California | Casino Stalker | Opinion
Editorial: Off-reservation gaming project unfair to other tribes



Artist's rendering of the proposed North Fork Rancheria casino. Image from North Fork Casino Environmental Impact Statement

Newspaper opposes off-reservation casino for the North Fork Rancheria, saying it would be unfair to the Tule River Tribe and others in California:
All Indian casinos in the state are on land that was in trust or part of the Reservation prior to 1988 as required by law. The Tule River Tribe wanted to place its casino off the reservation when it was first developed, but that was not allowed.

Now, if Prop. 48 passes, new tribes that want to open a casino could do so on land that is not on the reservation. It would open up the floodgates to new casinos up and down the state and those casinos could be along highways, or in the middle of towns. There are already more than 50 casinos in the state. Those new casinos would be much more accessible and would take away business from the existing casinos that are not as accessible. That could create a financial burden on tribes like the Tule River Tribe.

We do not feel changing the rules now is fair to those tribes who were required to build their casinos on reservations. Therefore, we recommend a no vote on Prop. 48.

Get the Story:
Prop. 48 would open up casino floodgates (The Porterville Recorder 10/30)

California Court of Appeal Decision:
Picayune Rancheria v. Brown (September 24, 2014)

Bureau of Indian Affairs Documents:
Press Release | Fact Sheet: North Fork Rancheria Decision | Section 20 Determination: North Fork Rancheria

Related Stories:
Editorial: Keep tribal casinos in California on existing Indian land (10/30)
Pechanga Band chair featured in ads against North Fork casino (10/29)