Directories
Quick Searches
Find a Job
Quick Search
For Employers
Yahoo! HotJobs Local Search
Casino deals head to voters
By: CHRIS BAGLEY - Staff Writer
Tribes renew legal efforts to block four measures from Feb. 5 ballot | ∞
California's chief election official has cleared the way for voters to decide on several casino expansions, though two of the four Indian tribes involved plan to renew legal efforts to keep the referenda off the Feb. 5 ballot.
Under deals the state government approved earlier this year, the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians and three other tribes would be allowed to add as many as 17,000 slot machines to the 8,000 now at their casinos. Pechanga would be allowed to add 5,500 machines to its current 2,000. The new slots could be installed in a casino that Pechanga already has permission to build on its 5,500-acre reservation, which borders Temecula's south side.
But a coalition of a hotel workers union, a horse-track owner and a handful of other tribes circulated petitions to bring the four deals ---- known as compacts ---- before voters in February. Secretary of State Debra Bowen ruled Friday that the coalition had obtained more than the necessary 433,000 signatures to put the Pechanga expansion to voters. Bowen signed off Monday on similar ballot measures pertaining to the Sycuan tribe east of El Cajon, the Agua Caliente tribe in the Palm Springs area and the Banning-area Morongo tribe.
Pechanga and Morongo sued Bowen last month in an effort to block the referenda on their casinos, saying that the anti-casino group had taken too long to file the petitions. Two judges dismissed those arguments last week in Sacramento Superior Court.
Pechanga will appeal that ruling, Chairman Mark Macarro said Tuesday. The Morongo tribe will appeal its ruling Friday or Monday, Morongo spokesman Patrick Dorinson said. Pechanga attorney Bob Hertzberg, the former state Assembly speaker who represented Pechanga in the case, couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday.
A spokesman for the four tribes said they are continuing their campaign to sway voters. In each of the four ballot measures, a "yes" vote would be for approval of the compact that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger negotiated with each tribe last year.
"We've always had to look at this as though it's going to be on the ballot," said Roger Salazar, a spokesman for the four tribes' Coalition to Protect California's Budget & Economy. "They put $4.5 million into qualifying the referenda. You put that much money in and you can get anything on the ballot."
About 52 percent of registered California voters support the ballot measures, according to a poll conducted last month by Field Research, an independent research firm. Among the 1,200 voters polled, just 35 percent opposed the measures, but that proportion could rise as the anti-casino group redirects its focus from petitioning to advertising, Field's polling director said.
The four tribes, meanwhile, have contributed $18.2 million to the joint campaign, funding pro-casino television commercials in most of the state's major media markets. The ads tout predictions made by Schwarzenegger and other proponents that the state could reap as much as $9 billion in revenue over the next 23 years from the casino expansions.
The nonpartisan analyst who advises the Legislature on budget matters has cautioned that amount is vastly overstated, but the analyst said this week that the delay of final approval until February could reduce the state's revenue by $200 million in the current fiscal year, which ends July 1. The report from the office of Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill cited figures from the Schwarzenegger administration. Hill and other analysts in her office couldn't be reached for comment late Tuesday.
Under Pechanga's compact, the tribe would pay the state 15 percent of its net winnings on the first 3,000 machines it adds and 25 percent of the net winnings on the next 2,500 machines. The compact calls for a minimum payment of $42.5 million each year, up from $29 million under the current arrangement. The compact would expire in 2030.
Pechanga representatives have declined to discuss actual plans for an expansion.
State law would also require the tribe and Temecula to come to terms over any such expansion, with the tribe offsetting the cost of wider roads and other expected effects on the city and its residents and businesses. Pechanga and Temecula representatives have met just once to discuss the process for determining those costs, Temecula Councilman Mike Naggar said Tuesday.
"We just want the tribe to mitigate their impacts in regards to traffic and ... public safety," Naggar said. "Nothing more, nothing less."
Pechanga has contributed or pledged $21.3 million for local road projects and $4.4 million for law enforcement in neighboring areas since July 1999, according to a tally provided by the tribe.
Still, nearby residents said Tuesday that they've gotten frustrated with ---- and even fearful of ---- the traffic zipping between the casino and Temecula Parkway to the north. Three residents of Masters Drive, a mile from the casino, said concert-goers frequently cut through their neighborhood when traffic backs up on Pechanga Parkway.
Chrystal Phillips, whose two children must cross the busy thoroughfare on the way to and from Luiseno Elementary, said a widened road would still pose a danger to neighborhood kids. Elementary-school children don't always use the crosswalk a few hundred yards to the south.
"I've seen them, literally, just run across the street," Phillips said. "They're kids. They're going to do it."
Echoing other neighbors, Phillips said crime had increased in the last three years, including two stolen cars and three incidents in which she said thieves broke into her husband's truck. Phillips attributed the crime to casino patrons, though she also said that no neighborhood is immune and that crime wouldn't be the deciding factor for her in February.
All three residents of the street said they would support an expanded casino if they had a guarantee that the traffic wouldn't get any worse.
Pechanga representatives said they sympathized but argued that blocking the compact wouldn't necessarily make things any better.
"We are as frustrated as others in the community with the delays over the much-needed improvements to Pechanga Parkway," Macarro said in an e-mailed statement. "We remain committed to working with the city and county to solve these challenges.
"We must, however, recognize that Pechanga is not the only contributor to traffic. Temecula has undergone dramatic development in the last decade, including, just along Pechanga Parkway, more than 2,000 homes, a new high school, and other developments that generate substantial traffic."
-- Contact staff writer Chris Bagley at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2615, or cbagley@californian.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Charles wrote on Nov 21, 2007 12:17 AM:Pechanga Parkway is a nightmare, on Friday and Saturday nights the traffic is backed up from the Casino all the way to the freeway, all night long. Greed is at the heart of the matter, don't these people have enough.
tunnel wrote on Nov 21, 2007 6:44 AM:Pechenga shoulpay to build a tunnel through the mountain straight to the 15 and wouldease the burden.
Double-Talk wrote on Nov 21, 2007 7:41 AM:"They put $4.5 million into qualifying the referenda. You put that much money in and you can get anything on the ballot." Say what? Exactly how much money will the tribes contribute towards the defeat of these ballot measures? Be careful about speaking from both sides of your mouth.
WhoKares wrote on Nov 21, 2007 8:05 AM:I pulled $1,000 out of Reno this last weekend. Nothing to do with this article, just want to tell everybody.
Fred H wrote on Nov 21, 2007 8:44 AM:I say let the native americans take whatever they want. Lord knows they have suffered enough....as long as THEY PAY for whatever thay want, that is. I agree...WHO CARES?
Concerned-1 wrote on Nov 21, 2007 8:49 AM:For the life of me I can't understand why people waste their money on games that they can't win. I know, you can get lucky and win but in the long run the house wins. I'm not sure on where I stand on the vote. Posters above make some good points about traffic.
Is it ever enough? wrote on Nov 21, 2007 9:24 AM:Pechanga does pay their fair share for improvements, revenue sharing etc.. But when is enough enough? I am in favor of Indian Gaming.. but I think the wealthy tribes, Pechanga in particular.. should be happy with what they have accomplished in a relatively short period of time..they went from being a very poor reservation (with no electricity) to a Tribe who has so much money they don't know where to spend it... what happened to modesty?
Deal wrote on Nov 21, 2007 9:30 AM:Make a deal. Add a interchange to the 15 through pechanga and we vote it in. Simple.
me wrote on Nov 21, 2007 9:49 AM:Yes, close Pechanga....5000 people out of work with no health insurance,no handouts to every charity in town,no place to house the next round of fire evacuees, no place to go for a concert, dinner,etc. Yeah, sounds like a great idea.No, I do not work for Pechanga or any other casino and I don't gamble but many do and I'm sure Nevada would love additional revenue.
anotherview wrote on Nov 21, 2007 10:05 AM:Yes, the state will benefit by the additional revenue coming from the tribal casino expansions. The four tribes and the state reached agreement to amend the existing tribal-state gaming compacts while taking into account other interests. The labor union bosses wanted to change these amendments to do away with employee elections for a union and to stop tribes from having a say-so about a union in their casinos. The union did not get what it wanted. So the union must still face elections and free speech. Yet, the union may now organize casino workers, and workers have a right to join a union. The basic provisions of the NLRA apply to casino workers. Further, casino workers now have good jobs with benefits. These facts may explain why casino workers show little or no interest in joining a union and paying dues. The labor union bosses could convince neither the governor, the State Legislature, nor the four tribes to give the union more. Infuriated, the labor union bosses have bought another opportunity, via the four referenda, to impose their will on the other parties, if the voters go along with this ploy. Let us hope the voters reject this power-play by the union.
Whatever Unions wrote on Nov 21, 2007 10:14 AM:favor, vote the other way as you can bet what they want is bad for business and tax payers in general. Solution, open gambling to all including Gringos to put casinos wherever properly zoned. The Indians should not have a monoploy on all this money. Open it up, tax and reduce income and sales tax.
TedHead wrote on Nov 21, 2007 11:11 AM:I don't understand the fuss. I've seen the commercials, talking about Indian gaming. They can play checkers, chess, hopscotch all they like...doesn't bother me. What I don't like is the Indian GAMBLING. Don't hand me these thinly disguised disingenuous mis-used words. It is GAMBLING. OUTLAW GAMBLING ALLTOGETHER! Yes, Ralphie...CLOSE THE INDIAN CASINOS!!
True American wrote on Nov 21, 2007 11:16 AM:We need to add to this bill, the legalization of prostitution and crack sales on the Reservations. Heck, they're illegal activities just like gambling, why not. I personally think that gambling needs to be legalized. The state does it (Lottery), the Native Americans do it (Casinos), other states do it, so why can't we. I think in a free nation we should be able to open a casino if we want. If not, then no one else should be able to.
Vista Resident wrote on Nov 21, 2007 11:41 AM:"A 2006 report by the California Research Bureau estimated that problem and pathological gambling costs the state $1 billion, largely in costs related to crime, bankruptcy and public health services." -- NC Times article "Awareness of problem gambling slowly increasing"
Part of America!!! wrote on Nov 21, 2007 11:45 AM:Gambling has been on the American scene since the early days. If Thomas Jefferson wasn't busy impregnating his slaves, then he could be found doubling down at the nearest black jack table. George Washington was a Pai Gow maniac! Ben Franklin loved the nickel slots although he was notorioisly a bad tipper. Let the tribes do whatever they want, its part of who we are as a nation.
chump change wrote on Nov 21, 2007 12:07 PM:"as much as" $9 billion over 23 years is a pittance. The state is $9 billion in the red right now. In 23 years it will be bankrupt and the Indians' $400 million a year isn't going to help.
To Part of America: wrote on Nov 21, 2007 12:11 PM:That's an ugly rumor about Ben Franklin started by Alexander Hamilton. Franklin was a good tipper, especially when he won...
Get it right wrote on Nov 21, 2007 12:19 PM:What has the city done with the $21 million that Pechanga "has contributed or pledged"? Why can't they just get it right and widen Pechanga Pkwy?
LOL wrote on Nov 21, 2007 12:29 PM:George Washington and Pai Gow, Ben Franklin and the nickles....too funny. I thought those guys played poker? I think I'm gonna check the history book on this one, I was sure it was Texas Hold em'.
A better deal wrote on Nov 21, 2007 12:38 PM:Look, California is again facing a huge budget deficit. Schwarzenegger got a fair share for us. These greedy special interests have already blocked $200 million for the state this year because of these referendums. This is a better deal for California and Temecula than the last one.
GFN wrote on Nov 21, 2007 1:51 PM:I agree with True American, 11:16 am post: Gambling needs to be legalized. Our state does it (Lottery), the Native Americans do it (Casinos), other states do it, so why can't we? Let the Indians continue with the gambling they have now and the state gets $9 billion over the next 23 years. Legalize gambling in California outside the reservation and the state will get $150 BILLION over the next 23 years!!!
David wrote on Nov 21, 2007 2:42 PM:Gambling is for people who are very bad at math. In addition, gambling has never been good to society as a whole in the long run. Better to throw your money at something more worthwhile.
GrlNSoCal wrote on Nov 21, 2007 3:40 PM:Hey TedHead and Ralphie.....what exactly would you like to tell all the people who work for pechanga as to your reasons behind wantintg to close it down? I don't work for pechanga, heck I'm not even a big gambler. So it causes some traffic, big whoopty freakin doo. Who cares if its gambling it brings money in to the state and othere aspects of our communities. You guys need to wake-up
Mark wrote on Nov 21, 2007 5:22 PM:Mark Macarro is absolutely right. The city has left its mark in the area by approving thousands of homes while reporting there would be no problem. Pechanga expands and more patrons must drive thru residential areas to get there. City representatives have met with local neighborhoods, will Mark Macarro?
Nick wrote on Nov 21, 2007 6:31 PM:LOL....I can't stop laughing. The white man stole the land Temecula sits on from us Natives and gave us hard scrabble mountains only good for avacodos and oranges. Indian Reservations are SOVEREIGN NATIONS. Don't you people get it. The white man has no say in Indian affairs, but continue to tell us what we can and can't do. The only reason they even care about the Casinos is to help bail them out of the financial deficit that the great California Government created. Us Indians didn't put California in fiscal dire straights, but they sure do love our money to ease the burden on all of you whiney tax payers. If it wasn't for your thieving ancestors, Natives wouldn't need Casinos now would they?
Jimboy wrote on Nov 21, 2007 7:50 PM:Traffic is a fair concern, but you look at all the new homes and businesses in the area and, clearly, it's not just the casino that's had an impact. And, ultimately, I have to question whether some posters are using traffic to hide the real issue -- their dislike for Native Americans. For example, the first poster talks about traffic but quickly reveals himself when he says "don't these people have enough?" Sounds like petty jealousy from someone who liked it the way it used to be -- when Indians were poor and pushed into the rocks.
Sacramento wrote on Nov 23, 2007 1:21 PM:" Taxpayers are Denied a Fair Share of Revenue - Not One Penny Guaranteed to Schools The Big 4 revenue claims are wildly exaggerated. Even the state’s independent, non-partisan Legislative Analyst says their figures are unrealistic. The deals require them to pay a percent of their “net win” gambling revenues, but guess who decides what that figure is? Independent financial accountants? No. The deals let the Big 4 tribes themselves make that calculation, and ambiguous language lets them manipulate the “revenue sharing formula” and underpay the state. What about their promises to fund public education? Consider this: The deals are opposed by the California Federation of Teachers. Not one penny is guaranteed to our schools. The revenues are not even subject to the state’s minimum education funding guarantee (Prop 98). "
Temecula teacher wrote on Nov 23, 2007 1:24 PM:" Gambling has become a problem for families in the State. People are losing their homes and their livelihood for the "big one". Neither the State or The National Indian Gaming Associaltion monitor for compliance, audit the records, etc.. because tribes are sovereign nations. These 4 tribes want the people to believe that when they give thousands of dollars to their "local" communities they are helping, but at what cost? In addition, lifelong members of their tribes are being removed from their homes, the membership rolls and no longer eligible for their benefits. I'm appalled that with such a rich history of compassion for their families, in addition to the spirit of community that Indians had when faced with termination, that they now terminate their own. What a mistake I made when I voted for Prop 5 and 1A. I thought I was helping all individual indians, not just a few. How can we justify allowing tribes to hurt their own people and that not all Indians in California benefit? "
Jeffrey wrote on Nov 23, 2007 2:47 PM:Too much? I remember that was the question Indians asked the White Man for five hundred years. The way i see it - give the Indians their lands back and you can keep the casino. But since that will never happen... stop complaining. You people are annoying. If i were i'd start worrying about something more important like how you're going to pay for the house and car and flat screen TV you got with you line of credits. I never heard an Indian complain about that - why? Because they've been stuck on reservation for a hundred years - when they complained it was about medicine and food and shelter. You disgust me because you complain and still go gamble at their casinos!
Get Real wrote on Nov 23, 2007 2:52 PM:I do not know how long each of you has lived in Southern California. In case you haven't figured it out yet, it makes no difference how many lanes are added to streets, parkways and highways. As long as there is land to build new housing and businesses, there will be people adding more vehicles to the roads. I agree with most of what Nick stated, except I do not believe "they" care at all. And Temecula teacher, people are losing their homes because they signed agreements, that they knew for a fact they couldn't afford down the road.
Cali Voter wrote on Nov 23, 2007 9:42 PM:You got to be kidding me. These tribes dont already have enough money? That they still need to add more and more slots..come on now. What a bunch of greedy indians! They throw crumbs out to local schools. Pechanga us voters arent fools anymore. We see the big picture. $GREED$$
Californian wrote on Nov 24, 2007 10:56 AM:Do the inmates running the asylum (state government) in Sacramento (both Govonor S and the band of girlie men that masquerade as legislators)think that the people of California are stupid? Does the head of the special interest group of gamblers think we are stupid. I am appalled by the ads that they are running about how much they are going to help pay for police and fire services. They only care about one thing, lining their own pockets. I have some Native American blood and know that for years the white man took advantage of the Native America's trust and naivete, but are we going to do the same thing? Reverse these harmful compacts, we don't need more gambling in California, especially in the hands of just four tribes that are more like members of the mafia. IF we are to have more gambling, let's have something that is fair to all, not just one side
Advertisement