Meetings & Information




*****************************
****************************************************
MUST READ:
GET THE FACTS!






Showing posts with label Station Casinos. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Station Casinos. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Labor Rights And Tribal Sovereignty Collide At Indian Casinos




Labor Rights And Tribal Sovereignty Collide At Indian Casinos

Posted: Updated: 


In 2013, Gary Navarro took a job working the slots at the Graton Resort and Casino, an Indian-owned casino in Rohnert Park, California. He was just 45 days into the job when he learned that an effort to unionize the workforce was underway.

“I wasn’t too keen on the union at first,” explained Navarro, a registered Republican. “Because I didn’t know what a union was, I didn’t understand what the union stood for.”

Navarro hit it off with a union representative and had a change of heart. He took a lead role in the union effort, and now he and his fellow slot workers are members of Unite Here, a union representing service workers.

But Navarro now finds himself at the center of a clash between labor rights and tribal sovereignty. He is a Pomo Indian from the Round Valley Tribe. His casino is owned by Pomo Indians from a different tribe, the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. Many tribal casinos are now asserting that a U.S. labor law protecting workers like Navarro does not apply to tribal businesses on tribal lands. Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle seem to agree.

On Wednesday, Navarro was among 60 workers from Unite Here, including 16 employees of tribal casinos in California, who donned red shirts emblazoned with the slogan “All-American rights for all Americans," and packed the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs hearing for a bill that would exempt tribes from the National Labor Relations Act, or NLRA, the Great Depression-era law that covers collective bargaining in the private sector.

The bill reveals ongoing tensions between labor and native rights about whether the National Labor Relations Board, or NLRB, the agency that enforces the law, can adjudicate disputes between tribal businesses and their workers. The jurisdiction of the NLRB in Indian Country has been a contentious issue between unions and Indian Nations that extends back to the Indian Gaming Regulatory ACT of 1988.

Indian casinos are at the heart of the issue. In 2012, Indian casinos brought in $28.13 billion, representing 43 percent of all U.S. casino gaming revenue for that year. The largest market for Indian gaming is California, where the Graton Rancheria brought in $190 million during the first six months of 2014 before their partner, Station Casinos of Las Vegas, stopped publicly reporting its income.

To unions, Indians Casinos are big business. “The issue of tribal sovereignty is being used as a phony way to say, ‘We’re for sovereignty,’ when in fact, [they're] really just for the money behind this,” said Maria Elena Durazo, vice president of civil rights and immigration for Unite Here. Unite Here, which represents 270,000 hospitality workers in North America, including 6,000 workers from Indian casinos, insists that the NLRA’s jurisdiction extends to tribal businesses on Indian reservations.

Although Indian casinos may be operated by major players in gaming -- in Graton's case, the Las Vegas-based Station Casinos -- they are owned by tribal members, rather than the Donald Trumps or Sheldon Adelsons of the world. Many casinos are relatively small operations that use their revenues to fund vital services such as education, law enforcement and healthcare that would otherwise be severely underfunded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Tribes argue that the NLRA regulates relations between workers and private employers. As sovereign governments, tribes insist, the NLRA does not apply to them.

An exemption from the NLRA would prevent tribal casino workers from unionizing through the same legal framework that protects most U.S. workers. So far, the NLRB appears to be leaning toward the unions.

In a 2004 decision, the board dismissed the San Manuel Tribe’s petition for exemption from the NLRA. In its ruling, however, the board stated that exemptions might apply under specific treaties and also in disputes entirely internal to tribes.

Last week, the NLRB declined to assert jurisdiction over the Chickasaw Nation’s WinStar World Casino in Oklahoma. In its decision, the board cited sovereign rights specific to the Chickasaw in the 1830 Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek.

Other tribes, such as the Saginaw Chippewa and Little River Band of Ottawa, both in Michigan, have also challenged NLRB jurisdiction. On Tuesday, an appeals court ruled that the Little River Band of Ottawa must stop enforcing provisions of tribal labor laws that conflict with the NLRA.

Meanwhile, the Saginaw Chippewa case against the NLRB is still being adjudicated. Like the Chickasaw, the Saginaw Chippewa have built their case on treaty rights, which they argue reserve “broad, general rights” of self-government to tribes on the reservation. But California tribes such as the San Manuel -- and Navarro’s employer, the Graton Rancheria -- do not have treaties that were ratified by the United States. Under the precedent set by the San Manuel ruling in 2004, the NLRA still presumably applies to Indian casinos in the state.

However, that could all change with the Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act, versions of which have been introduced in both chambers of Congress. The Senate bill passed a voice vote in the Committee on Indian Affairs on Wednesday. The legislation, which was introduced by Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and sponsored exclusively by the eight Republicans on the committee, would amend the NLRA to exempt tribes as employers under the act.

Critics like Unite Here say the bill “will strip thousands of American workers from rights and protections.” Proponents, like Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the committee chairman, say the bill “will empower tribes and respect them as sovereign governments.” These two opposing positions suggest a tradeoff: You can have labor rights, or you can have native rights -- but you can’t have both.

The conflict has made Democrats uneasy, with many members of the Committee on Indian Affairs reluctant to comment on the issue. Democratic Sens. John Tester (Mont.) and Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) are expected to cross the aisle and vote in favor of the bill. Both Senators hail from western states with strong tribes.

In a statement through his spokesperson, Tester explained, “I support the critical role the NLRB plays in protecting workers, but my vote on this issue is a vote in support of tribal sovereignty.” Despite having reservations about the bill, Tester consulted with tribal leaders in the state, who were unanimously in favor.

Navarro will testify at the hearing for the House version of the bill on Tuesday. The legislation has a strong chance of passing both GOP-controlled chambers, as Republicans in general have been hostile toward the NLRB, threatening its funding and powers. 

If the legislation makes it all the way to President Barack Obama’s desk, he will face the same political tradeoff as his fellow Democrats in Congress. Since his visit to the Standing Rock Indian Reservation last June, Obama has emerged as a strong advocate for Indian Country, particularly on issues facing youth. But despite his current battle with organized labor over his massive trade deal, the president has also been closely aligned with labor unions.

These divisions extend down to Navarro, whose background as a Pomo working the wildly successful casino of his kin is unique. (The vast majority of workers at tribal casinos are not Native American.) Navarro’s experience and family history reveal just how deeply this bill cuts into the fraught relationship between the first peoples of this land and workers over scarce resources and opportunities.

In the early days of the United States’ control over California, Navarro’s Pomo ancestors faced enslavement and massacre at the hands of settlers, and were eventually forced onto the impoverished Round Valley Reservation. Had Navarro’s ancestors fled south to live with their Southern Pomo kin, Navarro might have been an owner rather than a worker at the Graton Resort and Casino.

Instead, his great-grandmother grew up in a trailer with 14 siblings on the Round Valley Reservation before running away and marrying a migrant worker. Navarro, their great-grandson, has maintained that tradition of work. He believes union rights are important to preserving good work.

“I’m not super rich, I’m nowhere near it,” he said, “but I’ve worked my ass off for everything that I get, and I’m not going to stop!”



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/15/native-americans-labor-unions_n_7573322.html?utm_hp_ref=politics




Monday, October 29, 2012

The biggest bingo parlor in history!





From: Stop the Casino 101 Coalition
The biggest bingo parlor in history!

The Biggest, Most Expensive Bingo Parlor in U.S. History!
Compact lawsuit moves forward after first hearing!

 
Let me make one thing perfectly clear: our first lawsuit against Governor Brown's illegal gambling compact is going forward full-steam ahead.

Our lawsuit passed its first milestone with its first hearing on October 12, and we're moving forward with our Complaint intact!

We are challenging the validity of the Graton Rancheria compact, specifically, that under California law, the state legislature MUST cede sovereignty over the land to the federal government.

Until then, it isn't Indian land, and is still governed by State law, and state law does not allow casino-style gambling except on Indian land. Get it?

No Compact means no casino-style gambling.

When we win this lawsuit, Station Casinos and Graton Rancheria will be left with the biggest, most expensive bingo parlor in U.S. history!


But it all takes money, honey! So give right now, and be as generous as you can. If you really want to stop the casino, you have to be willing to cough up come cash.



County's "Wimpy" Deal with the Casino
WImpy by fourpanelhero on Deviantart.com

The County's deal with Graton Rancheria reminds me of Wimpy who would say to Popeye, "I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today".
The fatal flaw in any agreement for payments from Graton Rancheria is that they don't have to pay if they don't make enough money, and there is no independent auditing mechanism to check the figures.
As was made clear in the hearings in Sacramento in May, Graton doesn't have to allow anyone on its property to audit the books, state officials included.
And "wimpy" certainly describes the County's casino policy. Had the County fought vigorously and asked for Senator Feinstein's help at any point along the way, as Contra Costa County did in its battle against the San Pablo casino, it could have stopped the casino dead.
Fortunately, Stop the Casino 101 Coalition has stepped in to intervene when the County would not.
Help us do what the county lacked the guts to do! We'll fight in court for you!


http://www.stopthecasino101.com/

Saturday, October 20, 2012

The Community Voted NO!


From: Stop the Casino 101 Coalition:






webassets/LagunaDeSRookingeEastFromStonyPointRoad_NCRWCB.jpg

AFTER????
CasinoArchitectDrawingGIF.gif
This is only a portion of the entire casino-Click Pic for More

Tribal casino to pay at least $9 million a year to Sonoma County

Graton Rancheria could pay up to $38 million more in deal to offset Rohnert Park casino impacts


By JEREMY HAY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
10/20/2012
Published: Saturday, October 20, 2012

The tribe building a casino in Rohnert Park has agreed to pay at least $9 million annually to Sonoma County to offset the impacts of the project, plus up to $38 million more a year if its revenues hit projections.

Facts


TRIBAL PAYMENTS TO SONOMA COUNTY

Under an agreement that Sonoma County supervisors are to take up on Tuesday, the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria would make a series of payments to the county, including:

ANNUAL PAYMENTS
$3.1 million for law, justice, public safety and tribal relations.
$2 million to the Sonoma
County Transportation Authority to complete work on the Marin-Sonoma Narrows project on Highway 101. After the 10th year, or following completion of that project, the tribe would pay $2 million annually to fund projects on 101 between Highway 12 and the Sonoma- Marin County line or other arterial roads serving casino.
$1.79 million to be paid as development and mitigation fee programs. The payment is equivalent to what a commercial developer would pay in order to obtain a permit.
$1 million to fire districts.
$700,000 to be paid in lieu of county transient occupancy tax once a planned hotel opens.
$600,000 for education, prevention and treatment programs to address gambling addiction and problems associated with substance abuse, mental illness, elder abuse, domestic violence and child abuse and neglect.
$500,000 to mitigate the impacts on local roads within a two-mile radius of the casino.
$416,918 to mitigate crime impacts. Santa Rosa will receive $286,923; Petaluma, $102,591; Sebastopol, $14,596; Cotati, $12,808.
$275,000 for a water conservation program.

ONE-TIME PAYMENTS
The tribe's proposed one-time payments to the county include:
$1.7 million to hire and train four new sheriff's deputies and purchase two new sheriff's vehicles.
$1.5 million for fire and emergency services.
$1.5 million for measures to offset the project's groundwater use.
$370,000 for traffic improvements near the casino.
$60,000 for "tribal relations."

The payments from the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, some of which would start this year, are nearly four times what the county previously estimated it would get.

And they are separate from those laid out in a 2003 agreement between the tribe and Rohnert Park, under which the tribe is to pay the city about $200 million over 20 years.

“Without a doubt, I think it's the best agreement that's ever happened between a tribe and a local government,” said Shirlee Zane, chairwoman of the county Board of Supervisors. She lauded the tribe for its participation.

“I think they've set a good role model for other tribal agreements in the future,” she said. “The tribe has been continually trying to put their best foot forward in terms of negotiating and really giving back to the community.”

The county in 2008 concluded that although it opposed the casino, it could not stop it, and reached a deal with the tribe to negotiate payments to address its impacts. Those negotiations led to the agreement announced Friday.

The casino, with a maximum of 3,000 slot machines, is projected to open next year. The tribe secured $850 million in financing in August.

Of the money the county would get, Santa Rosa, Petaluma, Sebastopol and Cotati would share $416,000 a year for law enforcement, and county fire districts would split $1 million.

Page 2 of 4

Also the tribe is to make one-time payments totaling $5.1 million, mainly to address costs associated with public safety, traffic improvements and measures aimed at addressing the casino's anticipated impact on groundwater supplies.

An initial payment of $3.52 million is expected to come in January to cover public safety costs, including the hiring of four new sheriff's deputies.

The agreement extends for 20 years, the term of the gambling compact between the state and Graton Rancheria that allows the tribe to operate a Las Vegas-style casino. That compact required the tribe to sign agreements with the county and Rohnert Park before opening the casino.

Work on the project started in June and its steel framework began rising on 66 acres last week.

The board is to vote on the agreement Tuesday. Zane wouldn't predict the outcome of that vote, but she said the agreement, reached after 3½ months of negotiations, achieved everything the county wanted and more.

“This agreement has met, I believe, every single concern that we've put forward in terms of mitigation,” she said.

“In addition to that, there are community benefit dollars that will come back to the county for mutual interests,” she said, referring to money that the tribe would give the county, primarily for open space projects, if it has money left over after its payments to the state, county and Rohnert Park.

In practice, the tribe is to pay, for the first seven years of operation, 15 percent of its net earnings from gambling to the state into a Graton Mitigation Fund. After seven years, that drops to 12 percent. The state then distributes that fund to Rohnert Park and the county.

Page 3 of 4

In April, the state and tribe projected those earnings, known as net win, as $350 million in the casino's first year, rising to $418 million in its seventh year.

Neither the tribe nor its attorney responded Friday to requests for comment. Nor did opponents of the casino, who are still fighting it in court.

The agreement includes language allowing the county and tribe to reopen negotiations if impacts are found to be greater than projected, something supervisors had pushed for.

“There might be unforeseen issues that come up outside the scope of the agreement, the tribe may want to do something, or the county may recognize something that we want to address, and there's a mechanism to do that,” said Supervisor David Rabbitt, whose 2nd District includes the 254-acre Wilfred Avenue casino site just south of Home Depot.

Over and above the $9 million a year the county is guaranteed, the agreement stipulates that once the tribe meets its financial obligations to Rohnert Park and the state, it will begin paying the county more.

It would give up to $25 million a year to county parks and the county's Open Space District. The money could not be used to buy more land. It would go to create public access to parks and open space, conserve and protect environmental resources, develop organic gardens and farms serving “disadvantaged” people and enhance understanding of local Native American tribes.

Should that $25 million be paid in full, additional monies would go first to other environmental projects and then to the county's Indian Health Project and other Sonoma County tribes that do not run gambling operations.

Page 4 of 4

Asked whether the casino, which has been one of the most controversial projects ever in the region and is still bitterly resented by many, might prove to be a net win for the county, Rabbitt said: “I think that the proof's really in the pudding going forward, and we'll see.”

“My hope is that it will be seen as a positive,” he said. “My hope is that the majority of people will visit the casino in a bus, leave their money here and go home.”



http://www.petaluma360.com/article/20121020/COMMUNITY/121029996/1362/community?p=4&tc=pg

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Targeting the Young Gambling Addicts on the Internet




Casino Companies Are In For an Overhaul






Thursday, August 23, 2012

Who knew?



Most 'developers' and Gambling Industry 'experts' overstate revenues, many leading to casino bankruptcies.

Maybe this is one of the consequences that make sense.

Complaint Filed With Sec on Station Casinos Investor Information

Monday, July 16, 2012

California: "clear-cut cases of reservation-shopping."


Gov. Jerry Brown at center of off-reservation casino fight

Published: Monday, Jul. 16, 2012 - 12:00 am | Page 1A

In the coming weeks, Gov. Jerry Brown will decide whether two Indian tribes in remote parts of California can build gambling establishments next to freeways many miles from their homes.

The questions he faces put him at the center of a big-money casino fight – a massive lobbying effort in the Capitol that includes some very rich and influential groups.

The proposals from the Enterprise Rancheria near Marysville and the North Fork Rancheria near Fresno are part of the growing phenomenon critics describe as off-reservation casinos. But they are unusual because approval is in the hands of the governor under a process that's been used only a few times nationwide.

Most Indian casinos are on either tribal land or land restored to a tribe by the federal government, leaving state politicians out of the equation.

The Enterprise and North Fork proposals are subject to a different bureaucratic process because they don't necessarily fit those criteria – tribal members already have land but want to build casinos somewhere else.

Their projects have been given the green light by the U.S. Interior Department. Now Brown has until Aug. 31 to decide whether they can move ahead.

"It's a political question at that point," said Cathy Christian, an expert in tribal law who is not involved in these cases.

Moving the decision-making to the governor could mark a shift in tribes' strategy to get gambling projects approved, Christian said. And it has prompted major activity in the Capitol lobbying corps.

The North Fork and Enterprise tribes are backed by a Las Vegas casino owner, a Chicago racetrack developer, several construction unions, one lobbyist who is a Democratic fundraiser and another whose relationship with Brown goes back to the 1970s.

They argue that each tribe – North Fork is a band of Mono Indians; Enterprise is part of the Maidu tribe – historically moved around a large area that includes their current rancheria in the mountains and the proposed casino location on the valley floor.

Casino supporters say the projects will bring self-sufficiency to Indians who have lived in poverty for decades – and thousands of construction and service industry jobs to residents of hardscrabble Central Valley towns.

On the other side, urging Brown to reject the casino proposals, are the lobbyists and PR teams for several wealthy gambling tribes who fear the competition could harm their business. They say the projects violate the law California voters passed in 2000, when they approved what the voter handbook called "gambling on tribal lands."

"They're undercutting tribes that played by the rules, or what they thought were the rules, which is you need to build on your reservation or rancheria," said David Quintana, a lobbyist for several tribes that already operate casinos.

"Now you're going to allow tribes to suddenly cherry-pick locations, cutting the legs off other tribes who spent hundreds of millions of dollars to play by the rules in these out-of-the-way locations."

U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and at least 10 members of Congress also have asked Brown to stop the casinos from being built, writing in an April letter to him that the projects "set a dangerous precedent and will encourage other tribes in the State to seek casinos far from their existing reservation lands and closer to urban population centers."

The tug of war comes as Brown is raising money for a November ballot measure that would temporarily raise taxes to plug the state's budget deficit. Gambling tribes, including several that oppose the casino proposals, have already given $728,000 to support Brown's initiative. Construction unions, including several that support the casinos, have given $813,000.

"Our office continues to solicit and consider input from all stakeholders regarding the projects as we weigh the interests of local communities, tribes and the people of California," spokesman Evan Westrup wrote in an email.

Richard Lehman lives in the mountains northeast of Fresno and can see the North Fork rancheria from his home. He represented the tribe in Congress for 12 years, where he helped write the federal law that governs Indian gaming. Before that, he was a state assemblyman during Brown's first term as governor. A page on the state's Department of Conservation website features a black-and-white picture of Brown and Lehman during a 1982 bill signing.

Today, Lehman is a lobbyist who counts the tribe among his clients.

"I've known the governor a long time. I have enormous respect for him and his ability to wade through complex issues and come up with the right answer," Lehman said. "He's not going to play favorites."

Lehman said he represents the tribe because of his long-standing relationship with its members – his neighbors – and his desire to help them do better.

"These people are entitled to an opportunity to live off something other than the federal government," he said. "Absent a development like this, there's just no opportunity."

The land tribal members live on – 80 mountainous acres south of Yosemite National Park – is too steep and remote to develop, he said. Lehman said it makes more sense to build a casino along Highway 99 in Madera County on land already slated for development.

The property is owned by Station Casinos, a Las Vegas casino operator whose lobbyist in Sacramento is Darius Anderson, a Democratic fundraiser with strong ties in the Capitol. He has personally contributed $4,000 to support Brown's tax measure.

Farther north in Yuba County, the Enterprise Rancheria wants to build a casino near the Sleep Train Amphitheater and Highways 65 and 70. The land is owned by Gerald Forsythe, an auto racing team owner from Chicago who once hoped to build a automobile racing track on the property in an area zoned for sports and entertainment.

"The Enterprise Tribe … moved along the Feather River drainage area between the Sierras and Valley in modern Butte and Yuba County – down to the areas around the proposed casino site," tribal spokesman Charlie Banks-Altekruse said in an email.

Cheryl Schmit, a Placer County activist who helps local communities oppose Indian casinos, said both the Enterprise and North Fork projects are "clear-cut cases of reservation-shopping."

"You have tribes that have established Indian lands that were rurally located and they've hooked up with gaming investors from out of state … for the sole purpose of the establishment of casinos," she said.

Schmit has been helping residents of Yuba and Madera counties express their opposition to the governor with letter-writing campaigns and town halls. She said they've paid her with bags of walnuts, plums and figs harvested from their land.

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/16/4633154/gov-jerry-brown-at-center-of-off.html

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Patchak decision could have wide-ranging effect on tribes




Court decision could have wide-ranging effect on tribes, casinos
By Chris Sieroty
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Posted: Jun. 22, 2012
 
A lawsuit seeking closure of the tiny Gun Lake casino in Michigan could have a major effect on the nation's Indian casino market, an industry that posted $26.73 billion in revenue in 2010, according to the Indian Gaming Industry Report.

Analysts say this week's U.S. Supreme Court decision to remand the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals could make it more difficult to fund tribal casino projects or even delay some projects until the matter is settled. The $160 million resort targeted in the lawsuit is in Wayland Township, 20 miles south of Grand Rapids. It was developed and is managed by Las Vegas-based Station Casinos LLC.

"The decision has the potential to change how the federal government takes land into trust for tribes," said Steven Light, co-director of the Institute for the Study of Tribal Gaming Law and Policy at the University of North Dakota. "It's potentially a huge problem for expansion of gaming for recently recognized tribes."

Casino opponent David Patchak challenged the way the federal government took 147 acres in trust for the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians, also known as the Gun Lake Tribe, so it could build a casino.

The tribe announced plans for a casino shortly after being formally recognized by the federal government in 1999.

Patchak, who opposes the development because of its land use impact, argues the land could not legally be placed in trust under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 because the tribe was not recognized in 1934. Light said the high court's decision "lines up with the Carcieri (versus Salazar) decision of 2009," in which the Supreme Court held that only tribes "under federal jurisdiction" in 1934 are eligible to have land taken in trust on their behalf.

The federal government's ability to make land-in-trust decisions is crucial for tribal casino operations because if the land can't be held in trust, it's ineligible for Class III gaming that includes slot machines, blackjack, craps and roulette.

In a three-page report, Michael Paladino, senior director with Fitch Ratings in New York, wrote the ruling could have several key "credit implications for the gaming" industry. It's unclear how many casinos would be affected.

He said it is likely to result in increased challenges from anti-gaming interests regarding land-into-trust decisions as it lengthens the statute of limitations on judicial review to six years from 30 days. Casino operators faced with competition from tribal operations could benefit from a longer regulatory process.

"Raising capital for Native American casino projects could become more difficult (and) expensive as investors are likely to have heightened concern about potential challenges regarding land-into-trust decision," Paladino wrote.

Station Casinos executives declined comment on the high court's decision. The gaming company developed the 76,000-square-foot Gun Lake casino and manages it through MPM Enterprises LLC, in which Station Casinos is a 50 percent partner.

The company earns an annual management fee equal to 30 percent of net income over the seven-year contract.

Paladino noted that a separate $433 million tribal casino project between Station Casinos and the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria in Northern California is not affected by the Patchak lawsuit.

The U.S. Department of the Interior's land-into-trust approval for that tribe was authorized by Congress in the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act of 2000.

A state compact that would allow the Graton Rancheria to operate the casino awaits Interior Department approval, though earth moving started Monday. The casino is on 254 acres in a affluent area of Sonoma County about 43 miles from San Francisco. Station Casinos expects construction on the 535,000-square-foot project to take 18 to 24 months. The 100,000-square-foot casino will operate up to 3,000 slot machines.

Station Casinos also has a development and management agreement with the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians, whose casino near Madera, Calif., was approved by federal officials last year and will be built on trust land. The deal requires Gov. Jerry Brown's support by Sept. 1 for planning to continue.

Light said it remains to be seen whether Patchak prevails in court.

"The growth of tribal gaming has been remarkable in the last 25 years," Light said. "There have been blips along the way. I wouldn't classify this as a blip. We don't know yet what will happen."

http://www.lvrj.com/business/court-decision-could-have-wide-ranging-effect-on-tribes-casinos-160063355.html

Saturday, June 2, 2012

YOU ARE BEING WATCHED!



To suck every last dollar from your wallet, your bank account, your kids' college fund, YOU ARE BEING WATCHED!






press release
May 31, 2012

Station Casinos Selects BIS(2)'s Multi-Award Winning Software

BIS2's gameViz software to provide advanced gaming analytics for Las Vegas' Station Casinos

 



SAN DIEGO, May 31, 2012 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- BIS(2) today announced that Station Casinos, the leading provider of gaming and entertainment to Las Vegas residents, has chosen to install BIS(2)'s gameViz(TM) software to take Station Casinos' gaming and analytical capabilities to the next level.

"We were on an extensive search for a best of breed product that would complement our advanced analytics with slot centric player information. The BIS(2) software achieves our goal by opening up a whole new dimension to drive better decisions. It enables us to truly understand player behavior through robust visual tools. We are very excited about the BIS(2) technology and how it can help us either reinforce our current philosophies or adjust them through quantitative data," stated Brian Eby, Corporate Vice President of Slot Operations for Station Casinos.

"The BIS(2) software provides huge value in terms of driving slot floor performance and operators are now looking to our software as a way to get a more complete understanding of player activity and preferences on their property. The BIS(2) software makes decision-making easy. From player valuation, to asset optimization, the BIS(2) software empowers casino executives to optimize revenue and bottom line results," said Mukesh Gordhan, BIS(2) CEO. "We are very impressed with Station Casinos operations and management team, and we are extremely pleased with their decision to install our software," Gordhan added.

"Our new super advanced analytics to identify revenue efficiency from game changes and displacement of revenue is being welcomed as a long awaited market need by many casino operators," said Andrew Cardno, BIS(2) CTO. "We use our Super Graphics and other special techniques to present data at a user-level and also in a corporate-style war-room environment to communicate what is really going on in the business," Cardno added.

"We are very pleased to be representing BIS(2) in this sale with Station Casinos," states Jon Zimmerman, President of Casino Business Strategies, a BIS(2) partner. "I have been an operator in the gaming industry for many years and I see the BIS(2) technology as highly innovative and an essential analytics tool for casino operators today," added Zimmerman.



BIS(2)'s gameViz(TM) industry solution is a data visualization BI software solution that allows casino operators to directly interrogate their data without the requirement for ETL, and view the results visually using innovative and powerful Super Graphics. It represents the next generation of advanced data visualization software for strategic, operational, and analytical users of gaming data. Users are able to understand and take action on their gaming data in a new way. Using BIS(2)'s Super Graphics to view complex analysis provides a better way to understand data and quickly identify patterns, trends and improvement opportunities.

For more information on Station Casinos visit www.stationcasinos.com .

For more information on BIS(2), contact Veronica Ruffo, email: veronica.ruffo@bis2.net, phone: 1-877-592-2472 or visit www.bis2.net .

SOURCE: Business Intelligence Systems Solutions, Inc. (BIS2)

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/station-casinos-selects-bis2s-multi-award-winning-software-2012-05-31


Monday, May 14, 2012

Texas teachers’ pension fund invests in casinos, loses $99 million




Texas teachers’ pension fund invests in casinos, loses $99 million

http://www.dallasnews.com/investigations/headlines/20120512-texas-teachers-pension-fund-invests-in-casinos-loses-99-million.ece
May 12, 2012

By STEVE McGONIGLE The Dallas Morning News Staff Writer

First of two parts


As public investments go, this one looked like a roll of the dice.

But the Teacher Retirement System of Texas wanted a big win, so it put $100 million into the buyout of a Las Vegas gaming company called Station Casinos.
The company went bankrupt, and like many an unlucky jackpot-chaser, the state’s largest pension fund walked away a loser. More than $99 million of Texas teachers’ retirement money had vanished.
“There is no getting around it,” said Britt Harris, the fund’s chief investment officer. “This was a bad investment.”
It wasn’t the only one. Between April 2006 and last September, the teacher fund saw the value of its “opportunistic,” or high-risk, real estate deals drop by $599 million, a data analysis by The Dallas Morning News found.
In all categories of real asset investments, including real estate, the worth of the TRS portfolio fell by more than $1 billion over that same period, according to the evaluation by The News.
A spokesman for the teacher fund disputed the newspaper’s calculations The News on Friday, contending the decreases in high-risk real estate values were much less.
TRS is the nation’s fifth-largest public pension provider, with current assets of $110 billion. It serves 1.3 million public education employees, about one-fourth of whom are retired.
Like many pension plans, TRS faces a widening gap between assets and long-term obligations, a result of market volatility, tight state budgets and a rising tide of retirees. Last year, this unfunded liability reached $24 billion and forced the teacher fund to continue a decadelong freeze on increases in benefit payments.
The response by TRS and other funds has been to shift from traditional stocks and bonds toward alternatives that offer higher returns but present larger risks.
TRS has a higher share invested in alternative assets — 31 percent — than any of the 10 largest public pension funds, according to Preqin, a London-based research firm.
Harris and other Texas fund officials credit the diversification with helping TRS to weather the global financial crisis better than most pension funds. In 2011, TRS had one of the highest returns of any state pension fund.
TRS spokesman Howard Goldman, in a summary provided Friday, said more recent data than his office initially released to The News paints an upbeat picture of the last six years. When earnings are included, Goldman said, opportunistic investments have dropped $250 million, and the entire real asset portfolio gained $430 million.
Critics contend alternatives are too risky, too costly and not transparent enough. They predict the investments will falter, leaving taxpayers with a massive bailout bill.
Edward Siedle, a Florida lawyer who has investigated several public pension systems, including TRS, said the Texas fund’s alternative investments were typical. “We see every single day public pensions investing in schemes that make no sense and are doomed to fail,” he said.
The $99 million Station Casinos loss was modest by TRS standards, said Harris, the chief investment officer. “No loss is insignificant. It’s still real money,” he said. “But it hasn’t affected the [overall] return on the fund.”
Nothing, however, in the TRS portfolio quite matches the casino deal for implausibility or colorful settings. By investing in Station, TRS backed a politically connected Las Vegas family, in a city on the brink of a real estate catastrophe, and an activity — casino gambling — that is illegal in Texas.
That investment and a related transaction also featured a financial side trip to a disastrous entertainment mall in the New Jersey Meadowlands.
The $99 million was only part of the loss. Altogether, the Texas teacher fund committed $400 million to those privately managed investments. At last count, the market value was roughly one-third that amount.
It looked, TRS officials said, like a good deal at the time.
Investment revolution
The Texas Constitution prohibits the teacher fund from owning real estate, but managers have repeatedly tried to skirt that ban.
In the 1980s, loan defaults on commercial developments forced TRS to repossess almost 20 office buildings. Investment officials not only were accused of violating the constitutional ban but of mismanagement and conflicts of interest.
The TRS board flirted in the late 1990s with reviving the real estate program but shelved the idea under pressure from legislators.
Then came a lingering bear market. In 2002, the fund had its second straight year of losses and owed $3.2 billion more in long-term obligations than it had in assets.
A projected state budget deficit made help from the legislature improbable. State contributions, along with those from active members, account for about 25 percent of the fund’s annual revenues.
So in 2003, the TRS board voted to allocate more money to alternative assets, including real estate. Linus Wright, a former board chairman, said members felt they had no choice. “We had to have a better investment program,” he said. “So we did completely revolutionize.”
Trustees hired The Townsend Group, a nationally regarded real estate consulting firm, to devise an investment strategy. Next, they brought in Harris, a former hedge fund executive, to implement the new plan.
In April 2007, the Texas fund made headlines by announcing it would commit 35 percent of assets to such things as hedge funds, private equity or real estate. To comply with the constitutional ownership ban, investments would be made through limited partnerships.
Eric Lang was the TRS point man on real estate. Through Townsend, Lang said, he learned about a $4 billion fund called Colony Investors VIII that was advertising a portfolio of commercial property investments around the globe.
The fund was a type known as opportunistic. Such funds are considered high risk because of the amount of debt they assume and presumptions that properties are undervalued but will rise in worth.
The first deals in the pipeline were a management-led buyout of Station Casinos and the bailout of Meadowlands Xanadu, a stalled retail-entertainment project in the former swamplands of northern New Jersey.
Colony estimated returns at 15 percent or more. Lang was all in.
Vegas boom
Station Casinos was a Las Vegas success story, thanks to Frank Fertitta Jr. and his sons.
Fertitta was a former Galveston resident who began work in Las Vegas as a hotel bellman and rose to the status of local legend.
His great uncles were Sam and Rose Maceo, kingpins of a Galveston gambling empire that dominated the island city for four decades.
The state closed the Maceos’ operations in 1957. Some of the family moved to Las Vegas, where Sam Maceo helped finance the Desert Inn, an early Strip casino.
Organized crime ran much of Las Vegas then, and Fertitta managed mob-backed casinos before opening his own business. He was investigated for years for alleged cash skimming but was never charged with a crime.
He started what became Station Casinos in 1976 as a slot machine parlor attached to a motel. Unlike the glitzy gaming halls on the Strip that catered to tourists, Fertitta targeted local residents with cheap food, bingo and greater odds of winning.
His sons, Frank III and Lorenzo, joined the business after college. They assumed control when their father retired in 1993 and took the company public. (Frank Fertitta Jr. died in 2009.)
The brothers built Station into a giant. As Las Vegas grew, so did the number of casinos the Fertittas opened. They built or bought 15 in 14 years. They also gobbled up hundreds of acres of raw land on the edge of Las Vegas for future development.
“We’ve had a lot of stupid gunslingers in this market,” said David McKee, a Las Vegas journalist who writes a blog on the casino industry. “These guys, what they aimed at, they usually hit.”
One of their best bets was paying $2 million for the Ultimate Fighting Championship, a promoter of the mixed martial arts style of caged combat. Estimates of UFC’s current worth start at $1 billion.
Perhaps their biggest setback was the demise of a riverboat gambling operation in Missouri. The Fertittas sold out in 2000 and later paid $38 million to settle civil allegations that their attorney had obtained their gaming license by improper influence.
But by 2005, Station was rated as one of the best places to work in America, its stock was soaring and the Fertittas were on the cusp of becoming billionaires.
Still, the brothers felt stifled by Wall Street’s short-term vision. “Being private, it seemed like it had advantages in terms of our autonomy and then doing something that we wanted to do,” said Scott Nielson, Station’s chief development officer.
The Fertittas declined to be interviewed. Nielson agreed to answer some questions from The News.
He said the Fertittas were contacted by Colony Capital, a Los Angeles private equity firm, to explore a joint venture that would take Station private.
Colony was led by Tom Barrack , a charismatic investor who once advised Fort Worth financier Robert Bass. Barrack had built a storied career dealing in distressed properties.
Barrack said he was convinced that a buyout of Station made sense, and he agreed to a partnership with the Fertittas. The Las Vegas economy was booming, he said, and so was Station. “Kind of all the ingredients at the time were there,” he said.
On Dec. 1, 2006, Fertitta Colony Partners made an initial bid of $4.7 billion, or $82 per share, to Station’s stockholders.
Two weeks later, Barrack appeared before the Alternative Assets Committee of the Texas teachers’ fund board to pitch a $150 million investment in Colony Investors VIII, a major financier of the Station Casinos buyout.
Lang, the TRS real estate manager, made the staff presentation. He mentioned Station twice in recommending a commitment to Colony. The committee, and later the full nine-member board, gave unanimous approval.
Jersey Xanadu
The only other investment in Colony VIII that trustees heard Lang mention was Xanadu, an eclectic development with a name made famous by English poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge.
The project, spread over 104 acres of the New Jersey Meadowlands, was a combination shopping mall and entertainment complex. The plans included a large indoor ski slope, simulated skydiving tunnel and 30-foot chocolate waterfall.
There were environmental issues from the start, and concerns about the economic impact on an area rife with other malls. Critics fretted that the location near one of the busiest highway interchanges in the New York City area would worsen gridlock.
Construction delays and cost overruns had driven the price from $1.3 billion to $2 billion. The original developer, Mills Corp., was teetering on the brink of bankruptcy.
“I called this the Vietnam of malls,” said Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Sierra Club, an early opponent.
As it emerged, the exterior would be ridiculed for its mix of shapes, colors and patterns. It was compared to children’s Lego blocks or a bar code. Critics bestowed the nickname “Xanadon’t.”
But where some saw disaster, Barrack saw gold. “It’s probably the best retail location ever,” he said. “Mills’ problem was capital structure. It wasn’t that they had a project that wouldn’t work.”
Colony Capital announced in 2006 that it was taking control of Xanadu and would spend $500 million to complete the project. The takeover was finalized just before Barrack made his investment pitch to the committee of the Texas teacher fund’s board.
Seven months after making the first $150 million investment with Colony, the teacher fund board agreed, at Lang’s urging, to double the amount.
Lang also pitched an additional, $100 million co-investment with Colony. Unlike the pool investment, which included multiple properties, the co-investment was solely directed toward the Station Casinos buyout. This boosted the teacher fund’s total commitment to Colony to $400 million.
Lang touted the success of the Fertittas’ company and called the brothers “very dynamic people.” He did not mention Station’s problems in Missouri and said in an interview this year that he was unaware of them.
Dory Wiley, a Dallas investment banker who chaired the committee that approved the Station and Colony investments, sounded one of the few cautionary notes by saying there was growing sensitivity about morality and public investing.
Wiley was one of a breed of less orthodox thinkers that Gov. Rick Perry appointed to the TRS board. He was a strong advocate for diversifying into alternative asset investments. He also had an ear for political reality.
“There may be a day where you bring a gambling deal to us, and it gets turned down,” Wiley told Colony’s chief investment officer, Jonathan Grunzweig.
But it was not that day.
Worst investment
The teacher fund invested in Station Casinos at a time when there were clear signs that the formerly robust Las Vegas economy was withering.
Housing in the area was hit especially hard by the subprime mortgage crisis. Foreclosures were rising, as was unemployment.
Because all but one of Station’s 17 casinos catered to Las Vegas-area residents, the company’s fortunes were tied less to tourism and more to the health of the local economy.
In July 2006, The Wall Street Journal had warned that Station was “a slave to the housing market,” and its shares could be hard hit should the real estate bubble in Las Vegas come to an end, as some analysts were projecting.
There was also a matter of debt. Station had $3.4 billion before the proposed buyout, and the $5.4 billion plan finally accepted by Station shareholders required steady growth in cash flow to service the debt.
The plan called for Colony to contribute $2.7 billion for a 76 percent share of the private company. The Fertitta family would put in $870 million and control 24 percent. The remaining capital would come from loans.
A few gaming analysts and state regulators raised the debt issue but were assured by the Fertittas and Barrack that the company could survive any economic downturn.
Decades of steady profits had made the casino industry feel invincible, said Bill Thompson, a retired professor of public administration at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. “Nobody,” he said, “was worried about debt.”
Lang told The News that he vetted Colony Capital but relied on its own analysis of Station. He insisted that an appropriate amount of research was done. “Who knew that the markets would collapse like they did?” he said.
Texas law exempts documents deemed part of the due diligence process from public disclosure. As a private company, Colony is not required to reveal its research.
Trouble surfaced soon after the buyout in November 2007. The following February, Station conducted layoffs. It also revealed that earnings had been down sharply in the fourth quarter of 2007.
Then, in September 2008, came the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, the giant investment bank, and the virtual collapse of credit markets. The Las Vegas economy, and casino revenues, went into freefall.
The Texas teachers’ fund and other large institutional investors began to write down the value of their investments in Station.
Yet the Fertittas kept rolling. They announced a $10 billion casino development in Las Vegas, their biggest ever. With Station trying to renegotiate with its lenders, Frank Fertitta III paid $28 million for an oceanside home in Laguna Beach, Calif.
Time finally ran out on Station Casinos in July 2009. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, citing $5.7 billion in assets and $6.4 billion in debts.
In August 2010, a bankruptcy court judge approved a deal that allowed the Fertittas to regain control of Station and most of its properties while shedding $4 billion in debt. Colony became a minor partner.
Barrack called the Station deal the worst investment of his career.
“That process, and the problem, and the fault, quite honestly, are mine,” he said in an interview. “It was on my watch. It was my team. It was my decision. It was my responsibility.”
The same month, Barrack surrendered control of Xanadu to a consortium of lenders. It was later sold to a Canadian mall developer, who renamed the project American Dream. It remains an empty shell.
Barrack called the New Jersey development “a disaster” but one that would have been avoided had his lenders held to their commitment. “It would probably be one of the most successful retail entertainment malls in the nation, for sure,” he said.
‘Old TRS’
The amount TRS lost in Xanadu is not publicly available. The market value of the $300 million TRS committed to the entire pool of 27 properties in Colony Investors VIII has dropped to $122 million, state records show.
A Colony spokesman declined to say how much of the TRS loss was attributable to Xanadu or the Station Casinos buyout. Barrack said investments are made on a proportional basis, with money put into every project in the pool.
Value increases from other properties in Colony’s pooled fund should rebound to allow TRS to earn back 110 percent of its investment, Barrack said.
TRS has written down its $100 million TRS co-investment in Station Casinos, and does not expect to recover the losses. The investment is now worth $516,000.
Station Casinos, meanwhile, seems to have turned a corner.
Revenues are rising. In February, Station announced that the Fertittas were planning to buy a 15 percent share held by JP Morgan Chase, which would give them 60 percent control of the company.
After two years of steep investment losses, the Texas teacher pension fund has rebounded to the level of assets it had before the financial crisis. An 11 percent return in 2010 earned Harris and 53 other investment staffers $9.7 million in bonuses.
The commitment to alternative assets remains strong, although results are mixed. Investments in private ventures have posted big gains. Opportunistic real estate investments continue to lag behind other types.
Harris said the Station Casinos investment was a vestige of “the old TRS.”
Since 2007, he said, the entire TRS investment process has been overhauled. The number of staff reviewing deals has been increased tenfold, he said, and there are more thorough risk assessments.
The casino investment did offer a painful lesson, Harris said.
“It’s not worth it to invest in the gaming industry,” he said. “We are not going to do this again.”
Staff writer James Drew in Austin contributed to this report.

KEY PLAYERS: Station Casinos deal

Thomas Britton “Britt” Harris
TRS Chief Investment Officer. Hired in 2006 to implement a more diversified investment strategy. Former chief executive officer of Bridgewater Associates, one of the nation’s largest hedge funds.
Eric Lang
TRS Real Assets Manager. Chief sponsor of the TRS investment in Colony Capital and Station Casinos.
Tom Barrack
Founder and chairman Colony Capital Inc., a Los Angeles-based real estate investment company. Personally pitched the investment in one of his investment funds, Colony Investors VIII, to the TRS board in 2006. Described as “the best real estate investor on the planet” in 2005 by Fortune magazine.
Frank Fertitta III
Chairman and chief executive officer of Station Casinos. Co-owner of Ultimate Fighting Championship.
Lorenzo Fertitta
Board member Station Casinos. Chairman and CEO of Ultimate Fighting Championship.

COMING MONDAY

The businessmen behind Station Casinos have been generous campaign contributors to Texas Gov. Rick Perry.