La Crosse Tribune: Ho-chunk wants La Crosse casino

The Ho-Chunk Nation is making a bid to open a gambling casino in La Crosse.

County voters could see an advisory referendum in November on whether to let the tribe open its fourth casino in the state here, said La Crosse County Board Chairman James Ehrsam.

No location has been chosen, but Ehrsam said he would like to see the bankrupt Holiday Inn and Yacht Club Resorts property on Baron Island reopened.

In 1995, La Crosse County voters overwhelmingly turned down a referendum for the Lac du Flambeau tribe to open a casino at the Holiday Inn. The hotel closed in November, and a court-appointed receiver is trying to sell the property. County Treasurer Donna Hanson said Friday the back taxes, interest and penalties on the property now total $930,247.

Ho-Chunk officials wanted to appear before the full County Board this month, but made their request too late, Ehrsam said. If approved by two board committees, the tribe could be on the board's August agenda.

"I'm willing to listen and see what they have in mind," Ehrsam said, adding the public may be more receptive to a casino than in 1995 because of the proliferation of casinos in the area and the loss of jobs at the former G. Heileman brewery in La Crosse.

"There certainly would be jobs involved. Most of the casino workers are not Native Americans. There's a chance for some jobs - good jobs because (the casino) is run by computers," Ehrsam said.

Ehrsam and La Crosse Mayor John Medinger met with tribal officials in March and at the time downplayed the likelihood of a proposal. They also said the Ho-Chunk representatives suggested they could give the city and county each $2 million per year if the casino was built in La Crosse.

"It came out of the blue, really," Ehrsam said of the request, which came in a letter received Thursday by Supervisor Donald F. Meyer, who chairs the county's Administrative/Legislative Committee. Meyer could not be reached for comment.

The Ho-Chunk Nation did not return phone calls from the Tribune Friday.

However, Ovation Marketing of la Crosse said Friday that it has been hired to do public relations for the Ho-Chunk Nation in the event of a referendum.

Nichole Jordan, Ovation Marketing account manager, said La Crosse is one of the sites the Ho-Chunk are considering. The former Holiday Inn is one of the locations, but the nation is open to other options, she said.

Ovation has handled public relations for the Ho-Chunk Nation since April, but has not yet been directed to do any work regarding a possible casino, Jordan said. A campaign would focus on activities such as press conferences, and probably would not involve TV ads, she said.

Public support is critical for Gov. Tommy Thompson's approval of any new Indian gaming casino locations, said Scott Scepaniak, administrator of the Division of Gaming in the state Department of Administration.

Under recent amendments to the compact between the HoChunk Nation and the state, the nation would need city as well as county approval for the state to discuss locating a casino within a city, Scepaniak said.

The Ho-Chunk Nation has not yet had any discussions with the state regarding a casino in La Crosse, he said.

Discussions with the state will be necessary because the HoChunk Nation will need to enter a compact with the state, Scepaniak said. The nation's compact with the state allows four casinos. The nation already has three casinos in Baraboo, Nekoosa and Black River Falls, he said.

The compact states the location of those first three casinos, and says a fourth location is to be determined by the state and the tribe, Scepaniak said.

The nation does not need state approval to locate bingo halls, he said. Bingo is Class 2 gaming, which does not come under the state's regulatory authority, while casinos are Class 3 gaming, which are state regulated.

Medinger said Friday he has not talked with Ho-Chunk officials about a casino for about three months.

"I heard that it is the (former) Holiday Inn, but I have not talked to the Ho-Chunk on this issue in several months," he said. "I wasn't aware that it was going to be on the county agenda."

Medinger said he does not know why the nation would want a county, rather than a city, referendum and does not know if it would be necessary to have a city referendum, too, as city residents could vote in the county election.

He said he voted against a casino in 1995 because he did not like the then-owners of the Holiday Inn, but plans to take no position on the issue this time.

State Rep. Mike Huebsch, R-West Salem, who was among casino opponents in 1995, said he welcomes another referendum.

"In the last year, there have been continuous rumblings that maybe they should have a casino here," Huebsch said. "I would welcome the opportunity to have that vote. It will give us the opportunity to get the word out about how casinos adversely affect the community. I think it will give those of us who have opposed a casino from the beginning the opportunity to hopefully put the stake through the heart of that whole idea. I will be glad to lead the charge against a casino, to bring out the negative effects it would have on a community."

The nation "will promise wonderful things," Huebsch said. But he said the city would have no legal recourse if it did not come through, unless the nation would agree to relinquish its legal sovereignty.

The Tavern League and local restaurateurs opposed the casino five years ago out of concern it would offer cheap liquor and food as an incentive to gamble. Ehrsam said he believes "those things can be worked out."

In the end, Ehrsam said, it will be up to the public.

"We're here to represent the people and we have to listen," Ehrsam said. "The people will decide."