tribe

Santa Anita’s experiment of placing a similar version of Historical Horse Racing at the race track on Thursday came to an abrupt halt on Saturday afternoon when law enforcement officials physically removed the machines after racing ended.

Two officials at Santa Anita confirmed that representatives of the state Department of Justice removed the betting machines that were installed on Wednesday and have been confiscated and removed from the track.

According to eyewitnesses a representative of the Arcadia Police Department, along with several law enforcement officers with patches that read “California Department of Justice Attorney General,” came into the grandstand area where the Racing on Demand machines were located and unplugged them, placed them on handcarts and removed them from the building.

The employees working in the area were told to leave as about 15 officers confiscated the machines, including all the cash in the machines.

The machines, which allow people to bet on past horse races in a slot-machine-type format, were put into the grandstand area of Santa Anita on Thursday with no notice. Santa Anita did not advertise the machines or mention it in its fan newsletter. It was called a soft opening. The move to install the machines came without advance notice to the California Horse Racing Board.

It’s unclear who or what precipitated the removal but the tribes, which control most non-pari-mutuel wagering in the state, told The Times that it would have a “full throated” response to the installation of the machines, which it says violates the tribal compact on gambling. The tribes are a very powerful force in state politics and contribute millions of dollars to political candidates.

A tribal leader who specializes in gambling did not respond to a message.

Santa Anita believes the machines, which offer first, second and third betting on three past races, does not violate the rules for pari-mutuel gambling. The tribes contend the slot-machine-like machines are a game of chance and under its purview. Santa Anita says because the mutuel pool is not held in-house but between bettors that it is a game of skill and allowed.

No doubt this is headed for litigation and the fact that the machines were removed so quickly by the state attorney general’s office might tip which side has the early edge. The consortium that was trying to bring this type of wagering to California said it sent a copy of its legal opinion to the attorney general in advance of the installation.

The CHRB also called for a legal opinion on the issue although the contents have not been made public.

At stake is the future of California racing. The state is one of the few that receives no supplemental income from casino-type gambling. Historical Horse Racing, allowing people to bet on past races with little handicapping information, has greatly increased purses in Kentucky and other states, where it is legal.

California is at a big disadvantage in purses because it does not have the supplemental income. Santa Anita has not disclosed how much of this type of wagering would go to purses.

The fight over horse racing tracks’ right to legally install slot-machine-like terminals in their facilities to allow betting on past races hit the boiling point on Thursday when Santa Anita installed 26 Racing on Demand machines at the track on the ground floor of the grandstand. They will be in operation after 11 a.m. on live racing days.

At the crux of the issue is the legality of slot-machine-type terminals. Is it pari-mutuel wagering, where the payoff is determined by the amount of money bet, and considered a game of skill? Or is it a game of chance, such as slot machines and most table games? If it is a pari-mutuel game of skill, then it is governed by the state regulatory agency, the California Horse Racing Board. If it is a game of chance, it is governed by the tribes, who hold exclusive purview over most non-pari-mutuel wagering in the state.

“This puts it on a collision course with the tribes,” said Victor Rocha, conference chair of the Indian Gaming Assn., who said he did not have advance notice of this. “They clearly know what they are doing, they are smart guys, but it is clearly gambling. They will get the appropriate response, politically speaking.

“When you put illegal gambling machines in a liquor store, it gets shut down. If Santa Anita has illegal machines, they should be out of business. California didn’t sign up for racinos [the term for race tracks that have casinos].”

The addition of the machines was first reported by the Paulick Report.

Determining if these machines are skill or chance remains the unresolved issue, with each side claiming the view that best suits their advantage. The machines, which fall in the specter of Historical Horse Racing, have the look and feel of a slot machine with a rapid churn of money. You get scant information on the horses or jockeys you are currently betting on. The default on these machines is you just see the last two to three seconds of the race. The tracks contend that because they give you minimal handicapping information, and that you are not betting against the house but other players, it’s a game of skill.

One loophole that the tracks are trying to use on this was the passing of a three-by-three bet in April 2024. In it, you have to pick first, second and third in three pre-chosen races. All the wagers go into the same pari-mutuel pool, where you compete against other bettors. The track does take a percentage off the top, although in this case, the percentage and distribution are not known. In most areas, Historical Horse Racing uses about an 8% takeout. Live horse racing has an average takeout of 20% but it varies by type of bet. This is the first time the three-by-three has been used on past races.

“I think like sweepstakes and prediction markets, everyone has lost their mind when it comes to gambling,” said Rocha. “Everyone is looking for a loophole. [Santa Anita] has been champing to get into digital gaming. This is clearly a violation of state compacts. You can expect a very full-throated reply.”

A couple play a Historical Horse Racing electronic gambling machine at the Nash Casino. Santa Anita Park in Arcadia has installed comparable machines.

(Boston Globe via Getty Images)

The Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC) foreshadowed a move like this on page 25, item 41, of its Race Meet Agreement with Santa Anita where it said:

“Wagering on Concluded Races. Track shall not import and conduct wagering on concluded races at Santa Anita Park or Online without first obtaining the consent of the TOC and the CHRB. TOC hereby consents for Track to have at Santa Anita Park up to forty (40) self service totalizator terminals that facilitate wagering on concluded races.”

No one thought much of it at the time as the consortium working on the HHR project didn’t seem to be doing much. If the machines are allowed to stay at Santa Anita, it is expected they will soon be installed at Del Mar and Los Alamitos.

What is expected to go on now is the fight over if the machines can stay there. If it’s a case of winning friends and influencing people, the track is already in a deficit by not telling the group that regulates the sport that this was coming.

“Like everyone else, we had heard rumors, but the CHRB was unaware of this actual move,” a CHRB spokesman said in a statement.

Historical horse racing betting terminals sparked controversy when they were installed in Idaho. Similar machines were installed at Santa Anita Park in Arcadia.

(Otto Kitsinger/AP)

The CHRB was anticipating an ask to amend the track’s license that would allow it to place what they thought would be Historical Horse Racing machines at Santa Anita. It even asked its legal staff to come up with an opinion about if putting the machines in would be legal. The Times request for the document was turned down citing attorney-client privilege.

But neither Santa Anita nor the Thoroughbred Owners of California requested an agenda item by the cutoff 12 days ago.

Santa Anita’s owner, the Stronach Group, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

In fact, no one seems to want to talk about this. Santa Anita did not even put out a news release about this new betting opportunity at the track. And, it did not even mention it in its racing day newsletter “Stable Notes,” which generally touts things for fans such as $2 hot dogs and free parking.

However, in a one-page fact sheet about Racing on Demand, TSG painstakingly tries to explain why it “Does Not Violate Tribal Gaming” and why it has “Existing Authority.”

In a section titled “What It’s Not,” it makes these points about what it isn’t:

“— A slot machine.

“— House-banked gambling.

“— Historic Horse Racing (as operated in Kentucky, Virginia or other states.)”

The tribes have enormous political influence in California, in part, because of the millions of dollars it spends in political contributions. They are known to freely litigate any challenge to their sovereignty over most non pari-mutuel gambling in the state. And they almost always win.

Last year, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 831, which prohibited companies from offering types of online sweepstakes that are seen by the tribes as a threat to their gambling exclusivity. The combined vote was 120-0.

Sapang Kawayan, Philippines – Two hours north of the capital, Manila, on the vast grounds of a former United States military base, the Philippine government is pushing ahead with plans for a multibillion-dollar “smart city” that President Ferdinand Marcos Jr hopes to turn into a future “mecca for tourists” and a “magnet for investors”.

The New Clark City, which is being built on the former Clark Air Base, is central to the government’s effort to attract foreign investment and ease congestion in Manila, where nearly 15 million people live.

To accompany the city’s development, the government has also laid out an ambitious slate of projects at a nearby airport complex — new train lines, expanded airport runways, and a $515m stadium that officials hope will be enticing enough to draw the global pop singer Taylor Swift.

Caught between the rising new city and the site of the proposed stadium lies the Indigenous Aeta village of Sapang Kawayan. For the roughly 500 families who live there, in houses of nipa grass and rattan, the developments spell disaster.

“We were here before the Americans, even before the Spanish,” said Petronila Capiz, 60, the chieftain of the Aeta Hungey tribe in Sapang Kawayan. “And the land continues to be taken from us.”

Historians say American colonisers, who seized the Philippines from Spain in 1898, took over the 32,000-hectare (80,000-acre) tract that became Clark Air Base in the 1920s, dispossessing the Aetas, a seminomadic and dark-skinned people thought to be among the archipelago’s earliest inhabitants.

Many were displaced, though some moved deeper into the jungle inside the base and were employed as labourers.

The US turned over the base to the Philippine government in 1991, some four decades after granting the country independence. Since then, the Bases Conversion and Development Authority, or BCDA, has managed the complex. Some 20,000 Aetas are thought to remain in the Clark area today, spread across 32 villages.

But most of their claims to the land are not recognised.

In Sapang Kawayan, residents fear the government’s development boom means they could be pushed out long before they can establish such claims. The community – along with other Aeta villages in Clark – is working with researchers from the University of the Philippines to expedite a long-pending application for a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title, or CADT — the only legal mechanism that would allow them to assert rights to their territory and its resources.

In January, July and September, Aetas young and old gathered under makeshift wooden shelters in Sapang Kawayan, assembling family trees and sharing stories and photographs. Volunteers documented each detail in hopes of demonstrating that the community there predates colonial rule.

Their 17,000-hectare claim overlaps with nearly all of the 9,450 hectares designated for New Clark City, while 14 kilometres to the south is the airport complex where the new railway line, runway and stadium are slated to rise.

Together, the new city and airport complex “will eat up the fields where we farm, the rivers where we fish and the mountains where we get our herbs”, Capiz said.

‘Taylor Swift-ready’

The Philippine government first announced plans for New Clark City under then-President Rodrigo Duterte, promoting it as a solution to the crippling congestion in Metro Manila. The BCDA describes the development as a “green, smart and disaster-resilient metropolis”.

Construction began in 2018 with major roads and a sports complex that hosted the Southeast Asian Games in 2019.

Designed to accommodate 1.2 million people, the city is expected to take at least 30 years to complete.

The BCDA is now building three highways linking New Clark City to the airport complex, where the “Taylor Swift–ready” stadium is planned. Officials have hyped that the stadium, to be built by 2028, will lure Swift after she skipped the Philippines during the South Asian leg of her Eras tour last year.

“One of the main elements that make Clark so attractive to investors is its unmatched connectivity,” the BCDA’s president, Joshua Bingcang, said this year, citing the airport, a nearby seaport and major expressways. “But we need to further build on this connectivity and invest more in infrastructure.”

That expansion has come at a cost for Aeta communities.

Counter-Mapping PH, a research organisation, and campaigners estimate that hundreds of Aeta families have been displaced since construction of the city began, including dozens of families who were given just a week in 2019 to “voluntarily” vacate ahead of the Southeast Asian Games.

They warn that thousands more could be uprooted as development continues.

The BCDA has offered financial compensation of $0.51 per square metre as well as resettlement for affected families. In July, it broke ground on 840 housing units, though it is unclear whether they are intended for displaced Aetas.

The agency maintains that no displacement has occurred because Aetas have no proven legal claim to the area. In a statement to Al Jazeera, the BCDA said it “upholds the welfare and rights of Indigenous peoples” and acknowledges their “long historical presence” in central Luzon, where Clark is located. However, it noted that Clark’s boundaries follow “long-established government ownership” dating to the US military base, and that the New Clark City does not encroach on any recognised ancestral domains.

The BCDA also contended that it is the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) that deals with the applications for a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title, and stressed that it respected “lands awarded to Indigenous peoples”.

The Clark International Airport Corporation, which oversees the airport complex, offered similar assurances, stating that “there are no households or communities existing in the said location”. The group added that while the extended Clark area has Aeta communities, none exist within the airport complex itself.

‘Since time immemorial’

Only a handful of Aeta tribes have been awarded CADTs.

Two certificates have been granted on the outskirts of Clark, while the application filed by Sapang Kawayan and other villages inside the base have languished since 1986.

Marcial Lengao, head of NCIP’s Tarlac office, told Al Jazeera that to grant Aetas in Clark a CADT they must “prove that they have been there since time immemorial”, meaning, during or before the arrival of the Spanish colonisers to the archipelago 400 years ago.

The commission, he said, specifies minimum requirements for a CADT: a genealogy of at least five clans dating back at least three generations or to the precolonial period, testimonies from elders, a map of the domain and a census of the current population.

Lengao said Sapang Kawayan’s application has yet to complete these.

But even if the application is granted, the village faces another unique hurdle. Because the BCDA owns land rights to Clark, any CADT approved by the commission in the area must then be deliberated by the executive branch or the president’s office.

“They will be responsible for finding a win-win solution,” Lengao said.

Activists, however, denounced the NCIP’s requirements as onerous and warned that the longer Aetas remain without a CADT, the more vulnerable they are to losing their lands.

“Without a CADT and without genuine recognition from the government, the Aetas will continue to be treated like squatters on their own land,” said Pia Montalban of Karapatan-Central Luzon, a local rights group.

‘Among the most abused Indigenous Filipinos’

The Aetas, who rely on small-scale subsistence farming, are among the most historically disenfranchised Indigenous peoples in the Philippines. No official data exists on the Aeta population, but the government believes them to be a small subset of the Philippines’s Indigenous peoples, numbering in the tens of thousands nationwide.

The Aeta Tribe Foundation describes them as among the “poorest and least educated” groups in the nation.

“They are among the most abused Indigenous Filipinos,” said Jeremiah Silvestre, an Indigenous psychology expert who worked closely with Aeta communities until 2022 while teaching at the Tarlac State University. “Partly because of their good-natured culture, many have taken advantage of Aetas. Worse, they live off a land that is continuously taken from them.”

Silvestre, too, described the CADT process as “unnecessarily academic”, saying it required Indigenous elders to present complete genealogies and detailed maps to government officials in what he likened to “defending your dissertation”.

Changes in government personnel can restart the entire process, he noted.

A World Bank report last year found that Indigenous peoples in the Philippines “often face insurmountable bureaucratic hurdles in their efforts to process CADTs”. The report called recognising and protecting Indigenous land rights a “crucial step in addressing poverty and conflict”.

For the families of Sapang Kawayan, experts fear the lack of formal recognition could lead to displacement and homelessness.

“There’s no safety net,” Silvestre said. “We may see more Aetas begging on the street if this continues. Systemic poverty will also mean the loss of an Indigenous culture.”

Victor Valantin, an Indigenous Peoples Mandatory Representative for Tarlac Province, which includes parts of Clark, fears that the territory for the Aetas in the former base is shrinking as the new projects accelerate.

“We’ll have to move and move,” he said. “Shopping centres won’t move for us.”

Valantin went on to lament what he sees as a familiar imbalance.

“BCDA projects happen so fast,” he said. “But anything for us will be awfully slow.”