Those Arizonans interested in wagering on Thursday night’s NFL opening season game between Super Bowl champs Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Dallas Cowboys will be able to legally do so, courtesy of a court order issued Monday.
Maricopa County Judge James Smith denied a request by the Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe for a temporary restraining order (TRO) which would have postponed the Sept. 9 start of mobile sports betting within the state of Arizona. An attorney for the Arizona Department of Gaming argued that postponement had the potential to result in “millions per month” of financial losses to several businesses involved in the new gaming opportunities allowed under Arizona’s 2021 Indian Gaming Compact negotiated by Gov. Doug Ducey.
In its request for the TRO, the tribe argued that allowing the new 2021 gaming compact negotiated by to go into effect would result in “direct, substantial and uncertain injury” for its members. Such results would reduce the amount of revenues available for tribal operations and programs, the lawsuit alleged.
The tribe also argued that Proposition 202 which was approved by voters in 2002 to create gaming compacts with Native American tribes, so state lawmakers can only amend the initiative if it furthers” the purpose of the original proposition.
However, Smith ruled the Yavapai-Prescott Tribe was unlikely to prevail in its lawsuit, which still remains in play against Ducey as well as Ted Vogt, the director of the Department of Gaming. But it’s clear the odds are not in favor of the tribe securing an order invalidating the 2021 Compact or House Bill 2772 signed by Ducey which changed parts of state law related to gaming.
Supporters of expanded gaming in Arizona welcomed Smith’s ruling, as the Sept. 9 start date for the new betting options is the same day the NFL begins its regular season. One of those supporters is Rep. Jeff Weninger (R-LD17) who helped ensure passage of HB2772 and worked with Ducey to amend the nearly 20-year-old compacts.
“Thrilled to hear this decision and I am excited for event wagering to start on Thursday,” Weninger tweeted Monday evening. “Today was a good day.”
Some Arizona sports teams are even promoting the new gaming opportunities to their fans, such as the Phoenix Suns’ sweepstakes offered for those who preregister with FanDuel. The prize is an opening night suite and $1,000 in team shop credit.
By not signing on to Ducey’s 2021 Compact, Yavapai-Prescott will likely lose out even more than most, because its two casinos are limited to games allowed under its 2003 Compact, which does not permit games such as craps and baccarat included under the new compact.
During Monday’s special court hearing, Smith learned that the Yavapai-Prescott Tribe had been in settlement discussions with the Department of Gaming until late August. Whether those negotiations will continue is unclear, nor is it certain what options would be available under current law and the 2021 Compact.
Another question will be whether the new gaming options increase overall betting activity across the state or simply pull revenue away from the 17 tribes which currently operate casinos across the state.
In addition to the new games which can be offered at tribal casinos, the 2021 Compact allows 10 of the 22 tribes in Arizona to be licensed to engage in off-reservation mobile sports betting. Those licenses have been awarded to the Ak-Chin Indian Community, Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, Fort Yuma Quechan Indian Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Navajo Nation, San Carlos Apache Tribe, San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, Tohono O’odham Nation, and Tonto Apache Tribe.
The 2021 Compact also allows 10 professional sports teams to be licensed for off-reservation mobile sports betting along with offering books at select sports venues. Those licenses were issued to the Arizona Cardinals, Arizona Coyotes, Arizona Diamondbacks, Arizona Rattlers, Phoenix Mercury, Phoenix Speedway, Phoenix Suns, and TPC Scottsdale.
There is one other active lawsuit against the Department of Gaming related to new sports betting opportunities, but its claims are not going to stymie the start of mobile sports betting.
Turf Paradise contends its Phoenix-area horse track qualifies for one of the professional sports licenses and that the decision to deny its application was incorrect. The lawsuit was filed even though the owners of Turf Paradise have administratively appealed the denial to Vogt.
The former CEO of one of Arizona’s largest healthcare companies must pay nearly $774.500 before Nov. 19 to ensure his plea deal on fraudulent schemes charges stays in place, and give himself a better chance to avoid a prison sentence.
William J. Timmons, former head of Hacienda Inc, and various nursing care and health supply businesses is set to be sentenced in the Maricopa County Superior Court after pleading guilty in June to two Class 2 felonies stemming an elaborate scheme that bilked Arizona taxpayers out of millions of dollars through improper billing for services.
Timmons, 74, will have an opportunity to argue mitigating factors to Judge Timothy Ryan in an attempt to get probation instead of prison. But first, he must pay $500,000 in restitution to the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) and $274,500 in fines to the Arizona Attorney General’s anti-racketeering revolving fund.
Failure to make the payments could lead Ryan to reconsider the plea deal.
Meanwhile, Timmons’ co-defendant Joseph O’Malley will be back in court Sept. 24 for a case management conference in advance of his March 2022 trial on similar charges. O’Malley,58, remains out of custody pending trial.
In August 2020, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich announced that a grand jury had indicted Timmons and O’Malley following an investigation into allegations the two intentionally misallocated funds from AHCCCS as well as the Arizona Department of Economic Security’s Division of Developmental Disabilities.
Timmons, who had been with Hacienda for nearly 30 years until 2019, faces up to 12.5 years in state prison on each of the counts. However, his plea deal did not contain a prison-mandatory stipulation, so Timmons can argue for probation. If Ryan does impose a prison sentence, the minimum would be three years.
Hacienda has already agreed to repay AHCCCS nearly $11 million in overpayments. A repayment plan calls for an initial payment of $7 million followed by monthly payments of $50,000.
In addition, the company has consented to a $1 million fine which will be allocated between the AHCCCS Inspector General and the Attorney General’s Office. In exchange, the State has agreed to not pursue criminal or civil action against Hacienda provided the company complies with the consent agreement.
The Attorney General’s Office initiated a criminal investigation into Hacienda’s finances in early January 2019 after learning the company failed to comply with its contract terms. Among the allegations is that the company engaged in improper billing from 2013-2018.
The investigation also revealed that the Hacienda board of directors did not receive accurate financial data from Timmons and O’Malley, nor had the directors inquired as to the company’s performance. A new administrative team was put into place in March 2019.
The Navajo Nation has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Interior and the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation in an attempt to secure the proper conclusion of federal relocation for over 16,000 Navajos, something that was previously ordered to be completed in 1986.
The lawsuit filed in late August with the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona in Prescott on behalf of the Nation and more than 50,000 of its affected citizens seeks a court order forcing the U.S. Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation (Office of Relocation) to remain open and provide the relocation assistance, and community facilities and services promised and mandated by Congress decades ago.
According to the lawsuit, the Office of Relocation established in 1988 and its predecessor, the Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation Commission, have relocated over 3,700 households of Navajo families comprising over 16,000 Navajo citizens from their ancestral lands within the 2.5 million acres of the 1882 Reservation.
But the Nation alleges the Office of Relocation has failed to provide relocation services for many other households, and has failed to ensure the availability of community facilities and services -such as water, sewers, roads, schools, and health facilities- for households at on-reservation relocation sites.
The Relocation Act is the compilation of Congressional actions dating back to the Navajo-Hopi Settlement Act of 1974 and its subsequent amendments, including the Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation Amendments Act of 1980 and the Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation Amendments of 1988. It involves mandatory relocation of Navajos off some Reservation land partitioned off for members of the Hopi Tribe.
The Nation’s lawsuit puts forth claims on behalf of itself and over 50,000 of its citizens being adversely affected by the ongoing failure of the Office of Relocation to properly discharge its federal duties, which included implementing a Congressionally approved relocation plan.
The Office of Relocation traces its start to 1943 when a 642,000-acre area of the Reservation designated as District 6 was set aside for the exclusive use of the Hopi Tribe. Eventually all Navajo residents of District 6 were evicted by the U.S. government.
The remaining 1.8 million or so acres of the Reservation were for the “joint, equal, and undivided” (JUA) use of both Tribes. However, conflicts over the JUA continued for several years, and by 1974 a partition plan was enacted for the forced relocation of thousands of Navajos off what became known as Hopi Partitioned Land (HPL).
The lawsuit calls the still ongoing relocation of Navajos from HPL “the largest forced relocation of any racial group in the United States since the relocation and internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.”
Hopis also had to leave what came known as Navajo Partitioned Land (NPL), and according to government reports that part of the relocation was completed by 2013.
The Settlement Act 1974 tasked a Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation Commission with developing a relocation plan. It also required a reduction in livestock grazing on JUA lands, which harmed several Navajo farmers and ranchers.
In addition, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management was ordered to acquire land from the Navajo Nation within Arizona and Mexico “to be held in trust” for the Nation. Those lands would come to be known as “New Lands” and would be where many of the relocatees were placed.
Over the years, Congress passed laws related to a formal Relocation Plan under which the United States had a duty to assure schools, roads, power, and other facilities for relocation to the New Lands. Other provisions of the Settlement Act took effect in July 1981 with a five-year deadline for relocation to be completed.
However, a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in 1991 noted that only 68 percent of the eligible families had been relocated. By then, the July 1986 deadline had been missed by five years.
In 2005, a Congressional hearing noted that the cost of the federal relocation program over the preceding 36 years was almost half a billion dollars, which was more than 10 times what Congress estimated in 1974. The cost was also equivalent to what the United States was spending at the time in Iraq every 36 hours, the lawsuit states.
By 2018, the Office of Relocation announced it planned to cease operations and transfer its activities to another agency, even though the Department of Interior admitted the Relocation Act did not authorize such a move. Hundreds of Navajo relocation-certified households were still awaiting services at the time. Many others had the right to pursue eligibility by filing a claim with the federal court of appeals, the Department of Interior reported.
Even so, the Office of Relocation contended it had “fulfilled the duties it was legislatively assigned by providing relocation benefits to all individuals who were found eligible and that other services such as infrastructure should be provided by another permanent agency.”
The Navajo Nation and the Hope Tribe oppose the transfer, which even the Bureau of Indian Affairs admits “could further delay relocation.” The GAO worries that transferring relocation to another agency “likely would increase” program costs and delay completion of relocation.
“July 2021 was the 35th anniversary of the statutory deadline to complete relocation,” the Nation’s lawsuit states. “However, relocation still has not yet been completed and significant issues and work remain outstanding to complete relocation.” In addition, not all of the 400,000 acres of New Lands has been acquired and transferred as required under the Relocation Act, the lawsuit points out.
But it isn’t just direct relocation services to families that the Office of Relocation is accused of failing to provide.
The Office of Relocation is also responsible for developing community facilities and services, such as water, sewers, roads, schools, and health facilities, as well as power, telephone, and other utilities, at the relocation sites, many of which are on the New Lands, which is wholly populated by Navajo relocatees and their families.
According to the lawsuit, many relocatees and their communities (known as Chapters) rely on extensive unpaved roads that are in poor condition, live in homes with no indoor plumbing or easy-access potable water supplies, and do not have proper watering systems for livestock.
“Many communities with many relocatees lack sufficient electricity or appropriate septic or sewer systems,” the lawsuit contends. “These issues are especially problematic for elders during cold winters. There also are inadequate schools in many relocate areas,” which require students to commute hours each way to school.
“Finally, many Chapters seriously impacted by relocation lack adequate access to health and emergency facilities, which places all lives there at greater risk,” the lawsuit alleges. “This extreme delay is also unreasonable because it fundamentally concerns human health and welfare.”
The Nation is asking for an injunction prohibiting the Office of Relocation from shutting down. The lawsuit also seeks an order compelling the Department of Interior to ensure all Relocation Act services and benefits are made available without further delay.
An answer is expected to the filed by the U.S. Government later this month.
Fresh off a trip to Atlanta for the annual conference of the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), the president of Aerospace Arizona Association says the UVS industry in Arizona continues to grow, as a South Korea recently opened a subsidiary in Maricopa County. A UVS is often referred to as a drone.
According to Mignonne Hollis, Aerospace Arizona promotes the aerospace industry throughout the State of Arizona. The organization informs its members on legislative, regulatory, safety and technical issues, while also educating federal, state, county, and local elected officials on the importance and necessity of policies that facilitate a thriving aerospace industry in Arizona.
Businesses and groups with Arizona ties which attended AUVSI’s conference in Atlanta included Darling Geomatics, GoTenna, HFE International, Hydronalix, and Prime Solutions Group. The Arizona Commerce Authority also had a representative in Atlanta for the AUVSI gathering.
In addition, several Aerospace Arizona representatives were in attendance, including Hollis, Lorie Grabham of American Airlines, Steve Latino with ASURE, Adam Hawkins of Global External Relations, and an official of PABLO AIR, a South Korea company which recently filed incorporation papers with the Arizona Secretary of State for a subsidiary, PABLO AIR International.
“While the conference was much smaller than it has been in previous years, we were able to make solid contacts and connections for Arizona – particularly the Benson Airport as it truly is a prime location for testing unmanned systems,” Hollis told AZ Free News.
One company that has already committed to using Benson’s municipal airport as a test site is PABLO AIR, which recently announced an MOU with three Arizona-based businesses to advance its proprietary unmanned drone delivery system platform into the United States.
The companies working with PABLO AIR are NGL Transportation, a Phoenix-based logistics company whose customers include Walmart and Amazon, as well as Delivery-EZ, a developer of unmanned home-delivery box systems also based in Phoenix. Hollis said Aerospace Arizona is the third business in the MOU, providing PABLO AIR a local test bed and institutional support, including information on FAA flight regulations.
PABLO AIR was announced as a 2021 finalist for AUVSI’s Excellence in Operations award which honors innovators who have shown a demonstrated commitment to advancing autonomy, leading and promoting safe adoption of unmanned systems, and developing programs which use UVS technologies to save lives and improve the human condition.
“We plan to demonstrate PABLO AIR’s unique technology in the global market by implementing practical commercialization along with demonstration of delivery in the United States, for the first time as a Korean drone startup,” said Kim Young-Joon, CEO of PABLO AIR.
Young-Joon added that the company has long-term goals to help resolve issues with the efficiency of various mobility vehicles, such as self-driving trucks, unmanned ground robots, and delivery drones.
Hollis said the aerospace industry is one of the largest economic sectors in Arizona. There are more than 1,200 companies engaged in the market in Arizona, which ranks the state as 5th in the U.S. for aerospace employment.
A former justice of the Arizona Supreme Court who used to prosecute cross-border criminals before becoming a judge says many Arizonans along the border feel abandoned by President Joe Biden, but he has an idea to help stop the influx of undocumented immigrants and smugglers coming into the state.
During an interview with KFYI’s James T. Harris on Thursday, Andrew Gould agreed with a recent assessment by Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels that the situation at the border is out of control, but the crisis “is far, far worse than you could imagine,” he said.
“We’ve created an open border, and the Biden Administration has essentially abandoned American citizens just like he did with Americans in Afghanistan,” Gould said.
Gould told Harris that there are options for making Arizona unattractive to those illegally entering the United States via Arizona. The options could be undertaken without the help of federal authorities such as the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Border Patrol, which get their orders from Biden.
One option which Gould believes can be easily implemented is establishing a No Trespass Zone from Cochise County to Yuma County on state and private lands along the 325 miles of border between Mexico and Arizona.
According to Gould, Arizonans are now “at the mercy of these cartels who are making billions of dollars off crime. They are pushing illegal immigration, fentanyl, methamphetamine, sex trafficking, extortion, murder, bribery. And there‘s no help for us coming from the federal government.”
The answer, Gould believes, is for local and state officials to join with property owners to post no-trespassing signs on private property and state land. The signs are necessary to satisfy the “reasonable notice” requirement in state law before anyone can be arrested for criminal trespass.
Gould brings a unique perspective to the subject, as a one-time prosecutor for Maricopa and Yuma counties where he handled major felony cases. He went on to serve as a judge with the Yuma County Superior Court and the Arizona Court of Appeals before being appointed to the Arizona Supreme Court by Gov. Doug Ducey in 2016.
The appointment as a supreme court justice came with a practically guaranteed seat on the bench until age 70. In fact, Gould was retained by voters in the November 2020 General Election for a six term.
But in April, the 57-year-old Gould shocked court watchers when he stepped down to run for Arizona Attorney General, who is not only Arizona’s top prosecutor but also its top legal advisor to dozens of state agencies. With illegal immigration and drug / human smuggling among the biggest legal challenges facing the state, Gould says Arizonans cannot wait on the Biden Administration to address the public safety, public health, and environmental harms posed by an uncontrolled border.
A no-trespassing zone is something Gould has discussed with border sheriffs, including Dannels and Yuma County Sheriff Leon Wilmot. Both expressed interest in the idea, he said.
A conviction for misdemeanor criminal trespass can carry a jail sentence of 30 to 180 days. Most non-U.S. citizens would be ordered held in custody pending resolution of the charges, so Gould says Arizona’s county jails would need financial support to handle the increased incarceration costs.
One option, he noted, is to aggressively target Cartel assets to help with the expense.
