A U.S. District court judge ruled last week that the California legislature acted in bad faith in its dealings with the Enterprise Rancheria of Maidu Indians by not ratifying a state tribal gaming compact with the tribe, which wants to build a casino on 40 acres Yuba County, in northern California.
The tribe has sought permission to build the casino since 2002.
U.S. District Judge Troy Nunley wrote that the legislature “has not met its burden of showing it has negotiated in good faith in order to conclude a compact.” Governor Jerry Brown negotiated the compact with the tribe in 2012.
Because the legislature declined to approve of a Class III gaming compact in 2015 the tribe cancelled its plans for a casino and announced plans for a smaller, more modest Class II casino, which, under federal law, does not require a compact. But it’s also less profitable. Class II casinos can offer bingo machines, pull-tabs, punch board, tip jars, instant bingo and non-banked card games.
However the tribe did file suit against the state in 2014. Judge Nunley wrote: “The legislature’s nearly two years of inactivity regarding the compact until it expired, and no activity since then, constitute evidence (the state) has not responded in good faith to requests to negotiate.” The judge characterized this inactivity on the compact a “bad faith negotiation.”
The judge referenced correspondence from a state senator to Governor Brown that convinced Nunley that legislators were not serious about approving a compact of any sort with the tribe.
Nunley’s ruling gave the state and the tribe 60 days to conclude a compact or the federal government will be entitled to impose one. Federal law entitles the judge to appoint a mediator to choose between a compact proposed by the state and one proposed by the tribe.
The tribe has sought a compact in 2000, ever since the state’s voters approved Las Vegas style tribal gaming in the Golden State.
Tribal Chairman Glenda Nelson issued a statement that said, “The tribe is gratified with the ruling and looks forward to proceeding on the path set forth under federal law and in the court’s order.”
Assemblyman James Gallagher, an opponent of the casino, said that the compact will come back to the legislature. He opposes the compact because it is an example of an off-reservation casino.
