Header image alt text

Joyce Clark Unfiltered

For "the rest of the story"

Aug 14

10

Still more reasons to reject a flawed agreement

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 10, 2014
Posted in Casino • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , | 2 Comments

The Glendale City Council will vote on the proposed Tohono O’odham/Glendale agreement on Tuesday evening, August 12, 2014. Expect a packed house with speakers both pro and con. If you would like to attend the meeting here are the details:                                                     

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

6 PM

Glendale City Council Chambers

5850 W. Glendale Avenue

In the proposed agreement the Nation will pay $100,000 to the Glendale Convention and Visitors Bureau with an annual 2% ($2,000) increase. Bet on the payment coming from the state mandated percentage that all tribes must dole out to non-profits annually. Although not specified in the proposed agreement the general understanding is that the money will be used to promote and advertise the casino. Now, that’s a sweet deal for the Tohono O’odham (TO). The funds will be used exclusively for the proposed casino’s promotion to the detriment of other competitor member businesses who have restaurants, bars or hotels.

Glendale would be better served to have a stipulation similar to the Seneca/Buffalo agreement. In June, 2014 the Buffalo News reported, “Seneca Gaming Corp. on Thursday announced a plan to spend $3 million over a year marketing Buffalo’s attractions… The marketing program announced Thursday includes print, television, radio and digital advertising in Ontario, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Among the targeted markets are Toronto, Cleveland and Pittsburgh.” Hmmm…$3 million and Glendale is settling for $100,000 to its Convention Bureau to be used to advertise the proposed casino.

It is widely known that Mayor Weiers, while visiting the City of Niagara Falls, received a great deal of information on that city’s casino revenue sharing arrangement. He brought it back, had it copied and distributed to every member of council. They know there is a better deal to be had yet they continue to rush to accept this deal. People are now openly wondering is there any quid pro quo? Have the Tohono O’odham done or will it do Independent Expenditure campaign mailings for Alvarez? In 2016 will it do the same for Hugh, Sherwood and Chavira? Many readers of this blog still can’t get over Mark Becker’s (Becker Billboards owner) campaign donation of $2,500 to Alvarez and her vote of approval for the billboards. So much for principle. If they are ugly and unwanted in her district, why wouldn’t they be ugly and unwanted in the Cholla district?

Are you dumb founded yet by this proposed agreement? If not, you should be. It’s reminiscent of the arena management deal and the Camelback Ranch deal. The majority (Alvarez, Hugh, Sherwood and Chavira), avid supporters of the TO, have continually pointed fingers at previous councils and their inability to negotiate deals to benefit Glendale. Now they have an opportunity to negotiate in Glendale’s best interest and they have blown it.

This is a deal that begs for rejection. The majority of 4 can’t do that for all kinds of reasons: their haste to get something…anything…before the November General Election when the council make up could change and they lose their majority; their haste to get something…anything…should the Attorney General’s investigation into Open Meeting Law violations drops the hammer on any or all of the 4 of them and they lose their majority; and lastly, out of sheer embarrassment for rejecting an agreement they have publicly proclaimed as a “good deal for Glendale.”

What they fail to recognize is that the Tohono O’odham are desperate. They need Glendale. Glendale does not need the Tohono O’odham. The TO must still secure gaming approval from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Interior Department and to obtain it they need Glendale and the Governor of the State to enthusiastically embrace their plans.

This coalition of 4 councilmembers reminds one of an old, worn out, street hooker bending over and willingly accepting five bucks for services rendered. It’s downright pitiful and embarrassing.

© 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.

Aug 14

8

Three reasons to reject the proposed Tohono O’odham/Glendale agreement

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 8, 2014
Posted in Casino • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , | 1 Comment

The proposed agreement between the City of Glendale and the Tohono O’odham should not be executed at this time. It is premature. There are outstanding legal actions and Congressional legislation yet to be decided. At the very least, the Glendale City Council should table this action to a time uncertain. There is absolutely no need for execution of this agreement immediately. In the last blog there were 3 major flaws with the agreement. Let’s take a look at them.

  1. The City of Glendale has no authority to review the design and the only entity that can inspect construction is the Fire Marshall. The Fire Marshall will not be able to tell if the plumbing, electrical, etc., construction is up to Code. The reservation is similar to a foreign nation planted inside Glendale. The proposed casino’s design cannot be approved by Glendale and even more importantly, the Federal Aviation Administration. The University of Phoenix Stadium’s height was subject to the FAA process and required approval from the agency. If the Tohono O’odham builds structures whose height interferes with operations of Luke Air Force Base or the Glendale Municipal Airport, Glendale and every agency is prohibited from taking action to stop it. There is precedent for such action. In Kenosha, Wisconsin their agreement stipulates, “That the Menominee Kenosha Gaming Authority will follow all applicable building and Federal Aviation Rules during the construction and operation of the project.”  Glendale should insist on a stipulation in the agreement requiring the Tohono O’odham’s development to be subject to Glendale’s design review process and FAA restrictions.
  2. The amount to be paid to Glendale annually is too low. Here are some examples of Tribal revenue sharing with other cities across the country. In NY Governor Cuomo’s press release of August, 2013 says, “Under the agreement, the local governments in Buffalo, Niagara Falls, and the Salamanca area will receive their full 25% share of local impact payments, a total of $140 million. Today, the Governor traveled to Western New York to present checks to the local governments receiving funds under the agreement: Buffalo will receive $15.5 million, Niagara Falls will receive $89 million, and the Salamanca area will receive $34.5 million.” Because of a dispute between the State of New York and the Seneca Tribe payments were suspended for several years. The money cited in the press release were back payments made by the Seneca Tribe to those 3 cities. These cities receive anywhere from $2 to $8 million annually. The Seneca facility is about half the size of the proposed TO casino and therefore generates about half of the revenue expected at the proposed TO facility. Here is another example and it underscores another problem, “Officials in Duluth, Minnesota, are still trying to reinstate a gaming agreement with the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians. The tribe was sharing 19 percent of gross revenues from the Fond-du-Luth Casino. The tribe stopped making payments in 2009 after sending $75 million to the city.” If the Tohono O’odham stop making their miserly annual payments to Glendale, the city will see itself in a Duluth-type situation, waiting years to rectify the situation. Here is one last example and believe me, there are plenty more that could be cited. The Michigan Pokagon-New Buffalo Area Local Revenue Sharing Agreement says, “Section 18 of the Compact defines how tribal payments are made to local governments…These payments shall equal 2% of the annual net winnings at each casino derived from all Class III electronic games of chance, to the local units of government that are located in the immediate vicinity of each tribal casino site or that are otherwise directly affected by the operation of the casino.  It is the intent of the State and the Tribe that the payments to local units of government provided for in this section will be used primarily to provide financial resources to those political subdivisions of the State that actually experience increased operating costs associated with the operation of the Tribe’s Class III gaming facility.” For the most recent fiscal year, as of July 31, 2011, the total allocations of the tribal payments were shared by 8 cities and 4 educational districts in the amount of $5,818,019. The City Council should renegotiate the Tohono O’odham annual payment and require $15 million annually. That is equal to ONE DAY of estimated net profit or it should stipulate a percentage (no less than 5% annually) of net profit.   
  3.                                                                                                                                                                                                             3.  Lastly, Lastly, there is the issue of tribal sovereign immunity. The TO in the proposed agreement refers to a TO Resolution 14-317. I visited the Tohono O’odham’s web page on its Code and some very interesting information was available: “The Tohono O’odham Code is an unofficial compilation of the Nation’s laws of permanent and general interest, as well as Tohono O’odham Judicial Court rules, canons, and significant administrative orders. While the Code as a whole has not been formally adopted by the Legislative Council, an increasing number of the Nation’s laws are being adopted in a uniformly codified format and the individual laws appearing in the Code have been duly enacted as reflected in their legislative histories.” The web page defines sovereign immunity further: 

“Section 2101 Sovereign Immunity

    1. “The government of the Tohono O’odham Nation (“Nation”) and any person acting within the scope of his or her capacity as an officer, employee, or agent of the Nation are absolutely immune from suit, court process, or liability.
    2. “The Nation’s sovereign immunity extends to the Nation’s districts, enterprises, entities, and the officials, employees, and agents thereof.
    3. “Sovereign immunity cannot be waived except by a resolution or other official action of the Tohono O’odham Legislative Council expressly waiving, or authorizing a waiver of, sovereign immunity; provided that such a waiver shall be limited in accordance with its terms. A Legislative Council action that authorizes a Nation’s district, enterprise, or entity to sue or be sued does not waive sovereign immunity unless a waiver is expressly granted in a separate written contract or other duly approved writing.”

What is Resolution 14-317, where is it and what does it say? On Thursday, July 17, 2014 the TO called a Special Session and the last Resolution approved that day is Resolution 14-316, approving a Pisinemo District 2014 Operations Amendment . When was Resolution 4-317 passed and why is it not posted on the TO web site listing all actions passed by their Legislative Council? The City Council should require a stipulation requiring the TO to completely waive sovereign immunity with regard to any provision of this agreement. If the TO will not do so, then they have something to hide.

The proposed agreement makes me ill. Once again, Glendale is being taken to the cleaners and the majority of 4 councilmembers are too dumb or too ignorant to realize it. If they are truly serving the best interests of Glendale, as they claim to do, ad nausea, then they would take action to reject this TO self-serving agreement or at the very least, table it and craft an agreement that protects Glendale and works in its favor. Any one of these issues is enough grounds to reject or table the current proposed agreement. I would hope Councilmember Hugh might be concerned enough about these agreement provisions to support such action. So should Councilmember Sherwood, who fancies himself a negotiator and businessman extraordinaire.  

©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.

Aug 14

8

The cost is too high

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 8, 2014
Posted in Casino • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , | 3 Comments

There is so much wrong with the City of Glendale/Tohono O’odham proposed agreement, one hardly knows where to begin. Let’s start with the fact that it was posted on the city’s website on Wednesday, August 6, 2014. Do you know when the council vote is scheduled for this agreement? How about in 6 days, on August 12, 2014. In a city with a population of 239,000 how many people are even aware of or know any of the details of this agreement? Let’s be generous and acknowledge that perhaps the number is 2,000 residents. That’s .008% of Glendale…not even 1%. What’s the rush? The city should take the time necessary to inform its residents. Each of the councilmembers should be hosting a district meeting to offer information on the proposed agreement and get feedback from their residents. There should be a presentation on its TV cable channel 11. How about a town hall? This is an issue that calls for extensive public outreach.

What does the Tohono O’odham want from Glendale?

  • A restatement of Glendale’s repeal of a past resolution opposing a reservation within Glendale’s Municipal Planning Area (MPA).
  • Support of the Nation’s putting the entire 134 acres into Trust.
  • Admit that the land is not, and never has been within the corporate limits of Glendale.
  • Public acknowledgement of Glendale’s support for the proposed casino and wants it built as quickly as possible.
  • Urge the State of Arizona not to challenge the Secretary of the Interior’s decision and to withdraw its legal appeal regarding annexation
  • Urge Arizona’s Congressional delegation to oppose Representative Trent Franks’ bill and the bill offered by Senators McCain and Flake
  • Issue a joint press release within 10 days of the signing of this agreement to publicly state all of the above stipulations
  • Glendale is not to challenge any decisions made by the Secretary of the Interior
  • Glendale must stipulate to the National Indian Gaming Commission or Department of the Interior that their property meets U.S. Code requirements
  • The land is not subject to Glendale’s design standards or review and the TO will use its own building codes
  • Glendale will provide water and wastewater services

What can be learned from the Tohono O’odham’s Wish List? They are scared because they see the hurdles before them which they may not clear successfully. Of course they want Glendale to repudiate everything. What if the Congressmen’s bills pass? The TO are dead in the water. Any one of the State of Arizona’s challenges could be successful. The National Indian Gaming Commission could deny their right to put gaming on the land. Again, why are 4 Glendale councilmembers so anxious to support the TO and to approve the agreement now…immediately? Because the TO are desperate. Their very Wish List signals that they need Glendale to avidly support them to succeed.

What will the TO give to Glendale?

  • The TO will pay for construction of infrastructure on their property (something that all developers ordinarily do). They refer to Exhibit C with a list of what that would be. Do we know? No…because there is no publicly available Exhibit C
  • The TO will pay for construction of offsite improvements if Glendale can prove they are a direct result of the TO project. They refer to Exhibit D with a list of what that could be. Do we know? No…because there is no publicly available Exhibit D
  • The TO may, if they feel like it, enter into a public safety mutual aid agreement
  • The TO promises to give the Glendale Convention and Visitors Bureau $100,000 a year and increase it by 2% a year ($2,000). That’s easy…that will come from the 8% a year the state requires of all Tribes to be dispersed to non-profits
  • The TO will pay Glendale $1.4 million a year and increase it by 2% a year until 2026. After that the payment drops to $900,000 a year. Why use the year 2026? That’s the year the current State Compact expires. Do you think the Tohono O’odham might suffer under a new Compact? If there is one? You betcha.
  • The TO waives Sovereign Immunity…sort of. First there must be Mediation, then Arbitration. Is the action is in accordance with the TO’s Resolution No. 14-317 the city might be able to legally sue the Tribe. What is in this mysterious and secret Resolution 14-317?

Set aside the fact, for the moment, that Glendale should not be entering into any agreement with the TO now. There are so many issues unsettled. Of all of the flawed stipulations in the proposed agreement the three major ones are: the amount of payment by the Tohono O’odham to Glendale; the prohibition of Design Review and construction inspection by Glendale;  and the issue of sovereign immunity. They will be explored further in the next blog.

Glendale promises to be cheerleader and lapdog, all rolled into one, for the Tohono O’odham…but the cost to Glendale is extremely high, especially in terms of its reputation and its integrity with the Tribes opposing the proposed casino, the State of Arizona, Arizona’s Congressional delegation and all Valley cities. The cost is too high.

© 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.

Aug 14

7

Glendale sells its soul for 30 pieces of gold

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 7, 2014
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale finances • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , | 2 Comments

Glendale released the draft of an agreement with the Tohono O’odham (TO). Here is the link: http://www.glendaleaz.com/documents/SettlementAgreementDRAFT.pdf  . The Arizona Republic has an August 7, 2014 article on the subject as well. Here is their link: http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2014/08/06/glendale-council-casino-agreement-tohono-tribe/13680763/ .

The first question that arises is why the sudden rush to get this accomplished? Think about it. Councilmember Gary Sherwood is under investigation by the Attorney General’s Office over allegations of violations of the Open Meeting Law. What if it proves true? There is always the possibility that he could be removed from office. If that were to occur, poof…the coalition of 4 councilmembers could become a minority of 3. There goes the coalition driving Glendale’s Tohono O’odham train.

As Mayor Weiers said in his testimony before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, why should one man, Gary Sherwood, who reneged on his anti-casino pledge to voters, be allowed to decide the fate of Glendale?

What is stranger still, there are Tribal law suits undecided and even if a decision is rendered, appeals are sure to follow. Legally this issue is far from being decided. Then there is legislation introduced by Senators McCain and Flake. Should the bill’s passage occur after the November General Election with the strong possibility of a Republican majority in the Senate, the TO are stopped in their tracks. Again, the question, why the rush?

Should we expect this issue to appear on the August 12, 2014 council meeting agenda? Remember all of the countless times Councilmember Alvarez has called for an issue to be decided by a vote of Glendale’s residents? Her silence in requesting a public vote on this issue is deafening. When an issue is going her way, as far as she is concerned there is no need for a public vote.

In an earlier blog I referred to educated and credible industry estimates of the kind of revenue that will be generated should such a casino be built in Glendale. The estimate is that the TO casino will net between $300 million and $350 million a year. Over 20 years the TO’s earnings from the proposed casino will be the stratosphere of $6 Billion. It’s a number that is mind boggling and nearly incomprehensible. And the TO, in a fit of generosity, are willing to give Glendale $26 million over 20 years? The Glendale City Council is now truly and certifiably nuts.

The draft agreement certainly favors the interests of the Tohono O’odham and not the City of Glendale. Look for the next blog to discuss the specifics of the draft agreement.

There has been so much deception and betrayal throughout this entire saga, not yet ended. The Tohono O’odham deceived and betrayed its Sister Tribes, the State of Arizona and the voters who approved the 2002 Compact. Councilmember Gary Sherwood deceived and betrayed his constituency by running on an anti-casino platform and then reversing his stance. Glendale is poised to betray the Tribes opposing the proposed casino, the State of Arizona, Arizona’s Congressional delegation, all of the region’s cities and most importantly, the people of Glendale…all for what? 30 pieces of gold.

© 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.

Aug 14

1

Times have changed

Posted by Joyce Clark on August 1, 2014
Posted in City of Glendale  | Tagged With: , , , | No Comments yet, please leave one

GWC and Mom July 31 2014Bless their hearts. I love and respect the Glendale Women’s Club (GWC). My Mom was a member of the GWC for over 25 years. They are a well respected organization within our community.

Times have changed and so should they. On July 24, 2014 the GWC held its biannual Candidates’ Forum. They hosted eleven candidates. Think about it. There are 4 candidates each in the Barrel, Cholla and Ocotillo districts. All were there with the exception of Reginald Martinez who could not get time off from work. It’s too much already!

They wanted to keep the Forum to a reasonable length of time – no more than 60 to 90 minutes.  They allotted each candidate an opening minute and a closing minute. That exercise alone consumed 22 minutes. The result was that there was very little time to ask questions of individual candidates. The candidates’ responses to questions are critical to draw distinctions between them. But there was no time…no time to probe…no time for follow up. I would humbly suggest that the GWC institute a new system when there are so many candidates. Perhaps they could conduct two forums or a forum for each district…perhaps held in each of the respective districts? Something has to give. The present forum no longer works.

Early ballots for the Primary Election are being mailed now. If you signed up for voting by Early Ballot you should receive it sometime in the first week of August. If truth be told early voting totals will decide the races in all three Glendale districts. Yes, there will be some voting at the polls but there will not be enough numbers to offset the results of early voting.

Each candidate deserves a “thank you.” It is never easy to put yourself in front of your peers to be judged by them while asking for their vote. It is a humbling experience and one of satisfaction if you are still standing after the Primary. Then the real work begins and the most difficult aspect of all is for each candidate to communicate the critical distinctions between himself/herself and the opponent. Good luck to all of the candidates.

With 4 candidates in each district the chances of one candidate securing 50% + 1 are very difficult and we can expect to see run offs in every district at the General Election. In two of the districts – Cholla and Barrel – voters do have legitimate choices. In the Ocotillo district there is but one choice. Here is a recap of this blog’s choices in each of the districts:

Cholla district:             

  • Van DiCarlo
  • Lauren Tolmachoff

Barrel district:

  • Randy Miller
  • Bart Turner

Ocotillo district:

  • Bud Zomok

Voters it’s up to you now. Do your homework. Take the time to find out your candidates’ positions on Glendale’s major issues. Please do not do what so many ill informed voters do and that is choose the first name in the list or choose the name you like the best. Be careful for whom you cast that precious ballot. Your city’s future viability is riding on your choice.

© 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.

Jul 14

31

“They looked us in the face and lied”

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 31, 2014
Posted in Casino • City of Glendale • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

“They looked us in the face and lied.” Those are the words of Diane Enos, President of the Salt River-Pima-Maricopa Indian Community when she testified, under oath, on July 23, 2014 before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. Her words are blunt and unequivocal. It is an expression of utter frustration and betrayal perpetrated by Tohono O’odham (TO) on virtually every Tribe in the state. What other lies may be on the horizon?

Here is one. What about the 6,000 construction jobs promised by the TO in its effort to sell the casino to an unsuspecting public? Large casino construction projects across the country generally average about 2,000 jobs. In California the Graton Rancheria Tribe constructed an $800 million entertainment and gaming destination. It resulted in 750 construction jobs. Mike Sunnucks in a July 28, 2014 story for the Phoenix Business Journal quotes Libby Francisco, COO of of the Tohono O’odham Gaming Enterprise as saying, “…the first construction phase will employ 3,500 workers…” If my math is correct, that is a little over half of the construction jobs promised by the TO. So much for their promise of 6,000 construction jobs. Might this be lie #2?

The Tohono O’odham do not have approval to place gaming on their newly designated reservation but that has not deterred them from hiring construction companies. Sunnucks says, “The Tohono O’odham Nation has picked Hunt Construction Group and Penta Building Group…” as their contractors. These companies will, in turn, hire sub-contractors for electrical, plumbing, concrete work, etc. These subs will put out a call to hire for this project. Men and women will come from all over the country and be hired. It will not matter where the workers come from as long as they can do the work at the hourly wage that Hunt and Penta’s sub-contractors will offer.

My family members are or were union members. Some are still actively employed and others are retired. All their work lives at one time or another, for short periods of time and sometimes for a year or better, they have worked out-of-state on large, mega construction projects. They go where the work is and the competition for these jobs is fierce.

Arizona’s unions have been most vocal in their support of the proposed TO casino as visions of local, union construction jobs dance in their heads. If these unions have a behind-closed-doors, back-slapping “understanding” with the TO about using local, union labor exclusively they better get it in writing and insist on a waiver of the Nation’s claim to sovereign immunity. Without a waiver they cannot sue for breach of contract. The TO will not be directly hiring any of the construction workers. The sub-contractors hired by Hunt Construction and Penta Building Group will do the hiring and they will decide based upon what works to maximize their bottom line. Might this be lie #3?

There is more to come, such as the wages paid for permanent jobs, but I’ll save that for another blog. You may consider the Tohono O’odham’s word as suspect and many do. It certainly should be on the minds of the Glendale city council for just like the Tribes throughout the state they may learn, painfully, that any promises, understandings, compacts or contracts are not worth the paper they are written on without a waiver of sovereign immunity. The TO could promise anyone anything and not deliver on their promise – just as they did to their sister Tribes – and then use their shield of immunity.  Remember President Enos’ words, “They looked us in the face and lied.” Who wants to take that chance?

© 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.

Jul 14

29

Senators McCain and Flake introduce companion bill to Franks’ HR 1410

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 29, 2014
Posted in Casino • City of Glendale • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

On July 27, 2014 Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake introduced S. 2670 according to an Associated Press release. The senators announced that their bill is a companion measure to Representative Trent Franks’ H.R. 1410 approved by the House of Representative and awaiting action in the Senate. It prohibits the construction of any new Indian gambling operation on unincorporated land in the metro Phoenix area that is not contiguous to an existing Indian reservation.

This bill takes aim at the very heart of the Tohono O’odham’s proposed casino on unincorporated land in Glendale. A very special “Thank you” goes out to the three members of the Arizona Congressional delegation: Representative Trent Franks and his bill, H.R. 1410 and Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake for their bill, S. 2670. Those of us who live near the proposed casino and who would have to deal with its impacts on our quality of life are extremely gratified and appreciative.

This bill seems to have wide support in the Senate. Talk is that even some Democratic senators will support this bill. It appears that many Senators have become concerned about the latest national trend of “reservation shopping.” While this bill does not address that issue per se it does send a strong signal to tribes across the country that they may very well see legislation banning the practice, especially if the Senate is controlled by Republicans after this fall’s election cycle.

Again, thank you Senators McCain and Flake. We on the front lines appreciate your support and your efforts.

© 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.

Jul 14

29

Casino reality

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 29, 2014
Posted in Casino • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Tohono O'odham  | Tagged With: , , , , , | 4 Comments

This is the proposed casino’s reality. Fort McDowell Casino isFort McDowel prime-rib 2 currently running ads that offer Prime Rib on Tuesdays for $6.99 and Crab Legs on Wednesdays and Thursdays for $7.99. It’s not possible for a Yard House, Gordon Biersch, McFadden’s or Saddle Ranch Chop House at Westgate to offer these prices.

Fort McDowell prime rib July 2014You will not see prices like these at the Westgate restaurants for very good reasons: sales tax and regulatory costs. You see, these restaurants have to collect federal, state, county and Glendale sales tax. The Glendale portion of the restaurant sales tax is 3.9%. When state and county taxes are added the total rate is 11.2%.What sales tax does the proposed Tohono O’odham casino with its planned restaurants pay? Nada…zip…nothing.

The icing on the cake is that the Glendale city council just voted to make the temporary sales tax increase permanent…just another stake in the hearts of these restaurants.

Add to the unlevel playing field of all kinds of taxes paid by businesses in Westgate the myriad of federal, state and local regulations with which these businesses must comply. It eats into Westgate businesses’ profits to do so. As a sovereign nation the TO is not required to comply with federal, state, county or local regulations. What regulatory costs does the proposed Tohono O’odham casino bear? Nada…zip…nothing.

TV Channel 5 weekly runs a “Dirty Dining” segment with recent results of inspections of restaurants in Maricopa County. Have you ever seen a Tribal restaurant inspection review? Of course not. Tribal reservations are not subject to these kinds of inspections. They are not subject to federal (OSHA), state, county or local health, safety and welfare regulations because they are a reservation and have sovereign immunity…consider the reservation as a foreign country planted within Glendale. A call placed to the Maricopa County Department of Environmental Services revealed that it has no jurisdiction over tribal restaurants and the Indian tribes regulate themselves. What regulations are there to protect the health, safety and welfare of the casino’s workers and patrons? Nada…zip…nothing.

What do you bet one of the very first elements the Tohono O’odham (TO) will build is paved parking lots. Why, you ask? So they can undercut parking prices for Cardinals games, hockey games and other non-sporting events held at Glendale’s arena, less than a mile away. Is there anything that can prevent the TO from offering cheap parking? Nada…zip…nothing.

I can see it now…shuttle busses packed to the gills disgorging seniors coming from the Sun Cities and Youngtown, spending their time playing bingo and the slots, then partaking of a buffet lunch or dinner before being whisked back to whence they came, never seeing the light of day at Westgate or Tanger Outlets.

Recently I received over the Indian gaming transom some  reliable estimates of what the proposed TO casino is projected to earn in revenue. The numbers are astounding. The numbers offered are not carved in stone but are reasonable estimates provided by people who would know within the industry. Estimates provided are that a new casino in Glendale would earn between six hundred million dollars and seven hundred million dollars a year in gross revenue.

It is estimated that the Tohono O’odham’s net will be half that amount (50%) or three hundred to three hundred and fifty million dollars a year. The net amount reflects the subtraction of all costs associated with O&M as well as an amount of 1% to 8% of the tribe’s gross gaming revenue to the state. To put that in some kind of perspective, it is estimated the TO will net a million dollars a day. Think about that…a million dollars a day.

Which leads to the question of why do the 32,000 members of the TO Nation average an income of $8,000 a year as Chairman Norris testified, under oath, before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs this past week, “Most of our reservation land is located in remote isolated areas and our population is one of the poorest in the United States with average individual incomes of just over $8000.” The Tohono O’odham have 3 casinos operating in southern Arizona. Their website says, “The Desert Diamond Casino, owned and operated by the Tohono O’odham Nation, provides three exciting entertainment venues in Southern Arizona: Desert Diamond Casino (Nogales Highway), Desert Diamond Casino (I-19 & Pima Mine Rd) and Golden Ha:san Casino (Why, AZ).” It goes on to say, “The mission of the casinos is to provide the means for a better quality of life for Tohono O’odham Nation and all people in Southern Arizona.” If the TO are netting even a portion of these revenue estimates from its three southern Arizona casinos, why is part of the net not distributed to the Nation’s members by the Tribal leadership to reduce the poverty rates of its 32,000 members?        

It is widely known that 4 Glendale councilmembers directed staff to negotiate with the Tohono O’odham and the results will be discussed at their August 5, 2014 workshop. Rumor has it that the city council has negotiated something in the neighborhood of $100,000 from the TO. That’s got to be a joke. If it turns out to be true, once again, Glendale’s city council will get snookered…this time by the TO…all the while congratulating staff for their work and patting themselves on the back.

They should demand…not ask…demand a 5% payment of the Tohono O’odham’s annual net revenue earned by all of the development placed on that site. It has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it? What does 5% equal? How about $15,000,000 a year? Doesn’t that number sound familiar? It’s the same amount the city must pay annually to IceArizona under the management agreement. It would certainly go a long way to relieving the tremendous financial pressure the city faces annually as a result of that payment to IceArizona.

Are Glendale residents willing to sell their souls and bear yet another financial burden for not only a token payment but for the TO’s highly inflated numbers of temporary construction jobs and low-paying service industry jobs? Is this city council while pandering to a small number of extremely vocal residents that desperate and gullible? Is this the best that we can expect from our city council?

© 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.

Jul 14

26

More situational ethics

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 26, 2014
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Jobing.com arena  | Tagged With: , , , , , , | 19 Comments

A comment received in response to my blog entitled Situational Ethics was that the commentator had talked to Councilmember Gary Sherwood who named me as the leaker to Darrell Jackson (reporter for the Glendale Star and original FOIA requester) of the infamous Sherwood email. There can be but one response to such ignorance and idiocy. My thanks to a  friend who sent me this YouTube clip that sums up my response perfectly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0 .

Councilmember Sherwood has responded to the allegations publicly, most notably in Darrell Jackson’s article in the Glendale Star. Here is the link: http://www.glendalestar.com/news/headlines/article_b55d0f60-1122-11e4-a1bb-0019bb2963f4.html . Let’s see what Mr. Sherwood has to say for himself, “It is no secret that I was pushing for the Coyotes,” Sherwood said by phone. “At the time we had acting attorney and city manager and a deputy city manager that we were not trusting of.” That in and of itself, is an incredible statement. Sherwood and the rest of council had enough confidence in Dick Bowers and Nick DiPiazza to appoint them as Acting City Manager and Acting City Attorney, respectively. Bowers and DiPiazza had been given direction by a majority of council (Sherwood, Martinez, Knaack and Chavira) to execute the best possible management agreement for the city with IceArizona. Bowers and DiPiazza took their obligation to craft the best deal possible seriously. Bowers, in fact, had publicly stated that he was concerned about the management fee of $15 million annually and its impact on Glendale’s precarious financial situation. Apparently this did not sit well with Sherwood, et.al. No wonder Sherwood and crew were doing an end-run around Bowers and DiPiazza by meeting with the IceArizona attorney, Nick Woods, and negotiating the deal. More situational ethics.

Sherwood goes on to say, “All of the items discussed (at the meeting with Wood) were supposed to be posted on our website; they just got delayed in posting.” That is no excuse for divulging Executive Session material. Sherwood’s expectation that it would eventually be publicly posted was not a valid rationalization for his giving Executive session material to Woods. More situational ethics.

Sherwood explains his direction to Martinez to delete the email by saying, “That last line was damning to look at, it was just for information.” He goes on, “Manny had no personal e-mail account, that (to delete) was for his benefit. I just wanted him to be careful so I just suggested he delete it.“ If the email had been appropriate to begin with, there would be no need to instruct Martinez to delete it. More situational ethics.

Sherwood’s dismissive attitude is reflected in, “We have had so many things go to the AG and it is another thing for them to look at. I just don’t see anything becoming (sic) of it.” He may be the only person on the planet to feel this way. The allegations of Open Meeting Law violations are serious this time. He practically calls out the Attorney General’s Office as being ineffectual.

Lastly, Sherwood says, “…he feels that this is a personal attack and was upset with the way it is being handled.” Why? Because he wasn’t given advance notice that a complaint was being filed? Welcome to the world of politics.

It is no secret that Gary Sherwood’ ambition is to become the next Mayor of Glendale. After all, since he was elected as a councilmember he has repeatedly tried to assume that role usurping Mayor Weiers at every available opportunity. It is also no secret that he can be extremely arrogant and rude. It has been demonstrated numerous times in his manner of response to citizen public hearing comments at council meetings. For example, his reaction to citizen comments on the billboard issue was to dismiss their lack of knowledge on the issue and to berate the numbers of anti-billboard attendees.

Many find it creditable to believe that Sherwood lined up four votes for an approval of the IceArizona contract. There has been rampant speculation for over a year that he and Chavira traded votes. Chavira would vote for the management agreement if Sherwood would vote for the casino. Coincidentally, Sherwood who ran on a platform of opposition to the casino flip-flopped and came out in favor of the casino in August, 2013, after the vote on the arena management deal. Many also believe that Sherwood was taking the lead and personally negotiating the arena contract and side-stepping the responsibilities of Glendale’s senior management. At that time he made public statements in media interviews which he used to portray himself as taking the lead position.  Is it any wonder that his actions are now under scrutiny?

It’s also no secret that many have expressed concern that Sherwood may have used the same tactics to secure a very recent council majority vote (Sherwood, Chavira, Alvarez and Hugh) of support for the proposed Tohono O’odham casino. That meeting appears to have been choreographed by the same 4 majority councilmembers who voted in the affirmative. Did they collude prior to the meeting causing yet another Open Meeting Law violation? I don’t know but I suppose over time we will all find out. A spider’s web of deceit and deception seems to be the hallmark of this council – a notion troubling many Glendale residents.

© 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

Jul 14

25

Shield of sovereign immunity

Posted by Joyce Clark on July 25, 2014
Posted in City of Glendale  | No Comments yet, please leave one

On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing entitled Indian Gaming: The next 25 years. There were 4 panels that testified but the most important was the last one. On it was Diane Enos, President of the Salt River-Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, Mayor Jerry Weiers of Glendale and Ned Norris, Jr., Chairman of the Tohono O’odham Nation.

I have transcribed verbatim the 5 minute opening remarks of all three principals and those remarks are offered at the end of this blog. It’s long and an optional read. You may choose to read it…or not.

There were take-aways from all 3 speakers. President Enos said, “They looked us in the face and lied. They broke faith with us and the voters of Arizona.” It is not only evident but sad that the TO lied to its Sister Tribes. They broke faith with not only the other tribes but with every voter is the state that approved the 2002 Compact. They have squandered the trust that had been placed in them and that will be very difficult to overcome. In 2027 the Compact will be up for renewal and approval by the voters. If there is a casino in Glendale it will give proof to the voters that a new compact is not to be relied upon and that notion could lead to voter rejection of a Compact renewal.  

Another concern raised by President Enos was, “Now, even our existing establishments are in jeopardy as corporate gaming interests point to this deception to justify opening up Arizona to commercial gaming, like Montana.” Mayor Weiers reiterated this sentiment by saying, “As a former state legislator, I know that if gaming happens in Glendale there will be a strong effort in the Arizona legislature to authorize non-indian gaming in the state and that will have a devastating effect on all of our tribes.” Think about it. The court recently ruled that the state had diverted $1 billion from education funding and mandated that the state repay this diversion of funding. The idea of opening up the state to commercial gaming will look very attractive to state legislators. They can levy heavy taxes on the industry and use the revenue to repay the deficit in educational funding. In the process a major source of revenue for every state tribe will be in jeopardy.

Mayor Weiers also said, “It’s important to note that Glendale may not be the only city impacted. Our sister cities know that unless Congress acts, they may be next. There are over 200 other county islands in the Phoenix metropolitan area and TO attorneys have said the Tribe has the right to close its existing three casinos and open them on these county islands.” If the TO are successful in planting a casino in Glendale it is an action destined to be repeated. Where? Take your pick…Scottsdale? Phoenix? Tempe?

Chairman Ned Norris used two tried and true arguments. He opened with a description of his Nation’s poverty and used it to justify the TO’s actions. His argument appears to be if you are poor you have the right to do whatever works. In order to avoid responding to any allegations, he attacked by saying, “…the Nation respectfully requests that you put an end to this self-serving, mean-spirited, multimillion dollar lobbying campaign against our people and stop this piece of 19th century throwback legislation.” He brushed everything aside by saying that the courts had ruled in their favor. A closer look shows that the judicial issues settled were very narrow and when any major legal complaints arose that the TO deemed to be a serious threat or might not be decided in their favor, they raised the shield of sovereign immunity. Sovereign immunity means that a tribe is considered in the same context as a foreign country and cannot be sued.

President Enos commented, “Contrary to what Chairman Norris asserted, the court had to dismiss the charges that the State of Arizona filed against the Tohono O’odham of fraud and misrepresentation and promissory estoppel because they raised sovereign immunity defense. “

Pick your poison for it may be coming. We could see commercial, non-Indian gaming throughout the state; or the TO planting 3 more casinos in the Phoenix metro area; or a non approval by the voters of the renewal of another Indian Gaming Compact in 2027. All because the TO lied and chose willfully and deliberately to ignore promises made in 2002.

Testimony of Diane Enos, President, Salt River-Pima-Maricopa Indian Community

“Mr. Chairman and members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to testify. For 20 years Arizona Indian gaming has been stable and successful but today we face a crisis, off reservation gaming. The Tohono O’odham nation wants a casino 150 miles from its government center, on 54 acres that is within my Tribes original 1879 reservation.

“I am sorry to have to say this – this is a problem that only Congress can fix. We cannot fix it without your help. Congressional action on HR 1410 is the only remaining recourse for the tribes and voters of Arizona. So I am here today to ask that you swiftly enact this legislation. The bill is a measured and appropriate solution to a horrendous predicament.  

“Beginning in 1999, 17 Arizona tribes came together to begin renegotiating our expiring gaming compacts. I was on council at the time. We had a real challenge. The state insisted on a single compact for all tribes that reduced the allowable number of casinos and restricted casinos from being opened in urban areas. It was tough negotiating. Tribal leaders met more than 85 times. We met with the state more than 35 times. Our relationship solidified as meetings lasted late into the night, some lasting several days.

“Once we agreed on the compact Arizona voters had to approve it. Tribes, including Tohono, contributed more than $23 million to the campaign. We worked tirelessly with the Governor’s office on television and radio, giving interviews, buying ads, distributing voter pamphlets. The major thrust of the campaign was to promise voters there would be limited gaming or “no additional casinos in the Phoenix metro area.” We repeated this promise over and over for two reasons. Number One, we believed in it. The Governor had demanded that the four Phoenix metro tribes, Salt River, Ak-Chin, Gila River, Fort McDowell, each give up their right to operate an additional casino under the compacts then in effect. So, we gave up those rights to insure that all tribes in Arizona could continue to benefit from the gaming exclusivity. That was the goal of our fight.

“The second reason was because through polling the tribes knew this promise would help to convince voters to approve the compact, which they barely did on election day, 50.9%. The day after the vote the Tohono’s chairman was quoted in the Tucson papers saying, ‘To us this is a major victory. We stayed together. We stayed united.’ We now know this was not true. Our partners in this effect, in this effort, the same people we fought alongside day in and day out, had been working behind our backs and behind the backs of Arizona voters the entire time.

“Documents recently disclosed by Tohono revealed that they were acting secretly to buy casino land in metro Phoenix as early as March, 2001, a full year and a half before voters approved the compacts and at the very same time that tribes in the state were promising voters that there would be no additional casinos in the Phoenix metro area. They made a calculated choice to keep their plan secret for years from other tribes and to violate our promise to voters. They looked us in the face and lied. They broke faith with us and the voters of Arizona.

“Now, even our existing establishments are in jeopardy as corporate gaming interests point to this deception to justify opening up Arizona to commercial gaming, like Montana. This deception will also impact the state tribal compact renewal in 2027. That is why, Mr. Chairman, many Arizona tribes, cities, the state and city of Glendale, are fighting so hard to oppose the Glendale casino. We want to insure that our word is good and that tribes in Arizona and across the country can continue to benefit from the economic engine of IGRA. There remains poverty and great need for service in all Arizona tribes. The loss of gaming revenue would be devastating.  

“With me today are over 25 elected officials from tribes and Phoenix metro cities. We reluctantly come to Congress to fix a problem caused by Tohono’s decision to violate our promise to voters. Our attempts to persuade the tribe have failed and the courts are powerless to remedy Tohono’s fraud and misrepresentation because they chose to raise sovereign immunity. The Keep the Promise Act simply conforms tribal behavior to tribal promises. It doesn’t change Indian gaming. It doesn’t create precedent and it doesn’t amend the Gila Bend Act. It protects Arizona Indian gaming. If you believe that government integrity matters, move the bill out of this committee. Thank you. I am happy to take questions.”

Testimony, Jerry Weiers, Mayor of the City of Glendale

“Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am here today to discuss the controversial proposed tribal casino in the city of Glendale. I’ll present my council’s most recent views on this project and then also my personal request for swift action on HR 1410, The Keep the Promise Act.

“My name is Jerry, pronounced ‘wires.’ I was born in Deadwood, South Dakota. My family moved to Arizona when I was just 8 years old. I am the Mayor of the city of Glendale, a city of 232,000 people which is the 72nd largest city in the United States. Before becoming Glendale’s mayor, I served in the Arizona legislature for eight years.

“I supported Arizona’s Proposition 202 ballot initiative which gave tribes the exclusive right to conduct gaming but limited casinos to tribal reservations. One key aspect of the initiative was there would be no additional casinos in the Phoenix area. As a Glendale resident this was a primary factor in my support for the Proposition. My wife and I chose to live in Glendale, in part, because it was not near any of the large Phoenix area casinos and we believed the initiative preserved our neighborhood as it was.

“Like many Glendale residents I was blindsided when the Tohono O’odham Nation, I’ll respectfully refer to as the TOs, announced in January, 2009, that it was going to create a reservation and build a Las Vegas style casino on a 54 acre county island within our city limits. This announcement came seven years after the voters approved the ballot initiative which we thought prohibited new casinos in the area. It also came five years after Raymond Kellis High School opened just across the street from where TO is proposing to operate its casino, a site within 2 miles of 12,000 homes.

“Now, as you can imagine, we were mad, we are mad. The city has been involved in two lawsuits at an enormous financial cost. The City Council passed a resolution opposing the casino because it would hurt the interests of our residents. My wife and I were completely shocked at what we learned- while TO and other tribes were telling voters there would be no additional casinos in the Phoenix area, TO was actually looking to purchase casino land in Glendale. Moreover, they knew what they were doing was wrong. The tribe went to great lengths to keep their plan secret from other tribes, local governments and voters. The deceit did not stop there. The TO had already purchased Glendale land when a school district announced plans to build a new Kellis High School just across the street. The TO watched us built a school while continuing to keep its casino plans secret and said nothing. We never thought our children would be across the street from a Las Vegas style casino.

“My city’s been in chaos for the past five years and the federal government seems unwilling to help us. Last week, after the Interior Department’s decision to take the TO’s land into trust, the city council voted 4-3 to repeal our 2009 resolution opposing the casino and passed a new resolution. This new resolution says that Glendale does not object to the trust land being utilized for gaming. President Kennedy once said let us never negotiate out of fear. Well, with few choices left, the slim majority of my council felt that we had to come to the bargaining table with the TO. Our choice was not ideal — continue to fight and hope for action from this body or give in to this casino being forced on us. It’s frustrating to be a city of our size and have no choice on a casino proposed by a tribal government that’s more than 100 miles away.

“It’s important to note that Glendale may not be the only city impacted. Our sister cities know that unless Congress acts, they may be next. There are over 200 other county islands in the Phoenix metropolitan area and TO attorneys have said the Tribe has the right to close its existing three casinos and open them on these county islands. We are a test case but it is the start of a very slippery slope. If Congress does not act, the entire Phoenix area should be prepared for more off-reservation casinos.

“As a former state legislator, I know that if gaming happens in Glendale there will be a strong effort in the Arizona legislature to authorize non-indian gaming in the state and that will have a devastating effect on all of our tribes. And even if the state legislative effort to authorize non-indian gaming is not successful, these compacts are only valid for another dozen years. At that time the tribes will have to go back to the voters and after what we’ve experienced, I can’t say I blame the voters for questioning agreements of the past.

“That’s why I urge this committee to approve HR 1410 so that it may be quickly adopted by the Senate. The bill is not about holding one tribe back but preserving a much needed economic development tool for all of Arizona’s tribes. Thank you once again for the opportunity to testify. I’m happy to answer any questions that you may have, sir.”

Testimony of Ned Norris, Jr., Chairman of the Tohono O’odham Nation

“Thank you. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Ned Norris Jr. I am the Chairman of the Tohono O’odham Nation.  I am here today representing the nation’s more than 32,000 members.

“Since time immemorial the nation and its members have lived in Southern and Central Arizona. Our reservation is composed of several noncontiguous areas in Pima and now in Maricopa County.  Most of our reservation land is located in remote isolated areas and our population is one of the poorest in the United States with average individual incomes of just over $8000. In the 1960s the Corps of Engineers built a dam to protect nearby nonunion commercial farms. The dam backed up and flooding destroyed nearly 10,000 acres of our Gila Bend Reservation, land in a fertile area of Maricopa County, ruining homes, farms and our local church. Our elders recalled the desecration of their cemetery as a result of flooding.  Tribal members were forced to move on to a small 40 acre parcel of land known as San Lucy Village  where today they crowd into small houses and live well below the poverty line.

“In 1986 Congress enacted the Gila Bend Act to compensate the Nation for its losses. Pursuant to the act the Nation settled our legal claims and gave up nearly 10,000 acres of our reservation land and water rights.  In return we have the right to acquire replacement reservation land without any conditions on the future use. We acquired replacement land in the West Valley and Maricopa County and the Department of the Interior took it into trust.

“Four West Valley cities, Peoria, Tolleson, Surprise and now the City of Glendale have taken formal positions of support for the nation’s project and against HR 1410. I’m honored to be joined today by Mayor Barrett of Peoria and Councilmembers Sherwood and Chavira from Glendale.  We are respectful of rights of individuals like Mayor Weiers to express their personal opinions regarding the Nation’s project.  However formal official positions of the communities in the West Valley could not be more clear. They support the project.

“Undaunted by this local support opponents of the nation’s project have pushed HR 1410, a bill that would undue a nearly 30 year old land and water rights settlement agreement, all in order to protect the interest of a few East Valley gaming tribes. Proponents of HR 1410 asserted a wide range of legal claims to block the nation’s project but a federal court has now explicitly confirmed that the Arizona gaming compact that the Nation, the state and all tribes explicitly signed provides that the Nation has the right to conduct gaming on this property. The court roundly rejected interpretations of the compact advanced by proponents of 1410 calling them ‘entirely unreasonable.’

“Mr. Chairman, this is the third time in five years I have had to testify before Congress in defense of the Nation’s rights. The Nation has complied with the letter of every applicable law and has gracefully answered every allegation no matter how ridiculous or how offensive and every lawsuit and in every congressional hearing.  But the millions of dollars the Nation has been forced to spend defending its rights would have been better spent to build houses for our elderly, pay for college tuition for our children and bolster our head start programs.

“Honorable Chairman of the committee and members of the committee, the Nation respectfully requests that you put an end to this self-serving, mean-spirited, multimillion dollar lobbying campaign against our people and stop this piece of 19th century throwback legislation. We ask that you see this legislation for what it is – the first time in the modern era in which Congress would unilaterally renege on the solemn promises made by the United States and in the Indian land and water rights settlement. This project is fully in line with IGRA section 20, equal footing exceptions that will benefit the Nation, local communities and the state of Arizona for the next 25 years and beyond. I thank you for your time the Nation is happy to answer any questions.”

Chairman Tester

“Thank you all for your testimony. I can feel the emotion up here. So, I am just going to ask two questions. I’m going to ask one of Diane and one of Ned. Number 1, Diane, this question, you just heard Chairman Norris state that this would be the first time that there would be unilateral reneging on a promise. You’re Native American. I want to know what your thoughts are on that statement.”

President Enos

“It’s ironic that the Tohono O’odham talks about reneging on a promise because that’s what they did when they sat down with us all those days and years of working with us. The promises that they violated- there was first an agreement in principle.  We all signed a document agreeing to put our trust in each other, recognizing sovereignty of each tribe but yet also requiring each tribe that signed that document, if you have an interest that’s different from the group, the coalition of 17 tribes, you must tell us. They didn’t tell us. You know the real tragedy here today, Senator Tester, all of this could have been avoided. All the millions that Chairman Norris talks about, all the times we have to travel and all these tribal leaders here, these city leaders that are having to come here to lobby you for help. All of this could’ve been avoided if they had just told us during those negotiations; if they had just told us what their intentions were instead of doing this behind closed doors and keeping it secret not only from tribes but the Governor and the voters of Arizona. All of this could have been avoided. “

 Senator Tester

 “Just to clarify that if, if it goes the Tohono O’odham’s way, you do not believe that this would have negative impacts on Native Americans moving forward?”

President Enos

“The state will open up to state-wide gaming as I said in my testimony. They’re waiting. They’re looking.”

Senator Tester

“Ok. Ok, I gotcha. Chairman Norris, claims have been made that the Tohono O’odham promised not to open up a facility when 202 was being debated and sold and voted upon. Can you tell me if that is true or false?”

Chairman Norris

“Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. We are not here to relitigate the arguments that the opposition has already raised in front of a federal judge. The federal court has already ruled on every single legal challenge that the opposition has raised on this issue. The federal courts have already ruled that there were no promises made. The federal courts have already ruled that there was never any agreement. The federal courts have already ruled that we will not violate the current compact and many other written decisions as well.”

Chairman Tester

“And just to recap Mayor Weiers, you are opposed to the gaming that is going to happen in your city but the city Council voted 4 to 3 to support the gaming. Is that accurate?”  

Mayor Weiers

“That’s accurate in the sense of, Chairman, the fact that our council has been split on this issue for years and just recently one councilmember switched his vote and, I guess my point I’d like to make is, should one person make a difference for the entire state and affect all the Native American tribes we have in Arizona. I think not.”

Chairman Tester

“We thank you and I just want to thank you for bringing this issue forward – it is very complex. I will tell you that I am sitting here listening to the arguments made vacillating back-and-forth as you make the arguments. It is not as clear cut as Senator McCain said when this thing started. Some of the most complex issues are issues dealing with Native Americans. If you consider the history and where we’ve been and where we’re going, as we talk about language; and we talk about taking care of folks with education and housing and police protection and water resources. These are important issues if you’re living it and you guys are living it. And we’ve got a lot of leaders in this audience that are living it and I can just tell you that it’s very difficult. With that…we’re going to…we will allow you to say something. Go ahead.”

President Enos

“Contrary to what Chairman Norris asserted, the court had to dismiss the charges that the State of Arizona filed against the Tohono O’odham of fraud and misrepresentation and promissory estoppel because they raised sovereign immunity defense. “

© 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.

« Previous Page — Next Page »