Another Stereotype of the Month entry:

Rob's reply
>> A national pattern is emerging in areas far distant from Indian reservations. <<

A "pattern"? It's hard to say the four official off-reservation casinos constitute a pattern. But as we'll see, Willman isn't talking primarily about areas distant from reservations. She's mixing and matching unrelated cases to attack gaming tribes.

>> Local elected officials are ill-equipped, unprepared and loathe to ever disagree or interfere with "economic development" desires of an Indian tribe. <<

Actually, local officials feel free to disagree and interfere with a tribe's economic development. I venture to say that no tribe has ever built a casino without local disagreement and interference.

>> Community residents tend to walk around shell-shocked wondering what happened. <<

No, they tend to walk around complaining after several years of vociferous campaigning against a casino. Willman's picture of innocent and naive community residents is a flat-out fiction.

>> Where did this tribal government come from? Folks wake up to a tribal reservation and fully equipped tribal government where only a tribal casino was contemplated. <<

Ridiculous. The whole point of off-reservation casinos, the point every critic harps upon, is the taking of land into trust far from a tribe's reservation. Critics harp upon this precisely because the land taken into trust becomes sovereign territory under the tribal government.

Again, every critic understands this. This understanding is the crux of every campaign against an off-rez casino. I'd love to see the situation where a local community was deceived into thinking a land-into-trust decision wouldn't involve the expansion of tribal authority over the new tribal land. I don't think such a situation exists.

>> At this point in the process, no one sees the actual tribal government coming to town. <<

Where exactly is this simpleminded, childlike community? Willman probably can't say because it exists only in her imagination.

This is a variation of the age-old stereotype of Indians lurking behind a tree. Somehow those dirty, underhanded Indians have disguised the fact that a tribal casino runs under a tribal government. Watch out...the next thing you'll know, the skulking savages will be murdering you and torturing your wives and children!

>> The casino literally just opens its doors once it has complied with federal law and secured a state-tribal gaming compact. <<

First a tribe has to be federally recognized. If it's not already, the recognition process can take a decade or more.

Then there's the land-into-trust process, which is presumably part of complying with federal law. That can take several more years.

Signing a state compact involves getting the approval of a state's governor and legislature and the Secretary of the Interior. Those are three conduits for a local community's making its voice heard. This process also can take several years.

Then the tribe has to actually build a casino, which can take a couple more years. After completing all these steps, then and only then can a casino "literally" just open its doors.

>> 1. Revenue from a tribal casino is used to acquire land areas adjacent to the operating casino. <<

Another fiction. First, acquiring land adjacent to an existing reservation has nothing to do with off-reservation shopping. Off-reservation shopping means finding a site far from the reservation, not next to it. Whether Willman realizes it or not, she just violated her thesis. Her "pattern" of far-from-the-rez activity isn't a pattern at all.

Second, why would a tribe with an existing casino acquire land adjacent to its reservation for another casino? Why not just expand the existing casino on the existing land? If there's ever been a case of a tribe acquiring adjacent land to build a second casino, I don't know of it. That's why I say this is a fiction.

>> Lynwood, Illinois and Rhonert Park, California are at the front end of this process. <<

The Ho-Chunk proposal for a Lynwood casino is a standard off-reservation case. Neither the BIA nor Congress has approved the Ho-Chunk's land-into-trust application, so the proposal is just that—a proposal—so far. This has nothing to do with taking adjacent land into trust and nothing to do with surprising Lynwood with the establishment of a tribal government. Everyone understands the consequences of this proposal so there are no surprises lurking.

The Graton Rancheria is in a similar position with regard to its proposed Rohnert Park casino. It hasn't taken the land into trust or signed a compact, so the proposed casino remains a hopeful wish with no substance to it yet. But it's very clearly the Rohnert Park government knows what it's dealing with, since it's already signed a deal with the tribe to receive a percentage of the revenues should the casino be built. Willman's claim that the casino, if it's ever built, is a stalking horse for an unsuspected tribal government is simply false.

>> 2. Land adjacent to the class III casino is acquired to establish a larger land base under tribal control. <<

It's clear Willman doesn't know what the hell she's talking about. She's confusing two things: reservation shopping, which involves land parcels far from an existing reservation, and economic development on land near reservations.

If she does know what she's talking about, she's intentionally deceiving her readers. Either way, you can't trust her as far as you can spit.

Confusing land into trust with reservation shopping
>> The Santa Ynez Valley is maturing through this stage. <<

If so, neither the Ho-Chunks nor the Graton Rancheria will ever go through this "stage." Why not? Because their proposals don't involve expanding on land next to their reservations.

>> Additional land is used for either expanded gambling enterprises or other tribal, tax-exempt businesses that operate at a significant advantage over neighboring non-tribal businesses. <<

Or for projects that aren't businesses at all, such as housing developments or cultural centers. That's the case with the Chumash in Santa Ynez.

>> 3. This process of expanding the tribal land base is repeated annually, with annual gambling revenue generated by the primary casino. <<

Annually? Not likely, since land-into-trust applications generally take years. I doubt any tribe has ever taken additional land into trust on a yearly basis.

>> As the land base increases, a tribal government headquarters appears within the land base, and the need for a tribal court, and subsequent tribal law enforcement emerges. <<

Again, a complete fiction. If a tribe buys land next to its existing reservation, the tribal government is already there. It's right down the road, usually less than a mile or two away. It's impossible for the tribe's expanding jurisdiction to be a surprise to anyone alive.

>> A "satellite" reservation has then been effectively constructed. <<

A "satellite" reservation next to an existing reservation isn't much of a satellite. In fact, the reservation in this case is still a single reservation. It has just expanded slightly in size.

>> 4. A very serious presence of a tribal government with governing authority over "Indian Country" or a "reservation" asserts its voice in all projects adjacent to the tribal land base. <<

If we're talking about new land adjacent to existing land, that's the way it was before. The tribe could assert its voice on the projects adjacent to its land, and now it can continue asserting its voice.

>> 5. Large areas of a county or region have morphed into a separate tribal government, a separate "nation," operating under its own rules and not those of the host state or county. <<

Fiction upon fiction. First, there are no annual land-into-trust approvals. Second, no land-into-trust application is for a large parcel of land. It takes several years to approve a land-into-trust application for even a small parcel of land. Therefore, there's little or no possibility of "large areas" morphing into a tribal nation.

>> 6. With hefty supportive resources of federal subsidies, gambling revenues, special preferences and tax-exemptions, tribal enterprises thrive and non-tribal enterprises within the region wither and die. <<

Tribes don't receive federal subsidies or special preferences. They do receive treaty benefits, which are a separate matter. See Indian Rights = Special Rights for details.

>> 7. Failed businesses and additional properties are generally acquired by a tribe <<

More fictions.

>> The most stunning examples of the above pattern are present in Madison and Oneida Counties, NY (Oneida Indian Tribe) and Snohomish County, WA (Tulalip Tribe). <<

The Tulalip case is instructive. There the state government, not the federal government, passed HB 1322. This Washington state law said

This has nothing to do with the land-into-trust process and nothing to do with reservation shopping. Willman is combining several different issues and falsely labeling them "reservation shopping" to scare people. Readers take note.

If Willman doesn't like tribal land being made tax-emempt at the state level, she should stump for a different governor and legislators. Because they're the ones who passed HB 1322. The tribe didn't force the state to pass the law and it can repeal the law whenever it wants.

Let's recap. The Ho-Chunk and Graton Rancheria cases are examples of reservation shopping but not of adjacent land-buying. The Chumash, Tulalip, and Oneida cases are examples of tribes expanding their land base but not of reservation shopping. Only the Chumash and Oneida cases involve land-into-trust proposals and neither proposal is guaranteed to succeed. The Oneida case is the only case involving a relatively large amount of land. As far as I know, none of these three tribes have stated a desire to build a new casino on the newly acquired land.

Most important, the local communities are fully aware of what's happening in all five cases. They understand that if the land-into-trust proposals succeed, the land will become part of each tribe's reservation and will fall under the auspices of each tribe's government. Willman's claim that communities are unaware of the possible expansion of tribal jurisdiction is a bald-faced lie.

Where's the pattern?
>> The pattern is in full motion in the quiet hills of the Santa Ynez Valley, CA. <<

This is yet another case of a tribe proposing to take land into trust—not a case of reservation shopping. The Chumash have asserted that they want the land for a museum or cultural center—not for a casino.

Since this is just a proposal, the "pattern is in full motion" translates to "the process has barely started and may well not happen." So where's the so-called pattern?

Willman gives us two cases of reservation shopping, two cases of land-into-trust expansion, and one case of land-not-into-trust expansion. Meanwhile, 550-odd tribes are generally not doing anything similar. So where exactly is the threat to local communities? How is tribal sovereignty as a whole a threat to state sovereignty?

>> Is governmental co-existence, balance and preservation of community values possible? <<

By "community values," Willman means the non-Indian community, not the Indian community. The Indians' values don't matter to her.

>> Can state sovereignty hold its own with tribal sovereignty? <<

States are so dominant over tribes these days that it isn't funny. But Willman's claim that tribes are about to overrun states is funny. In fact, it's a sick joke at the tribes' expense.

>> Elaine Willman, MPA, is Chair of Citizens Equal Rights Alliance (CERA) a national organization of community education groups and citizens in 25 states who reside within or near federally recognized Indian reservations. <<

CERA is a right-wing organization dedicated to the destruction of Indian rights and sovereignty. Don't be fooled by its lies and propaganda.

Related links
The critics of Indian gaming—and why they're wrong
The facts about Indian gaming—reservation shopping

Readers respond
"Such areas can fall under jurisdiction of a tribal government, but they cannot 'have morphed' into a tribal government."

Join our Native/pop culture blog and comment   Sign up to receive our FREE newsletter via e-mail   See the latest Native American stereotypes in the media   Political and social developments ripped from the headlines

. . .