Indian gambling conflicts heating up in Arizona

Paul Davenport

Monday, July 30, 2001 | 10:44 a.m.

PHOENIX -- The lawyers could be in court for years while arguing the legality of Indian casinos in Arizona, but the issue likely will touch off a broader debate as well.

Legislators are gearing up to tackle the issue during their 2002 regular session, and voters may be asked to decide the fate of one or more ballot measures on the subject.

Candidates for office in next year's election likely won't be off the hook either.

"It's clearly going to be an issue that people are going to have to take a stand on," said Len Munsil, president of the Scottsdale-based Center for Arizona Policy, a conservative advocacy group.

All that was set in motion by U.S. District Judge Robert C. Broomfield's July 3 ruling that Gov. Jane Hull lacks legal authority from the Legislature to enter new compacts and that state law does not permit compacts that allow slot machines, blackjack and keno.

Broomfield is preparing to issue an order to carry out his ruling, which stems from a lawsuit filed against the state by race tracks that oppose expansion of reservation gaming. Track officials see Indian casinos as unfair competition.

Both sides agree the order should bar Hull from entering new compacts. If the tracks get their way, Broomfield also would require her to declare that the current compacts will not be renewed when they start expiring in late 2003 and tie her hands on making changes to them in the meantime.

What Broomfield orders will help state officials decide whether to appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Hull spokeswoman Francie Noyes said.

"The governor wants to keep the state's options open," Noyes said. "But there's no doubt, if you look at the preliminary ruling from the judge, either the Legislature or the people ... have to be involved in the ultimate solution."

The tribes also are keeping their options open, said David LaSarte, executive director of the Arizona Indian Gaming Association. The group represents 15 of the 17 Arizona tribes with compacts.

Those options include lobbying the Legislature to clear the way for new compacts or asking voters to approve an initiative on the issue.

"We will let the ground settle before we make any strategic decisions," LaSarte said.

Voters in 1996 overwhelmingly approved an initiative which forced then-Gov. Fife Symington to issue the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community a compact.

A public vote on Indian gaming would prompt broader debate on gambling and its social effects, not just economic benefits to the tribes, Munsil said.

Munsil and other gambling foes argue that it increases family problems, leading to bankruptcies, divorce, domestic violence and other woes. "You open the door to all of those things through gambling," he said.

If the judge's ruling remains intact, any proposed law to allow reservation gaming might have to allow casinos statewide, said Munsil, an attorney.

"That's the issue that the people of Arizona are going to have to decide," Munsil said. "We're going to do our part to tell people that Las Vegas is close enough."

Meanwhile lawmakers are researching the gaming issue. They haven't dealt with it to any major degree since the early 1990s, when they gave Symington a free hand -- now ruled illegal by Broomfield -- to enter compacts.

Senate President Randall Gnant, R-Scottsdale, said lawmakers are just beginning to gather information. He doesn't know what the Legislature will do.

One possibility would be to present voters with a referendum keeping existing limits on the number of gaming machines, requiring that some revenue go to the state and increasing state regulation of casinos.

However, Gnant said a pro-gaming initiative would make lawmakers more likely to also send voters a referendum. But he wants to keep the controversial issue off the 2002 ballot.

"It's not that I'm opposed to the people voting on an initiative, but if a gaming initiative is on the ballot, it will color every election from dogcatcher and constable all the way up to governor," Gnant said. "What candidates feel about issues such as education or transportation and growth and the like will be lost in the rhetoric and the emotion surrounding gaming."

Gnant isn't the only legislator watching the issue warily.

Sen. Ramon Valadez, D-Tucson, has two Indian reservations in his district and considers himself a supporter of tribal gaming.

"I'm also a supporter of the dog track in my district," Valadez added.