Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Revenue Sharing Tribes should VOTE NO on Prop. 94-97

This was posted on Yahoo's Native California Indians newsgroup and reason why revenue sharing tribes should be voting NO on expanded gaming compacts. No to Pechanga:

The state doesn't have the money to increase revenue sharing next year, and ifthe 2006compacts are approved, the state won't even be able to fully fund the $1.1Million tribalrevenue sharing payments.
The problem ahead: 60 percent of the money used to fund revenue sharing for thetribewith no casino and those that operate less than 350 machines is through a"backfill" intothe Revenue Sharing Trust Fund (RSTF) from the Special Distribution Fund (SDF).
If the2006 compacts are approved by the voters in the February 2008 state election,thosetribes will no longer pay into the Special Distribution Fund and its annual revenue will drop from $137 million to $46 million.
The State has been spending $99 million per year from the Special Distribution Fund for Revenue Sharing Trust fund backfill,state program,and local government grants. Despite the priority for funding from the special distribution fund, Revenue sharing Tribes will have to compete for appropriations from the special distribution fund against those programs or seek funding from the general fund at thesame time as the state enters the budget year with a $14 billion deficit.
The only assured funding for tribal revenue sharing would be the revenue sharing trust funditself, which itis estimated can only provide $449,000 of the promised $1.1 million

VOTE NO on 94 thru 97

No comments: