Mike is there any truth to this or is this a lie also?
http://cfowebmaster.blogspot.com/200...they-come.html
If Middleboro says "No" to a casino, will the Wampanoag come and build it anyway? That is what the pro-casino people are saying with such regularity that it has all the hallmarks of an organized campaign of disinformation. In fact, I've heard this old chestnut rolled out so many times I was beginning to doubt myself and decided to read up on this specific item.
The short answer is if middleboro says "No", the tribe will go elsewhere. This is nothing more than a scare tactic. They want us to think that we have no choice and had better sign the agreement "or else". They don't want an honest count of who wants that casino, they want a count of who feels forced to vote for an agreement out of the fear that we'll get nothing if we say no.
Glenn Marshall has said many times that he will not force a casino on an unwilling community. That alone should be enough to convince anyone - we know what a great "steward of the land" he is. There is a video of him saying so on CasinoFacts.org and there are multiple interviews saying the same thing. There is good reason for his seeming benevolence. Getting the land put into trust, which is required to have gaming, will be essentially impossible without a willing host community. Now you're saying "Oh sure - you just don't want a casino and you'll say anything to stop it". Here are the facts and you can judge for yourself.
The Wampanoag need to place their casino on a reservation. They don't have one. The federal government needs to put land into trust. "Land Into Trust" will convert private land into federal land. The federal government will then allow the tribe to use it and control it. They won't actually own it but may use it as if they do.
In order to have land put into trust, the tribe must fill out an application explaining what they plan to do with it, state and local considerations, and environmental impacts. At that point, the federal government will notify the state and local governments that a trust application has been received. At this point, the state and/or local government may make a case as to why this land should not be put into trust. We can't just say "We don't want gambling", we need to provide evidence as to how it will negatively impact our tax base and jurisdiction. Well folks - if we don't have an agreement in place the cost of hosting the largest casino in the world will most certainly impact our tax base.
The exact law that covers this is the Code of Federal Regulation section 151.11 part D. It says
Sec. 151.11 Off-reservation acquisitions.
The Secretary shall consider the following requirements in
evaluating tribal requests for the acquisition of lands in trust status,
when the land is located outside of and noncontiguous to the tribe's
reservation, and the acquisition is not mandated:
(a) The criteria listed in Sec. 151.10 (a) through (c) and (e)
through (h);
(b) The location of the land relative to state boundaries, and its distance from the boundaries of the tribe's reservation, shall be considered as follows: as the distance between the tribe's reservation and the land to be acquired increases, the Secretary shall give greater scrutiny to the tribe's justification of anticipated benefits from the acquisition. The Secretary shall give greater weight to the concerns raised pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section.
(c) Where land is being acquired for business purposes, the tribe shall provide a plan which specifies the anticipated economic benefits associated with the proposed use.
(d) Contact with state and local governments pursuant to Sec. 151.10 (e) and (f) shall be completed as follows: Upon receipt of a tribe's written request to have lands taken in trust, the Secretary shall notify the state and local governments having regulatory jurisdiction over the land to be acquired. The notice shall inform the state and local government that each will be given 30 days in which to provide written comment as to the acquisition's potential impacts on regulatory jurisdiction, real property taxes and special assessments.
We are going through an ugly battle that has practically destroyed our town before the socio-economic wart known as casino has even arrived. If we say "No" and make our case to the federal government during the trust application, this land will not be put into trust. There is study after study after study that shows the negative social and economic effects of casinos. We can easily demonstrate that the casino will have disastrous effects on the town - particularly if we don't have an agreement that pays us money to mitigate the effects.
Beyond all the legal mumbo jumbo just use some common sense. The casino developers behind the Wampanoag tribe would not be giving us millions of dollars if it wasn't absolutely necessary.
Now you're saying. "OK, so the trust process will be difficult without our cooperation. Just look at Ledyard and Montville - they didn't negotiate before Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun and they got nothing". The reason Ledyard and Montville got nothing is because the tribes were building on existing reservations! An agreement with the host community is only required to put the land into trust.
Pro-casino people who stand to gain financially from a casino that will ruin our town and social well being can continue to call us liars for telling the truth. And that truth is: IF WE SAY NO, THEY WILL GO AWAY.
So the next time someone rolls out this old threat you will know that they are either misleading you, misinformed, or both. At that point you should call into question anything else they are saying to sell this socio-economic Chernobyl to you.
References:
Code of Federal Regulations Title 25
Larry E. Scrivner - Director Office of Trust Responsibilites, Bureau of Indian Affairs
Posted by Mark Belanger at 3:29 PM