Saturday, January 12, 2008

Another offsite casino bites the dust

Another tribe's plan for an off reservation casino has been denied - this time the Jemez Pueblo of New Mexico. Also a smaller casino proposed by the Tiguas of El Paso was rejected. In the article below 65-year-old Jesus Aguila whines "That casino was going to be the future of this community,". No Mr. Aguilar, the Interior Dept. just saved your community (inadvertently of course). The crime, the graft, the division of community that arrive with the casino are not worth the low-end jobs the casino brings in.

Interior Department rejects trust land for Jemez Pueblo casino
By Jose L. Medina/Sun-News reporter

LAS CRUCES - The U.S. Department of the Interior has denied two proposals to build off-reservation Indian casinos in Doña Ana County.

The department on Jan. 4 sent a four-page letter to Jemez Pueblo of northern New Mexico denying an application to acquire in trust a 78-acre parcel to build a 48,000-square-foot casino in Anthony, N.M., nearly 300 miles away from the Jemez reservation in central New Mexico.

The tribe applied for the land on Dec. 23, 2004.

The Interior Department also denied a proposal by the Tigua Indians of El Paso to build a smaller casino near Chaparral. In a letter also dated Jan. 4, the department said it denied the Tigua proposal because the application was incomplete and no new information had been submitted in more than a year.

Federal law allows Indian tribes to build off-reservation casinos if the Interior Department is convinced that the casino will benefit the tribe. In the Department of the Interior had approved the proposal, the governor would then have also had to approve it.

In the letter denying the much-debated Jemez proposal, Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Carl J. Altman wrote that a casino in Anthony would not address the pueblo's unemployment problems and could have a detrimental effect on the tribe because of the distance from the reservation.

"Because the proposed gaming facility is not within a commutable distance of the reservation, resident tribal members will either: a) decline the job opportunity if they desire to remain on the reservation; or b) move away from the reservation to take advantage of job opportunities."

The news was met with sadness by casino supporters who had hoped it would create jobs.

"We just need more work, more future," said 65-year-old Jesus Aguilar, an Anthony, N.M., resident who said his two sons have left the area because work opportunities are lacking in the community.

"That casino was going to be the future of this community," he added.

But opponents of the casino reiterated that its potential economic and social benefits had been overstated.

"We're very pleased with it," said Joe Monahan of the Committee to Protect Doña Ana County, a group opposed to the Jemez proposal and backed by Sunland Park Race Track and Casino owner Stan Fulton. "It's been a long, hard struggle."

The tribe had planned to build the casino off Interstate 10 in conjunction with Santa Fe developer and art dealer Gerald Peters. A call placed to Peters' chief of staff was not returned Monday.

In the three years since it was introduced, the plan had been met by opponents who argued the casino would draw away from local businesses and would open the door for other off-reservation casinos.

Supporters argued that the casino would bring tourist dollars to the area and provide an income stream to the Jemez Pueblo, which has an unemployment rate thought to be about 50 percent or possibly as high as 66 percent.

In a statement, Jemez Gov. Paul Chinana said he would not comment further until the decision was reviewed by the tribe's lawyers, but he did say that the ruling ignored the Pueblo's job creation plan, which would have benefited both the tribe and Anthony.

"Under our plan, the pueblo leadership would identify the needed jobs, which would include needed teachers, health-care professionals, nursing-home personnel, child-care workers, policemen, and a host of other needed tribal service providers and occupations," Chinana said. "Pueblo members would choose their vocations, obtain their education and training via a casino funded scholarship program, return to the reservation and provide needed but currently unavailable services to its own tribal members."

In the statement, Chinana said that a day prior to the letter being issued, the Interior Department issued new guidance regarding land into trust applications where the proposed site exceeds a "commutable distance" from the reservation.

The pueblo preferred the off-reservation proposal because Jemez is too far from a population center and faced too much competition from already established Indian casinos near Albuquerque.

The casino would have provided direct competition to Sunland Park Race Track and Casino, owned by Fulton. He has promised to give New Mexico State University 50 percent ownership in the casino upon his death, but only if no other casino exists within a 50-mile radius of his casino. NMSU President Michael Martin said he respected the department's decision, but otherwise repeated his previous stance not taking sides in the issue.

"The way the Interior Department phrased this, this is a firm rejection of off-reservation gambling," Monahan said.

The New Mexico Indian Gaming Association opposed the pueblo's request in December 2005, saying it did not object to a tribe entering into gambling or seeking economic development, but did not favor any proposal for off-reservation gaming in New Mexico.

The same year, the Doña Ana County Commission voted 3-2 to support the proposed casino, but six state legislators from the area asked the Interior Department to reject it. Gov. Bill Richardson never took a formal stand for or against the casino.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

Geezzz! Give them an inch and they take a mile. Allowing gaming was one thing but this expansion craze is another. Wanting to expand off reservation land is crazy! Rape is what tribal gaming is doing to us! There are NO positives from tribal gaming as it stands now. The cost in both dollars and loss of values aren't even being addressed.