|
California Court
Decision Lifts Slot Machine Cap
28 Aug, 2009 / GamblingCompliance
Ltd / Peter
Hecht
A court battle in
California to overturn the state’s slot machine limits has ended
in victory for the tribes who opposed the administration’s
restrictive reading of their 1999 compacts.
California Indian tribes
fighting to add slot machines without renegotiating 1999 state
gambling agreements have won a court victory which could open up
the Golden State market for 10,549 new slot machines. But they
face two major obstacles: a weakened economy and the determined
opposition of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The governor’s office
announced this week that it will seek a legal stay to stop a
court-ordered draw of new slot machine licenses by the California
Gambling Control Commission and press on with an appeal in the
case.
On August 19, US District
Court Judge Frank C. Damrell issued a key ruling on behalf of a
Northern California tribe, the Colusa Indian Community. The tribe
was seeking to add slot machines to its casino north of
Sacramento, but was blocked by a statewide cap imposed by former
Governor Gray Davis.
Damrell’s ruling ordered
the state to conduct a drawing to issue new slot machine licences.
It followed his earlier decision that the Davis administration
wrongfully set a statewide limit of 32,151 slots for 61 tribes
that signed 1999 casino deals allowing a maximum of 2,000 machines
each.
The statewide figure was
based on the fact that many isolated tribes would only have market
capacity for a few hundred slots or less.
But Damrell ruled that
that the state set the slot machine limit unreasonably low and
should have allowed the 1999 compact tribes a total of up to
42,700 machines.
Eleven California tribes
exceeded the 2,000-per-tribe slot machine limit after negotiating
amended compacts that paid the state tens of millions of dollars
in revenue sharing payments in exchange for casino expansions.
Another half dozen tribes
met the 2,000 limit under the 1999 compacts.
But Damrell’s ruling
appears to be a huge victory for several tribes that complained
they were not allowed to expand casinos under the 1999 gambling
agreements. They said they were unwilling to be shaken down by the
governor’s office to pay new revenues to the state for amended
casino deals.
“This is an enormous
vindication of the rights of the tribes obtained under the 1999
compact,” said George Forman, a lawyer who represents the Colusa
tribe. “No longer can they be forced to make additional
concessions in order to enjoy the benefits they have obtained.”
Damrell said the state
must receive tribal applications and hold a draw for new licences
within 45 days of his August 19 decision. The state tentatively
set an October 2 date for the slot machine draw, but is hoping to
stop it while appealing Damrell’s ruling to the US 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals.
“The state will be
filing an appeal and seeking a stay of the decision,” said Jeff
Macedo, a spokesman for Schwarzenegger. “If a stay is granted,
then the licence draw will not occur until after the 9th Circuit
issues a decision on the appeal.”
Forman said it is unlikely
California will see any rapid growth of casino slots due to the
difficult economy and that fact that many 1999 compact tribes
don’t reside in lucrative markets.
Even though the state may
be forced to make more than 10,000 licences available, Forman
said, “I would be surprised there would be even as many as 2,000
licences requested right now because of the economy. Once you get
outside of the metropolitan areas of Southern California, the
candidates that can operate as many as 2,000 slots become very
rare.”
He predicted the state
will see “incremental growth over a wide area” if Damrell’s
decision stands.
In December, 2008, ten
California tribes submitted requests for a total of 600 slot
machine licenses. At the time, the state said it had only 75
licences available.
The Colusa tribe, which
operates the 846-slot Colusa Casino Resort, went to court because
it was denied permission to add 300 slots under its 1999 compact
due to the statewide cap.
Another tribe, the San
Pasqual Band of Mission Indians in San Diego County, filed a
demand note for $555m it claimed it is owed because the state
failed to honour its 1999 compact. The tribe wants to add 428 slot
machines to reach 2,000.
San Pasqual Attorney
Steven Warren Solomon, who filed a friend of the court brief
supporting Colusa’s legal claim, said San Pasqual will
immediately ask the California Gambling Control Commission for the
additional slot machines licences, a move which will delight US
slot machine manufacturers.
The Rincon Band of Luiseño
Indians is seeking to add 400 slots to its casino in Valley View
in San Bernardino County in Southern California.
In a statement, tribal
lawyers Scott Crowell and Scott Wheat said Damrell’s ruling is
“a huge victory for California tribes, likely providing enough
gaming devices licences for every tribe that is seeking additional
licences”.
Solomon said many tribes
would be reluctant to pay licensing fees of up to more than $4,000
per new slot machine given the difficult economy. But he said the
state should now get out of the way of tribes that want to expand
under their 1999 compacts.
“You would think that
the state would want to stay out of internal tribal issues and
worry about the real problems we have today in California,”
Solomon said.
###
Hot Topics
| Intertribal Court of Southern California Bar Association Accepts New Members from the Law Firm of Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson
More
... |
| Judgment for 42,700 Slot Machine Licenses Issued by Federal Court
More
... |
| Tribe Sues State of California For
$115 Million Lost Revenue
More
... |
| Identity Swap: California and
Amsterdam ... Which Municipality Best
Regulates Marijuana and Prostitution?
More
... |
| The Best Of Los Angeles: SOLOMON, SALTSMAN & JAMIESON, Newsweek, January 4, 2010
More
... |
| Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson File
$550 million Claim For Damages Against The State Of California On Behalf Of The San Pasqual Band Of Mission Indians Valley View Casino
More
... |
| MTA
Found Liable For Over $1,300,000 In
Attorneys Fees In Addition To Compensatory Damages
Of $2,247,000 For A Total Judgment In
Excess Of $3,560,000
More
... |
|