From: Barbara E. Risling (916) 624-4462 To: Daniel Inouye
Date: 7/25/2003 Time: 5:21:46 PM
My name is Priscilla Hunter; I am the chairwoman of the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo
Indians. We appreciate this opportunity to present testimony to the U. S. Senate Indian
Affairs Committee on the issue of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
Indian gaming is working - for some tribes.........but for the Coyote Valley Band of
Pomo Indians....it is not working as well as we want.
Coyote Valley has unsuccessful tried to get a tribal-state gaming compact since 1994.
Pete Wilson, Governor of California at that time, would not negotiate with the Tribe.
Nearly 10 years ago, and two Governor's later, the Coyote Valley Tribal Council is still
trying to get the Governor of California to enter into negotiations for a fair and
equitable tribal state class III gaming compact in accordance with IGRA.
Twice the State has offered the tribe a compact; however, neither compact addressed or
includes Coyote Valley's specific input or concerns. Both of these compacts included
provisions that this Tribe feels are an infringement on our sovereignty and in violation of
the IGRA.
In 1999, Governor Davis agreed to negotiate a class III tribal-state gaming compact with
tribes, but not for individual compacts. The Governor wanted a “model" compact.
Governor Davis encouraged the tribes to negotiate as one group, for one compact because
it would be easier for him than for him to negotiate individual compacts with 60
individual tribes.
In contemplation of the compact issues, Coyote Valley looked long and hard at the long
and contentious history between Indian tribes, the United States and the State of
California. We also looked forward, toward the future of the Coyote Valley Band of
Pomo Indians. Using this as a guide the Coyote Valley Tribal Council agreed to meet
with the other tribes to discuss common issues but Coyote Valley never gave up its right
to request individual negotiations for tribal specific issues. Coyote Valley never agreed
to "automatically" accept a compact just because it is what other tribes agreed to accept.
To that end, the Coyote Valley Tribal Council adopted a resolution in support of tribal
joint negotiations with the Governor but retained our legal right to negotiate as an
individual sovereign.
However, the joint negotiation process was not followed in accordance with the
agreement between the State and the United Tribes and instead it turned into a scramble
for "whoever could get in the door first" to see the Governor's chief negotiator, Judge
Norris, to make their arguments for their own individual tribes. Coyote Valley never
saw the Judge again until the last day when he handed us a compact and said,” take it or
leave it". I remember this event clearly because we (the tribal council) had to leave the
negotiations early and return to our reservation due to a death in our family; when we
returned to the negotiation process we found that the agreed to negotiation process was
totally abandoned.
Testimony of Priscilla Hunter, Chairwoman
Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
Mendocino County, California
From: Barbara E. Risling (916) 624-4462 To: Daniel Inouye
Date: 7/25/2003 Time: 5:21:46 PM
During the joint tribal discussions, if Coyote Valley felt a provision was a violation of
IGRA and/or an infringement on sovereignty, Coyote Valley voted "no" and asked that
the vote be recorded so that the tribe could return to that issue during its own individual
negotiations with the Governor.
When the joint negotiations ended Coyote Valley asserted that reserved right, and
requested negotiations on the disputed items. However, Governor Davis refused to
acknowledge or accept that Coyote Valley had differences on his model compact.
The Coyote Valley Tribe believes that as a federally recognized tribal government, we
have a right to request individual compact negotiations with the State ON GAMING
ISSUES THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO THE COYOTE VALLEY TRIBE.
For issues of this magnitude, the Tribal Council must seek approval from the General
Council authorizing the waiver of our tribal sovereignty before we can sign this compact.
The Tribal Council took the Governor's Model Compact to our tribal members and they
voted to oppose Governor Davis' 1999 model compact because they felt it contained too
many provisions which violated our tribal sovereignty.
Coyote Valley disagreed with the Governor's model compact. Coyote Valley knows all
too well, and history has proven, that once you give up something of value (like when
tribes lost their land) you can never get it back.
We have gone to the courts and are still in the courts, and so far the federal courts have
agreed that the State can run over a tribe and tell the tribe to take his compact or leave it;
exactly what Congress was concerned with when it enacted the IGRA in 1988. We are
operating under a stay of the court while we exhaust our judicial options.
Governor Gray Davis' 1999 model compact includes taxation and revenue sharing
provisions which the tribe disagrees with.
The tribe does not disagree with the concept of sharing, and in fact, Coyote Valley has a
long history of sharing. We have longed shared our revenue and our resources with other
tribes, organizations, individuals and local governments; but the tribe strongly disagrees
that it should be mandated by a State government as to how, when, where and how much
of the tribe's money or jurisdiction it should give away.
Governor Davis believes that the State has a right to a portion of the revenue generated
by the tribes. In fact, earlier this year, Governor Davis spoke out publicly stating that he
wants his "fair share" of Indian money. After years of mismanagement, the state is in a
financial crisis and is looking for tribes to bail them out.
Testimony of Priscilla Hunter, Chairwoman
Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
Mendocino County, California
From: Barbara E Risking (916) 624-4462 To: Daniel Inouye
Date: 7/25/2003 Time: 5:21:46 PM
The State tells us to "pay our fair share". Coyote Valley is paying our fair share, but we
are doing it within our own tribal and local community because the State has never paid
this Tribe its "fair share of State revenue and resource protection".
As we have always done, Coyote Valley is still working toward our goal of providing
essential services for our tribal members such as homes, employment, education,
medical, dental, substance abuse programs, child protection services, cultural programs,
tribal police, fire and other emergency services, water, electricity and other infrastructure,
religious and cultural protections, new facilities for our tribal operations, the list goes on
and on.
With the exception of compensating the State for regulatory costs, Coyote Valley
questioned the compact provision establishing a Special Distribution Fund. The
Governor's model compact could have taxed Coyote Valley nearly 33% of its net
revenue on gaming machines for the first year.
In its response to Coyote Valley's version of the proposed compact, the Governor said:
"Changes to the 1999 compact would be a significant modification that would
alter the fundamental understanding and agreement reached by the State and
almost 60 Indian tribes. For these reasons, Coyote Valley's proposal is
unacceptable to the State."
The State's response to Coyote Valley's concern with the model compact on taxation was
"These (referring to funding for gambling addiction, local government, shortfalls
to the tribal distribution fund, and any other purpose), and other programs may be
deemed by the Legislature as servicing the public interest in addressing some of
the consequences of gaming (albeit unproven and unknown) in the State of
California. Accordingly, simply providing for the State's costs of regulating
“specific activities at the facility” is inadequate and unacceptable.”
Again, the State's argument violates the simple language of the IGRA that says taxation
by the State is illegal. The IGRA only allows assessment by the State of such
activities as are necessary to reimburse or to defray the costs of regulating gaming.
So the State was saying that the provisions in the IGRA dealing with this issue were
inadequate and unacceptable.
The IGRA says that a state cannot impose taxes on a tribe. The court agreed that the
State cannot impose taxes on a tribe UNLESS THE STATE OFFERS SOMETHING
IN RETURN. I tried to research this but I cannot find this exception in any law!
The Governor argued that the State gave tribes slot machines. The fact is the
Governor did not have the authority to give tribes anything. The tribes had to go to
the people of California and ask them to amend the California Constitution
(Proposition 1A) to allow tribes to have slot machines on their Indian lands.
Testimony of Priscilla Hunter, Chairwoman
Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
Mendocino County, California
From: Barbara E. Risling (918) 624-4462 To: Daniel Inouye
Date: 7/25/2003 Time: 5:21:48 PM
The Governor argued that the tribes can have a monopoly on slot machines. Once
again, the Governor does not have authority to give a monopoly, it is up to the
people of the State of California to determine who else might have slot machines.
As I indicated earlier, Coyote Valley is concerned with the future of our tribe. We are
concerned that once the State starts taking money away from the tribe and the courts and
the United States Congress allow it, the State will keep coming back year after year and
continue to take money and tribal jurisdiction; as its thirst and need for more money and
power will continue to grow. Eventually, the tribes will not have the money to give so
the people of the State will vote to allow non-Indian commercial gambling which will be
located in large metropolitan areas so that the State can tax them at an even higher rate.
That will leave those poor tribes that were relegated to the furthest, remotest areas of
California with no casino business. It will be even more devastating for those tribes in
remote areas that have not only agreed to give the State millions of dollars for 20 years,
but have also entered into a 20 year million dollar agreement with their local
governments.
Once those tribes stop generating money for the State and the local government what is
going to happen, how will they fulfill their legal responsibility? What will those tribes
do, especially when most of those tribes have given away not only their money but their
jurisdiction just to get the gaming they now have?
Coyote Valley does not want to be put in that situation and we are fighting hard to
prevent that from happening to this Tribe.
II. Revenue Sharing with other Tribes
One of the purposes of IGRA is to provide a statutory basis for a tribe to use gaming as a
form of economic development, to become self-sufficient, and to build a strong tribal
government. The procedural process outlined in the IGRA is for INDIVIDUAL tribes
to follow in pursuing gaming on its own Indian land.
Coyote Valley believes that the IGRA does not apply nor was it ever intended to provide
benefits to tribes that were not interested and do not want to conduct gaming on its own
Indian land.
Governor Gray Davis has determined the intent of IGRA is that those tribes that operate
gaming shall share the tribe's revenue with those tribes that do not or can not operate
gaming. Coyote Valley believes that the intent of the Governor's mandate and in fact the
Governor told the tribes in his first meeting with the tribes that revenue sharing with
non-gaming tribes would be an incentive to keep those tribes out of gaming, thereby
successfully keeping those tribes from exercising their right to become independent, and
economically self-sufficient. Instead now they are becoming more dependent on the
revenue sharing money they received and on other tribes.
Testimony of Priscilla Hunter, Chairwoman
Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
Mendocino County, California
From: Barbara E. Risting (916) 624-4462 To: Daniel Inouye
Date: 7/25/2003 Time 5:21:46 PM
The response by the State to Coyote Valley's concerns about revenue sharing with other
tribes was "these provisions provide some economic parity amongst the gaming and non-
gaming tribes"; It was a material deviation from the agreement reached by the other
tribes in the state and therefore the State denied Coyote Valley's request.
The Court read IGRA to mean that "all" tribes must benefit from an individual tribe's
economic development and decided that
"The State did not lack good faith when it insisted that Coyote Valley adopt it
(revenue sharing with other tribes), as a precondition to entering a Tribal-State
compact."
Another provision Coyote Valley disagreed to, is the 1999 compact's labor provision.
Coyote Valley has an approved personnel police for the protection for all Coyote Valley
employees. We believe in the protection of our employees and currently strive to provide
employment benefits and protections equal to or greater than those benefits of existing
employers in our area.
Governor Davis decided long before many of the tribes built their gaming casinos, that
those tribes would not be fair to their employees, so the Governor mandated that the
tribes adopt tribal law to allow access and organizational rights for unions to their
gaming establishment and other related structures. THE GOVERNOR'S CONCERN
WAS NOT FOR THE PROTECTION OF TRIBAL EMPLOYEES, IN FACT,
PROTECTION OF EMPLOYEE RIGHTS WAS NEVER A CONCERN IN THE
NEGOTIATIONS, THE ONLY DISCUSSION IN THE NEGOTIATIONS, WAS THE
GOVERNOR'S POLICAL CONCERN THAT UNIONS GET A FOOTHOLD IN
TRIBAL GAMING FACILITIES.
Worthy of note is that the tribes themselves, placed in the "model compact" provisions
which includes issues dealing with public and workplace health, safety, and liability.
Once again Coyote Valley is not opposed to labor unions and in fact many of our tribal
members are members of labor unions or were members at one time and the Tribe may be
interested in working directly with individual unions in the future, but ONCE AGAIN,
WE DO NOT WANT THE STATE TO MANDATE THAT WE HAVE TO
ALLOW UNIONS TO ORGANIZE ON OUR LAND, NOR DO WE WANT THIS
PROVISION AS A CONDITION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE STATE WILL
GIVE US A COMPACT. FURTHER, THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
ACT DOES NOT APPLY TO TRIBES.
The Governor's model compact states:
"Notwithstanding any other provision of this Compact, this Compact shall be null
and void if, on or before October 13, 1999, the Tribe has not provided an
agreement or other procedure acceptable to the State for addressing
Testimony of Priscilla Hunter, Chairwoman
Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
Mendocino County, California
|