ToCasino.net Online Casino

A PROPOSAL by the Spokane Tribe of Indians to build its third casino away from its reservation, near the Fairchild Air Force Base, should be rejected by Gov. Jay Inslee.

Approval would endorse a troubling pattern of tribes developing off-reservation casinos. It may also compromise the agreement tribes have with the state and each other to share gambling proceeds.

The governor should look at the broader picture.

The Obama administration has tilted toward allowing tribes to create pockets of territory off their reservations, spurring casino development even as gambling revenues are leveling off. It endorsed the Spokane project in June, citing the tribe’s historical ties to the area — but Inslee has final say.

New regulations adopted in June also make it easier for additional tribes to get federal recognition, which could lead to more casino development, including some in urban areas.

This federal stance has raised concerns, particularly in California where scores of newly built casinos have made it the second-largest gambling state after Nevada.

Among opponents of this proliferation are some tribes, which fear the application of looser standards would oversaturate the market, diluting their gambling revenue.

In Washington, at least seven more casinos are in the works, but the floodgates would open if the Spokane project is approved, according to Curt Holmes, the Kalispel Tribe’s director of government affairs.

Holmes said the “historical ties” criteria is a Pandora’s box, since most tribes have historical ties to better locations than their reservations and those ties can overlap.

“Who wouldn’t want to be in downtown Seattle, who wouldn’t want to be closer to a better market?” he said. “But the tribes exist where they exist. They’ve learned to capitalize on those markets to the best of their ability.”

Rejecting the Spokane proposal may seem unfair because Washington in 1998 approved a similar deal for the Kalispel Tribe, allowing the roughly 430-person tribe to build an off-reservation casino in the same area.

But the Kalispel Tribe deal was an extraordinary case — the tribe has a small, remote reservation with few natural resources and limited opportunity to build because of flood plain restrictions. On top of that, the Spokane Tribe had already built a casino in the area.

If tribes are allowed to operate casinos off reservation with fewer gambling restrictions that would also be unfair to nontribal gambling and entertainment operations.

Besides, the Spokane region has plenty of gambling opportunities — per capita, the market is more saturated than Atlantic City, according to a study the Kalispel Tribe commissioned.

The Spokane Tribe is proposing a nearly 1 million-square-foot complex with a casino and hotel operated by Florida-based Hard Rock International. The 2,800-person tribe also does logging, operates convenience stores and is developing an energy business that could buy and resell power and add solar power generation. This pursuit of new industry with better-paying jobs is great progress and far preferable to expanded gambling and its social costs. Washington state is already extraordinarily generous toward tribal casinos. Under a deal the Spokane Tribe brokered with then-Gov. Chris Gregoire in 2005, tribal casinos don’t share any revenues with Washington as they do in other states. One argument for the deal was to limit casino proliferation. As part of the bargain, the governor can reject gambling projects. Inslee has until June to decide. He recently spent several hours conferring with Spokane tribal leaders. A meeting with the Kalispel Tribe is in the works. A better way was floated by Kevin Washburn, the Department of Interior’s assistant secretary for Indian Affairs, in his June letter supporting the Spokane casino. Washburn urged the Spokane and Kalispel tribes to compromise with each other, rather than fight and “risk a costly battle over market share.”

The tribes have many ties, including intermarriage. But decades of tension over casino projects will make it hard to agree on a joint venture.

Even so, cooperation on a single gambling venture in Airway Heights is the best option. Inslee should encourage a partnership between the tribes rather than approving an additional casino that would increase tensions and have repercussions across the state.