Letters from readers - Minneapolis StarTribune

A downtown casino?

It is time to end the economic disparity between the small, wealthy tribes in this state and the larger poorer tribes. The governor's casino proposal is correct in asking for revenue from a venture such as this since it is not on tribal territory. It is also important to make sure that the proposed casino is in a location that will attract tourists, so it will gain more revenue from out-of-state visitors than from our own community.

The benefits could far outweigh the costs of this proposal if it is carried out correctly. Congratulations to the governor on solving multiple problems with one proposal.

Brandon Fish, Minneapolis.


Taking the low road

While I've often found myself at odds with both local and national Republicans, at least they could historically be counted on to insist on fiscal responsibility when dealing with budgets. President Bush ceded that high ground some time ago, and Gov. Tim Pawlenty seems eager now to follow suit.

In particular, his reliance on a $200 million upfront licensing fee to balance the budget, a fee which has yet to be agreed upon by the involved parties, flies in the face of a "conservative" approach to budgeting. Pawlenty needs to look for more reliable solutions. Now is the time for him to remember that more than 60 percent of Minnesotans voted for someone other than a "no new taxes" Republican in the last gubernatorial election.

Tom Lee, Minneapolis.


If the DFL were to propose a budget based upon potential revenue from a source that didn't exist, the party would be laughed out of the Legislature by the Republicans. Will Gov. Tim Pawlenty next propose selling Girl Scout cookies? It is time to balance the budget in a realistic manner that includes tax increases.

Rick Felber, Minneapolis.


Pawlenty's journey

How did Tim Pawlenty, who grew up in working-class South St. Paul, end up endorsing gambling to fund the frivolity of sports stadiums while cutting $200 million to MinnesotaCare, the state-sponsored health care program for low-income individuals? One more Minnesota politician who's sold his soul.

Lisa Johnson, Stillwater.

Trying to figure the casino odds

Patricia Lopez, Star Tribune
January 30, 2005

From pull tabs at bars to lottery tickets in every convenience store from Roseville to Roseau, from betting on ponies at Canterbury to pulling slots at more than a dozen Indian casinos, Minnesotans like to try their luck. But a new level may lie ahead.

Last week, during what is typically the rather dry presentation of the governor’s budget proposal, Minnesotans were treated to Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s proposals for additional gambling in the state.

Check out the seven options and the odds they face.

1. The Long Shot

The Mall of America has been called the "premier site in the nation" for a new casino by Las Vegas interests, who are eager to get in on what is already one of the top tourist draws in the country.

Pros: A casino here could bring in as much as $300 million to $400 million a year, according to State Lottery estimates. A good share of that cash would come from tourists and conventioneers, who might also drop some of their winnings at the mall, further bolstering profits.

Cons: Good grief, Charlie Brown, casinos at Camp Snoopy? Showgirls and shopping? Local opposition to slot machines at the family-oriented mall is strong, starting with the Bloomington legislators who normally would be expected to sponsor such a bill. Even the administration now deems the prospect "unlikely." But nothing that could make this much money is ever dead.

2. The Smart Money

Slots at racetracks, so-called racinos, have become moneymakers in many states, and tend to have more popular support than pure casinos. Canterbury Park has been pushing hard for years to get slot machines, and a proposed harness racetrack in Anoka County is thought to be a likely second site for a racino.

Pros: Even legislators opposing expanded gambling find it easier to vote for something that would "help out agriculture," as House Speaker Steve Sviggum, R-Kenyon, puts it. Pawlenty has said that northern Indian bands, the poorest in the state, could become partners with the racetracks for a piece of the action.

Cons: Returns are modest. State Lottery officials project just $50 million a year from a single racino at Canterbury. Projections for the harness track have not been made. The Mille Lacs Band is expected to fight vigorously against a casino at the Anoka track, which probably would cut traffic at the band's popular Grand Casino Mille Lacs.

3. The Favorite

Pawlenty's latest pitch centers on metro-area casino for interested bands, presumably the Leech Lake, Red Lake and White Earth bands, with whom he's been negotiating. They would own and operate the casino, while the state would own the slots and rake in at least $100 million in profits.

Pros: Until now, the three Chippewa bands, which make up 85 percent of the state's total Indian population, have had limited success with gambling because of the remoteness of their reservations. Pawlenty's plan would give them some economic development and afford him some political cover for expanding gambling.

Cons: A lot of Republicans still don't like the idea of more casinos, particularly if they benefit Indians, who as a whole have tended to contribute heavily to DFLers.

4. The Crap Shoot

Mom-and-pop taverns, particularly in outstate Minnesota, have been longing for video slots in bars but have met with heavy resistance. Such machines, run by the State Lottery, have proved lucrative in other states, where they turn up in saloons, restaurants and truck stops.

Pros: Big money -- as much as $400 million a year for the state, according to projections by the Minnesota Lottery, and a large boost for the small businesses that would have the slots.

Cons: Slots in bars might be too successful. Lottery officials have warned that the combination of easy access and rapid play makes this "the most problematic form of gambling."

5. The Short Odds

Pawlenty has repeatedly said his preference is not to expand gambling, but lately he has dangled the prospect of a third compact for the state's Indians, offering an array of casino games that could include live keno, craps, roulette and the spinning-reel-style slots offered in Las Vegas. The new compact could also approve multi-casino jackpots, offered in other states, and pari-mutuel betting. In return, the tribes would have to agree to pay revenues to the state.

Pros: Some would-be gamblers who aren't enticed by video slots and blackjack might be more excited by other games.

Cons: The Minnesota Indian Gaming Association has said its member bands and tribes -- which own the most successful casinos - have little interest in the new games, which do not bring in as much as slot machines. They contend that since casino gambling was intended by the federal government as a means of economic development for Indians, and since they developed the industry from nothing, they are entitled to the benefits.

6. The Hard Way

To make expanded gambling more appealing, Pawlenty has said that a portion of the money generated by a "partnership casino" would go into a community fund that could build, oh, a stadium, maybe a planetarium, maybe something for the arts. Or maybe a stadium.

Pros: This could prove the elusive nontax way to build the stadiums that the Twins, Vikings and Gophers demand. (The Gophers' demand is tempered by the fact that they can't move to another state, but still, they want one, too.)

Cons: Enthusiasm for new stadiums has been remarkably absent among Minnesotans, who have become inured to the nearly decadelong pleas for a replacement for the Metrodome. For both professional sports and the university, a link to gambling could prove problematic.

7. The Dark Horse

Rumors keep flying that St. Paul Mayor Randy Kelly wants his city to be considered for a metro-area casino. Variations on this theme have it connected to the RiverPlace Convention Centre, parked as a riverboat on the Mississippi itself, run in partnership with Indians, or just as a commercial casino.

Pros: The location -- downtown + convention center + riverfront -- has appeal and could bring some energy to the city's center.

Cons: This slightly strait-laced city of neighborhoods seems an unlikely venue for a glossy downtown casino. Council members already have voiced objections, and residents are almost certain to oppose it. (Heck, some of them are still griping about downtown's sole jazz club.)

Patricia Lopez is a plopez@startribune.com

Lawmaker says Pawlenty budget plan to use Indian gaming funds amounts to extortion

Wednesday, January 26, 2005

By Brad Swenson
Staff Writerbswenson@bemidjipioneer.com

Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s pitch to use $200 million from American Indian gaming amounts to extortion, says state Rep. Frank Moe, DFL-Bemidji.

Pawlenty, in his 2006-07 biennium budget released Tuesday, called for a new tribal-state gaming partnership.

While the budget speaks of working with “interested” tribes, Pawlenty has been actively working with the Red Lake, Leech Lake and White Earth bands of Chippewa in a partnership to locate a casino in the Twin Cities area.

Under the budget proposal, those tribes that agree to participate in an optional compact would be eligible to be partners in a single metro area casino. There would be an initial licensing fee by “the managing entity” to the state of $200 million in 2006.

After that, the state would receive annual revenues of about $114 million, starting in 2008.
“I believe the northern tribes will have nothing of it,” Moe said Tuesday night. “They should not mortgage their tribes to bail out the governor.”

The stumbling block, Moe said, is the upfront $200 million “licensing fee.” Pawlenty wants the tribes to form a corporation, borrow the fee and pay the state even before the first slot machine is pulled, he said, adding the Republican governor believes the tribes can get their investment back eventually through gaming.

“He wants the tribes to borrow the $200 million,” Moe said. “It’s a bad idea for the northern tribes, and I hope the tribes won’t bail out the governor.”

Tribes split over Pawlenty's casino plan

by Tom Robertson, Minnesota Public Radio

January 25, 2005

Bemidji, Minn. — Gov. Pawlenty has been trying to get the state's wealthier Indian tribes to share their casino profits. Those efforts have gone nowhere. Now, the governor is proposing a new deal. Interested tribes could become partners in a Twin Cities casino operated jointly with the state.

Tribes would be required to pay a one-time licensing fee of $200 million. After that, the state and tribes would share the profits. Minnesota would get a projected $114 million in casino profits each year. Pawlenty says the plan would bring fairness to Indian gambling in Minnesota.

"As we talk about fairness," Pawlenty said, "we define that not just as what's fair to the state of Minnesota, relative to the growth in the industry, but also what's fair to what's going on in comparable states, and what's fair to the 85 or 90 percent of Native Americans in our state who don't belong to the tribes who are involved in large casino gaming operations in our state."
Eighty-five percent of Indians in Minnesota live in the northern part of the state, on the White Earth, Red Lake and Leech Lake reservations. The three tribes are pushing legislation similar to Pawlenty's plan. The governor met with those tribal leaders just a few weeks ago, including Erma Vizenor, chair of the White Earth Band. Vizenor says the governor's goals are generally in line with theirs.

"There certainly is momentum," Vizenor said. "When the governor is working on redesigning Indian gaming in the state of Minnesota with a partnership with tribes that represent a majority of Indians in the state, yes. And White Earth is very pleased to be working with the governor's office and looks forward to refining and defining our common goals."

Wealthier tribes around the Twin Cities oppose another Twin Cities casino. They say it would cut into their profits. John McCarthy, director of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, describes the governor's plan as a "cynical effort to create disunity among tribes." He says it will transform Minnesota into a "Las Vegas of the north."

"What the governor has done basically is created an atmosphere of gaming frenzy," McCarthy said. "So it isn't just cut and dried and that simple, that you put one casino in and everyone is happy. This is the opening of the door. That's all it is."

McCarthy accuses the governor of breaking a promise that he would not expand gambling in Minnesota. Last year the governor asked the state's Indian tribes to share their casino profits to the tune of $350 million. McCarthy says the governor's only goal is to use tribal resources to fix a state budget crisis.

"What happened to the $350 million that he was trying to extort from the tribes? Where did that go?" said McCarthy. "Now it's a $200 million licensing fee? Of the three tribes that have shown some interest, by their own admission, they're all pretty well strapped for cash. Where are they going to going to come up with a $200 million up-front fee?"

Northern tribal leaders say they're doing what's best for their people. In a recent interview, Red Lake Tribal Secretary Judy Roy said she believes this will be the year the gaming landscape changes. Roy said northern tribes have to be at the table.

"I don't think that anyone begrudges the tribes who have very successful gaming. We applaud them and we're happy for them," said Roy. "So the problem is more of location, and that we will never achieve the kind of financial benefit with our locations and with the sparse populations that we have in northern Minnesota."

Along with profit sharing, the governor's Twin Cities casino plan would have another component. It would establish a separate fund that could one day be used for new sports stadiums, the arts and other community assets. Northern tribal leaders say they'll continue talks with the governor's staff to iron out differences.

Bruce Babbitt’s Nemesis: Death of an Indian Casino

by Gary Larson

25 January 2005

Ten years ago, a casino was to be the deliverance of the St. Croix Meadows Dog Racing Track. Then Bruce Babbitt got involved.

…the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday [Jan. 10, 2005] declined to hear an appeal by three Wisconsin tribes seeking to turn the greyhound racing track in Hudson, Wisconsin, into a casino.

Weeds overrun the race track near Hudson, Wisconsin. Greyhounds no longer run there. With gate receipts tumbling, owners shut down St. Croix Meadows Dog Racing Track in 2001. Ten years ago, a casino was to be the track’s deliverance, and a ticket out of perennial poverty for three impoverished bands of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa (Ojibwe). No longer.

When the high court did not take up their appeal, the Indians and their track owner-partner, a white guy from Miami, lost their 10-year war against a politicized “liberal” bureaucracy, politicians with upturned palms and a Byzantine court system. But not without a fierce struggle . . .

Lengthy, brutish, litigious at the end, it amounted to a casino war among tribes, their hired guns a-blazing. It pitted wealthy tribes with thriving, well-located casinos vs. remote Ojibwe bands with ramshackle casinos and bingo halls not geographically blessed by being near metro markets.

Today, the poor Indians and their deep-pocket patron, track owner Fred Havenick, find their casino dreams dashed. Their struggle at what Judge Robert Bork called “the bloody crossroads of law and politics,” triggered two Congressional inquiries (1997-98) and an $5 million investigation by Independent Counsel Carol Elder Bruce (1998-99). At the time, only a silly intern named Monica was bigger News of the Day.

The casino was to be the solution (“bailout,” insist news media) for Havenick’s “financially ailing” (ditto) racing venue. His track did have location, location, location -- covetously, just 30 minutes east of the Twin Cities market. Teaming with three Ojibwe bands, all from north central Wisconsin, Havenick crafted a novel tribal-private business venture to clear the path for a casino at his track. They called it Four Feathers Joint Venture, Ltd. It seemed such a win-win thing for him and the Ojibwe -- the Lac Courte Oreilles, Red Cliff and Mole Lake bands.

Conventional wisdom said this casino was to be a “slam dunk”. A final nod from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) was needed to put private land “into trust” for the an off-reservation casino. This is found in law under the casino-friendly Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) signed by President George H.W. Bush in 1988.

Four Feathers’ plan: Remake the 160,000 sq. ft. grandstand into a job-creating, tax-paying, ancillary local business-building, native American poverty-busting, intrastate tourist magnet. Slots. Racing. Table games. BINGO!

On the eve of approval, “politics took over…when the issue was kicked upstairs,” said a candid BIA “career” staff member. Clinton appointees at the BIA were about to assert themselves. Money was about to change hands. The agency’s decision was about to become PO-lit-i-cized, somewhat like pardons later on, in the scandal-ridden Clinton era. Opposing tribes, ever-expanding their own “gaming floors,” joined forces with a vocal anti-casino Hudson citizenry. They trotted out the usual (and suspect) anti-casino themes -- crime, “outside” riff-raff, traffic snarls, lessened property values, and that dreaded “expansion of gambling.“ (Media always bite on this red herring.)

Tribes' long enemies, united now by casino-driven wealth, the Dakota (Sioux) and other Ojibwe (Chippewa), formed a mighty lobbying consortium. By one count, they hire 17 well-connected lobbyists. Cost is no object. (In the 1995-96 election cycle, the wealthy “opposing tribes,“ as the Independent Counsel calls them, ante up at least $417,250 in political contributions, all to "Ds," according to the I.C.’s Final Report on Aug. 22, 2000.) Lobbying to kill a casino starts inauspiciously, on February 12, 1995, in an unlikely place -- the Washington office of Minnesota Congressman James Oberstar (D-MN.). Eight wealthy tribes’ reps show up, with two key BIA officials, for the 2 p.m. meeting. Four other Congressman, all “Ds,” join in, some with aides. It is S.R.O. in his office as 16-term Congressman Oberstar declares the purpose of the meeting:
To strike down a proposed casino in the neighboring Badger State.

Fresh from the meeting -- in fact, the next day -- Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt’s Chief Counselor at BIA, John Duffy, a political appointee, re-opens “the file” on the casino at Hudson. This will allow extra time for anti-casino folks to marshal their forces on the Hill. Four Feathers is left out of the loop.

After pressure-packed lobbying, BIA rejects the dog track casino on July 14, 1995. “Local opposition“ is said to be the reason, and is immediately challenged by Four Feathers as a smokescreen for the real reason -- ugly partisan politics.

Four Feathers learns of the rejection from its lobbyist, hired just for this issue, Paul Eckstein of Phoenix. Longtime Democrat, Babbitt’s former law partner in Phoenix, and his classmate at Harvard Law School, Eckstein had asked to meet with his friend after sensing impending doom for his clients. Babbitt agreed. They met privately, for only a half-hour, on July 14, 1995. Reports of their astonishing conversation ignite a political firestorm. Later it will be the focus of Independent Counsel Bruce’s investigation into Secretary Babbitt’s role, if any, in the Hudson casino denial on his watch at BIA, and what he told Congress (including Senator John McCain) and Paul Eckstein about it.

Eckstein reports Babbitt asked him if he knew the sums of money “those Indians” -- or, “those tribes” -- were giving to “their [Democratic] party.” (Babbitt denies it.) Babbitt then answers his own question, “about a half million dollars,” according to Eckstein (Babbitt denies this, too.) Babbitt tells Eckstein that no less than White House Deputy Chief of Staff Harold Ickes, Jr., had ordered the denial be made that day. (Babbitt later asserts he invoked Ickes’ name only to clear his old friend Eckstein out of his office. This claim will provide a field day for pundits and editorial cartoonists.)

After the 1995 denial comes a deluge of litigation: Starting in September, multiple lawsuits are filed, criminal and legal, in state and federal courts. Legal papers fly, alleging all sorts of mischief. Two fallouts along the way, both lightly reported:
-- In Minnesota, Hennepin County (Minneapolis) District Judge Deborah Hedlund imposes sanctions totaling $85,315, paid by certified check with interest, for obstruction of justice, against O’Connor & Hannan, the lead law firm representing wealthy tribes opposing the rival casino. Chalk one up for Four Feathers.
-- In Wisconsin, Four Feathers gets a rare break: Western Wisconsin Federal District Judge Barbara Crabb (Madison) at last allows wider “discovery.” New information, some spilling in from state suits, causes her to revisit the issue. Press reports, too, bring new, untested evidence of “undue political influence.” (Cited in Judge Crabb’s new order are investigative articles in the New York Times, by Donald Van Natta, Jr., and the Minneapolis Star Tribune, by Greg Gordon.)

After “protracted” negotiations, and pressure from the Court, an out-of court settlement is announced in Madison, Wisconsin, in late 1999. Federal District Judge Crabb approves its terms. The agency, for its part, will “vacate and withdraw” its 1995 rejection. Four Feathers agrees to file a new application. And BIA staff in the first decision are recused from considering the new application.

On February 10, 2002, seven years nearly to the day the anti-rival lobbyists rallied in a Minnesota Congressman’s office, and seven months after the dog track at Hudson was closed, the Bureau of Indian Affairs finally approved Four Feathers’ new casino application. BIA’s News Release called the casino to be “in the best interest of the Tribes without being detrimental to the surrounding community.” It was a total reversal of the 1995 decision, from basically the identical record. Go figure?

Four Feathers’ lawyers are not so fortunate in their next legal rounds. Wisconsin Governor Scott McCallum, filling Governor Tommy Thompson’s term, vetoes their off-reservation casino under a curious provision in the federal IGRA. This veto is upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (Chicago) and appealed to the Supreme Court which, on January 10, 2005, declines to hear the appeal.

Rather with a whimper, the 10-year war to kill a casino at an obscure Hudson dog track ends up at the doorstep of the Supreme Court. It is buried in wire reports of myriad cases not being heard. Few recognize it as the last battle of a casino war started in 1995 at the BIA. But three still-impoverished Ojibwe bands recognize this as fini for their casino dreams for the dark, now weed-overgrown track 30 minutes from the bustling Twin Cities metro market. So near, and yet so far away. The End?

Gary Larson is a retired association CEO and former newspaper and business magazine editor. He is a graduate of the School of Journalism at the University of Minnesota, and NOT the retired cartoonist. Larson is a regular at Intellectual Conservative; prior columns are found under Culture, Media.

Pawlenty budget proposal includes casino money

Patricia Lopez and Dane Smith, Star Tribune
January 25, 2005 BUDGET0126

Minnesota would spend more on schools but would slow the growth of health care spending and significantly expand gambling with an Indian-run, metro-area casino to help put its books in the black and possibly fund a stadium, under a budget proposed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty on Tuesday.

To erase a $700 million projected deficit for 2006-07 and fund new spending, Pawlenty would cut the number of people eligible for MinnesotaCare, the state's subsidized health insurance program, keep liquor and car rental taxes where they are instead of allowing them to drop, boost traffic ticket surcharges $10 -- to an average of $75 per ticket -- and make myriad small cuts to programs in virtually every state agency.

Pawlenty noted that his overall budget would increase state spending by $1.6 billion -- 5.8 percent -- over the current biennial budget to just under $30 billion, and would increase funding to K-12 schools and higher education.

"This is a budget we're proud of," he said at a news conference on Tuesday.

Much of his presentation was devoted to outlining Pawlenty's "Gaming Fairness Proposal," which would have participating Indian tribes operating a metro-area casino in partnership with the state. The Minnesota Lottery would operate the slot machines, but the tribes would build, pay for and own the casino itself.

Pawlenty noted that part of the state's share would go into a "Community Assets Account" that would be used "to fund facilities for professional or college sports, the arts or other community priorities."

An executive summary of the budget didn't identify the tribes. The governor earlier mulled a project that might include the White Earth, Red Lake and Leech Lake tribes, all in far northwestern Minnesota.

``We've seen explosive growth in Minnesota's tribal casino industry over the past 15 years,'' Pawlenty said in the summary. ``That growth has not benefited 85 percent of tribal members, nor the state as a whole. Numerous other states have re-examined their gaming agreements to ensure greater fairness and it's time for Minnesota to do the same.''

The $200 million would come from a one-time licensing fee. Starting in 2008, the state could expect $100 million each year from the casino, according to the budget summary.

The idea was immediately criticized by the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, a group that includes all of Minnesota's bands except for Red Lake and White Earth.

``The governor's scheme to involve three northern tribes in a metro-area casino is nothing more than a cynical effort to create disunity among tribes and use the poorest Indians in the state as human shields to protect him from the political fallout of gambling expansion,'' the group said in a statement.

Pawlenty's proposed two-year budget is a 5.8 percent increase over the current budget, slightly more than the rate of inflation. It includes $426 million in spending cuts and $476 million in new spending.

Pawlenty had to account for a $700 million state deficit in crafting the proposal, and the administration was conducting an afternoon briefing to detail the plan. The proposal serves as a starting point for the Legislature.

As the World Turns....the World of Gaming in Minnesota

Opinion - By Dave Snetsinger

It has been very interesting watching Minnesota's Governor Tim Pawlenty during his trek to solve Minnesota's financial problems.

In his State of the State speech in 2004, he stated Minnesota deserves a "better deal". He stated that Indian tribes in Minnesota should pay their share with gaming revenues to help reduce the state's budget woes. Pawlenty has proposed a “take” of tribal gaming proceeds in Minnesota. He estimates that about 25 percent of the gaming revenue or $350 a million would be a fair amount. But the tribes dispute that figure. Where did the Governor get his figures?

Why would Minnesota Tribes want to reopen their gaming compacts with the state and give away 25% of their profits. Did the Governor think that he could just open up the compacts and renogotiate a deal. Tribal Gaming Compacts can only be reopened if both parties agree. Many tribal members said that they would much rather see these funds stay with the reservations, to help serve their people, than go to the states coffers to solve a problem that the Indian tribes had nothing to do with.

Then there were the threats. Governor Pawlenty proposed a “take” of tribal gaming proceeds in exchange of offering the tribes exclusivity of gaming in Minnesota. There were a number of proposals before the legislature last year dealing with gaming. Expanding the Canterbury Park racetrack into a "Racino" was just one proposal that got a lot of attention. Putting slot machines into Minnesota's bars was also proposed. Partnering with northern Minnesota tribes to build a Metro Casino was also debated. These are all cards that the Governor feels he has to pressure a deal.

In late August 2004, Melanie Benjamin, Chief Executive of the Mille Lacs Band, wrote to Governor Pawlenty, proposing several partnership opportunities that could benefit the State and the Band. The Governor welcomes the idea of cooperation. Then the Mille Lacs executive withdraws her proposal, saying the Governor does not negotiate in good faith. She explains why in her letter to the Governor:

• First, at your request, the State filed an amicus brief supporting Mille Lacs
County in its lawsuit aimed at disestablishing the Mille Lacs Reservation’s
boundaries. Fortunately for the Band, the Supreme Court has refused to hear the
case, supporting the ruling of two lower courts against the county.

• Second, you sent a letter to all of Minnesota’s tribal leaders demanding the tribes pay $350 million to the State. This amount is based on the conclusions of a
thrown-together study conducted by your administration without any basis in
reality. Meanwhile, you and your chief of staff made well-publicized attempts to
push forward the idea of opening Minnesota to Las Vegas gaming interests.

• Third, you led a political smear campaign leading up to the election in a
deliberate attempt to turn undeserved animosity toward Indian gaming and Indian
people into votes for Republican candidates. Your name and voice were part of
campaign ads and literature, politicizing the issue to an extent that shows how
out of line your priorities are with the Mille Lacs Band’s wish to work together
on a government-to-government basis. The fact that your campaign failed does not
make it any less shameful.

Chief Executive Benjamin goes on in her letter..."Your actions to politicize the gaming issue since the Band came forward in August have poisoned the water. At this time, there is no point in participating in a one-sided discussion with no real hope of a solution."

Pawlenty once was among the opponents of any expansion of gambling and said "running, managing, licensing casinos is not a proper government function." He told the Pioneer Press in November that he would prefer there were no gambling in Minnesota. But he said the current situation in which tribes enjoy a monopoly on casino gaming but pay nothing to the state is not acceptable.

According to a St. Paul Press article in December, Pawlenty said his strong first choice is to persuade tribes to give the state a 25 percent cut of their revenue in return for a guarantee of a continued monopoly and perhaps state approval for a new Twin Cities casino that would benefit Indians and the state. And if the tribes do not agree? "We're actively pursuing Plan B and Plan C options," He refused to elaborate.

In a Dec. 17 letter to Pawlenty, Stanley Crooks, the Mdewakanton tribal chairman, wrote, in part: "(You) trample your own political party's core principles by promoting a tax or fee (or whatever you wish to call it) on the tribes. Regardless, it is nothing more than a financial punishment against tribes for achieving meaningful economic success."

The Governor's effort to persuade tribes to give the state a share of gaming profits has failed, according to House Speaker Steve Sviggum. "It's not happening," Sviggum said. "They're not meeting with him."

The Governor makes history. On January 6,2005 Governor Pawlenty traveled to the White Earth Reservation to meet with tribal leaders from Leech Lake, Red Lake and White Earth. White Earth Chairwoman Erma Vizenor opened the meeting by stating that "For the first time in my memory and the memories of many of our elders, that a Governor has come to visit us in our home." The Governors tone and tactics were much softer. During this meeting, the Governor offered some "concepts" to consider. The Governor said that he has not presented these "concepts" to the state legislature yet, but wanted to discuss them with the northern tribes. All representatives from the three reservations said that they would take these "concepts" back to their governing bodies to discuss.

The following week, the Governor's spokesman Brian McClung stated that the only new casino proposal the Governor is considering is one that would allow three northern Minnesota tribes to build a Twin Cities casino.

During the Governor's State of the State speech in Rochester, he state that his preferences on gambling have not changed, but eluded to the fact that tribal entities would not change. Thus, he concludes that "we're left to explore other alternatives". He goes on how he was please with the discussions with the tribes in Northern Minnesota.

The day after the Governor's State of the State speech, the Associated Press writes that the governor's spokesman stated that Gov. Tim Pawlenty met with the mayor of Bloomington last month to discuss opening a partially state-run casino at the Mall of America. Pawlenty's spokesman, Brian McClung, stressed that the governor has met with several local officials around the Twin Cities in recent weeks to discuss his casino proposal. It would be a partnership between the state and several northern Minnesota Indian tribes that don't currently own casinos.

McClung also said that Pawlenty has also met with officials in the Anoka area. Interesting.....

According to a Star Tribune article on January 23, 2005 Minnesota's debate over gambling took a couple of sharp turns last week with state approval of a harness racing track in Anoka County The $47 million harness track plan emerged without fanfare from the little-watched Minnesota Racing Commission, which had rejected it as recently as last October. But the commission's vote had barely been recorded before House Speaker Steve Sviggum, R-Kenyon, was talking of adding a casino to what is now 165 acres of hay and scrub trees in Columbus Township near Forest Lake.

Could this be the proposal that Governor Tim Pawlenty intends to propose to the state legislature? Who knows..... Stay tuned... as the World Turns.

Some say 'racino,' others casino

Conrad Defiebre, Star Tribune
January 23, 2005

Minnesota's debate over gambling took a couple of sharp turns last week with state approval of a harness racing track in Anoka County and news of Gov. Tim Pawlenty's widening net of negotiations for a new casino in the Twin Cities.

The $47 million harness track plan emerged without fanfare from the little-watched Minnesota Racing Commission, which had rejected it as recently as last October. But the commission's vote had barely been recorded before House Speaker Steve Sviggum, R-Kenyon, was talking of adding a casino to what is now 165 acres of hay and scrub trees in Columbus Township near Forest Lake).

That would go along with the casino -- or "racino" -- the House has been pushing for the Canterbury Park track in Shakopee. Together, the two gambling emporia might produce the hundreds of millions of dollars a year that House Republicans think they need to balance the state budget for the next two years.

Pawlenty has been pushing another way to corral a major chunk of cash -- new agreements with casino-rich tribes in the southern half of Minnesota. But they have snubbed the governor, so he has turned to impoverished northern tribes, who would like to set up slots closer to population centers, and to the Ghermezian brothers, who envision a mega-casino at the Mall of America much like the one at their big mall in Edmonton, Alberta. The Ghermezians own 50 percent of the Bloomington mall.

All this activity has left the rich tribes, Bloomington officials, DFL politicians -- all opposed to expanding gambling -- and even the harness track promoters -- who say they aren't thinking about a casino yet -- somewhat dazed. But this is an issue that isn't likely to go away this legislative session.

Megamall casino idea finds opponents

Patricia Lopez and Bill McAuliffe, Star Tribune

The Mall wants it; the governor is looking into it, but leaders in Bloomington remain largely hostile to the latest efforts to build a "Las Vegas-style" casino at an expanded Mall of America.
The renewed efforts may have gathered steam during Gov. Tim Pawlenty's recent trip to Edmonton, Alberta.

In addition to visiting schools there, he also met privately with the Ghermezian brothers -- developers and 50 percent owners of the Mall of America -- and toured their West Edmonton Mall and its casino.

Pawlenty spokesman Brian McClung said he did not know whether the governor specifically discussed the Mall of America as the site for a possible casino at that meeting, but the Ghermezians have long been interested in a casino at the mall, which Las Vegas casino officials have called the "premier location in the nation" for a new casino.

McClung insisted that no decision on a metro-area casino has been made, but he acknowledged that since Pawlenty's Dec. 9 meeting with the Ghermezians, the governor has met with Bloomington Mayor Gene Winstead about it, that it has come up in Pawlenty's talks with northern Indian tribes eager for a metro-area casino, and that lobbyists for the mall made a casino pitch in late December to Pawlenty's chief of staff, Dan McElroy.

But resistance to a mall casino remains heavy among most Bloomington officials.
"I would absolutely stand against it," said Jan Schneider, chairwoman of the city's Planning Commission.

"Expansion of gambling [in Minnesota] is something I would prefer not to have at all, but I'd really prefer it not to happen in Bloomington," she said.

In 2002 the Bloomington council declared its opposition to a casino "unless it is inevitable," in which case it would strive for the most beneficial deal for the city.

Schneider said Wednesday that a casino -- authorized by the Legislature -- would probably have to come through the Planning Commission for approval -- something she believes isn't likely to happen.

Indeed, the city's representatives at the Legislature also blasted the proposal, especially because they felt excluded and so far the proposal has avoided customary public airing.
Rep. Ann Lenczewski, DFL-Bloomington, had set a town meeting for next month with representatives from Caesar's, who aren't part of the current proposal. She said she was blindsided by the possibility that Pawlenty may be considering a mall at the casino.
"I'm not a big fan of expanding gambling, but even for those who are, the people who reside here and will bear the social and financial costs -- the police costs, the prostitution costs [and] the narcotics costs -- deserve to be involved in this process," Lenczewski said.

Las Vegas interests proposed a casino at the mall last year and spent more than $600,000 lobbying for it, only to get a cold shoulder from legislators. This time, the Pawlenty administration hasn't made Vegas part of the discussions. Instead, Pawlenty has hinted he would like to reach an pact with northern Minnesota Indian tribes who want a metro-area casino.

Pawlenty has been searching for a way to get the state in on burgeoning Indian casino profits, first proposing that the major gaming tribes pay $350 million a year to retain exclusive casino gambling rights. When that went nowhere, he began talks with the Leech Lake, White Earth and Red Lake tribes, whose remote casinos have been only marginally successful and who want a metro-area site.

Sen. Jane Ranum, DFL-Minneapolis, whose district includes part of Bloomington, said she opposes gambling. Moreover, she believes it would be a bad fit for the mall. "The mall has thrived because of its vision as a family-friendly place. If you put a casino out there, you are changing very much the complexion of what the Mall of America is about. It goes from Snoopys and Legos to strip joints."

McClung said the idea of a casino at the mall "has been out there for some time, but the governor wants to be very clear that no site has been selected for a possible gaming operation."
However, McClung did say that the site did come up in Pawlenty's Jan. 6 meeting with the three northern tribes and that the governor's staff has researched the idea.

"Research has been done on all the various options for alternative gaming operations," McClung said, including a state-run casino and a casino run by the tribes.

Sen. Geoff Michel, R-Edina, who also represents part of Bloomington, said he opposes a casino as part of the mall's proposed Phase II development, which includes the Ikea store. He and Ranum said they would insist on a local referendum, should the idea continue to gain steam.

Former Mayor Kurt Laughinghouse said he was receiving casino proposals as far back as the late 1980s, when the Mall of America was still just a twinkle in developers' eyes.

"People wanted to meet with me. I wasn't interested," said Laughinghouse, who said he also opposes expanding gambling.

He called it "a tax on lower-income people" and said it often destroys families and generates crime.

But Laughinghouse, who works for the state attorney general's office, said the business pros and cons ought to be weighed. A casino may draw more out-of-town visitors to the mall, and that wouldn't hurt Bloomington, he said.

On the other hand, he said, the city should determine whether a different development on the same site could also attract significant traffic. And he said the prospect of more visitors should be weighed against the fact that a casino, whether operated by a tribe or the state, would take prime commercial property off the tax rolls.

The Ghermezian family, which recently won a court judgment that could give it control of the mall, said last summer that it would promote the development of nearby attractions to build customer traffic. Among the possibilities cited for property adjacent to the mall were a hotel, an ice rink and water features such as those at the West Edmonton Mall.

Lia Fitzpatrick, spokeswoman for the Ghermezian family's Triple Five Corp., said Wednesday that the company would not comment on the possibility of a casino near the mall until all mall ownership issues are resolved.

Pawlenty, Bloomington mayor discuss Mall of America casino

By PATRICK CONDON Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, January 19, 2005

ST. PAUL

Gov. Tim Pawlenty met with the mayor of Bloomington last month to discuss opening a partially state-run casino at the Mall of America, the governor's spokesman said Tuesday.
Lawyers for the mall's owners also met recently with the Bloomington City Council to discuss the same possibility.

"I think we're open to what people have to say," said Maureen Bausch, the mall's vice president for business development. "I certainly understand why it makes sense. We're the number one tourist destination in the Midwest, and we certainly have the land."

The casino, which could include a resort and other amenities, would likely be located across the street from the mall at the former site of Met Center, Bausch said.

The Ghermezian family, which helped build Mall of America and recently regained a controlling interest, also own the West Edmonton Mall in Edmonton, Canada, which includes a casino.
Pawlenty's spokesman, Brian McClung, stressed that the governor has met with several local officials around the Twin Cities in recent weeks to discuss his casino proposal. It would be a partnership between the state and several northern Minnesota Indian tribes that don't currently own casinos.

"I would caution people not to read too much into the fact that the governor has met with anybody," McClung said, adding that Pawlenty has also met with officials in the Anoka area.
McClung also said Pawlenty would not support building a casino in any community that doesn't want one.

Pawlenty suggested last year that the Minnesota's casino-owning tribes should give the state a share of their profits in order to retain their casino monopoly, an idea roundly rejected by tribal leaders. Since then, Pawlenty has increasingly spoken in favor of the state-tribal partnership, which could include the White Earth, Red Lake and Leech Lake tribes.

The governor said in his State of the State speech Tuesday that he expected to release a proposal sometime in the next few weeks.

Bloomington Mayor Gene Winstead did not immediately return a call seeking comment. State Rep. Dan Larson, DFL-Bloomington, whose district includes the Mall of America, said city officials are worried that a casino would put a strain on resources while not benefiting the city financially.

"I'm not morally opposed to gambling, but I think there are a lot of concerns with dropping a casino down in the middle of a major metropolitan area," Larson said.

New report criticizes regulation of gambling

Pat Doyle and Mark Brunswick, Star Tribune
January 19, 2005

The state agency that inspects tribal casinos in Minnesota fails to fully exercise its authority to ensure that they comply with rules intended to keep the games honest, the legislative auditor said Tuesday.

The failure was among findings in a report that was critical of the state's regulation of legalized gambling, including the card room at Canterbury Park and tavern games such as pull tabs.
The evaluation by the Office of the Legislative Auditor concluded that the Department of Public Safety, which has limited authority to inspect casinos, should spend more time scrutinizing casino audits and other financial data and less time inspecting slot machines.

The department's gambling division "has access to an array of information, including relevant casino information systems, casino financial and internal control audits, compliance data from tribal regulatory authorities" and other data, the auditor said. Because the division hasn't fully used those tools, its judgments on casino compliance are based on limited information.

The auditor also found:

• The agency that oversees pull tabs and other games played in taverns doesn't adequately detect and deter violations by the organizations running the games. While the purpose of so-called charitable gambling is to provide money for clubs and nonprofit organizations, the auditor found that "some organizations have excessive expenses and make small contributions to charities."

• The Minnesota Racing Commission's oversight of gambling at Canterbury Park racetrack is inadequate. While the commission exercises "effective oversight of horse racing, the commission relies too heavily on Canterbury Park for oversight of card club activities. The Racing Commission employs stewards, veterinarians and barn technicians to oversee racing. Each of these personnel has a specific role in ensuring the integrity of horse racing. In contrast, the Racing Commission does not have personnel with sufficient expertise to oversee card club activities, and the commission relies too much on self-regulation by Canterbury Park."

• The lottery does an adequate job protecting its scratch-off and online games, minimizing the risk of cheating, and makes sure its proceeds are distributed properly. However, its dual role as regulator and promoter could compromise integrity.

"All of Minnesota's gambling regulatory agencies, except the lottery, should make better use of technology to fulfill their oversight and regulatory responsibilities," the report said.

The writers are at pdoyle@startribune.com andmbrunswick@startribune.com

Northern tribe metro casino plan on Pawlenty’s desk

By DON DAVIS

St. Paul Bureau

The only new casino proposal Gov. Tim Pawlenty is considering would allow three northern Minnesota tribes to build a Twin Cities casino, his spokesman said Tuesday.

Press secretary Brian McClung said no other tribes have accepted the governor's proposal to split casino profits with the state. Also, Senate Minority Leader Dick Day, R-Owatonna, said he understands Pawlenty will endorse an agreement with the Leech Lake, Red Lake and White Earth bands of Chippewa next week. McClung would not confirm that, but said the governor wants to correct the unfairness that the three bands face with their remote casino producing little profit. “There hasn't been a decision yet,” McClung said.

Pawlenty's State of the State speech comes in Rochester on Tuesday. White Earth Chairwoman Erma Vizenor and Sen. Keith Langseth said Pawlenty did not mention his State of the State speech during a meeting at White Earth last week, but he did say he wants to make a decision quickly.

McClung and Day both mentioned Langseth, DFL-Glyndon, as a possible leader in any casino bill the 2005 Legislature considers. Day, who has had a long-held dream of building a casino at the Canterbury Park horse-racing track in the southern suburbs, said he hopes Langseth becomes a primary sponsor of the bill.

Langseth, however, appeared to lean more toward combining the so-called “racino” with a casino to help the three northern tribes. That could mean building a new casino at the race track, with profits split among the tribes, state and Canterbury. Langseth said he thinks this is the year the Senate can approve a new casino. A year ago, the state's richer tribes sent senators a message that they wanted lawmakers to hold off approving a new casino for a year. “It's been a year,” Langseth said.

While Langseth said he does not support gambling, the state's 18 tribal casinos are not helping many of the state’s Indians. Approving a new casino will be tough, he added. “I think it is going to get very sticky.”

Tribal leader says bands with casinos should share with have-nots

Tribal leader says bands with casinos should share with have-nots

Associated Press
January 11, 2005

VINELAND, Minn. -- Minnesota's most prosperous American Indian bands should join together to provide financial help to less fortunate bands, the head of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe said Tuesday.

Chief executive Melanie Benjamin, in her annual address to band members, urged tribes to revive their tradition of sharing their wealth. She envisions contributions to a foundation that would distribute grants, and said she's already sent a proposal to other tribes.

``As a band, we have an obligation to share with people who do not have enough,'' Benjamin said. ``We must do this because it's what we've been taught. We do this because we can - and we do this because it is the right thing to do.''

The White Earth, Red Lake and Leech Lake tribes, all in far northwestern Minnesota, have discussed partnering with the state of Minnesota to open a new casino in the Twin Cities area. The Mille Lacs band and other tribes with casinos already established in the area oppose the idea, worried that it would hurt their business.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty has said the wealthy tribes could maintain their monopoly by paying the state $350 million from their gambling revenue. Tribal leaders have so far rebuffed Pawlenty's suggestion.

Benjamin said she'd been working on her proposal for several months and it isn't a direct response to Pawlenty. But she admitted many band members would rather see money go to help other tribes instead of to the state's general fund.

``For some reason, the citizens of Minnesota don't believe we give,'' Benjamin said. ``By starting this foundation, it would allow us to formalize our giving.''

Such a foundation wouldn't dissuade the White Earth band from seeking to operate a joint casino with the state, executive director Ron Valiant said.

``We do appreciate this offer, but we feel like we would rather go and earn the money ourselves instead of taking the money from other tribes,'' Valiant said.

Brian McClung, a spokesman for Pawlenty, was noncommittal. Pawlenty remains interested in a way to make the casino gambling system more fair to northern tribal members, he said.

Benjamin said she's raised the proposal with the Shakopee Mdewakanton Dakota, who own Mystic Lake Casino, and with the Prairie Island Indian Community, owner of Prairie Island Resort and Casino.

She said she suggested an initial investment of $50 million.

Officials said it's not clear how the foundation would distribute its grant money.

``It's important to say that this is in the very early stages right now,'' said Tadd Johnson, the Mille Lacs band's chief lobbyist.

In the meantime, tribal secretary Herb Weyaus said no negotiations are planned with the governor's office. He said the Mille Lacs band remains opposed to sharing revenue directly with the state.

``We are people of our word - let us hope the legislators are also people of their word, and that they hold to the agreements in our compacts,'' Weyaus said.

Willie Hardecker, a spokesman for the Shakopee Mdewakanton, said the band supports Benjamin's idea, though officials aren't immediately sure how they want to participate. He noted the Shakopee band already makes regular grants and loans to other tribes, citing three separate grants of $1 million or more in the past two years to the Bois Forte, Upper Sioux and White Earth bands.

Editorial: A better bet/Deal with northern tribes first

Editorial: A better bet/Deal with northern tribes first
January 9, 2005

Gov. Tim Pawlenty's attempt to get a share of Indian gambling dollars flowing into state coffers took him to the White Earth Chippewa reservation in northwestern Minnesota on Thursday. It was a smart turn.

That trip, and the words spoken that day, represent a marked improvement over the tactic the governor was employing three months ago. In October, Pawlenty demanded a huge chunk of Indian casino revenues -- $350 million a year -- and broadly hinted that if it was not forthcoming, Las Vegas casino competition would be allowed in the state.

On Thursday, the governor's message and tone were much more respectful -- and the three tribes represented responded in kind. Their public comments were replete with references to understanding, cooperation and partnership.

Of course, they are only three of the state's 11 casino-operating native bands -- the most populous, the most plagued by poverty and the least able to prosper by operating casinos on their remotely located reservations.

For several years, two of the bands, White Earth and Red Lake, have sought the Legislature's permission to set up their slots where the real money is -- the Twin Cities. They are willing to share their profits with the state to get it. This year, their plea has been joined by the Leech Lake band, the third tribe represented at Thursday's meeting.

Pawlenty continued to express a preference last week for obtaining a slice of revenue for the state from the casinos already operating in Minnesota. He has good reason for that preference. Casino gambling is not a socially benign enterprise. Its spread would scar more Minnesotans' lives and alter Minnesota's culture in undesirable ways. Obtaining a reasonable payment -- much less than $350 million a year -- from the tribes, in exchange for a promise that no non-Indian casinos will be allowed in the state, would be a deal worth making.

That's a deal that to date has eluded Pawlenty, at least in part because of his ham-handed demand for cash. Pursuing it now requires a fresh start and, most likely, a fresh bargaining team. Pawlenty would do well to appoint a panel of respected Minnesotans to pursue the possibility of a new bargain with the tribes.

But by looking at the northern reservations, Pawlenty is also taking note at something all Minnesotans should see: Casino gambling, as now configured, isn't giving a majority of this state's native people the economic opportunity they deserve. It's a cruelly unfair development tool, allowing a few to become fabulously wealthy while leaving most behind.

State government has risen repeatedly to the task of reducing disparities between rich and poor in this state, to the benefit of schools, colleges, cities and more. The tribes may be separate nations, but they are Minnesotans too. Poverty at Red Lake, White Earth and Leech Lake is a Minnesota concern.

A joint state-northern tribes casino might be one way -- but is certainly not the only way -- for the state to move toward more equal opportunity for a good life, for all Minnesotans. Pawlenty is right to explore the option.

Northern Tribes to Study Gaming Plan

Northern tribes to study gaming plan

Sunday, January 09, 2005
By Brad SwensonStaff Writerbswenson@bemidjipioneer.com

RED LAKE - Leaders of three northern tribes plan to mull over a state role in a joint casino partnership.
“Red Lake has not committed to anything,” Red Lake Tribal Chairman Floyd “Buck” Jourdain said Friday.
Representatives of Red Lake, White Earth and Leech Lake bands of Chippewa met Thursday at White Earth with Gov. Tim Pawlenty over the tribes’ pitch for a northern Twin Cities casino partnership with them and the state.
Pawlenty gave the tribes some options under which such a partnership could be envisioned.
“He calls them concepts, not proposals,” Jourdain said. “Each council will talk.”
Jourdain gave the update during a town meeting Friday, held by Sen. Rod Skoe, DFL-Clearbrook, at which he included Reps. Brita Sailer, DFL-Park Rapids, and Kent Eken, DFL-Twin Valley.
Pawlenty has proposed a “take” of tribal gaming proceeds in Minnesota in exchange of offering the tribes exclusivity. He estimates that portion, about 25 percent, at $350 a million, but the tribes dispute that figure.
Red Lake and White Earth have pushed for the Minnesota Gaming Equity Act, allowing them to operate a Twin Cities-area casino and splitting the proceeds with the state. Now, Leech Lake has joined the other two tribes.
The Twin Cities market is seen as more lucrative for the state’s poorest tribes
and most abundant, making up about 80 percent of the state’s American Indian population.
Jourdain said the Red Lake Tribal Council recently voted to continue to support the Minnesota Gaming Equity Act, “to move forward and push as far as we can.”
But now Pawlenty’s “concepts” will also be studied. Jourdain, in an interview, said that the state’s other tribes probably will not like what Pawlenty is proposing. But he added that all the tribes are speaking and working together, that sovereignty is a key concept.
But while Pawlenty would like an answer before he releases his budget in two weeks, Jourdain said the tribes feel no immediate pressure, as the Legislature isn’t scheduled to adjourn until May 23.
Under the northern tribes proposal, they would operate the casino, with the state getting about $90 million a year and the tribes splitting about $190 million with construction costs.
“It was a very cordial, good meeting,” Skoe said of the gathering with Pawlenty, which he also attended. “And I think that the remarks of the representatives who were there reflect that. They were all quite positive in their relationships with the governor.”
Red Lake was represented at the meeting by Tribal Secretary Judy Roy and Tribal Treasurer Darrell Seki.
Skoe also anticipated that the governor’s pitch might put the northern tribes at odds with the state’s other tribes, to which Pawlenty seeks revenue sharing.
“You see the wedge being driven between the northern tribes and the rest of the tribes,” he said. “As discussions go forward, there are a lot of issues that Indian people in Minnesota work on that are broader than gaming, and hopefully they’ll be able to move beyond this and work together on all the other issues.”
Any agreement worked out between the state and the three tribes still won’t mean major money for the state, however. “It’s not going to solve the deficit, it’s just not that large,” Skoe said. “But if we can come up with something positive that benefits many of the native American peoples in the state, we should be looking at that. And if the state can get some resources out of that, that would be a good thing also.”
Skoe, now vice chairman of the Senate Agriculture, Veterans and Gaming Committee, said Thursday’s meeting also included the panel’s chairman, Sen. Jim Vickerman, DFL-Tracy, who in the past has been cool about gaming bills.
“The Senate has really been the holdup on gaming legislation,” Skoe said. “Gaming legislation has passed the House in the last couple of years, and I don’t know what the changes in membership will do for the House in their ability to pass gaming legislation.”
The GOP holds a 68-66 margin, having lost 13 seats in the fall election. The House previously approved the Minnesota Gaming Equity Act, as well as slot machines at Canterbury Park, the so-called “racino” proposal.
“I do sense that there is a little more support for some kind of gaming bill in the Senate,” Skoe said. Vickerman “did talk (Thursday) like he was going to hear the bills and give them a hearing and let the committee decide.”
Sailer said she would support legislation that helps the district, as well as the state.
“It’s my job to be looking at what benefits the people of this district and this area, and also the people of Minnesota,” she said. “It’s going to be give and take, most certainly, on it.”