Here is the opinion in Knox v. State of Idaho. And the court’s press release.
From the opinion:
This is an action seeking to have Idaho Code §§ 67-429B and 67-429C declared unconstitutional. The district court dismissed this action on the ground that the Plaintiffs lacked standing. It concluded that the relief sought would not redress the Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries. We affirm.
Indian Gaming @ G2E
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
CD2: Big Brands: Native American Casino Design
Room: N115 ~ 9:15AM – 10:15AM (Tuesday, November 17, 2009)
Just as in the commercial market, a brand is what separates a successful Native American operation from its more pedestrian competitors. This session will examine branding as part of the overall design process, including the minimization of costs and implications for long term success. Executives from some of the most recognizable brands in Indian Country will discuss their experiences and offer valuable insights for expanding your casino brand through resort design.
Moderator:
Tom Hoskens – Vice President, Cuningham Group Architecture, P.A.
Speaker:
Charles “Chief” Boyd – Partner, Thalden-Boyd-Emery Architects
J R Mathews – Vice Chairman, Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma
David Stewart – CEO, Cherokee Nation Entertainment
CSR7: NCRG at G2E: Myths vs. Evidence: The Impact of Indian Gaming
Room: N103 ~ 11:45AM – 12:45PM (Tuesday, November 17, 2009)
Myths about the impact of Indian gaming on the health of tribal members, crime and economic development persist in the media. Does scientific research support these assumptions? The panel, representing a variety of perspectives, will examine these myths in the light of research.
Moderator:
Christine Reilly – Executive Director, Institute for Research on Pathological Gambling & Related Disorders, Division on Addictions, Cambridge Health Alliance
Speaker:
Harry Ashton – Head of Legal Research, Gambling Compliance Ltd.
Jacob Coin – Director, Office of Public Affairs, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Kate Spilde – Chair, Sycuan Institute on Tribal Gaming, San Diego State University
FIN2: Spreading the Wealth: Tribal Financing Options
Room: N109 ~ 2:00PM – 3:00PM (Tuesday, November 17, 2009)
The money is still there for tribal gaming projects, but lenders are much more careful now about who receives loans from them and for what purpose. Speakers at this session will explain how to best qualify for loans, what lenders require and how they expect to be repaid, while tribal officials involved in these financial deals will reveal how they convinced banks and other financial institutions to provide capital or refinance existing loans.
Moderator:
Kristi Jackson – CEO, Tribal Financial Advisors
Speaker:
Rochanne L. Hackett – Senior Vice President / Director of National Gaming Development, Wells Fargo Bank N.A.
Jeff Hartmann – Executive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer, Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority
Mike Lettig – Executive Vice President, Native American Financial Services, Key Bank
Dave Rebich – CFO, Turning Stone Resort Casino
CLR5: Tribal Perspective: Indian Gaming and the Obama Administration
Room: N109 ~ 3:15PM – 4:15PM (Tuesday, November 17, 2009)
Some of President Obama’s most ardent campaign supporters were Native Americans. The tribes believed they needed a change in the way they related to the federal government and that Obama would deliver. Now, one year later, tribal leaders, former and current federal officials and other experts will come together to discuss whether the change they sought has been delivered, and what the future holds for Indian Country during this administration.
Moderator:
Tom Foley – President, Foley Law Group
Speaker:
Tom Brierton – President, Franklin Creek Consulting
Larry Rosenthal – Partner, Ietan Consulting, LLC
John Tahsuda – Vice President, Navigators Global LLC
Loretta Tuell – Attorney, AndersonTuell, LLP
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
IG4: National Indian Gaming Commission: An Update
Room: N115 ~ 9:15AM – 10:15AM (Wednesday, November 18, 2009)
With at least one new member, the National Indian Gaming Commission will be re-tooled to consider a wide range of issues that will impact Indian Country. This session will bring together the current members of the commission for an annual update on the role of this federal agency in overseeing tribal gaming and what its members hope to accomplish during the upcoming year. Topics discussed will be Class II gaming, off-reservation gaming and the relationship of the NIGC with other federal bodies, including the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Moderator:
Ernie Stebbins – Executive Director, Washington Indian Gaming Association
Speaker:
Norm DesRosiers – Vice Chairman, National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC)
George Skibine – Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs, Acting Chairman, National Indian Gaming Commission
IG5: Tribal Compacts 2.0: The Next Generation
Room: N115 ~ 11:45AM – 12:45PM (Wednesday, November 18, 2009)
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) prohibits states from taxing tribal gaming revenues. Tribes may, however, agree to share a limited portion of their gaming proceeds with state and local governments, subject to approval by the Secretary of the Interior. To ensure that these compacts are not interpreted as imposing taxes and therefore in violation of IGRA, states and tribes are beginning to develop a new generation of compacts that include revenue sharing models designed to provide more certainty and enforceability. This panel will provide background regarding compacts and older models, and explain how this next generation of revenue sharing can benefit tribal and state governments alike.
Moderator:
Mark Van Norman – Executive Director, National Indian Gaming Association (NIGA)
Speaker:
Scott Crowell – Attorney, Crowell Law Offices
Ezekiel Fletcher – Attorney, Rosette & Associates, P.C.
Paula Hart – Director, Office of Indian Gaming, US Department of the Interior
As this article reports, the 29 Palms Band sued the State of California over gaming-related income on behalf of its off-reservation members. The court granted an earlier motion to dismiss, but allowed the Band leave to file an amended complaint on whether IGRA preempts state taxation.
Here are the materials so far:
Sept DCT Order Granting California Motion to Dismiss
Here is the opinion in Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y. v. Hunt Construction Group, reversing a trial court order that accepted jurisdiction over four counterclaims against the Nation — Oneida Indian Nation v. Hunt Constr Group
An excerpt:
Plaintiff, the owner of the Turning Stone Casino & Resort, commenced this action seeking damages resulting from the alleged breach by defendant of its construction contract with plaintiff. Plaintiff moved to dismiss the second through fifth counterclaims on the ground that it had waived sovereign immunity only with respect to counterclaims seeking to enforce the terms of the contract and thus that Supreme Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the second through fifth counterclaims. We agree with plaintiff that the court erred in denying those parts of the motion seeking to dismiss the second counterclaim to the extent it alleges the breach of implied warranties; the fourth counterclaim, for quantum meruit and unjust enrichment; and the fifth counterclaim, for an account stated. We therefore modify the order accordingly.
From dBusinessNews (via Pechanga):
In a special report released today (Nov 2009 Fitch Report), Fitch Ratings says there are two important issues that will determine the future for the Native American gaming industry’s expansion: whether tribes will have access to the debt capital needed to finance growth, and federal government policy decisions regarding approvals for future Native American gaming developments on off-reservation lands. Investor sentiment on the Native American gaming sector has soured in this economic downturn, as poor trends in regional gaming markets pressure credit profiles, three tribes defaulted on bond payments in 2009, and the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation recently announced a forbearance agreement with its senior lenders after the Tribal Chairman made comments highlighting investors’ concerns about the unique legal issues involved in lending to a tribal government.
Fitch believes many investors are likely to take a ‘wait-and-see’ approach with respect to these ongoing debt workout and restructuring efforts before committing significant additional funds to the sector, making it unlikely a tribe would be successful in arranging debt financing for a large-scale greenfield casino development at the present time (for additional information on this topic see Fitch research ‘Managing Through Distress: Considerations for Investors in Distressed Native American Gaming Credits’, dated May 11, 2009). However, over the longer term, the federal government’s policy stance with respect to approvals for off-reservation gaming projects will be the most important factor shaping the future growth path of the Native American gaming industry.
‘Right now the Native American gaming sector is feeling the effects of poor gaming operating trends and unfavorable credit market conditions, but those issues are likely to be less limiting down the road assuming an economic recovery and improved investor sentiment on the sector,’ said Megan Neuburger, Director at Fitch. ‘Actions taken by the federal government under the Bush Administration in 2008 were clearly an effort to curb off-reservation gaming expansion. Department of Interior officials have recently made public comments that they are in the process of reviewing their policy on off-reservation gaming approvals, and we’re closely following the developments to assess their impact on the industry.’
According to the report, since the promulgation of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) set the framework for the Native American gaming industry in 1988, there has been significant political controversy. Proponents of expansion tout the benefits of economic development, while opponents decry ‘reservation shopping’ and the ills associated with the expansion of casino gaming. While it has never been easy for a tribe to obtain the regulatory approvals necessary for gaming on off-reservation land, recent developments have made the likelihood of a successful outcome even more remote. These developments include guidance and a rule published by the U.S. Department of the Interior in 2008, as well as the 2009 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Carcieri v. Salazar.
In the special report, Fitch explains these developments, the associated impact on the approval process, and the actions the federal government may take under the Obama Administration with respect to these issues, as well as providing a summary of the implications for the credit outlook for the sector. ‘Native American Gaming Insights: Off-Reservation Gaming Approvals: How Will the Feds Play Their Hand?’ is now available on Fitch’s web site at ‘www.fitchratings.com’.
Additional information is available at ‘www.fitchratings.com’.
From ICT:
NEW YORK – Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., says the Obama administration will make a critical decision on off-reservation gaming policy in the coming weeks.
Schumer told the Times Herald Online that he recently spoke with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who is reviewing a “guidance memorandum” issued by former Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne in January 2008. The controversial guidance placed a new hurdle on land into trust applications for gaming – a “commutability” standard under which the applied-for land is to be considered in light of its distance from a nation’s reservation, regardless of whether it is within a nation’s historical territories.
The memo caused an uproar across Indian country, not only because distance isn’t mentioned in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, but also because the guidance effectively amounted to a new regulation that had been promulgated without consultation with the nations, raising memories of the days of federal paternalism and policies to keep Indians on reservations.
Continue reading
From Indianz:
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has canceled oral arguments in an off-reservation casino case.
The court was due to hear St. Croix Chippewa v. Salazar on November 13. But the case will instead be decided on the briefs.
The St. Croix Chippewa Tribe and the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indianswant to build a casino in Beloit. The project enjoys strong local support.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs, in the final days of the Bush administration, rejected the casino, saying it was too far from the tribes’ reservations. Beloit is more than 300 miles away.
At issue is a January 2008 guidance memorandum that make it nearly impossible for tribes to acquire land away from existing reservations. The Obama administration is reviewing the policy but continues to fight the lawsuit.
From the Freep:
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Walter Shapero has scheduled four days of hearing time during which the plan’s proponents and objectors are to call more than 20 witnesses and present 539 exhibits to prove their cases, according to a procedural order filed with the court.
At dispute is how Greektown Casino, the smallest by revenue of Detroit’s three casinos, was valued. The higher the value, the more creditors have to share. As it stands now, the pre-petition lenders, led by Merrill Lynch Capital Corp., put the value at $540 million and would own the casino after it emerges from bankruptcy.
Negotiations were ongoing over the weekend to deal with a potential wrinkle after the attorney for one creditor said he might offer a competing plan for reorganization. This plan would ensure bondholders, owed about $185 million, would get something out of the process.
“All of the parties continue to negotiate,” said Chuck Moore, a turnaround expert for the casino’s estate. “At this point, there is no plan other than to move forward with the confirmation hearings.”
Here is the opinion in Guzman v. Laguna Development Corp., decided in June. An excerpt:
David and Maria Guzman (the Guzmans) appeal the dismissal of their wrongful death and loss of consortium claims for the death of their son, Anthony M. Guzman. The district court both dismissed (pursuant to Rule 1-012(C) NMRA) and granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendants Laguna Development Corporation, d/b/a Route 66 Casino, George Russell Kainoa Ayze, and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company (Defendants). We reverse and remand holding that: (1) summary judgment was not proper because Defendants are estopped from taking a position before the district court inconsistent with their successful position before the Workers’ Compensation Administration, and (2) dismissal was not proper because the Guzmans’ complaint sufficiently pleads claims that fall within the Laguna Pueblo’s waiver of sovereign immunity for injuries to visitors at the casino, pursuant to its gaming compact with the State of New Mexico. NMSA 1978, § 11-13-1 (1997) (the Compact).
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.