The North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians whose tribal state gaming compact with California was overturned by the voters last November by an overwhelming margin, has gone to court to try to reverse the results.
The tribe has sued in federal court in Fresno alleging that the state did not negotiate the compact in good faith, as required by federal law.
The tribe is based in a rancheria near Yosemite, a location far too remote for attracting customers to a casino. Because of that fact, the tribe was able to persuade the Bureau of Indian Affairs to put land in Madera, 40 miles away, into trust, i.e. an off-reservation land into trust process. Governor Jerry Browned signed onto this and so did the legislature.
However, voters who opposed this first off-reservation casino in the state raised enough signatures to bring the matter to a vote in the form of Proposition 48. Gaming tribes who did not want to face competition in their markets contributed the lion’s share to the statewide campaign, outspending the North Fork tribe by a factor of about 18 to one.
Voters who simply oppose the idea of off-reservation casinos combined with those who bought some of the scare tactics that the new casino would open the way for a flood of off-reservation gaming, especially in urban areas. Opponents of Prop. 48 also noted that when Indian gaming was sold as a constitutional amendment in 2000 that voters were told casinos would only be built on original tribal land.
The lawsuit claims: “The governor of California and the tribe initially negotiated and executed a compact and the California Legislature passed legislation to ratify the compact. The state’s position, however, is that because California electors subsequently voted to reject the legislation ratifying the compact, the state has not entered into a valid gaming compact with the tribe.”
Brown’s office has said that it doesn’t intend to enter into another compact negotiation with the tribe, characterizing them as “futile” because of the voters’ resounding vote. However the complaint alleges that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) does not give states a choice on whether to negotiate compacts.
The 2000-member tribe is asking the court to order the state back to the negotiating table.
The organization that organized the statewide effort against the compact, Stand Up for California, and one of the rivaling gaming tribes, the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians is also moving forward in federal court. This lawsuit seeks to obtain a ruling that the compact is void and that no casino can be built.
The Chukchansis also claim that the Madera casino would irreparably damage its own casino’s revenues by more than 30 percent. That the Bureau of Indian Affairs determined that the new casino would not have a detrimental effect on surrounding casinos is a reason that determination should be reversed, says the lawsuit.
