At least two prominent California Indian tribes are implementing dispute resolution provisions of their tribal-state casino compacts, an initial step in what may result in a federal lawsuit over allege failure of the state to regulate cardrooms, sources say.
The Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation in Yolo County and Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians of San Diego County contend the state has failed to enforce state laws and a constitutional amendment giving tribes the exclusive right to offer banked and percentage games.
What are referred to as “meet and confer” provisions of tribal-state compacts are a roughly 40-day period of “good faith negotiations” required before tribes or the state can file a lawsuit in U.S. District Court over an alleged breach of the compact.
Sources say Yocha Dehe and Viejas filed notice with the state last week. The two tribes are members of a coalition of seven tribes that for more than six years have confronted state regulators over cardroom rules. They have threatened to sue the state over their grievances.
Yoche Dehe and Viejas declined last week to confirm they initiated the “meet and confer” process.
“If the governor were in a meet and confer process with the tribes and that information got out, the governor would think it was a bad faith attempt by the tribes,” says a source who requested anonymity.
But Viejas and Yocha Dehe both weighed in on the dispute.
“For over six years, Viejas has been engaged in efforts to secure state enforcement of California law and banked card game exclusivity guaranteed to the tribes under the constitution and executed compacts against illegal gaming operated by the cardrooms,” says Tuari Bigknife, Viejas attorney general.
“Those efforts continue in earnest on many fronts. At this time, I am not authorized to provide further details on Viejas’ efforts.”
“The Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation has consistently objected to the illegal operation and advertisement of house-banked card games … in California cardrooms,” Yocha Dehe Chairman Anthony Roberts said in a statement. “These activities blatantly violate state law, the state constitution and the state’s legal commitment to tribal nations under mutually beneficial gaming compacts.
“For (six years) Yocha Dehe and other tribes have, to no avail, repeatedly called on the state to enforce the clear laws the California voters and our legislature have put in place. After all these years, the cardrooms continue, with the state’s sanction, to break those laws.
“We are deeply frustrated by the lack of action by authorities to curb these overt illegal activities and support the efforts of tribes to seek resolution in the courts.”
Two other tribes in the coalition – the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians near San Diego and Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians near Santa Barbara – earlier this month filed a lawsuit in San Diego County Superior Court alleging cardrooms and player-banking firms are violating state law and the constitution in offering banking and percentage card games.
Requests to discuss the dispute with Joginder Dhillon, Gov. Jerry Brown’s tribal liaison, were intercepted by the governor’s press office, which has consistently refused to comment.
“Again, I don’t anticipate we will be weighing in on this,” Brian Ferguson, Brown’s deputy press secretary, said in an email.
The Rincon/Chumash lawsuit names Hustler Casino, Commerce Casino, Bicycle Casino, Hawaiian Garden Casino, Hollywood Park Casino, Oceans 11 Casino, Players Poker Club, Celebrity Casinos and Sahara Dunes Casino. It also cites several unnamed third-party proposition player firms (TPPPs) hired by the clubs to deal and bank the games.
The tribes are seeking an injunction preventing cardrooms from playing banked games. They are also seeking damages. They contend $18 million a year is lost to cardrooms by players that would otherwise patronize tribal casinos.
The cardrooms say they are operating in compliance with regulations and game rules established by California’s politically bifurcated regulatory system: an adjudicatory Gambling Control Commission (GCC) under the authority of the governor and an enforcement and investigatory Bureau of Gambling Control (BGC) under Attorney General Xavier Becerra.
“These tribes continually make false statements about the legality of our business in an effort to shut down the cardroom industry, which supports our cities and provides living wage jobs to thousands of people,” cardroom owner Ryan Stone told the San Diego Union Tribune.
“Both player-dealer games and blackjack-style games have been approved by the California Department of Justice and played at California cardrooms without harm to or complaint from the public for decades,” cardroom owner Kyle Kirkland told the Union Tribune.
But both the GCC and BGC have been working with tribal casino and cardroom operators in efforts to get game rules in compliance with state penal and business codes, particularly laws prohibiting blackjack and other banked games and requiring “systematic and continuous” rotation of the dealer position.
The dealer position is seldom rotated in what are known as “California/Asian” games, versions of blackjack, pai gow poker and other games normally played in Nevada and tribal casinos.
BGC Director Stephanie Shimazu, in September announced a crackdown on cardroom games, saying the bureau “plans to rescind game rules approvals for games too similar to 21/blackjack that are prohibited by state law.”
“We will notify cardrooms and defer enforcement for a specified period of time to enable cardrooms to prepare for this action,” she said.
Shimazu also said the bureau also will “promulgate regulations to address rotation of the player- dealer” and examine cardroom contracts with TPPP firms hired to bank the games.
Austin Lee, executive director of Communities for California Cardrooms, questioned why “such a drastic change” in bureau policy would be adopted without industry and public input, noting cardrooms often generate 60 percent or more of a municipality’s tax revenue.
“We are not challenging the right of a business to operate, but rather the non-compliance with California law,” Rincon Chairman Bo Mazzetti says. “If (state regulators) enforced the current laws that exist, we would not have taken this action.”
