Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

(Counsel conferring with witness.]

The Witness When you when they work with the tribes

at the local level agency or the area, they know that community support is a key factor We give then every opportunity, and I think the records in the gaming office in terms of all of the mail, the letters that have gone out with my signature, with George's signature, will verify the fact that we inform the tribes, we inform the communities, that they all have an equal opportunity to present their case and to develop a record. So when I say, yes, we don't put a casino in a community that doesn't want it, I qualify that by saying, however, that the community has to have a reason for not wanting it there. It can't be just because they don't like Indians, for example.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

detriment to the community, we move forward with a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for approval, and in fact, there is at least two cases that I was personally involved in where we did that, where the community did not have a basis for their opposition, other than they just didn't want Indians right next door to them.

[blocks in formation]

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

[blocks in formation]

the community opposition was in this case?

A Environmental concerns. They were concerned about

Q Could those concerns have been cured?

A Probably, at probably great expense to the tribes.

I mean we're talking about, you know, such things as providing

police services; you know, all the kinds of services that you would need to supplement when you're going to start bringing in a lot of people.

Q And who made the determination that the expenses were - who made the determination on behalf of the tribes that the expenses were prohibitive?

A I didn't say that that decision was made. You asked me if they could have been corrected, and I'm giving you my opinion that probably, yes, but probably at great expense. Q Were the tribes given an opportunity to cure the specific defects?

EXHIBIT

AD 10

[The deposition of Franklin Ducheneaux follows:]

EXECUTIVE SESSION

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT,
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

DEPOSITION OF: FRANKLIN DUCHENEAUX

Washington, DC.

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1997

The deposition in the above matter was held in Room 2203, Rayburn House Office Building, commencing at 10:00 a.m.

Appearances:

Staff Present for the Government Reform and Oversight Committee: James C. Wilson, Senior Investigative Counsel; Robert Dold, Jr., Investigative Counsel; Michael Yang, Minority Counsel; and Michael Yeager, Minority Counsel.

Mr. WILSON. Good morning, Mr. Ducheneaux.

Mr. DUCHENEAUX. Good morning.

Mr. WILSON. On behalf of the members of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, thank you for appearing here today. This proceeding is known as a deposition. The person transcribing this proceeding is a House reporter and notary public. I would now request that the reporter place you under oath.

THEREUPON, FRANKLIN DUCHENEAUX, a witness, was called for examination by Counsel, and after having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

Mr. WILSON. I would like to note for the record those who are present at the beginning of this deposition. My name is James Wilson. I am the designated Majority counsel for this deposition. I am accompanied today by Bob Dold, who is an investigative counsel with the Majority. The Minority is represented by Mr. Michael Yeager.

Although this proceeding is being held in a somewhat informal atmosphere, because you have been placed under oath, your testimony here today has the same force and effect as if you were testifying before the committee or in 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 are unable to recall those exact words and then you are requested to give me the gist or substance of any such conversation to the best of your recollection. If you recall only part of a conversation or only part of an event, please give me your best recollection of that conversation or that event. If I ask you whether you have any information about a particular subject, and you have overheard other persons conversing with each other about that subject or have seen correspondence or documentation about that subject, please tell me that you do have such information and provide that information.

The Majority and Minority committee counsels will ask you questions regarding the subject matter of this investigation. Minority counsel will ask questions after Majority counsel has finished. After the Minority counsel has completed questioning, a new round of questioning may begin.

Members of Congress, if any should attend today, 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 of your rights. It is my understanding that you have elected to appear today without an attorney; is that correct?

The WITNESS. Conditioned upon the statement I will make in a few minutes.
Mr. WILSON. Certainly.

Any objection raised during the course of this deposition or any questions that you have regarding the procedure or the substance of the questioning will be discussed on the record and we will make the best effort we can to resolve the questions you have. As I stated a moment ago off the record, we will make every attempt to accommodate any question or observation you have, and if it is deemed necessary for you to consult with counsel, for any purpose whatsoever, then obviously we will not pursue a particular line of questioning and allow you to do that, and that might require us to reschedule to resolve that particular issue.

This deposition is considered as taken in executive session of the committee, which means that it may not be made public without the consent of the committee pursuant to clause 2(k)(7) of House Rule XI. During the course of the questioning, I will make every attempt not to ask you questions about proprietary information, but in order to effect as little disruption to your life and business as possible, you will have an opportunity to discuss removing any information that you consider to be confidential, and we will discuss in a moment your review of the transcript. But if you have a question or any observation about material that you would prefer not to be publicly disseminated, please make the observation at the time and we will do the best we can to get around that question or issue.

No later than 5 days after your testimony is transcribed and you have been notified that your transcript is available, you may submit suggested changes to the Chairman. Transcripts have generally been available within a day or two of the deposition being taken.

Practically speaking, I or somebody else from the committee will notify you as soon as possible and will give you an opportunity to come down to the committee rooms at a time convenient to you and review the transcript for any changes that you consider to be necessary. Committee staff may make any typographical or technical changes requested by you. Substantive changes, modifications, clarifications or amendments to the deposition transcript, submitted by you, must be accompanied by a letter requesting the changes, and a statement of your reasons for each proposed change. A letter requesting substantive changes must be signed by you. Any substantive changes will be included as an appendix to the transcript, conditioned upon your signing of the transcript.

Do you understand everything we have gone over so far?

The WITNESS. Yes.

Mr. WILSON. Do you have any questions about anything we have gone over so far? The WITNESS. No. Well, at a proper time.

Mr. WILSON. Sure. And I am going to ask you a couple of questions and then you will have an opportunity to make a statement. If you don't understand a question, please say so and I will repeat it or rephrase it so you do understand the question. Do you understand that you should tell me if you don't understand my question? The WITNESS. Yes.

Mr. WILSON. The reporter will be taking down everything we say and will make a written record of the deposition, therefore, I ask that you give verbal, audible answers in order to assist the House reporter. If you can't hear me, please say so and I will repeat the question or have the court reporter read the question to you; do you understand that?

The WITNESS. Yes.

Mr. WILSON. Your testimony is being taken under oath, as if we were in court, and if you answer a question, it will be assumed that you understood the question, and the answer was intended to be responsive to the question. Do you understand that?

The WITNESS. Yes.

Mr. WILSON. It is my understanding that you are here voluntarily, and we do thank you for coming in. Do you have any questions about the deposition before we begin the substantive portion of this proceeding?

The WITNESS. Is this the appropriate time for a statement?

Mr. WILSON. Absolutely.

The WITNESS. Well, I just want to, on the record, first of all, talk a little bit about the transcript. I can't get a copy, but I am entitled to see it within 5 days after it is available?

Mr. WILSON. Absolutely. And we can work with you on that score, if there are any conflicts in your schedule. We are not going to be rigid on that, but it is generally available within one or two days of the deposition, so perhaps as early as tomorrow, I will inform you that it is ready at the committee offices and you can come down at your convenience, too.

The WITNESS. If at some point I am called as a witness before the committee, will the transcript be available to me?

Mr. WILSON. It probably will be. Almost all transcripts, and I shouldn't say that, dogmatically, but at the time a witness appears, transcripts are generally released and they can be released at other times as well.

The WITNESS. I am going to keep my own notes here, as we go through this, of significant parts.

The only other thing I want to say before we get started is, as you point out, I am here voluntarily and without counsel. It is my understanding that I am being deposed relating to, first of all, documents that I submitted pursuant to the subpoena of the committee and also, generally, my knowledge and involvement in a

matter, which for shorthand terms is the Hudson Dog Track issue. And I am pleased to cooperate without counsel.

As I indicated to you on the phone yesterday, and I think I talked to Mr. Yeager, that is what I am here for, voluntarily, and I don't expect that you will do it, but if the questioning begins to go off the point, you know, I reserve the right to terminate the interview and seek counsel.

In addition, as you point out, if there are certain questions, and I don't think there will be, where I have some concerns, I reserve the right to do that, also. Mr. WILSON. Absolutely, and that is understood.

The WITNESS. With that, I am prepared to answer your questions.

Mr. WILSON. Thank you very much.

Mr. Yeager.

Mr. YEAGER. Thank you.

This deposition relates to the Interior Department's denial of an application by three Indian tribes to place off-reservation land into trust for development of a casino in Hudson, Wisconsin.

After the Interior Department rejected the request, the applicant tribes alleged that opponents of the casino project, other Indian tribes, improperly influenced the decision through contacts with Democratic Party and administration officials. These allegations are the subject of a well-publicized lawsuit pending in the U.S. District Court for the western district of Wisconsin.

The Majority is aware that the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee has already investigated this matter. It has already interviewed and deposed dozens of witnesses and taken public testimony from those people central to any allegations of impropriety. For example, the Senate took public testimony from Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt, former DNC Chairman Donald Fowler, lobbyist Paul Eckstein, and former Deputy Chief of Staff Harold Ickes. The Attorney General is looking into this issue, and I also understand the House Resources Committee has commenced its own investigation.

I want to take this opportunity to lodge a continuing objection to this deposition and every deposition relating to the Hudson casino matter. It is not that the committee lacks the power to pursue this inquiry. It is, however, imprudent and oppressive use of that power to investigate and reinvestigate matters that have already seen the light of day. It has an effect on real people.

On behalf of the Minority, I would like to thank Mr. Ducheneaux for appearing today voluntarily. He was not called by the Senate to give deposition or hearing testimony. I suspect there was a good reason for that and he has little to add to the public record.

Mr. WILSON. Just before I begin, I do recognize that you are going to be taking notes, and I will make every attempt to ensure that you are able to take notes that you deem necessary, but if you would, I request, please tell me to go slower or change my style if I am going a little too quickly for you to get that down, and hopefully we can move expeditiously through this.

EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:

Question. Mr. Ducheneaux, would you please state and spell your name for the record?

Answer. My name is Franklin Ducheneaux, Franklin, F-R-A-N-K-L-I-N, D-U-C-HE-N-E-A-U-X

[blocks in formation]

Question. Where did you attend college?

Answer. University of South Dakota.

Question. If you could, please provide a brief employment history after college, and when I say brief, if you could just provide your major employment situations? Answer. Okay.

Question. If you would, please.

Answer. You mean on the record?

Question. Yes.

Answer. Okay. I graduated from law school in 1965, from the University of South Dakota, in the spring of '65. I went to work for the United States Government as a regional civil rights coordinator with the old Office of Economic Opportunity. I worked there until the September of '67.

I then went to work for the Bureau of Indian Affairs here in Washington, D.C., as a congressional relations official. I worked there until the end of 1970. For a short period of time, I was executive director of the National Congress of American Indians, which at that time was an elective position.

I then became a free-lance consultant. In March of 1973, I was hired by the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the old House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee and served as counsel on that committee for, let's see, for about 6 years, I think. And then after that, I was hired by Chairman Udall as Indian Affairs counsel to the full Interior committee, served in that capacity until toward the end of 1990, and since then have been in a lobby government consulting business under two different names, currently Ducheneaux, Taylor & Associates, Inc.

Question. Have you discussed this deposition with anyone else, apart from people in this room?

Answer. With my wife. With my partner. You mean did I mention I was going to have a deposition?

Question. Any substantive discussions?

Answer. I think I have indicated to certain people who are involved in the issue. Larry Kitto, I told him I would be testifying. I talked to Mr. Corcoran and told him that I would be testifying when I had my records subpoenaed, but that is about it. Question. Have you provided documents regarding the Hudson Dog Track matter, and just parenthetically, I think we hit the same shorthand for this, just to refer to the subject of this deposition, I will refer to as the Hudson Dog Track matter. Have you provided documents regarding the Hudson Dog Track matter to the Department of Justice?

Answer. No.

Question. Has anyone from the Department of Justice spoken with you about the Hudson Dog Track matter?

Answer. No.

Mr. WILSON. I would like to, and this is a little bit cumbersome, but it is just a housekeeping matter relating to your production of documents. I will submit the production to you, or at least give you a copy of the production, which I don't anticipate you will need to go through right now. I also will give you a second exhibit. The first exhibit will be FD-1, and the second exhibit is marked FD-2.

[Ducheneaux Deposition Exhibit No. FD-1 was marked for identification.] [Ducheneaux Deposition Exhibit No. FD-2 was marked for identification.] [Note. All exhibits referred to may be found at the end of the deposition.]

EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:

Question. Exhibit 2 represents the documents that have been taken from your production that appear on the Ducheneaux-Taylor letterhead, which represents_five separate documents, and I wanted to ask you a couple questions about the document production. As I said, this is a housekeeping matter, and I am just trying to determine we have everything that is relevant.

There are five documents here on the firm letterhead. Are you aware of, or do you know of any other documents that relate to the Hudson Dog Track matter that you still have, other than the five documents that have been marked as Exhibit FD2?

Answer. No, I'm not aware of any.

Question. Okay. You provided

Answer. Oh, I'm sorry. I provided copies of letters to you. I think I sent two letters to the DNC on our letterhead, I believe.

Question. Okay. That are?

Answer. In here, they should be in here.

Question. Well, I am saying this is a housekeeping matter and I did it this way just to check on that because it seemed there were very few documents on the letterhead.

Answer. Okay. But I have

Mr. YEAGER. The record should reflect Mr. Ducheneaux hasn't had an opportunity to go through the entire package.

Mr. WILSON. Absolutely. And he is relying on my representation that these are the only documents.

The WITNESS. The five you submitted to me, FD-2, and, again, as Mr. Yeager says, I could flip through here and see, but you left off the two letters I wrote to the DNC and I think at least one of them appears on our letterhead, maybe not.

Question. Okay.

EXAMINATION BY MR. WILSON:

Answer. Because, just for the record, I don't keep hard copies of my computer letters, I put them on the computer, and when I print off the original letter, I print

« AnteriorContinuar »