 |
| StopTheBelmontCasino.com |
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.
A majority of Shinnecock Indian Nation members rejected a controversial gaming agreement with its longtime financier, Detroit-based Gateway Casino Resorts, in a referendum December 15.
Members were asked to vote yes or no on authorizing the Board of Trustees to enter into a non-interference and enabling agreement that would hand over to the tribe’s gaming authority the ability to make all casino decisions with Gateway on the tribe’s behalf without any input from the members. The agreement was defeated by a vote of 153-121. The scandal-plagued Gateway has investing millions of dollars in the tribe over the past eight years.
The elected three-member Board of Trustees issued a statement indicating they intend to continue pursuing a relationship with Gateway. “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,” the trustees said. The board includes Chairman Randy King and trustees Gerrod T. Smith and Frederick C. Bess.
Opponents of the agreement were concerned that the contract with Gateway, which included among other things a waiver of tribal immunity, would erode the tribe’s sovereignty and would give Gateway too much of the tribe’s revenues. The proposed agreement stipulated that Gateway would keep 28 percent of monthly casino revenues.
Lance Gumbs, a former trustee, was a vocal opponent of the Gateway agreement, said he voted against the agreement. “Gateway needs to understand that they are not going to control our tribe,” Gumbs said.
A detailed story will follow.
 |
| Michael J. Malik, Sr., controversial co-founder, Gateway Casino Resorts, L.L.C. |
"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.During the last decade Lance Gumbs, then a trustee of the Shinnecock Indian Nation was one of those out front on efforts to gain Federal Recognition and pursue casino development. However, in an unprecedented run-off earlier this year, Gumbs was ousted as Trustee by Fred Bess, a former Trustee. It's been reported that Bess is seen by some members of the Tribe as a tool of casino syndicator Malik.
 |
| Lance R. Gumbs tribal leader, Shinnecock Indian Nation |
 |
| Lance Gumbs, Shinnecock Indian Nation |
"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.
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
In a tribal referendum on Thursday, a majority of the members of the Shinnecock Indian Nation voted against authorizing the tribe’s leaders to sign a new contract with the Detroit casino developer who has been bankrolling their years-long push to open a casino in the New York metropolitan area.See also:
Vote totals from balloting are not yet available, but the casino developer, Gateway Casino Resorts, acknowledged the results and said it will respect the decision of the tribe’s membership.
“While we are of course disappointed in the vote to not move forward at this time with revised business agreements, which followed well over a year of negotiations and months of tribal meetings, we do respect the decision of tribal members to have further review and discussions of the new deal points,” a statement issued by an attorney for Gateway Casino Resorts co-owner Michael Malik on Thursday evening read. “We look forward to concluding that process. We have stood by the Shinnecock Indian Nation for the last eight years, and will continue to do so and support its quest for economic justice.”
The vote went forward on Thursday over the objections of the Tribal Council, which said the three Tribal Trustees were forcing the vote on the rest of the tribe members before they had a chance to adequately examine the contract.
The Trustees announced the vote in a letter to the entire tribe on Monday. They also urged their members to approve the contract so that the casino effort could continue.
The partnership with Mr. Malik, who has spent millions on legal battles and salaries for some two dozen tribe members, has been the subject of much suspicion and distrust among some members of the tribe and the catalyst for open discord at recent tribal meetings. The contract the tribe was being asked to approve was drafted by Gateway representatives and the five members of the tribal Gaming Authority.
There are approximately 1,200 members of the tribe, of which approximately 650 live on the tribe’s Shinnecock Neck reservation just outside Southampton Village.
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.
Gateway shall assist the Nation in pursuing the acquisition of the college campus known as State University of New York at Stony Brook in Southampton, New York (the "College") by providing reasonable financial assistance to the Nation to: conduct due diligence and research regarding the property, investigate acquisition options, negotiate with the State of New York and federal, state and local entities regarding acquisition of the property, and provide other reasonable assistance to help the Nation facilitate the acquisition of the college. Gateway agrees that the initial $500,000 Gateway provides for such purposes will be a gift to the Nation and that, neither the Nation nor the Authority is required to repay this initial amount of $500,000 to Gateway, with any remaining expenditure being Approved Development Costs. The parties agree that, if the parties determine that the due diligence contemplated by this paragraph indicates that the Nation has a viable opportunity to acquire the College, the parties will discuss how Gateway can assist the Nation with such acquisition or assist the Nation in acquiring a loan to purchase the property. Gateway shall also support efforts by the Nation to include the acquisition of nongaming land during the compact and other negotiations with the State, local and federal governments.
 |
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 |
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.”
