Can of worms: opened. Good question about how it works, though. Did the tribe buy a city block? If so, how does that land suddenly become sovereign?

I did a little background research on this a few years ago. Here's my notes.

The brainchild of Mayor John Fedo's administration, the Fond du Luth Casino was originally co-owned by the City of Duluth and the Fond du Lac band. In the mid-1980s, the city and the tribe successfully lobbied Congress to designate the old Sears building in downtown Duluth as tribal land, so that the band could put a casino in the building. Representatives of the Bureau of Indian Affairs expressed strong concerns, saying that "the purpose of taking land into trust is to preserve Indian homelands," not to sidestep state regulations and build casinos in random locations. Nevertheless, Congress approved the change. The Fond du Luth Casino became an official part of the Fond du Lac reservation, and remains so today. This arrangement was the first of its kind in the nation and has not, to my knowledge, been repeated since.

The casino opened in 1986 as a bingo parlor and steadily added games and slot machines from that point on.

Under the original agreement, profits from the casino were to be divided up as follows: 25.5 percent would go to the tribe, 24.5 percent would go to the city, and 50 percent would go to the Duluth-Fond du Lac Economic Development Commission, a seven-member board set up to oversee the casino, to spend on economic development. Essentially, the commission was a third body of government, composed of members of the tribe and the city, but separate from both. Conflicts within the commission were immediately apparent, and grew worse as time went on. Meetings were often acrimonious, and votes were frequently split along tribal/city lines.

In 1988, the federal government passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, saying that Indian tribes needed to have sole ownership of Indian casinos, and that Indians should collect at least 70 percent of the profits. The law was intended to protect Indian casinos from infiltration by organized crime. In Duluth, the Fond du Lac band began to argue that the new law voided the 1986 agreements with the city, and that the band should have full control of the casino. When the casino began to show a profit, in 1992, one $500,000 payment was distributed in accordance with the original agreement. After that, the profits were put into an escrow account each quarter, to await a final legal decision on the casino's ownership.

In 1993, the National Indian Gaming Commission ruled that the 1988 law superseded the 1986 agreements. Rather than challenge the ruling in court, Mayor Gary Doty's administration decided to make a deal with the tribe. Under the agreement, the city received a lump sum payment of $9.7 million and the tribe got sole ownership of the casino. The agreement also gave the city 19 percent of net video game revenue from the casino each year until 2010, when the agreement would be renegotiated.

That's about where we are now. You can fill in the rest from recent headlines.

I have to admit, I was stunned by the recent ruling that the tribe doesn't have to pay the city anything any longer. I had sort of been expecting the negotiations to result in a smaller percentage of slot machine revenues for the city, like maybe 7 or 8 percent. Shows how much I know.

There is no question that the casino has been a very substantial source of revenue for the city over the past two decades. If that revenue is eliminated, the effect will be quite severe. 

But, then again, whose fault is it that the city depends on that revenue so much? The city's. If we had put it in permanent escrow, we'd have $100 million by now. Instead, we've spent it on everything under the sun.

And still our taxes and fees go up. Amazing.

Facts to consider:

1) The Band did not have the right to establish a casino in downtown Duluth without the consent and partnership of the City. Without that agreement, there is no Fond-du-Luth casino.  

2) The contract provides the citizens of Duluth 50 years of financial benefit related to the establishment of a casino in downtown.  In contrast, the Band would receive the ability to game on that location until the end of time.  50 years is a long time - forever is much longer.

3)  We have a contract signed by both parties, approved by the federal courts, and the then-Chair of the NIGC.  The now-Chair of the NIGC (a political appointee) has a different opinion.  We disagree with the idea that an opinion by a political appointee should have the power to invalidate provisions of a contract.


The Band has done everything in their power to invalidate the partnership and the rights of the City under the contract.  

The Band is not "following the law" - it has succeeded in changing the interpretation of the law as it relates to our contract.  The Band went to the NIGC and essentially said "please find us in violation," the NIGC did just that. Then they went to the Courts and said "we're in violation, so take the rights of the City." With the last ruling, that is what the court did.

The contract was established with strong protections for both the Band and the City.  In succeeding by stripping the City's rights under the contract, the Band has triggered those protections.  

The City's position is that the partnership should continue and provide value to both the City and the Band.  That's what we've been fighting for this entire time.

The Band has been seeking to invalidate the partnership.  But at what cost?

Yukkh on both sides.  Better to get rid of the casino and find more socially productive ways of employing people and more socially productive uses for downtown property.

Wow, this is complicated.  Wow.

So out there on the horizon somewhere Duluth might get involved in the state-run gaming argument?  The band owns the land - in perpetuity - but the city owns the building?  While we're on the subject what role might the band's ownership of the Carter Hotel play in this ... discussion?

Is this one of those things bound for the US Supreme Court like hunting and fishing rights did?  It seems that complicated to me.

Thank you for clarifying the City's position, Mr. Mayor. I had not understood it til now.

Think about it. Who was here, first? When Casino money is threatened, there is no problem with the tribes totally ending all Casinos. So what would Minnesota have to do in order for that to happen? Give the land back. Most tribes are for that, are you? Have respect for the land you are walking on and maybe you can understand, better.

Yeah, right.

Okay. I have to admit, I've been through the reservation archives before, as well as the archives of other media, researching casinos and casino financing, and I missed the two sentences on Page Nine of the October 2008 issue of Nah gah chi wa nong where Wally Dupuis says, "We are now the proud owners of the Black Bear Casino Resort. After considerable discussion and review of our finances, a decision was made to pay off the construction loan." 

Given all the hoopla surrounding everything Black Bear Casino-related that had come before, including a lot of discussion about the financing, I guess I was expecting something a little bigger for such a momentous occasion as paying off the loan--like maybe a front-page headlne or a media-wide press release or something. That's my fault for not reading carefully enough. I apologize.

It's interesting to note that on the same page as Wally Dupuis's bizarrely understated announcement is the first mention in the reservation newspaper of issues regarding profit-sharing at the Fond-du-Luth Casino.

Chairman Karen Diver writes: "The agreement with the City does not comply with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, and the City will have to prove it earns the money it takes from the Casino, or else it is just a tax."

Either it is a coincidence that these two things happened simultaneously, or they are related. I believe they are related. I believe that the band is scrambling for every penny because the Black Bear expansion is affecting their finances. If it paid off its $120 million construction loan so early, the money had to come from somewhere.

OK Makoons. You obviously didn't read my post, or I didn't do a good enough job laying out my opinion. I didn't say ban gambling. I just don't want my government involved in it. I said leave the casinos on the rez so you can continue to rob ignorant whites and your own people of their financial dignity. That's your problem, not mine. I promise you won't get any of my money unless it's to see an aging crooner trying to make a buck or two. That or the tasty buffet. 

Anyway, to further defend my statement, I didn't say ban tobacco either. I implied that I didn't agree with the government collecting taxes on something they say is dangerous and that they ban in many instances. I would imagine your elders agree with me, especially since tobacco is sacred in native culture and abusing it is considered an iniquity. 

I also abhor the synthetic drugs the Last Place on Earth is selling to the profit of 6 mil per year. Again, my biggest issue lies within our government embracing the business or product through collecting taxes and chamber money yet admonishing it for its scourge on society. You can't have it both ways without being a hypocrite. 

My stance is simple. Stop being a profiteer when it comes to these issues. It's morally corrupt. I know you can't stop gambling, or alcohol abuse or any of the other vices society offers on a daily basis. You can, however, keep a moral high ground by not profiting on it. 

Lastly, regarding McDonald's. That's an establishment I wouldn't be encouraging anyone to frequent if I were you. With a diabetes rate of close to 95% for aboriginal males, I guess I'd consider moving toward a diet that is a bit closer to one that natives consumed for the last 10,000 years. The European type diet of gluttony and high trans fat hasn't given the Ojibwe society much benefit. And I think modern day anglos could learn a thing or two about the way native nutritional habits provided some of the longest life spans of anyone on the planet prior to European settlers taking over. Giga-waabamin minawaa.