New York and Seneca Nation at Odds on Whether Gaming Compact Agreement in Principle Exists

There is confusion over whether New York State and the Seneca Nation have reached an “agreement in principle” on a new gaming compact, with state officials disputing the claim.

J.C. Seneca, Seneca Nation President, said on Thursday that an agreement had been reached and that the deal could be presented to the state legislature in the spring. New York Senate Minority Leader and Niagara County Republican Rob Ortt offered a contrasting account, noting that the Governor’s Office had contacted certain elected leaders last month to say there was a deal, or at least a framework for one.

“I know for a fact the Governor’s Office called certain elected leaders — myself not a part of that — last month to tell them that there was a deal, or at least the framework of a deal. But then I heard nothing after that,” Ortt told 2 On Your Side.

“Now you have the Seneca Nation saying there’s an agreement in principle, whatever that means, in substance, right? And yet the Governor’s Office is now saying no, that would be premature.”

A governor’s spokesperson said there had been “productive discussions” on a new compact but that there was currently “no agreement” and that public discussion of one was “premature.”

Points of Contention in Compact Talks

J.C. Seneca also said state negotiators had rejected continuing slot-machine revenue-sharing pass-throughs for Niagara Falls, Buffalo and Salamanca.

For Niagara Falls, the issue could have a significant impact on its budget. Mayor Robert Restiano said the city could lose between $11 million and $13 million if revenue sharing is not included. He is preparing a new budget for Nov. 1.

“My concern is getting more information on the accuracy of what’s been reported. What’s really going to be happening? Has an agreement been reached? I can honestly say to you that I have not been advised that that has happened,” Restiano said.

“If you think about the fact that the city’s budget is a little more than $100 million, and if you think about the fact that we have an amount in the budget that is almost 10 percent — not 10 percent but almost — you’re thinking about a substantial gap to fill.”

The Path to Legislative Approval

Ortt said, “This has dragged on with almost no information, and now you’re getting these conflicting reports.”

“The whole point of the compact was exclusivity and a payment, so if there’s no exclusivity and no payment, that sounds to me like there’s an agreement that we’re not going to have an agreement.”

Any new compact would require approval from state lawmakers. According to Yogonet International, these divergent accounts underscore the unresolved questions on core terms that must be settled before the matter reaches the legislature.

Reporting: Yogonet International

Generated by SCCG’s automated editorial system from published source reporting. SCCG Management holds editorial responsibility.