Tribes decry surprise casino bill

BOISE – Legislative efforts to undermine a voter-approved ballot measure authorizing Native American casinos in Idaho drew an angry rebuke Monday from tribal leaders.

“This measure is a direct challenge to the ability of Indian tribes within the state of Idaho to conduct gaming operations on their own land and secure their own economic future,” Chief Allan, chairman of the Coeur d’Alene Tribe, said during a rally at the state Capitol.

House Concurrent Resolution 35 asks the attorney general to appoint a special counsel to examine whether the video gambling devices at Indian casinos qualify as slot machines, which the Idaho Constitution prohibits.

The Idaho Indian Affairs Council has asked to be notified when legislation comes forward that affects Indian tribes, but the council didn’t hear about HCR35 until it was introduced to a committee on Thursday.

“I was livid when I found out about it,” said council Chairman Sen. Mike Jorgenson, R-Hayden Lake, who was joined at the rally by Reps. Eric Anderson, R-Priest Lake, and Bob Nonini, R-Coeur d’Alene.

But Jorgenson said he’s spoken with the legislation’s sponsors and has determined that the lack of notification to the council was an accident.

Republican state Rep. Bert Stevenson of Rupert, one of HCR35’s co-sponsors, also said the oversight was unintentional, but he questioned the need to clear bill proposals in advance with Indian tribes.

“I don’t know why I’m obligated to call them and tell them what legislation I’m doing,” Stevenson said.

Voters approved an initiative in 2002 that allowed Indian gaming machines. The Idaho Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to the initiative in 2004, citing the need for it to be heard by lower courts first.

Stevenson said the constitutionality of Indian gaming casinos must be addressed, and Rep. Lawerence Denney, R-Midvale, another HCR35 co-sponsor, agreed.

“It should have happened long before now because the tribes are so far down the road with their machines that if they are found unconstitutional, they’ve got quite an investment in them,” Denney said.

Denney said an outside party should examine the issue because of what he said is a conflict of interest with the attorney general. The resolution includes a request for $75,000 to cover legal costs.

The attorney general is charged with upholding both the law and the constitution, and the issue of Indian gaming casinos might involve a contradiction between the law and the constitution.

“What this is asking him to do is appoint outside counsel to eliminate that conflict of interest,” Denney said.

But Idaho Indian Affairs Council member Rep. George Sayler, D-Coeur d’Alene, said the issue has already been addressed by voters. He also said the legislation is nothing more than a waste of taxpayer time and money.

“I don’t think I would blame anybody,” Sayler said. “I just think it’s unfortunate that they’re going ahead with it.”