Extensive article in today's Marin Independent Journal, by Mary Lynne Vellinga, Scripps-McClatchy News Service, by-lined "Pala Indian Reservation" (45 miles north of San Diego). Much too long to retype entirely (which is to say nothing of the copyright violation!).

Main points: Pala Band of Mission Indians was the principal signatory to the existing Indian gaming pact with the State of California. They have plans to build a $42 million casino (planned opening next year). The Pala Band opposes Prop 5 and has participated in TV ads against the proposition.

Mark Macarro, Chairman of the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, is the primary spokesman for Prop 5 (Pechangas also north of San Diego, only seven miles from the Palas). Pechangas now have a makeshift casino made of 50 trailers stuck together (with walls torn out). It has 1333 video slot machines. Macarro says before gaming, most of his tribe was eligible for food stamps; within a year after the casino opened in 1995, none were.

A few other tribes have sided with Palas (including the Rumsey Band of Wintun Indians, which operates Cache Creek in Brooks, CA); more than 80 have sided with Pechangas. Paula Lorenzo, Chairman of the Rumsey Band, has appeared in a TV ad opposing Prop 5 (newspaper article says, without attribution, that this "public denunciation of Proposition 5" was "paid for by Nevada casinos".

Prop 5, among other things, would legalize video slot machines in Indian casinos. Both the state and federal governments now consider them illegal (which virtually assures lengthy post-election litigation if Prop 5 passes).

The article describes improvements in living conditions on the Pechanga reservation since the casino opened: welfare rolls reduced to zero, new fire station and truck, new sports park with modern equipment for children, current total of 22 college scholarships for Indian students, new houses and double-wide trailers replacing dilapidated reservation housing and every adult member of the tribe receives a monthly payment of "less than $3000".

Opponents contend that Prop 5 is bad for Indian gaming because it will be tied up in court for years, "continuing the legal cloud over Indian gambling". The Pala leader thinks this will result in rescission of their casino financing agreement.

California's Constitution includes a clause added by the 1984 Lottery act which bans "casinos of the type currently operating in Nevada and New Jersey". Because Prop 5 is a statutory measure, not a constitutional amendment, it cannot override this provision. [JTR note: the constitutional provision is pretty vague and the proposition does not address it directly; fertile ground for the lawyers.]

Opponents also worry that elimination of the state's ban on slot machines would prompt existing cardrooms and race tracks to request permission to install slots.

Another tribe, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians in Palm Springs, has begun collecting signatures for another proposition aimed at undoing the existing Pala agreement with the state.

As of Sept. 30, tribes backing Prop. 5 had raised $42.7 million ($20 million from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, which has 145 members). [JTR note: !!!!] No on 5 had raised $15.5 million (major contributors Hilton Hotels, Circus Circus and Mirage Resorts).

Indian gaming in California started in 1980 when Cabazon Band of Mission Indians opened a cardroom on their reservation near Palm Springs. Soon after added high stakes Bingo. California tried to shut them down, but the Cabazons won a major U.S. Supreme Court case in 1987 (held Indians have the right to run gambling operations in states where gambling is legal off-reservation).

----- jim o\-S