n his last months as a ranking official in the Clinton administration, Michael J. Anderson made a pivotal decision in favor of the St. Regis Mohawk Indian tribe in a multibillion-dollar dispute over casino gambling, then left office for a job working on behalf of the tribe's gaming interests.
Anderson was the deputy chief of the Bureau of Indian Affairs when he was asked by the Mohawks last fall for help removing a major obstacle to the tribe's ambitious plans to open a casino in the Catskill Mountains of New York.
Tribal leaders told Anderson that a lawsuit filed against them by tribe members backing a different casino proposal could derail their plans. They suggested Anderson help them get rid of the lawsuit by declaring, in an official policy statement, that the lawsuit was of no consequence because the tribal court where it was filed lacked authority.
Anderson wrote on a Bureau of Indian Affairs letterhead on Oct. 6 that the bureau considered the tribal court to be without authority, even though that position apparently conflicted with existing policy.
Now, the Department of Interior's inspector general is investigating whether Anderson's decision in favor of the Mohawks was influenced by his job prospects, and whether he violated the federal revolving-door statute in his recent role as lobbyist for the tribe.
The incident is the latest and, by some measures, the most serious instance of Clinton officials in the Bureau of Indian Affairs making vital decisions that helped clear the way for tribes to build casinos, just before going to work on behalf of Indian gaming enterprises.
Anderson declined to be interviewed, but told others that all his Bureau of Indian Affairs decisions, including those affecting the Mohawks, were based strictly on merit, without regard for personal gain. He said he wrote the letter concerning the Mohawk tribal court months before considering any private sector job.
And he said he did not work directly for the Mohawks, but instead for a Niagara Falls, N.Y.-based company working with the tribe to build a casino.
The stakes are exceedingly high in the Catskills, where billion-dollar fortunes seem within reach for whichever group opens a casino just 90 minutes outside New York City. Specialists point to the successes of the Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun casinos, built in Connecticut between Boston and New York, as proof of the vast East Coast gambling market.
In recent years, the competition has been intense in the Catskills - and elsewhere - among companies seeking partnerships with tribes, who are exempt from the general prohibition on gambling.
In such a heated environment, every decision by the Bureau of Indian Affairs is considered crucial, potentially affecting hundreds of millions of dollars in gaming revenues.
Anderson's involvement in the dispute over the Mohawk casino began at a private meeting on the tribe's reservation, at which leaders sought his help in ridding them of the suit in tribal court. The action had grown out of a dispute between two Mohawk factions.
Originally, the tribe had planned to build on a former racetrack in Monticello, N.Y., and had many tribal supporters. Then, in one day, a group of leaders scuttled that deal and threw their support behind casino impresario Arthur Goldberg of Park Place Entertainment, who advanced the leaders $3 million on the spot.
Others in the tribe feared that Goldberg, a legendary salesman, had somehow misled the leaders into abandoning a sound casino proposal.
One group of Mohawks sued Goldberg in tribal court for enough money to effectively derail their plans. The Mohawk leaders tried a variety of legal maneuvers to free themselves of the lawsuit; none succeeded. Finally, just days after losing the latest in a series of challenges to the lawsuit, they turned to Anderson.
The letter Anderson wrote on behalf of the Mohawk leaders is unusual because, according to longstanding policy, the bureau does not involve itself in the internal affairs of tribes, who as sovereigns must govern themselves. Also, a copy of Anderson's letter is missing from the bureau's official files, and officials could not say whether it had been reviewed and approved by others.
Since leaving the bureau in January, Anderson also has attracted the attention of the Department of Interior's inspector general for his lobbying work on behalf of the Mohawks.
In an apparent violation of federal ethics laws, Anderson called a former assistant at the bureau concerning Mohawk business on March 22. Federal law prohibits former senior officials from contacting colleagues at their former agencies within one year of leaving office. An exception exists for lobbyists representing state, local, or tribal governments, but would not seem to apply to Anderson since he works for a private company.
Anderson's former assistant at the Bureau of Indian Affairs confirmed the call from Anderson in an interview with the Globe, but said he could not remember what was discussed. Another bureau official said the assistant told others in the bureau the topic was Mohawk gaming business.
Allegations of improprieties against Anderson were made in a letter to the Bureau of Indian Affairs by a lawyer representing a competing gaming company.
Larry Noble, executive director for the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group, said Anderson's overall conduct was troubling.
''One concern is classic conflict of interest, where his official decision-making may have been clouded by his personal interest,'' he said. ''The other is the classic revolving door, when he trades on contacts made while in government.''
The Globe reported March 25 that Anderson and Kevin Gover, another ranking political appointee now working as a gaming industry lobbyist, reversed the findings of staff historians in the Bureau of Indian Affairs to recognize three groups as tribes, thus giving them the right to open casinos.
The fact that the staff findings were reversed was never made public, but was confirmed by government sources. Those actions are also the subject of an ongoing inspector general's investigation.
In the Mohawk case, Anderson's letter disputing the authority of the tribal court is being used by the Mohawk leaders as a key reason for dismissing the lawsuit by the rival tribal faction. The case is pending in federal appeals court.
In the meantime, the tribal court returned a verdict against the tribal leaders and their backers, who chose not to defend themselves in tribal court.
The verdict was for $1.8 billion.
Sean P. Murphy can be reached by e-mail at smurphy@globe.com.
