (and majority) vote to accept the IceArizona deal. Sherwood becomes the 4th councilmember (a majority) to support a dialogue with the TO after 8 months into his term. Coincidence? You must decide for yourselves. Did these councilmembers play a game of Monopoly?

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Can’t find it

Posted by Joyce Clark on October 2, 2014
Posted in Casino  | Tagged With: , , | 1 Comment

One of my readers shared that all Arizona tribes with casinos are audited by the Arizona Department of Gaming. I went online to see if the tribal audits are posted and public. Answer…of course not…you can’t find it. I am going to do a FOIA request but I suspect I will be told the information I seek is confidential. However other interesting information appeared.

Total contributions from all Arizona gaming tribes in Fiscal Year 2013 were $97,581, 815. That’s a lot of money. How is it distributed? Here’s the list:

  • 12% goes directly to cities, towns and counties. In FY 2013 that amount was $11,054,208
  • The rest, 88% goes into an Arizona Benefits fund and is divided thusly:
  •         9% or $8 million, whichever is greater, goes to the Arizona Department of Gaming for expenses. The FY 2013 total was $8 million
  •         8% goes to the state’s Tourism Fund. In FY 2013 it was $6,143,764
  •         8% goes to the Wildlife Conservation Fund. In FY 2013 it was $6,143,764
  •         2% goes to the Office of Problem Gambling. In FY 2013 it was $1,730,552
  •         28% goes to the Trauma & Emergency Services Fund. In FY 2013 it was $21,503,176
  •         56% goes to the Instructional Improvement Fund. In FY2013 it was $43,006,351

Without knowing revenues earned collectively or individually by the gaming tribes it is impossible to figure out how much money is being earned annually. The formula for each gaming tribe’s contribution to the state is as follows:

  1. (b) Tribal Contributions. In consideration for the substantial exclusivity covenants by the State in Section 3(h), the Tribe shall contribute for the benefit of the public a percentage of the Tribe’s Class III Net Win for each fiscal year of the Gaming Facility Operator as follows:
  2. (1) One percent (1%) of the first twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000.00);                                                                          (2) Three percent (3%) of the next fifty million dollars ($50,000,000.00);                                                                          (3) Six percent (6%) of the next twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000.00); and                                                                    (4) Eight percent (8%) of Class III Net Win in excess of one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000.00).

There is another factor that all of us should consider. A best guesstimate is that gaming tribes in Arizona collectively take in a billion dollars a year. That is a billion discretionary dollars diverted from expenditures on food, clothes, housing etc. That is a billion discretionary dollars earning no sales tax locally or statewide.

Did you know it was reported in October of 2013 that “Federal programs operated by the Hopi Tribe are in danger of being taken over by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and Indian Health Service (IHS) because the Hopi Tribe is seriously delinquent in submitting audits for Fiscal Years 2010, 2011 and 2012? Because of the severity of the problem, the BIA has designated the Hopi Tribe as a “High Risk” tribe and imposed a Level III sanction on the tribe. The BIA Hopi Agency, by federal law, must now take steps to take over these programs and stop all funding to the tribe. Other federal agencies may also pull their funding.” (http://indigenouspeoplesissues.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=18261:arizona-hopi-tribe-faces-danger-of-losing-federal-programs&catid=22&Itemid=55 ). Or in July of 2014 it was reported that “The White Mountain Apache Housing Authority misspent millions of federal dollars on entertainment, gift certificates and other improper items, and is so badly managed it should be considered for receivership, according to a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development audit released this week. A HUD Office of Inspector General report issued Tuesday also says the agency’s Southwest Office of Native American Programs should order the tribal housing agency to reimburse $2.3 million and acknowledge the unsupported spending of an additional $8.2 million.”(http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/2014/07/12/audit-millions-misspent-apache-housing-agency/12563303/ ).

When incredible amounts of money are involved, whether as a federal grant or gaming revenue, the possibility of graft and corruption increase dramatically for any group not just tribes. True, the state audits the gaming tribes but 99% of the general public is not aware of that fact much less knows the results of these audits. Again, I ask how the Tohono O’odham that allegedly earns $68 million a year spends it. Chairman Norris, in his Sept. 17, 2014 testimony before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, testified that many in his Nation live in substandard housing without water or electricity. Why?

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

On September 17, 2014 the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs took testimony on S. 2670, a bill introduced by Senators McCain and Flake. It is designed to prevent the Tohono O’odham from building a casino in Glendale until 2027 when the current state-Indian gaming compact expires.

Because there is a lot of testimony I have broken it into segments. This portion is the testimony of Governor Gregory Mendoza, Chairman of the Gila River Indian Community and Mayor of Glendale Jerry Weiers. It is evident from Mendoza’s testimony that the 16 other tribes that are part of the gaming compact feel betrayed and are very bitter about the actions of the Tohono O’odham (TO). The reason that Governor Mendoza of the Gila River Indian Community and President Diane Enos of the Salt River-Pima-Maricopa Indian Community have taken the lead in opposing the TO’s project is that these two tribes have the resources to do so. They have the support of the other Arizona tribes.

Mayor Jerry Weiers highlighted Proposition 202, the Arizona Gaming Compact, and distributed to members of the committee copies of the original publicity pamphlet distributed to voters in 2002. What is ironical is that the pamphlet used, that promised no new casinos in the Phoenix Metropolitan area was paid for by the Tohono O’odham.

Both men spoke of possible consequences should the TO prevail. Governor Mendoza spoke of the harm that will befall rural tribes and Mayor Weiers spoke of action that could be taken by the Arizona legislature to open up the entire state to non-Indian gaming.

The actions of the Tohono O’odham stink on so many levels:

  • They don’t care that they have destroyed the deep-seated, long-term trust they enjoyed with their sister Arizona tribes.
  • They don’t care that they broke their word and their commitment to keep new casinos out of the Phoenix Metropolitan area.
  • They don’t care if they destroy, single-handedly, the voter approved state gaming compact.
  • They don’t care if their casino is across the street from a high school and becomes a magnet for curious teenagers.
  • They don’t care if they destroy the fabric of neighborhoods with greater 24/7 traffic and spill over crime.
  • They don’t care if the state legislature opens the state up to non-Indian gaming.
  • They don’t care if rural Indian tribes suffer.

Their actions are nothing short of Machiavellian, “the ends justify the means.” Their only concern appears to be enriching themselves at the expense of all around them. They have 3 casinos in the Tucson area estimated to earn $36 million annually. I guess that’s just not enough for them. If they succeed in building the casino the unintended consequences will be felt for many years to come. But that’s OK – as long as they get what they want.

Below is the verbatim transcript of the testimonies of Governor Mendoza and Mayor Weiers:

Governor Mendoza: “Good afternoon Chairman Tester, members of the committee. Thank you for holding this hearing and inviting me to speak in support of the Keep the Promise Act. I want to start by saying that it pains me to advocate against a sister tribe. But this is not a dispute with the Tohono O’odham people, only with the leadership of the Tohono O’odham Nation whose actions jeopardize every tribe in Arizona. Contrary to what Tohono O’odham claims, this is not a fight about market share. It’s about preventing fraud upon tribes, local governments and voters. Tohono O’odham likes to talk about the promises made between their tribe and the federal government in 1986 but this bill is about protecting the promise made to my community and to other tribal governments.

“Our tribes relied upon the actions of Tohono O’odham when we gave up our rights in 2002. While we agreed the Tohono O’odham should get replacement lands under the 1986 law we also strongly believed that Tohono O’odham must abide by the promise and commitments they made to us. In 2002 Arizona tribes had to get approval for our compact from the voters. In order to get this approval we promised the voters that the number of casinos in the Phoenix metro area would not increase until 2027.

“At the same time that Tohono O’odham helped us to win voter approval they also were secretly plotting to build a casino in Phoenix. That casino will be located right across the street from a high school and it’s near homes and churches. This is exactly what we promised the voters would not happen. Tribes like mine gave up rights to build additional casinos. We also agreed to limit on the number of gaming machines allocated to us. We did this in order to get voter approval and to preserve the tribal monopoly on gaming in Arizona and assure that rural tribes benefit from gaming.

“Tohono O’odham doesn’t deny making promises nor do they deny knowing that their sister tribes gave up rights in order to limit the number of casinos in Phoenix. They don’t deny that the compact negotiations would have been vastly different if everyone knew of their plans. Instead they say they’re winning in the courts. There remains a dispute because they refuse to waive their sovereign immunity for claims of fraud. We do not want to attack another tribe’s immunity. That is why the bill merely provides for a temporary restriction on additional casinos in the Phoenix area until the end of the existing compacts. At that point all parties can come together at the table and bargain in good faith. Hopefully my community will be able to regain the rights we gave away.

“The Gila River Indian Community will weather the storm but most tribes in Arizona are not as fortunate. Rural tribes will suffer the most from Tohono O’odham’s fraud. There are six rural tribes that utilize gaming compacts to lease gaming machines to urban tribes. Leasing these machines allows them to benefit from gaming even though their markets can’t support a casino. Each year these tribes receive more than $30 million dollars to provide basic services to their members and the structure of the gaming compacts create markets for a few rural tribes to operate small casinos.

“If gaming happens in Glendale the state legislature will likely eliminate that tribal monopoly. If this happens urban tribes will have no reason to lease gaming machines from rural tribes. Patrons will stop traveling to reservations for gaming and instead visit non-tribal casinos in cities. We have come to Congress because you’re the only entity that can provide swift action to preserve the promises made in 2002. Interior indicates it cannot resolve this matter because Congress through the 1986 law mandates that they take the land into trust for the Tohono O’odham.

“This bill does not set bad precedent. It is common for Congress to pass bills that limit tribal gaming. In this Congress alone, two bills have been enacted placing land into trust for a tribe but prohibiting gaming on those lands. The bill narrowly restricts gaming on the land until 2027 but does not eliminate the uses of the land and there are a number of non-gaming activities that Tohono O’odham could conduct. For all of these reasons I ask that you pass this bill. Thank you.”

Chairman Tester: “Thank you, Governor. Uh, Welcome Mayor Weiers and I would ask you to try to keep it to five minutes because the Senator has another meeting to get to and I want to get to him for questions.”

Mayor Weiers: “I’ll do the best that I can, Sir. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, Chairman Tester, Vice Chairman Brasher and members of the Committee. My name is Jerry Weiers. I am the Mayor of Glendale, a city of 232,000 and the 72nd largest city in the country.

“Before becoming mayor I served eight years in the Arizona legislature. I am here today to discuss my personal views on a casino proposed to be built in my city. I am required to state that my views today do not represent the majority of the body of the council and my views are not the official position of the council.

“Like Senator McCain I supported Arizona Proposition 202, the ballot initiative which gave tribes the exclusive right to conduct gaming. One key aspect of that campaign was the clear promise, repeatedly made to voters by tribes and state officials, that there would be no additional casinos in the Phoenix metro area. When Governor Hull concluded compact negotiations in 2002 with the seventeen tribes she publicly announced that under the compact that there would be, and I quote, ‘no additional casinos in the metropolitan Phoenix area.’ Now here’s a voter pamphlet from the 2002 initiative campaign. It was widely distributed by the seventeen tribes. The pamphlet told voters that under the compact and I quote, ‘There will be no facilities in Phoenix.’ If you look at page six, which I’ve got highlighted here, ah, major funding for this pamphlet was provided by the Tohono O’odham Nation, that I will respectfully refer to as the TO.

“Understandably the public was blind sided when the TO announced in January of 2009 that it was going to open a Las Vegas style casino on a 54 acre parcel within our city. At that time I was serving in the Arizona legislature and I met with TO Chairman Norris and I expressed my grave concerns with gambling within our city. The council immediately passed a resolution opposing the casino because it would harm our residents and our way of life.

“Recently the city council voted 4 to 3 repeal the 2009 resolution opposing that casino. But this was done only after the Interior Department had already decided to grant a casino reservation on that parcel. We had no real choice. We could continue to fight and hope for action from this body or give up. It’s frustrating to be a city of our size and have no voice on gambling pushed by a tribal government that’s more than a hundred miles away. The public has no right to object to gambling because of the narrow exception in the 1988 Indian Regulatory Gaming Act the TO is using, and gives Interior absolutely no authority to stop gambling even if it knows the adverse impact to nearby neighborhoods, churches and a public school across the street.

“Since the Interior has no authority to stop gambling it has no reason to ask the public for comments or investigate adverse impacts. This is the polar opposite to the two part exception in IGRA which is typically used for off reservation casinos. It requires that the Interior prepare for an environmental impact statement and investigate in great detail adverse impacts that a casino may cause. What’s more, for gambling to be allowed, the Secretary must determine on the record, and I quote, ‘would not be detrimental to the surrounding community.’ And most importantly, the state’s governor has the right to veto any casino project regardless of the Secretary’s decision.

“But in our case, the public has no say. The state legislature has no say. Our governor has no say and the Interior has no authority to stop it. For us this means the largest tribal casino in the history of the state may operate on a 54 acre island in the middle of the Phoenix metro area without anyone investigating and addressing the adverse environmental and social impacts it will cause and without any federal, state or local official deciding that it can safely operate in the public’s interest.

“What’s more, my city may not be the last. Our sister cities realize that unless Congress acts, they may be next. Under the 1986 Gila Bend Act, TO claims that it can create new reservation land on more than 6,000 acres. They also claim the right to operate a total of four new casinos in the Phoenix metro area. If Congress does not act the entire Phoenix metropolitan area must be prepared for more off reservation casinos. That is why many mayors and city councilmembers have signed a letter asking the Congress to enact the Keep the Promise Act.

“As a former state legislator I know that if gambling happens in Glendale there will be a strong effort in the state legislature to authorize non-Indian gaming in all of Arizona and that will have a devastating effect on all the tribes. I urge this committee to move the Keep the Promise Act. The bill is about preserving the promises made by tribes to voters protecting Phoenix metro cities from having unwanted gambling within their borders. Thank you, Mr. Tester. I’ll be happy to answer any questions.”

Chairman Tester: “Thank you Mayor Weiers.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

On September 17, 2014 the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs met to consider the Senate Bill, S. 2670, Keep the Promise Act of 2014, introduced by Senators McCain and Flake. I have transcribed the testimony verbatim. Since I am not technically savvy enough to create a link to my file I will offer the first portion of the testimony at the end of this blog. If anyone reading this can tell me how to create a link to one of my files I would appreciate it.

This portion of the hearing deals with Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs of the Department of the Interior, Kevin Washburn. He offers his testimony and then is questioned by Senator McCain and Chairman of the Committee Tester. He has to defend the Department of the Interior’s action of having approved reservation status to the Tohono O’odham. He does not work for the Bureau of Indian Affairs that will decide the question of allowing gaming on the TO’s new reservation. Having watched the hearing via the internet and then transcribing the hearing one cannot help but develop first impressions.

Mr. Washburn appears to be your typical bureaucrat, a small minded man enamored by his title and power; and rigid beyond all reason. I bet his business cards are engraved in gold. He certainly is good at towing the party line. He insisted that the Tohono O’odham (TO) are an impoverished tribe despite their annual revenue of over $36 million derived from their 3 casinos in the Tucson area but when asked if he knew how much revenue the TO earned annually he admitted that he did not know. He also insisted that there was no prohibition in any law, including the current Arizona Gaming Compact, that would prevent the TO from building a casino in the middle of Glendale.  His stance was since there is no legal prohibition from driving your car over a cliff or eating yourself to death, it’s perfectly all right to do so. The absence of a “no” makes any action permissible according to Mr. Washburn.

Senator McCain repeatedly and forcefully made clear the intent of the Inouye McCain Bill, formally known as the Gila River Indian Land Replacement Act of 1988. McCain said that just as with the voter approved state gaming compact, the universal assumption was that the TO would build its fourth casino in southern Arizona. No one contemplated the recent action taken by the TO. There is now concern that the TO may close its casinos in southern Arizona and rebuild on other county islands in Maricopa County. It’s not so farfetched a notion. Apparently TO council notes have been discovered that outline just such a scenario.

I expect that the McCain Flake bill will make it out of committee and will be approved or rejected by the full Senate. Until such time, the Tohono O’odham are making a millions of dollars bet that they will prevail and the casino will become a reality. They could end up losing millions of dollars. Not bad for an “impoverished tribe.”

Here is a verbatim transcript, Part I, of the Committee hearing:

Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Sept 17 2014

Chairman Tester:  “The committee will come to order. Today we are holding a hearing at the request of Senators McCain and Flake on S. 2670. The bill would address an issue specific to Arizona but one that could have broader implications for this committee and affect the role of Congress with regard to gaming compacts between tribes and states. The Indian Regulatory Act affirmed the authority of tribes to conduct gaming on Indian reservations and specifically required states and tribes to negotiate gaming compacts. The Act further requires the Department of Interior to approve or disapprove these compacts. The Act provided no further role for Congress in this process and I think most of the members of this committee would agree that’s a good thing. The state of Arizona and the tribes within the state entered into a compact which was voted on and passed through a statewide vote in 2002. Now, however, the tribes within the state and some municipalities disagree on what the vote approved. Senator McCain was highly involved in the drafting and passage of both the Indian Regulatory Gaming Act and the Gila Bend Indian Reservation Land Replacement Act. These acts form the basis of the issue that S. 2670 would address. We heard witness testimony on this issue earlier this year and now we have called the stakeholders back to discuss the specifics of this legislation and also invited the administration to give their perspective. Welcome Kevin. Overall this committee wants to insure that any action taken on this specific issue doesn’t have broader impacts for tribes across the country. Senator Brasher do you have anything to say?…”

Senator McCain:  (Missed much of Sen. McCain’s opening remarks) “…and I can assure the witness it was never the intent of Senator Inouye and I through months…weeks and months of hearings, to have an airdrop, no matter what rationale you are using for it because of some settlement, to have reservations, indian gaming, have non contiguous indian gaming air dropped in the center of a metropolitan city, without at least the people of that area being allowed to vote on it…at least. But the fact is, it was never the intent of the law and what you are about to do, Mr. Washburn, apparently, is to violate the intent of the law. Quite often around here we hear about legislation and people talk about the intent of Congress. I’m telling you the intent of Congress because it was called the Inouye McCain Act and it was a great act in light of the Cabazon decision it was mandatory that the United States Congress act and I’m proud of that act and I’m proud of the benefit that has accrued to Indian Country. I am proud that there has been revenue sharing between, as it in our state of Arizona , between the gaming tribes and the state of Arizona, the contribution they’ve made. I never contemplated air dropping in the middle of Glendale, no matter what the rationale was for, an indian gaming operation. So, I want to make it clear, Mr. Chairman, what the intent of the law was because I was one of the two authors. I thank you Mr. Chairman.”

Chairman Tester: “Thank you Senator McCain and Senator Brasher for your comments. I will now call up our first witness, Mr. Kevin Washburn, Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs in the Department of Interior. Kevin, you’ve been with us many times. We always look forward to hearing the administration’s thoughts on these issues. The committee knows you’re busy so we’ll try to get through your portion of the testimony as soon as possible. We will have some questions. We appreciate your time. Thank you for being here today. You may proceed.”

Mr. Washburn: “Mr. Chairman, thank you. Mr. Vice Chairman, Senator McCain, thank you for having me here today. Maybe I shouldn’t be thanking you. This is a difficult issue and umm, I find myself nervous today and I guess it’s because I never like to disappoint my friends and umm, there are umm, no more passionate tribal leaders in the country that I know of than Greg Mendoza and Diane Enos and they are probably here in the room. Umm, and yet, we find ourselves being asked, being forced to provide our perspective on this bill. Umm, I have to tell you that I’m not really happy to be here, but, umm, when pushed I will tell you what I think about this bill and, umm, I believe that, ah umm, the Tohono Nation has an expectation of land in Maricopa County or in Pinal or Pima County and they’ve had that expectation for nearly 30 years now based on the Gila Bend Act. And they came by that expectation righteously. We assured them that we wouldn’t flood their lands in the San Lucy District back in 1960 when we started working on a dam and we proceeded to do just that. We flooded those lands and, umm, they came to Congress and looked for a settlement. Given the fact, umm, their expectations didn’t come out, umm, as they should have with regards the dam. So, Congress enacted the Gila Bend Act and promised them land, up to 10,000 acres, umm, in three counties and umm, in Arizona, central Arizona so long as it was not within an incorporated municipality. And umm, that was their expectation, that’s what the Gila Bend Act and Congress was well aware of gaming at the time the Gila Bend Act was passed and it didn’t preclude any prohibitions on Indian gaming. Indian gaming had been, was a robust industry by that time and the very next year it ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court in the Cabazon case, and uh, cases don’t just arrive in the Supreme Court. They go through multiple levels before they reach the Supreme Court. So this was, again, well known to Congress. There had already been hearings before Congress on Indian gaming and it was well known at the time the Gila Bend Act was passed. And then shortly thereafter, in 1988 Congress enacted the Indian Regulatory Gaming Act that Senator McCain spoke eloquently about. The Indian Regulatory Gaming Act did not mention Tohono O’odham and indeed included a specific provision, umm, that allows umm, that allows, umm, an exception to the prohibition that allows gaming after the enactment of IGRA on lands acquired after that time. Umm, it included a specific provision, umm, that essentially speaks right to the situation involving the Gila Bend parcel. So, Tohono O’odham had an expectation, a reasonable expectation, that this land which was certainly thought to be for economic development that they would be able to game on this land. I think a more practical perspective is also in order. I hear over and over that gaming distributes resources unfairly because it creates tribes who are haves and tribes that are have-nots. And despite the popular conception most tribes do not have gaming. Most tribes don’t benefit in any way from gaming. Umm, gaming was being strongly encouraged when the Gila Bend Act was passed. Ronald Regan’s Department of the Interior was strongly trying to get tribes to increase gaming because that would increase self sufficiency for tribes. And when Ronald Regan signed the Indian Regulatory Gaming Act in 1988 he said he was supporting the statute because he wanted tribes to be more financially independent, more self sufficient. And I come over to this committee all the time and I get beat up because some members of this committee think that this administration is not asking for enough money from the taxpayers for indian tribes and maybe we aren’t. But this action by Tohono O’odham to try to open up this casino is their effort to provide for their own people and is clearly allowed by existing law. And that issue has been litigated over and over and that’s what Judge Campbell, a Republican appointee, found when he looked at this issue. Let me add, too, that when gaming began in the Valley of the Sun the population of the Phoenix metropolitan area was in the neighborhood of 2 million people. Today the Phoenix metro area exceeds 4.3 million people. Surely there is enough room in the vast market for another tribe to benefit from gaming, especially an impoverished tribe. Last I checked, despite the recession and everything else that’s been going on, Phoenix is still one of the fastest growing cities on the country. And again, surely, umm, in the fastest growing cities there’s an opportunity for a growing gaming market, an opportunity for one more tribe to benefit from this vast market. The promise referenced in the title of S. 2670 is kind of ironic. It’s not one that’s known to me and it certainly is not a federal promise. The federal promise was to take land into trust for Tohono O’odham anywhere in Pima, Pinal or Maricopa counties so long as it was not within an already incorporated area of a municipality. In my mind our trust responsibility demands that we keep our federal promises. We have broken a lot of treaties and we have broken a lot of federal promises to Indian people in the past and the only promise of the United States that’s at issue here today is the one made in the Gila Bend Act. And the only way the federal government can keep its promise to the Tohono O’odham is for this committee is to reject this bill. The Tohono O’odham property near Glendale presents an opportunity for another Indian tribe to share the wealth and open a new part of this gaming market. And in a tight fiscal market that kind of economic development should be an imperative. Opening this facility will help make President Ronald Reagan’s dream come true of using gaming to lift tribes out of poverty and help make them more self sufficient. I’ll stand for your questions. Thank you Mr. Chairman.”

Chairman Tester: “Thank you Secretary Washburn. I know that Senator McCain has a conflict with Foreign Affairs, I believe. So I’ll let him go ahead of me.”

Senator McCain: “Mr. Washburn, ah, you talk about impoverished tribes. Would you say  Tohono O’odham fit into that category since they already have 3 casinos?”

Secretary Washburn:  “Yes, Senator. Despite…”

Senator McCain: “Yeah, in other words, you just, you just falsely gave the committee the impression as if the Tohono O’odham was an impoverished tribe without Indian gaming. They have 3 casinos, right?”

Secretary Washburn: “I didn’t…”

Senator McCain: “Is that true?”

Secretary Washburn: “I didn’t mean to give the impression that they were not a gaming tribe. They, indeed, already are. But I will tell you their gaming is in Tucson and Phoenix is a much larger market than Tucson and they are…”

Senator McCain: “They are certainly not impoverished, Mr. Washburn. Mr. Washburn, ah, in the ah, you said that it was the intent that indian gaming not be located in incorporated areas. Right?”

Secretary Washburn: “Yes. I…”

Senator McCain: “Isn’t that kind of technical because it’s in the middle of the city of Glendale ? It’s technical. Everything around it is incorporated. It’s not out in the desert.”

Secretary Washburn: “Senator, it was your bill and you wrote the language. We’re just applying it.”

Senator McCain: “You know something, Mr. Washburn? That’s a pretty smart ass answer and the fact is I’m telling you what the intent was. Okay? Now we wrote the bill and when we wrote it so that there would not be exactly what has happened now and if you want to interpret it that way, fine. You can interpret how you want to. I interpret it as not ever intending to have a gaming operation in the middle of an incorporated area without the permission of the people, not only in Glendale, because as you said, this is a large metropolitan area, but the people of the metropolitan area. They should have a say in this. You’re not giving them a say in this. The city of Glendale has been split on this in various ways. So, so, you’re saying one, that it’s for impoverished tribes. Clearly, by any measurement, this tribe is not impoverished. Second of all, you say it was not the intent of the tribe, of the Act, to be in incorporated areas. It’s surrounded by incorporated areas, Mr. Washburn, and I can tell you what the intent is and I believe also that it’s your interpretation of the law versus my interpretation of the law. And I really appreciate your concern for impoverished tribes. I have that same concern. The Tohono O’odham tribe isn’t one of those. It isn’t one of those. They are doing very well with the three casinos that they have already and there are established casinos within the Phoenix metropolitan area that this is going to impact. That’s why the other tribes are against such a move which would then impact their gaming operations and revenue. And has that been taken into consideration in your decision? The impact on other Native American tribal gaming?”

Secretary Washburn: “As I said, Senator, this is a rapidly growing market. Umm, it continues to be one of the fastest growing cities in the country. We certainly have a trust responsibility to all the tribes, but…”

Senator McCain: “So, it’s up to you to decide whether an area is fast growing or not, as to whether, what guides your decision?’

Secretary Washburn: “No…”

Senator McCain: “Mr. Washburn that has nothing to do with the law.”

Secretary Washburn: “It’s my responsibility to follow the law and follow what Congress said and what you said was, umm, outside of any municipality, incorporated municipality, anywhere in Maricopa County, and that’s what we read. That’s relatively clear and, umm, that’s what we determined and that’s what the courts have upheld and umm, we believe that they are a tribe that’s got significant burdens. They are one of the largest tribes in the country. They have roughly 40,000 members and they’ve got a lot of land to try to take care of with a modest revenue source. And umm…”

Senator McCain: “Three casinos is not a modest revenue source?”

Secretary Washburn: “Given their burdens, yes Senator. This is not a tribe with 30 people or 300 people. This is a very, very large tribe with a lot of responsibilities and I can assure you they can use more revenues.”

Senator McCain: “I can assure you every tribe in America can use more revenue. So you’re basing your decision as to what…are you saying they are impoverished?”

Secretary Washburn: “Senator, ahh….”

Senator McCain: “Are you saying they are impoverished, because you said, you’re referring to impoverished tribes. Are you saying this tribe is impoverished?

Secretary Washburn: “I, I want gaming to benefit all tribes but yes, I’m, I’m, I’m willing to live with the fact but yes, the Tohono O’odham is an impoverished tribe. It’s got a large number of members and many of them are living in very, very terrible conditions.”

Senator McCain: “And are you aware of the gaming revenue from the three casinos?”

Secretary Washburn: “Umm, ah, I’ve heard the revenue from the three casinos. I don’t have ‘em in front of me as I sit here.”

Senator McCain: “Do you know what they are, roughly?”

Secretary Washburn: “No.”

Senator McCain: “So, It doesn’t matter to you what, since you don’t know, it doesn’t matter what it is. So, you’re making a judgment as to the economic condition of the tribe without knowing what their revenues are. That’s really, really good Mr. Washburn. I don’t have any more questions for this witness.”

Chairman Tester: “Assistant Secretary Washburn, the department approves Class III tribal state gaming compacts. I believe, ah, the department has approved the latest compacts between the state of Arizona and the Arizona tribes. Ah, do you know if the type of compact currently in effect have a limitation as to the type of facilities in the Phoenix area?”

Secretary Washburn: “They, they do not have any limitations, umm, as to the number of facilities in the Phoenix area.”

Chairman Tester: “Ok. Ah, you mentioned in your testimony that the department does not support the bill as it would undermine promises made by the United States to the TO Nation and the Gila Bend Indian Reservations, ah, Land Replacement Act. Ah, I want you to describe if this bill were enacted, cause you describe the policy implications it might have on future settlements and negotiations between the tribes and the United States.”

Secretary Washburn: “Well, the potential is that, um, we will have, um, tribes feeling, um, this is the same stuff, a different day; that we were, ah, are just continuing in the mode of breaking treaties, breaking promises to tribes and that’s a, that’s a tough situation to be in because I had hoped we were past all that and that we were working to live up to our promises to Indian tribes going forward. And so this would significantly undermine the promise that we made to Tohono O’odham and the Gila Bend Act and umm, I think that that, umm, would cause tribes to, umm, great pause in settling with the United States government that doesn’t live up to its promises.”

Chairman Tester: “So you believe that, ah, the Gila Bend Act, umm, gave the Tohono O’odham the authority?”

Secretary Washburn: “I believe it gave them the opportunity to take land into trust anywhere in Pima, Pinal or Maricopa counties and, umm, with some caveats. One of the caveats being it couldn’t be already incorporated land. And this is, so they went out and bought land that was not incorporated but was in Maricopa County. Umm, and umm, if we add requirements to that we’ve changed the promise. We’ve changed the deal we struck with Tohono O’odham.”

Senator McCain: “And did that Act anywhere refer in it, any reference to gaming?”

Secretary Washburn: “It had no prohibition on gaming whatsoever.”

Senator McCain: “Did it have any reference to gaming?”

Secretary Washburn: “It said that, umm, Indian reserve, lands could be used for all purposes, which…”

Senator McCain: “It made no reference to gaming. Thanks Mr. Chairman.”

Chairman Tester: “That’s ok. Assistant Secretary Washburn, ah, some of the witnesses’ testimony that we’re going to hear today talks about possible violations of the Arizona tribal compacts whether by the TO project itself or by possible repercussions if the TO project is allowed to proceed. What role does the department play in instances where the tribe or the state violates provisions of the compact?”

Secretary Washburn: “Well, first of all, we approve those compacts. So we stamped approval on those compacts and those compacts, umm, would be violated by this statute and again, would change, again, the terms of those compacts. And so, there are potential provisions for violations of gaming compacts. Umm, I’m not sure what the steps would be for the United States to take for those violations. Umm, but one of the compact’s, umm, terms was that this compact, the final agreement for the parties on these issues and introducing new terms after everybody agreed that, umm, they’ve agreed on all the terms is definitely a change in the promise.”

Chairman Tester: “Ok. Do you have any more questions Senator McCain? Alright, thank you Secretary Washburn. Appreciate taking time out of your schedule to be here today. We’ll give the staff, ah, a moment, ah, to reset the witness table. (Pause) And the witnesses can come up. At this time. (Pause) I, ah, want to welcome our second panel of up to the witness table. We will first hear from Governor Gregory Mendoza of the Gila River – Pima – Maricopa Community. Then we’ll turn it over to Mayor Jerry Weiers. Got it right this time. The City of Glendale. Welcome back, Mayor. Ah, we then will have Sammy Chavira, a Glendale City Councilman, and finally, we’re gonna hear from Ned Norris, Chairman of the Tohono O’odham Nation and we  welcome you back. (Pause)  Oh, Ok, in place of…oh, I’m sorry, alright. Gary, my apologies.  Umm, we’ll then hear from Gary Sherwood, Glendale Councilman. Same position, different person. Umm, and finally we’re gonna hear from Chairman Ned Norris of the Tohono O’odham Nation and we welcome you back as well, Mr. Chairman.  Thank you all for being here today. Ah, Governor Mendoza, we’ll start with you. Go ahead.”

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

On September 9, 2014 at its regular council meeting the Glendale City Council approved a new name for its arena. It will now be known as the Gila River Arena. The following day there was a press conference to announce the name change. Anthony LeBlanc, one of the Coyotes’ owners was there; Gregory Mendoza, Governor of the Tribe was there; Jan Brewer, our state Governor was there; and Jerry Weiers, Mayor of Glendale was there.  Guess who wasn’t there? Our infamous “gang of four,” Councilmembers Alvarez, Sherwood, Hugh and Chavira. It’s perfectly understandable. After all, their allegiance is to the Tohono O’odham Nation. Alvarez was also the lone negative vote on the name change to Gila River. Instead she stubbornly questioned staff on the necessity of bringing the name change before council for ratification.  It appeared as if she questioned the action long enough and hard enough she could make the need for a council vote disappear. Didn’t happen. Apparently Norma’s love for minorities does not extend to the Gila River Community.

However, it’s not so strange a move. Gila River has been a long time partner of the Arizona Coyotes hosting the Gila River Club within the arena proper. If I were the Gila River I would be secretly smug and taking enormous satisfaction in the fact that their name will be prominently displayed across the street from their duplicitous sister tribe, the Tohono O’odham’s new casino.

Here’s a reminder that today, Wednesday, September 17, 2014 at 2:30 PM Eastern time, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will have a legislative hearing on Senate bill 2670, Keep the Promise Act of 2014, introduced by Senators McCain and Flake. It can be viewed online live.  Panel One of the hearing will have Governor Mendoza of the Gila River Indian Community, Ned Norris Jr., Chairman of the Tohono O’odham Nation, Glendale Mayor Jerry Weiers and Glendale Councilmember Gary Sherwood. It should prove interesting as 2 champions of the casino face off against 2 opponents of the casino. Hopefully, the bill will move out of committee paving the way for a full senate vote.

Considering the fact that Glendale did not recoup its $14,002,055 (not a full fiscal year, prorated for 11 months) paid for the management fee and capital improvement fund and that you can add another $12 million for the arena construction debt, you would think Alvarez would welcome the new Gila River name and the 20% of the fee paid by Gila River to IceArizona. It will offset the approximately $20 million in arena costs, not by much, but every penny is welcome. A lot of Glendale’s residents are anxiously awaiting the audit of IceArizona’s budget and hope it is made public and put on the city’s website. If not, don’t be surprised if there are a lot of FOIA requests for a copy of the audit.

There was no council workshop on Tuesday, September 16, 2014 because there was not a quorum. How many of Glendale’s council is attending the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs legislative hearing today? I guess we’ll find out.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

photo aOn September 12, 2014 two political action committees, No More Bad Deals for Glendale and Respect the Promise turned in approximately 15,000 petition signatures collected in 28 days for each of two referendum petitions. These petitions seek to overturn the city council votes of August 12, 2014 approving a settlement agreement with the Tohono O’odham and supporting the TO’s reservation status by requesting an election.

The approximately 15,000 petition signatures turned in is greater than the 10,914 Glendale citizens who exercised their right to vote in the recent Primary Election. That’s disconcerting. You would think that the number of petition signatures collected would send a strong message to this city council that Glendale residents want to weigh in on this issue by virtue of an election.

The Glendale City Clerk has 20 business days to do something, anything with the petitions before she turns them over to the Secretary of State. She is not an independent agent. She will be told what to do. Now it gets interesting. Wanna-be mayor, Councilmember Gary Sherwood was in attendance for the delivery of the petitions to the City Clerk. He could be heard muttering, the council votes of August 12th are not referable and these petitions are no more than toilet paper. You can be sure the “gang of four” (Sherwood, Alvarez, Hugh and Chavira) as the majority on council will give direction to the City Manager and City Attorney to reject these petitions. The City Attorney and his minions are burning the midnight oil to find Arizona case law that supports the city’s act of rejection. What does “not referable” mean? The city will take the position that the council votes were not legislation per se. Therefore the petitions which seek to refer those council actions to Glendale residents are not valid and thereby rejected by the city. Their position will be that those council votes were not legislative action and only legislation can be referred to the voters.

Make no mistake. Both groups, No More Bad Deals for Glendale and Respect the Promise are prepared to go to the legal mat on this issue of referability. If and when the city rejects the petitions on those grounds expect both groups to file suit. Isn’t it ironic that Alvarez and her merry band of pro casino councilmembers have complained bitterly about the money spent by the city on legal action when its position was in opposition to the casino and reservation? Will they decide not to spend money to defend the city’s position of petition rejection now that the city supports the casino and reservation? I guess the spending of taxpayer money on legal action depends on whose ox is being gored.

Alvarez, nearly every time she casts a “no” vote on a major city issue, can be heard pontificating that it is an issue upon which Glendale residents should vote. This time she has been amazingly silent in advocating that view when it comes to the casino and reservation. What, Norma, when it’s an issue you personally do not like it merits a vote of the people but when it is an issue that you do like, forget the people?

For those of you following this saga, this Wednesday, September 17, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Eastern time (11:30 AM in Arizona) the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will hold a legislative hearing on Senate Bill 2670, Keep the Promise Act of 2014, introduced by Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake. Here is the link to the site where it can be viewed live, online:  http://www.indian.senate.gov/hearing/legislative-hearing-s-2670-keep-promise-act-2014 . If this link doesn’t work please copy and paste the link into your browser.

It appears that the bill could be marked up and passed out of committee for a full Senate vote. If that is the case and the bill is approved in the Senate there would be a House and Senate Conference Committee meeting to make sure the House version and Senate version of the bill are in agreement. It would then go to the President to sign or veto. If the bill were to be successful the Tohono O’odham, despite their ground breaking, would not be able to build a casino in Glendale or any other portion of the Phoenix Metro area.

On another note, to date the Attorney General’s Office is still investigating the alleged Open Meeting Law violation by Councilmembers Sherwood, Knaack, Martinez and Chavira. If the complaint had no merit we would have received that opinion by now. The fact that it is taking so long would lead one to assume that there is merit to the allegations. If that turns out to be the case, look for some kind of major sanction against Councilmember Sherwood and perhaps a minor sanction for the three others. I wouldn’t be surprised if the AG’s Office required another vote on the original IceArizona/City of Glendale Management Agreement. This, too, could prove interesting dependent upon which candidates win council seats at the General Election in November.

It looks like Councilmember Hugh has met with Lauren Tomachoff and Bart Turner. Tolmachoff is a candidate for the Cholla district seat and Turner is a candidate for the Barrel district seat. It seems Councilmember Hugh is busy trying to build his own coalition. It appears that he fancies a run against current Mayor Jerry Weiers. Hey, Jerry, watch out! It looks like they are starting to line up for a run against you…Sherwood and now, Ian Hugh. It wouldn’t be too surprising to see Councilmember Knaack (retiring in January, 2015) decide on a run for mayor. Being part of a clearly dysfunctional council is no fun but perhaps becoming mayor is.

A lot is riding on this Attorney General Office’s investigation. It could kill any mayoral ambitions of both Sherwood and Knaack. It’s rather difficult to win the support of the Glendale electorate if you have been found to have violated the law. Just when you thought Glendale’s problems were cooling down, they’ve heated up again. As President Truman once said, “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.” I wonder if the Glendale city council loves the kitchen heat now.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

NOMOREBADDEALS-talkingpoints_Page_1Today, Friday, September 12, 2014 at 1 PM two Political Action Committees (PACs), NO MORE BAD DEALS FOR GLENDALE and RESPECT THE PROMISE, chaired by local resident Gary Hirsch, will turn in to the Glendale City Clerk approximately 15,000 signatures in opposition to the Glendale City Council’s recent votes regarding the Tohono O’odham (TO) casino. The minimum number of signatures required by law on each measure is 6,956 and the PACs have far surpassed that number by almost double. Expect the city to fight them with every fiber of its being by declaring the council votes to be “administrative actions” not subject to referral to the voters. Expect after that to see the issue wind up in the courts. On August 12, 2014 at its regular city council meeting the council approved two actions related to the Tohono O’odham.  Agenda item 36 by council’s majority vote (Alvarez, Sherwood, Hugh and Chavira) approved a settlement (read contract) with the TO. The settlement terms are embarrassing. The deal is so bad it’s as if the council had accepted a dollar from the TO and called it good. One of the petitions being submitted this afternoon is for the purpose of bringing the settlement before Glendale voters to accept or reject. In agenda item 37 the city council voted in the affirmative to support the creation of an Indian reservation. This action is the cherry on top of the cake for the TO. They need Glendale’s support desperately to show the Feds that the host city within which the reservation is located is in favor of their action. The second petition seeks to bring before the Glendale voters the majority vote of council (Alvarez, Sherwood, Hugh and Chavira) that supports a reservation within Glendale’s boundaries. All of these council votes are for the benefit of a Tribe that:

  • Violated a 2000 agreement signed by 16 state Tribal leaders, including the Tohono O’odham, vowing “to strive for a good-faith cooperative relationship between and among themselves.”
  • Created a corporation  in 2000 chartered by the TO actively seeking land in the Phoenix Metro area for the “possibility of doing a casino” prior to the 2002 statewide vote on the Gaming Compact.
  • Looked it sister Tribal leaders in the face and lied to them.
  • Actively promoted and financially contributed to the campaign in support of Proposition 202, the Tribal Gaming Compact, promising voters that there would be no new casinos in the Phoenix Metro area.
  • Actively participated in the election campaigns of sitting councilmembers who voted for these agenda items through the TO’s independent expenditures for campaign mailers in support of these council persons. Expect them to do the same in this election cycle. These four elected officials owe the TO and they know it.

These majority council votes by Alvarez, Sherwood, Hugh and Chavira stink to high heaven. Were these four elected officials acting in the best interests of Glendale? You can decide for yourselves but I think not. If and when these council votes come before you, the voter, you will have an opportunity to reject these council votes and send a strong message to these councilmembers that “back door” deals will not be tolerated. There are still actions that have not been settled…legal decisions not yet rendered and legislation introduced by Senators McCain and Flake awaiting a full Senate vote up or down. The Tohono O’odham are making a million dollar bet that nothing will stop them. They could end up losing that bet. Remember, it’s not over until the fat lady sings and she hasn’t sung…yet. © Joyce Clark, 2014 FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

On August 28, 2014 the Tohono O’odham broke ground for their casino WITHIN Glendale. I love the way some people not only rewrite history but change geographical boundaries. All of the expected players were there…members of the Nation, Tohono O’odham vendors and contractors (and wanna bes) on the project, a few West Valley elected officials, and of course the infamous 4 Glendale Councilmember supporters – Alvarez, Hugh, Sherwood and Chavira. There was a by-invitation-only gathering at the Renaissance Hotel prior to the ground breaking and only the most ardent were invited.

Norma was positively giddy during the entire event and proudly strutted around with her ceremonial walking stick. Sherwood was there acting in his capacity as pseudo-mayor of Glendale. Hugh and Chavira were…just there. From reports of a few who attended, it was a sight to behold.

But…hold on a minute. Isn’t there still legal action not yet decided? Doesn’t the Tohono O’odham still have to get gaming permits from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of the Interior? Isn’t there a bill introduced by Senators McCain and Flake yet to be approved or denied by the Senate? Yes…to all.

Even Councilmember Martinez’ reading of a letter at the last council meeting in opposition to the casino penned by former Glendale Mayor Elaine Scruggs held no sway with anyone…then or now.  

The Tohono O’odham are making a bet that nothing stands in their way to stop their project. What more could one expect from a casino operator who relies on your losing bets every single day? That’s chutzpah.

© Joyce Clark, 2014

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.