The Buffalo News

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
subscribe now

“The Seneca Nation is pleased that its Buffalo Creek Casino is endorsed and free to remain open and operating.” Seneca President Barry E. Snyder Sr.

In final hours of Bush administration, U. S. issues new approval

Senecas win a round in the casino fight

NEWS STAFF REPORTER

Story tools:

The Seneca Indian Nation won the latest victory Tuesday in the long-running battle over the legality of a downtown Buffalo casino.

But don’t expect a final winner in that battle to be declared anytime soon.

Acting in the final hours of the Bush administration, the National Indian Gaming Commission issued a new approval of plans for the casino.

Seneca President Barry E. Snyder Sr. received a letter from the gaming commission Tuesday morning, stating that the commission has approved an amended gaming ordinance for Buffalo, which the tribe applied for three months ago.

Senecas were pleased with the development, but sources on both sides of the casino dispute said it is likely that a long, complicated federal court fight still looms.

The approval from Washington came in the final few hours of the administration of President Bush, who left the office at noon with the swearing- in of Barack Obama.

The approval letter — dated for Tuesday— came from Philip N. Hogen, the commission chairman, on a day when the commission’s offices were closed.

It is the second time that Hogen has reapproved the Seneca’s Buffalo gaming proposal after a federal judge rejected it and directed Hogen to reconsider it.

“It’s frustrating to a lot of people,” said Neil D. Murray, an attorney representing a group that is fighting the Buffalo casino. “But nothing surprises me at this point.”

Murray said he doesn’t know whether the Senecas timed their latest application to coincide with the last day of the Bush administration. He also said he doesn’t know how many chances the Senecas will get to make new, amended proposals to the gaming commission.

“This [gaming commission decision] came in the 11th hour and 59th minute of the Bush administration,” Murray said. “It could be by coincidence. It could be by design.”

The Senecas maintain that the timing of the approval was a coincidence. They said the only reason it occurred Tuesday is that their latest proposal for a Buffalo gaming ordinance was filed 90 days earlier, and under law, Hogen had 90 days to act on it.

According to Snyder, Tuesday’s action by the gaming commission confirms that lands the tribe purchased in downtown Buffalo are now eligible for gaming.

“[The] Seneca Nation is pleased that its Buffalo Creek Casino is endorsed and free to remain open and operating,” Snyder said. “Construction of its $333 million permanent version will also be free to continue when the Seneca Gaming Corp. determines the time is right.”

A copy of Hogen’s 22-page letter to Snyder was obtained by The Buffalo News late Tuesday. In the letter, Hogen said his ruling was “consistent with the best reading of the law.”

“As you are aware, the [Seneca] Nation’s gaming ordinances, and my approval of those ordinances, have been the subject of much controversy, as well as two lawsuits,” Hogen wrote.

A gaming commission spokesman could not be reached to comment. Murray said Hogen’s latest approval of the gaming proposal will be challenged in federal court, where U. S. District Judge William M. Skretny has already ruled that the Senecas’ land off Michigan Avenue cannot be legally used for casino gaming.

But the Senecas say they will prevail in court because of changes in interpretations of the law enacted last June by the U. S. Interior Department.

The Interior Department changes involve what lands can be eligible for use for Indian-run casinos, and Skretny was unaware of those changes when he ruled against the Senecas last summer, the Senecas said.

“The new Interior Department interpretation promulgated in June clarifies that gaming is permitted on restricted fee land without the need for any specific regulatory approval beyond what the [Seneca] Nation already secured,” Snyder said.

Richard J. Lippes, a Buffalo attorney for casino opponents, disagreed.

“This does not surprise us. For months, it has been evident that the gaming commission works hand in glove with the Senecas. We do not necessarily think this affects our case in federal court,” Lippes said. “The legal issues are the same. Nothing has changed.”

In 2006, casino opponents filed a federal lawsuit, asking Skretny to declare the Buffalo casino illegal. The opponents said the federal government acted illegally in approving a 2002 Buffalo gaming proposal submitted by the Senecas.

In January 2007, Skretny vacated Hogen’s approval of the gaming proposal, directing Hogen to reconsider it.

The Senecas then sent an amended proposal to the gaming commission, which Hogen approved in July 2007.

In July 2008, Skretny again vacated the Senecas’ Buffalo gaming proposal, again directing Hogen to reconsider its legality. Several days after that court decision, the Senecas filed another amended proposal but quickly withdrew it.

The tribe then filed another amended proposal in October 2008, exactly 90 days short of the last day of the Bush administration.

Now, the issue is before both Skretny and the Obama administration, which now controls the gaming commission.

“At this point, we don’t know what position President Obama is going to take on Indian gaming or this particular proposal,” Murray said.

The Senecas have operated a small temporary casino on their downtown land since July 2007. Last year, steel girders were erected for a much larger facility that the tribe wanted to open in 2010.

Last August, Seneca officials abruptly stopped construction, blaming the stoppage on financing problems. Snyder said Skretny’s rulings against the casino had also “hampered” the project but were not the reason why construction was stopped.

The Senecas gave no timetable for completion of their larger casino, which they say will eventually employ 1,200 people and become part of a “very real renaissance” in downtown Buffalo and on its waterfront.

Casino opponents insist that any financial benefits from the casino will be more than offset by the social problems caused by a sharp increase in addictive gambling.

dherbeck@buffnews.com


Reader comments

There on this article.
Rate This Article
Reader comments are posted immediately and are not edited. Users can help promote good discourse by using the "Inappropriate" links to vote down comments that fall outside of our guidelines. Comments that exceed our moderation threshold are automatically hidden and reviewed by an editor. Comments should be on topic; respectful of other writers; not be libelous, obscene, threatening, abusive, or otherwise offensive; and generally be in good taste. Users who repeatedly violate these guidelines will be banned. Comments containing objectionable words are automatically blocked. Some comments may be re-published in The Buffalo News print edition.

Log into MyBuffalo to post a comment





What is MyBuffalo?
MyBuffalo is the new social network from Buffalo.com. Your MyBuffalo account lets you comment on and rate stories at buffalonews.com. You can also head over to mybuffalo.com to share your blog posts, stories, photos, and videos with the community. Join now or learn more.
sort comments:

Buffalo News Video


Breaking News Video

Breaking 24 Hour News

more >>

Most Viewed Stories, Last 24 Hours