Tohono O’odham chairman says casino plans will go on
Sun, 01/24/2010 - 23:51
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Capitol Media Services
PHOENIX — Saying the Tohono O’odham Nation is entitled to do what it is doing, tribal Chairman Ned Norris Jr. told Gov. Jan Brewer it has no intent on killing its plans for a new casino in Glendale.
“The Nation has spent a great deal of time and resources on this site,” Norris wrote to the governor on Friday. Norris pointed out the 135 acres the tribe already has bought were authorized by Congress after the federal government built a dam on the Gila River.
If you find a correction for this story, please contact our editorial department
Related Terms:
Family Fun This Week
|
Tue, 02/14/2012 - 05:30 - 07:00
|
|
Sat, 02/18/2012 - 09:00 - 12:00
|
|
Sun, 03/11/2012 - 04:30 - 07:00
|
|
Fri, 03/16/2012 (All day) - Sun, 05/06/2012 (All day)
|
|
Thu, 03/29/2012 - 10:00 - 12:00
|
|
Mon, 04/23/2012 - 09:00 - 16:00
|
|
Fri, 04/27/2012 - 10:30 - Fri, 05/01/2015 - 10:30
|
The Tohono O’odham land, purchased adjacent to Glendal in the West Valley, is
NOT elligible to construct and operate a gambling casino. The tribe was given
30 million dollars payable over three years as compensation for land
inundated by water backing up from the federal Painted Rock Dam. The payment
of money was for economic development. IF the tribe decided to purchase land
for economic development it could be brought into federal Indian trust under
authority of Indian Reorganization Act (25 USC 465-479) and the Secretary of
Interior could deem it to be “reservation lands”. That cash settlement Act
was in 1986. The Indian Gaming and Regulatory Act was enacted in 1988 and
provided that ANY lands acquired by an Indian tribe after October 1988 was
NOT elligible for gambling unless it qualified for one of the exceptions set
out in 25 USC 2719. (see 25 USC 2703) The Gila River settlement was NOT A
SETTLEMENT OF A “CLAIM TO LANDS”. The T.O. already has a res and this land is
ineligible!
It is interesting how we rename "gambling" to make it a more respectable activity. How about the stock market? Isn’t engaging in that activity gambling? Just because we call it "investing, speculating, securing our futurem, etc." doesn’t make it not gambling. Regardless of the stated risks on any stocks or mutual funds, that risk taking is gambling. At a meeting at the library with Rep. Kolbe, a citizen claimed that the crisis caused him to lose significantly in investments and what is he and the government going to do about it? Should the government (which is actually the tax payer) bail out the guy who just lost significantly at a casino because he was gambling at a slotmachine? The nerve of asking some one else to bail them out for gambling with their savings! What does the administration mean by "too big to fail?" If corporations are too big to where their global operations will colapse because of their greed, cut them down in size were failure of incompetance and greed. Why are we bailing out corporations with overseas operations? Is that not bailing out foreign companies and foreign employees? Tax payer bailouts should be limited to operations within the United States. Should retirment funds that are gambled in stock based plans be bailed out? I don’t think so!