Roy wrote on Jan 12, 2008 8:58 PM:Wow that 400 million a year will really help our 14 BILLION dollar deficit! It reality it does not even offset the social and economic drain that to the communities that have funds drained away to gaming instead of being spent for more productive pursuits. Say NO to 94 95 96 97

O Pechanga wrote on Jan 12, 2008 10:27 PM:Pechanga has cheated it's own people, as written here in the NC Times. Certainly they will cheat CA.
Vote NO on 94

Times reader wrote on Jan 12, 2008 11:05 PM:Roy - Are you the same Roy who has an uncontrollable need to voice his (or her) "NO" opinion EVERY TIME a casino story is published? If so than PLEASE for the rest of us who are tired of hearing from you EVERY TIME I say, Find more productive persuits or at least a hobbie :)

Carter: wrote on Jan 12, 2008 11:17 PM: I didn't know there were that many little old ladies on Social Security in this area. Perhaps some of the young people are hooked also.

Anti Roy wrote on Jan 13, 2008 12:17 AM:Say YES to 94 95 96 97

Ray wrote on Jan 13, 2008 1:37 AM: A decade ago the voters were "suckered" into allowing these casinos with the understanding that they would do it on their own without Vegas influences, they lied to the voters and I am voting NO on all the measures.

Spelling teacher wrote on Jan 13, 2008 5:20 AM:To "Rimes reader" who chastised Roy. Hobbie is the name of a doll. Hobby is the passtime that people take up.

A Voter wrote on Jan 13, 2008 5:36 AM:A deal was made with the Indians who stepped up and contracted with the State of California. All the tribes have the same choice to do the same. The cause that is being to the voters is nothing more that a labor dispute with the hotel employees union and some folks who own horseracing tracks who have seen folks trot off to the casinos instead of going to the race tracks. The Indian casinos have been helping not themselves but the communities in which they are located. The deal was struck let us honor it. I for one am voting YES!

Karl wrote on Jan 13, 2008 6:20 AM:Roy has company.

rog wrote on Jan 13, 2008 7:15 AM:It is time for California to wake up and build its own casino.s Then all of the profit could be given to ease the budget and the burden on the taxpayers.
Homeowners in this state are being assesed to pay for everything in this state. California should be in the same business as Nevada Bring in the Casinos

Jim wrote on Jan 13, 2008 7:29 AM:You can't stop the spending on the front end by putting a patch on it at the back end.

JA wrote on Jan 13, 2008 7:55 AM:What's the downside? If people want to gamble with the lousy odds, why not get some money for the state? What are Pala and the rest offering instead, NOTHING.
I'm voting YES.

don wrote on Jan 13, 2008 8:06 AM:vote NO until they agree to pay fot all roads into and out from the cAASINOS AND NOT JUST IN FRONT OF THE CASINO hwy 76 is a death trap

VOTE NO!!! wrote on Jan 13, 2008 8:43 AM:Much of the rhetoric developed for these propositions is laughable. But it's not funny that what is left of our rural landscape is rapidly changing due to greedy expansion of tribal casinos. It is unfortunate to see our beautiful geography spoiled by an overabundance of "mini-Vegas" style casinos while area residents get stuck with all the impacts associated with them. Stop this rude display of greed! VOTE NO on 94, 95, 96, & 97!

Yes on 94,95,96,&97 wrote on Jan 13, 2008 8:46 AM:They already have agreed to binding arbitration to pay for all the costs the casino impacts cause in the new agreements. No delay or cost to sue them, just make them pay. That is a fair share, not paying for a road that services a home development down the street that should have been paid for by the developer or the homeowners. Don't be greedy and expect a free ride. That's what the $400 million going to the state is for, freebies that everyone can fight over, the teachers want a guaranteed 40% piece of the pie, that's why they are crybabies. Vote yes for billions for CA, at least on the others if roy don't like Pechanga. Forget Roy, another crybaby, their money is good. Vote yes on them all.

beachbum wrote on Jan 13, 2008 9:07 AM:The teachers already get to much money in salary, benefits, retirement,etc.....let's not start with them..

just FYI wrote on Jan 13, 2008 9:08 AM:To spelling teacher: PASTIME only has one "S"...if we are getting picky!

sdcntycit wrote on Jan 13, 2008 9:49 AM:Are you kidding me? Why don't you move to Dehesa Valley for just a couple of days? Then you can find out what it is like to live next to a "corporate citizen". Cars, trucks, buses, noise, light pollution, drunk drivers. This happens 24/7. Not just 9 to 5. The tribes will not be paying higher revenues to the state. The state will not be able to audit the books to find out if they are getting what is due them. The states budget woes will not be fixed with gambling money. Even if the state were to get the actual money the tribes are stating, it would only be $450M a year. Split between 58 counties that's $7M a year for each county. Just how will San Diego County split that up? Who will need that money the most? The police and fire around Sycuan to pay for the increased traffic, drunk driver crashes and deaths in Dehesa Valley. Let's not forget the Gamblers Anonymous needs funding because that many more people are going to the casinos and losing everything. That $7M is pretty much gone already and Wow, we haven't funded the extra healthcare we need from all the 2nd hand smoke patients from the the casinos. Where are we going to get the money? Vote No on 94, 95, 96 and 97.

Roy wrote on Jan 13, 2008 10:06 AM:I have many hobbies and supporting political positions through my writings is one of them. I want all readers of this to visit all four casinos duing the weekends and weekdays and see the constant flow of traffic; see the high police presence; (which may seem good but it usually indicates the presence of alot of bad apples) Look at the current inadequate infrastucture and think about all the revenue that has already been generated and see where it has not gone and then project the additional revenue with its impacts and add in the same token infrastructure investments that past patterns have followed and the only vision that will be before your eyes is a nightmare for the people living in close proximity to these casinos. As an empathetic citizen I cannot morally justify further damage to areas around these casinos by expansion. I also have a difficult time fathoming the 30k per month per tribe member, which is about the right number, not being enough compensation. They want 100k a month post expansion? Give me a break! People need to stop and think about the human cost that these monolithic facilities will cause. And they also need to understand that the 400 million per year is not going to keep police, fire, or any essential service funded. Califoria's budget woes are exponentially larger than what these casino expansions impact on the budget will be. the amount these casino expansions will generate amount to around one half of one half of one percent of the California budget. This expansion benefits the tribe members hugely in individual income terms. It benefits the state in miniscule terms. Don't let the commercials on Yes on 94 94 96 97 fool you... Think of the locals and vote NO ON 94 95 96 97

Voter wrote on Jan 13, 2008 10:06 AM:Vote no on 94,95,96 and 97!!!!

JSten wrote on Jan 13, 2008 10:11 AM:I guess its more fun to take your hard earned dollar and plunk it down on the slim chance that you life will be better somehow, than it is to take your hard earned dollar and invest it in a corrupt stock market and hoe that your life will be better somehow, or perhaps to take your hard earned tax dollars and turn them over to the state in the hopes that your life will be better somehow.

Frankly I dont see the difference-

Moderate wrote on Jan 13, 2008 10:22 AM:No-one paid much attention to these Indian tribes until they began profiting from the white man's greed and inhumane treatment. Now everyone wants a piece of the action and have become opinionated about how their affairs should be run.

Amazed wrote on Jan 13, 2008 10:30 AM:I love to gamble - IN VEGAS. VOTE NO on all of these! They cheat their own people, why would YOU trust them? Have you ever gambled there? I bet you lost like 95% of everyone else and yes, just like me. I would only support this is if ALL of the money went directly to education and health care, but I dont think they will ever agree with that. Plus - Vegas is way better, its not causing traffic in Temecula and you get free drinks! I cant believe they don't even hook you up with the free drinks here, total rip off - LONG LIVE VEGAS!!! They have plenty already - NO ON 94, 95, 96 & 97!!!!!!!!!!!!

Times Reader wrote on Jan 13, 2008 10:48 AM:Dear Spelling teacher, Thats "Times reader" not "Rimes reader" Can you spell GLASS HOUSE? have a good day and don't let anyone tell ya oops you how to vote.

Arny's Army wrote on Jan 13, 2008 12:08 PM:why are the monies not distributed proportionally to the communities being adversely affected by the casinos impactsVote no on Arny get that patsy out he is a pawn not a player he cant win anything in his field of expertise (c-movies) so you neo-cons award the moron robot a Governorship-- Gambling creates damage at all levels they just market it as a victimless entertainment this area needs to create local revenue for local benefit : FYI pachanga gives our local schools millions annualy

In the Know wrote on Jan 13, 2008 12:21 PM:I feel compelled to comment on several of the comments above. First and most importantly, Pala and United Auburn tribes negotiated new compacts with the state a couple of years ago which allow them UNLIMITED slot machines. Why isn't this a problem?

The beautiful geography in San Diego and Riverside counties has been taken away by housing developers. All of the new housing developments in these counties have done more damage to the roads and overall infrastructure than these 4 casinos combined.

Free drinks are prohibited by the ATF - it is not a choice made by the tribes.

To "Amazed" - continue to spend your money on gasoline to drive to Vegas and leave your money there. California gets nothing out of your travels to Vegas except the need to continue to improve I-15, and more air pollution.

gambling is.. wrote on Jan 13, 2008 12:43 PM:a disgusting waste of time and money that has the potential to ruin your life. I will vote NO.

JP wrote on Jan 13, 2008 1:41 PM:You have to ask yourself why the Indian casinos are willing to shell out $40 million for this campaign. If you think they are doing it because they just can't wait to give lots of money to the State, then you're just the person they are looking for to pour money in their slots.

all4justice wrote on Jan 13, 2008 1:45 PM:Every casino worker, who pays both State and Federal taxes in these Indian Casino's, are abused by our CA Governor because he won't inforce ANY compact he signs! Worker protections are a JOKE...with NO teeth from the DFEH/EEOC. Stop compact negotiations entirely and rescind ALL Indian compacts on their face until Arnold enforces what he signs! Employee and patron deaths, rapes, sexual assaults,etc are occuring without ANY action/justice on behaqlf of our Governor, Atty General, DOJ or the Division of Gambling and Control in these Indian Casino's. These are non-Indians, corporate Las Vegas company executives and Indians alike committing these crimes on an unsuspecting public and patron clientel alike. They hide everything from the public and the papers under the exclusion of "sovereign immunity". This is BS and the public demands MORE from our Governor who signs these compacts, collects our taxes, and doesn't enforce them! Wake up California! Would you want these things to happen to your sisters, mothers, grandmothers and family? We are guaranteed our civil rights protections under our U.S. constitution, specifically under our 14th ammendment rights of equal protection under the law. California citizens, please help us casino workers. Repeal prop.1A....unless these Indian Casino's ALL conform to the laws of our state and federal goverment...and especially demand enforcement from our governor who sign's these horrific compacts that have no remedies for these serious violations whatsoever!!!

Jon wrote on Jan 13, 2008 2:32 PM:I used to think that Indian casinos were a good thing. After seeing the results from increased traffic, deadly accidents, robberies of local north county businesses, and the general lowlife frequenting these establishments I have changed my opinion. No more machines.

Roy wrote on Jan 13, 2008 2:47 PM:Did anyone notice how most of the pro compact comments now and in the past had the verbage of paid professionals? Vote NO and dont let the fake proponents and slanted commercials fool us. THere is enough gaming. We draw the line here!

No more casinos wrote on Jan 13, 2008 3:00 PM:I'm voting no on all of these props. Enough of enabling people with addictions to be sicker than they need to be. Its not okay for these establishments to be in business anymore.

Informative Article wrote on Jan 13, 2008 4:28 PM:I was ignorant of the issues unitl I read the article and many of the comments here. As a citizen of North County, I've decided to vote NO on these propostions for now. I will only reconsider when that death trap of a road leading to the casinos, highway 76, is improved. To my mind, one of the orignal arguments for supporting these casinos (that they would improve the surrounding community) has not come to pass. All the money poured into PR fo these propostions could (should) have been spent upgrading highway 76!

Anti Roy wrote on Jan 13, 2008 4:37 PM:Hello North County and Ca. I thought I would check back on this artical for fun, just to see who else chimed in and read there comments and low and behold Roy, Roy, Roy. One would think he was running for office. We are into day two with this artical and it's way past sounding like He is the only paid spokesmen for "No more competition" on this site! Passion is one thing but his sounds like obsession. And Yes I do like to hit the Casinos from time to time and have lost more than I have won over the years but I have fun doing it and like the vast majority of responsible people I have never spent more than I budgeted for. If you have a gambeling problem as it sounds like some do than stay out but don't allow the few to keep the many from enjoying ourselves at our own expense. besides No one ever promised me that the casinos were going to solve 100% of the states financial mess nor or they obligated to but something is much better than nothing.This is my last post on this subject, time to move forward. Vote how you want but "Get out and vote".

PHunter wrote on Jan 13, 2008 5:04 PM:Keep in mind, Temecula, that if Pechanga is going to deliver on the amount of money to us that it promises, it will have to TRIPLE the amount of customers it services EVERY hour of every day.
Can the casino hold that many people safely? Can they park an additional 10,000 vehicles per day? Can the city/county/state enforce safety laws?
Think the traffic is bad now? WAIT.

Hwy 76 wrote on Jan 13, 2008 5:13 PM:had accidents before the casinos were a twinkle in the NATIVE AMERICAN'S eyes. I have lost a lot of family members in accidents on this hwy before the casinos. Accidents are only being mentioned now because of the cause of the casino. ...

Well Said Info . Art. wrote on Jan 13, 2008 5:20 PM:I say put casinos where the people are {not out in the boonies} Casino Escondido Center for the Arts ......Keep the $$$$$ local

The Future wrote on Jan 13, 2008 5:39 PM:VOTE NO. Stop the greedy!!

Roy wrote on Jan 13, 2008 5:52 PM:Will someone please pay me for my time here? Some people cannot handle that passion for an issue can outwit and out debate the paid professional drones. They only have their pre thought out talking points and when new arguments are presented that do not mention unions, Vegas, or race tracks then there is no "canned" response to turn to. These compacts are a bunch of foolery being thrust upon us so a few make out like bandits while many get their neighborhoods degraded and each county, if the share of the spoils is divided equally, gets seven million. Sounds like a raw deal to me. Does anyone think that the County of Riverside will spend that seven million around all its casinos? If you do I have some houses to sell you at 2005 prices. NO 94 95 96 97

How did we? wrote on Jan 13, 2008 6:36 PM:Get along without these large money sucking structures? Where did we go wrong? I see this as a problem that WILL never go away! The exclusive entitlement that has been endowed to the these tribes is mind boggling.
I feel sorry for their ancestors, not the ones we see today. Now I feel sorry for our heirs that will have to endure these ugly giant creations.
I cannot ever remember doing anything mean to a tribal member much less their ancestors. The tribal members that live today are simply reaping all the benefits of what happened a hundred years ago.

VotersSay NO!! wrote on Jan 13, 2008 6:38 PM:To 94,95,96,97,

JR wrote on Jan 13, 2008 9:50 PM:Vote YES !!!! They need to build malls and movie theatres also. Why let Vegas get all the business and money, let's cash in for the state and make a better life. Keep them out towards Palm Springs, let the traffic get bad,( and let them fix it ) it's only a small area compared to everywhere else in CA. If u don't like it then MOVE somewhere else !! Don't live next to a casino, duh !!!

SanMarcosPass wrote on Jan 13, 2008 9:50 PM:Vote no on 94-97. These tribes have more than enough slots now. Unless they want to play nice like the rest of the taxpayers in Calif., and submit to the same rules/taxes/transparency any other commercial venture does in the State I say no. Feeding these dictatorships more money with zero accountability is very unhealthy.

No New Taxes--VOTE YES wrote on Jan 14, 2008 12:32 AM:VOTE YES on these initiatives. Help save some of the cuts that the state will be making starting THIS year. Some of the cuts are necessary, but many of them will hurt the most needy people in our state. The people running this opposition campaign have no interest in California, only in themselves...think about it...Las Vegas Casino owning horsetrack owners, out of state labor unions looking to boost their union dues to the national office and 2 Indian casinos who are being advised by their Las Vegas Executive groups. There is a reason these deals were already passed by the Governor and a broad array of Democratic and Republican legislators. Don't get fooled by Roy and all his other out of state friends who are looking for nothing more than their own self interests. Vote YES on these measures.

to SanMarcosPass wrote on Jan 14, 2008 12:39 AM:You say to play nice like the rest of the taxpayers in Calif., and submit to the same rules/taxes/transparency any other commercial venture does in the state. Well by your own logic you should be voting Yes on these measures, because the Indian tribes will be paying not just the same, but MORE TAXES by the same rules and structures built into the compacts for the state to have open auditing of any of these 4 casinos. The Indians have agreed to pay more than the 8 1/2 percent tax that corporations pay in California. In fact they are paying 2 to 3 times more. And they are doing it with the transparency of allowing the state to have access to their books at any given time. How's that for "playing nice?" I guess there will be a YES vote from a San Marcos resident if he/she pays attention to the facts and is not deceived by the campaign against.

Its really simple... wrote on Jan 14, 2008 7:55 AM:For those who dont frequent the Casinos, this is free money to the state!! For those who do, you are just paying for a different form of entertainment. Nobody is forcing people to goto the casinos. This is money being put into the general fund without taxing Californians. I say YES to 94-97!!!

Simple math folks... wrote on Jan 14, 2008 7:58 AM:Increased traffic, crime, etc... is not entirely a result of Indian Casinos. How about the population boom in Riverside county? When the Temecula pop. DOUBLES in size since 2000-2001, crime and traffic should be expected. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out...

HMMM wrote on Jan 14, 2008 9:04 AM:Hey "No New Taxes," I hope you read the article in Monday's Union re. the mysterious dissappearance/reappearance of compact paperwork in Washington DC. Isn't it a little bit fishy that these documents were "found" in the nick of time to be signed but with no time left to review. And you must be aware that gaming consultants from all over the U.S. (not just Vegas) have been advising tribes from the get-go. Pull you head out of the sand!

No New Taxes--VOTE YES wrote on Jan 14, 2008 11:09 AM:to HMMM--Yes I read that article. It is fishy in deed, but how does that issue relate to the Indians? Isn't that just typical bureaucratic bungling within the state and federal GOVERNMENTS? Since when did the Indians have authority to send documentation from the state of CA to the Feds? Since when did the Indians have the ability to approve their own agreements within the Federal Interior Department?

Lastly, the gaming consultants who are putting money behind this No campaign ARE LAS VEGAS groups. The Pala Resort is operated, financed and managed by a Las Vegas casino, as is Harrah's Rincon. Don't believe me? Look it up...it's fact. Now it appears that your head is buried someplace. Pull your head out and look around at the apparent forces behind this campaign...they have no interest in California...they are all outsiders who are interested in their own pocketbooks and taking money OUT OF CALIFORNIA. Vote YES on these measures and help yourselves and your neighbors out of a difficult tax and spend situation.

Strange Logic wrote on Jan 14, 2008 5:37 PM:Just what we need, more gambling to solve our difficult tax and spending problems. Thanks, but no thanks for the advice, Einstein.

No New Taxes--VOTE YES wrote on Jan 15, 2008 12:25 AM:So what is your strategy of finding money or cuts to fix our problems here Mr. Holier than Thou, Strange Logic? I am not gambling MY money, so it is others who are are helping ME out of this state's problems by increasing their contributions to the general fund. Seems like a no brainer to me.

You don't need to be Einstein to approve of billions of FREE money that won't be paid by me.

Roy wrote on Jan 15, 2008 9:39 AM:Hey No New Taxes who is employing you to be the rep here? I am just an ordinary middle class guy that knows a scam when he sees on. So if the answer to our budget woes is more gaming the question is: How many more casinos are needed to cover the 14 billion shortfall? Your expansion has already been figured into the state budget and does not count against the 14 billion. If what you advocate is such a great thing then lets just expand to the point where no taxes are paid by Californians an casinos are on every corner or your facilities each look like mine Vegas' in the middle of neighborhoods. We draw the line in the sand here. VOTE NO 94 95 96 97

SanMarcosPass wrote on Jan 15, 2008 10:02 AM:VOTING NO. NO. NO. AND NO. For the pro voter - your predictions are as bad as your math. I will be voting NO.
Recalculate, then educate yourself - then come back and talk to me.

How does it feel to have victory slipping away from your fingers?

No New Taxes--VOTE YES wrote on Jan 15, 2008 11:20 AM:Hey Roy, I am just an ordinary middle class guy just like you that knows a deal that will save me money when he sees one. Why is it that if someone has a different logic or opinion than you, they are automatically a paid rep on the take? Perhaps YOU are the paid rep. It seems your name is all over every story I ever read that is against these measures or against the Indians. Do you even live in California, or are you from Las Vegas? Or perhaps you are a union boss looking to line your pockets.

The answer to our budget woes is NOT more gaming...that is the problem with your side of the argument. You guys seem to think that this one revenue source SHOULD solve all the budget woes, but let's face it, California is a mess and every little bit will help. That is why I look at this issue as a win. By voting YES, I don't have any downside only upside. No new taxes to me and it adversely affects my life in absolutely no way since I don't gamble. Seems perfectly logical to me.

To SanMarcosPass, you clearly have made up your mind to vote no, but your criteria for voting that way has nothing to do with your logic. The Indians are paying from 15% to 25% in taxes to the state under their deals. Corporate tax in California is 8 1/2%. Anyone applying the math here can see that the Indians are actually at a disadvantage to any business in California by 2 to 3 times. That math is very simple. The state is getting a deal here. You say you want transparency...the Indians are opening their books to California state audits at ANY random time. Your criteria have been met and EXCEEDED. YOU do the math. YOU recalculate. Open YOUR eyes.

Bingo wrote on Jan 15, 2008 12:04 PM:Free Money? Where do I sign up? Come on NNT, there's no such thing. It might be more efficient if
Californians quit going to tribal casinos and instead contribute what they like by sending a check directly to Sacramento, thereby eliminating the tribal laundering. And even you could help, even though you don't visit casinos.

No New Taxes--VOTE YES wrote on Jan 15, 2008 12:13 PM:Hey Bingo, the free money is at props 94, 95, 96 and 97. To sign up, vote YES to each of those measures. Those who gamble choose to. Their loss is your gain. If you gamble, then you take the chance of paying higher taxes than the rest of us. Free to me. Cigarette smokers pay a sin tax...their choice, but free money to me since I don't smoke. If all cigarette smokers would quit and instead contribute what they save by sending a check directly to Sacramento, they thereby eliminate tobacco company laundering. Same concept, Bingo.

It's really very easy, if you look around, you can find lots of free money to you. It's all about your choices.

icitall wrote on Jan 15, 2008 1:28 PM:Why do these commercials say: " California stands to lose up to 9 billion dollars?" How do you lose money you don't yet have? If this amount, 9 BILLION dollars is 25% of the net win these tribes are willing to give to the state that logically means that they will be pocketing an estimated 27 BILLION dollars. 27 BILLION. This for how many people maybe 3000? ...

Betsy wrote on Jan 15, 2008 1:59 PM:Do you really think the would want to be adding more slot machines if they were losing money. NO GAMBLING for me.

Roy wrote on Jan 15, 2008 6:39 PM:Listen to the talking points from No New Taxes and then read the other posts from real citizens. Boy that 27 billion to a few thousand sure sounds like a sweet deal for such a small group. Where can I meet and marry one of those tribal women and sign up!

No New Taxes--VOTE YES wrote on Jan 15, 2008 7:29 PM:Roy is from Las Vegas. He is not a "real citizen." Californians know a good deal when they see it. That is why Arnold and your legislators already voted YES for these compacts overwhelmingly.

By the way, a fifth tribe, San Manuel got their compact passed too only a few weeks later than those for the four tribes on the ballot. How come Roy isn't screaming over that deal?

To Roy wrote on Jan 15, 2008 7:35 PM:Hey Roy, I'll bet if you found yourself one of them Indian girls you wouldn't be working for your current benefactor on this no campaign.

onlooker wrote on Jan 15, 2008 7:55 PM:icitall--California will lose $9 Billion if you no voters get your way. Fact is, the state already does have the $9 Billion because the compact was passed by the full legislature and the governor. You are attempting to undo that deal and take that money away--money that the state has already negotiated--done deal.

RobertM wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:43 AM:Yes!! Tax the poor and stupid. It started with the lottery and continues with casinos. It's about time stupid people paid their fair share.

Roy wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:03 AM:Ah liars like No New Taxes like to make you think they are not who and what they are. Hey rep I live in Murrieta and have been posting here under this name for a long long time. Where have you been? Working behind the scenes for the tribes?

No New Taxes--VOTE YES wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:12 AM:I live here in Sun City. I am a rep to no one but myself. I am looking out for my best interests, and those interests happen to be the best interests of all Californians in this circumstance. I have been reading your posts on the NC Times site since the beginning. Seems you chime in only when it has something to do with Pechanga. You always have a negative attitude towards anything out there with those Indians. Like I said earlier, I haven't seen you raise any concern over the San Manuel compact which is not being challenged. Their compact gives them more than the other 4 compacts. You and your No folks silence on that compact is interesting to me.

VOTE NO! wrote on Jan 16, 2008 11:30 AM:Citizens are finally being given another opportunity to have their say on these matters regardless of what politicians and lobbyists have agreed on ($$$). The final say belongs to the voters of California, of which I'm one (native, by the way). Sounds to me that some of the posters are along for a free ride on the shoulders of losing gamblers or better yet, as a member of a casino tribe. It's not too late to slow down this train befores it wrecks California.
Take charge Californians! VOTE NO on 94, 96, 96, and 97!

VOTE YES!! wrote on Jan 16, 2008 2:30 PM:... Pala already got their deal from the Governor for UNLIMITED slots. These 4 agreements have limits on the amounts of new slots. Pala just doesn't want the competition so that they can rake in more profits. If they weren't owned and operated by Las Vegas interests, Pala would make more money than any other tribe in California with its compact. Unfortunately for them, they have to pay the piper, the Las Vegas piper who is taking all that California money back to Nevada.

Roy wrote on Jan 16, 2008 6:12 PM:You know what No New Taxes the other compacts concerning expansion had gone to a vote I would have voted those down to. I do use Pechanga as an example but I am against these compacts in general. The BIGGEST flaw is that there is no guarantee that the funds generated to the state will actually proportionally go to the areas of greatest impact. IE your home County Riverside. If distributed propotionally between all counties the amount is 7 million per county based on the most optimistic projection. So are you telling me that we in Riverside should disproportionally accept the impacts of the unprecedented triple expansion of these casinos and live with the reality based on past spending that the infrastructure will not even, and again using Pechanga as an example, negate the impact of 48000 ADDITIONAL car trips per day? Or how about the loopholes in these compacts that will actually allow a reduction in payments by two thirds? A loop hole? Yes No New Taxes these compacts are not legally airtight and the only thing that is guaranteed is that the tribe members will triple their earnings to in excess of 100k per month. We are talking 27 billion in revenue for 3000 tribe members over 20 years. This deal sounds like the biggest special interest givaway the state has ever done. And in the end No New Taxes two thirds of your fellow Riverside County residents agree in a poll that the casinos are large enough and should not be expanded. TWO THIRDS! What may happen here is that the rest of the state may approve this and screw Riverside County. We need to yell at the top of our lungs to the rest of the state to VOTE NO 94 95 96 97! And I will continue to be here until the fifth of Feb to promote this issue that I have adopted.

Realist wrote on Jan 18, 2008 11:33 PM:Gambling is a terrible waste of money that divides and destroys families. I have voted NO on all gambling referendums and will continue to vote NO because there is always a moral and ethical solution to the problems we Californians face.