At least three labor organizations are supporting Gov. Tim Pawlenty's controversial plan for a state-supported casino.

Representatives of UNITE HERE Local 17, the Minneapolis Building and Construction Trades Council, and Teamsters Joint Council 32 all are publicly supporting two proposals ? a "racino" allowing Canterbury Park to add slot machines to its race track and card room in Shakopee, and a metro-area casino operated by the state and by three northern Minnesota Indian tribes, possibly near the Mall of America.

The unions say they have agreements in place with Canterbury Park management and with the Leech Lake, White Earth and Red Lake bands of Ojibwe. The agreements would require the casinos to be built union under a project labor agreement, and would grant automatic union recognition to casino employees once a majority sign union authorization cards.

"We've been very careful in how we proceed," said Wade Luneberg, lobbyist for UNITE HERE Local 17, which represents hotel and restaurant workers in the Twin Cities.

"A lot of folks in the labor movement don't think gaming is a good idea. The Building Trades and our union historically see it as a source of good jobs. If we're moving to a service-sector economy, it's our responsibility to make sure the jobs are high quality."

Unionized casino jobs are just that, he said. UNITE HERE represents 90,000 gaming workers nationwide in casinos, riverboats and affiliated hotels and restaurants ? including 55,000 jobs in Las Vegas, which Luneberg points out, is a "right-to-work state."

Money for the budget deficit. Pawlenty is pushing a state-sponsored casino as a way to help patch Minnesota's budget deficit ? estimated at $1.2 billion over the next two years.

The Indian casino is projected to generate a one-time, $200 million licensing fee plus $143 million a year in revenue for the state. The Canterbury proposal is expected to produce a $100 million licensing fee and $103 million in annual revenue.

Minnesota currently receives no fees from existing Indian-run casinos. The wisdom of expanding gambling isn?t the only issue that makes the casino proposals controversial.

On March 30, the state attorney general's office issued an advisory opinion stating that the proposals, as now drafted, probably would violate the state constitution unless approved by voters.

In addition, some unions have labeled the casino proposals just another "gimmick" that allows Pawlenty to technically abide by his "no new taxes" pledge while dodging long-term answers to the state?s budget deficits.

Agreeing to disagree
"Gaming is like the Blue-Green Alliance," said Brad Lehto, legislative director for the Minnesota AFL-CIO. "We agree where we can; we go our separate ways where we can't." (The Alliance is a coalition of labor and environmental groups.)

AFSCME Council 5, which represents 41,000 public employees in the state, is among organizations that has characterized the casino as another of Pawlenty's gimmicks. But Council 5's executive board has not taken a formal position on the casino proposals, spokesman Don Dinndorf said.

"We continue to push the message that we need to find real solutions to the state?s budget problems," he said. "One of those solutions has to be a way to enhance revenues."

The prospect of additional revenue for the state ? even if it is a gimmick ? can't be ignored, said John Williams, business manager for the Minneapolis Building Trades, and Don Gerdesmeier, of Teamsters Joint Council 32.

"It's money we can go after for education, for public employee pay raises, for health-care needs," Williams said.

?We need to raise revenues," Gerdesmeier said. "Some people wonder whether it's right to use gambling money. I don't know if we have the answer to that. But it merits an open and frank discussion of whether or not it's the right thing to do."

On a "very selfish and self-serving" level, Williams said, part of the Building Trades' support is because of the construction jobs a new casino would create. "That's what they pay me to go after," he said. But he also sees a larger benefit for the tribes and for the state.

"Somehow, you have to get money back into the coffers," Williams said. "This isn't a cure-all, but gambling is here. It's here to stay. We might as well be making some money off of it."

Local 17's Luneberg makes a similar point. Last year, he said, gaming generated $1.5 billion in Minnesota. "To think that gaming isn't in Minnesota, isn't expanding in Minnesota, is not right. We added 5,000 slot machines last year. There's 5 to 8 percent annual growth in tribal gaming."

The union recognition agreements with Canterbury Park and the three Indian tribes are a rare opportunity to create thousands of good union jobs, he said. The sovereignty of Indian nations means existing tribal casinos are not covered by federal labor law, which makes them all but impossible to organize, Luneberg said.

Minnesota is only the third state where UNITE HERE has been able to reach a card-check agreement with a tribe, he said.

Adapted from The Union Advocate, the official newspaper of the St. Paul Trades and Labor Assembly. E-mail The Advocate at: advocate@mtn.org