Perhaps, given this information, via Indianz:
Foxwoods and the tribe, in their brief, claim that because only a “fraction” of the revenue from Foxwoods is available to the tribe after lenders are paid, a strike at Foxwoods would severely impact the tribe’s ability “to operate a tribal government and function as a sovereign entity.”
The record, however, does not support the claim, Kreisberg writes:
“In this regard, it is undisputed that the Employer (Foxwoods) has annual gross revenues in excess of $1 billion. … Therefore, even if the employer were to face a protracted strike, there is insufficient evidence to establish that it would lack sufficient revenues and/or capital to provide the Tribe’s 900 members, as well as employees and other visitors to the reservation, with any ‘essential’ public services.”
Didn’t Foxwoods just note concern about being able to pay its creditors? What’s in this record?
Turtle Talk 