Correct. In WA state they force the tribes to spend it "within the community," which ends up as huge hotels and other ridiculous expenses that don't help the poor members of the tribe.
I live in WA and I don't understand why local city casinos are choked, but we allow some specific groups to run casinos 30 minutes away by different rules. How is it making any sense? Lets run casinos on the same enabling rules and get taxes back to communities. The situation now is that members of all communities play, 3 communities pocket the profits.
Well... my point was a bit different. WA state grants tribal casinos better licensing for gambling as well as other breaks, but X% of the profits must be "re-invested" into the tribe by law.
Although the tribes by and large fund education, medical expenses, and other stuff rather well, it still leaves a huge surplus of money they are forced to spend on community "reinvestment." And that's how you get the ridiculous Tulalip hotel, and there's tons of outrage at the tribe for this - when in reality the law is forcing them to spend it.
Are you talking about hotel on top of the casino? Why is it ridiculous? It seems like natural and good business development for casinos to have hotel near by. Or are they pissed about funds reappropriation back into business instead of being spent on community needs?
