Koi Nation’s Casino Plans Are Stalled As Governor Moves To Block Project

Written By Adam Hensley on September 3, 2024 - Last Updated on September 24, 2024
Road Closed sign signifies opposition for Koi Nation casino

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is not on board with plans for a proposed Koi Nation casino.

The California casino project has received backlash before, but this is the most serious opposition so far.

The state’s senior adviser for tribal negotiations, Matthew Lee, sent a letter on Newsom’s behalf pushing for the Department of the Interior to squash the Shiloh Resort and Casino. It also called for blocking another tribe, the Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians, from building their own casino in Vallejo.

“Despite our nation’s best efforts to educate stakeholders about our eligibility to seek gaming-eligible trust land under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act‘s ‘restored lands’ exception, it is evident that the governor’s opposition reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of federal law,” Koi Nation Vice Chair Dino Beltran told The Press Democrat.

Koi Nation has been working toward casino for years

The Koi Nation purchased 68 acres of land in Sonoma County in 2021 and announced plans for its $600 million casino shortly thereafter.

However, three years later, ground has not been broken on the project, though the tribe has jumped through plenty of hoops to get the support of labor unions, public agencies, and several other tribal governments.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs was accepting public comment on the proposed casino’s environmental impact statement up until last week.

Plans for the casino call for a 540,000-square-foot facility featuring 2,750 gaming machines, a number of restaurants and bars, a 2,800-seat event center, a 400-room hotel, and a spa.

Why is Newsom opposed to this casino?

In the letter, Lee said that Newsom has many concerns about the Shiloh Resort and Casino.

He said the governor “is concerned that these specific projects are proceeding in a manner that would sidestep the State, ignore the concerns of tribal governments and other local communities, and stretch the ‘restored lands’ exception beyond its legal limits — while failing to adequately consider whether there might be a better way.”

Lee’s letter indicated there were issues with what falls under the restored lands exception. Newsom says that it applies only where casinos “would not be detrimental to the surrounding community” and that it only works if the governor is on board.

One example of this came in the summer of 2022, when Newsom approved the Tejon Indian Tribe‘s plan to build a casino in Kern County. That tribe boasts a massive reservation and its casino would be situated in the middle of those lands.

Lee’s letter stated that when it comes to deeming land fit for these types of projects, it must be an instance “where the voters who legalized tribal gaming were promised that such gaming would remain geographically limited.”

‘Restored lands’ factor into debate over proposed casino

The term “restored lands” appeared in Lee’s letter and in Beltran’s statement to The Press Democrat.

In short, the restored lands exception allows tribes to conduct gambling operations on land returned to them after federal recognition. These lands were previously recognized as the tribes’ sovereign territory but were taken away and sold off by the U.S. government during the mid-1900s.

Section 20(a) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act says that land may not be used for gambling purposes unless three statutory exceptions apply:

“The lands that are taken into trust as part of: (i) the settlement of a land claim; (ii) the initial reservation of an Indian tribe acknowledged by the Secretary under the Federal acknowledgment process; or (iii) the restoration of lands for an Indian tribe that is restored to Federal recognition.”

Beltran told The Press Democrat that a federal judge gave the tribe the green light to pursue a casino under the restored lands provision in a lawsuit five years ago.

“Project approvals from the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) would not represent a departure from precedent. To the contrary, IGRA’s restored lands exception was designed precisely to correct historic wrongs that rendered landless tribes like the Koi, depriving them of opportunities to develop and achieve economic self-sufficiency.”

Other tribes, Windsor residents also oppose project

The Graton Rancheria tribe isn’t on board with the project either.

During a hearing last fall, Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria Chairman Greg Sarris mentioned that this casino would be far from the Koi Nation’s original reservation.

“Their proposed site here is 49 miles from their original reservation,” he said. “And never, never has the Department of [the] Interior taken restored lands into trust that far — never farther than 15 miles from their original rancheria.”

This casino would be southeast of Windsor, whose residents are largely opposed to the project. Some argued that the Koi Nation should build something like a winery and event center, but with no gaming. Others said the tribe shouldn’t be allowed to build on the land at all.

Site of Koi Nation proposed casino

Windsor residents said the casino would significantly increase traffic in the area. Noise and crime are other community concerns, as is the amount of water needed to operate the facility. Fire safety is a big issue, too.

Meanwhile, the Lytton Rancheria of California thanked the governor for expressing his concerns. The tribe backed his decision to oppose both the Koi Nation and Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians’ casino proposals.

“Unfortunately, these two projects are being recklessly advanced in an unprecedented way without important safeguards — which could have disastrous consequences for the local environment and surrounding communities,” Lytton Rancheria Tribal Chairperson Andy Mejia said in a statement. “Both of these projects are opposed by the native peoples actually indigenous to these sites and supported by tribes from outside Solano and Sonoma counties.”

What’s next for the Koi Nation’s casino plans?

This is the tribe’s third attempt at a casino project. The first came in 2005, and the second took place in 2014. And as of now, the tribe is still without a casino.

But it likely won’t go down without a fight.

Sarris told The Press Democrat that the letter’s specific recipient was Bryan Newland. As the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Newland has ties to the Koi Nation, and he has worked with the tribe as a lawyer. Sarris added that because Newland is a member of the Bay Mills Indian Community in Michigan, a tribe that has faced similar opposition, he has experience in this area.

Sarris also told the newspaper that he believes Newland will recuse himself from the Koi rulings because of his ties to the tribe. But he added that Newland could still influence staff decisions.

“If this can go through, his tribe has got a precedent set for them to get their land into trust,” Sarris said.

Adam Hensley Avatar
Written by
Adam Hensley

Adam Hensley is a journalist with experience covering online sports betting and gambling across Catena Media. His byline has appeared in the Associated Press, Sports Illustrated and sites within the USA Today Network.

View all posts by Adam Hensley
Privacy Policy