As reported by: The Associated Press
The Tule River Indian tribe runs a booming casino with 1,500 slot machines on its reservation in California's Central Valley. But the casino is up a winding road miles from the region's main route, prompting tribal members to consider abandoning their casino and building a new one at a more lucrative location, alongside Highway 190.

The tribe's problem is that the site it wants for a casino isn't part of its reservation. It can't build a casino there unless it's granted a rare exception under federal law.

That's not stopping tribal officials from trying. It's one of a growing number of tribes in California - such as the United Auburn Indian Community, owners of the Thunder Valley Casino outside Sacramento - and elsewhere that are looking beyond reservation boundaries for larger crowds and greater profits.

“It is like any real estate,” said Tom Rodgers, a member of the Blackfeet tribe in Montana and a consultant to Tule River and other tribes. “What are the three rules? Location, location, location. Access to market is everything now.”

Tribes like the United Auburn can help their cause a great deal with the promise of millions of dollars of revenues to help towns like Lincoln (where it is situated), and other nearby small towns build new infrastructure.

Route 65, for instance, the main road into Thunder Valley from Interstate 80, is being widened with much of its cost being handled by the casino.

The casino also helps bring more business to the town and its surrounding outlet malls - another selling point, especially in areas that are already expanding.

Reno gaming consultant Ken Adams has said the “real pain” of Thunder Valley's threat to Northern Nevada is over.

“We've reached the end of it,” Adams said in April. “It doesn't mean it won't continue to hurt us, but it's built into out stock prices, it's built into who we are now.”

Rural areas are challenge

In other, more rural areas, things are more of a challenge.

Just ask the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, who have wanted to build a casino in Rohnert Park, near Santa Rosa and north of San Francisco. They've been in pitched legal battles for a year or so, even after promising millions of dollars of incentives to the surrounding communities.

“This may still be the tip of the iceberg,” John Farahi, president/CEO of Monarch Casino & Resort Inc., which owns the Atlantis Casino Resort in south Reno, said last year about the Northern Nevada impact of Thunder Valley and the Graton Rancheria. “We have known for a long time that we'd be seeing this.”

The trend is being eyed warily by some local officials, as well as some of Tule River's neighbors.

“When we voted for Proposition 1A, that was to help the Indians gain self-sufficiency,” said Robert Inabinette, a Tule River opponent, referring to the 2000 ballot measure that legalized Indian gambling in California. “We didn't in our wildest imagination ever think that they'd want to move off the reservation and put in a Vegas-style casino.”

Tribal gambling has exploded into a $5 billion-a-year industry in California in the last several years, with tribes operating 54 Nevada-style casinos in the state and trying to open more.

Unfavorable locations at issue

But many tribes are hampered by the unfavorable locations of their reservations, which are often in remote, desert or rural sites. Some of these tribes are trying to move to better locations, even if they're away from the reservation land where most agree federal law intended tribal gambling to occur.

“The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act was set up to disfavor off-reservation casinos,” said Guy Martin, an attorney who has represented California communities as well as some gambling interests and tribes.

“Still and all, off-reservation casinos are clearly the most desirable locations, and since almost every tribal casino proposal exists because of the participation of wealthy financial interests, that will become the main battleground of the future with respect to Indian casinos.”

The Indian Gambling Regulatory Act confines tribal gambling mostly to reservations, and generally prohibits gambling on land acquired after the law's passage in 1988.

But there are several exceptions, including for land restored to a tribe that has regained federal recognition.

The secretary of the interior also can determine that an off-reservation casino is in a tribe's best interest and wouldn't harm the surrounding community. In the latter case, the governor of the state where the casino will be built also must agree to the project.

Issue not yet widespread

About a dozen tribes nationwide have received land for gambling through acts of Congress that also restored their federal recognition.

Three tribes nationwide, in Washington, Wisconsin and Michigan, have attained off-reservation casinos by getting the interior secretary and the governor to agree to it, said George Skibine, director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs' Office of Indian Gaming Management.

Tribal members and allies cite the relatively small numbers as evidence that off-reservation gambling is in no danger of becoming widespread.

“It's a very painfully long and very demanding process,” said Jacob Coin, executive director of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, which represents 61 tribes.

But Skibine and others said the number of tribes trying to build off-reservation is growing.

Eleven tribes nationwide are far enough along that they've submitted environmental studies to the BIA. They include the Tule River tribe, whose reservation is in Tulare County between Visalia and Bakersfield, and three others in California: the Fort Mojave tribe, which is seeking to build in Needles; the Enterprise Rancheria, which is seeking a casino in Yuba County; and the Elk Valley Rancheria, which is planning a casino in Del Norte County.

Many more tribes around the nation are in earlier stages of exploring off-reservation casinos, experts said.

In California alone, the casino watchdog group Stand Up for California! estimates more than 20 off-reservation casinos are in various stages of planning.

The trend has caught the eye of at least one federal lawmaker. Rep. Jim McCrery, R-La., said he is considering legislation to block tribes from building off their reservations.

McCrery opposes an effort by the Jena Band of Choctaw Indians to build an off-reservation casino, a move that has been approved by the federal government but not yet by Louisiana's new governor.

“They can take land into trust, build a gaming establishment and pay zero taxes,” McCrery said. “I think that is wrongheaded public policy.”

Sovereignty is underlying factor

Tribal sovereignty, which underpins Indians' monopoly on Nevada-style gambling in California and other states, also shields them from most state and local laws and taxes.

That concerns state and local officials who don't want casinos to show up in communities without having to contribute money or abide by environmental regulations.

Tribal officials contend they try to be good neighbors, and say that often local residents want them because of the economic development they can bring.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is trying to renegotiate tribal gambling agreements to get more money for the state, would have the final say on some off-reservation projects.

His main negotiator with tribes, Daniel Kolkey, told reporters recently that Schwarzenegger would approach such decisions cautiously.

“For the most part, any land that is taken into trust by a tribe that already has a reservation cannot be used for Class 3 (Nevada-style) gaming without the consent of the governor of the state, so this is something that I certainly am sensitive to,” Kolkey said.

“And I might also add that the traditional justification for the tribes to have in essence a monopoly on gaming is that the gaming is supposed to be conducted on the tribal reservation.”

Governor getting involved

Schwarzenegger is trying to bring California tribal casinos more in line with casinos in Connecticut and New York, where tribes pay as much as 25 percent of their profits to the state.

In California, tribes pay nothing to the state general fund but contribute to two special funds - one to distribute profits to tribes without casinos or with small numbers of slot machines, and the other to pay communities for costs associated with casinos.

To some tribal members, it's simply unfair that they're prevented from expanding their businesses beyond reservation borders.

“To me, it's borderline racist that any other business is able to expand and it's not questioned,” said Dave Nenna, Tule River's tribal administrator and a member of the tribe. “But when it comes to a tribal entity, it's, 'Let's suppress them and keep them on their reservation.' ”