Editorial by the
Santa Fe NewMexican.com - The recent piece by Tim Korte of The Associated Press, entitled "New Mexico casino lawsuit calls tribal sovereignty into question," may be news to New Mexicans but it is old news for many of us who follow the issue of sovereignty as it applies to business contracts as conducted by the tribes with non-Indians. The reason we don't hear much about the connection with this lawsuit and the possibility of other lawsuits regarding sovereignty is because our local journalists can't connect the dots; what occurs in our local tribal casinos is also happening nationwide. In the New Mexico case, attorney Sam Bregman has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case where a client, retired Albuquerque city worker Gary Hoffman, sued Sandia Resort and Casino over what the tribe characterized as a malfunctioning slot machine that displayed a $1.6 million "jackpot." In New Mexico, both the state District Court and the New Mexico Court of Appeals said that the tribes' sovereign immunity kept them from being sued. Bregman may not be as crazy as some think and he may not be the only attorney suing tribes, including tribal casinos that have not only not paid up on "malfunctioning" machines but also on potentially much larger issues — like how are non-Indian investors going to get their money back if tribal casinos go belly up? According to a November, 2009 copyrighted article in The Financial Times by Nicole Bullock, tribes have financed "casinos projects with debt including more than $5 billion in high-yield bonds, according to Barclay's Capital." Of particular interest is one of the world's largest casinos, owned by the Connecticut Mashantucket Pequot tribe, which is reportedly $2 billion in debt to its lenders and "has stopped making its annual $100,000 per capita payment to tribal members." A July 16, 2010 article by New England journalist Scott Van Voorhis says "the downturn is taking its toll on the Indian gaming industry as aggressive lenders push for payment on billions in debt as cash-starved federal tax men ramp up the pressure, as industry observers say." According to Van Voorhis, the Internal Revenue Service has launched a "wide-ranging probe to crack down on alleged tax evasion in 'Indian Country,' one that appears to be focused heavily on certain tribal casino operators, businesses and governments." Locally, our own Buffalo Thunder appears to be in arrears an approximate $33 million on its $245 million bond payment as last reported in The New Mexican May 19, 2010. Since then things may have changed as there is very little news reported on this issue. However, the question remains, how will non-Indian investors get their money back on their investments on the "casino" bonds if tribes can't meet the payments or, worse, go bankrupt and use the "sovereignty" card as their defense?
Read more
Questions arise on sovereignty for casinos
Editorial by the Santa Fe NewMexican.com - The recent piece by Tim Korte of The Associated Press, entitled "New Mexico casino lawsuit calls tribal sovereignty into question," may be news to New Mexicans but it is old news for many of us who follow the issue of sovereignty as it applies to business contracts as conducted by the tribes with non-Indians. The reason we don't hear much about the connection with this lawsuit and the possibility of other lawsuits regarding sovereignty is because our local journalists can't connect the dots; what occurs in our local tribal casinos is also happening nationwide. In the New Mexico case, attorney Sam Bregman has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case where a client, retired Albuquerque city worker Gary Hoffman, sued Sandia Resort and Casino over what the tribe characterized as a malfunctioning slot machine that displayed a $1.6 million "jackpot." In New Mexico, both the state District Court and the New Mexico Court of Appeals said that the tribes' sovereign immunity kept them from being sued. Bregman may not be as crazy as some think and he may not be the only attorney suing tribes, including tribal casinos that have not only not paid up on "malfunctioning" machines but also on potentially much larger issues — like how are non-Indian investors going to get their money back if tribal casinos go belly up? According to a November, 2009 copyrighted article in The Financial Times by Nicole Bullock, tribes have financed "casinos projects with debt including more than $5 billion in high-yield bonds, according to Barclay's Capital." Of particular interest is one of the world's largest casinos, owned by the Connecticut Mashantucket Pequot tribe, which is reportedly $2 billion in debt to its lenders and "has stopped making its annual $100,000 per capita payment to tribal members." A July 16, 2010 article by New England journalist Scott Van Voorhis says "the downturn is taking its toll on the Indian gaming industry as aggressive lenders push for payment on billions in debt as cash-starved federal tax men ramp up the pressure, as industry observers say." According to Van Voorhis, the Internal Revenue Service has launched a "wide-ranging probe to crack down on alleged tax evasion in 'Indian Country,' one that appears to be focused heavily on certain tribal casino operators, businesses and governments." Locally, our own Buffalo Thunder appears to be in arrears an approximate $33 million on its $245 million bond payment as last reported in The New Mexican May 19, 2010. Since then things may have changed as there is very little news reported on this issue. However, the question remains, how will non-Indian investors get their money back on their investments on the "casino" bonds if tribes can't meet the payments or, worse, go bankrupt and use the "sovereignty" card as their defense? Read more
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment