Carcieri Fix Might Not Be So Easy

I couldn’t really do it in 800 words, but my ICT editorial necessarily left out several points I still want to make about Carcieri and its impact. Here is the first. Others will follow.

The Carcieri fix will not be an easy sell. Tribal interests have relatively recently “fixed” a Supreme Court decision by asking Congress for help — the so-called Duro fix. But consider how many other “fixes” never got off the ground: (1) Oliphant Fix (numerous incarnations); (2) Seminole Tribe Fix; and (3) Hicks Fix.

Why did the Duro Fix get through while the others did not? First, the only constituency that would have opposed the Duro Fix was nonmember Indians, the most famous (later on) being Russell Means, who traveled from city to city arguing against tribal criminal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians after he got arrested at Navajo. Second, state and local governments had some general interest in limiting tribal criminal jurisdiction (the same as they do with jurisdiction over non-Indians) but the interest is just that — general. And a bit disingenous in a lot of places in the country.

Continue reading

Judge Cohn Rejects Challenge to Michigan Gaming Control and Revenue Act

The Eastern District of Michigan rejected a constitutional challenge to Michigan Const. art. IV, section 41, otherwise known as Proposal E, and the Michigan Gaming Control and Revenue Act. Here are the pleadings in Northville Downs v. Granholm.

northville-downs-complaint

state-motion-to-dismiss

mgm-motion-to-dismiss

northville-response-to-motion-to-dismiss [response begins around page 27, the rest is an amended complaint]

state-reply-brief

mgm-reply-brief

northville-downs-dct-opinion

BankFirst v. Ginsburg — Suit between Lender and Gaming Developer

The District of Minnesota denied a change in venue sought by a Florida gaming developer in a suit involving a gaming-related loan. The developer works for Chippewa Cree Community Development Corporation, of the Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy’s Reservation.

Here is the order and the underlying complaint:

bankfirst-dct-order-re-venue

bankfirst-complaint

Emmet County Revenue Sharing Board Loses Court Case

From Ludington Daily News:

PETOSKEY — The Emmet County Local Revenue Sharing Board’s method of dividing tribal casino profits among local governments was wrong, a judge ruled recently.

Charlevoix County Circuit Court Judge Richard Pajtas made the ruling in a suit three Petoskey area school boards brought against the revenue sharing board, according to Dennis O. Cawthorne, a former state representative from Manistee who represented the school boards through the law firm Kelley Cawthorne, which he heads with former Michigan Attorney General Frank Kelley.

Cawthorne recently notified Manistee Area Public Schools Superintendent Bob Olsen about the Emmet County decision and said it proves the Manistee Local Revenue Sharing Board is correct in the way it handles allocations from slot machine profits at the Little River Casino Resort.

Continue reading

Allen v. Mayhew — Complaint against Tribal Officials and Individuals

Once again, the Eastern District of California has refused to dismiss a Section 1981 complaint against tribal gaming employees of the Gold Country Casino, owned by the Berry Creek Rancheria of Tyme Maidu Indians. Here is the opinion — feb-20-2009-dct-order

Here is our earlier post, with the earlier order.

Commentary: Now Is the Time for Michigan Tribes to Renew Their Gaming Compacts

The success — shocking and aweing (surely to the MichGO plaintiffs — :)) — of the Gun Lake Band in getting their Class III gaming compact through the Michigan Senate (controlled by Republicans) and House (controlled by Dems, and a few years back had previously approved the compact) should be a serious sign to the rest of the Michigan tribes — NOW is the time to renew or renegotiate gaming compacts.

Here are the facts:

  1. Michigan, and the rest of the US, is in a serious, serious economic downturn.
  2. The State of Michigan, losing tax revenue each and every day, and suffering through year after year of declining governmental revenues.
  3. Michigan tribes, also, are suffering through declining revenue. It turns out that gaming may be recession-proof, but it surely isn’t depression-proof. Now is the time to prove to the State’s negotiators that tribes will be hurt — perhaps even killed — by increased revenue sharing.
  4. Gov. Granholm isn’t going to be the State’s governor forever. The next governor may be someone far less likely to (a) negotiate an Indian gaming compact with reasonable terms, or (b) negotiate a gaming compact at all.
  5. Tribes like Burt Lake will be knocking at the State’s door offering something more than 10 percent, all the way up to the Detroit casino’s 36 percent (did I get that percentage right?).

Continue reading

Michigan House Approves Gun Lake Compact

From AP:

LANSING, Mich. (AP) — The state will get a slice of revenue from a planned Native American casino southwest of Grand Rapids, thanks to a deal approved by both chambers of the Legislature.

The House approved a resolution on the compact with the Gun Lake tribe by a voice vote Thursday. A similar resolution was approved by the Senate earlier this month.

The 2007 compact was negotiated between the tribe and Gov. Jennifer Granholm. The federal government put 147 acres of land into trust for the casino in Allegan County’s Wayland Township this year.

Continue reading

McCracken v. Easley — N.C. Court Says IGRA Doesn’t Allow State to Ban Video Poker

Here is the opinion in McCracken v. Easley — mccracken-v-easley (via Pechanga and TV):

Strange case. Without any discussion except one sentence, the court struck down a state law ban on video poker, a ban that excluded tribal gaming in accordance with a Class III compact. The sentence is: “IGRA does not permit a state to ban the possession and operation of video gaming machines elsewhere in the state while allowing their possession and operation on tribal lands.”

I’d like to see the briefs, but all I can say is … baffling. Of course IGRA allows exactly this kind of law. IGRA allows tribes to negotiate and execute Class III compacts with states that have not banned gaming outright. And even if the state bans all gaming post-Class III compact, the compact will continue until it expires.

Commentary on Possible Burt Lake Band Casino Development

Yesterday’s interesting statement by a lawyer for the Burt Lake Band suggesting that all the Band would need to commence gaming is simple legislation from the State Legislature deserves a spot of commentary. I guess their lawyer is reading this provision of the Michigan Constitution, added by state referendum in 2004, for support:

The legislature may authorize lotteries and permit the sale of lottery tickets in the manner provided by law. No law enacted after January 1, 2004, that authorizes any form of gambling shall be effective, nor after January 1, 2004, shall any new state lottery games utilizing table games or player operated mechanical or electronic devices be established, without the approval of a majority of electors voting in a statewide general election and a majority of electors voting in the township or city where gambling will take place. This section shall not apply to gambling in up to three casinos in the City of Detroit or to Indian tribal gaming. [Mich. Const. sec. 41, emphasis added]

Since Burt Lake Band is not a federally recognized tribe, they would not be subject the requirements of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, nor would the Department of Interior take land into trust for the Band under 25 U.S.C. 465. So the lawyer’s statement (“A bill will have to be introduced, passed by a simple majority in the House and Senate, has to be signed by Gov. Granholm, and we can rock and roll from there”) that the Band isn’t subject to all these difficult regulatory hurdles is correct, perhaps, but only if the Band would be considered eligible for “Indian tribal gaming” under Section 41.

Leaving aside for the moment the very real political problem the Band would face getting the Michigan Legislature to pass a special statute for them, I think there might be a significant legal problem facing the Band. Literally read, Section 41 applies to all Indian tribes. Burt Lake Band is an Indian tribe, as are the 12 federally recognized tribes. And so are the other non-federally recognized tribes as the Mackinaw Band, the Black River and Swan Creek Band, and Grand River Band. However, I strongly suspect the intent of the provision was to protect the federally recognized tribes of Michigan.

In short, I doubt the “Indian tribal gaming” language was intended to include tribes like the Burt Lake Band. It is my understanding (I was living in Grand Forks, N.D. when the voters adopted this referendum) that the key sponsors of the language were the federally recognized tribes. If there is any legislative history on this Section, I’d like to see it. Moreover, the State of Michigan has cut deals with all 12 federally recognized tribes to conduct gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, so it makes additional sense to limit the “Indian tribal gaming” language.

I think there are also some sound public policy reasons for limiting the application of that language. The key one for me is that, if Burt Lake Band gets special legislation, Michigan will be innundated by Johnny-come-lately “Indian tribes” from all over looking for the same backdoor to a casino.

I’m a very strong supporter of Burt Lake’s petition for federal recognition, and any efforts to convince Congress to recognize the Band. But I surely hope their lawyer is doing more than just blowing smoke. There isn’t going to be much “rock and roll” from here.

Burt Lake Band May Pursue Casino under State Law Without Federal Recognition

From Indianz:

The Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians doesn’t need federal recognition to open a casino in Michigan, a lawyer for the tribe said.

The tribe can pursue state approval for a casino in Sturgis, said John Dresser, of Dresser, Dresser, Haas and Caywood. “A bill will have to be introduced, passed by a simple majority in the House and Senate, has to be signed by Gov. Granholm, and we can rock and roll from there,” Dresser told Business Review Western Michigan. The process would take much longer if the tribe was recognized, according to Dresser. He said new regulations would limit where the tribe could pursue a casino.

Get the Story:
Truck stop with casino seen as a quick economic fix for Sturgis (Business Review Western Michigan 2/17)