Proposed State Law – Host Counties Would Vote to Approve Gaming Compacts

Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, an opponent of the Indian casino planned in Rohnert Park, is planning to introduce a bill that would require any tribe with land taken into trust after Jan. 1, 2008 for gaming purposes to have their compact with the state approved by voters in the host county.

The planned bill would allow the tribe to conduct gaming without voter approval, but only if it reaches an agreement with the county and even surrounding cities to offset casino impacts such as traffic, crime, greenhouse gas emissions and groundwater depletion.

"It is important that the Legislature not approve compacts for gaming if the residents, businesses and governments in the area do not support having a massive Las Vegas-style casino in their community," Huffman said. "And it is just as important that these compacts not be approved unless the negative impacts of a casino development are completely mitigated."

Huffman said he expects to get plenty of support for his bill when he introduces it next month, when the Legislature reconvenes. But some legal experts, as well as an Indian casino critic, were pessimistic about its chances for passage, or that it would work as intended.

"While it has good intentions -- to prevent or stop a casino -- there's a downside of unintended consequences," said Cheryl Schmit, director of Stand Up for California.

She said a tribe could decide to open a casino with gambling that does not require state approval, like the Lytton Band of Pomo did at the San Pablo Casino with electronic bingo machines that resemble slots.

Attorneys who deal with Indian law and gaming also said Huffman's bill could backfire.

"The lawyers will feed off it like sharks on chum," said Tom Gede, a former special policy adviser on Indian issues in the state Attorney General's Office.

He noted that federal law requires the state to negotiate "in good faith" with a tribe that is eligible for Class III, or Las Vegas-style gaming.

If the governor agreed to the compact and the county or city disapproved it, the tribe might file a lawsuit claiming the state failed to complete the contract in good faith, according to Gede, who also teaches federal Indian gaming law at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento.

And if there is a lawsuit, he said, it likely would be handled by a mediator who could impose the "last best offer" between the tribe and state --- essentially allowing the tribe to conduct its gaming regardless of what local voters have to say.

"What the bill does is add a layer which can still be bypassed under federal law," he said.

Howard Dickstein, a Sacramento attorney who represents Indian tribes, agreed Huffman's bill may not work as intended. "No state legislation that impacts Indian gaming is free of federal legal entanglements," he said. He added, "You can't stop all gaming by stopping a compact -- you saw San Pablo."

Huffman said while his bill is motivated by his opposition to the Rohnert Park casino, its focus is on "the scourge of off-reservation, urban casinos."

The draft language in Huffman's bill indicates a tribe could be required to reach separate agreements to offset impacts with nearby cities as well as counties within 75 miles of a proposed gaming facility.

Full Article:
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20080723/NEWS/807230323/1044/Opinion&title=Casino_law_would_call_for_voters__OK