Topeka ? Gambling opponents often talk as if they’re trapped in a castle besieged by pro-gambling barbarians.

Each year, the hordes batter the walls. Each year, they’re hurled back, but the fear of a new assault remains. The people in the castle want to sweep the barbarians away forever.

That image explains the outcome last week of a legislative committee’s review of a compact between Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ office and the Kickapoo and the Sac and Fox tribes, permitting the tribes to operate a large casino in Wyandotte County.

The compact guarantees the state a share of revenue from the new casino — perhaps $50 million a year — but penalizes the state if it allows other gambling to compete with the tribes’ operation.

Exploding development

A majority of the Joint Committee on State-Tribal Relations wanted to sweeten the deal — for the tribes. The committee asked the tribes and Sebelius’ office to renegotiate the compact to make the penalties for the state even harsher.

Gambling opponents calculate that if they satisfy Wyandotte County’s boundless appetite for a casino, they also can block gambling elsewhere. If successful, the state could not afford to consider further gambling — effectively ending the debate.

“I do think that a lot of legislators are pretty tired of a yearly gambling debate and would like to see it end,” Sebelius said. “I don’t know how realistic that is.”

The Kickapoo and the Sac and Fox plan a $210 million casino-and-hotel complex near Kansas Speedway, where retail development has exploded over the past three years.

Wyandotte County residents seem to want a casino on the Kansas side to compete with casinos on the Missouri side.

State to receive revenue

For the first time, Kansas would get a share of the revenue from an Indian casino. Seven states — Arizona, California, Connecticut, Michigan, New Mexico, New York and Wisconsin — have such agreements with tribes, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

However, if Kansas wants revenue from the new casino, the tribes want assurances the state isn’t going to allow competitors to undercut the tribal venture.

That dynamic created an opportunity for gambling opponents.

“Numerous legislators have said we need to find a way to stop the annual waste of legislators’ time debating bills on expanding gambling,” said Glenn Thompson, executive director of the antigambling group Stand Up for Kansas.

As drafted, penalties for the state would kick in when the state allowed 500 or more state-owned slot machines or video lottery terminals within 100 miles of the Kickapoo-Sac and Fox casino, or when it permitted 1,500 outside that 100-mile limit.

The state’s revenues would dwindle as the number of state-owned machines increased. Eventually, the state’s share would decline to a few million dollars.

The compact specifies state-owned machines because, under the Kansas Constitution, only the tribes and the state lottery can own casinos or slot machine parlors. The lottery can’t get into such a venture without legislative approval first.

Statehouse sieges

Over the past decade, legislators have rejected every proposal for state-owned casinos or slot machines, frustrating developers who would like to get lucrative state licenses to manage such ventures.

But gambling opponents fear the compact, as drafted, would encourage gambling promoters to return to the Legislature year after year, seeking slots.

Furthermore, they worry that the longer pro-gambling forces persist, the more likely they are to wear down resistance.

Thus, a 5-4 majority of the State-Tribal Relations Committee asked the tribes and Sebelius’ office to rewrite the compact so that the state would lose all revenue from the Kickapoo-Sac and Fox casino if it allowed even one slot machine elsewhere.

Backers of the idea believe the penalty would be so severe that the Legislature could never seriously entertain the idea of additional gambling. Pro-gambling forces would be forced to give up their annual sieges of the Statehouse.

“Legislators do have an opportunity here to change — and set — the landscape,” said Senate Majority Leader Lana Oleen, R-Manhattan, an opponent of expanded gambling.

Of course, it’s probably a vain hope.

Gambling promoters are drawn to the Statehouse keep each year by the vision of the treasure they’ll pile up if they can breach the walls holding them back. The sight of someone else making money is likely to spur them on, no matter how high the walls.