Florida New Poker Limits - SB 788. - Page 5 - Poker Legislation

buckyb88 · 06-12-2009, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdom88

SIGH

.

soulvamp · 06-12-2009, 02:23 AM

I doubt that it's posturing, and I don't see how anyone can be surprised by this stance.

NoLimitLover · 06-12-2009, 10:23 AM

I am so sick of the attitude coming from the Seminoles. I am personally going to boycott the Hard Rock. A monopolistic competitive advantage is not an entitlement.

**PokerXanadu** · 06-12-2009, 10:31 AM

This just in:

Quote:

Seminole Lawyer Expects Fla. Gaming DealTALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) ―
A lawyer for the Seminole Indians says he thinks the tribe can reach a gaming deal but some changes will be needed in a proposal from the Legislature.

Barry Richard said Friday that the Legislature's proposed compact doesn't comply with federal law, but there's no reason why the tribe can't reach an agreement with lawmakers and Gov. Charlie Crist.

Richard cautioned that he hasn't spoken to tribal officials about the proposal and was just offering his personal opinion.

The Legislature passed a bill that sets parameters for negotiations and includes a proposed compact. Any deal that comes out of those talks must then go to the Legislature for final approval.

**PokerXanadu** · 06-12-2009, 10:34 AM

And this one, with more details of what was said:

Quote:

Tribe's attorney: Seminoles "couldn't live with" Legislature's casino deal

> Posted by Josh Hafenbrack on June 12, 2009 10:08 AM
It seemed like hard part was over: Getting Florida's gambling-resistant Legislature to sign off on casino-style gambling at Seminole Indian reservations. But getting the tribe to agree to a final deal will be tough, too.

The tribe is balking at several parts of the Legislature's gambling offer, including an increase in annual payments to the state and a provision limiting the tribe's exclusive rights to blackjack and slots.

Would the tribe approve the compact passed by the Legislature?

Barry Richard, an attorney for the Seminole Tribe:

"Not the way it was written in the compact that was included in the bill, because it's not economically viable for the tribe. It effectively destroys any guarantee of exclusivity without releasing the tribe of the obligation to make payments. We're hopeful we can correct those things and send it back and that also the Legislature will participate in the negotiations. Hopefully we can come up with something that everyone will be happy with."
On the exclusivity controversy, Richard said: "What the Legislature did, they provided that gambling could be expanded anywhere in the state, through home rule or by legislative agreement to a referendum. And if that happens, the tribe's payments still have to continue, they're just reduced. That eliminates exclusivity, which is the basis of the federal [Indian Gaming Regulatory Act] law."

The new $150 million annual minimum payment -- a 50 percent increase over the original 2007 compact -- "made out of whack economically," Richard added. "We worked very hard with the governor's office on the first round to balance the economics. Everybody agreed it was fairly balanced. It increases the annual minimum, while at the same time reducing exclusivity. Those things have to be readjusted."

We called Rep. Bill Galvano, who chaired the House committee on gambling and authored the legislation, for his reaction. Not surprisingly, he differed strongly with Richard's assessment.

"I believe that the approach is a sound approach that would get approval by the (federal government), simply because we have worked in a formula, if you will, for any other games that might come online," he said, referring to the exclusivity provisions. "The obligation of the tribe would be adjusted [if new gambling are approved elsewhere]. Just to have a blanket escape clause for the tribe is not practical. It inhibits Florida and policy decisions to come down the line."
He noted that the Legislature's gambling deal includes "not just exclusivity in geographical areas, but they're going to have to recognize that we have gone the extra step and awarded through the compact the ability to conduct (blackjack and other card games), which is not in any way contemplated by the federal law as an obligation."

On the $150m annual minimum, Galvano said: "That's not a big difference from where it was at, $100m. If you look at where we were at throughout the course of the session, at one point $400 million was being discussed. We really came down on that. I don't want to mischaracterize that an agreement was reached, but there was enough communication with the tribe that I felt comfortable -- and I know the Senate did -- that $150m was a good number. With what they're making and what they're projected to make, that's not a burden at all."

Making broad changes to the deal the Legislature approved would be somewhere between extremely difficult and impossible, he said.

"If we're talking about filling in details or making a tweak, that's not going to be very difficult," he said. "If the tribe expects that we would come back to the Legislature with major structural changes, I think the more appealing route would be to just let the feds enforce [current gambling law]. We have put forth a good-faith effort and we can show the federal government we've had hearings, we're talked with the tribe, we've done all we can."

PEPIV · 06-12-2009, 10:37 AM

Any idea if or when craps will be allowed at the casino? Great post OP1

**PokerXanadu** · 06-12-2009, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PEPIV

Any idea if or when craps will be allowed at the casino?

That's not been part of any deal. Probably won't be considered for years, if at all. It was part of the original Senate version of the gambling deal, but I don't think any of the legislators really figured it would make it through to the final bill.

**PokerXanadu** · 06-12-2009, 11:02 AM

By the way, the claim by attorney Barry Richards that the Indian Game Regulatory Act entitles the Tribe to gaming exclusivity is a bunch of bull. The IGRA in no way, shape or form says anything about such exclusivity. The new compact does not violate Federal law and would not be rejected as violating the IGRA. I can't even imagine why he would make such a claim, other than as a stalling or negotiating tactic.

From the IGRA:

Quote:

Sec. 2702. Declaration of policy

The purpose of this chapter [i.e., the IGRA] is -

(1) to provide a statutory basis for the operation of gaming by Indian tribes as a means of promoting tribal economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments;

(2) to provide a statutory basis for the regulation of gaming by an Indian tribe adequate to shield it from organized crime and other corrupting influences, to ensure that the Indian tribe is the primary beneficiary of the gaming operation, and to assure that gaming is conducted fairly and honestly by both the operator and players; and

(3) to declare that the establishment of independent Federal regulatory authority for gaming on Indian lands, the establishment of Federal standards for gaming on Indian lands, and the establishment of a National Indian Gaming Commission are necessary to meet congressional concerns regarding gaming and to protect such gaming as a means of generating tribal revenue.

riastrad · 06-12-2009, 11:47 AM

Thanks for the breakdown. Hopefully this thing will get done. God (and the Seminoles) knows the state needs the money and the tribe will want to keep blackjack. Doesn't seem like the sides can be too far apart.

**PokerXanadu** · 06-12-2009, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by riastrad

Doesn't seem like the sides can be too far apart.

It doesn't matter how far apart or how close they are. Any attempt by the Seminoles to change the terms now will probably be met with a brick wall by the Florida House leaders.

**PokerXanadu** · 06-12-2009, 01:04 PM

A few more news articles on the topic have come out, but they all just mimic the earlier ones. The only additional info is this one line from the Orlando Sentinel:

Quote:

The tribe's spokesman, Gary Bitner, said the Seminoles wouldn't add to Richard's comments until negotiations resume with the governor. "There's no date set for that," he said.

mdom88 · 06-12-2009, 02:20 PM

greedy ****s

i really hope this is posturing by the tribe. and if it isn't, i hope that the minute they decline this deal, the state of FL/federal marshalls/whoever does it raids all their blackjack tables.
they're playing with fire. **** them if they think they're entitled to even more of a competitive advantage than is already provided to them

soulvamp · 06-12-2009, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdom88

greedy ****s

i really hope this is posturing by the tribe. and if it isn't, i hope that the minute they decline this deal, the state of FL/federal marshalls/whoever does it raids all their blackjack tables.
they're playing with fire. **** them if they think they're entitled to even more of a competitive advantage than is already provided to them

Well, the issue is that the state is trying to take away things from them that they now have and wants more money from them for the consideration.

I agree with the sentiment that the Seminoles shouldn't be allowed to have things that others aren't allowed. I've said that before. I'm just pointing out what the reality is.

mdom88 · 06-12-2009, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soulvamp

Well, the issue is that the state is trying to take away things from them that they now have and wants more money from them for the consideration.

I agree with the sentiment that the Seminoles shouldn't be allowed to have things that others aren't allowed. I've said that before. I'm just pointing out what the reality is.

What exactly are they taking away? Blackjack at immokelee or whatever? the state never gave that to them in the first place (well it did sort of, but you get my point)...

**PokerXanadu** · 06-12-2009, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdom88

What exactly are they taking away? Blackjack at immokelee or whatever? the state never gave that to them in the first place (well it did sort of, but you get my point)...

From the time that Class III slots were approved in Broward county, the Seminoles have maintained that there were entilted to run all Class III games since they all belong to the same Federal classification. This has yet to be tested in the courts. The original compact that was negotiated with the state was a compromise between this stance and the State opinion that they are only allowed Class III slots. The State is now taking away a big chunk of what was granted to them in that original compact, including exclusivity, and demanding more money from the Tribe to boot. I can understand the reluctance of the Tribe to just bow down and accept these changes.