ADN article recounts Rep. Don Young's history with House Natural Resources Commmittee

12.10.08

Young bumped from top House committee spot
RESOURCES: Longtime chair acknowledges taint from federal investigation.

By ERIKA BOLSTAD

ebolstad@adn.com

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Rep. Don Young, who wielded considerable power on the House Committee on Natural Resources in the 1990s as chairman and in recent years as its senior Republican, on Wednesday lost his top spot on the panel...

...It definitely is the end of an era, said Deborah Williams, an environmentalist who now heads Alaska Conservation Solutions. In the Clinton Administration, Williams worked for then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt as a top aide on Alaska issues while Young headed the Resources Committee. In that role, she often testified about Alaska-related matters at his committee meetings, and occasionally, sparred with him.

"When Don Young sought to advance the public good in that position, it was a pleasure to work with him and he was very effective," Williams said. "But again and again, when he sought to advocate for legislation or interests that were not in the public interest ... he was thwarted and spent a lot of energy and political capital on issues that did not advance."

Young took over the Resources Committee in 1995 after Republicans regained control of the House of Representatives in the 1994 elections. At that time, the Natural Resources Committee was renamed the House Resources Committee -- a signal that its focus would be less about conservation and more about resource development. At one of Babbitt's first meetings with Young at the helm, at a committee hearing on a federal wolf reintroduction program, he told Young: "Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt about who the alpha wolf is in this room."

Young held the chairmanship of the committee until internal House rules on term limits for committee chairmanships forced him to step aside for Rep. Jim Hansen, R-Utah. Hansen held the seat for two years before the Republican Young had mentored, Rep. Richard Pombo of California, took over as chairman.

Young then took over as chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, where he oversaw the $286.4 billion highway spending bill in 2005 that included money for what became known as Alaska's "bridges to nowhere." It also earmarked $10 million for the now-infamous Coconut Road interchange study in Florida that, this year, prompted Young's colleagues to ask for a federal investigation into how it was inserted in the bill... (Complete Story)

Schwarzenegger Approves Casino Plans Near Fresno

4.29.08

Governor OKs Indian casino near Fresno
State legislators and U.S. officials must still approve plan for off-reservation site with 2,000 slot machines.

By Nancy Vogel, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced Monday that he has signed a deal to allow a Sierra Nevada Indian tribe to build a casino along a major highway near Fresno that could be worth about $25 million a year to the state.

But the tribe lacks federal permission to put a gambling operation on that land. And state legislators -- many of whom are wary of urban, off-reservation casinos -- must approve the compacts. Those are high hurdles that could take months, if not years, to clear.

The deal also may conflict with the governor's own policy on tribal gambling accords.

Under the unusual arrangement, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians would build the casino along California 99 in the heart of the Central Valley, about 40 miles from their foothills reservation. The tribe would share profits with the state and an impoverished tribe, the Wiyot, on the Humboldt County coast hundreds of miles away. The Wiyot would agree not to build a casino on their land near Humboldt Bay.

Schwarzenegger's official policy, spelled out in a May 2005 proclamation, states that he will not negotiate with tribes that do not already own land that the federal government deems eligible for a casino.

It also states that Schwarzenegger will oppose casino construction in urban areas away from tribal reservations.

The proposed North Fork casino is less than a mile from Madera, population 46,000, and about 22 miles northwest of Fresno. It is owned by Station Casinos, a Las Vegas company pursuing projects with several California tribes.

"Placing a casino along Highway 99 right at the foot of the city of Fresno is certainly an urban casino -- there is no other way to see it," said state Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter), who heads the Senate committee that oversees gambling.

In a press release, Florez called the proposal "erratic" and "illogical."

Schwarzenegger's legal affairs secretary, Andrea Hoch, defended the agreement. It is consistent with the governor's gambling policy because the North Fork tribe does own land that is federally eligible for casino construction, she said -- it just isn't the land where the tribe proposes a casino.

"These compacts are novel approaches to providing what is best for the state of California," she said.

Under the compact, the North Fork tribe would build a hotel and casino with 2,000 slot machines and give the state 13.5% to 22% of net revenues, with the state's share rising as revenues increase.

The tribe also would share a small percentage of revenues -- estimated at $3 million to $5 million a year -- with the 600-member Wiyot tribe. Wiyot tribal administrator Maura Eastman said the money would probably be used to invest in economic development.

North Fork tribal Chairwoman Elaine Bethel Fink said her tribe's rancheria south of Yosemite National Park is too remote for a casino.

"Environmentally, it just makes sense for us to partner up," she said.

Schwarzenegger failed the last time he sought federal and state approval for an off-reservation casino. In 2005, he struck a deal with the Los Coyotes band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians in San Diego County and the Big Lagoon Rancheria of Humboldt County to open casinos in the Mojave Desert town of Barstow, where city officials eagerly sought the jobs it would offer.

Legislators -- who can ratify or reject tribal gambling compacts negotiated by the governor but cannot change them -- refused to vote on the Barstow deals.

In any case, the U.S. Department of the Interior refused to allow the tribes to use the Barstow land for casinos because of the potential harm of tribal families leaving their reservations to work in casinos hundreds of miles away.

Schwarzenegger said he would not submit the North Fork and Wiyot compacts to the Legislature until the secretary of the Interior gives North Fork approval to use the land near California 99 for a casino.

There is no guarantee that will happen.

In January, the Bush administration toughened its stance on off-reservation casinos and promised greater scrutiny on casino proposals more than a "commutable distance" from a reservation.

Cheryl Schmit, director of the gambling watchdog group Stand Up for California, said the compacts, if they are ever implemented, could lead to more casinos near big California cities.

"I think the policy of negotiating before the tribe even owns the land . . . is an invitation to further off-reservation gaming expansion," she said.

nancy.vogel@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-casinos29apr29,0,966956.story

Governor's office indicates Barstow compacts are "null and void;" Senator "can't imagine" reconsidertion of the failed deals

9.19.07

Big Lagoon tribe, Los Coyotes band may revive talks with on another anyway

By James P. Sweeney
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE

SACRAMENTO – Blocked by powerful tribal opponents, gambling agreements that authorized the Los Coyotes band of San Diego County and another tribe to build large, off-reservation casinos in Barstow have expired.

The passing of a midnight Monday deadline to have land eligible for the joint project rendered the compacts “null and void,” said a spokeswoman for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who negotiated the deals.

However, the bid by Los Coyotes and the Big Lagoon tribe of Humboldt County to build side-by-side casinos along a popular route to Las Vegas may not be dead.

"Within the next few weeks we'll meet with Big Lagoon and Barstow and try to get a meeting with the governor's office . . . to see what options are open," said Shane Chapparosa, vice chairman of Los Coyotes.

Jason Barnett, a spokesman for Big Lagoon, said "the compacts have expired but that doesn't necessarily mean we're at the end here."

The administration also said Barstow remains its preferred alternative to a casino on Big Lagoon's environmentally sensitive reservation along the Northern California coast.

The compacts never developed much traction after they were signed two years ago. They were conceived as a compromise after the Big Lagoon tribe sued the state, seeking a compact to develop its coastal property.

Without a compact, the Big Lagoon tribe may ask the court to push ahead with the litigation.

The off-reservation casino proposals were always controversial. The Big Lagoon reservation is 700 miles from Barstow.

Some of the state's most successful gaming tribes urged state legislators not to ratify the agreements, even though they recently approved a compact with an off-reservation casino for the Sycuan band of El Cajon.

State Sen. Dean Florez, a Bakersfield Democrat who is chairman of the committee that screens gaming compacts, said California voters never intended for Indian gaming to be hundreds of miles from a tribe's reservation.

"Gaming was to be conducted on Indian lands – period," Florez said in an e-mail. "At this point, I don't believe the two-casino compact proposal is viable and I can't imagine the administration making a strong case as to why it should be reconsidered."

Casino developer may have mislead Schwarzenegger's negotiator to get approvals for twin casinos

Dan Kolkey may have been duped by Barwest's half-truths and illusions but this should take all that mystery and confusion away

From the very beginning, Barwest LLC demanded secretness and exclusivity. A city employ explained that prior to June 2003, there had been 15 months of top-secret negotiations and that he, a city employee, had signed a confidentiality agreement with the Detroit developer. And when they could no longer moved foward in secret, Barwest demanded and got an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with the City of Barstow (June 2, 2003). There is not one reference in that exclusive agreement to the Los Coyotes Band of Indians nor in the "rationale" provided to the Barstow City Council at the time they were to consider approval of the agreement. That ENA between the Detroit Developer and the City of Barstow was extended in September 2003 and again March 1, 2004 without reference to the Los Coyotes Tribe.

In March 2004, a Desert Dispatch columnist reported that Barwest Principal Michael J. Malik and his attorney Lance Boldrey had threatened to walk away from Barstow if the City engaged in discussions with any other prospective tribes or partners. Overtime you can see a pattern of threats and heavy handed leverage.

By June 2004, pressure was building on the City Council to resist yet a third extension of the Barwest ENA and other sideshows were secretly playing out behind the scenes but wouldn't be disclosed for almost a year:

(1) in March 2004 Governor Schwarzenegger had informed Barwest, Los Coyotes Leaders and Mayor Lawrence Dale that he would not approve a Los Coyotes project;

(2) An original introduction to Big Lagoon Rancheria Chairman Virgil Moorehead in April/May 2004 was not productive;

(3) Los Coyotes leaders were becoming increasingly disenchanted with Barwest; and in fact, would formally split with Barwest a month or two later (August 2004); and

(4) Mayor Dale was facing re-election.

Fearing their original 2-3 year capital "investment" might be flushed away, Barwest conjured up a little scheme that:

(a) guaranteed Barwest exclusive casino development rights to Barstow, regardless of tribe, via a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) between Barwest and the City; and

(b) invoked the Governor's name and manufactured a "do or die" sense of urgency in order to convince a majority on the City Council to approve, what amounted to a bogus Municipal Services Agreement (MSA) with the Los Coyotes Tribe for a project Barwest and the Mayor knew was already "Dead on Arrival."

It wasn't a binding contract they sought with the MSA but simply a placeholder for Barwest and a barrier of entry into the Barstow market for anyone else over the following nine months. Barwest and local politicians needed to buy some time: Barwest needed time to regroup after the Governor rejected their plans for Los Coyotes and after Los Coyotes rejected Barwest as its business partner; and local politicians were looking to get through their re-election campaign with little noise and controversy. [Officials seek to dispel rumors; Desert Dispatch 10.02.04]

Understand, Barwest presently controls at least 100 acres in Barstow, maybe more (at one time Barwest's officials indicated hoped to acquire 200+ acres). Barwest has access to thousands of acres of BLM land directly adjacent to its 100+ acres. Neither tribe owns or controls any land in Barstow today (that's the purpose of the federal fee to trust process). The original Los Coyotes casino project approved by the Barstow City Council expressly limited the tribe to a 20 acre development. But now, the project has more than doubled: there are two casinos (twin full-service spa casino resorts) to be developed on almost 50 acres (250% larger); with nearly three times the number of the slot machines and gaming tables originally anticipated in the Los Coyotes proposal. Sound like someone hit a jackpot?

With this in mind, read the following post which substitutes Barwest's name for Los Coyotes name where it would be factually correct to get a true picture of who's pushing things in Barstow.

---

The following dialogue between Senators and Daniel Kolkey, Governor Schwarzenegger's former lead gaming compact negotiator is excerpted from transcripts of a March 28, 2006 Senate Governmental Organization Committee hearing, Sacramento, Calif.

SENATOR FLOREZ: So, Los Coyotes without Big Lagoon wouldn’t be a valid use of State policy then?

MR. KOLKEY: No.

SENATOR FLOREZ: So, there lies one issue. So, you have Big Lagoon that normally wouldn’t be eligible is eligible now—excuse me, Los Coyotes—because of Big Lagoon. Is that correct?

MR. KOLKEY: The project is eligible under the Governor’s policy because it facilitates Big Lagoon’s relocation.

SENATOR FLOREZ: So, in essence, what came first then—Big Lagoon or Los Coyotes? Why would Los Coyotes even be on the topic if the Governor’s policy itself wouldn’t allow for that?

MR. KOLKEY: Well, number one, the only way for us to facilitate the relocation of Big Lagoon was to find a site in Barstow. Barstow & BARWEST had already identified this site near outlet malls as part of its plan for renovation of the city. And they had an exclusive agreement with Los Coyotes BARWEST. So, the only way that we could facilitate the Big Lagoon relocation was through the site identified by the City of Barstow with Los Coyotes BARWEST. And these were the facts that the State was dealing with then. Let me just say that having gotten Los Coyotes’ BARWEST's agreement to do this, we felt it was a matter of, really, honor and fair dealing that we stick with Los Coyotes BARWEST throughout this. In other words, they BARWEST facilitated this relocation. As a matter of honor and fair dealing, we were going to stick with BARWEST, Los Coyotes and Big Lagoon as a unified project and not try and find, if we could, some other site in Barstow. This was the site that Barstow had picked. Los Coyotes BARWEST facilitated it, and this accomplished, through a relocation and consolidation, really, of two casino projects, the Governor’s policy of avoiding the environmental impact on the coast. [BARWEST is rewarded with two casinos for taking the Big Lagoon problem off Kolkey's lap.]

SENATOR FLOREZ: Okay. Senator Battin?

SENATOR JIM BATTIN: Mr. Kolkey, I have a couple of questions I don’t understand. So, the City of Barstow got to decide where California was going to allow a casino project?

MR. KOLKEY: No—I wouldn’t put it that way. What we have here is we wanted to relocate the casino project that Big Lagoon had on the coast.

SENATOR BATTIN: But through Los Coyotes’ BARWEST's agreement with Barstow, that somehow became an exclusive. You could not have put Big Lagoon there without Los Coyotes?

MR. KOLKEY: We would have needed a site, and one of the things that the Governor’s proclamation has made clear is that in relocating any tribal casino under the Section 20 authority, is we want support by the local jurisdiction and the local community. We’re not going to relocate a casino against the wishes of the local jurisdiction or the local community. And so, if the local jurisdiction says, Here’s where we would like to have a casino, then we’re going to accommodate that local jurisdiction. We’re not going to force something on the local jurisdiction, so we were going to do it where Barstow wanted to do it.

SENATOR BATTIN: So, if I understood a recent news article that I just read, is that the City of Barstow has actually not. . . . the city council could not take a position on the referendum that is in front of the city right now; whether or not they support having the casino there.

MR. KOLKEY: Well, that local initiative is actually quite different from support of the Big Lagoon-Los Coyotes unified casino project. That is a local initiative that seeks support of casinos in Barstow but at a different site and not the site at the outlet malls that the City of Barstow had identified.

SENATOR BATTIN: The city council of Barstow, then, has passed and made a deal with Los Coyotes BARWEST?

MR. KOLKEY: The City of Barstow has a . . .

SENATOR BATTIN: Exclusive, you said.

MR. KOLKEY: They had at the time we were negotiating an exclusive agreement [with BARWEST not Los Coyotes as Kolkey suggests over and over]. This was in 2004. They had an exclusive agreement with Los Coyotes BARWEST. They also have an MOU MSA with Los Coyotes ...

[Yes, there had been an MSA for a project that had already been aborted long before the Barstow City Council awarded the agreement - in March 2004 the Governor had rejected that proposal. Barwest and Mayor Dale failed to reveal they were no longer pregnant with the Los Coyotes Casino when they asked the City Council to seal the deal with an MSA they knew would not ever be valid. Then weeks before the November 2004 election it was discovered Mayor Dale had never executed the bogus agreement.

It wasn't until almost a year later when Barwest announced it would give birth to twin Casino resorts that the players confessed what had gone on behind the scenes the year before].

click for: complete transcripts