Waikiki Casino Advocates: An Unlikely Coincidence or In Cahoots?

Radcliffe & So-called Citizens Group Both Report 

Expenditures of $39,093.10

Is it mere coincidence or in cahoots that Citizens for a Better Way and Radcliffe & Associates both reported expenditures totaling $39,093.10 for the period ended April 30, 2011?

Background
John Radcliffe, a lobbyist for gambling interests and vice president with Capitol Consultants of Hawaii, re-established his defunct Radcliffe & Associates in February 2011.  In April 2011, he switched his representation of Marketing Resource Group (MRG) from Capitol Consultants of Hawaii to Radcliffe & Associates. MRG is the Lansing-based PR/Political firm representing Marian Ilitch and Michael J. Malik, Sr., founders of Detroit's MotorCity Casino. Those casino syndicators have pursued plans to develop a Waikiki casino. Radcliffe has represented MRG and its Detroit gambling clients for the better part of the last decade. Records reviewed by TVT, suggest that MRG was the only  Radcliffe & Associates client during the period ended April 30, 2011.  For the period ending April 30, 2011, Radcliffe & Associates reported "other disbursements" of $39,093.10 (see disclosure below).  Radcliffe did not disclose who received those payments nor has he disclosed where the nearly $40,000 he paid came from.

Coincidentally, or not, in April 2011, a so-called "citizens" advocacy group supporting plans by Radcliffe's clients to build a Waikiki casino appeared out of nowhere on the political landscape.  A woman with a questionable past, Liz Watanabe, was said to be the organizer of Citizens for a Better Way (CFBW).  However, it's clear that Radcliffe and his associates had their hand in the creation of the group.  Radcliffe has denied to reporters any role in organizing, managing or funding the organization. He clearly mislead Honolulu's press corps. Among other things, an associate at Radcliffe's Capitol Consultants lobbying firm established and owns the CFBW website.  In April, CFBW launched and reportedly paid for a sophisticated lobbying campaign, including robo-calls to voters, designed to urge Hawaii's legislators to approve the stand-alone Waikiki casino scheme promoted by Radcliffe's and his clients. The campaign was very similar to other political advertising campaigns launched by Marketing Resource Group in various communities where the Detroit casino syndicators have interests. Nothing in Watanabe's background suggests she has any experience or familiarity with such sophisticated paid political advertising efforts

And coincidentally, or not, CFWB also reports spending $39,093.10 during the period ended April 30, 2012 (see disclosure below).  It's not clear who received the payments from Watanabe/CFBW, or where she got the nearly $40,000 she reports spending.  What is clear is that Watanabe, who filed an individual $387,000 bankruptcy just weeks later, didn't use her own money.

Did Radcliffe provide Watanabe with nearly $40,000?  Did Watanabe pay Marketing Resource Group (MRG) or its usual vendors to carry out the political advertising campaign?  Where did Radcliffe & Associates come by funds it spent?  Since Marketing Resource Group is seemingly the only Radcliffe & Associates client, it would make sense that the funds expended by Radcliffe came from MRG.  However, MRG only disclosed paying Radcliffe $11,890.21 during the period ended April 30, 2011?

You be the judge: was it a coincidence that both Radcliffe & Associates and Citizens for a Better Way both reported spending exactly $39,093.10 or are John Radcliffe/Marketing Resource group in cahoots with Liz Watanabe?  If you believe they are in cahoots, then you should urge the Hawaii Ethics Commission and/or Hawaii's Attorney General to look into the matter because clearly they've participated in a conspiracy.

Official Disclosure Filings
Radcliffe Assoc Lobbying Expenses - Period Ended 2011.04.30

CFBW Lobbying Expenditures - Period Ended 2011.04.30

Long Island Citizens Opposed to Detroiters' Belmont Casino Plans will meet Thursday, Feb. 2

A group organized to stop plans by Detroiters to use the Shinnecock Indian Nation to develop a casino complex at the famed Belmont Racetrack on Long Island will hold a community meeting on Thursday, Feb. 2, 2012 at 5:30PM, Floral Park Recreation Center, 124 Stewart Street, Floral Park, New York. Information about the group is available at StopTheBelmontCasino.org or on Facebook at "Stop the Belmont Casino."

Mayor Heralds Off-Reservation Casino Schemes in Lansing; Then Uses Racial Slurs to Attack Native American Opponents

Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero recently announced a plan to bring a $245 million tribal casino to downtown Lansing. The casino would be adjacent to the Lansing Center near Cedar Street and Michigan Avenue. However, there's nothing to suggest that the Sault Ste Marie tribe of Chippewa Indians has the necessary state and federal approvals to build any off-reservations casino.

In fact, the former chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission has recently opined such would be illegal under current guidelines.

Bernero subsequently came under fire for what two Michigan tribes described as a string of anti-Indian racial slurs at a fund-raising speech last week, denied Monday that he directed his remarks toward Americans Indians, but apologized “to any and all who were offended by my choice of words.”

click arrow below to play video here
 

Candidate for San Bernardino County Supervisor comments on Barstow Casinos

From the Mojave Free Press...

James Ramos, candidate for San Bernardino County 3rd District Supervisor, on proposals for casinos in Barstow, CA. He is the former chairman of the San Manuel Band of Serrano Mission Indians

click arrow below to play here

Hawaii Gambling Advocates Push for Slots at Honolulu Convention Center

Hawaii gaming supporter wants to place slot machines at Honolulu convention center
1.25.2012

By Howard Stutz

If it’s January, then it’s time for another casino gaming proposal to surface in Hawaii.

Gambling proponents believe Honolulu’s 15-year-old convention center would be the perfect location for slot machine casino. Revenues from the games would help pay for a renovation to the facility.

Randy Tanaka, the assistant general manager of the convention center told KITV News, Honolulu’s ABC affiliate, that he was not aware anyone was pushing gaming proposals for the center.

“It’s news to me,” said Tanaka.

Hawaii is one just two states, along with Utah, that does not have any form of legalized gaming.

The Hawaii Tourism Authority said it has not taken a position on gambling, but longtime gambling supporter Joe Souki told the TV station the convention center is under consideration.

“There is some possibility we could put it there and start it off quickly,” said the Maui lawmaker.

Souki has introduced a bill for a stand-alone entertainment center and casino. It calls for a single casino, centrally located in Waikiki and not attached to any hotel.

Other bills in the Hawaii Legislature would allow Internet gambling, slot machines in resort areas and at the Honolulu International Airport.

In the past gaming legalization bills have faced stiff opposition from opponents.

Blogger's Note: Gambling lobbyist John Radcliffe and his clients Detroit gambling industry clients have previously floated the idea of converting some or all of the existing Convention Center space into a gambling and entertainment venue.  The Detroit gambling interests have some experience converting existing space into gambling use and they have experience working with publicly owned arenas and convention centers.

Editorial: Lansing casino would be a lousy bet for Michigan

EDITORIAL

By Editors, Detroit Free Press

As only the most recent arrivals in the long line of players looking for a piece of Michigan's casino gambling action, Lansing and Mayor Virg Bernero should know better.

Artist's Rendering: Proposed Kewadin Lansing Casino

Michigan voters made it quite clear (58%-42%) in 2004 that they did not want more gambling in the state unless any expansion was subject to a statewide vote. Ever since, casino dreamers have tried to build upon the constitutional amendment's only exemption, which allows tribal gambling over which the state has virtually no control anyway.

But tribal casinos are restricted to their own reservations. Every tribe that has tried to work around that restriction to date has come up empty-handed. The most recent attempt, a casino in Vanderbilt that the Bay Mills tribe opened in 2010, shut down after a federal court ruled against it. Earlier attempts included asking Congress to sign off on tribal casinos in Port Huron and Romulus, an effort that fell short.

Now Bernero is entering the same fray with the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians at his side. They will either have to go to Congress or hope that the Bay Mills tribe eventually wins its court case in further hearings and sets a new precedent for defining reservation land. But neither the federal courts nor Congress should fall for the dubious logic involved.

Unless a casino can become a major destination for out-of-state travelers, it largely churns local money and removes much of it from the economy. Casinos rank as economic development tools only as part of a mix of entertainment options or, if properly promoted, as a lure for visitors. If Michigan were to develop a statewide casino strategy, Port Huron would probably better fit the development bill as the only border town without a casino.

Lansing residents -- and Michigan State students -- are already within an hour's drive of two of Michigan's 22 Indian casinos. They are hardly out of range of Detroit's casinos, either.

Presumably Bernero and the Sault tribe have marketing studies to back up their estimates of $250 million in annual revenue, with at least $5 million returned directly to the city. (By way of comparison, Detroit's casinos were estimated to have revenues of $1.4 billion in 2011 -- a figure they may never match again if a Toledo casino opens in April, as planned.) Certainly Lansing, like virtually every city in Michigan, would delight in the projected 1,500 new jobs.

But if Lansing succeeds, it will create a precedent not just for itself but for every other city that thinks a casino is the answer to its prayers. Michigan's voters have already said they don't want to go that route -- and praying for salvation via a casino is only a reminder of how desperate people become in tough economic times.

Related Links:

• Lansing casino builders face potential suit aimed at shutting project down
• Lansing casino effort draws opposition
• Michigan Indian tribe wants to halt plans for downtown Lansing Indian casino
• Editorial: Lansing casino would be a lousy bet for Michigan
• Lansing casino plan faces a fight from 2 Detroit casinos, outstate tribes
• Lansing casino builders face potential suit aimed at shutting project down
• Lansing casino effort draws opposition
• Letter from Phil Hogen, former NIGC chair, opposing Lansing casino

Blogger’s NOTE:  Odd that owners of Detroit’s MGM Grand Casino and Greektown Casino have expressed opposition to plans for a Lansing casino while Marian Ilitch, owner of Detroit’s MotorCity Casino, has remained silent?  Not really, since Ilitch and her family’s partner Michael J. Malik, Sr., have pursued plans for casinos in Port Huron and elsewhere for more than 20 years.  In fact, their plans for a Port Huron casino might be tied to plans by the Sault tribe proposal for Lansing.

But 54% Think Gambling in Hawaii Would Have Overall Negative Impact

Survey shows support for casino

1.20.2012

By Derrick DePledge

Three-quarters of people in a new survey say they would visit an entertainment center in Waikiki that had showrooms, movie theaters and a casino.

The Waikiki Improvement Association paid for the survey to measure local perceptions about the state's primary tourism destination. The results will likely be used to reinforce arguments by gaming interests that the state should legalize gambling.

Hawaii and Utah are the only two states without some form of gambling. Several proposals, including a Waikiki casino, have been floated at the Legislature without success.

The survey, conducted among 1,000 people statewide by SMS Research & Marketing Services, found that 76 percent would be very or somewhat likely to visit an entertainment center with a casino developed in Waikiki. The survey was taken by telephone between Nov. 15 and Dec. 22. The margin of error was 3.1 percentage points...

People who responded to the survey were divided about the merits of legalizing gambling. Fifty-eight percent said they believe gambling would be positive for the state's economy. But 54 percent think gambling would have a negative impact overall.

Many people who favor a casino are lifelong residents, according to the survey, while many opposed have lived in the islands for less than five years.

Egged said the Waikiki Improvement Association has not taken a position on gambling and is not advocating any specific casino development project.

State House and Senate leaders have said that they expect gambling bills to be debated but doubt legislation to legalize gambling would pass this session.

"There's enough to do in Waikiki without a casino," said state Senate Majority Leader Brickwood Galuteria (D, Downtown-Waikiki). "But the question of gaming is not going to go away."

State Rep. Tom Brower (D, Waikiki-Ala Moana), chairman of the House Tourism Committee, said lawmakers should be open to a discussion about a Waikiki casino. He said he has visited well-executed casinos in Singapore, Macau and the Philippines.

"In order to compete, I think we have to consider gambling," he said. (Complete Story)

Opinion: New York Betting Too Much on Gambling

Suffolk Closeup: Betting on a casino

1.21.2012

By Karl Grossman 

The current issue of New York magazine speaks of Governor Andrew Cuomo seeking “gambling everywhere.” That’s a bit of an exaggeration. In his recent State of the State speech, Mr. Cuomo called for a change in the state constitution to allow for non-Indian, off-reservation casinos in New York, which currently prohibits them. It’s not “gambling everywhere” but the governor does want a major expansion of legalized gambling.

“Cuomo Bets On A Casino” was the headline in Newsday. It referred specifically to Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens as a place where the governor wants to see a big casino.

A casino there would be a problem for the Shinnecock Indian Nation, which wants to build a casino at nearby Belmont Park in Elmont. Newsday quoted State Senator Jack Martins of Mineola as saying a casino at Aqueduct would “effectively kill” plans for a Shinnecock casino at Belmont. A broader concern is whether or not the legalized gambling market is being saturated by casinos opening all over the nation, -Native American and non-Indian.

Mr. Cuomo is betting on a big financial boost for New York State through a major expansion of legalized gambling here but the market has its limits.

The day of Mr. Cuomo’s State of the State speech, the New York Times reported on the “hopes of reviving Atlantic City.” Gambling revenue was down in Atlantic City, the Times reported, and there’s hope that a new $2.4 billion resort and casino, being built with state financial help, will “usher in a new era for Atlantic City.”

“Atlantic City has been in decline since 2006,” the Times reported, “when Pennsylvania opened its first casino, beginning a slow bleed of gamblers that have never returned. With rival casinos opening in Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland and upstate New York, there is little Atlantic City can do to stop the loss …”

This spread of gambling has not only hurt Atlantic City but Las Vegas, too, and severely. Factor in the impact of the recession on gambling and it would seem the industry is in trouble. So how can New York State figure on a big win?

But that’s the dream -or illusion-, not only in New York but other areas of the nation. A Times story last month reported on the Florida Legislature considering three “Las Vegas-style casino resorts” in south Florida to offset the economic downturn following the burst of Florida’s big real estate bubble.

Meanwhile, what about gambling as a way for Indian tribes to break out of centuries of economic hard times? That was the basis of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, the federal law that set up a system under which Native Americans were given the go-ahead -and structure- to develop gambling.

It was a kind of long-delayed reparation for Native Americans for the loss of their homeland and culture and it has made some tribes-, including several in Connecticut-, super-wealthy.

These days, if you take a drive on the stretch of New Mexico between Albuquerque and Santa Fe, you’ll come upon a gambling casino every few miles, in front of each Indian pueblo, with few cars in their parking lots. And in recent years, with non-Indians being allowed to get into gambling elsewhere, it’s not just intra-Indian competition that’s diluting the market.

Although legalized gambling had to come, it’s a problematic activity for society. There are the high-rollers at casinos in Las Vegas and Atlantic City and Connecticut. My impression of the bulk of bettors, however, is that they are desperate people who mostly play the one-armed bandits, dumping in their quarters, hoping for a bonanza.

For society to benefit by drawing money from legalized gambling- as it cannot from illegal gambling- is one thing. But to promote it, subsidize it and depend on it is another.

Then there’s the over-expansion, and the consequent cost to Native Americans including the Shinnecocks, who have had it tough economically for centuries and only recently achieved federal tribal recognition. They had been hoping for some payback, finally. Now the house may be rigging the game against them.

Opponents of Detroiters' Belmont Casino Plans Launch Website

A Long Island citizens group opposing plans by Detroiters Marian Ilitch and Michael J. Malik, Sr., to build a casino complex in partnership with the Shinnecock Indian Nation at the famed Belmont Racetrack have organized as "Stop the Belmont Casino" and established a website, StopTheBelmontCasino.com.

StopTheBelmontCasino.com

The citizens' group has also created a facebook page.

Shinnecock Coalition for Answers Wants Class-II Gaming now on Southampton Reservation; Independent Counsel Examining Pacts with Gateway Casino Resorts

Shinnecock pushes for smaller-scale gaming

12.21.2011

By Mark Harrington

Now that factions of the Shinnecock Indian Nation voted to block approval of gaming pacts with the tribe's Detroit backers, some on the Southampton reservation are making the strongest push yet to begin class-II gaming such as bingo.

The Shinnecocks' formal efforts in gaming thus far have focused on large-scale casinos with table games such as blackjack and poker -- casinos that require a state compact and layers of federal approval. Those ambitions are still years away.

But small-scale class-II gaming efforts such as bingo halls could take place on the reservation now, one former tribal leader said. He's one of many members urging Shinnecock leaders to use the tribe's federally recognized status to reconsider low-level gaming immediately.

"It's ridiculous that we would sit and wait another three to five years for gaming to come, when we could be doing small-scale gaming now," said Lance Gumbs, a former tribal trustee who is part of a group called the Shinnecock Coalition for Answers that last week championed the vote to block pacts with Gateway Casino Resorts.

Gumbs said he envisions a simple, even temporary structure erected on the tribal Powwow grounds in the center of the reservation for a bingo parlor. "We're talking about what the church is doing down the street," he said.

But Randy King, chairman of the tribal trustees, the Shinnecock's official government, said the tribe would continue on its course for larger-scale, class-III gaming.

"The current plan is to discuss alternative locations west of the reservation in more suitable areas," he said of the tribe's plans for casinos at Belmont Park and in Yaphank, among others. "We hope to discuss all of this with the governor's office shortly."

Tribal leaders have worked out arrangements with local politicians to keep gaming west of County Road 105 near Westhampton, with the promise of political support. Rep. Tim Bishop (D-Southampton) is among those party to the agreement.

"Congressman Bishop calls on the Shinnecock Nation to consult with the Southampton Town Board and other local government entities if they reach the decision as a tribe to pursue a Class II gaming facility such as a bingo hall on the reservation," said Bishop spokesman Oliver Longwell.

Eagerness to start some sort of gaming has reached such a level that the tribe was forced to issue a cease and desist letter to shop owners who attempted to open Internet gaming cafes on the reservation last month, several sources close to the tribe said.

On a higher level, the push for a tribal bingo parlor is a sign of impatience with the pace of economic progress on the cash-strapped reservation, and a push for broader participation in decision making.

On Monday night, the Shinnecock tribal council, an advisory body which has retained a private law firm to review the contracts with Gateway Casino Resorts that were voted down last week, met to discuss concerns about that vote.

Among them: that 1,100 Shinnecock members who do not live on the reservation were prevented from voting; only 36 hours' notice was given before the vote; and what the long-term implications of the vote itself were, according to a person who attended.

King said the trustees won't discuss or negotiate such internal tribal matters in the media.

Beverly Jensen, a spokeswoman for the tribe, said she believed last week's vote and the need for future discussions were part of the tribe's evolution now that federal recognition is in place.

"It's about the birth of a nation, for real," she said.

Hawaii Tax Foundation Prez Poses Questions about Legalized Gambling in Hawaii

Can Legalized Gaming Fill Hawaii's Budget Hole
12.18.2011

By Lowell Kalapa
President, Tax Foundation of Hawaii

At its most recent meeting, the State Council on Revenues downgraded its outlook for Hawaii’s economy by dropping its forecast of economic growth from 6.7% to 5.2% for the current fiscal year.

Although the overall growth rate in general fund tax revenues was pegged at 14.5%, 4.3 points are attributable to the catch up of the delay in state income tax refunds from two years ago and 5 points are attributed to the changes in state tax laws that are expected to produce about $200 million less in new revenues than the legislature had counted on when drawing up its financial plan for the fiscal biennium.

These latter tax law changes are good only for the current and next fiscal year and, therefore, added revenues from that source will disappear in fiscal year 2014.

It should also be noted that the Council’s adoption of the added revenues from tax law changes is substantially less than what the legislature had assumed when they adopted those changes. The difference amounts to approximately $100 million for each of the two fiscal years. Therefore, even without any spending restrictions or other adjustments to the recently approved biennium budget, the state-spending plan will be under water by almost $200 million over the fiscal biennium.

Given that situation, lawmakers will be searching for additional revenues in order to avoid making additional reductions in spending. The will to adopt additional tax increases will be absent given the fact that all legislators will be up for reelection in 2012 as a result of the decennial reapportionment of the legislative districts.

Thus, many observers believe that the legislature will actually turn its attention to a number of gaming bills that were introduced during the 2011 session and to some extent received considerable attention. There is no doubt that gaming might be looked upon as a potential resource to fill in the budget gap.

On the other side, again, is the fact that next year is an election year and the public is deeply divided on the issue of gaming, especially in the House where each representative has a smaller constituency in his or her district and where a few votes one way or the other could win or lose the election. In addition, as with all levels of government pushing to downsize payrolls, the additional monitoring and regulation of gaming activities may work against adoption of the activity if it means added personnel costs for the public sector even though there may be additional revenues from gaming.

Then there are those who are concerned about the potential social problems that gaming in Hawaii would create. We all chuckle every time someone mentions going to “Vegas” or enumerates the number of trips made to that ninth Hawaiian Island. It is a matter of fact that Hawaii people like to gamble and at least the time and expense of traveling to Las Vegas stands as a barrier to those who financially cannot swing the trip and probably can’t afford to lose the money.

The question that lawmakers and taxpayers need to ask is whether or not the additional revenues lawmakers believe will come from adding gaming to the list of revenue resources will outweigh the additional costs that will come with gaming. While gaming, per se, is not a tax, it has tax implications from the standpoint that it will require additional public programs - those that are needed to operate the gaming activities including the legal enforcement and those that will be needed to address the social and financial implications.

Another consideration is the amount of participation that will be needed to make a gaming industry a lucrative source of public revenue. Unlike its counterparts on the mainland which allow gaming, Hawaii is not contiguous with other jurisdictions where residents from other states or counties can cross state lines to participate in the gaming activity of another state or county. Think of it in the reverse of Hawaii residents traveling to Las Vegas. Will the cost, time and distance be attractive enough to gamble in Hawaii?

Finally, the adoption of any form of gaming in Hawaii may open the door to forms other than what may be authorized by the legislature because of the Hawaiian sovereignty issue giving rise to those other forms of gaming on native Hawaiian enclaves such as Hawaiian Homes Lands.

It's Carcieri not Malik that poses Bigger Problems for the Shinnecock Nation

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) only allows for gaming on Indian lands held in trust by the U.S. Secretary of Interior. The Shinnecock Indian Nation currently has no land in trust with the Secretary. The lands designated as the Shinnecock Indian Nation reservation on Long Island near Southampton, New York, are not held in trust with the Secretary of Interior. Today, the Shinnecock Nation has no land eligible for Indian Gaming under IGRA -- not even the land designated as the Nation's Long Island reservation.

This presents big, perhaps insurmountable hurdles for the Shinnecock Nation and its Detroit casino backers.

That the Shinnecock Nation would be eligible to have land taken into trust for the purpose of developing a casino, or for any other purpose, appears unlikely at this time.

It was revealed this week that developers behind the Shinnecock Indian Nation's casino schemes had planned to introduce "Mandatory Acquisition" legislation in Congress next year. This suggests tribal leaders and their casino partners now realize they have bigger problems relative to the U.S. Supreme Court's Carcieri decision.  And in fact, it appears Shinnecock leaders have abandoned the attempt by other tribes to advance a so-called Carcieri Fix in Congress.

SCOTUS: Carcieri v. Salazar

In Carcieri, the U.S. Supreme Court said that the Secretary can’t take land into trust for tribes that weren’t “under federal jurisdiction as of 1934.” This has been read to mean that only tribes recognized in 1934 can have land taken into trust. This doesn’t necessarily mean that a tribe has to be on the list of recognized tribes in 1934, but must at least have had a relationship with the federal government as a tribal entity as of 1934.

The Shinnecock Nation's Carcieri problems are made worse by Interior Department acknowledgments published in 2010.

Interior, in granting federal recognition to the Shinnecock in 2010, made several findings that pose Carcieri problems for the Shinnecock. Most relevant, the Interior Department found that it never had a pre-existing relationship with the Shinnecock prior to their recent federal acknowledgment. The Final Determination for Federal Recognition of the Tribe published 6.18.2010 states:

The Department “finds that evidence in the record does not show that the Federal Government established, by its actions, a relationship between the United States and the petitioner [Shinnecock Tribe] as an Indian tribe at any time… .” “…the Department was aware of the Shinnecock of Long Island and held internal discussions as to whether the Department should establish a Federal relationship with them, but the Department took no action to do so.” “The Federal Government explicitly rejected the opportunity to establish a relationship with the petitioner [Shinnecock], sometimes stating that the petitioner [Shinnecock] was the State of New York’s responsibility.”

Clearly the Interior Department found that it had no previous relationship with the Shinnecock Indians, and thought that they were New York’s responsibility. The Shinnecock viewed this as a problem and offered additional evidence to try and show a relationship but the Interior Department rejected that evidence as showing a previously existing relationship. Thus, the Shinnecock wouldn’t have been “under federal jurisdiction” in 1934. So, Carcieri restrictions apply to the Shinnecock Nation.

Under current federal law the Shinnecock are not eligible for federal trust land, thus unable to open an IGRA casino.

That the Shinnecock would be ineligible to have any lands taken into trust by the U.S. Secretary of Interior, for gaming purposes or otherwise, seems only likely if Congress enacts new legislation specifically allowing such -- that remains highly unlikely.

Throughout the last decade the casino syndicators behind the Shinnecock schemes attempted numerous times -- both forthright and sneaky -- to have Congress enact special legislation that would have allowed the Shinnecock or the casino syndicator's other tribal partners to establish casinos.

Despite spending hundreds of millions on lobbying and campaign contributions, the Detroit casino syndicators failed, repeatedly. The only winners were the lawyers, lobbyists and politicians who willingly took millions from the perennial cockeyed optimist who managed the syndicate -- and apparently the handful of tribal leaders on his payroll. The losers remain the naive tribes at-large and economically depressed communities that pin their hopes for the future on the anticipated riches of gaming hopelessly dangled before them, like a carrot to a hungry horse.

See also:

• To Bypass Carcieri and Other Off-Reservation Casino Hurdles, Detroiters Plan Introduction of "Mandatory Acquisition Legislation" in Congress
• Obama repeats support for 'Carcieri fix' on Indian land rights | The Providence Journal
• What They Won't Tell You: Insights on Gateway Casino Resorts, its Detroit Organizers and Their Plans for Shinnecock Casinos

Statement by the Trustees of the Shinnecock Nation Following Thursday's Vote Denying them Authority to Contract with Detroit Casino Syndicator

As the elected leaders of the Shinnecock Indian Nation, we understand and accept the vote of our people on Thursday. While some may want to put their own spin on this vote, the elected leadership of the Shinnecock Indian Nation remains committed to the eight-year partnership we have had with Gateway and remains committed to pursuing economic opportunities for our people, including off-reservation gaming on Long Island. We have made tremendous strides in these last eight years and will not turn back now.

We hear clearly that we must do a better job of explaining and clarifying these agreements for our people, while also remaining open to adjustments to address legitimate concerns. We will work with our independent experts to ensure our people get accurate information about the terms, which were carefully negotiated for more than a year. We will not allow false and misleading information, peddled by negative forces, to stop the Shinnecock Indian Nation from getting the economic opportunities we have long been denied.

Shinnecock Indian Nation Tribal Board of Trustees Chairman Randy King, Trustee Gerrod T. Smith and Trustee Frederick C. Bess on the Shinnecock Nation Tribal Vote December 15th

According to the Daily News, former Shinnecock Nation Trustee Lance R. Gumbs had this to say following Thursday's vote:

"Gateway [Michael Malik and Marian Ilitch] needs to understand that they are not going to control our tribe," said Lance Gumbs, a former tribal trustee who voted against the pact.

Reader Explains Why Shinnecock Won't Build a Casino at Belmont Park Race Track

from "Comments" responding to the 12.14.2011 Southampton Press article titled "Discord Erupts Over Shinnecock Vote On Casino Partner's Future:"

By Walt

There is no way the Shinnecock will get a casino at Belmont Park. It doesn't matter what any local officials say; only New York State can permit this to happen. Right now, Resorts World New York City, located at Aqueduct, is regulated by New York State. The agreement with them gives a 30 mile exclusivity clause. I believe Belmont Park is only a few miles from Aqueduct. Secondly, facilities like Resorts World regulated by the state give almost double the profits back to the state than any of the Native American casinos. The state is also moving to make table games legal, and the facility at Aqueduct will be one of the first ones to get table games. Looks like the Shinnecock will have to settle for a location in Suffolk County!

This group is asking for double the management fees from what they would get at other casinos. If they are like the Mohawk casino near the border with Canada, the natives won't be getting the job they expect and will have a token say in how things are run. It is evident that tribal trustees are profiting by having salaries paid to them over the past ten years, salaries for what? For selling out the interests of their tribal members for their own personal interest. These tribal leaders should be in jail! Tribal members would be smart to vote no and kill this agreement, and secondly to elect a new tribal council who has your interests at heart!

It is evident

Did the Honolulu Star-Advertiser Purge Comments Exposing Pro-Gambling Front Group? Why Didn't Seasoned Political Reporter Investigate Further?

On July 24, 2011, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser ran a story entitled "Entrepreneurs get rolling on Waikiki casino idea," by Richard Borreca whose pieces on politics appear in the Star-Advertiser on Sundays, Tuesdays and Fridays.

Borreca wrote on the overnight emergence of the so-called "Citizens for a Better Way," a pro-gambling advocacy group for which Liz Hata Watanabe was recruited as spokesperson.

The Hawaii Free Press reports that the following was among comments originally attached to the article:

“Borreca stays in the shallow end of the pool once again. Major players? Liz is consistent: 100% track record of failure. With all of biographical info he puffed her up with, why omit an important fact -- her bankruptcy filing in June, 2011, which details her train wrecks and the $300,000 plus she stiffed her creditors for. She is a success only at self-promotion which you and others facilitate at the expense of reality. Coelho was an advisor to Mufi. More relevant was that he was the managing director for less than a year and eased over to Director of Customer Service. After three years with Salem, he is soon to be retired and moving to the Mainland. Whoever hires Radcliffe, though, gets something for the money -- newspaper space even if the stories are fantasies.”

Now consider the power of press censorship. The article as it currently appears at staradvertiser.com has been purged of that comment and any others that may have been left originally.

Is it as the writer of the comment above suggests, that Borreca lacks skills as a true investigative political reporter?  Or that Borreca or perhaps editors at the Star-Advertiser are supportive of legalized gambling?  Could it be that Borreca is a friend of lobbyist John Radcliffe?  Or that Radcliffe consistently makes himself available to Borreca?

That Borreca failed to consider how it was that Radcliffe would claim he wasn't behind Citizens for a Better Way (CFBW) and yet he was answering questions about the organization and its activities is alarming.

That the Star-Advertiser's seasoned political reporter failed to recognize it would take someone with experience and a lot more true sophistication than the likes of Hata-Watanabe to pull of the comprehensive political advertising campaign sponsored by CFBW is disturbing.  That he failed to push either Watanabe or Radcliffe on the question of who was financing their effort or investigate such further -- especially in light of Watanabe's $387,000 bankruptcy and lack of political fundraising skills.

That he never mentioned Hata-Watanabe's troubles with the Honolulu Liquor Control Commission which are well documented in the public record. That he wasn't aware of or failed to report on Watanabe's one season-wonder TV show "Hawaii's Big Deal Poker Tournament" or probe who bankrolled that venture.

Or that Hata-Watanabe's husband is a veteran officer with the Honolulu Police Department which hands down is opposed to the legalization of gambling in Hawaii. And specifically has opposed the stand-alone Waikiki casino that Watanabe and her benefactors are so eager to see approved. (See testimony by HPD Captain Jerry Inouye opposing HB 781).

Shinnecock Vote Down gaming pact with Gateway Casino Resorts, reject longtime investors Michael Malik & Marian Ilitch

Shinnecock Tribe votes down gaming pact

12.15.2011

By Mark Harrington

The Shinnecock Indian Nation Thursday voted down a gaming pact with partner Gateway Casino Resorts, a rejection of a longtime backer that has already invested millions of dollars and seven years' work in the project.

"The nation has spoken, by consensus, as it has for thousands of years, and voted today not to finalize gaming agreements with Gateway Casino Resorts," tribal trustees said in a statement Thursday night after the contentious vote.

Of the 274 votes cast, 153 opposed the pact and 121 voted for it. There are some 1,400 Shinnecock members, most of whom do not live on the reservation and were not eligible to vote.

"Gateway needs to understand that they are not going to control our tribe," said Lance Gumbs, a former tribal trustee who voted against the pact.

It's unclear whether the tribe will attempt to negotiate more favorable terms or if the two groups will go their separate ways. A spokeswoman wasn't immediately available. Beverly Jensen, a tribe spokeswoman, declined any further comment.

The Detroit company has financed the tribe's federal recognition efforts in exchange for a casino partnership.

The contracts gave the right to make vital casino decisions on the tribe's behalf to a gaming authority, and stipulate tribal "noninterference" in dealings on the projects.

Only tribal members who are 21 years or older and have lived on the reservation for the past six months were eligible to vote, said Janine Tinsley-Roe, who is on the Shinnecock tribal roll but was prevented from voting because she doesn't live there. Eligible voters were said to number a few hundred members.

Opponents of the contracts feared the tribe would giving away hard-won rights to sovereign immunity and would be locked into a financial agreement they felt was too generous to Gateway. A law firm hired by the tribal council expressed reservations with elements of the non-interference contract.

Much is at stake. The Shinnecock hope to open at least two class III casinos on Long Island, one at Belmont Park, the other in Suffolk, possibly at a former Estee Lauder warehouse in Yaphank .

The agreement with Gateway stipulates the backer will help the tribe acquire the Stony Brook-Southampton campus, and gives the company a 28 percent take of monthly casino revenue.

Recently disclosed gaming documents show conceptual drawings of a casino at Belmont and on Governors Island in Upper New York Bay, though the latter plan is said to be inactive.

Artist's Renderings of Detroiters' Planned Shinnecock Casino Development at Belmont Race Track

Although Detroit casino syndicator Michael J. Malik, Sr., had previous forbid Long Island reporters from printing previously publicly displayed copies of artist's renderings produced for his proposed Shinnecock/Gateway Casino Resorts Gambling Hall at the Belmont Race Track, TVT has received these two renderings among other background materials.

Artist's Rendering: Belmont Hotel & Entertainment Entrance 

proposed by Gateway Casino Resorts with Shinnecock Nation

Artist's Rendering: Belmont Arena Plaza and Monorail proposed 

by Gateway Casino Resorts with Shinnecock Nation

Click on the various "labels" below to discover related stories, documents and resources.

Once Again Michael Malik is at Center of Intra-Tribal Controversy; War Brews on Shinnecock Reservation over Gateway Casino Resorts Contract

Discord Erupts Over Shinnecock Vote On Casino Partner's Future

12.14.2011

by Mike Wright

The Shinnecock Indian Nation is set to hold a pivotal vote today, December 15, on whether the tribe will continue its business relationship with Gateway Casino Resorts, the Detroit-based casino developers that have pumped millions of dollars in legal fees and salaries into the tribe over the last eight years in an effort to build a Shinnecock gaming facility.

But in the run-up to the vote, which could approve or reject a new contract with Gateway that was drafted by the tribe’s Gaming Authority, discord has arisen among tribal members over the involvement of Gateway principal Michael J. Malik and the future path of the casino effort in general. The Tribal Council has called for the vote to be canceled while it seeks an independent legal review of the new Gateway contract.

In what was supposed to be a confidential letter to tribal members this week, the Tribal Trustees called for the vote and urged the tribe to ratify the new contract. The letter is dated December 12, just four days before the vote was to be held—a period of time members of the Tribal Council apparently felt was not long enough for tribal members to familiarize themselves with the details of the 12-page contract.

“The Tribal Council is attempting to do its fiduciary responsibility of reviewing the documents with a third-party, unbiased legal council to advise the Nation and tribal leadership before this vote is to be taken,” a statement issued by the Tribal Council on Wednesday morning said. “We are disappointed with the Board of Trustees for forcing this time line and vote on the community before this evaluation is complete. The Tribal Council does not support the vote at this time.”

The tribe’s five-member Gaming Authority has outlined plans for up to three Shinnecock-run casinos on Long Island. This past summer, the tribe received the tacit support of Nassau County Executive Ed Mangano to be the primary developer of a new gaming facility at Belmont Race Track and unveiled sketches of a hotel, casino and entertainment complex adjacent to the famed horse racing venue. Over the last two years, the tribe has also been in discussions with Suffolk County leaders about possible sites for a casino, including parcels in Brookhaven and Riverhead towns.

The new contract with Gateway includes provisions that would have Mr. Malik and his partner, Marian Ilitch, wife of the billionaire founder of the Little Caesar’s pizza chain, continuing to finance more than two dozen salaried positions within tribal government, fund the tribe’s legal and consulting fees, and ultimately pay for the planning and construction of the hoped-for casino.

It would be the first time the Shinnecocks have renegotiated their agreement with Mr. Malik since he purchased the right to be the tribe’s partner from another casino developer, Ivy K. Ong, in 2003. Since that time, Mr. Malik has poured millions of dollars into the tribe’s legal battles, first over initial plans to use a Hampton Bays property owned by the tribe as a casino site—a proposal that has been abandoned—and then in its successful push to secure federal recognition more than a decade sooner than federal agencies would have allowed otherwise. The tribe has also waged court battles claiming contracts with Southampton’s early European settlers in which it gave up ownership of large swaths of Southampton Town were illegal—a claim widely seen as a tactic to win political support for a Shinnecock casino elsewhere.

“I believe the majority of the people will look at what Gateway has done for this community in supporting us and our efforts and livelihoods, with the jobs and the legal help and the federal recognition, and see that [Mr. Malik] has been a good business partner,” Tribal Trustee Fred Bess said this week. “The Trustees’ stance is that we have a good working relationship with our current developer, and we’re looking for their support to move to the next level. We feel that we’ve had many discussions with the membership on these issues, and we think the time is now.”

The letter from the Trustees says that they will not proceed in signing the contracts without the support of the full tribe and cannot enter into any binding agreements on possible sites for a Shinnecock casino, or the necessary compact with New York State, until the contracts with Gateway are affirmed.

The full text of the contract has been posted on a website called The Verifiable Truth, which does not identify its publisher. The website features stories and documents related to the gaming industry, and to Mr. Malik and Mrs. Ilitch specifically. Mr. Bess, however, confirmed the authenticity of the documents posted at the website.

“It’s unfortunate that some tribal members took it upon themselves to talk outside the tribe and share these documents and information with others,” Mr. Bess said. “But we’re going to deal with it and, hopefully, do what’s right for the tribe. The Trustees have the best interests of this community at heart. This is just growing pains, and we’ll get through it as a community.”

Various Related Documents

Michael J. Malik, Sr. is a controversial character, who is often at the center of intra-tribal disputes with those whom he is a casino development partner.  Earlier this year the tribal chairwoman for the Los Coyotes Band of Indians (CA) was ousted because Malik didn’t like a business partnerships she had arranged.  The long-time chairman of the Bay Mills Indian Community (MI) was ousted in an election last month in part because tribal members saw him as Malik’s tool and they’d had enough of Malik’s idle promises for off-reservation casinos.  The now deceased elder and former chairperson of one tribal partner became disillusioned with Malik and called him the “Devil.” She said he had “seduced” younger members of her tribe who didn’t know any better.  By that, she meant he had bought them off with salary, or stipends, or honorariums.

Shinnecock Nation Casino Timeline

Detroiters' Shinnecock Casino Schemes

Timeline (Past History & Future Activity)

2001-2012

Of particular note in 2012, the Developer (Gateway Casino Resorts) plans to negotiate a State Compact with Governor Andrew Cuomo, get said Compact introduced and approved by the New York Legislature; and present and get Congressional approval of something called "Mandatory Acquisition Legislation."  And overlaying all of that are ongoing PR advertising campaigns carried out by Lansing-based Marketing Resource Group to spin the developer's schemes and control messages. What's not outlined here are payments to the tribe and "salaries" or payments by Gateway Casino Resorts to key tribal members who support the schemes.

Shinnecock Nation Gaming Authority Timeline 2001-2012

Although Honolulu PD Actively Opposes Legalization of Gambling; Officer’s Wife is Fronting Group Pushing Mainlanders’ Waikiki Casino Schemes

Click for: Honolulu PD Gambling FAQ

Last Spring, Elizabeth Hata Watanabe, the wife of a Honolulu Police officer, emerged out of nowhere as the head of the so-called Citizens for a Better Way. Despite denials by Watanabe and lobbyist John Radcliffe, the group is apparently a front for a mainland casino syndicate hoping to get approvals to develop and operate a stand-alone Las Vegas-style casino in Waikiki.

The Honolulu Police Department has historically opposed the legalization of gambling in Hawaii. In fact, during Hawaii’s 2011 Legislative Session, HPD Officers endorsed by Police Chief Louis Kealoha testified against bills to allow: on-board gambling on cruise ships docked in Hawaiian waters, bingo, gambling on Hawaiian Homelands and development of a stand-alone casino in Waikiki. The later being the objective of Mrs. Watanabe’s lobbying efforts and a mainland casino syndicate (see links to testimony in Scribd box below).

In nearly every instance where HPD officials provided testimony in opposition to a gambling measure,  lobbyist John Radcliffe provided testimony in favor of gambling.  Radcliffe is believed to be the driving force behind the lobbying group for which Mrs. Watanabe fronts.

Honolulu Police Department's Position on Gambling.
Honolulu Police Department's Gambling FAQ
Honolulu Police Deparment's Ant-Gambling Links

During Fall 2010, Watanabe identified herself as the executive producer of “Hawaii’s Big Deal Poker Tournament,” a reality TV show airing Saturdays on Honolulu’s KHON. Despite promises for a second season of Hawaii’s Big Deal, nothing has materialized. And it’s unclear who bankrolled Season One. Watanabe claimed it was to bring attention to her newly formed tax exempt charitable organization, the Hata Foundation.

For several years prior, Watanabe was owner of failed nightclub and restaurant operations. Her establishments were under increasing scrutiny by the Honolulu Liquor Control Commission (HLCC). Namely she had repeated violations serving liquor to minors and it was alleged that she hid her books from HLCC investigators for four years – nearly the entire time she operated the nightclub. In 2009-10, she had one temporary license revoked and the nightclub’s liquor license was suspended. In the wake of HLCC actions, she chose to shutter the establishments.

After closing the failed nightclub and restaurant, producing one season of “Hawaii’s Big Deal Poker Tournament”, and spending nearly $40,000 on a sophisticated advertising campaign which failed to push legislators to support the mainlanders’ proposal for a stand-alone casino in Waikiki, Watanabe filed a $387,000 bankruptcy.

In other related developments...

HPD Major Arrested on Extortion
Reports from the Associated Press during the last month indicate a Honolulu police Major Carlton Nishimura who is facing federal extortion charges received $6,000 a month to protect an illegal gambling room.

According to the court documents and the FBI, while a captain assigned to a Honolulu patrol district, Nishimura directed subordinate officers to inspect and harass other illegal gambling operations considered by his patron to be direct competition.

Nishimura, 55, has remained in custody since a raid on Nov. 14, when agents said they found about a half-pound of methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia. They also reported the discovery of $2,400 in cash in a safe, jewelry, gift cards, casino player club cards and a college basketball betting odds sheet.

Gambling Scandal Plagues University of Hawaii Football
Although Honolulu Police say they don’t have enough information to launch an official investigation, allegations surfaced in November to suggest that University of Hawaii football players were involved in a points shaving gambling scheme.

University President M. R. C. Greenwood said she and board of regents Chairman Eric Martinson met with Honolulu Police Chief Louis Kealoha to offer the university's full cooperation.

However, the NCAA said, "We are extremely concerned by the point-shaving allegations involving University of Hawaii football student-athletes and have been in contact with the school since early November."

"We take any allegation of point shaving very seriously as it is a crime that threatens two core NCAA principles -- the well-being of student-athletes and the very integrity of intercollegiate sport."

Subsequently University of Hawaii Warriors Football Coach Greg McMackin resigned under pressure.