And now:LISN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: August 28, 1999 -- Updated 01:17AM CDT (0617 GMT) Online at Omaha World Herald: http://www.omaha.com/Omaha/OWH/StoryViewer/1,3153,210070,00.html Santee Celebrate Casino Ruling BY ROBERT DORR AND PATRICK STRAWBRIDGE WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITERS Santee Sioux tribal members in Omaha were jubilant Friday, after a victory in federal court kept their leaders out of jail and forestalled the closing of their tiny casino in northeastern Nebraska. But even as Tribal Chairman Arthur "Butch" Denny accepted congratulatory hugs outside the courtroom, he knew that not all the news was good. "We won the battle, but we could still lose the war," he said. U.S. District Judge William Cambridge's ruling on Friday may force a confrontation between federal prosecutors who have tried for three years to close down the Ohiya Casino and the tribe that sees the gambling parlor as its only chance to lift itself out of poverty. Cambridge refused to hold 12 of the tribe's leaders in contempt of court - which could have led to jail terms - despite their failure to comply with his long-standing order to close the casino. The judge said an Aug. 3 tribal vote in support of the Ohiya means tribal members, not their leaders, are now the only ones who have the power to close the casino. "This was a victory for the Santee people," Denny said. "They kept us out of jail." But in a stinging rebuke aimed at the U.S. Attorney's Office, Cambridge made it clear that he believes the casino should be closed. And he berated prosecutors for pursuing a civil lawsuit, instead of criminal charges, against the tribe. "This casino is an illegal gaming operation," Cambridge said. "It could have been shut down any time in the past three years if the U.S. attorney had not elected to file a civil case instead of by enforcing the criminal law." Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Boeshart told the judge that the government was justified in pursuing the case in civil court and had done so to avoid a confrontation with the tribe. Cambridge held his ground. "Yes, I am criticizing you," said Cambridge, who added that federal prosecutors should not sidestep their duty to enforce the law, no matter whom the case involves. "I tell juries that come in here thatthe law applies to everybody, no matter rich or poor." Cambridge's ruling was the latest entry in the three-year civil case against the Santees. He previously imposed more than $500,000 in fines against the tribe for ignoring his Nov. 24, 1998, order to close the casino. The tribe has ignored the fines and kept the casino running, which led to Friday's hearing. U.S. Attorney Tom Monaghan, who made a rare appearance in court for the issue and sat silently through Cambridge's tongue-lashing, disagreed with the judge after the hearing ended. "I was very disappointed," Monaghan said. "We have always believed and we still believe that this case can be handled through civil channels." He added that it is U.S. Justice Department policy to handle Indian gambling cases through civil court. He declined to comment about future moves in the civil case and would not say whether he would pursue criminal charges against tribe members. Monaghan did say that he viewed the referendum as a calculated legal move. He noted that the election was scheduled after 12 defense attorneys were appointed to advise the tribal leaders. "I think it was a ploy to try to make an argument in front of the court," Monaghan said. The referendum was key to Cambridge's decision. Santee members voted 61-11 on Aug. 3 that the tribal council headed by Denny should "under no circumstances" close the casino without permission of the tribe's members. The referendum gave the tribe's council members a compelling legal defense. Because tribal council members can no longer close the casino, Cambridge said, there was no point in punishing them. "It seems to me it's outside of their hands. Had this all been done prior to the referendum, it would be a different situation. It's just been too long." Denny's lawyer, federal public defender David Stickman, said the referendum complied with the bylaws of the tribe's constitution. "This was the will of the people that decided to keep the casino open," he said. "There's not an individual there responsible for the casino being open." Although his role in the case is done, Stickman argued that the most peaceful solution to the matter lay not in the hands of the federal government, but the state. "The State of Nebraska has an opportunity to enter a compact with the tribe to allow gambling on the reservation," Stickman said. Gov. Mike Johanns, along with former Gov. Ben Nelson, has refused to negotiate a compact with the tribe. Previous negotiations with state officials so frustrated Santee leaders that they went ahead and opened the Ohiya Casino in February 1996 at the site of a former cafe. Compared with the legal riverboat casinos in Council Bluffs, Iowa, the Ohiya is a shack. It holds fewer than 80 slot machines, while Bluffs Run has 1,248. And the Ohiya takes in less than $1 million a year - about three days' worth of gambling at Bluffs Run. Still, the money it has provided has been invaluable to the tribe, said Thelma Thomas, the casino's manager. "The opening of the casino has improved life for the Santee people," Thomas said. "It provided a $400,000 payroll that never existed before." Not all the Santee tribal leaders in court agreed. Two former members of the tribal council, Daniel Denny and Frank Whipple, testified that they believe the tribe should close its casino. After hearing their testimony, Cambridge separately dismissed them from the contempt hearing. Despite that testimony, Thomas said most of the tribe's members support the casino, as evidenced by the referendum's overwhelming vote to keep the Ohiya open. "Not only the Santee, but all the surrounding towns support us," she said. "We've had people from those towns come to court with us before."
