Replies

They do pay direct fees - they pay into a statewide emergency services fund, the general fund, a fund for non-gaming tribes, they pay for road work on state highways and roads if a casino wil increase traffic, they pay for any infrastructure california needs to upgrade/build if a casino effects it, etc... then, they pay all the other fees that business pay PLUS a fee per slot machine etc...

This is in addition to any taxes etc... However, any money earmarked as "tribal" money, which goes to support the tribal government and reservation infrastructure is not taxed. That seems fair to me...

And if the state wants to renegotiate for expanded gaming, and negotiate for more fees, I support that.

They do pay direct fees - they pay into a statewide emergency services fund, the general fund, a fund for non-gaming tribes, they pay for road work on state highways and roads if a casino wil increase traffic, they pay for any infrastructure california needs to upgrade/build if a casino effects it, etc... then, they pay all the other fees that business pay PLUS a fee per slot machine etc...

Ugh, the reality of all of this is that some of your statements are technically correct. Initial fees per machine went to a statewide emergency fund, with no further contributions required. No fees whatsoever go to the state general fund. Yes, some of the yearly fees go to county governments, but only after the majority is taken out to give to non gaming (under 350 machines) tribes. Yes, they pay fees (see previous) for infrastructure, however, in San Diego, for example, it isn't even a hundredth of what the county has paid for infrastructure improvements. Casinos have no profit, they are taxed 100 percent by the tribe, so no, they do not pay the same taxes that every other business does.

The state-tribal compacts suck in that they never dealt with the impacts of these casinos. Yes, I know, 40,000 jobs, plus the billions in building contracts, etc, has a huge impact on the state economy. But have they paid their fair share? Not even close. Do they make selective donations to try to reduce the impact? Yup, they do - only thing is that we didn't elect them to make such decisions.

Once again, you keep mentioning fees that Indian gaming concerns pay in other states, but fail to address the issue of them paying direct fees to the state in addition for healthcare, schools and other items. Here you did alude to that stating that you supported the state renegotiating additional fees. I agree with you there.

I think it should be reasonable. I'm not looking to soak anyone. Frankly, I'd rather see our state get it's fiscal house in order so it could drasticly reduce all fees, those to the Indian tribes as well.