Valley View and Harrah’s Rincon casinos each want at least 2,000 slots

By TERI FIGUEROA - Staff Writer | Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Now that a federal appeals court says two North County tribes can sue the state of California in a bid to add hundreds of slot machines, the tribes can tell a judge why the state should ante up permission.

But any legal decision that could put more slots in the casinos, and maybe more traffic on the roads to the local gaming houses, is a long way off.

Thus far in the cases —- Rincon sued in 2004, San Pasqual in 2006 —- the courts haven’t looked at the actual issues, the meat of the tribes’ arguments. Rincon runs Harrah’s Rincon Resort and Casino and San Pasqual operates Valley View Casino, both of which are in the Valley Center area.

“The court hasn’t even addressed the issues, let alone decided it,” said Howard Dickstein, a tribal attorney who added that the case is “years off from a resolution.”

At the heart of the issue is the statewide number of slot machines allowed under a 1999 state agreement that gave the tribes the OK for gaming.

The number of allowed slot machines, which state officials argue has been reached, is the subject of much disagreement among tribal lawyers, the governor and the state’s legislative analyst. The state maintains the agreement sets the number of slot machines allowed at 62,000 divided up among each of the state’s gaming tribes, of which there are about 60.

California maintains all 62,000 licenses for slot machines are taken and that by the state’s count, there are no more licenses available to give to Rincon and San Pasqual.

Under the 1999 agreement, no tribe can have more than 2,000 slots. Some have far less.

Rincon and San Pasqual say the state’s formula for determining which tribes get slot machines and how many, is too restrictive.

The two tribes each have about 1,600 slots; both want to bump that number to at least 2,000.

That battle has remained untouched by the courts, as it first had to deal with the legal logjam over whether the tribes could sue.

The federal trial courts said no, not unless all the other California tribes with casinos also joined in since they were all party to the same 1999 state agreement.

But the federal appeals court rejected that finding.

In August, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said the Rincon tribe could sue the state. And earlier this week, the appeals court handed down the same ruling for San Pasqual.

Some tribes, Pechanga and Pala among them, have renegotiated their deals with the state. In exchange for permission to exceed 2,000 slot machines, those tribes agreed to pay a premium price for that privilege. That money goes into the state’s general fund.

Rincon, which wants 2,500 slots, balked at such a deal with the state and sued over that, too. Earlier this year, a federal judge called the premium price for the machines a unfair tax. That battle is now in the federal appeals court.

Contact staff writer Teri Figueroa at (760) 740-5442 or tfigueroa@nctimes.com.
(c) North County Times

Posted on October 8th, 2008 by hunwut
Filed under: Gaming, Reservations, State Government