At the request of Cayuga and Seneca counties, the Cayuga Indian Nation of New York has agreed to extend the deadline it had imposed for the counties to decide on a proposed settlement to land claim and land-into-trust disputes.

In a July 20 letter written to the attorney working on the issue for the counties, Cayuga Indian Nation attorney Daniel French said the Cayugas will expect a decision by Aug. 31. Previously, the tribe had imposed a July 31 deadline. No deadline had been included in the original proposed agreement announced by all the parties in May, but the tribe established one in a letter sent near the end of June.

In addition to extending the deadline, the Cayugas also have offered to amend the agreement to allow the counties to preserve their right to litigate the validity of the land-into-trust process. If the counties lost in such an effort, the terms of the settlement would remain in place except for a provision that now allows the counties to veto Class II gaming within their boundaries.

Under the proposal in its current form, the Cayugas would give up their right to continuously apply to the federal government to take their open market property purchases into trust; to run Class II, or bingo hall gaming, without getting county approval first; and to their claim to their 64,000-acre historic homeland surrounding northern Cayuga Lake that is based on a disputed 1700s-era treaty.

The counties would get a portion of the casino's net slot drop. The tribe would be able to have up to 10,000 acres kept in sovereign status, but the acreage would be limited to three groups and make up no more than 20 percent of any municipality in the land claim area. The Cayugas would get a state gaming compact for a casino, most likely in the Catskills.

French wrote his most recent letter in response to a request from Brian Laudadio, the Harris Beach attorney handling the case for the two counties. Laudadio had written to ask for a deadline extension.

“Simply put, both the Cayuga County Legislature and the Seneca County Board of Supervisors need additional time to reach a consensus as to their position on the proposal,” Laudadio wrote. “I anticipate that my clients will be in a position before the end of August to respond to the proposal and offer revised terms.”

French, however, said the nation will not be renegotiating key provisions. He pointed out that the offer to allow the counties to preserve their rights to litigate should not be viewed as a starting point for further negotiation.

“As we have previously stated, the current agreement represents considerable concessions on the part of all parties, and the Nation will go no further on these essential terms,” he wrote.