“7

ST sa”

Nationa FILE COPY

INDIAN
GAMING
Commission

JAN 23 1996

Rose M. Gunroe, Tribal Chairperson

Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewas
P.O. Box 529

Bayfield, Wisconsin 54814

Alfred Trepania, Acting Tribal Chairperson
Lac Courte Oreilles Band of

Lake Superior Chippewa Indians

Route 2, Box 2700

Hayward, Wisconsin 54843

Arlyn Ackley, Sr., Tribal Chairperson
Sokaogon Chippewa Community

Route 1, Box 625

Crandon, Wisconsin 54520

Fred Hevenick

Galaxy Gaming and Racing Limited Partnership
P.O. Box 350940

Miami, Florida 33135

RE: Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewas, Lac Courte
Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, Sokaogon
Chippewa Community and Galaxy Gaming and Racing Limited
Partnership Appeal of the Chairman's Disapproval to the
Management Contract Between the Parties.

INTRODUCTION

This matter is before the National Indian Gaming Commission
(Commission) on Appeal of the Chairman's decision to disapprove
the Management Contract (Contract) among the Red Cliff Band of
Lake Superior Chippewas, the Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake
Superior Chippewa Indians, the Sokaogon Chippewa Community
(collectively referred to as the Bands) and Galaxy Gaming and
Racing Limited Partnership dated February 23, 1994. The parties
submitted the Contract to the Commission on June 30, 1994, and
the Chairman disapproved it on December 6, 1995. The parties
filed a timely appeal on January 3, 1996. The Commission h
thirty (30) days to render a decision on the appeal from the date
of the appeal. 25 C.F.R. § 539.

1441 L STREET, NW, 9THFLOOR WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 TEL: 208-632-7003 FAX: 202.632.7066


Hongo?

Nowe

Ne

The Contract provides for the development of a gaming
operation on a tract of land known as the tludson Dog Track.
Because this tract of land does not qualify as "Indian lands,"
the Bands submitted an application to Minneapolis Area Office of
the Bureau of Indian Affairs to take that parcel of land into
trust on November 15, 1994. By letter dated July 14, 1995,
Michael Anderson, on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior
(Secretary), declined to take that land into trust. The Bands
have filed a suit in the Federal District Court for the Western
District of Wisconsin challenging that decision, Sokaogon
Chippewa Community (Mole Lake Band of Lake Superior Chippewa), et
al._v. Bruce C. Babbitt, et al., Case No. 95-C-0659-C. The
Chairman disapproved the Contract because the Secretary refused
to take the land into trust.

OPINION

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) authorizes gaming
only on Indian lands. 25 U.S.C.A. § 2710 (1988). IGRA defines
Indian lands as follows:

(A) all lands within the limits of any Indian
reservation; and

(B) any land title to which is either held in trust by the
United States for the benefit of any Indian tribe or
individual or held by any Indian tribe or individual subject
to restriction by the United States against alienation and
over which an Indian tribe exercises governmental power.

25 U.S.C. § 2703(4).

Because the Secretary did not take the land in question into
trust, it does not qualify as Indian lands for the purposes of
the IGRA. The Chairman cannot approve a contract for gaming on a
parcel of land that does not meet the requirements of the IGRA.
25 U.S.C.A. § 2711.

Because the parties have sued the Secretary to overturn his
decision and they are confident that they will prevail, they
argue that the Commission should overturn the Chairman's
decision. They request that the Commission remand the matter
back to the Chairman with instructions to hold approval of the
Contract in abeyance pending a final decision in the suit.

The Chairman did not err in disapproving the Contract. ‘The
law gave him no other alternative. While we are sympathetic to
the parties situation, it would be imprudent for us to reverse
the Chairman's decision and order him to hold his decision in
abeyance while the court case is proceeding. As the Chairman
stated in his letter, should the parties prevail in their suit

2


they may resubmit the Contract to the Chairman for his approval.
The Contract will be given the highest priority at that time.

Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, the Chairman's
decision is AFFIRMED.

par HS, Cofftissioner

cc: S. Todd Farris, Esq.