An agreement that would ban new casino competition would be a great deal for two Kansas Indian tribes, but what about the rest of the state?

Many businesses would like the kind of competitive protection being sought by American Indian tribes who want to develop a casino in Wyandotte County.

In testimony to Kansas legislators Thursday, representatives of the Kickapoo Tribe and Sac and Fox Nation said they would give the state a share of their profits in exchange for the state agreeing to block future competition from other Indian gambling operations. No figure was placed on this proposed payoff.

The two tribes are hoping to build a $175 million hotel and casino in the fast-developing area near the Kansas Speedway. But before they invest that much money in the project, they want to hedge their bets by acing out future competition. They want the state to prohibit any new gambling, including dog and horse tracks or casinos, operated by out-of-state tribes. The state’s lottery and existing horse and dog tracks wouldn’t be affected.

The tribes are willing to try to compete with existing casinos across the state line in Missouri but not against new tribal operations in Kansas. The land they are hoping to develop isn’t currently owned by the tribes, but they are asking the U.S. Department of the Interior to put the land in trust for them to allow the gambling operation. They also will have to work with Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to arrive at a gambling compact, which also must be approved by the Kansas Legislature.

There have been indications that Sebelius provides a more friendly audience than former Gov. Bill Graves did to Indian gaming proposals, and a Sebelius representative said the governor was interested in the Kickapoo/Sac and Fox proposal. The possibility of establishing a new “revenue stream” to feed into the state treasury during the current financial crisis certainly would make the governor take a second look at the proposal.

However, caution is called for. There may be positive aspects of limiting the number of gambling outlets in the state, but the governor must be careful about unfairly clamping down on competition. Former House Speaker Robin Jennison, who now lobbies for the Wichita Greyhound Park, made a good point when he said it may be unfair to eliminate the possibility of casinos or other gambling operations in other parts of the state. Wyandotte County is a long way from Garden City, for instance. If someone wants to develop a casino in the southwest part of the state, should they be locked out by a pact with the Wyandotte County developers?

What if the Kickapoos and Sac and Fox Nation decide they want to expand their operation in Wyandotte County or even to other locations in the state? If they can get land placed in trust, should they be allowed to expand their casino monopoly?

If a compact is approved that includes a no-competition arrangement, does this open the door for other businesses to seek similar deals with the state? It would be a dangerous precedent.

Many Kansans remain philosophically opposed to expanded casino gambling in the state no matter who is running the games. The federal government has decreed that American Indian tribes are a special case when it comes to gambling regulation. State officials are required to negotiate compacts to allow Indian gaming, but they also are responsible for the best interest of Kansas as they discuss those compacts.