Some Tribes Are Fighting Initiative 651 Wide-Open Gambling Effort Being Challenged By Coalition

Indian tribes opposed to Initiative 651, the tribal gambling measure, are joining together to fight it.

Tribes for Responsible Gaming expects to gain support from nearly a dozen tribes, said Doreen Maloney, an organizer of the opposition group and Upper Skagit tribal council member.

Eight tribes already have lent their support to defeat the initiative, according to the Committee Against Unrestricted Gambling.

Voters will decide I-651 on the Nov. 7 ballot.

The initiative goes too far and opens the door to crime and graft, Maloney said. She also argued it will create an elite class of wealthy tribal casino owners, not general betterment for all tribes.

Tribes pushing the initiative claim broader support for it among Washington Indians than there really is, Maloney said.

“They are in for a rude awakening,” she said.

“They aren’t going to use us anymore. We know this initiative doesn’t benefit us, and that it’s just for a few of them.”

Three of four board members of the Yes on 651 Committee are connected to tribal gambling operations that stand to become more lucrative if the initiative passes.

“That’s why these guys want this thing,” Maloney said of Spokane, Puyallup, and Shoalwater Bay tribes pushing the initiative. “It allows individually owned casinos. If this thing were to happen it would create a separate elite class of casino owners.

“If it really benefited all tribes, we would all be for it. And we are not.”

Russel Lafountaine, spokesman for the initiative, said full-blown casino gambling, including slot machines, would create all kinds of jobs.

“There’s more than just owning casinos. There’s building them. Cleaning them. Managing them. Making the machines for them.”

Each tribe decides whether gambling is allowed on its land and imposes taxes paid by casino owners to the tribe, Lafountaine said. Because the rules vary, it’s impossible to say how each tribe would be affected if the initiative passes.

Location is bound to squeeze many remote tribes out of the action unless they can hatch creative ways to lure gamblers far from urban areas.

Tribes opposed to the initiative also are concerned that unrestricted gambling will jeopardize economic opportunity for all tribes by opening the door to crime.

“Those of us who want to preserve and protect the opportunity for economic development that gaming provides need to come out against unrestricted gambling,” Maloney said.

“This initiative is damaging to both the tribes and the people of the state of Washington.”

She called the initiative’s promise to pay 10 percent of gambling proceeds to the voters “an insult” and said the intertribal board of directors set up to administer the fund is “an open invitation to abuse.

“They set their own salaries. They serve for life. They determine what reasonable expenses can be deducted from the voters’ fund. Come on.”

The initiative invites the state auditor to sit on the board and assist with administration. But state Auditor Brian Sonntag wants no part of it.

“I have no interest, and no authority under the state constitution, to participate in this in any way.”

The Committee Against Unrestricted Gambling, also opposed to the plan, cheered the formation of Tribes for Responsible Gaming.

“We welcome them to the playing field. It can only help,” said spokeswoman Ellen Murray.

“The tribes pushing this have been saying the opposition is anti-Indian and that’s not true at all.”

, DataTimes MEMO: This sidebar appeared with the story: INITIATIVE 651 Initiative 651 would: Allow expanded gambling, including slot machines, on tribal land on and off reservations. Remove all state restrictions on the size or number of gambling halls, size of bets placed, hours of operation and type of gambling. Greatly reduce state regulation of tribal gambling.