PROVIDENCE, R.I. – After years of frustration, the Narragansett Indians of Rhode Island now have support from an official state commission for one of their key goals, a state-wide referendum to allow casino gaming. The commission called for a vote on November 4.
But the report also raises another hurdle. If voters allow a casino, the Narragansetts will have to compete against other interests for the right to operate it. The commission recommended that the vote set up an independent regulatory body to select a development proposal. It also said that the potential host community should also approve the proposal.
Chief Sachem Matthew Thomas, head of the Narragansetts, hailed some of the “excellent conclusions” in the report, but sharply criticized its plan for a referendum. He called the set-up a “blind vote,” that would take choice of the final casino proposal out of the hands of the voters and give it to “five men appointed by the politicians.”
The Commission report still has to be acted on by the Rhode Island General Assembly. Thomas indicated that a vigorous debate lies ahead on framing the referendum question.
This long trail to a potentially lucrative casino comes from a unique legal situation. The Narragansetts say they are the only federally recognized tribe specifically barred by Congressional legislation from taking advantage of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).
One hurdle on this trail fell on April 1 when Rhode Island’s Special House Commission to Study Gaming issued its final report. The Commission, set up by the state House of Representatives in March 2002, recommended a statewide referendum on whether or not to allow one “destination-style” casino resort. The Commission said it believed the economic benefits of such a resort would outweigh the negative impacts.
The Narragansett tribe has pushed for such a statewide referendum for years. It has also made a detailed casino proposal to the southern Rhode Island town of West Warwick, which approved the plan in a June 1999 referendum by a two-to-one margin.
State law requires the General Assembly to ratify such a local referendum. In the course of the Narragansett push for Assembly approval last spring, opponents of gaming substituted the measure establishing the Study Commission. After a year of hearings and research, however, the Commission said that in the final balance, a casino could be good for the state economy.
Its report stated, “the Commission concurs with the strong conclusion of a study done by Adam Rose and Associates: ‘A sufficient number of properly done studies, as well as adjustments in the findings of some flawed studies, enable ? [us] to state the conclusion: a new casino, of even limited attractiveness and placed in a market that is not already saturated, will yield positive economic benefits on net to its host economy.’”
The Rhode Island legislators also endorsed a finding of the National Gambling Impact Study Commission that “within the casino industry, destination resorts tend to create more and better quality jobs than other kinds of casinos.” They cited a finding of the national body “that, especially in economically depressed communities, casino gambling has demonstrated the ability to generate economic development through the creation of quality jobs.”
The Rhode Island report also cited the importance of a strong state regulatory system for a future gaming industry. It said, “In the event Rhode Island enters the casino gambling market, a strict and comprehensive statute dealing with casino governance similar to those in other states would need to be enacted.
“If the voters approve a referendum calling for moving forward with a process to accept applications to develop expanded gaming in the state, the General Assembly requires that an independent regulatory body with broad licensing and enforcement powers must be created within such a statute to provide regulatory oversight and vigilance.”
The Commission report devoted a great deal of attention to “problem gamblers,” a number of whom it said could already be found in the state. It recommended that a portion of future gaming revenues should go to the study and treatment of pathological gaming.
The report posed a series of tasks for any applicants for casino development. It said potential bidders should sponsor research on the costs and benefits of their proposal, including studies of competition from other states and types of gaming, of fiscal arrangements such as state taxation and of the burden problem gambling might place on state services.
Chief Sachem Thomas complained that the Commission treated his tribe unfairly in opening the door to other bidders. He said his tribe had worked 10 years to develop a casino proposal and was the only developer to have the support of a locality. He questioned the constitutionality of the Commission recommendation that he said would supersede the existing state law sending the West Warwick referendum to the General Assembly for ratification.
Thomas also took a swipe at two possible competitors, the Lincoln Park Greyhound Track and the Newport Jai Alai. He observed that the state Lottery Commission had recently approved installation of 1,300 video lottery terminals (VLTS) at Lincoln Park even though, he said, the racino was under federal investigation. He also noted that Lincoln Park was owned by Wembley plc, the British gaming corporation. He said that the Newport Jai Alai was owned by a Palm Beach, Fla. family.
By contrast, he said, the Narragansetts were the indigenous people of Rhode Island. He said the tribe had always been public about its financial backers, now the prominent gaming corporation Harrah’s Entertainment.
Although IGRA and the 1987 U.S. Supreme Court Cabazon decision would ordinarily confirm the right of a sovereign tribe to operate a casino in a state which allowed other casino gaming, the Narragansetts observe with some bitterness that they fall under a unique exclusion. A history on the tribal Web site calls it “The Midnight Rider.”
According to the Narragansett account, “On Sept. 30, 1996, a rider was placed on the Omnibus Appropriations Bill that stripped the Tribe of their rights under IGRA. This bill, totally unrelated to Indian Affairs, reopened our Government after it had been effectively shutdown. The so-called budget bill had no hearings on this issue, and further was veto-proof because of its larger purpose to reopen our Government. The rider, passed in the middle of the night without notification, made the Narragansett Indians the only federally recognized tribe in the nation (there are 558) not allowed to exercise their IGRA rights.
“The legislative intent of the rider was to transfer jurisdictional control over the casino project from the federal government to the state government of Rhode Island. The Tribe would then be forced to pursue a casino as if they were any other private entity in the State. This meant seeking the approval of the people in a statewide referendum.”
If the General Assembly approves the referendum, Rhode Island will be the second New England state to vote on casino gaming in this year’s elections. An initiative question is already set to appear on the Maine ballot to authorize a tribal casino.