The politicians who have tried for years to stop the Tohono O’odham Nation from opening a casino on land it owns north of Glendale's Westgate Entertainment District celebrated a great victory recently.

Although, it wasn’t actually great.

And, well, it wasn’t exactly a victory, either.

Look at it this way: Let’s say the politicians opposed to the casino had a softball team and they were playing a game against a Tohono O’odham team, and the politicians were losing by a score of something like 16-0 in the late innings. And then the politicians scored a run.

It was that kind of “victory.”

Judge David Campbell of the U.S. District Court of Arizona decided that he would not grant the tribe an injunction against the Arizona Department of Gaming and state officials over certification of its casino.

Does that mean the casino won’t open?

No.

There have been many other court challenges to the casino, but they've all failed. All this means is that the tribe will open its new casino to Class II gaming instead of the more Vegas-style Class III. While the overall case continues in court.

One of the reasons the judge didn’t grant the injunction is that he believed the tribe would make a lot of money from a Class II casino, enough to see it through the court case. The chief gaming officer for the casino said patrons won't notice much of a drop-off.

Unfortunately for Arizona taxpayers, the state doesn’t have regulatory power over such an operation, and the tribe doesn’t have to share revenue with us.

The Tohono O’odham Nation has committed to sharing revenue with local communities, however.

A number of those towns approve of the casino. A while back the vice mayor of Glendale and the mayors of Surprise, Peoria and Tolleson wrote a letter to The Arizona Republic in support of the casino and against a federal law to stop the casino that some members of the Congressional delegation are trying to get passed.

"We were not consulted on this legislation, and we stand together to affirm that those closest to the project are solidly in support of this development," the letter reads in part. Adding, "Construction is well underway and our constituents are already benefiting from the 1,300 construction jobs and $200 million that will be invested during 2015. When the facility opens later this year, more than 500 new and permanent jobs will be created."

So the tribe did not get the injunction it wanted from the judge but the case moves forward and the casino will open.

On the day of the judge’s ruling Tohono O’odham chairman Edward Manuel issued a statement saying, “The nation is comfortable with the court’s decision today, and we remain confident that the court will ultimately rule in our favor.”

Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake, along with other members of the Congressional delegation and Gov. Doug Ducey have accused the tribe of not being honest when the original agreement for casinos was drawn up. They introduced d the "Keep the Promise Act 2015" to prevent the $400 million casino from opening. Not everyone in Congress agrees.

“Honestly, I don't understand the motivations behind this. It makes no sense to me," said Rep. Rep. Raúl Grijalva. The Tucson Democrat  worries that if such a bill passes the tribe would sue and taxpayers could lose up to a billion – with a B – dollars. And for what?

The tribe was able to purchase the land after receiving payment for thousands of acres it lost to the federal government for a flood project. Some of our politicians, along with the Gila River and Salt River tribes, who have casino operations, say the Tohono O'odham Nation defrauded voters and the state by not announcing early on its plans. I can understand the other tribes being upset. But, come one, isn’t it just a little nervy for members of the U.S. Government to accuse a Native American tribe of not being honest in negotiations?

Still, after many losses in court, opponents of the casino had a “victory." Then again, opponents also tried to get the casino issue put before voters in Glendale. They lost that case recently in the state court of appeals.

I’m not sure what that makes the score.  Something like 17 to 1, maybe.

Read or Share this story: http://azc.cc/1FsxBL3