A former executive director of the Seneca Gaming Authority has filed with the Seneca Nation Courts a challenge of the legality of the Jan. 12 settlement agreement over the casino company payments with New York state.
Cattaraugus community member Marie E. Williams’ legal filing is focused on the “assessed costs” within the settlement agreement, which she claims go beyond the provisions of the compact and Seneca President Matthew Pagels buried in the agreement.
Williams said the additional costs have consistently been disputed and denied by the Seneca Gaming Authority and several Seneca Nation presidents for nearly a decade.
This is the second time this week the settlement agreement has been challenged by members of the Seneca community.
A group of Seneca women, the Mothers of the Nation, gathered Tuesday on the Allegany territory to oppose the agreement, calling upon the Tribal Council to halt over $800 million in disputed payments to the state.
As the former executive director of the Nation’s gaming authority, Williams said she can attest to disputed billings from the New York State Police and state Gaming Commission from 2014 to 2019.
“The crux of my legal filing has to do with years of disputed billings that have been consistently denied by five administrations,” she said. “President Pagels’ settlement agreement must be nullified as release of these disputed funds, that pertain to the New York State Police and New York State Gaming Commission, are unjustified expenses and overbillings that go beyond the scope of the Nation-state compact.”
Procedurally, the New York State Police submit billings to the Nation on a quarterly basis, Williams said. The state police billings have been disputed as far back as 2011 and amount to approximately $35 million.
The New York State Gaming Commission (NYSGC) submits separate billings to the Nation on a quarterly basis pursuant to Appendix G of the Compact. The gaming commission billings amount to approximately $18 million.
Williams noted that under the tenures of former presidents Maurice John and Todd Gates, both executives placed the state on official notice of compact violations regarding the improper billings. Both John and Gates extended offers of good faith negotiations to the state to resolve the disputed billing matters, but those offers went unanswered by the state, she said.
A separate court filing by another community member alleged that the president’s settlement agreement should be nullified for failing to obtain Tribal Council authorization. That case is on appeal in the Nation’s Appellate Court.
“Protecting our gaming operations, through a fair and equitable compact, is our Nation’s greatest economic priority,” Pagels told the Times Herald Tuesday. “These operations generate revenue that funds vital programs, services and benefits on which our people depend. We are committed to protecting this important economic engine for our people today and for generations to come.”
Williams said she believes that Pagels does require council authorization in keeping with the precedent set in 2013 by then-President Barry Snyder, who signed the memorandum of understanding, resolving the exclusivity dispute. Snyder inserted a caveat to the exclusivity agreement that stipulated it was subject to council approval, she said.
“President Pagels and this current council dismissed a reasonable and consensus-building Snyder precedent,” Williams said. “We are a nation built on custom, tradition and practice. The precedent for Council authorization is an important one that should not be so readily ignored.”
Williams is a signatory to a petition that was submitted last week to the Department of the Interior and National Indian Gaming Commission to investigate and review the Gaming Compact and the legality of payments to the state.