One Little Indian Reports

Documentary To Be Produced On Enrollment Issue

The time has finally arrived to bring the issue of "genocide on paper" to the forefront of the national political organizations, the media and the general public.  In the past few years, the gaming Tribes around California have acted with impunity to destroy their once proud people by disenrolling them from their ancestral homes, unceremoniously discharging them from their heritage and from their federal status as Native Americans, all in the name of the almighty dollar.

This story, like so many in a world as corrupted as ours, goes much deeper than just the poor souls caught in the crossfire.  The gaming Tribes in California have a secret and an unlikely guardian angel looking out for them: the federal government.  As I have researched the reasoning behind disenrollments of Tribal people, I have discovered that the federal government has given their "silent approval" of what is going on through inaction, inaction that coincidently comes with hefty donations to their political parties and personal campaign bank accounts.

Let me tell you the vicious cycle that many Native Americans are now caught up in. The first step towards disenrollments occurred decades ago when the Supreme Court ruled that a Tribal government has absolute and unequivocal authority to determine the qualifications for its membership.  In the time since that ruling, this authority has been expanded upon to give the Tribal government the right to violate the Indian Civil Rights Act, the Tribe's Constitution and the Constitution of the United States when the Tribal government is acting on the matter of enrollment.

The next item in the circle was the determination to allow gaming on Indian lands.  As the money rushed out to the reservations, Tribe's suddenly realized that they were going to get rich.  In some cases that didn't happen, while in others, their locations made it possible for the Tribe to bring in millions of dollars every month.  When it was determined to allow Tribes to distribute earnings from their casino operations, the other shoe began to drop with a thud heard around Indian Country.

With their lawyers and their Supreme Court decisions at the ready, Tribal governments began giving their memberships the once over, checking and rechecking every detail, every dot on the 'i', every slash on the 't' in an effort to disqualify members of their Tribes.  When that didn't produce the results they wanted, the Tribal governments simply sent out a letter to the member telling them that it was determined that they are ineligible for membership, citing an obscure or even falsified fact concerning their ancestry.

Once the member is disenrolled, they are no longer federally recognized as Native Americans.  They have lost their membership with their ancestral people and their protection under federal laws.  Their "termination" cannot be challenged in any court.  They are legally no longer an Indian.

Now, you may say to yourself "Doesn't the government realize what's going on?"  Or, "How could the government let this happen after so much that has happened to the poor Indians already?"  This is one of the heavyweight players in the circle who can decide the fate of so many if they choose to exercise their legal and moral authority in the matter.  Of course, the answer is as complicated as it is simple: its all about the money.  While Tribes are being given unprecedented immunity from federal and state laws, the lawmakers are doing their part to keep the status quo alive by failing to take any actions to stop these "terminations" from occurring.  In exchange for this favorable treatment, gaming Tribes donate heavily to both political parties and their candidates.  In 2006 it totaled into the millions of dollars just in California.

The next heavyweight player in this game is the media, the champions of the weak and saviours of the down-trodden.  The media has the power to bring down Presidents, expose corruption in even the most obscure locations and to shine the light of truth into the dark corners where human cockroaches dwell, feeding off the misery of their fellow man. The question that begs to be asked is "Where are they and why aren't they ringing the alarm bells at the appalling treatment being delivered by gaming Tribes to their own people?"  Wait, could it be that dastardly "for the love of money" once again?  Yes, the fact of the matter is gaming Tribes give out tens of millions of dollars in advertising revenue to their local TV, radio and newsprint organizations which buys alto of hush, hush.

If a story about disenrollment appears on TV, its usually quickly reported, and in many cases its not even shown during the prime time newscasts.   The newspapers aren't in any hurry to bite the hand that feeds them either.  The newspapers are in the best position to report the story in-depth, but they are also in the most compromised position financially which has led to severe under reporting on all fronts.  In a recent campaign for a political office, a source who must remain unnamed until the film is released was told that the news media would not cover his/her campaign if they continued to pursue the issue of disenrollment as part of their platform.  That must have been the 800 pound gorilla talking because the message got through loud and clear.

The last major player in this whirlwind of corruption, deception, and money grabbing is...let the drums roll maestro...YOU, the person who spends their rent money, their last $20 of their check, their first $200 of their check, or their grandma's social security check in the Indian casinos every week.  The billions of dollars that are being spent are the catalyst for the disenrollments, they are the grease that keeps the political wheels and the media giants from looking the victims in the eye and telling them "You don't matter. If you did, I wouldn't take the money from the Tribes knowing that it has devastated you, your family and your way of life."

"If you mattered, I would put an end to the way people have been treated and get you back home.  But, the fact is the Tribe pays better than you. Therefore, you...don't...matter."  Coindidently, the general public is also listed in the "you don't matter" category.  Doesn't anyone realize the reason why those very same gaming Tribes that donate millions of dollars are immune from virtually every civil law on the books.  Yes, the Tribal members, the gaming public and the employees that work for the Tribes are in a very similar situation: none of us have any civil rights protections while on the job or in the seat at a slot machine.

Employees at Tribal casinos can be and will be victimized with sexual harassment, racial discrimination, age discrimination and much more when they work for a Native casino.  Its a shameful fact, but the Tribes don't care about those little inconveniences to their workers.  They only care about the Almighty ones coming in through the magic of slots.  According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Tribal casinos generate the highest number of complaints of any other industry from their workers, however the agency is unable to take any actions on behalf of the victims, you know who they are, they are American citizens just like you.  They could be your mom or dad, your brother or sister or your best friend.  And, they could be getting victimized right now just like the Native American's who were kicked out, ran off and told to never come back for as long as the money keeps flowing!

If it weren't for the Labor Unions taking on the Tribes, the estimated 53,000 casino workers here wouldn't have anyone looking out for them.  Unite Here! represent Hotel employees and Restaurant Employees along with several other service related job descriptions.  If the Tribe agreed to allow the Union to organize on their compacts with the State, then they are prevented from interfering with organizational efforts on the part of the Unions.

When a casino is unionized, the Union stands up for the worker when the casino tries to treat him or her improperly.  While the union drive was underway at Chukchansi Gold, the senior executive team made it sound like Satan was at the door with a Union card in hand, waiting to take $40 and the soul of our team members.  At first, none of knew what to expect so there was a lot of trepidation about the matter.  Eventually the Union won by a small margin, but the primary catalyst behind their victory wasn't the offer of a better deal from the Union, it was the continuing atmosphere of harassment and discrimination being fostered inside the Casino that drove the vote over the top.

And, the team members are damn lucky that they made that choice too.  As it stands right now, the Union is the only prayer they have against the behaviors of the Tribe or the Casino's management teams in Tribal Casino's around the state.  Naturally,one prominent Tribe in California is in litigation against the Unions with the claim that the Tribe is immune from the National Labor Relations Act.  The Tribe wants the federal government to make them immune from federal labor laws now, which of course will make this greedy little ride even greedier, even harder to stop and even more destructive to the Native people caught in the feeding frenzy.  Also, the California Legislature is holding up five new compacts that would give the five richest California Tribe the right to expand their casino slot floors from 2,000 machines to 10,000 machines because of a major missing component: the lack of labor representation in the compacts.  The Tribes are outraged of course.

I realize that you may be thinking to yourself "Well, he has spilled the whole plot to his documentary, why do I need to see it now?"  The simple fact of the matter is, there is so much information to be shared with you that I would need to write a novel sized article to explain it all today.  Rest assured, you will be saddened, shocked, embarrassed and angered at the players in the film, and you will see with newly opened eyes just what exactly has been going on.

But, as with many epic stories waiting to be told, I have stumbled upon a funding issue that requires the help of the many of you out there that want the truth to be told, that demand that justice be served and that truly feel that it is unacceptable to allow Tribal governments to trump the US Constitution by ignoring your rights as American citizens, and by treating their own Native American people like animals with no recourse for them to fight back.  If you believe the way I do, then help me out so that I can hire a film crew, pay some salaries, and create a film that will be the Fahrenheit 911 of the Indian Gaming Industry.

Your help can be given through pay pal on the Chukchansi Country website.  Your help will be credited here and on the film.  If you like surprises, I can tell you this: I have several in store that will create an uproar that will be heard from Coast to Coast.  You see, my goal is to bring the Tribal People back to their homes to set things right.  It's not about the money for me, or the fame or the sacrifice.  It's about the difference between right and wrong, just and unjust, and how these concepts have mysteriously vanished at the hog's trough behind the casino cages at Indian facilities around the country.

You can make a difference for thousands of Native Americans.  You can make a difference for yourself.  Help me to win this fight.

Tribal Members Explore Options

At a meeting of many today to discuss the future course of the exiled/disenrolled Tribal members of the Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians, it became apparent that the issue of disenrollments are so far reaching into the neighboring Indian communities that the tone of the get together almost got off to the wrong start.

This meeting had been scheduled as part of an educational series to showcase a legislative piece that could effectively end the "genocide on paper" practice now being carried out by Tribes around the State and the Country.  The bill, authored by Laura Wass, Executive Director of the Many Lightning's Cultural Center and Bryan Galt, former Chukchansi member, doesn't give any preferential treatment to specific Tribal groups.  The bill instead focuses exclusively on fixing the problem at its root source by shutting off the Tribe's ability to remove its citizens at will and adding in severe penalties for doing so.

However, this was only one part of the agenda that appeared for the meeting and neither the training nor the meeting agenda listed the topics some of the participants wanted to talk about such as bringing lawsuits against the BIA or the Tribal Councils, so the meeting started to become derailed within the first fifteen minutes while Ms. Wass was attempting to outline the plan to "bring everyone home."

Kathy Lewis of Table Mountain Rancheria tried to make the point that any meeting of the people shouldn't be used as an exclusive means to further the goals of any one Tribal group, especially since the overall issue has affected everyone in the State. She tried to make the point that she and several others have protested and brought suits to federal court even without the full support of the rest of the Native peoples in this area, and that made it so much more difficult to accomplish, but her voice was lost in the crowd as many people started to speak their views on this.

After a couple of minutes of back and forth discussions with a couple of members in the audience, Mr. Ron Alec, former Chair of the Cold Springs Rancheria spoke up.  His tone was strong and commanded attention from the crowd.  He stated, "We have to come together to be strong, like a band of sticks. When they are bound together, you cannot break them. When they are individuals, anyone can break them. This is how we are now and we have to stop. Our focus should not be on the little distractions, it should be on [the goal]." He went on to add that the Indian people needed to come back to the Mother, to the Water and to begin to heal each other.  He offered a prayer in song to the Creator for our people and brought the meeting into order.  His actions touched many of the attendees.

However, the magic of his actions wore off fairly quickly as the meeting turned back to the various issues at hand.  The major points that were being kicked around the room were four of the five possible options available to any former PRCI member and to former members of some Tribes (depending on their situation).

1. CREATE A NEW TRIBE: Should the exiled/disenrolled members of PRCI or any Tribe attempt to create another Tribe? This was one of the highest priority items of the agenda but it didn't take into account several key issues such as the seven criteria for recognition, the tremendous waiting list to achieve recognition and the generation and presentation of hundreds of pages of supporting documents that would be required to show eligibility for recognition, including an extensive report from a certified historian/genealogist plus untold thousands of dollars for legal feesand travel expenses.  This option did not present any method for prevention of exile/disenrollments from occurring if this new entity happened to win its bid for federal recognition.  The bottom line is that even a newly recognized Tribe cannot prevent their political leadership from taking steps to eliminate political opponents or to reduce the number of members enrolled in the new Tribe if they so chose.  So what would the 1000's of hours of work that would go into the recognition process accomplish?
2. RECALL THE TRIBAL COUNCIL: Should the remaining existing members of the PRCI conduct a recall of the Tribal Council or force another petition to be circulated to amend the Constitution to reverse the damage that has been created by removal of so many of the membership? What steps would be necessary to accomplish this option and how many of the enrolled members would come forward to support this action?  If the Tribal Council was successfully removed from their posts, what then?  What would the new Council do to prevent further exile/disenrollments from occurring and how would they make sure that the next Council down the road didn't just pick up where this one left off?
3. FILE SUIT IN FEDERAL COURT: The suggestion was made that the currently enrolled Tribal members and the exiled Tribal members should utilize habeas corpus to sue the government and the Tribe for denying our people their rights as guaranteed to them in the US Constitution as Native Americans for removal from the Tribe and loss of their access to the Chukchansi lands. According to the proponents of this idea, it has already been tested in federal court and successfully won by the individuals who brought the suit forward. The flaw in this option is that it doesn't resolve the status of the exiled members of the many Tribes in California, therefore what would be the point?
4. SUPPORT THE CILA: Should the exiled/disenrolled members of the PRCI or any Tribe support the California Indian Legacy Act as the best alternative to any of the choices listed above? Well, the jury was out by the end of Ms. Wass' presentation and it didn't seem too moved by the time I completed the follow-up either.  What we were unable to communicate to the members was the simple fact that only Congress can change the core issue that has created the rampant and unchecked moves by Tribal Councils to exile/disenroll their citizenships, and that issue is removing the Tribe's absolute power to make the determination of who is truly qualified for the citizenship.  The Supreme Court and the Appellate Courts have ruled on a dozen cases that the Tribe has 100% autonomy on this issue and that the only federal body that can change this is the Congress.

With the only choices left to the exiled members lawsuits, takeovers, Congressional lobbying or simply allowing the Tribal governments to toss them aside for their own financial gain, it doesn't seem that any choice is a viable one that will help everyone.  But, when carefully analyzed by carefully reading the bill and reviewing the Court decisions on enrollment issues, the CILA does come out as the only option that will serve all California Indians and "bring them home" where they belong.  Is this going to be an easy fight to win?  I seriously doubt it.  The bill is doing for Native Americans what the Tribal Councils who represent those Native Americans no longer have the moral capacity to do for their own people-it makes it the law that all Natives have a home, and no one can take that from them.  Isn't that the real reason behind the Casino's being granted to Tribe's in the first place, to take care of their own?  Now, the time is here to make that happen, even if it means by legal force.

Senate Proposes Campaign Contribution Limits

On January 9th, 2007 Senator David Vitter, R-La., attempted to renew an amendment to define tribal governments as corporations under the Federal Election Campaign Act.

The amendment came up as Congress debated an ethics and lobbying reform package, S. 1 in the Senate, which is a priority of the new Democratic majority. Vitter's amendment - ''To modify the application of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to Indian tribes.''

In the past, this amendment has been defeated by extensive lobbying efforts from Tribal governments from across the country who claimed that limiting the campaign contributions of Tribes would limit their participation in the political process.

What the Tribes aren't disclosing is that many of their actions and activities are on the same standing as a corporation.  For instance, Tribal governments in California generally act as the heads of their government and the heads of their development corporations (casinos usually).  These casino operations generate tremendous profits for the Tribes which they pass on to their membership shareholders as 'per capita' payments, just like a corporation would pass on its profits to its stock holders.

The California Supreme Court recently ruled against the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla band of Indians over their donations into the California political system.  The Court felt that the Tribe was able to wield too much influence in the political system without enough checks and balances being applied to their contributions.

When looking back at the Abramoff scandal, it seems apparent that the Tribal governments have been using this same type of influence on the national level.  What is truly at stack here is not Tribal sovereignty but political integrity of a system that has come into dire need of a boost in its integrity in the past decade.

The bottom line is Tribe's want to be considered sovereign nations.  Sovereign nations are not allowed to contribute money to political campaigns in the United States.  If a Tribe wants to divert money from their corporate developments (casinos and whatnot), then they should be classified as a corporation for the purposes of limiting and reporting their donations.

Currently, Tribes are enjoying tremendous and liberal treatment under the law when you consider that they are virtually immune from every civil law on the books.  If the Tribes aren't subject to US laws, they shouldn't be able to participate in manipulating them either.  That's a right reserved for citizens of the United States who are American Indians, not the groups who would be Kings among the Natives.

Please support the Senator's drive to make these changes.  The Tribe's are going to throw the big bucks at preventing any changes in the status quo, so its up to the rest of us to make the Congress do what's right.

New Tribal Council Members for PRCI

In December, the election for three positions on the Tribal Council was held with ten candidates running for office, including one candidate who was disenrolled just days before the election.  Mary Martinez, a long standing member of the Tribe had been added to the absentee ballots for this election prior to her receiving her notice of disenrollment.  As a result, she received 60 votes on Election Day which were all disqualified.  These votes were simply thrown away.

The reason Mary Martinez was disenrolled was a violation of the Tribe's Constitution and enrollment ordinance. Mary qualified for membership as a Petitioner, which meant she could prove she was of Chukchansi Indian descent, and that she was signed up for membership by April 1990 which was determined to be the cutoff date for Petitioner's.  This was all that is required under the Chukchansi law for her to prove.  However, her disenrollment notice stated that the Tribe felt she should be a member of the Table Mountain Rancheria since she was born in that area, therefore she was to be disenrolled.

The election results weren't good overall for the incumbents Dixie Jackson, Morris Reid and Harold Hammond, Sr.  The top winners were Joe Alberta, Sam Lawhon and a tie occured between Morris Ried and Harold Hammond, Sr.  Sam Lawhon campaigned particularly hard on the enrollment issue making it his personal goal to make sure the audit continued.

At the Picayune Rancheria last week, a run-off election was held between Morris Reid, Vice Chairman and Harold Hammond, Sr., Member-at-Large of the Tribal Council for the Chukchansi Indians.  The winner was Harold Hammond, Sr.  Morris Reid had served almost continuously on the Tribal Council since 1989 with only a small break during one of the political upheavals that the Tribe went through during the early 1990's.

With the new Council comes no new hope for the "exiled" members of the Chukchansi people.  As the Council now stands, at least four of their members are strongly in favor of further disenrollments.  This is all that is necessary to create a quorum which will drive the wedges of distrust and hatred further into the hearts of the Chukchansi people.

To make matters more challenging, one of the current Tribal Council member's does not qualify under the three areas of membership and will most likely be removed from office within a matter of weeks once the new Council is seated.  This will give the Council an opportunity to appoint another Council Member who is sympathetic to their point-of-view, making it impossible for any opposition to occur from within the Council's ranks.

If the promise of this Council is brought to fruition, it will be very likely that the Tribe will be reduced to less than 100 members before the end of 2007, from its peak of 1,227 in 2003.  That's a loss of 89% of the entire membership base in less than fifteen months (August 2006 to December 2007).  What explanation can any Tribal Government offer for this kind of loss and destruction towards their own people?  Can any amount of money paid in per capita to the remaining members purchase their souls back from the Creator?  Only time and the Divine can be the judges of that question. 

Chukchansi Tribal Elder Fired From Post

In the last days before Christmas, a notice was handed down to one of the Chukchansi Tribal Elders working at the Tribal Offices of the Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians.  The notice was direct and to the point. 

Yvette Good was fired by Tribal Council Chairperson Dixie Jackson from her position as an Administrative Assistant in the Tribal office. The reason given for this action: Yvette was being accused of inappropriate language or behaviour during a disenrollment hearing for a member of the Walker family earlier in the month.

Yvette had completed extensive research into the allottment holdings of the Walker lineage over the past 18 months in anticipation of disenrollment hearings.  She had gathered dozens of pages of evidence to support the Walker family claim of lineal descendant of Chukchansi Indians who held "public lands as described by the 1887 General Allotment Act" which is one of the three criteria for membership in the Tribe.  The other two qualifications are: Distributee's-Chukchansi Indians and their lineal descendants who were terminated under the Rancheria Termination Act in 1961 and listed in the Federal Register as Distributees of the Picayune Rancheria; and Petitioners: Chukchansi Indians who were not Distributees of the Picayune Rancheria termination in 1961, not lineal descendants of Chukchansi Indians who held "public lands as described by the 1887 General Allotment Act."

Prior to the exchange of views with the Council, Yvette was disqualified to be called as a "witness" regarding the research she done on the Walker family allotment land because of the so-called "conflict of interest" due to her job at the tribal office. Yvette was previously removed from her Enrollment position due to the "possible perception of conflict of interest" regarding the up coming disenrollment hearings for part of her family and now was being disqualified as a witness altogether.

Yvette was given one option if she wished to testify: she would have to resign from her position at the Tribal office.  There are no stipulations of this type within the Enrollment Ordinance or the Constitution of the Tribe, nor within the Personnel Policies for the Tribe.  This action was uncalled for and provides outside viewers with a rare look into true Tribal politics at work.  If Yvette wanted to speak on behalf of her blood relative, she would have to sacrifice her income and family stability to do so.  Yvette is the sole support of four family members whom she could not ignore in her decision not to testify.

Instead, she spoke up. Obviously the words Yvette spoke, clearly, upset some of the council members. Yvette said, "The few words addressed to four council members, in essence, were, 'You, who is considered as family [Herb Punkin]; You, the so called Spiritual leader [Harold Hammond, Sr.]; You, who works in mental health [Joyce Burel]; You, part of your family has been disenrolled [Dixie Jackson]; how can you cut the Heart out of the people and tear it apart by signing your signatures to these disenrollment papers!?! How can you hurt the people like this? Don't you know what you are emotionally doing to them?'"

Chairperson Dixie Jackson is reported to have responded that Yvette was "totally out of line" and "inappropriate".  Council Treasurer Dora Jones was reported to state "she has made ONE comment TOO MANY!"  Chairperson Jackson then ordered, "ESCORT HER OUT OF HERE!"  Yvette was escorted out of the hearing.

Laura Wass became the spokesperson on behalf of the Walker family members who were being disenrolled that evening.  She was not suprised by the moves or the motives of the Council to prevent Yvette from speaking. She did challenge Chairperson Dixie Jackson's right to sit in judgement of the Walker files since she claims to be from the Walker linage.

After the hearing, theTribal Administration and members of the Council were questioned concerning this conflict, especially since Yvette wasn't allowed to be apart of the disenrollment hearings of the Walker family.  The apparent concensus was, "NO", the chair was NOT entitled to participate, nor should she have been allowed to either.

In her termination notice, she was also informed that she was being disqualified for her Christmas bonus that was being paid to all the Tribal Office employees. Her termination from her position would have been the grounds for a lawsuit if it had occurred in any other business or governmental agency.  The Tribe's personnel policy does not contain any language regarding a Tribal employee speaking out at a political function of the Tribe, nor does it state that doing so will result in the loss of the Tribal employee's job.

In Indian Country today, these are just one of many issues facing Tribal members and Native Americans subject to the whimsical interpretations of Tribal laws by Tribal Councils across the State and the Nation.  In writing this article, it is feasible that the Council could take further actions against Ms. Goode simply because they don't like anyone to know what they are doing.  The Tribe had no comment on this matter and has declined to return any messages as of this posting.

If Tribal governments are to be given more and more authority to govern the affairs of others, it must be a requirement that these governments are bound by laws and regulations that are consistent with the laws of the US Constitution so that the rights of the individual Native Americans are not trodden into dust by the corrupt and abusive systems in place today.

Another Comment For Monteau

The following commentary was sent to me after being rejected for publication by Indian Country Today. This editorial is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of One Little Indian Reports.

A "less personal" response to Harold Monteau:

Dear Attorney Monteau,

I read the propaganda piece you wrote for Indian Country Today in which you accuse the State of

Connecticut

of “genocide” for denying the recognition of two Indian Tribes.   As a lifelong

Connecticut

resident I feel I must disagree with your views.  The reality is that political corruption and bullying of poor Tribes by rich ones (which you happen to represent) caused the events you are supposedly appalled by.

The State is not trying to wipe out all signs of Indian life, only the tribes who are poor and have no casinos.  These tribes provided much of the “illegal” funds you describe that were used to squash the recognition of the other two tribes, one of which was recognized by the State long before the Pequots or Mohegans were recognized by the Federal government.  During your rein as the head of the NIGC, you helped the Pequot and Mohegan become two of the richest tribes in the nation.  Several news reports stated that the tribes could have lost an estimated $3 billion dollars if other tribes were allowed to operate casinos in CT, but that is only one part of the story.

What you also fail to mention is that the State Gaming Compact allows Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun to stop paying a portion of their slots revenue to the state if any other business are allowed to operate slots.  This explains the illegal actions of the state, not genocide.

An article in the Wall Street Journal, also published on Indianz.com stated “  Foxwood's operators felt vulnerable and in need of allies, so another resurrected tribe, the Mohegans, teamed up with another billionaire, South African Sol Kerzner. Swiftly approving their Mohegan Sun casino was Harold Monteau, the Clinton-appointed head of the National Indian Gaming Commission, who ignored opposition from agency staff and from both of his fellow commissioners.

Need we add that Mr. Monteau, a Chippewa-Cree, was eventually shooed from office by congressional critics (mostly Democrats)? His law firm, with the Mohegans as a major client, now serves as a landing place for other fixers on the wing."

You seem to be guilty of the same actions as the people you condemn.  The State of

CT

, the Pequot and Mohegan Tribes and Harold Monteau have all engaged in sleazy behavior for profit.  Before you decide to write another article, remember that people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Katie Beecher
www.CasinoWhistleblower.com

Seminoles get sued over Hard Rock purchase

In a new twist to Indian gaming, the Seminole Tribe of Florida has been accused by their business partner The Cordish Co. of "cutting a secret deal guaranteeing it would win control of the Hard Rock Cafe empire" by promising some of the HRC's top executive members new jobs in the newly formed organization of Seminole Hard Rock Entertainment.  Cordish also contents that the Tribe was working with HRC's current owner the Rank Group located in Great Britain to put the Tribe's bid in as the only bid.

The Cordish Co. has been partnered with the Tribe since 2003 and they negotiated the partnership agreement between HRC and the Tribe, plus they built the Tribe's Hard Rock Casino's in Tampa and Hollywood Florida. They have continued to played a major role in the Tribe's property development.  The company has an agreement with the Seminoles that gives them a percentage of the profits brought in from these properties.

Cordish's suit against the Seminoles and two other entities stems from their perceived exclusion from bidding on the HRC last year.  In 2005 the Cordish Co's attempted approached to the Rank Group to feel out the potential for purchasing the HRC was unsuccessful with Rank turning them away.

Then in 2006 the Rank Group announced that it would be accepting bids on the HRC and once again Cordish went to make a bid. And, again they claim that they were rebuffed by the Rank Group.  While this was transpiring, the president of HRC America Hamish Dodds is being accused of using his influence to convince Rank Group and Merrill Lynch to ignore the bid of Cordish and any others.

The Cordish Co. and and its affiliated contractor Power Plant are suing the Tribe for triple damages based upon a profit projection formula that predicts what the company should profit over the next ten years.

Adding to the suspicion of the transaction is the reports from financial analysts that stated Rank Group could have made at least $100 million more from the deal.  Also, Rank declined to allow Cordish to bid on the HRC during the open bidding process that occured last year.  Rank declined to make a response concerning these allegations.

The accusations and the lawsuits have brought the honeymoon to an end for the Seminoles and Cordish.  Since their partnership began in 2003 the duo have profited more than $1 Billion.  The Tribe and the company have a development contract that extends out 10 to 15 years on several different deals and are projected to earn Cordish $1.5 Billion in profit out of a projected $17 Billion in profit for the Tribe.

In 2005, the Tribe profited $500 million from their operations with $150 million going to Cordish Co. This is 30% of the profits which is the standard amount agreed upon by many Tribes across the country.

In June 2006 the Tribe filed a lawsuit to break its contractual agreements with Cordish.  The Tribe isn't accusing Cordish of wrongdoing in their lawsuit.  They stated that "the [casino] projects have become so financially successful that Cordish's share of the profits is SIMPLY TOO LARGE!."

The Tribe is claiming that they are protected from entering, EVEN KNOWINGLY, into contracts that give too much tribal money to outside entities.

In America, where accountability is a dirty concept, the Tribe has demonstrated theirs thoughts on the matter in a very clear message: We are sovereign, laws don't apply to us.

Everytime I read about abuses and flagrant flaunting of their legal status by a tribe, it makes me car sick.
Isn't it interesting that a Tribe is always willing to give a developer the moon when they need their expertise or the companies money to finance their casino empires, but the very nanosecond that the casino is doing fine on its own, the financier suddenly becomes dead weight to the Tribe?

This is not the first time that a Tribe has dumped the companies that brought them to a profit margin many corporations would be envious of. The same fallout happened at Chukchansi as well when the Tribal Council decided to through out the contract with Cascade Entertainment. This happened on the same day that the casino opened for business.  Of course, it took another six months to finish the break and it cost the Tribe $22 million to settle the contract break, but they have never thought twice about it.  What does this say about Native American when their business loyalties are so weak that they are virutally nonexistent.

I am going to predict that some federal judge sitting at his bench is going to somehow make matters worse for the business world by ruling tribes cannot be sued for any reason, even colusion and potentially racketeering, election rigging and who knows what else. These types of rulings only serve to empower the Tribes to become bad neighors and even worse, more empowered facsist in their governmental structures.

Doesn't anyone remember that this is America and we are all supposed to have the same rights and be subjected equally and impartially to the laws?  What is going on here!

2006 Challenged Sovereignty Some Say

From every corner of the United States, Tribal authorities are clamoring about the loss of sovereignty in one form or another.  In California on Dec. 21, the state Supreme Court filed an opinion that the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla lack immunity from lawsuit over noncompliance with state regulation of its political and electoral processes.  The Tribe was contesting the State of California's right to place regulations onto them when it came to donating money to political campaigns. 

''Tribal sovereign immunity from suit is not synonymous with tribal sovereignty. Rather, it is merely one attribute of the status of Indian tribes as domestic dependant [sic] nations. That tribal sovereign immunity included immunity from suit was a concept developed 'almost by accident' in Turner v. United States (1919) 248 U.S. 354. ... There, 'for the sake of argument,' ... the high court made a 'passing reference to immunity.'... The concept of tribal immunity was elevated from dictum to holding [in 1940] ... 'Later cases, albeit with little analysis, reiterated the doctrine.'''

And, in a case that revisited the legal status of race relations going all the way back to the Civil War, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on Dec. 19 that the Cherokee Tribe and its officials are not immune from lawsuit from a group of their members known as the Freedman.  The Tribe had attempted to change their Constitution without the input of these members and at the same time tried to write them off the membership rolls.

The issue stems from a treaty signed by the Cherokee at the end of the Civil War.  The treaty reads, in part: ''all freedmen who have been liberated ... as well as all free colored persons ... and their descendants, shall have all the rights of native Cherokees.''  Congress also has made clear that the Freedman are entitled to the same rights as any other Cherokee citizen.

Does the fact that a Tribe makes an effort to play outside the rules mean that they have lost some of their sovereign power?  In both of these cases, the Tribal governments acted as if they were not accountable to any authority other than their own.  However, their actions placed them squarely at odds with standing laws of another sovereign: the State or the federal governments.

In the case of the campaign donation issue, the State Supreme Court makes an important distinction when it notes that the Tribal Members are also U.S. Citizens and as such are subject to the laws of the United States, at least in this case.  Why would the Tribe believe that they are not subject to the campaign laws when everyone else is?

In the case of the Freedman, the Cherokee are doing them a disservice by trying to oust them from the Tribe with a new Constitution.  These folks and their descendants have been with the Tribe for 140+ years and deserve better treatment.  Once again, why would the Tribe believe that it isn't subject to the laws of not only the Tribe but of the United States?  Why would a Tribal member not be allowed to sue the Tribal government?  It is their government after all isn't it?

When a Tribe wants to be free from legal accountability from its own membership, from their state of residence and from the laws of the United States, the red flags should go up.  The Congress and the Courts have made sovereign immunity something that it should never have become in the first place by allowing Tribes to be placed above the law on many issues.  Now, they are reaping what they sow, Tribes are demanding more and more immunity from everything regardless of whether this immunity will harm many others in its wake.

If the U.S. government, specifically Congress doesn't take some actions to secure the rights of the members of a Tribe, secure the rights of the States that interact with the Tribes and finalize what exactly a Tribe is entitled to be immune against, there will be losses on all sides of the issue as the Courts once again try to straighten things out with no clear idea of where they will be heading in the future.