Grand Forks casino proposal dies in House vote
Apr. 24—BISMARCK — A portion of a state Senate bill that included language to move forward a casino proposal in Grand Forks County failed in a Wednesday House vote, likely ending the plan for the conceivable future.
Senate Bill 2018, an appropriations bill, included language that sought to allow the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa the ability to expand its casino operation beyond current tribal land. Existing state law mandates that the tribe cannot move outside of its traditional boundary. An earlier bill, SB 2376, specifically addressed the potential change
but it failed in a 29-15 Senate vote
in February.
In March, the proposal was inserted into a Senate Bill 2018. At the time, state Rep. Emily O'Brien, R-Grand Forks,
said she wanted it in SB 2018
because she considered it an "opportunity for the state to support local and tribal (economic development)." She said the state shouldn't stand in the way of what she considers local development decisions.
The proposal was only to let the casino plan move forward, and was not the final say on whether it would be built. Various other approvals — and from various levels, ranging from city to federal — would have been needed prior to construction.
On Wednesday, the House voted 66-26 against SB 2018's Division C, where the proposal was inserted.
Prior to the vote, several members of the House debated the casino's merits, with O'Brien notably speaking in favor and others against.
"For generations, tribal nations have fought for the right to self govern and build their own economies and to provide for the people with dignity and independence," she said. "Under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, tribal casinos are not just entertainment venues, but engines of opportunity. They fund schools, health care clinics, housing, addiction treatment and public safety on reservations, where those needs are urgent and under-resourced.
"This is not a handout."
But some felt the casino would open the possibility of tribes branching outward en masse while potentially having an adverse effect on the state's charitable gaming industry.
Grand Forks Republican Rep. Nels Christianson said "compromise" and "balance" with gambling already exist in North Dakota. He believes that allowing expansion of American Indian gaming outside of a tribe's borders would jeopardize that balance.
"A casino in Grand Forks County upsets that great consensus. Let us not have any misconceptions about this: A casino in Grand Forks will mean, eventually, a big casino adjacent to each large city in our state," he said. "This means money leaving our community and each tribe will feel the need to upstage the next for the best location adjacent to another North Dakota community."
He added: "The proposed casino in Grand Forks County represents a giant monster sucking the lifeblood and earnings out of our community. I stand against this monster and I seek to slay it."
Rep. Matthew Heilman, R-Bismarck, wondered aloud if allowing the proposal to move forward would be detrimental to the existing charitable gaming industry.
"I'm not really sure," he said, answering his own question. "But I don't want to find out. ..."
O'Brien specifically addressed charitable gaming during her short speech on the House floor. She said she supports the industry; meanwhile, she said, North Dakota charitable gaming has grown in recent years.
"As of Dec. 31, 2024, there are five tribal casinos in North Dakota, compared to 328 licensed gaming entities, which includes 846 sites and 5,250 e-tab machines," she said. "These machines are easily accessible at our local restaurants, bars and fraternal clubs. And in 2022 alone, charitable gaming generated more than $1.7 billion — that's a 560% increase in just five years."
At the same time, she said, tribal casinos are confined to traditional areas and thus are being "boxed out" as other gambling grows.
"They are held to a stricter set of rules, bound by federal oversight and denied the ability to expand or relocate under state law. This is not equity and it's not balance," O'Brien said. "Both (industries) deserve our support."
During his testimony, Rep. Mike Nathe, R-Bismarck, said he has received numerous emails from charitable organizations "that the sky is falling."
"The more charitable gaming emails I get, the more I want to investigate these guys," he said.
Rep. Lawrence Klemen, R-Bismarck, said the casino proposal reminds him of the failed Fufeng proposal. Announced in 2021and abandoned in 2023, the plan called for the China-backed company to build a corn mill on the edge of the city. It was abandoned when the Air Force declared the project a potential threat to national security.
"Well, I think I've heard enough from the city of Grand Forks on this subject. I don't think we should be approving what they do in the name of economic development," he said.
Later in the session, O'Brien rose to address "hurtful" comments.
"Our discussion should focus on the merits of the issue at hand and not on questioning each other's motives," she said, reminding members about decorum. "... While I would accept an apology, the damage has been done and I expect more from this chamber."
According to a report filed Thursday by Forum Communications columnist Rob Port
, Klemen did email an apology to O'Brien and Rep. Jayme Davis, R-Rolette, who is a member of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The spectacular end of Elon Musk and Donald Trump's bromance
During a press conference in the Oval Office last week, President Trump praised Elon Musk, his adviser and the outgoing head of the president's Department of Government Efficiency, for waging war on the federal workforce. 'Elon has worked tirelessly to lead the most sweeping and consequential government reform program in generations,' Trump said alongside Musk, who wore a black DOGE hat and 'DOGEfather' T-shirt while standing next to the president. For nearly an hour, Trump heaped effusive praise on the billionaire Tesla chief executive, SpaceX founder and owner of X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, whose stint as a special government employee had come to an end. 'Elon's really not leaving,' the president added. 'He's gonna be back and forth I think.' What a difference a week makes. Trump and Musk's unlikely bromance unraveled in spectacular fashion on Thursday, with the president telling reporters in the Oval Office that he was 'very disappointed' with Musk's criticism of his 'one big beautiful' spending bill, and Musk railing at Trump in real time on X. "I'm very disappointed in Elon," Trump said before a bilateral meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. "I've helped Elon a lot." The president suggested that Musk, like many others before him, had become 'hostile' upon leaving his administration. "I'll be honest, I think he misses the place," Trump said. 'People leave my administration, and they love us, and then at some point they miss it so badly, and some of them embrace it, and some of them actually become hostile." "They leave, and they wake up in the morning, and the glamour is gone," the president added. "The whole world is different, and they become hostile. I don't know what it is." Trump also suggested that Musk was upset that the Republican-backed reconciliation bill did not include an electric vehicle mandate, which would have benefited EV manufacturers, including Tesla. 'He knew the inner workings of the bill better than anybody sitting here. He had no problem with it. All of a sudden he had a problem and he only developed the problem when he found out we were going to cut the EV mandate." "False, this bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of night so fast that almost no one in Congress could even read it!" Musk wrote on X. 'Whatever,' Musk continued. 'Keep the EV/solar incentive cuts in the bill, even though no oil & gas subsidies are touched (very unfair!!), but ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill.' 'In the entire history of civilization, there has never been legislation that [is] both big and beautiful. Everyone knows this!' Musk added. 'Either you get a big and ugly bill or a slim and beautiful bill. Slim and beautiful is the way.' Musk, who was one of Trump's most fervent and visible supporters during the 2024 campaign, wasn't done. "Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate," Musk wrote. "Such ingratitude." Trump wasn't done either. 'Elon was 'wearing thin,'' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!" 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump added. 'I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' Musk tried to get the last word in, suggesting Trump's name is in unreleased FBI files on Jeffrey Epstein, the late financier and convicted sex offender. "Time to drop the really big bomb," Musk wrote. "@realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!" "Mark this post for the future," Musk added moments later. "The truth will come out." On Thursday night, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement that 'this is an unfortunate episode from Elon, who is unhappy with the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' because it does not include the policies he wanted." She added "The president is focused on passing this historic piece of legislation and making our country great again.' The split capped a longtime partnership for the pair, with Musk stumping for Trump on the campaign trail, and the president, after installing Musk as the head of DOGE, boosting Tesla amid criticism of Musk with an unusual event at the White House. ("Trump turns the White House lawn into a Tesla showroom," NBC News proclaimed.) But in the last few months, there had been reports that Trump was privately growing tired of Musk. On May 27, three days before Musk's farewell press conference in the Oval Office, CBS aired a clip that showed him expressing disappointment that Trump's signature spending bill would undermine his DOGE work. Then on Tuesday, Musk went full blast on the spending package. "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore," he wrote on X. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." "Call your Senator, Call your Congressman," Musk wrote on Wednesday. "Bankrupting America is NOT ok! KILL the BILL." That brought us to Thursday, when Trump was asked about Musk's attacks during his Oval Office meeting with Merz. "Elon and I had a great relationship," Trump told reporters. "I don't know if we will anymore." In a phone interview with CNN on Friday morning, Trump said he was "not even thinking about" Musk and would not be speaking with him anytime soon. 'I'm not even thinking about Elon. He's got a problem. The poor guy's got a problem,' Trump said, adding: "I won't be speaking to him for a while I guess, but I wish him well.'
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Power bills in California have jumped nearly 50% in four years. Democrats think they have solutions
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers this week advanced several efforts aimed at reining in utility profits and slashing electricity bills as part of their agenda to tackle the sky-high costs of living. The proposals would make sweeping changes to how utilities fund expensive infrastructure projects like putting power lines underground to guard against wildfires. They also would add more oversight around wildfire mitigation spending and put new requirements on utility requests to increase rates. Supporters said the goal is to make the big investor-owned utilities start sharing some of the costs to fight wildfires and build new transmission infrastructure. 'This is not a set of modest tweaks that will make minor improvements at the edges of a problem without offending anyone,' said Democratic State Sen. Josh Becker, the bill's author. 'This is a big deal.' One of the bills is part of the state Senate's package to address affordability amid growing concern about the high costs of everything from gas to groceries. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order last year urging lawmakers to do something to address skyrocketing electricity rates, which rose 47% on average for residential customers between 2019 and 2023, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analysts Office. But Republicans, who are in the minority in both chambers, say Democrats are not meaningfully addressing high prices. They did not support the energy reform bills, saying it wouldn't lower costs, and they unsuccessfully tried to force a vote on a proposal to limit utilities from raising power rates above the rate of inflation. Utility rate increases in recent years have been approved by state regulators in part to help investor-owned utilities bury power lines aimed at stopping wildfires. Some of the deadliest and most destructive fires in recent years have been sparked by power equipment. Pacific Gas & Electric, whose equipment sparked a 2018 wildfire that killed 85 people in 2024, raised its rates six times to help cover the costs of putting power lines underground and other improvement projects. While one in every five ratepayers can't pay their power bills, utilities like PG&E raked in record-breaking profits last year, according to The Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group. The group supports Becker's measure and has sponsored a similar effort in the Assembly. 'There are no limits to how much the utilities can ask for in rate increases. There are no limits to how many times a year they can ask,' said Mark Toney, the group's executive director. 'You can't blame them for asking for the sky.' Under Becker's proposal, utilities would be required to use public financing to fund the first $15 billion spent on capital investment projects. The option would allow utilities to access funding with lower interest rates, and utilities also would be prohibited from collecting a return on that investment for shareholders. That would save customers $8.8 billion over the next 10 years, Becker said. The bill would also set up a state-backed fund to reimburse utilities for wildfire projects, among other things. But the state may not have money to pay for that this year. The bill would also increase oversight of utility budgets and their wildfire spending. Utilities would have to include at least one rate increase proposal that doesn't exceed the rate of inflation in their requests. The proposal also calls for $60 billion worth of credits to apply on bills over the years during the summer months when usage is often at its peak. Senate Democrats overwhelmingly advanced Becker's measure this week. But Republicans, utilities and the California Chamber of Commerce said it would only drive up more costs. The legislation 'moves today's utility costs around without eliminating them,' the chamber said in a letter in opposition. New regulations around rate increase and shareholder returns also could halt utilities' investment in preventing wildfires or enhancing the grid, the letter said. Republican State senators said rising power bills are caused by Democrats' policies and push for more electric vehicles and less reliance on fossil fuels. In the Assembly, meanwhile, Republicans have called for permitting reforms to make it faster and cheaper to build better utility infrastructure. 'The regulation regime that we have in this state is oppressive and definitely drives prices,' said Sen. Roger Niello, a Republican. 'Your package of affordability is rather modest in number, but it is even more modest in its potential impact.' Lawmakers also advanced a slew of other measures aiming to provide relief to ratepayers, including one that would prohibit utilities from using rates to pay for lobbying efforts and one that would allow California to join a regional energy market with other Western states to help increase grid reliability.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bipartisan group of Georgia lawmakers pushes back on proposed federal 10-year ban on state AI limits
Six Georgia lawmakers joined more than 250 of their colleagues nationwide to ask Congress not to hamper their ability to regulate artificial intelligence. Midjourney/AI-generated art A bipartisan group of state lawmakers, including six from Georgia, is calling on Congress to cut a provision out of the massive federal spending bill that freezes state regulations on artificial intelligence for 10 years. 'As state lawmakers and policymakers, we regularly hear from constituents about the rise of online harms and the impacts of AI on our communities,' the lawmakers wrote. 'In an increasingly fraught digital environment, young people are facing new threats online, seniors are targeted by the emergence of AI-generated scams, and workers and creators face new challenges in an AI-integrated economy. Over the next decade, AI will raise some of the most important public policy questions of our time, and it is critical that state policymakers maintain the ability to respond.' The Georgia signers were Sen. John Albers of Roswell and Reps. Todd Jones of South Forsyth and Gary Richardson of Evans, who are all Republicans, as well as Democratic Reps. Scott Holcomb and Tanya Miller of Atlanta and Sam Park of Lawrenceville. In all, 261 legislators from all 50 states signed the letter. Georgia lawmakers from both chambers met over the summer last year to discuss potential AI regulations. Albers, who chairs the Senate AI study committee, often stressed that he did not wish to overregulate, saying that he saw lawmakers' duty as balancing protections for Georgians with creating a friendly environment for businesses. During this year's legislative session, no major AI bills passed into law, including broadly popular provisions like increasing penalties for using AI to create child pornography or deceptive 'deep fake' campaign advertisements. An Albers bill intended to create a new state advisory board on artificial intelligence and to require local governments to report on their use of the technology died in the Senate Economic Development and Tourism Committee on the advice of Suwanee GOP Congressman Rich McCormick. Then-committee chair Brandon Beach, who now serves as U.S. Treasurer, said at the time that McCormick told him not to take any action on AI because Congress would take care of it. Senators created a new committee this year to examine artificial intelligence and digital currency, but members have not yet been appointed and no hearing dates have been set. The GOP's megabill, which has become the cornerstone of President Donald Trump's domestic agenda, passed the House by a single vote and is now in the hands of the Senate. Getting the legislation through the House was a challenge the first time, with factions within the Republican Party at odds over the size of cuts to federal programs and the expected increase in the deficit. The new focus of the AI provision could prove to be another sticking point. Members of the House including Rome Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene have indicated they were not aware of the regulation ban when they voted for the bill and will not support it when it comes back to the House unless the rule is removed. 'I voted for President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill because it delivers his MAGA campaign promises and he endorses the bill and wants Congress to pass it in order to fund his MAGA agenda,' Greene said on social media. 'Do I love the price tag? NO. But I want OUR policies funded. I campaigned across the country for YEARS with Trump, more than any member of Congress, and the man NEVER said he would destroy state rights for 10 years to let AI tech companies run rampant!!! TAKE IT OUT OR I'M VOTING NO WHEN IT COMES BACK TO THE HOUSE!!!!!' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
