You are on page 1of 26

STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT - ALBANY COUNTY ___________________________________________

ROBERT L. SCHULZ , Plaintiff-Petitioner, -against-

VERIFIED COMPLAINT-PETITION
Index No.

STATE OF NEW YORK EXECUTIVE, ANDREW CUOMO, Governor; STATE OF NEW YORK LEGISLATURE, SHELDON SILVER, Speaker of the New York State Assembly; DEAN SKELOS, Temporary President and Republican Coalition Leader, JEFFREY KLEIN, Temporary President and Democrat Coalition Leader, Defendants-Respondents.

__________________________________________ Plaintiff-Petitioner ROBERT L. SCHULZ, alleges: 1. This is a constitutional challenge and an action for declaratory and injunctive relief. RELIEF REQUESTED 2. The relief requested herein is a final decree, judgment and order: a) declaring the Governors message to the Assembly and message to the Senate, signed on June 20, 2013 and June 21, 2013, respectively, calling for the immediate passage of A. 8112 and S. 5904, failed to satisfy the constitutional requirements mandated by Article III, Section 14 of the NY Constitution, and b) declaring A. 8112 and S. 5904 (hereinafter the NY GAMING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT) to be unconstitutional, null and void, and without effect, and c) declaring the Governors message to the Assembly and message to the Senate, signed on June 20, 2013 and June 21, 2013, respectively, calling for the immediate
1

passage of A. 8113 and S. 5903 failed to satisfy the constitutional requirements mandated by Article III, Section 14 of the NY Constitution, and d) declaring A. 8113 and S. 5903 (hereinafter the NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT) to be unconstitutional, null and void, and without effect, and e) declaring the Agreement between the State of New York and the Oneida Indian Nation signed on May 16, 2013, to be unconstitutional, null and void and without effect; and, f) declaring the Agreement between the State of New York and the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, signed on May 21, 2013, to be unconstitutional, null and void and without effect; and, g) declaring the Agreement between the State of New York and the Seneca Nation of Indians, signed on June 13, 2013 to be unconstitutional, null and void and without effect ; and, h) for such other and further relief as to the court may seem just and proper. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 3. The Governor and the Legislature have violated Article III, Section 14 of our New York State Constitution, which reads: No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon

4.

A. 8112, S.5904, (herein after referred to as the NY GAMING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT) and A.8113, S.5903 (hereinafter referred to as the NY TAX
2

FREE ZONES ACT) were passed by the NY Senate and the Assembly within hours of their receipt from the Governor, along with Messages of Necessity from the Governor that stated the bills did nothing more than correct technical errors contained in bills that had been previously delivered to the Legislature, when in fact the bills contained changes in state policy. 5. The Governor and the Legislature abused their power by suspending the three-day public review period, not allowing time for the rank and file members of the Legislature to hear from their constituents on matters related to the bills, nor providing the rank and file members of the Legislature time to read and comprehend the content of the bills, all as required by Article III, Section 14 of the NY Constitution. 6. The NY GAMING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT also violates Article IX, Section 2 of the NY Constitution which prohibits the enactment of laws that affect the property, affairs or government of one, two or more counties, but not all counties (unless 2/3 of the members of the governing bodies of those affected counties formally request the enactment of the law, which on information and belief did not happen).
7.

The NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT also violates other provisions of the NY Constitution including Article III, 17 (prohibits private and local laws that grant an exemption from
taxation on real or personal property to any person, association, firm or corporation) , Article VII,

Section 8.1 (prohibits the state from giving or lending its money or credit in aid of any private corporation or association or private undertaking), Article VIII, Section 1 (prohibits counties, cities, towns, villages and school districts from giving or lending money or property in aid of private undertakings) and Article IX, 2 (prohibits the enactment of laws

that affect the property, affairs or government of one, two or more counties, but not all counties). 8. The Agreements between the State of New York and the Oneidas, St. Regis Mohawks and Senecas violate NY Constitution Article VII, Section 8.1 and Article VIII, Section 1 (which prohibit the use of State and/local funds to sway the results of an election). 9. [S]uch acts of the legislature of this state as are now in force, shall be and continue the law of this state, subject to such alterations as the legislature shall make concerning the same. But all such parts thereof, as are repugnant to this constitution, are hereby abrogated. NY Constitution, Article I, Section 14. JURISDICTION 10. This Petition is brought under Article I, Section 9 of the New York State Constitution, which reads in relevant part:
9. 1. No law shall be passed abridging the rights of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government, or any department thereof.

11.

In addition this Petition is brought under the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution for the United States of America, which read in relevant part:
Amendment I. Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Amendment 5.No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. Amendment 14: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

12.

In addition, this Petition is a constitutional challenge brought under Article III, Section 14, Article III, 17, Article VII, Section 8.1, Article VIII, Section 1 and Article IX, 2 of the New York State Constitution.

13.

In addition, Section 3001 of the CPLR provides that a court "may render a declaratory judgment" to resolve "the rights and other legal relations of the parties to a justiciable controversy."
The supreme court may render a declaratory judgment having the effect of a final judgment as to the rights and other legal relations of the parties to a justiciable controversy whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. If the court declines to render such a judgment it shall state its grounds. CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND RULES, SECTION 3001.

14. 15.

The statute is broad in scope. James v. Alderton Dock Yards, Ltd., 256 N.Y. 298, 305 (1931). Neither an actual infringement of rights nor alternate coercive relief are necessary in a declaratory judgment action. See, e.g., Town of Ramapo v. Village of Spring Valley, 40 Misc. 2d 589, 591 (Sup. Ct. Rockland County 1962) (declaratory relief available to test validity of contract although it had not been breached), appeal dismissed, 13 N.Y.2d 918, (1963).

16.

A declaration of the Rights of the People and the obligations of the Government under the New York State Constitution in this case will serve a necessary and useful purpose. Davis Constr. Corp. v. County of Suffolk, 112 Misc. 2d 652, 656, (Sup. Ct. Suffolk County 1982), aff'd mem., 95 App. Div. 2d 819 (2d Dep't 1983).

17.

This controversy is definite, substantial, and ripe for final determination. The parties have adverse interests; Plaintiff has been harmed.

18.

There is no inherent limitation on the type of declaratory relief available under the Declaratory Judgment Act, CPLR 3001. Maguire v.Monaghan, 206 Misc. 550, 555, (Sup. Ct. N.Y. County 1954), afl'd mem., 285 App. Div. 926 (1st Dep't 1955); PARTIES

19.

Plaintiff- Petitioner ROBERT L. SCHULZ, is: a) a citizen of the United States of America whose individual, natural, unalienable, human Rights are guaranteed by the Constitution for the United States of America, and b) a resident of the State of New York whose individual, natural, unalienable, human Rights are guaranteed by the Constitution for the State of New York and New Yorks Civil Rights Act, and c) a payer of state and federal taxes; and d) obligated to defend the State of New York and the United States of America, an obligation Plaintiff gratefully acknowledges and accepts, and

20.

Under New Yorks Constitutional Republic, and for purposes of this action for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, the Plaintiff-Petitioner is the PRINCIPAL.

21.

The EXECUTIVE is a branch of the government of the STATE OF NEW YORK, one of the several states of the United States of America. ANDREW CUOMO heads the EXECUTIVE, as the duly elected Governor.

22.

The LEGISLATURE, with a Senate and an Assembly, is a branch of the government of the STATE OF NEW YORK.

23. 24.

SHELDON SILVER is the Speaker of the Assembly. DEAN SKELOS is the Temporary President and Republican Coalition Leader of the Senate.
6

25.

JEFFREY KLEIN is the Temporary President and Democrat Coalition Leader of the New York State Senate. Under New Yorks Constitutional Republic, and for purposes of this Action, the Parties listed in paragraphs 19-25 are the AGENT. STATEMENT OF FACTS NY GAMING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT

26.

27.

On June 18, 2013, Governors Program Bill #33 was sent to the Legislature where it was assigned bill numbers S.5883 and A.8101. See Exhibit A.

28.

On June 19, 2013 the Governor issued a press release (see Exhibit B). The opening paragraph reads:
Governor Andrew M. Cuomo, Senate Majority Coalition Co-Leaders Dean Skelos and Jeff Klein, and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver today announced an agreement on the Upstate NY Gaming Economic Development Act, which will establish four destination gaming resorts in Upstate New York and boost tourism and economic development in the region.

29.

On June 20, 2013, Program Bill #34, substantially modifying the proposed bill S.5883 and A.8101, was sent by the Governor to the Legislature where it was assigned bill numbers S.5904 and A.8112. See Exhibit C.

30.

On June 20, 2013, the Governor sent a Message to the Assembly requesting an immediate vote on bill A.8112. See Exhibit D. The Message reads in relevant part: AN ACT to amend a chapter of the laws of 2013 as proposed in legislative bill numbers S.5883 and A.8101.
The facts necessitating an immediate vote on the bill are as follows: I previously handed to the Legislature a version of the bill that was introduced as Governors Program Bill #33 (S. 5883 and A. 8101) on June 18, 2013. That bill has constitutionally aged and can be acted on without a Message of Necessity before the
7

Legislatures adjournment at the end of this week. Among other things, it establishes a comprehensive framework for regulating destination resort gaming in New York State and otherwise effectuates agreements with Indian nations and tribes. However, that legislation has some technical errors which, given the effective date of parts of the legislation, must be corrected to better effectuate the Legislatures and the Executives intentions. This bill, which corrects those errors, could not otherwise be acted upon before the adjournment of the Legislature. Because the bill has not been on your desks in final form for three calendar legislative days, the Leader of your Honorable House has requested this message to permit the immediate consideration of this bill.

31.

On June 21, 2013, the Governor sent a Message to the Senate requesting an immediate vote on bill S.5904. See Exhibit E. The Message reads in relevant part: AN ACT to amend a chapter of the laws of 2013 as proposed in legislative bill numbers S.5883 and A.8101.
The facts necessitating an immediate vote on the bill are as follows: I previously handed to the Legislature a version of the bill that was introduced as Governors Program Bill #33 (S. 5883 and A. 8101) on June 18, 2013. That bill has constitutionally aged and can be acted on without a Message of Necessity before the Legislatures adjournment at the end of this week. The bill, among other things, establishes a comprehensive framework for regulating destination resort gaming in New York State and otherwise effectuates agreements with Indian nations and tribes. However, that legislation has some technical errors which, given the effective date of parts of the legislation, must be corrected to better effectuate the Legislatures and the Executives intentions. This bill, which corrects those errors, could not otherwise be addressed before the adjournment of the Legislature. Because the bill has not been on your desks in final form for three calendar legislative days, this message is necessary to permit its immediate consideration

32.

On June 21, 2013, both the original bills (S.5883 and A. 8101) and S.5904 and A.8112 were approved. A.8101 passed at 4:42 pm; A.8112 passed at 4:46 pm.

33.

While the Messages of Necessity stated the intent of S. 5904 and A. 8112 (the new bill) was to correct errors technical in nature appearing in proposed bill S.5883 and A.8101 (the original bill), which at the time the Message of Necessity was delivered to the two
8

Houses had not been voted on, the new bill clearly includes substantial and significant changes in policy when compared to the original bill policies that had obviously been arrived at in a private meeting between the Governor and the Leaders of the Legislature on the June 19, 2013. 34. For instance: 1. Section 1 of the new bill (page 3) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (Page 2, line 48) the statement, The Legislature Hereby Finds and Declares that.Tribes whose gaming compacts are in good standing with the state will have their geographic exclusivity protected by this Article. 2. Section 1 of the new bill (page 3) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (Page 3, line 9) the statement, The Legislature Hereby Finds and Declares thatpolitical contributions from the casino industry will be minimized to reduce the potential of political corruption from casinos.
3. Section 2 of the new bill (page 3) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 9, line 33)

the requirement, The New York State Resort Gaming Facility Location Board shalldetermine, from time to time, whether tribal-state gaming compacts are in or remain in good standing for the purpose of determining whether a gaming facility may be located in areas designated by subdivision two of section one thousand three hundred eleven of this article.1
1

Subdivision two of section one thousand three hundred eleven reads as follows: Notwithstanding the foregoing, no casino gaming facility shall be authorized: (A) In the counties of Clinton, Essex, Franklin, Hamilton, Jefferson, Lewis, Saint Lawrence and Warren; (B) Within the following area: (1) to the east, state route 14 from Sodus Point to the Pennsylvania border with New York; (2) to the north, the border between New York and Canada; (3) to the south, the Pennsylvania border with New York; and (4) to the west, the border between New York and Canada and the border between Pennsylvania and New York; and (C) In the counties of Cayuga, Chenango, Cortland, Herkimer, Lewis, Madison, Oneida, Onondaga, Oswego and Otsego. 9

4. Section 4 of Program Bill #34 (page 3) changes the effective dates of twelve sections of S.5883 and A. 8101.2 5. Section 5 of the new bill (page 4) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 82, line 40) the restriction, Provided, further, no vendor is eligible for the vendors fee described in this clause who operates or invests in or owns, in whole or in part, another vendor license or is licensed as a vendor track that currently receives a vendor fee for the operation of video lottery gaming pursuant to this article. 6. Section 5 of the new bill (page 5) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 82, line 45) the provision a resort facility located in Sullivan County and replaces it with no more than one vendor track located in the town of Thompson in Sullivan County at the site of the former Concord Resort 7. Section 6 of the new bill (page 6) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 84, line 1) the requirement that reads: Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, when a vendor track is located within regions one, two, or five of development zone two as defined by section thirteen hundred ten of the racing, pari-mutual wagering and breeding law, such vendor track shall receive an additional commission at a rate equal to the percentage of revenue wagered at the vendor track after payout for prizes pursuant to this chapter less than ten percent retained by the commission for operation, administration, and procurement purposes and payment of the vendors fee, marketing allowance, and capital award paid pursuant to this chapter and the effective tax rate paid on all gross gaming revenue paid by a gaming facility within the same region pursuant to section thirteen hundred fifty one of the racing, pari-mutual wagering and breeding law. The additional commission shall be paid to the vendor track within sixty
2

Its difficult to understand the significance of the changes. 10

days after the conclusion of the state fiscal year based on the calculated percentage during the previous fiscal year. 8. Section 8 of the new bill (page 8) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 85, line 36) the requirement that reads: The division shall ensure the maximum lottery support for education while also ensuring the effective implementation of section sixteen hundred seventeen-a of this article through the provision of reasonable reimbursements and compensation to vendor tracks for participation in such program. Within twenty days after any award of lottery prizes, the division shall pay into the state treasury, to the credit of the state lottery fund, the balance of all moneys received from the sale of all tickets for the lottery in which such prizes were awarded remaining after provision for the payment of prizes as herein provided. Any revenues derived from the sale of advertising on lottery tickets shall be deposited in the state lottery fund. 9. Section 9 of the new bill (page 11) adds to S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 86, line 13) the provision: or a facility in the county of Nassau or Suffolk operated by a corporation established pursuant to section five hundred two of the racing, pari-mutual wagering and breeding law 10. Section 11 of the new bill (page 13) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 92, line 37) the provision, when a resort facility to be operated by other than a presently licensed video lottery gaming operator or any entity affiliated therewith selected by the division following a competitive process located in Sullivan county . and replaces it with when not more than one vendor track located in the town of Thompson in Sullivan County at the site of the former Concord resort .

11

11. Section 11 of the new bill (page 14) adds to S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 93, line 2) the provision: Provided, further, no vendor is eligible for the vendors fee described in this clause who operates or invests in or owns, in whole or in part, another vendor license or is licensed as a vendor track that currently receives a vendor fee for the operation of video lottery gaming pursuant to this article. 12. Section 13 of the new bill (page 14) removes from S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 95, line 38): Notwithstanding clause (A) and (B) of this subparagraph, when a video lottery gaming facility is located in either the county of Nassau or Suffolk and is operated by a corporation established pursuant to section five hundred two of the racing, pari-mutual wagering and breeding law at a rate of thirty-five percent of the total revenue wagered at the vendor track after payout for prizes pursuant to this chapter. 13. Section 14 of the new bill (page 15) adds to S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 97, line 23) the provision: and a facility located in Nassau county authorized pursuant to paragraph five of subdivision a of section one thousand six hundred seventeen-a of this article. 14. Section 14 of the new bill (page 15) adds to S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 97, line 36) the provision: and a facility located in Nassau county authorized pursuant to paragraph five of subdivision a of section one thousand six hundred seventeen-a of this article. 35. Besides these fourteen substantial and significant changes in policy included, there were a number of what are believed to be purely technical errors identified for correction by the new bill, including but not necessarily limited to: 1. Section 3 of the new bill (page 3) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 59 line 30) by changing pursuant to a gaming compact to pursuant to a valid gaming compact. 2. In various sections the word vendor was placed before the word track.
12

3. Section 9 of the new bill (page 10) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 85 line 53) by removing clearly duplicative and repetitive language. 4. Section 10 of the new bill (page 11) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 88 line 21) by changing (f-1) to f-1. 5. Section 10 of the new bill (page 11) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 88 line 24) by adding a missing word (investment). 6. Section 10 of the new bill (page 12) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 88 line 22) by changing Nassau in Suffolk to Nassau or Suffolk. 7. Section 10 of the new bill (page 12) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 88 line 34) by changing department of bureau of labor statistics shall be instead be to department of labor, bureau of labor statistics shall instead be.3 8. Section 12 of the new bill (page 14) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 94, line 11 through page 95, line37) by removing clearly duplicative and repetitive language. 9. Section 15 of the new bill (page 16) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 99 line 1922) by: changing (f-2) to f-2 and by changing, paragraph (5) of section six thousand seventeen a of this article, the division shall cause the in the . to read paragraph five of subdivision a of section one thousand six hundred seventeen-a of this article, the division shall cause the investment in the . and by changing (1) to 1. and by changing (2) to 2. and by changing (3) to 3. and by changing (4) to 4. and by

The new bill also corrected this same error appearing in S.5883 and A.8101 at page 88, line 44 and page 89, line 1 and page 89, line 13. 13

10. Section 19 of the new bill (page 19-20) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 95 line 46) by changing, competitive process pursuant to paragraph (5) of section six thousand seventeen a of this article to read competitive process pursuant to paragraph five of subdivision a of section one thousand six hundred seventeen-a of this article 11. Section 20 of the new bill (page 20) corrected S.5883 and A. 8101 (page 13 line 23) by changing, Licensees are required to commence gaming operations no less than twentyfour months following license award to read, Licensees are required to commence gaming operations no more than twenty-four months following license award STATEMENT OF FACTS NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT

36.

On June 18, 2013, Governors Program Bill #32 was sent to the Legislature, printed and given bill number S. 5884. See Exhibit F.

37. 38.

On information and believe S. 5884 did not have a Same as bill number in the Assembly. On June 20, 2013, Governors Program Bill #32 R, revising S.5884, was sent to the Legislature, printed and assigned bill numbers S.5903 - A.8113. See Exhibit G.

39.

On June 20, 2013, pursuant to Section 14 of Article III of the NY State Constitution, the Governor sent a Message to the Assembly requesting an immediate vote on bill A.8113. See Exhibit H.

40.

The Message reads in relevant part:


The facts necessitating an immediate vote on the bill are as follows: I previously handed to the Legislature a version of the bill that was introduced as Governors Program Bill #32 (S. 5884) on June 18, 2013. That bill has constitutionally aged and may be voted on without a Message of Necessity before the Legislatures
14

adjournment at the end of this weekHowever, that legislation contains technical errors that must be corrected to effectuate the Legislatures and the Executives intentions. With the adjournment of the Legislature imminent and coming within the three-day constitutional period for aging legislation, this corrected version of the bill, which better reflects the parties understandings, could not be acted upon before the adjournment without this message.

41.

On June 21, 2013, pursuant to Section 14 of Article III of the NY State Constitution, the Governor sent a Message to the Senate requesting an immediate vote on bill S.5903. See Exhibit I.

42.

The Message reads in relevant part:


The facts necessitating an immediate vote on the bill are as follows: I previously handed to the Legislature a version of the bill that was introduced as Governors Program Bill #32 (S. 5884) on June 18, 2013. That bill has constitutionally aged and may be voted on without a Message of Necessity before the Legislatures adjournment at the end of this weekHowever, that legislation contains a technical errors that must be corrected to effectuate the Legislatures and the Executives intentions. With the adjournment of the Legislature imminent and coming within the three-day constitutional period for aging legislation, this corrected version of the bill, could not be acted upon before such adjournment which better reflects the parties understandings.

43.

The original bill, S.5884 (Exhibit F) included a significant statement of intended policy that is NOT included in S. S.5903 - A.8113, the final version/form of the bill (Exhibit G).

44.

S.5884 included a policy provision that called for a substantial increase (from 2% to 5%) in the credit on qualified investments made by participants in the excelsior jobs program. That proposed policy appears on page 31 of S.5884, as Section 2 of Part C. in S.5884. See (Exhibit F). However, that policy provision does not appear in S.5903-A.8113, the final version/form of the bill (Exhibit (G).

45.

On June 20, 2013, A.8113 was delivered to the Assembly; it was approved the next day, June 21, 2013.

15

46.

On June 21, 2013, S.5903 was delivered to the Senate; it was approved the same day. STATEMENT OF FACTS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN NEW YORK STATE AND THE ONEIDA, ST. REGIS MOHAWK AND SENECA INDIAN NATIONS AND TRIBES

47. On May 16, 2013, an Agreement was signed by the State of New York and the Oneida Indian Nation. Exhibit J annexed hereto includes the following related documents: a. A map titled, 2010 Census Data which shows the approximate location of the Oneida Nation Reservation in central New York State. b. A map titled, Casino zones which shows the ten counties in central New York State included in the Oneida Indian Nation casino exclusivity zone agreed to by the terms of the May 16, 2013 Agreement. c. An article from the Oneida Daily Dispatch titled, Oneida Nation to share casino take with the state, counties (update), dated May 18, 2013. d. A letter with the subject, Agreement between the Oneida Nation and Governor Cuomo, by Attorney Cornelius D. Murray addressed to various federal, state and local law enforcement officials, dated June 6, 2013. e. An article from syracuse.com titled, Gov. Andrew Cuomos Oneida nation agreement is illegal vote-buying, lawyer for towns says posted May 16, 2013. 48. On May 21, an Agreement was signed by the State of New York and the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe. Exhibit K annexed hereto includes the following related documents: a. A map titled, 2010 Census Data which shows the approximate location of the St. Regis Mohawk Reservation in northern New York State.

16

b. A map titled, Casino zones which shows the seven counties in northern New York State included in the St. Regis Mohawk casino exclusivity zone agreed to by the terms of the May 21, 2013 Agreement. c. An article by the Associated Press titled, Cuomo, St. Regis Mohawk tribal leaders reach agreement on casinos dated May 21, 2013. d. An article by the Albany Times Union titled, Cuomo reaches deal with Mohawks dated May 21, 2013. e. Press Release by St. Regis Mohawk Tribe dated May 21, 2013. 49. On June 13, 2013, an Agreement was signed by the State of New York and the Seneca Nation of Indians. Exhibit L annexed hereto includes the following related documents: a. A map titled, 2010 Census Data which shows the approximate location of the Seneca Nation of Indians in western New York State (Allegany Reservation, Cattaraugus Reservation and Oil Springs Reservation). b. A map titled, Casino zones which shows the sixteen counties in western New York State included in the Seneca Indian Nation casino exclusivity zone agreed to by the terms of the June 13, 2013 Agreement. c. Press Statement by Governor Cuomo titled, Governor Cuomo and Seneca Nation of Indians Announce Landmark Agreement dated June 13, 2013. d. Memorandum of Understanding by and between the Seneca Nation of Indians and the State of New York. e. An article from the Buffalo News titled, Snyder opens up about casino tensions between state, Senecas dated June 15, 2013.

17

f. An article from Indianz.com titled, Seneca Nation ends dispute over Class III gaming compact dated June 14, 2013. ARGUMENT Point I: Enactment of GAMING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT and TAX FREE ZONES ACT Violated Article III, Section 14 50. The process used to enact the NY GAMING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT and the NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT violated Article III, Section 14 of the NY State Constitution: No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon

51.

Neither S.5904/A.8102 nor S.5903/A.8113 was on the desks of the Legislators for three days before final passage and the Governors messages of necessity contained no facts justifying immediate consideration of either bill.

Point II: TAX FREE ZONES ACT Violates Article III, Section 17 52. NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT violates Article III, Section 17 of the NY State Constitution:
The legislature shall not pass a private or local bill in any of the following cases: Granting to any person, association, firm or corporation, an exemption from taxation on real or personal property.

53.

Legislation granting corporations an exemption from property taxes, or granting employees an exemption from income (personal property) taxation violates this prohibition. Point III: The TAX FREE ZONES ACT Violates
18

NY Constitution, Article IX, Section 2 54. The NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT also violates Article IX, Section 2 of the NY State Constitution:
(b) Subject to the bill of rights of local governments and other applicable provisions of this constitution, the legislature: (2) Shall have the power to act in relation to the property, affairs or government of any local government only by general law, or by special law only (a) on request of two-thirds of the total membership of its legislative body or on request of its chief executive officer concurred in by a majority of such membership. (d) Whenever used in this article the following terms shall mean or include: (1) "General law."A law which in terms and in effect applies alike to all counties, all counties other than those wholly included within a city, all cities, all towns or all villages. (2) "Local government."A county, city, town or village. (4) "Special law."A law which in terms and in effect applies to one or more, but not all, counties, counties other than those wholly included within a city, cities, towns or villages.

55.

On information and belief, no governing body of any county, city or town adopted a resolution requesting the state legislature to pass the NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT.

Point IV: The TAX FREE ZONES ACT Violates NY Constitution, Article VII, Section 8.1 56. NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT violates Article VII, Section 8.1 of the NY Constitution:
The money of the state shall not be given or loaned to or in aid of any private corporation or association, or private undertaking; nor shall the credit of the state be given or loaned to or in aid of any individual,

57.

Forgiving state sales and income taxes is the equivalent of giving the money of the state to the new corporations and their employees. Point V: The TAX FREE ZONES ACT Violates NY Constitution, Article VIII, Section 1
19

58.

The NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT also violates Article VIII, Section1 of the NY State Constitution:
No county, city, town, village or school district shall give or loan any money or property to or in aid of any individual, or private corporation or association, or private undertaking

59.

Forgiving local property taxes is the equivalent of giving the money of the local government to the new corporation.

Point VI: Defendants Honor Neither The Words, Nor The Long And Substantial History Of Article III, Section 14 Origin Of 3-Day Rule 60. When adopted the 1894 Constitution introduced Article III with a new concept for transparency that required a 3 day waiting requirement on legislation before final passage in order to secure public comment and prevent last-minute amendments or hasty and careless legislation. In an effort to break with past practice and ensure that both legislators and the public would know the content of bills being voted on by the Legislature, the Constitution of 1894 required--for the first time--that bills be printed and distributed to the members of the Legislature at least three days before final passage (see 1894 NY Const, art III, 15). The objects of this reform were to prevent hasty and careless legislation, to prohibit last-minute amendments--deemed to be one of the principal evils in the way of legislation (1 Revised Rec, 1894 NY Constitutional Convention, at 902)--and to secure public comment prior to passage (see People ex rel. Hatch v Reardon, 184 N.Y. 431, 439, 77 N.E. 970 [1906]; Matter of Schneider v Rockefeller, 31 N.Y.2d 420, 434, 293 N.E.2d 67, 340 N.Y.S.2d 889 [1972]).Maybee v. State, 4 N.Y.3d 415, 422 (2005).
20

61. However, in order to provide for rapid legislation when faced with a genuine public emergency, an exception was adopted for those instances where the Governor certified the necessity of immediate passage. Nevertheless, because of grave doubt expressed as to whether it would be possible to print bills and get them on the desks of the members so quickly, as well as fears that public emergencies might require rapid legislation, an exception was adopted for those instances in which the Governor certified the necessity of immediate passage of the bill. Maybee v. State, 4 N.Y.3d 415, 422 (2005). The Constitutional Conventions Of 1915 And 1938 Both Sought To Address The Indiscriminate Use Of The Message Of Necessity By Governors. 62. The record reflects that this abuse was considered of paramount importance by the Delegates to the Constitutional Conventions of 1915 and 1938. At both the Constitutional Convention of 1915 and the Constitutional Convention of 1938, the indiscriminate use of gubernatorial messages of necessity was much criticized (see e.g. 1 Revised Rec, 1915 NY Constitutional Convention, at 767 [It was intended, beyond a doubt, that these messages should be used only in the case of a real public emergency and it was not intended . . . that they should be used as a dose of strychnine for legislation which was in its last gasps, on the last day or two of the legislative session, and which had not received proper attention earlier in the session. . . . I think it may well be doubted whether there ever has been, since 1894, a real emergency where it was actually necessary to pass a bill within three days of its introduction]; id. at 823 [When this matter was brought before the Convention of 1894 . . . the amendment was proposed for the purpose of preventing hasty and ill-considered legislation. . . . It never entered the head of anybody in that Convention that this . . . (message of) necessity . . . should be resorted to for the purpose of defeating the very object
21

which we had in view in incorporating this provision in the Constitution so as to require at least three days for deliberation.]; 2 Revised Rec, 1938 NY Constitutional Convention, at 975). Maybee v. State, 4 N.Y.3d 415, 422-423 (2005). 63. In 1915, the Constitution proposed by the Convention Delegates included an outright ban on the Message of Necessity. The 1915 Constitution, not adopted by the electorate, proposed to eliminate the exception for such messages altogether (see e.g. 1 Revised Rec, 1915 NY Constitutional Convention, at 824 [I do not think among the important things that we have to do, that there is anything more important than the elimination of this so-called emergency message. Nothing can be done which will tend to secure more deliberative legislation in the future than the doing away with this message.]; id. [I have such a strong feeling upon the subject that I believe, if this Convention did nothing more than to take out this emergency message, it would have rendered a very great service to the State.]). Maybee v. State, 4 N.Y.3d 415, 423 (2005). 64. In 1938, the Convention again sought to limit the power of the Message of Necessity by amending the 1894 Constitution. The framers of the 1938 Constitution (our current Constitution) similarly sought to decrease the frequency of these messages--the use of which was especially prevalent in the hectic last few days of each legislative session--by amending the Constitution to its present form, to require that the Governor accompany a Message of Necessity with a certification of the facts which in his opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon (see 1938 NY Const, art III, 14). In explaining the intent of this amendment, the sponsor explained: It provides first that instead of the Governor certifying as to the necessity for the immediate passage, which is exactly what he does, any Governor does: He has a printed form in which he certifies to the necessity for the immediate
22

passage; under the new proposal the Governor will certify the facts which, in his opinion, necessitate an immediate vote on the bill, not necessarily its passage, but an immediate consideration of it and an immediate vote upon it. And it is the hope of the members of the committee that if the Governor is required to certify facts which in his opinion constitute an emergency, it will not fall into a pro forma signing of a printed message which reads, in effect, I hereby certify the necessity for the immediate passage of bill No. so and so (2 Revised Rec, 1938 NY Constitutional Convention, at 1435). Maybee v. State, 4 N.Y.3d 415, 423-424. (2005). The Purpose Of The Amendment 65. The purpose of the amendment was thus to slow the emergency enactment process, prohibit last-minute amendments, force legislators to bring bills to a vote earlier in the legislative term, and reduce the number of bills requiring an immediate vote at the end of the term (see 2 Revised Rec, 1938 NY Constitutional Convention, at 975, 980). Maybee v. State, 4 N.Y.3d 415, 424. (2005).4 66. The common thread woven through 109 years of constitutional history is that messages of necessity were meant to be the exception, not the rule. 67. In contravention of the clear words and intent of the constitutional framers, not only in 1894 and 1915 but also in 1938, Defendants have enacted the subject bill based on the issuance of a pro forma message of necessity. There was no emergency. 68. The Governor failed to certify facts that necessitated an immediate vote on the bill. Issuing a Message of Necessity is of significant constitutional consequence. When the

At least 124 bills were approved by the Assembly on June 21, 2013, the final day of the Legislative session. 23

constitutional command is clear, it may not be waived even with the concurrence of the Legislature. CONCLUSION 69. Based on the above, Plaintiff respectfully requests a final decree, judgment and order: a) declaring the Governors message to the Assembly and message to the Senate, signed on June 20, 2013 and June 21, 2013, respectively, calling for the immediate passage of A. 8112 and S. 5904, failed to satisfy the constitutional requirements mandated by Article III, Section 14 of the NY Constitution, and b) declaring A. 8112 and S. 5904 (hereinafter the NY GAMING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT) to be unconstitutional, null and void, and without effect, and c) declaring the Governors message to the Assembly and message to the Senate, signed on June 20, 2013 and June 21, 2013, respectively, calling for the immediate passage of A. 8113 and S. 5903 failed to satisfy the constitutional requirements mandated by Article III, Section 14 of the NY Constitution, and d) declaring A. 8113 and S. 5903 (hereinafter the NY TAX FREE ZONES ACT) to be unconstitutional, null and void, and without effect, and e) declaring the Agreement between the State of New York and the Oneida Indian Nation signed on May 16, 2013, to be unconstitutional, null and void and without effect; and, f) declaring the Agreement between the State of New York and the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, signed on May 21, 2013, to be unconstitutional, null and void and without effect; and,
24

g) declaring the Agreement between the State of New York and the Seneca Nation of Indians, signed on June 13, 2013 to be unconstitutional, null and void and without effect ; and, h) for such other and further relief as to the court may seem just and proper.

DATED: July 25, 2013


ROBERT L. SCHULZ, pro se 2458 Ridge Road Queensbury, NY 12804 518.656.3578

INDIVIDUAL VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) COUNTY OF WARREN) ROBERT L. SCHULZ, being duly sworn, says: I am a plaintiff in the Declaratory Judgment Action herein; I have read the foregoing Verified Complaint-Petition dated July 25, 2013, and know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged upon information and belief and as to those matters I believe them to be true. Signature: ______________________________
25

Name: Address: County: Phone:

Robert L. Schulz 2458 Ridge Road Queensbury, NY 12804 Washington 518-656-3578

Sworn to before me this 25th day of July, 2013. __________________________ Notary Public

26