Tule River Indians ordered to stop casino-style gambling

Tuesday, Feb. 1, 2000 | 9:11 a.m.

After three years of court battles, the Tule River Indians were ordered Monday by U.S. District Judge Anthony Ishii to end all casino-style gambling at its Porterville casino by noon on March 14.

"The issue for me is that the tribe is operating an illegal gambling operation," Ishii said before issuing his decision. The judge was ruling on a motion for summary judgment brought by the government.

The tribe's legal troubles began in 1997 when it refused to sign an agreement championed by then-Gov. Pete Wilson to allow limited casino-style gambling on reservations in California.

That agreement was never enacted, but in 1999 Gov. Gray Davis reached agreements with the tribes that will be ratified if voters approve Proposition 1A on March 7.

The Tule River Indians, however, also refused to sign Davis' version of the agreement, which means it is in violation of the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The law requires tribes to sign compacts with the state government before opening gambling facilities.

"It's time to enforce the law - the tribes that are going to sign the compact have already done so," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Edmund F. Brennan.

The Tule River Indians don't dispute that they have been running an illegal casino. But representatives of the 1,640-member tribe say they haven't signed the compact because it was negotiated in bad faith by the state and it objects to key details.

For instance, the tribe dislikes a revenue-sharing mechanism that requires gambling tribes to deposit 2 percent of their net winnings from slots into a fund for non-gambling tribes.

The Tule River tribe has filed a lawsuit against the state in an effort to force it back to the negotiating table. During Monday's hearing, tribe attorney Scott Crowell asked that his client be allowed to continue to run the casino until that case is resolved.

"We're not asking the court to sanction uncompacted gaming. We're not asking the court to allow the tribe to get away with something," Crowell said.

"We want to be able to present to a court, and ultimately to a mediator, the problems with the Davis compact," he said. Crowell said it would be too much of a financial hardship for the tribe to continue its legal battle against the state without the millions of dollars brought in by its casino.

Ishii denied the request - but he left the door open for the tribe's return to Las Vegas-style gambling in the future.

"If the tribe signs the Davis compact, it is certainly something I will consider in terms of lifting the injunction," Ishii said.

Ishii stopped short of choking off the tribe's gambling revenue altogether, allowing some games like bingo, but he pulled the plug on casino-style games, including all slot machines and any Las Vegas-style card games.

Tribal Chairman Phil Hunter refused to comment.

The Davis agreement led to Proposition 1A, which seeks to reinstate Proposition 5, a ballot initiative voters approved in 1998 allowing gambling machines and certain card games at Indian casinos, by amending the California Constitution.

The state Supreme Court said Proposition 5 violated the California Constitution's bans on Las Vegas-style gambling.