New Gaming Proposition Sought for March Ballot

California’s Indian tribes, who won solid voter support last year for the spread of reservation gambling in California, are gearing up to do it all over again.

The tribes are circulating petitions to qualify an initiative for the March ballot designed to remedy possible legal flaws in Proposition 5, the Indian gaming initiative.

That measure, drafted by tribes to endorse the type of Indian casinos that now pepper California without state or federal approval, has not been implemented because the state Supreme Court has not yet ruled on its constitutionality.

Proposition 5 won support from nearly two-thirds of state voters last November after a campaign that cost both sides nearly $100 million--the most expensive ballot measure of its type in U.S. history.

Meanwhile, tribes are still hoping that they and Gov. Gray Davis will come to terms on specific tribal agreements allowing casinos on reservations. Those negotiations are continuing--but may be jeopardized by a final ruling on Proposition 5 that is expected from the high court by month’s end.

Tribes say that because of looming deadlines to qualify measures for the March election, they cannot afford to wait any longer to begin pushing the new initiative.

“Because of the uncertainty over the fate of Proposition 5, this is an insurance policy,” said Richard Milanovich, chairman of the Agua Caliente Indians in Palm Springs.

The new initiative campaign would be shelved if Proposition 5 is upheld.

To qualify for the March ballot, the tribes need to collect about 670,000 qualified signatures. Cost of the petition drive is estimated at $4 million--much of it going to petition solicitors who are paid about $1.50 per signature.

Petition backers hope to complete their work by Labor Day.

The new initiative seeks to skirt somewhat ambiguous language in the state Constitution that authorizes the state Lottery but bans Nevada-type casinos in California. The definition of what constitutes such casinos is one of the key issues before the state’s high court.

The new measure would exempt Indian gaming from the ban on Nevada-style casinos, but would still not allow such Las Vegas-type gambling as roulette, craps and baccarat. The balance of the initiative replicates the language of Proposition 5, which essentially calls for Indian tribes to be allowed to conduct the kind of casinos they now operate.

Federal law requires tribes to get state approval to operate casinos, and the tribes hoped Proposition 5 would be the answer in California. Federal authorities have threatened to close down the state’s 40 Indian casinos, but have held back because of the ongoing litigation.

The casinos currently offer modified slot machines that neither take nor dispense coins, nor are operated by levers. The casinos also offer various card games.

Tribes could have sought a constitutional amendment last year, but did not believe they could collect the 700,000 signatures needed to qualify such a measure for the ballot.

Instead, they sought a weaker statute initiative that required only about 400,000 signatures to qualify for the ballot. As it turned out, the tribes gathered more than 1 million signatures, and so in retrospect could have qualified a constitutional amendment for the ballot.

“If we thought we could have pulled it off last year, we would have tried,” Milanovich said. “But we didn’t realize we would have such a great response from voters.”

Milanovich said that if Proposition 5 is ruled unconstitutional, tribes expect to easily win voter approval a second time for reservation casinos. Because voters already know the issue, the media campaign would not be nearly as expensive as last year’s blowout, tribal leaders predict.

Critics of Proposition 5 say they are skeptical that the new Indian gaming initiative can easily overcome constitutional issues.

“The best way to address Indian gaming is for the tribes to sit down and negotiate agreements with the state, in conformity with the existing Constitution,” said Jack Gribbon, state political director for the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union. That organization is one of two that have challenged the legality of Proposition 5.

Retired federal appellate court Judge William A. Norris, appointed by Gov. Gray Davis to negotiate casino agreements with the tribes, said a pact will be presented to tribes within weeks, if not days. But a Supreme Court ruling on Proposition 5 might affect those discussions, Norris warned.

The tribes are frustrated waiting for a resolution, and have instituted another round of television commercials designed to keep the issue alive.

“Sadly, the dream of Indian self-reliance is still being blocked by big Nevada casinos,” Indian spokesman Mark Macarro--a fixture in last year’s Proposition 5 campaign--says in a new TV ad.

The new commercials are necessary, Macarro said, “because most Californians believe Proposition 5’s landslide victory has assured that gaming on tribal lands is protected. Most people don’t realize it hasn’t yet been implemented.”

He said the timing of the new TV campaign, funded by about 40 tribes, is coincidental to the new initiative campaign, which is sponsored by four other tribes.

“But if our campaign helps theirs, we’re glad to provide the support,” Macarro said.