| |
Main
Date: 05 Dec 2006 17:51:26
From: Cymbal Man Freq.
Subject: ADV-NEWS, The court battle to prove that Turning Stone is operating illegally ended Monday...
|
What's Next for Turning Stone?
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
By Glenn Coin
Staff writer
The court battle to prove that Turning Stone is operating illegally ended
Monday, and the citizens group that won the case says it's time for the state to
shut down the Verona casino.
But it's unclear when or if state officials would take such action. It's also
possible the state could negotiate a new, legal agreement for the casino to
operate.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to review a state judge's ruling in
2004 that the casino is operating without a legally valid agreement. New York
appeals courts had upheld that decision.
"This is the end of it," said David Vickers, president of Upstate Citizens for
Equality, the group that brought the lawsuit. "There are no more appeals."
The casino is owned by the Oneida Indian Nation. Officials at the nation said
Monday the agreement, formally called a compact, that allowed Turning Stone to
open 13 years ago is still legal.
"The Oneida's compact is and remains valid under federal law," said nation
spokesman Mark Emery, in a statement. "Indian gaming is the business of the
federal government, and it is not for a state court to interfere with it."
Vickers and UCE's lawyer say the state has authority to shut down Turning Stone
because a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year said Oneida nation land is not
sovereign. They plan to urge the governor's office to shut down the casino.
"It's illegal, period. It is unconstitutional," said Cornelius Murray, UCE's
lawyer.
Vickers said he would write letters to outgoing Gov. George Pataki and
Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer asking them to shut down Turning Stone's casino.
Neither Pataki's office nor Spitzer's transition office returned phone calls.
State Assemblyman David Townsend, R-Kirkland, doesn't think Turning Stone will
be closed.
"To say you're going to send in the state police or the National Guard or
whoever and shut this thing down is not realistic and it's not going to happen,"
said Townsend, whose district includes the resort. "I think what this means is
that the Oneidas are going to have to sit down with the governor and negotiate a
compact that's fair and equitable."
The Oneida nation is the only tribe in New York with a casino that has not
agreed to pay part of gambling revenues to the state.
Turning Stone opened in 1993 under the agreement with then-Gov. Mario Cuomo,
that was never ratified by the state Legislature. That meant the agreement was
invalid, state Supreme Court Justice James McCarthy ruled in 2004.
The agreement deals only with gambling, not the hotels, golf courses,
restaurants and entertainment venues at Turning Stone Resort and Casino.
Indian-run casinos fall under the federal jurisdiction of the National Indian
Gaming Commission, which has the power to close casinos. In 2004, the commission
warned the Oneida nation and other New York tribes that they must resolve casino
disputes with the state or face unspecified "enforcement action."
Monday, a commission spokesman said there are no plans to close Turning Stone.
"We're still reviewing the issues," said Shawn Pensoneau.
Any new state agreement would have to be voted on by the Legislature.
A spokesman for Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said the issue is in the
governor's hands.
"There's no immediate role for us in this situation," said Skip Carrier. "It
would be up to the governor to renegotiate a compact. We will see what
transpires."
The Mohawk Indians were in a similar situation in 2003, when a judge declared
that their agreement to open a casino in Hogansburg was invalid. The Mohawks
agreed to give a share of their video gambling machine revenues to the state,
and the Legislature ratified the pact in 2004.
The Oneida Nation bought 235 acres for Turning Stone in the early 1990s. The
casino opened, it has grown into a complex with 710 hotel rooms, 19 restaurants,
five golf courses and a 5,000-seat arena. The nation has asked the federal
government to take into trust the Turning Stone complex and all 17,370 acres the
nation owns in Madison and Oneida counties. A decision won't come until at least
2008, federal officials say.
A recent report prepared for the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs on the trust
request said that Turning Stone "would be assumed to be an illegal gaming
operation" if the land was not put into trust.
Emery, in a statement, criticized UCE and said a casino shutdown would cause
thousands of people to lose their jobs.
"Turning Stone Resort and Casino is the engine that drives the largest economic
development in Central New York," Emery said. "If we follow the UCE's lead there
would be no economic development in Upstate New York."
|
|
| |
Date: 05 Dec 2006 17:58:21
From: Cymbal Man Freq.
Subject: Re: ADV-NEWS, The court battle to prove that Turning Stone is operating illegally ended Monday...
|
Court refuses to consider case on Oneida Indian Nation
12/4/2006, 4:29 p.m. ET
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday refused to consider the case of
the Oneida Indian Nation, whose gaming compact with New York was invalidated by
state courts.
A group of New York residents, the Upstate Citizens for Equality, has challenged
the compact and said Monday's decision "calls into immediate question" operation
of the tribe's Turning Stone Resort and Casino, which attracts over 4 million
visitors a year.
State courts concluded New York's governor exceeded his authority under state
law in 1993 by entering into the gaming compact with the tribe without
legislative approval.
The Oneidas say the state court rulings conflict with the tribe's federally
protected sovereign immunity. The New York courts ruled that even though the
Oneidas cannot be made a party in the lawsuit the citizens' group brought
against the state, the courts could go ahead and litigate the tribe's interests
because the tribe can waive its sovereign immunity and enter the case if it
chooses.
The tribe asked the Supreme Court to consider the state courts' rulings in the
context of federally protected sovereign immunity for Indian tribes and the
federal interest in tribal economic development.
"Indian gaming is the business of the federal government, and it is not for a
state court to interfere with it," the Oneidas said Monday in a statement
maintaining the legality of their compact under federal law.
The Oneidas have applied to the U.S. Interior Department to put all 18,000 acres
the tribe owns in two counties in central New York state into federal trust, a
status that could bring full or partial sovereignty and exempt the tribe from
taxes. Taxes are the most contentious issue between the tribe and area residents
and governmental units.
The National Indian Gaming Commission said last year it had no plans to shut
down the gambling operation, but it also noted that the issue remains unresolved
and urged the state of New York to act quickly to resolve the it.
A spokeswoman for Gov. George Pataki said the state has repeatedly urged the
federal government to address the issue. "Today we renew that call," Suzanne
Morris said Monday.
A similar suit against the Akwesasne Mohawk Casino reached the state Court of
Appeals, which ruled the 1993 Mohawk agreement was illegal because the state
Legislature had not ratified it. Lawmakers ratified the agreement while the
casino kept operating.
An attorney for the citizens group challenging the compact urged state officials
to act quickly, saying the high court's refusal to hear the Oneidas' case "calls
into immediate question the continued validity of the operation of the Turning
Stone Casino."
"Let's see if they've got the guts to enforce the law," Albany attorney
Cornelius Murray said.
The Oneidas called attempts to shut down the casino, which employs more than
3,500 people, "reprehensible."
"That's not a victory and they shouldn't be celebrating," the tribe's statement
said. "If we follow the UCE's lead there would be no economic development in
upstate New York."
Turning Stone includes three championship golf courses, three luxury hotels, a
European spa, a convention center, a cabaret-style showroom and an events arena.
The case is Oneida v. Peterman, 06-470.
|
|
