Barona Bingo

California has long been a paradise for poker players. There are dozens of poker rooms operating around the state, and the list includes some of the largest venues in the world. So, it’s understandably annoying that the Golden State can’t get together on legal online poker.

However, California’s size and unique relationship to gambling have created a situation with many stakeholders in conflict with one another. These groups are each powerful enough to stall out most forward progress on the issue.

Too many online casinos to Pokerstar Para 32 Bits count, is the name of the game for this industry.Pokerstar Para 32 Bits Ranging from the well-established sites to many fly-by-night sites, it’s easy to get confused and overwhelmed with the choices. At Barona Resort & Casino, our goal is to make life easier for our guests, and nowhere is that more apparent than in our Concierge Lounge. Located on the 1st floor near Barona’s Business Center, our courteous and professional concierges will gladly assist you in making hotel, luxury spa, or San Diego golf reservations, securing tickets for. The former manager of bingo operations on the Barona Indian Reservation in Lakeside pleaded guilty Wednesday in Superior Court to four counts of felony grand theft for fixing bingo games. 4.2K likes 29 talking about this. A NEW GAME FROM THE GREATEST BINGO MINDS! Prepare yourselves, veterans and new players alike, to score.

As frustrating as it is, the plain truth is that there’s no real momentum for online poker in California at this time. For the moment, the only option available to Californians is sweepstakes poker sites.

PlayCA is your one-stop-shop for all the latest on California’s progress (or lack thereof) toward legal online poker. As developments occur, we will be sure to update you on what’s happening, what’s moving, and when you might be able to play real money poker online.

Play online poker in California at Global Poker

Sweepstakes poker

For right now, the only legal online poker option available in California is to play on sweepstakes poker sites. The top sweepstakes site active today is Global Poker, but let’s start by discussing what a sweepstakes site is and how to spot one.

What are sweepstakes, and how do they work?

Everyone has played sweepstakes at one point or another. Whether it’s the Monopoly game at McDonald’s or the Publishers Clearing House giveaways, we have all played for the minute chance at great wealth or prizes. For most, it may seem doubtful that these sites are anything but scams.

However, the good news is that they must, by law, award their advertised prizes to be a legal entity in most US states. As hard as it may be to believe, someone in the U.S. is winning a boat by sticking game pieces to a board that they acquired in a drive-through. The PCH Prize Patrol does go around awarding people $7,000 per week for life.

So, the first absolute must for legal sweepstakes is that someone has to win the prize. The second concrete rule is that it must be possible to win the grand prize without spending a dime. Sweepstakes must maintain a path to the jackpot that does not involve any kind of purchase whatsoever.

That rule is why any sweepstakes you play will have the disclaimer that there is “no purchase to play.” The organizers are not being generous, if they were to require any kind of payment, the sweepstakes would immediately become classified as a lottery, and would, therefore, be illegal in many states.

How does Global Poker work in CA?

Those two rules might seem to end the possibility of online poker play. However, sites like Global Poker have found a way to stay within compliance of the law to offer great poker action.

Since Global is the main sweepstakes poker site, we will discuss its specifics. However, be sure to look for similar rules at other sites, should you choose to play them. If there are no mechanisms designed to ensure compliance with the rules above, then the site is likely not kosher.

Global’s first bit of compliance comes in the form of its dual-currency system. For the convertible cash on-site to be eligible for withdrawal and transition into actual dollars, it cannot be possible to buy the site’s cash equivalent.

Instead, Global allows players to buy however much of its play currency as they wish. This currency is called Gold Coins, and neither has monetary value nor can be withdrawn from the site.

With most Gold Coin purchases, a player can also receive a quantity of the other currency, $weeps Coins, for free. This currency can be converted into a withdrawable instrument at the player’s discretion. Both currencies are valid for playing Global Poker games, although never at the same time.

However, it is also necessary for Global Poker to have a pathway that requires no purchase whatsoever. So, it is possible to receive $weeps Coins by sending a handwritten request to the Global Poker corporate office. This request must be in your handwriting and verifiable as your request.

Once they receive and verify the request, they will put a small amount of $weeps Coins into your account onsite. These coins are ready for play at that point.

Why legal online poker in California is stuck in limbo

Of course, with all the news about gambling expansions in other states, Californians could justifiably be confused about why the state cannot get going with fully legal online poker. After all, neither poker nor gambling, in general, are taboo commodities in the Golden State. There are dozens of poker venues scattered across the land, and most of them have steady player bases.

Too many fingers in the pie

The problem is that there are four main groups of people who have a stake in any kind of gambling expansion in California. These four groups are often at odds with one another and cannot agree on how any expansion would work.

There have been legislative movements to expand online gambling in the state since 2008. All of them have failed because each major stakeholder (and its political influence) goes a different direction.

The first group that has to be in any discussion along these lines are the Native American tribes within the state. California’s tribal interests earn billions of dollars annually from their land-based casinos.

These casinos are the only true venues of their kind in the state. The tribes vigorously defend both their exclusive right to offer the games that they do and their position at the table for any future gambling revenues. They argue that they have what amounts to a right of first refusal because of their sovereignty and compacts with the state.

Meanwhile, the California cardrooms feel as though they would be the natural stewards of online poker in the state. Given how much revenue they generate for their localities, it’s an argument that cannot be immediately dismissed. For instance, 70% of the City of Commerce’s tax revenue comes from Commerce Casino.

The state’s horse tracks also want to have their piece of any new pie that comes about. Horse racing in California, as is the case in other states, is declining, and the state’s industry has enough political clout to argue that it needs online poker to bolster its bottom lines and save the industry.

Finally, the state government itself, via the state lottery, might want to keep the management and resulting profits from online poker in-house, so to speak. Since other state lotteries often find themselves as the de facto regulators for gambling in the state, it’s not outside the realm of possibility that the lottery would oversee online poker.

Lack of legislative precedent

Online poker expansion in California is also hurt by the fact that, for all of its cardrooms and activity, there isn’t much in the way of laws, rules, and regulations overseeing the industry. The only major requirement for most cardroom venues in the state is that the games must generally be banked by players, rather than the rooms themselves.

However, cardrooms have found a way to sidestep this requirement and offer games that go far beyond poker itself. By employing proposition players, they have found a way to host all kinds of card-based games, including poker, baccarat, and pai gow poker.

The cardrooms have used this loophole for decades now without any real pushback from the government. Attempts to crack down have not yielded any measurable results

This is a problem for lawmakers because of how laws are typically written. Most bills build off the existing legal environment and seek to confine the change to a specific portion of the law. Because there is no law to change in California, lawmakers are fairly stuck.

A broad approach won’t work, either. A law to address the loophole would, in the eyes of tribal interests, legitimize the existence of the loophole in the first place. Since tribal interests feel that they are the only legitimate gaming in the state, they have no interest in seeing a legislative affirmation for the activities of the cardrooms.

At the same time, legislators cannot simply close the loophole, either. The cardrooms are far too valuable as sources of tax revenue for their localities.

All the while, the cardrooms keep hiring prop players and spreading games, while the tribes offer their activities and fume about the cardrooms. It’s a mess, and there’s no clear way out.

Options available in Nevada

For the most part, Californians are relegated to playing on Global Poker or other sweepstakes sites if they want to play online. However, we’d be remiss if we didn’t mention the opportunity to the east of the state.

As it turns out, traditional gambling mecca Nevada also has online poker. Any Californian who wishes to slip across the state lines can take part in the Silver State’s offerings if they choose.

The only site of note in Nevada is WSOP.com. The other site in the state, Real Gaming Online Poker, suffers from extremely low traffic and terrible instability in terms of maintaining active games.

As the online arm of the world-famous tournament brand, WSOP.com has great action, especially for tournaments, and even offers the opportunity to play for actual WSOP bracelets exclusively onsite.

However, it is necessary to travel across state lines to play. So, the feasibility of playing on a Nevada poker site will vary according to each Californian’s living situation. But it bears mention as an option until California can get itself sorted out concerning online poker.

Online poker vs. live poker

Whether you are playing on Global Poker, another sweepstakes site, or have made the journey to Nevada to play, you need to know about some key differences between playing poker live and playing online.

Speed

The biggest difference between online and live poker is the sheer speed discrepancy. Online poker tables can sometimes deal more than 100 hands per hour, while the fastest live tables would probably only be able to manage 30 or so.

Part of the speed found online comes from the fact there is no live dealer. Also, you will find online is the use of a play clock. In most cases, you will have only a few seconds to make your decisions.

While it is possible to ask for more time, this feature is always limited and finite. By contrast, it is not uncommon to allow for some several-minute delays in live poker if a player has a big decision to make. Only a request from another player for a “clock” can set a hard-and-fast time limit on a live player’s decision.

Because the online game deals roughly three times the number of hands that a live game can, you will have three times as many hands to see and decisions to make. It’s also important to realize that the dreaded moments of bad luck in poker (bad beats and coolers) will also happen far more often online.

This last bit is why there is perpetual grumbling in the poker community about players receiving unfair deals or playing in rigged games. However, given that the sites use random number generators to shuffle, the online game is fairer than its live counterpart. The truth is simply that more hands mean more chances for bad luck to occur.

Skill

The speed of the game and the increased number of hands has also had a profound effect on the level of play that you will find online. Because they get so much practice, online players at any given buy-in level are usually far more proficient than live players at the same level.

You should probably start at a lower level than you usually do when you first visit a site. A winning player at a particular blind level in live games could quickly find be chopped up by the increased competition if they play in the same game online.

Until you get used to the speed, pace of play, and overall proficiency of your competition, it is highly recommended that you take it easy to begin. Nothing is stopping you from moving up later on.

Multi-tabling

Finally, it’s important to note that the physical realities of playing live mean that you can only play on a single table at any time. Online poker players do not suffer from a similar limitation, and many play in multiple games at once.

If you choose to play on multiple tables, realize that, along with the potential winnings, the potential for poor variance and losing also increases. If you have any reservations about or known leaks in your game, it’s probably a good idea to hold off on playing multiple tables at once until you hammer out the rough spots.

Also, if you happen to notice that one or more of the players at your table are also playing elsewhere, it’s a double-edged sword for you. On the one hand, they are likely to be distracted and/or unable to keep track of every detail in the game at hand.

However, multi-tablers who you often see tend to be pretty good players themselves. After all, they felt confident enough in their game to divide their attention.

Popular real money poker games

You can find many of your favorite poker games in online poker rooms. Most of the games from your childhood and friendly games are playable on poker sites.

There’s no question that the most popular game in the world is no-limit Texas hold’em. Regardless of what online poker application you choose, you will be able to find an NLHE game, if nothing else.

Other popular poker games commonly found online include the following:

• Limit hold’em
• Pot-limit Omaha
• Limit Omaha
• Omaha Hi/Lo (Eight or Better)
• Stud

Some poker sites, like PokerStars, have even been known to unveil their games or variants. The mix of games depends on the site. Since Global Poker is the most likely choice for most Californians, there is a game that deserves an explanation.

Crazy Pineapple

Global Poker, the most prominent sweepstakes poker site, has three different games available for play onsite. Two of those games, no-limit Texas hold’em and pot-limit Omaha, are well-known commodities and are not uncommon.

However, the third game on the site, Crazy Pineapple, is a bit more esoteric for most poker players. So, if you’re curious about playing this game, here’s how it works.

Crazy Pineapple is a variant of Texas hold’em. Players compose their hands from a combination of hole cards and community cards, and there are four rounds of betting.

The key difference is that Crazy Pineapple begins with each player receiving three cards, rather than two. Then, after the round of preflop betting, the player must choose one of the three cards to discard before continuing in the hand.

In terms of strategy, more cards usually mean stronger hands are required to win. While not quite at the same level as Omaha, Crazy Pineapple will typically yield more possibilities for making a premium five-card hand.

If you have a chance, you might give Crazy Pineapple a try. It’s a nice option, if for no other reason than as a palate cleanser from all those hands of hold’em.

Barona Casino Hours

Can California tribes offer online poker?

Californians might be curious about whether online poker could come to them differently. After all, with so many Native American tribes in the state and the tribes at the forefront of gambling in California, it would make sense that they might have a claim regarding the ability to offer online poker.

Unfortunately, the answer is no. The courts have ruled definitively that California tribes cannot proceed with online poker until the state does so as well.

The Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel attempted to push things forward in late 2014. The tribe opened a real-money bingo operation to measure the legal environment for expansion into online poker. They even went so far as to house the servers for the site on tribal lands and were careful to confine operations to that property.

As expected, the state quickly moved to enjoin the tribe from operating the site, declaring it in violation of California law. Needless to say, the tribe decided to fight the battle in court.

After four long years, the Ninth District Court of Appeals issued what is likely the final word on the matter in 2018. The site does violate California state law.

Now, a single glimmer of hope might be to argue that bingo and poker are different types of games. However, given the definitive answer the tribe received, it’s unlikely to be worth pursuing any kind of victory on the semantics of the case.

The bottom line is that online poker remains illegal in the state of California for everyone, even those who might have an inside track to it.

Poker rooms in California

Live poker is legal in California. The Golden State now boasts some of the biggest and best poker rooms in the country. There are around 70 brick-and-mortar card rooms in California.

Commerce Casino

The Commerce Casino, in LA, is one of the biggest card rooms in the world. It houses more than 250 tables and hosts regular hold ’em, Omaha and Stud cash games and tournaments. The Commerce also offers blackjack and three-card poker tables.

The Commerce is a significant stop on the World Poker Tour, the WPT LA Poker Classic. The LA Poker Classic costs $10,000 to enter and regularly attracts some of the most prominent players in the world.

Bicycle Hotel & Casino

“The Bike” in BellGardens, is also one of the largest cardrooms in the world.

Its poker room is more than 100,000 square feet and features 185 tables spreading Texas Hold ’em, Omaha, 7-Card Stud and MexicanPoker.

The Bike is also a regular host for the World Poker Tour. The Legends of Poker event has been held at the Bike for years.

Bay 101 Casino

The Bay 101, in SanJose, has been operating since the 1920s.

The Bay 101 offers daily tournaments and cash games including Omaha Hi-Lo, No Limit Hold ’em and Stud.

The card room is also a host stop on the World Poker Tour. The Bay 101 Shooting Star takes place at the poker room every March and costs more than $5,000 to enter.

Full list of poker rooms in California

California online poker legislative history

The illegality of online poker in California is largely enumerated by a single section in the California Penal Code. Section 330 of the Code declares that a person who involves themselves with “any banking or percentage game played with cards” (among other things) is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to criminal sanction.

For more than a decade, California lawmakers submitted bills to legalize online poker every single year. Capturing the history of every single bill’s ultimate demise would be both onerous and depressing.

There were at least 15 different bills put into the legislative process over the years that would have allowed for online poker in the state. All of them have failed.

In the past few years, it has seemed as though the fervor to pass such a law has waned. Quite frankly, the eyes of most legislatures are on sports betting now, because of its new legality and greater potential for profit.

At this point, it’s probably unlikely that online poker will come to California before sports betting. Since the timeframe for the latter’s debut remains completely unclear, the launch of online poker in California must reside in the same category for now.

Federal gambling regulations

California card rooms and tribal casinos can’t launch online poker rooms because of the federal Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, or UIGEA. The UIGEA was put on the books in 2006 and prohibits American businesses from knowingly processing payments for any wagers placed over the internet.

The UIGEA doesn’t apply to licensed companies operating in states that explicitly legalized internet gambling, which is why Nevada, New Jersey, and Delaware are allowed to run online poker sites with this law still in effect.

Numerous California Assemblymen and Senators, such as Roderick Wright, Lou Correa, Lloyd Levine, Mike Gatto, Adam Gray, Isadore Hall, and Reggie Jones-Sawyer, have tried pushing for similar regulations to be introduced in the Golden State since 2008, but none of their proposals have gained enough support to make it to the governor’s desk.

Native American online poker

In November 2014, the Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel tribe tried to take matters into its own hands. The tribe launched a real-money bingo site called Desert Rose Bingo in an attempt to test the UIGEA prohibition and potentially lay the groundwork for a future Native American internet poker project.

The servers that powered the site were located within the reservation, and the tribe maintained that it had the right to offer its gambling products online because the compact signed with the state authorized it to offer Class II games on tribal land.

The government immediately filed an injunction, forcing the site to be temporarily shut down. The legal battle lasted four years, and in 2018, the Ninth District Court of Appeals ruled that the operation was illegal.

The judge agreed with the tribe regarding its jurisdiction over gambling on Indian land but noted that the act of placing a wager took place elsewhere on the territory of California, constituting a violation of the UIGEA.

This ruling proved without a shadow of a doubt that even the Native Californian tribes would not be able to launch legal poker sites without statewide legalization.

California Penal Code

Over the years, California poker players became discouraged with the lack of progress on the legislative front, and many turned to offshore poker platforms to get their internet poker fix. After all, these platforms can’t be shut down by the government as they are typically based in places like Panama or Antigua.

In the world of offshore gaming, the UIGEA doesn’t prevent you from enjoying the game; it merely inconveniences you when you try to make a deposit.

Unfortunately, the legality of playing on offshore sites is a contentious issue. Section 330 of the California Penal Code states that participating in any banking or percentage game constitutes a misdemeanor and is punishable by up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.

However, experts on gambling law can’t seem to agree on whether online poker offered by offshore platforms can be classified as a banking or percentage game. Pondering the technicalities of this issue should probably be left to people like Chuck Humphrey or Nelson Rose – we just want to emphasize that determining whether an online player can be punished if caught is impossible without precedent.

California online poker history

2018

As expected, 2018 was not the year for California online poker. For the first time in a decade, no poker-related proposals were put forward during the legislative session. The national gambling debate shifted to sports betting after SCOTUS overturned the federal PASPA ban in May.

Unfortunately, California needs to amend its constitution before its lawmakers can start working on a bookmaking bill. Assemblyman Adam Gray proposed putting this issue on the November 2018 ballot, but his initiative didn’t gain enough support before the elections.

As a result, Californians won’t get to vote on sports betting legalization until November 2020. If the online poker camp decides to stick to Jones-Sawyer’s plan and pair its new bill with this issue, 2019 will be another year in which we won’t see any meaningful legislative action.

On the judicial front, the Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel tribe lost the Desert Rose Bingo case in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The online bingo operation that was supposed to pave the way for tribal internet poker was deemed illegal. The court dismissed the argument that all servers were located on tribal land and based its decision on the fact that the act of betting occurred elsewhere.

2017

California Assemblymember Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer introduced AB 1677in February 2017. The goal of the bill was to legalize and regulate online poker in California. No wording in the bill even addressed the operator suitability issue. It looked like an attempt to start over.

Two months later, with no real movement on the bill, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians withdrew from its alliance with PokerStars.

California legislators never even got around to discussing online poker and when last day for the State Senate or Assembly to pass bills came on Sept. 15, California online poker was dead again.

2016

In 2016, California came closer to passing legislation that would legalize and regulate online poker than it ever has before. Yet still, by the time the state’s legislative session ended in August, no bill had passed.

As it had been in the past, the biggest stumbling block for online poker legislation in the state in 2016 was operator suitability.

A tribal coalition led by Pechanga and Agua Caliente was pushing for a 10-year ban against PokerStars and parent company Amaya. PokerStars itself, alongside in-state partners like the Morongo and San Manuel tribes and Commerce, Bicycle and Hawaiian Gardens cardrooms, wanted regulators to make the decision, but appeared willing to accept a five-year penalty or $20 million payment in lieu of it.

In June, an online poker bill passed through the State Assembly’s Appropriations Committee. It was the furthest an online poker bill had ever gone in California. Then-Assemblyman Adam Gray, author of the bill, introduced amendments supporting a five-year ban for persons that took bets in California after Dec. 31, 2006. Depending on how the language in the amendments was interpreted, it may have also included a lifetime ban for operators that did the same.

Neither side seems happy with it. PokerStars went from calling the tribal coalition obstructionists, to standing in the way of the online poker bill itself.

The bill never made it through Assembly, Senate, or came anywhere close to making it to the Governor’s desk.

The year 2016 started with the Horse Racing industry, Tribal casinos, and online poker operators all on different sides of the online poker issue in California. It ended much the same way.

2015

In many ways, 2015 is similar to the story of 2014, with the notable difference that political attention to the issue of online poker began earlier in the year and appears to have greater force behind it.

There are currently two primary competing visions for online poker in California – AB 9 and AB 167 – both of which sit with the Governmental Organization Committee in the Assembly.

There is an additional legislative vehicle for online poker in the Assembly: AB 431, sponsored by Assemblyman Adam Gray and co-authored by State Sen. Isadore Hall. AB 431 is currently a “shell” bill, meaning it contains little in the way of actual details or language.

You can read more about and track each bill using California’s online legislative information system.

As in past years, the key divisions revolve around who is eligible for licensure as an online poker operator.

2014

In February 2014, two online poker bills were announced. SB 1366would allow online poker only. It included a bad actor clause that would forbid any company from operating in the state if it took action from U.S. players after December 31, 2006.

AB 2291 was a similar bill. One difference is that the bad actor clause was left open for future debate.

On April 23, 2014, the California Assembly Committee on Governmental Organization held a hearing to discuss online poker. Topics included the history of online poker in the U.S., testimony from executives involved in the regulated industry, as well as views from tribal and commercial gaming companies.

The hearing appeared to be a positive for the online poker industry. One opponent of gambling in general was cut off from his speech. Andy Abboud, VP of Government Affairs for Las Vegas Sands, had his company’s motives questioned by the committee. All members of the committee that spoke appeared to be educated about the online poker industry.

Prior to 2014

Online poker has been an issue in California for nearly a decade at this point. The state has seen numerous bills prior to the handful currently circulating in Sacramento.

Six bills in the past had been introduced but failed to pass in the California Legislature. Those bills were the Internet Poker Consumer Protection Act of 2013, SB 51, SB 678, SB 1463, SB 40 and SB 45. These bills would have legalized, regulated and taxed online poker in California.

By Ethan Banegas

The Journal of San Diego History
San Diego History Center Quarterly
Winter 2017, Volume 63, Number 1
Indian Gaming in the Kumeyaay Nation (PDF)

San Diego County has the largest concentration of Indian casinos in the nation. Gaming has allowed Indian tribes to pursue the policy of self-determination, which means that Indian tribal governments can conduct their own affairs. The process of winning the right to gamble took place over the course of nine years and involved three landmark cases: Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Butterfield (1979), Barona Group of the Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians v. Duffy (1982), and California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987). This article examines the political climate that allowed the courts to favor Indian gaming. It also includes the shared history of the Barona, Sycuan, and Viejas casinos.

In the 1960s, Indians began to demand control over programs that affected their welfare. The federal government gradually allowed a higher degree of tribal sovereignty and self-determination. W. Dale Mason wrote:

Beginning with initiatives in the Kennedy administration, the 1960s brought about another dramatic change in Indian policy. By de facto ending termination and turning responsibility for federal programs over to the tribes, Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon set in motion a process that by the 1990s resulted in dynamic, thriving tribal governments.¹

The Reagan (1981-1989) and Bush Sr. (1989-1993) administrations solidified a policy of self-determination that began in the 1960s.

Barona Valley Ranch Resort and Casino, 2017. Photo by Ethan Banegas.

In the early 1980s, programs run by the Bureau of Indian Affairs were at risk of being cut when the Reagan administration decided to balance the budget.² Sen. Thomas Slade Gorton (Republican-WA) remarked, “no one can or should expect to be exempt from the inevitable cuts which ensue from balancing the budget.”³ A “longtime tribal antagonist” and chairman of the Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, Gorton successfully pushed to cut Indian programs.⁴ The pieces were in place for the state and federal governments to open the door for Indian gaming as a way to relieve tribal dependence on the federal government. Even a decade later in 1995, during the Clinton administration, the Senate refused to restore $200 million in cuts to the Bureau of Indian Affairs by a vote of 61 to 36.⁵ Pro-Indian supporters like Barbara Boxer (Democrat-CA), Edward Kennedy (Democrat-MA), and Majority Leader Tom Daschle (Democrat-SD) voted with the Republican majority.

With the 1980s cuts in federal funding, tribal governments looked for other ways of generating the revenue necessary to fund their programs. In 1975, the Seminole Tribe of Florida had established a high-stakes bingo operation that generated significant revenues for education, welfare, and economic development. Indian gaming was challenged when Broward County Sheriff Robert Butterfield, acting on behalf of the State of Florida, threatened to close the Seminole bingo hall because they offered prizes over $100. The Seminoles were granted a preliminary injunction by the district court and pursued a case against Florida, Seminole v. Butterfield. Attorneys for the State of Florida defended Butterfield by arguing that the state had criminal jurisdiction over Indian tribes. In 1953, Congress had passed Public Law 83-280 that permitted certain states to transfer criminal jurisdiction from Indian country to the state government. The law applied to California, Nebraska, Minnesota, Oregon, and Wisconsin with the exception of three reservations: Red Lake Chippewa Reservation, Warm Springs Reservation, and Menominee Reservation.⁶ Attorneys for the Seminole Tribe, however, successfully argued in 1979 that PL 83-280 only applied to criminal jurisdiction and not to gambling. The district and circuit courts agreed and ruled in favor of the Seminole Indian Tribe because “the playing of bingo halls and operation of bingo halls is not contrary to the public policy.”⁷ The court explained:

The district court held that Florida’s gambling laws were civil/ regulatory not criminal/prohibitory. Therefore, notwithstanding the state’s assumption of criminal jurisdiction over Indians in Florida reservations under Public Law 83-280, the state limits on bingo did not apply to the Seminole games.⁸

Barona Valley Barn (1932), 2017. Photo by Ethan Banegas.

Seminole v. Butterfield paved the way for the Barona Band of Mission Indians to commence gaming. Tribal chairman (1981-1988) Edward “Joe” Welch traveled to the Seminole Reservation in Florida to evaluate their gambling operation. After his return, the Barona tribal council voted to open their own high stakes bingo with both tribal money and funds from Welch’s personal account. Barona was among the first tribes to have bingo games on a federally recognized tribal reservation.⁹ Like Florida, however, the State of California had laws forbidding high-stakes bingo. San Diego County Sheriff John Duffy, acting on behalf of the state, threatened to close the Barona bingo hall. Barona filed suit in district court in Barona Group of the Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians v. Duffy and used the Seminole case as a precedent. Barona won in district court.¹⁰ The courts use the same language as the Seminole case to rule in favor of Barona, stating that California’s gaming policy was permissive/regulatory and bingo was beyond the Sheriff’s jurisdiction.¹¹ A plaque at the Barona Museum pays homage to Barona’s victory; it reads, “In 1982 Barona won US Supreme Court ruling Duffy v Barona, allowing high-stakes Bingo.”¹²

In the wake of the Barona and Seminole cases, which decided in favor of Indian gaming, approximately 80 other tribes entered the gaming business.¹³ Although these court cases ruled that gaming was beyond the reach of the state’s jurisdiction to prosecute, “states continued to enforce their gambling regulations on reservations.”¹⁴ The final showdown took place in California almost a decade after Seminole v. Butterfield in the California v. Cabazon case (1987).¹⁵ Eighteen tribes and two Indian organizations battled twenty-five states in the Supreme Court over the role of state governments and Indian gaming.¹⁶ Like the Barona and Seminole cases, the state’s main argument rested on Public Law 83-280 giving the state jurisdiction over federally recognized tribes.

On February 25, 1987, the Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 to reject California’s position. Using the same language as Seminole and Barona, the court found that Public Law 83-280 gave California the ability to regulate gaming but not to prohibit it. Congress had passed the law in an effort to combat lawlessness on reservations; it permitted states to intervene in tribal affairs only if criminal activity was taking place. California v. Cabazon settled the issue of states trying to forbid Indian gaming once and for all. Significantly, it was no coincidence there was a continuity of language used in all three court cases. During the author’s interview with Don Speer, long-time business advisor to the Barona Band of Mission Indians, he shared that the Cabazon attorneys used the Barona and Seminole cases as templates to win the case.¹⁷

Speer, working with the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians as an investor with a management contract for their Desert Oasis Casino at the time, emphasized that Barona was a massive influence on the steps taken to win the Cabazon case. These three court cases are inextricably linked. To summarize: in the beginning was the Seminole victory, which led Joe Welch (Barona’s Chairman) to visit the Seminoles and open a high-stakes bingo operation on Barona. Thereafter, Sheriff Duffy’s threat brought about Barona’s case and eventual victory, using the argument from prosecuting attorneys representing the Seminoles. After Barona’s victory, Cabazon had the final showdown in the Supreme Court and won by replicating Barona’s and Seminole’s arguments.

Barona Bingo Cardroom and Casino

Under Chairman Welch, Barona’s high-stakes bingo continued in an unassuming gymnasium at the center of the reservation and generated money.¹⁸ Tribal sovereignty gave Barona’s bingo a competitive advantage over off-reservation games because the state could not limit hours and jackpots.

Barona Casino Winners

In 1983, the Sycuan tribe, located eleven miles from Barona, followed suit and opened up a bingo hall. Sycuan’s high-stakes bingo enjoyed the same competitive advantage as Barona, and it was located much closer to large population centers in San Diego. It was not long before Sycuan took most of Barona’s business, leaving their neighboring tribe in a vulnerable situation. Barona’s nascent gaming business closed four times due to both mismanagement and Sycuan’s proximity to San Diego.

Barona Valley Ranch Resort and Casino, 2017. Photo by Ethan Banegas.

Clifford LaChappa, who succeeded Joe Welch as tribal chairman of Barona, inherited a gaming business in dire straits. After closing four times, Barona’s high- stakes bingo was hardly producing any income for tribal members. Chairman LaChappa was working for the San Diego Gas and Electric Company, and when he heard about a man named Don Speer who was recognized in the gaming industry for successfully turning around the bankrupt gaming business on the Cabazon reservation near Palm Springs, California, he reached out to him. After working with the Cabazon tribe for nearly six years, he was reluctant to come to the Barona reservation because it had a bad track record and an extremely remote location. Chairman LaChappa talked him into visiting the reservation and the rest is history. Speer was drawn to the people of Barona. On a handshake deal, he committed to not only investing his own money to help Barona turn its struggling business around but had a clear vision and determination to turn it into a financial success that would rival casinos on the Las Vegas strip. He took a gamble on Barona’s high-stakes bingo and built a new cardroom investing his own money in the operation.¹⁹

Speer and the people of Barona soon turned their gaming operation around. Eventually the tribe accumulated enough money to expand into a bona fide casino, the Big Top Barona Casino, that opened in 1994. Building this casino was not without risk because Barona did not yet have a state compact. Authorities could have closed the operation if a compact between the tribe and state was not agreed upon. Fortunately, the Las Vegas-style casino became an instant success. It was housed in a 39,000 square-foot tent, had 1,000 slot machines, and consisted of a vintage Barnum and Bailey circus theme. With the construction of the Barona Big Top, Barona’s gaming operation went from the third most successful casino in San Diego to the first.

In anticipation of a Barona compact with the State of California, Speer and the people of Barona began plans in 1998 with world-renowned Las Vegas architect Joel Bergman to build a new $225 million resort casino. Bergman had designed the Golden Nugget (Atlantic City), the MGM Resort & Casino (Las Vegas), the Mirage (Las Vegas), Caesar’s Palace (Las Vegas), The Paris Casino and Resort (Las Vegas), and numerous other projects. Significantly, Barona’s first gaming compact with the state was signed on October 8, 1999, during the preliminary stages of the new resort and casino.²⁰ After four years of planning and construction, Barona’s new casino was completed on December 31, 2002. There is a detailed description of Barona’s resort and casino on their website:

About Barona Resort & Casino: Named Best Casino and “Loosest Slots” for six consecutive years in the San Diego’s Best Union- Tribune Readers Poll, Barona Resort & Casino is the ultimate gaming entertainment destination featuring 2,000 slot and video poker machines and over 90 table games. The AAA Four Diamond rated property features 400 spacious guest rooms and suites with beautiful views of Barona Valley, award-winning dining, the AmBience Day Spa, a full-service events center and the 18-hole championship Barona Creek Golf Club, which was rated the 4th Best Resort Course in California by Golfweek Magazine.²¹

Sycuan Aims for Economic Diversity

Barona and Sycuan share a common history in Indian gaming. Among the most noteworthy correlations are bingo history and a pioneering tribal chair. In 1972, Anna Prieto Sandoval won the tribal chair of the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation. There were approximately eighty tribal members at the time and “none had a steady job.”²² Life on the reservation was full of extreme hardships and Sandoval walked ten miles one day to retrieve milk for her children. News travels fast among reservations in San Diego County due to ancient kinship ties, and Sandoval heard about Barona’s successful high-stakes bingo operation eleven miles away. In 1983, Chairwoman Sandoval was approached by Pan American International (PAI), a management company, to open a high-stakes bingo operation on Sycuan. This was the same management company that managed Seminole bingo in Florida.

Barona Casino

A year after Chairman Edward “Joe” Welch opened a bingo hall in Barona’s recreation center, Sandoval pioneered Sycuan’s high-stakes bingo. Like Welch, Sandoval used her own personal assets to start a gambling operation. PAI’s proposition had created strong opposition among a faction of Sycuan’s tribal members who feared that traffic jams and strangers would change their quiet reservation life. Sandoval, however, offered a remote site on the outskirts of the reservation (she owned half the title) to satisfy the tribal opposition. The Sycuan Bingo Palace, as it was called, irked those who had doubted Sandoval, particularly after her business venture became profitable.²³

Sycuan had a competitive advantage over Barona because it was located closer to large population centers in San Diego and just ten miles from the city of El Cajon. The tribe’s early success allowed them to part ways with PAI management in 1987 and to manage the bingo game themselves. Profits eventually allowed them to pay for an expansion that was completed in 1990. The new bingo hall consisted of a 68,000 square-foot structure and included a 1,500-seat bingo parlor, 35 poker tables, and 20 off-track betting seats. Chairwoman Sandoval was the

Sycuan Casino interior, 2017. Photo by Ethan Banegas.

leader of Sycuan for twenty years (1972 to 1992) and brought Sycuan’s eighty tribal members out of abject poverty. By the early 1990s unemployment disappeared.²⁴

In 2002 Sycuan hired Steve Penhall to be the general manager of their casino. He previously worked at the Sandia Casino in Albuquerque, New Mexico, for three years, and at the Ute Mountain Casino in Durango, Colorado, for seven years.²⁵ Penhall resigned in 2008 and Sycuan returned to managing their own casino for a second time. Hank Murphy, an elder tribal member of Sycuan, said that he could not believe so many Indian casinos spent money on management companies. With great pride, Murphy explained that the people of Sycuan and the tribal council “run our own affairs.”²⁶

Don Speer mentioned that management companies are often important for financial investment and gaming expertise to open an Indian casino. For example, he stated that San Diego’s newest casino on the Jamul Reservation “probably would not have gotten off the ground without a management company.”²⁷ He also believed the same was true for Harrah’s Rincon Casino in San Diego County, which is operated by the largest management company in the world. Notably, Barona, Viejas, and Sycuan all entered the casino industry with management companies. However, after their casinos became profitable, they no longer thought it was necessary to hire management companies.

There are costs and benefits to Indians managing their own casinos. Management companies are extremely expensive and their employees make all the daily decisions for the casinos. As a result, tribal members know very little about their own business and often feel worlds apart due to a lack of involvement. On the other hand, many Indians lack experience in the casino industry. In that business, decisions that seem counter-intuitive are often the right ones. Sometimes it helps to have a management company with decades of experience in the casino industry. The question of whether to self-manage or hire a management company remains a debate that is extremely important for gaming tribes and a topic that deserves more study.

Daniel Tucker was the tribal chair of Sycuan for most of the development of Class III Vegas-style gaming. He served as tribal chairman for fourteen years (1993-1996 and 2003-2014). Before his tenure, El Cajon’s major golf course, Singing Hills, had been bought by Sycuan in 2001 to attract customers to play at the casino. Singing Hills was renamed the Sycuan Golf Resort and includes fifty-four holes, two restaurants, a swimming pool, one-hundred-twenty rooms and suites, and shuttle service to the casino, located three miles away.

In 2011, Sycuan Casino spent twenty-seven million dollars to renovate their casino “reminiscent of a Sultan’s palace.” They gutted “the entire casino, section by section,” added a world class sports bar, and expanded the buffet.²⁸ The total square footage is 305,000, which is equivalent to Viejas’ floor plan. Currently, the Sycuan casino has a total of five restaurants and “the Bingo Palace on the second floor…can easily be said to be the most elegant bingo in San Diego.”²⁹

Viejas—A Casino plus a Factory Outlet

In 1977, before the Seminoles opened their high-stakes bingo hall, Viejas opened a bingo room in their Ma Tar Awa RV Park. This event, however, is insignificant to the genesis of Indian gaming because it did not challenge the state with high-stakes jackpots and extended hours of operation, as Barona did six years later.

Viejas Casino and Resort, 2017. Photo by Ethan Banegas.

Following the three cases that made Indian gaming legal in United States, the people of Viejas voted to open a 100,000 square-foot casino in 1991. Eight years later, in 1999, they expanded to a 300,000 square-foot casino.³⁰ This new expansion coincided with the signing of a state compact with then-Governor Gray Davis of California.

September 10, 1999 is considered the “economic Independence Day of California Indians” because 58 state compacts, including Sycuan and Viejas, were signed by tribal leaders and Governor Davis. Three more compacts were signed, including Barona’s compact, on October 8, 1999.³¹ Gaming compacts limited Indian casinos to 2,000 slot machines; Viejas, Barona, and Sycuan maxed out their allotted quota at the turn of the twenty-first century. On June 14, 2000, Viejas was the first casino to have Las Vegas-style (coin operated) slot machines on a reservation.³²

On March 21, 2013, Viejas Casino became the Viejas Casino and Resort after a $36 million dollar expansion added a hotel.33 Tribal chairman Anthony Pico said Viejas originally planned for a six-hundred room hotel in 2007, but after the economic downturn, the hotel was reduced to approximately 80 percent less square footage. The Viejas hotel currently has a total of 128 rooms, which include ninety-nine deluxe and twenty-nine luxury suites. Like Barona and Sycuan, the people of Viejas manage their hotel without a management company.³⁴

Viejas Outlet Center, 2017. Photo by Ethan Banegas.

To make way for the new hotel, the old bingo hall was razed and a new four- hundred-seat bingo hall was constructed across the street from the casino in the Viejas Outlet shopping center.³⁵ Currently, the Viejas Casino has six restaurants, a night club called the “Dream Catcher,” an RV park, and a sixty-store retail outlet mall. Although the Viejas Outlet Center has struggled in recent years, it grossed twenty million dollars in 2013 according to tax yields.³⁶ In addition, the mall has managed to attract and sustain several designer brands such as Tommy Hilfiger, Polo Ralph Lauren, Levi’s Outlet, Guess Factory Store, Gap Outlet, Eddie Bauer, Coach, Sunglass Hut, Nike Clearance Store, and eight eateries.³⁷

Comparing Three Native Nations

In the early history of the Kumeyaay Nation, Barona and Viejas shared a common history on the Capitan Grande Reservation. This was mostly a mutual political relationship because the kinship ties between Los Conejos and the Barona Band were tenuous. This political relationship became most evident during the relocation of 1932. Later, Barona and Sycuan enjoyed a common gaming history. Both tribes pioneered high-stakes bingo in San Diego County with trailblazing chairs, Edward “Joe” Welch and Anne Prieto Sandoval. Intense competition between Sycuan and Barona ensued in the burgeoning high-stakes bingo business, but in the end there were no losers. As Don Speer said, “Gambling begets more gambling.”³⁸ Sycuan still leads the Kumeyaay Nation in bingo, Viejas opened a new bingo hall in 2013, and Barona is out of the bingo business altogether, but is recognized as the leading gaming resort destination in the San Diego market.

Barona Bingo Hall

Hollywood Casino in Jamul, 2017. Photo by Ethan Banegas.

Juxtaposing economic diversity among Barona, Viejas, and Sycuan is significant. Barona is the least diversified and possesses almost no other form of income outside of gaming. Viejas owns an outlet shopping mall that grossed approximately $20 million in 2013. Sycuan owns the U.S. Grant Hotel which it purchased in 2003 for $45 million (with an additional $10 million set aside for renovations). Its namesake President Ulysses S. Grant created Sycuan via executive order in 1875, irony which is not lost on Sycuan’s tribal members.³⁹ In 2007, Chairman Danny Tucker was honored inside the Grant Hotel by the San Diego History Center at the History Makers Gala with the George W. Marston Award for civic leadership. According to The Journal of San Diego History, “to date, the casino has been the Band’s most noteworthy economic success.”⁴⁰ Such a bold statement deserves qualification.

Barona Casino Bingo Hours

If Barona, Viejas, and Sycuan were judged simply by economic output, Barona is the most successful casino by a large margin. Strictly from a gaming perspective, the Barona Valley Resort and Casino grosses more than Sycuan and Viejas combined and is the envy of the casino industry. If we measure Sycuan, Viejas, and Barona on economic diversity, then Sycuan is the clear winner. So far, Barona’s attempts at economic diversity have been nominal, and their economic development committee, SIGNATUS, has only invested in stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. SIGNATUS was created approximately a decade ago and consists seven board members (all tribal). The people of Barona recently approved a $40 million casino expansion in 2016.

In contrast to Barona, the people of Viejas have attempted other business ventures outside of gaming. The Viejas Factory Outlet Center is 255,000 square feet and includes allotments for 60 stores.⁴¹ Currently, San Diego’s newest outlet center is operating 30 stores and grossing $20 million.

After building their casino, Sycuan established the Sycuan Tribal Development Corporation to diversify their economic portfolio. They have made several noteworthy acquisitions. Their first major purchase was in 2001, with the Singing Hills Golf Couse. In 2003, the U.S. Grant Hotel was purchased followed by the procurement of Ringside Promotions (boxing promotions).⁴² In addition, in 2003 the Sycuan Tribal Development Corporation proposed a twenty-five-million- dollar hotel in National City and launched a mutual fund to invest in large and medium American stocks.⁴³ The drastic and subtle differences among these three tribes make for an intriguing case study indeed. One can only speculate about their future competition.

Big Top interior, Barona Valley Ranch Resort and Casino, 2017. Photo by Ethan Banegas.

Notes (PDF)

1. W. Dale Mason, “Indian Gaming: Tribal Sovereignty and American Politics,” Sovereignty
Symposium XVIII (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2005), 37.
2. Ibid., 26.
3. 98 Cong. Rec. H34,184 (November 18, 1983) (statement of Rep. Udall).
4. Mason, “Indian Gaming,” 27.
5. Bill McAllister, “Native Americans, Scientists Protest Cuts in Key Programs,” The Washington
Post, September 12, 1995; 98 Cong. Rec. H11,018 (October 3, 1984), statement of Rep. Shumay.
6. California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202, 207 (1987). The Cabazon reservation
is located in Coachella, 7 miles (11 km) from Indio, California, and 18 miles (29 km) from
Palm Springs in Riverside County.
7. Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Butterfield, 491 F. Supp. 1015, 1020 (S.D. Flor. 1979).
8. Mason, “Indian Gaming,” 47.
9. Don Speer, interview by Ethan Banegas, Barona Resort and Casino, November 25, 2015.
10. Barona Group of the Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians v. Duffy, 694 F.2d 1185.
11. Mason, “Indian Gaming,” 48.
12. Museum Label for 1981-88 Edward (Joe) Welch Administration, Barona, California, The
Barona Museum, May 2, 2016.
13. Steven Andrew Light and Kathryn R.I. Rand, Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The Casino
Compromise (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2005), 40.
14. Ibid.
15. California v. Cabazon, 480 U.S. 202. See Iris Engstrand, San Diego: California’s Cornerstone (San
Diego: Sunbelt Publications, 2016), 17-20.
16. Mason, “Indian Gaming,” 49.
17. Speer, interview by Banegas; California v. Cabazon, 480 U.S. 202, 208.
18. Edward (Joe) Welch served as Chairman 1968-1976 and 1981-1988.
19. Speer, interview by Banegas.
20. California Gambling Control Commission, “Ratified Tribal-State Gaming Compacts,” Cgcc.
ca.gov. http://www.cgcc.ca.gov/?pageID=compacts (accessed on May 1, 2016).
21. Barona Valley Casino and Resort, “About Us,” Barona.com; http://www.barona.com/aboutbarona/press-center/
(accessed December 10, 2015).
22. “Anna Prieto Sandoval, 76; Sycuan Leader was a Pioneer in Indian Gaming,” Los Angeles Times,
November 1, 2011.
23. Ibid.
24. Ibid.
25. David J. Valley and Diana Lindsay, Jackpot Trail: Indian Gaming in Southern California (San Diego,
Sunbelt Publications, 2003), 149.
26. Hank Murphy, interview by Ethan Banegas, Sycuan Reservation, November 5, 2015.
27. Don Speer, interview by Ethan Banegas, Barona Resort and Casino, December 11, 2016.
28. “Sycuan Casino Undergoes Major Renovations,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, June 21, 2011.
29. Valley and Lindsay, Jackpot Trail, 150.
87
Indian Gaming In The Kumeyaay Nation
30. Ibid., 155.
31. Viejas Band of Kumeyaay, “Tribal Gaming History,” viejasbandofkumeyaay.org http://
viejasbandofkumeyaay.org/tribal-gaming-history/ (accessed October 14, 2016).
32. Ibid.
33. “Viejas Casino to Add 150-Room Hotel,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, August 31, 2011.
34. “Viejas Casino Opens New Bingo Hall,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, March 27, 2012.
35. Ibid.
36. Michael Connolly Miskwish, Quantification of the Public Benefit of Indian Economies in San Diego
County California (Campo: Laguna Resource Services, 2015).
37. Viejas Casino and Resort, “Outlet Stores Directory,” Viejas.com, http://viejas.com/san-diegospremier-outlet-mall/viejas-outlets-main-directory
(accessed October 14, 2016).
38. Speer, interview by Banegas.
39. “Tribe Buys Downtown San Diego Landmark,” Los Angeles Times, December 6, 2003.
40. “The Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation,” The Journal of San Diego History, 53, no. 3 (Summer
2007), 150.
41. Don Speer, interview by Ethan Banegas, Barona Resort and Casino, December 11, 2016.
42. Bobby Barrett, “Spotlight on the Economy,” Indian Gaming (November 2008): 24. Accessed
December 13, 2016. http://www.indiangaming.com/istore/Nov08_TLR.pdf.
43. “Tribe Buys Downtown San Diego Landmark.

Bingo Barona Casino

Ethan Banegas, a member of both the Luiseño and Kumeyaay bands of Native Americans, grew up on the Barona Reservation in San Diego County. He received his BA degree in History, Religious Studies and Political Science in 2009 and his MA degree in January 2017 from the University of San Diego. This article is extracted from his MA thesis entitled The Socioeconomic Impact of Indian Gaming on Kumeyaay Nations: A Case Study of Barona, Viejas, and Sycuan, 1982-2016.

¹¹

Barona Bingo Schedule

Barona Tribal Museum and Cultural Center. Photo courtesy Barona Tribal Museum.