Indiana's Attorney General opposes a proposed settlement between the city of East Chicago and a developer regarding riverboat
casino revenues because it would grant additional money to that developer at a time when the state is suing to open up the
financial books.
East Chicago Mayor George Pabey announced Thursday he negotiated a settlement with East Chicago Second Century Inc. for all
future riverboat casino revenues that would have otherwise been paid to Second Century to go directly to the city. East Chicago
sued in 2005 to undo a local development agreement entered into by previous Mayor Robert Pastrick that gave a cut of casino
money to the for-profit developer - approximately $1.5 million annually.
In 2007, the attorney general intervened, filing a counterclaim and cross-claim seeking imposition of a constructive trust
for public benefit and an accounting of the money paid to Second Century. The trial court dismissed the AG's claims and
the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed. The Indiana Supreme Court last year reversed and remanded for further proceedings,
allowing the case to proceed.
That led to the AG last summer requesting in a separate civil suit against former Mayor Pastrick that a federal judge, as
part of an ongoing federal racketeering case, allow the state to look into the developer's finances and what has been
given to officials in East Chicago. Last year, the nonprofit organization Foundations of East Chicago, which also received
casino money and is a party to all this litigation, filed a motion to intervene in the federal case. U.S. Senior Judge James
Moody hasn't issued a ruling yet in that case.
In a statement released Thursday, Attorney General Greg Zoeller said he opposed any result that would allow additional funds
be given to Second Century, which has refused any public review of how it spent more than $16 million it received over 10
years. Zoeller is not involved in the settlement.
The issue for the attorney general is opening the for-profit developer's books and providing an accounting so that the
public can see how the money has been spent.
"Forward-looking disclosure is not enough; there must be disclosure going back to the founding of Second Century, created
by the Pastrick organization during the period that is subject of our RICO investigation," Zoeller said.
In addition to Second Century relinquishing its claims to future revenues paid from the riverboat, the proposed settlement
allows for the city and Second Century to jointly petition the court to distribute funds - approximately $8 to 10 million
- held in escrow since the beginning of the litigation. Of the escrowed funds, 54 percent would go to the city and 46 percent
would go to Second Century. The settlement agreement will be submitted to the East Chicago Common Council on Monday for approval.
As a result of this litigation, the attorney general supports language in Senate Bill 405 in the General Assembly this session
that would create transparency for local development agreement companies and LDA nonprofits that receive casino money. If
passed, the bill would require either a for-profit or nonprofit LDA to publicly disclose to the state how it spends the money
and who is awarded the funding. SB 405 is currently under consideration by the full House.














vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.
Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.