Table Of Content

THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR'S DENIAL OF THE WISCONSIN CHIPPEWA'S CASINO APPUCATIONS VOLUME 3 Y 4.G 74/7:D 41/V.3 lOS-2 Dipositions: Ike Oepartat of tlie laten'or's lenial of tke lisconsin Oiippoa's Casino Applications, DEPOSITIONS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JANUARY 21, 22, 28, AND 29, 1998 Serial No. 105-92 Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight I THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR'S DENIAL OF THE WISCONSIN CHIPPEWA'S CASINO APPUCATIONS VOLUME 3 DEPOSITIONS BEFORE THE COMMITTBE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JANUARY 21, 22, 28, AND 29, 1998 Serial No. 105-92 Printed for the use ofthe Committee on Government Reform and Oversight U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 48-630CC WASHINGTON : 1998 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington,DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-056598-7 COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman BENJAMINA. OILMAN, New York HENRYA. WAXMAN, CaUfomia J. DENNIS HASTERT, IlUnois TOM LANTOS, CaUfomia CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland ROBERT E. WISE, Jr., WestVirginia CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut MAJOR R. OWENS, New York STEVEN SCHIFF, New Mexico EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York CHRISTOPHER COX, CaUfomia PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida GARYA. CONDIT, CaUfomia JOHN M. McHUGH, New York CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York STEPHEN HORN, CaUfomia THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin JOHN L. MICA, Florida ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington, THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia DC DAVID M. Mcintosh, Indiana CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, IlUnois STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio DANNY K. DAVIS, DUnois MARSHALL "MARK" SANFORD, South JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts Carolina JIM TURNER, Texas JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine PETE SESSIONS, Texas HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee MICHAEL PAPPAS, New Jersey VINCE SNOWBARGER, Kansas BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont BOB BARR, Georgia (Independent) DAN MILLER, Florida Kevin Binger, StaffDirector Richard D. Bennett, ChiefCounsel William Moschella, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian Judith McCoy, ChiefClerk Phil Schiliro, Minority StaffDirector (II) CONTENTS Page Hearings held—onJanuary 21, 22, 28, and 29, 1998—Volume 1 Volume3 Depositions 1 Letters, statements, etc., submitted fortherecordby: Manuel, Hilda: Depositionof 1 Exhibits to deposition 31 Meisner, Kevin: Depositionof 148 Exhibitsto deposition 187 O'Connor,Jennifer: Depositionof 639 Exnibitstodeposition 705 O'Donnell, Patrick Emmit: Depositionof 305 Exnibits to deposition 320 Schmidt, MichaelT.: Deposition of 356 Exnibits todeposition 371 Schneider,ThomasJay: Depositionof 384 Exnibits to deposition 394 Sibbison, Heather: Deposition of 413 Exnibits to deposition 449 Skibine, GeorgeTallchief: Deposition of—Day 1 492 Depositionof—Day2— 633 Exhibits todeposition ^Day 1 564 (III) THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR'S DENIAL OF THE WISCONSIN CHIPPEWA'S CASINO APPLICATIONS [The depositions ofHilda Manuel, Kevin Meisner, Patrick Emmit O'Donnell, Michael T. Schmidt, Thomas Jay Schneider, Heather Sibbison, George Tallchief Skibine, and Jennifer O'Connor follow:] Executive Session CommitteeonGovernmentReform andOversight, U.S. House ofRepresentatives, Washington, DC. DEPOSITION OF: HILDAMANUEL Tuesday,January6, 1998 The deposition in the above matterwas held inRoom 2203, Raybum House Office Building, commencingat9:40 a.m. Appearances: Staff Present for the Government Reform and Oversight Committee: James C. Wilson, Senior Investigative Counsel; Bob Dold, Majority Counsel; David Sadkin, MinorityCounsel; and Ken Ballen, MinorityCounsel. ForMS. MANUEL: TIM ELLIOTT, ESQ. DeputyActingAssociate SoUcitor-GeneralLaw DepartmentofDefense, Officeofthe SoUcitor 1849 C Street, N.W. Washinton, D.C. 20240 Mr. Wilson. Good morning. On behalfofthe Members ofthe Committee on Gov- ernment Reform and Oversight, I thank you very much for appearing here today. This proceeding is known as a deposition. The person transcribing this proceeding is a House reporter and notary public. And I will now request that she place you underoath. THEREUPON, HILDAMANUEL, a witness, wascalled forexaminationbyCounsel, and afterhavingbeenfirstduly sworn, wasexamined and testified as follows: Mr. Wilson. I would like to note for the record those who are present at the be- ginning ofthis deposition. My name is James Wilson. I am the designated Majority counsel. I'm accompanied todaybyBob Dold. Mr. Sadkin. I'm David Sadkin representing the Minority. And I will bejoined by Ken Ballen in a fewminutes. Mr. Wilson. Ms. Manuelis accompanied todaybyMr. TimothyEUiott. Although this proceeding is being held in a somewhat informal atmosphere, because you havebeen placed underoath, your testimony here has the same force and effect as ifyou were testifyingbeforethe committee orin a courtroom. If I ask you about conversations you have had in the past and you are unable to recall the exact words used in such conversations, you may state that you're unable to recall those exact words, and then you may given me the gist or substance ofany such conversation to the best ofyour recollection. Ifyou recall only part of (1) a conversation or only part of an event, please give me yoiir best recollection of thoseevents orconversations. If I ask whether you have any information about a particular subject and you have heard other persons conversing with each other regarding that subject or seen correspondence ordocumentation about that subject, please tell me thatyou dohave such information and indicate the source from which you derived such knowledge. Majority and Minority committee counsel will ask you questions regarding the subject matter of this investigation. Minority counsel will ask you questions after I have finished. After Minority counsel has completed questioningyou, a new round ofquestioning may begin. Members ofCongress who wish to ask questions in the event that they attend, ofcourse, will be afforded an immediate opportunity to ask their questions. When they are finished, committee counsel will resume questioning. Pursuant to the committee's rules, you are allowed to have an attorney present to advise you ofyour rights. Any objection raised duringthe course ofthe deposition will be stated for the record. Ifyou are instructed or refuse to answer a question. Majority and Minority counsel will confer to determine whether the refusal is proper. IfMajority and Minority counsel agree that the question is proper, the witness will be asked to answer the question. Ifan objection is not withdrawn, the Chair- man or a Member designated by the Chairman may decide whether the objection isproper. This deposition is considered as taken in executive session of the committee, which means it may not be made public without the consent ofthe committee pursuant to clause 2(k)(7) and House Rule XI. No later than 5 days after your testimony is transcribed, and you will be notified that your transcript is available, you may submit suggested changes to the Chairman. The transcriptwiU be available for yourreviewatthe committee office. Committee staffmay make any typographical or techniced changes requested by you. Any substantive changes or modifications submitted by you must be accompanied bya letterrequestingthe changes and a statement foryour reasons foreach proposed change. And a letter requesting substantive changes must be signed by you. Any substantive changes will be included as an appendix to the transcript, con- ditioned uponyour signingofthetranscript. Andjust to tell you what has been happening, transcripts are generally available fairly quickly after the deposition is completed, within a day or two, and somebody will caU Mr. Elliott as soon as possible, inform him that the transcript is ready, and then we'll work to make it as convenient of as possible to review that transcript withyou. Doyouunderstand everythingwe've gone oversofar? TheWitness. Yes, I do. Mr. Wilson. Ifyou don't understand a question, please say so, and I will repeat it or rephrase it so that you do understand the question. Do you understand that you should tell me ifyou don'tunderstand myquestion? TheWitness. Yes, I do. Mr. Wilson. The reporter will be taking down everything we say and will make a written record ofthe deposition. Please give verbal, audible answers in order to assisttheHousereporter. Your testimony is being taken under oath as ifwe were in coiirt. And ifyou answer a question, it will be assumed that you xmderstood the question and the an- swerwasintended toberesponsiveto it. Doyouunderstand that? TheWitness. Yes, I do. Mr. Wilson. It's my understanding that you are here voluntarily, and we thank you for that. Do you have any questions about this deposition before we begin the substantive portion ofthe proceeding? TheWitness. No, I don't. Mr. Wilson. Mr. Elliott, ifyou wovild like to make a statement or observation at this time. Mr. Elliott. As I've said at two previous depositions, those ofMr. Hartman and Mr. Jaeger, we're veryconcerned abouttheeffectofthesedepositions onthe ongoing litigation involving the very same issue. We are concerned that these depositions and the process being undergone will adversely affect the United States' position in thatlitigation. Ms. Manuel was indeed in the Departmentofthe Interior in the Bureau ofIndian Affairs at the time ofthe application and the decision thereon. She knows the deposition-making process of the Department of Interior and she can talk about that. However, I have instructed her that she is not to talk about the litigation or any issues in the litigation so far as she is aware ofthem, even though she's not been activelyinvolved in the litigation itself Mr. Wilson. Thankyou. Mr. Sadkin. I have a fewbriefcomments before we begin. It is the understanding of the Minority that this deposition relates to the Interior Department's denial of an application by three Indian tribes to place ofT-reservation land in the trust for theaevelopmentofa casinoinHudson, Wisconsin. After the Interior Department rejected the request, the applicant tribes alleged thatthe opponents ofthe casino, otherIndian tribes, improperlyinfluenced the decision through contacts with the Democratic Party and administration officials. These allegations are the subject ofa well-publicized lawsuit pending in the U.S. District CourtfortheWestern DistrictofWisconsin, which Mr. Elliottreferred to. As the Majority is aware, the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee has already thoroughly investigated this matter. It has interviewed and deposed dozens ofwitnesses and taken public testimony from those people central to any allegations ofimpropriety. For example, the Senate held a public hearing at which Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt, former DNC Chairman, Donald Fowler, lobbyist Pavd Eckstein, and formerDeputy ChiefofStaff, Harold Ickes, all testified. TheAttorney General is also looking into this issue. And I understand the House ResourcesCommitteehascommenced its own investigation. I want to take this opportunity to lodge a continuing objection ofthe Minori^ to this deposition and eveiy deposition relating to the Hudson casino matter. Wiiile this committee has the power to pursue this inquiry, it is an imprudent use ofthe power to investigate and reinvestigate matters that have already been thoroughly examined. On behalfofthe Minority, I would like to thank Ms. Manuel for appearing today voluntarily. She was not called by the Senate to give a deposition or hearing testimony, and I suspect that is because you have little to add to the already exhaustive publicrecord. Thankyou. EXAMINATIONBYMR. WILSON: Question. Ms. Manuel, would you please state and spell yourname forthe record? Answer. My name is Hilda, H-I-L-D-A. My middle initial is A, last name Manuel, M-A-N-U-E-L. Question. Didyouattend college? Answer. Yes. Question. Wheredidyou attend coUege? Answer. UniversityofCaUfomia, Berkeley. Question. Could you please provide a briefemployment history after college until thepresent? Answer. Well, after coUege, I—wen—t to law school, graduated from University of Ne—w Mexico in 1976. And in 19 in I graduated in December of76. And then in 19 in July, I mean in January of 1977, I went back to Arizona to work with my own tribe as a juvenile judge where I remained for the next several years until 1990. Question. And af—ter 1990? Answer. In 1990 January of1990, 1 came to Washington, D.C. Question. Andwhere didyouworkwhenyoucame toWashington, D.C? Answer. I was hired as ajudicial services officer for the Bureau ofIndian Affairs. Question. And have you had different positions at the Bureau ofIndian Affairs? Answer. Yes. I remained in my judicial services officer for about a year. And in '91, May of '91, I was promoted to Division Chief of Tribal Government Services. And in November of'91, I was assigned a taskby the Secretary ofthe Interior, then Secretary Lujan, along with several other individuals in the Department to look at theproblems in Indian gaming. And from thatpointon, from November'91, through May '94, I worked exclusively in Indian gaming. I set up the first office for the De- partment. Question. And whatwereyourpositionsduringthistimeup tothepresent? Mr. Elliott. Duringthis time- Mr. Wilson. Well, I'm tryingtogeta sense Mr. Elliott[continuing]. From ^4? Mr. Wilson [continuing]. Ofthe titleofthejob. Mr. Elliott. She'sgivenyou to'94. Mr. Wilson. Ofthe titles tothepresent. The Witness. From judicial services ofBcer, tribal government services officer, andgamingmanagementspecialist. examination byMR. WILSON: Question. And isyourtitle still gamingmanagement specialist? Answer. No. I'm currentlythe DeputyCommissionerofIndianAffairs. Question. Did you have a title inbetweengaming management specialist and dep- utycommissioner? Answer. No. I was moved to the front office in May of'94 in an acting capacity asdeputycommissioner and thenbecame permanent—in Octoberof'94. Question. From May of 1994 until the end of 199 or until July of 1995, what wereyourresp—onsibilities? Answer. To as deputy commissioner, my responsibility is to provide supervision and directionto the Bureau ofIndianAffairs nationwide. Question. And is that related to all Indian Affairs matters orjust gaming issues? Answer. No. Everything. Question. In 1994 and 1995, where were you physically located in terms ofyour employment? Wherewas youroffice? Answer. In the central office here in Washington. Question. Andis thatatthe main Departmentofthe Interior Answer. Yes. Question [continuing]. Building? To whom didyou reportin 1994 and 1995? Answer. TotheAssistant SecretaryofIndianAffairs. Question. And thatperson, whatis the name ofthatperson? Answer. TheAssistant SecretarywasAda Deer. Question. Haveyou discussed this deposition with anybody? Answer. Just with Mr. Elliott, who informed me ofthe procedures ofhowyou pro- ceed with thedepositionand whatI mightexpect. Question. Have you provided docvunents regarding the Hudson Dog Track matter, and just for want of a better shorthand term, I'll refer to fee-to-trust application process and the denial of that application is the Hudson Dog Track matter. Have you given documents regarding the Hudson Dog Track matter to the Department ofJustice? Answer. Notthat I'm awareof. Question. Has anyone from the Department ofJustice spoken with you about the HudsonDogTrack matter? Answer. No. Question. Apartfrom this deposition and arrangingthe logistics ofthis deposition, have you spoken with any congressional personnel about the Hudson Dog Track matter? Answer. No. Question. And just to be clear, I'm including both the House of Representatives and the Senate Answer. I understand. Question [continuing]. Investigators. Do you have any dociunents that relate to the Hudson Dog Track matter in your personal possession? Answer. No, I don't. Question. When did you first hear about the application to take land into trust and theHuds—on DogTrack facUity? — Answer. In to the best of my knowledge, some time in during the summer of '94 when I was still in my role as the director ofgaming, but acting as deputy commissioner. Question. And doyou rememberhowyou heard aboutthe Hudson DogTrackmat- ter? Answer. From thearea director. Question. Do you recall whether the first time you heard about it was through verbal communications orwas itthrough materials thatyou received written? Answer. Itwas, I believe, verbal communication. Question. And withwhom didyou communicateatthattime? Answer. Thearea director. Question. And who is thatindividual? Answer. Atthattime, itwas Denise Homer. Question. Ijust want to ask a sort ofa very general question. And I have a num- ber ofdocuments that I'll be giving you, and we'll discuss specifics. But on July 14, 1995, the application to take land into trust at Hudson, Wisconsin, was rejected. Whywas itrej—ected? Answer. The as I recall, the letter which I believe I also sumamed, the reasons that we provided to the three applicant tribes were primarily based in the fact that the Secretary had decided to exercise his discretion not to take the land into trust because there were a nvunber ofproblems that we felt could not be overcome by fur- ther documentation orjustification. There was strong community opposition to the application. There was going to be detriment both to the local community and to