Casino bill adds means testing

By Pat Doyle

Star Tribune

      Any band that wants to participate with the state in running a Twin Cities-area casino would have to demonstrate that it currently lacks money to meet housing, medical care and other basic needs of its members, according to details of a House bill that emerged Monday at the Legislature.

      The bands would have to pass a means test before they would be eligible to join the state in the casino venture, which Gov. Tim Pawlenty has touted as a new source of revenue for the state and for large northern tribes that haven't prospered from existing tribal casinos.

      The Leech Lake, White Earth and Red Lake Chippewa have agreed to participate with the state in such a casino. While the governor had said he would allow any interested tribe to participate in the partnership, the bill indicates for the first time that the state's wealthier tribes, the Shakopee Mdewakanton Dakota Community, the Prairie Island Mdewakanton Dakota Tribe, and perhaps the Mille Lacs Band and others, apparently would be shut out.

The bill also appears to:

              • Require the tribal partners to conduct an annual audit of their operation of the casino and provide the state with a copy of it, but classify it non-public under Minnesota law.

              • Waive tribal sovereign immunity from lawsuits in the event of disputes over the construction or management of the casino. Lawsuits would be heard in state court instead of tribal court.

      The House bill's sponsors include Rep. Andy Westerberg, R-Blaine, and House Speaker Steve Sviggum, R-Kenyon.

      Adult members of the Shakopee -- which owns Mystic Lake Casino in Prior Lake -- have each received roughly $1 million a year, according to court records. Prairie Island members, owners of Treasure Island Casino, receive substantial profit-sharing payments as well.

      Stanley Crooks, chairman of Shakopee Mdewakanton, reacted to the bill Monday night by asking whether the state would hold tribes to a different standard from non-Indian gambling developers who also are interested in building a metro-area casino.

      Referring to a proposal by Canterbury Park, Crooks asked, "If the Canterbury bill gets to [the governor's] desk, will he veto it unless it has a means test for the Canterbury shareholders? Will they have to prove they are so poor before they can get slot machines?"

      Pawlenty's chief of staff, Dan McElroy, said economic qualifications for joining the venture were recently added to the proposal after consultations with state lawyers who said there needed to be a reason and a compelling state purpose to justify a law that selects particular beneficiaries for a special deal like the casino.

      "The compelling state interest in our tribal partnership bill is to help those tribes who have not benefited significantly from gaming, that have significant needs for things like education facilities, health care, safe drinking water, housing, job creation," he said.

      McElroy also said the provisions defining tribal audits as nonpublic would be consistent with the status of audits on existing tribal casinos and necessary to avoid divulging trade secrets.

      Other longtime opponents of a state-tribal deal attacked other details of the bill. Restrictions on tribal sovereignty could fuel opposition on the Red Lake Reservation, where there has been some resistance to a casino deal with the state, said John McCarthy executive director of the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association.

      "I think that tribal sovereignty issue is going to play heavily at home," McCarthy said.