NEWS
Ho-Chunk pulls gaming funds
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Yana Paskova:
- Paul Ryan reintroduces Social Security privatization package in House (April 22, 2005)
- Woman dies in apartment on Langdon (April 27, 2005)
- Capitol hosts first 'State of the Tribes' address (March 9, 2005)
- State to appoint Taser committee (February 24, 2005)
- Assembly passes property tax freeze pushed by Republicans (February 18, 2005)
Related Stories:
- Gaming compacts concern UW (March 10, 2003)
- Bingo! DeJope could broaden casino contract (November 18, 2003)
- Doyle amends tribe contract (October 5, 2005)
- State's tribal casinos see increased revenue (December 6, 2002)
- Ho-Chunk Nation to bet on referendum (January 30, 2004)
by Yana Paskova
Friday, February 4, 2005
The Ho-Chunk Nation announced Thursday they do not plan to pay the $60 million owed to the state under the gaming compact they signed with Gov. Jim Doyle. The Nation is not required to pay the money due to a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision last year.
Under the compact, the gaming tribe had agreed to pay the state $30 million a year in exchange for being allowed to add games such as poker, craps and roulette to its facilities.
However, the Republican Party protested the contract’s lack of an expiration date and argued it illegally expanded gambling. The Supreme Court then ruled the provision could not exist in perpetuity.
State Rep. Mike Ellis, R-Neenah, said Republicans disputed the gaming provisions in the contracts due to constitutional prohibitions on expanded gambling.
Thursday’s announcement drew scorn from numerous Republicans, who say the Ho-Chunk’s withdrawal of the compact money will only exacerbate the state’s budget deficit.
“Ho-Chunk owes the state $60 million dollars and, at some point, they will pay it,” Ellis said.
Ellis said he is confident Wisconsin Department of Administration Secretary Marc Marotta, who will participate in the negotiations process, will “get our money.”
Some officials have argued the cushion of funds were crucial to Doyle’s ability to balance the budget without increasing taxes.
Wisconsin will battle a $1.6 billion deficit in the next two years due to a shortfall in predicted income compared to state agency spending. Therefore, the governor and lawmakers will have to compensate for the deficit through spending cuts and perhaps tax increases.
Department of Administration Spokesman Scott Larrivee said the regulation has placed the state in a difficult position, but he added they would regularly meet with the tribes to agree to a contract with a shorter duration.
“We are confident and hopeful we will get a payment by June 30, which is the end of the fiscal year,” he said.
Larrivee added although the Supreme Court ruling returned 10 of the state’s 11 federally recognized tribes — including the Ho-Chunk — to the negotiating table with Doyle, nine casinos have continued making payments since the Supreme Court order.
Ho-Chunk spokeswoman Tracy Littlejohn defended the Ho-Chunk’s decision to not pay by pointing to a contractual clause relieving the casino of payment responsibilities if the jurisdiction deemed the compact invalid.
“We are not refusing to pay; we simply don’t owe any money,” Littlejohn said. “We decided to follow along with the Supreme Court’s decision, and we are just obeying the law.”
Littlejohn said she agreed the $60 million was a sizeable portion of the state’s plunging budget. But she said they would not have gone back to negotiations if not for the favorable outcome of the Republican-led lawsuit against Doyle’s tribe contracts. She also said both Ho-Chunk casino and the state would probably act in their own interests during the talks.
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 1:33am):
"we don't owe any money"
are you kidding me? why negotiate with these swines if they refuse to do so in good faith?
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 4:52am):
Wait, you're calling the Ho-Chunk 'swines'?
In the compact bargaining, the Ho-Chunk agreed to pay more money than they should have because Doyle gave them extra benefits (perpetuity, new types of gaming).
Then the Republicans take the compacts to the Supreme Court, contesting their legitimacy. The Supreme Court says the compacts are void and the Ho-Chunk don't have to pay until renegotiation.
Then before the new negotiations are through, the same Republicans that pushed the court case get angry because they don't have the money yet.
And now the Ho-Chunk are swine?
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 8:17am):
Doyle should not have made agreements for which he had no authority to make. Blame him and the staff who advised him. The State Supreme Court would not have taken up the case if they didn't think it was legitimate, so don't point the finger at republicans in the (I assume) legislature.
Don't you think it was fishy to make contracts that had no renegotiation date? That they were to go on into perpetuity?
Jon (February 4, 2005 @ 9:01am):
Way to go republicans! Although I'm sure they will find a way to blame Doyle for this one, even though Doyle had the contract all worked out till the republican lawsuit made it null and void.
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 10:21am):
Jon: The lawsuit didn't make it null and void, the State Supreme Court ruling did. Do you think the ruling was invalid? Doyle went beyond his authority in making the compact.
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 11:11am):
Anonymous on Jon:
You are correct: the court ruling did make the law invalid, though it was the republican suit which brought it to court in the first place. What I think Jon's point is, is that somehow the republicans are getting upset that Ho Chuck isnt paying something they are legally not bound to pay anymore (because of the suit). Since they never got to have expanded games, they dont have to pay, its pretty simple. Unless you're a state senate republican. And before someone calls me an "unrealistic liberal" or something like that, I'm not a big fan of the state democrats either (not funding the UW fully, ETC) - its just in this case the republicans look stupid fro trying to get money they cannot legally get (because of thier own actions, which I do find amusing).
Word
Z
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 4:07pm):
Ick. I'm no fan of the casino expansion that has happened in Wisconsin, but it's hard to stomach the level of racism on this board.
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 7:56pm):
Invite others to put up casinos and tax the business or maybe the state should just cut out the middleman and set up their own casinos.
Why give Ho Chunk a monopoly?
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 8:07pm):
Do you know about the other tribes in the state? The Ho-Chunk don't even have the most profitable of the casinos. The Ho-Chunk certainly do not have a monopoly. Just because the media chooses to chastise the Ho-Chunk, doesn't mean they are the only tribe in Wisconsin.
Anonymous (February 4, 2005 @ 10:24pm):
The timing of this might influence Doyle not to insist that the DNR keep Aztalan State Park open (our main archeological site in the state). Out of bitterness, he could just let the park lapse into a closed status thinking that will show the Wisconsin Native Americans. The DNR does not want to pay to keep it open even though it is a public state park and the decision is in Doyle's hands.
Anonymous (February 5, 2005 @ 5:54am):
Why give the tribes a monopoly?
Why not open it up to the highest bidder?
brad garrity (February 6, 2005 @ 10:49pm):
Doyle's contract violated the state constitution. Is it okay for the governor to make illegal deals to fill in his budget gap?
brad garrity (February 6, 2005 @ 10:50pm):
Doyle's contract violated the state constitution. Period. The governor swore to uphold the constitution of Wisconsin.
Is it okay for the governor to make illegal deals to fill in his budget gap?
A former Attorney General should know better.
brad garrity (February 6, 2005 @ 10:54pm):
Doyle's contract violated the state constitution. Period. The governor swore to uphold the constitution of Wisconsin.
Is it okay for the governor to make illegal deals to fill in his budget gap?
A former Attorney General should know better.
PS- How is it that the Oneida have a legal, fair compact written before Doyle became Gov.? Why wouldn't he use that as a template for the others?
