Loading...
2003/08/27 City Council Agenda PacketCity of Rohnert Park s6750 Commerce Boulevard ®Rohnert Park, California 94928 Phone: (707)588-2227 ® FAX: (707)588-2274 ♦ WEB: www.rpcity.org ROHNERI' PARD CTI'Y COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING. . AGENDA Wednesday, August 27, 2003 6:00 p.m. Special Session - Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call (Mackenzie_ Nordin_ Spradlin_Vidak-Martinez_ Flores Public Comments: For public comment on items not listed on the agenda, or on agenda items if unable to speak at the scheduled time (limited to 3-5 minutes per appearance & a 30 minute total time limit, or allocation of time based on number of speaker cards submitted) - PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING - *SEE NOTE BELOW Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria - City Council consideration of request for Municipal Services from Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria 1. Presentation by Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria 2. Council discussion/questions 3. Public Comments 4. Council authorization to establish an ad hoc committee to review Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria request for Municipal Services • Council discussion/action 5. Mayor's appointments to ad hoc committee & direction ADJOURNMENT DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability which requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this City Council meeting, please contact the City Offices at (707) 588-2227 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation by the City. Please make sure the City Manager's office is notified as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment requiring meeting materials to'be produced in another format (Braille, audio -tape, etc.) NOTE: Time shown for any particular matter on the agenda is an estimate only. Matters may be considered earlier or later than the time indicated depending on the pace at which the meeting proceeds. If you wish to speak on an item under discussion by the Council which appears on this agenda, after receiving recognition from the Mayor, please walk to the rostrum and state your name and address for the record. - PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING - Any item raised by a member of the public which is not agendized and may require Council action shall be automatically referred to staff for investigation and disposition which may include placing on a future agenda. If the item is deemed to be an emergency or the need to take action arose after posting of the agenda within the meaning of Government Code Section 54954.2(b), Council is entitled to discuss the matter to determine if it is an emergency item under said Government Code and may take action thereon. JH-h:agenda\082703 AGENDA-SPECIALRPCity Council (This agenda has been posted in accordance with state law, the Brown Act) , J ' FEDERATED INDIANSOF CRAYON RNCHEKIA P.O. Box 14428, Santa Rosa, CA 95402 August 19, 2003 Honorable Members Rohnert Park City Council 6750 Commerce Boulevard Rohnert Park, CA 94928 RECEIVED AUG 2 0 2003 CITY OF RQHS' ERI PARK Dear Mayor Flores and Honorable Members: � Ir a�r.aw�ws Ff/1o�03 Q[= 3 `,"U LLAN [OUS C M;MUNICATlONS ` PY TO- NPY TO: As you are aware, the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria (the "Tribe") has conducted an extensive search throughout our aboriginal territory to identify alternatives to our current site on Highway 37. This letter is written to advise you and the members of the City Council that the Tribe has entered into an option agreement giving us the right to acquire approximately 360 acres adjacent to Rohnert Park. The optioned property is located immediately west of the city limits of Rohnert Park and is bordered by Stony Point Road, Wilfred Avenue and the Rohnert Park Expressway. The Tribe hereby requests the opportunity to meet with the City Council to discuss the establishment of our reservation and the development of a resort -hotel casino on the optioned property. At this meeting we would like to present our vision of the proposed project and discuss the economic benefits to the City and the larger community that can be generated by such a facility. Following our presentation and discussion with the City Council, the Tribe will request that the City authorize the appropriate representatives to begin negotiating, on a government to government basis, the terms and conditions of a legally enforceable agreement setting forth the commitments necessary to insure that the proposed project benefits the City, as well as, the Tribe. We are excited about the prospect of establishing a strong and mutually beneficial relationship:vJth the. Rohnert Park community. We believe that the development of a first class entertainment destination at this location presents the City with a unique opportunity to strengthen its economy and provide entertainment, dining, lodging and .other amenities for the entire region. We look forward to meeting with you. Sincerely, Greg Sarris Chairman glAi ? 0 L .` FEDERATED ., 1NDIA,NS0F CK)A,TON RMCHCKIA P.O. Box 14428, Santa Rosa, CA 95402 August 19, 2003 Honorable Members Rohnert Park City Council 6750 Commerce Boulevard Rohnert Park, CA 94928 FI � 10 X03 QL- RECEIVED ------: 11" _ _LA'�EOUS rl(`M,x UNICATIONS AUG 2 0 2003 -- +LNDA S a;;1o J>�Y T0: Vit? _VNER T PARK COPY T0: Dear Mayor Flores and Honorable Members: As you are aware, the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria (the "Tribe") has conducted an extensive search throughout our aboriginal territory to identify alternatives to our current site on Highway 37. This letter is written to advise you and the members of the City Council that the Tribe has entered into an option agreement giving us the right to acquire approximately 360 acres adjacent to Rohnert Park. The optioned property is located immediately west of the city limits of Rohnert Park and is bordered by Stony Point Road, Wilfred Avenue and the Rohnert Park Expressway. The Tribe hereby requests the opportunity to meet with the City Council to discuss the establishment of our reservation and the development of a resort -hotel casino on the optioned property. At this meeting we would like to present our vision of the proposed project and discuss the economic benefits to the City and the larger community that can be generated by such a facility. Following our presentation and discussion with the City Council, the Tribe will request that the City authorize the appropriate representatives to begin negotiating, on a government to government basis, the terms and conditions of a legally enforceable agreement setting forth the commitments necessary to insure that the proposed project benefits the City, as well as, the Tribe. We are excited about the prospect of establishing a strong and mutually beneficial relationship with the .Rohnert Park. community. We believe that the development of a first class entertainment destination at this location presents the City with a,unique opportunity to strengthen.its economy and provide entertainment, dining, lodging and .other amenities for the entire region. We look forward to meeting with you. Sincerely, Greg Sarris Chairman #4030 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OFFICE OF THE Q' y ATTORNEY 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, California 94928 MEMORANDUM August 20, 2003 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Betsy Strauss RE: Tribal Gaming and Casinos Council: $ Miscellaneous Communications A ends A 03 Copy to: copy to: The purpose of this memo is to summarize the federal and state law that guides tribal gaming and the operation of casinos in California. - �/Ado3 The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) was enacted by the Congress after several years of discussions and negotiations between gaming tribes, States, the gaming industry and the Congress in an attempt to formulate a system for regulating gaming on Indian lands. The Act was passed for the purposes of providing a statutory basis for gambling by Indians and promoting Indian economic development and self-sufficiency.' A National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) was created with the power to enforce tribal gaming ordinances; monitor all Indian gaming activities; inspect gaming premises; conduct background investigations of employees and contractors; and enforce collection of civil fines.2 The Act'was also enacted in response to a decision of the United States Supreme Court that found that tribes, in states that otherwise allow, gaming,, have a right to conduct gaming activities on Indian Iands unhindered by state regulation.3 - - ' -24 U.S_:C,_§_2705.__._ — - - ---- - - - - - -- -- 2 The IGRA authorizes a fine, not to exceed $25,000 per violation, against the tribal operator of an Indian game or a management contractor engaged in gaming for any violation of the Act. 25 U.S.C. §2713. 3 California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians 480 U.S. 202 (1987). (707) 588-2214 1bstrauss@rpcity.org —2— August 21, 2003 The IGRA establishes federal gaming standards on Indian lands, leaves the states without a significant role unless one is negotiated through a tribal -state compact and has been interpreted to be entirely preemptive of all state and local regulation.4 Unless otherwise agreed to by the Tribe, neither the State nor any local government may impose any tax, fee, charge, or other assessment upon an Indian tribe authorized to engage in class III gambling.' The only exception made to this general rule is for law enforcement: States and local governments have the authority to enforce the criminal laws on Indians and Indian lands.6 No state or local regulation of Indian activity on Indian lands. It is a long and well- established principle of Federal -Indian law as expressed in the United States Constitution, reflected in federal laws, and articulated in decisions of the Supreme Court, that the regulatory jurisdiction of state and local governments does not extend to Indian lands. This means that, with the exception of the criminal law, no state or local laws apply to activity on Indian lands including land use laws and building codes. The IGRA does not unilaterally impose or allow State jurisdiction on Indian lands for the regulation of Indian gaming activities. Rather, the Act allows a tribe to affirmatively elect to have state laws apply to tribal lands. The mechanism for facilitating this relationship is the tribal -state compact. Class III Gaming. The IGRA describes three classes of Indian gaming. Class I gaming is social, traditional games played in connection with tribal ceremonies or celebrations. Class II gaming includes bingo, lotto, pull -tabs, punch boards and card games authorized or not prohibited by state law_ Class H gaming excludes baccarat, blackjack, and all slot machines. Class III gaming is all gaming that is not class I or class II, including slot machines. A tribe that chooses to engage in Class III gambling in a State that permits such gaming, must: (1) adopt a tribal ordinance authorizing the gaming; (2) gain NIGC approval of the ordinance; (3) enter into a tribal -state compact for the operation of tribal Class III games; and (4) gain approval of the compact by the Secretary of the Interior.' Only the tribe can own the gaming enterprise. In March 2000, the voters of the State of California approved Proposition 1 A, an amendment to the Constitution that allows the governor to enter into compacts with federally recognized Indian tribes to operate slot machines and banking and percentage card games upon Indian lands in accordance with the IGRA.9 Net revenues from any tribal gaming may only be used (1) to fund tribal government operations or programs; (2) to provide for the general welfare of the Indian tribe and its members; (3) to promote 4 American Vantage Companies v. Table Mountain Rancheria 103 Cal.App.4`' 590 (2002). 5 25 U.S.C. § 2710 (d)(4). 6 18 U.S.C...§ 1162; 28 U.S.C. _§1369 (commonly_refened-to-as-Public-Law 2807). - ---- -- -- — ' Santa Rosa Band oflndians v. Kings County 532 F.2d 655 (9'' Cir. 1975). 8 18 U.S.C. § 1166(c) (2); see, also, Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida 517 U.S. 44 (1996). 9 Cal. Const. Ari. IV, section 19(f). 2 -3— .August 21, 2003 tribal economic development; (4) to donate to charitable organizations; and (5) to help fund operations of local government agencies. 10 Lands held in trust. In order for gaming to occur on lands acquired in trust by the. Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary must determine that the gaming establishment would be in the best interest of the Indian tribe and its members, and would not be detrimental to the surrounding community. The determination is made after consultation with the Indian tribe and appropriate State and local officials." National Environmental Protection Act. The operation of a Class III gaming facility is subject to the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). NEPA requires an environmental assessment (EA), a document much like the initial study required by the California Environmental Quality Act. If the EA reveals that federal agency action may significantly affect the quality of the human environment, a detailed environmental impact statement ("EIS") concerning that action must be prepared- 12 There are three possible actions that could trigger NEPA` the Secretary of the Interior's consideration of a Tribal - State Compact; the NIGC's consideration of a tribe's gaming ordinance; or the Secretary of the Interior's consideration of acquiring land in trust for a tribe. An Environmental Assessment is conducted for the purpose of determining whether an EIS is required. If any "significant" environmental impacts might result from the proposed agency action, then an EIS must be prepared before agency action is taken.13 Sovereign Immunity. Indian tribes have long been recognized as possessing the common-law immunity from lawsuits traditionally. enjoyed by sovereign powers such as the federal and state governments. 14 A tribe may waive its sovereign immunity and consent to being sued but the waiver must be specific and will only apply in a narrowly defined situation. A waiver of sovereign immunity cannot be implied but must be explicitly stated in a written agreement.15 10 25 U.S.C. §2710(b)(2)(B). " 25 U.S.C. § 2719(b)(1)(A). This determination is not required if gaming will occur on lands that are restored to an Indian tribe that is restored to federal recognition. 1212 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C). 13 City of Roseville v. Norton (2002) 219 F_Supp.2d 130, 164 citing, Sierra Club v. Peterson 717 F.2d ---1409_(D_C_ Cir_ 1983).— 14 Turner v. United States 248 U.S. 354 (1919); United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. - 309 U.S. 506, 512-513 (1940). 15 Great Western Casinos v. Morongo Band oflLlission Indians (1999) 74 Cal. App. 4i1' 1407. 3 -4— August 21, 2003 Government Services. Since the adoption of Proposition 1A in 2000, a variety of cities and counties in California have entered into agreements with Indian Tribes to mitigate the impact of a class III gaming facility that would otherwise not be subject to the city or county's land use jurisdiction. We have reviewed a number of these agreements and have copies of agreements between a tribe and Placer County and a tribe and Yuba County_ These agreements cover such subjects as traffic impacts; public safety impacts, environmental impacts; and socio%economic impacts of the gaming facility. Some of these agreements provide government services to the tribe. Because local governments do not have the legal authority to regulate the use of Indian lands, a tribe is not required to enter into such an agreement. Although neither a city nor a county can require a tribe to agree to mitigate the impacts of its facility on the community, the governor is required to consider the impact of the gaming facility on the local community when deciding whether to enter into the required tribal -state compact. I hope the information in this memo is helpful to the City Council as it considers the proposal received from the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria. If you have any questions, please let me know. 11 AUG=27-2003 WED 02 58 PM PROVE110HER FLATT LLP 08/27/2603 15:00 RECEIVED AUG 2 7 2003 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 707-565-2624 FAX 110. 707 281 2387 SO CO COUNTY COUNSEL INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS P. 03.'04 PAGE 92/63 Council: X Date Al - Miscellaneous Communications �7 Agenda8/,2p X Copy to: Copy to: I will describe the procedural and legal context in which this matter is brought before your Board. The.l~ederated Indians of the Grat= Ranehcria was reinstated by an act of i Congress passed in December, 2000, as a recognized Indian tribe which enjoys rights under the Constitutions and laws of the United States. The Tribe govenas its own internal affairs and any lands held in Trust for its benefit. The Tribc appears before you as one government to another. The Tribe currently has no Ind of its own, no Rancheria or Trust land. - Howevery Congress provided that the Secretary of the Interior AMU tape into Trust any land acquired by the Craton tribe in Marin or Sonoma Counties. Once land i9 taken into Trust, it is m2l subject to any laud use controls by local govenunent. Indian Trust lauds are exempt from all taxes, including property taxes, sales taxts, and transient occupancy trues. Because the Secretary bas no discretion to refuse to take into Trust land acquired by this Tribe, the Secretary will .not conduct an environmental review relating to taking land into Trust. The Tribe anlnounccd in April that it had acquired options to acquire approximately 2,000 acres of land near Sears Point_ On May 13, 2003, your Board adopted Resolution No. 03-0512, which resolved in part: f [l J that the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, based on the i information currently available, strongly opposes the creation of a gambling casino- on the site proposed by the Tribe; [2] that County staff is directed to enter into good faith discussion with tribal representatives for the purposes of facilitating government to government communications, exploring casino development and reviewing i altGmative sites, as well as winimizing and mitigating environmental impacts of any casino project; and ti `AUG -27-2003 WED 02:59 PM PROVENCHER FLATT LLP FAX 110, 707 284 2387 P. 04.'04 08/27/2003 15:00 707-565--2624. SO CO COUNTY COUNSEL PAGE 03/03 [3] ...that any proposed gaming project in Sonoma County complies with the County General Plan, meats all federal and state environmental, public health, and ,public safety requirements that otherwise would apply to a non - Indian development projrct, and to require that any land proposed to be taken into trust goes through a thorough regulatory and environmental review process. County staff has ract with tubal mpreseutatives several times this summer. We discussed with the Tribe the requirements of the County General Plan, and responded to questions conn ming areas of the County generally eligible for urban or aomnlercial development. We learned that the Tribe was reviewing as many as a dozen potential Resort/casino sites in Sonoma and Marin counties, generally along the Higbway 141 corridor in or adjacent to cities. no Tnbe requested this meeting with you to present the results of their search for an alternative location. 08/27/2003' 16:00 7954386 PAGE 01 lfistory of the Graton Rancheria Tribe The Graton Rancheria community is known in the anthropological literature to be composed of Coast bliwok and Southern Pomo groups. The Nliwok of west Marin County have, through the years, been referred to as Marshall Indians, Marin Nfiwok, Tomales, Tomales Bay, and Hookooelco. To their north, the Bodega 1Vliwok (also referred to as Bodega and Olaznentko) traditionally live in the area of Bodega Bay. The Southern Porro Sebastopol group is the neighboring group immediately to the north, and east of the Miwok, with the modern town of Sebastopol located about one mile from the northern border of Miwok traditional territory and the southern border of Southern Pomo territory. Many Pomo from this area continue to live in their ancestral homelands. The earliest historical account of these peoples is from Sir Francis Drake's voyage in 1579. In June of 1920, the Bureau of Indian ,Affairs purchased a 14.5 -acre tract of land outside of the town of Graton for the "village home" of the Marshall, Bodega, Tomales and Sebastopol Indians. Thus, through the purchase of this land, put into federal trust, the government consolidated these neighboring traditionally interactive groups into one recognized entity, Graton Rancheria. These Miwok and Pomo people continued to use the Rancheria as the focal point of their culture throughout the next decades. However, because of the steep terrain and the lack of financial assistance from the BIA, these peoples had a difficult time building homes and moving onto the Rancheria. In the 1950s, the Federal government began selling Trust land to individual Indian people with the net result being a loss of sovereign status of hundreds of Indian Tribes. In August of 1958, the Bureau of Indian Affairs approved a plan to distribute the assets and remove the Graton Rancheria from federal trust with three distributees (now all deceased) - Thus, from 1958 through 2000, the Tribe was not a federal ;recognized Tribe and therefore, could not qualify for any federal government assistance. In 1990, through the efforts of Greg Sarris, the current Tribal Chairman, the Tribe embarked on an effort to regain it's status as a federally recognized Tribe. As a strategic move, Greg decided to pursue recognition as "The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria," rather than as individual tribes of Coast Nfiwoks or Southern Pomos- The Tribe's efforts culminated in passage of legislation by the US Nouse of Representatives and Senate restoring federal Tribal status'to the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. President Clinton signed Public Law 106-568 into law on December 27, 2000. 08/27/2003 16:00 7954386 PAGE 02 Historical Timeline Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria ➢ .1579: Earliest historical account of what we now call. the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria people from. Sir Francis Drake. ➢ 1595-1808: Descriptions by Spanish and Russian voyagers provide additional verification of Indian, people. ➢ 1861: The United States Congress enacts legislation which, effectively extinguishes Indian title to almost all land in California, leaving most tribes, including Graton Rancheria's ancestors, entirely landless. ➢ Mid 1880s: By this time period, as a result of the loss of homelands, European disease, mistreatment, and enslavement, the Indian population in California, which at European contact was estimated at 10,000 — 15,000, had declined dramatically. ➢ 1920: Bureau of Indian Affairs purchases a 15.45 acre tract of land in Graton, CA for the "village home" of the Marshall, Bodega, Tomales and Sebastopol Indians. 'Through the purchase of this land, which was put into federal trust, the federal government consolidated these neighboring traditionally interactive groups :into one recognized entity, Graton Rancheria. The parcel was too small to house all who wanted to Iive on it and the Bureau of Indian Affairs could not provide any assistance for construction costs. ➢ 1950s: Despite interest in moving onto the "village home," few people actually moved onto the property because there was limited buildable acreage, little water and no housing assistance. ➢ 1958: Congress passed the California Rancheria Act of 1958 calling for the termination of 41 California Rancherias, including the Graton Rancheria. Under the Act, land was distributed in fee to individual Indians, but the underlying water and sewer services that were promised never materialized. In Graton's case, the eland was transferred to three distributees (now all deceased) and eventually all but one acre passed out of Indian ownership. 1960s - Early 1990s: Despite the federal government's termination of the recognition of the Graton 'Tribe, Tribal members continued to protect the cultural identity of their people by preserving burial and other archeologically important sites throughout their aboriginal territory. ➢ 1990s: In a continuing effort to protect their aboriginal territory and their cultural and political identity, tribal members, led by now -Chairman Greg Sarris, raised money to travel to Washington to fight for restoration of their federal status. 08/27/2003 16:00 7954386 PAGE 03 ➢ 1997: A Congressionally mandated study recommended the immediate restoration of three California tribes, including the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. ➢ December 27,2000- President Clinton signed into law legislation restoring federal recognition to the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. The legislation also provided for the restoration of land to this now la Bless Tribe. In late 2002, the Tribe's membership rolls were ratified with 582 members and the Tribe turned its attention to establishing a land base for its people. ➢ April 23, 2003:. The Tribe announced it had purchased 2,000 acres within its aboriginal territory and intended to develop a gamng resort on less than 15% that land. The Tribe also issued a Ten Point Pledge of Cooperation in which it promised to work with local goverwnents and cornmpniti" to mitigate any potential off -reservation impacts of the project. ➢ May 2003: Two local Counties passed resolutions opposing development Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey announced her intention to introduce legislation amending the Graton Rancheria's.restoration legislation. ➢ June 2003: The Tribe and Sonoma County began working together to try to identify mutually acceptable resolution to issues affecting both the Tribal and County government. .08/27/2003 16:00 . 7954386 POSSIBLE QUESTIONS PAGE 04 • (Local economic impact) There is concern that this casino/resort would draw business away from local hotels and restaurants- In your experience, what kind of impact does a project of this magnitude /nave on surrounding business? • (Wastewater) I want to ask about wastewater. As you know, there are already serious wastewater capacity problems in our city. How can you avoid making a bad problem worse? • (Water) Water is also a serious problem for our city. What steps do you intend to take to avoid drawing down our city's limited capacity? • (Wetlands) There are wetlands and tiger salamander habitat on this land. We appreciate that you're giving away 2,000 acres of open space at the previous site, but how do you intend to protect the fragile environment on this new site? • (Crime) One of the biggest concerns about gaming is that it attracts crime. How can you ensure that our community won't see an increase in crime? • (Traffic) You've said that you would help mitigate traffic in and around this project. What do you think the impact will be on the 101, and would you be willing to pay for improvements along the 101? • (Traffic) What do you believe the impact on traffic will be on local roads surrounding this area, and how do you intend to help fix the problem? • (Gambling addiction) How do Delp those who are victims of gambling addiction? ® (Impact on young people) As an educator, I'm concerned that young people would be attracted to this facility. This casino is located just three miles frond, a university. How do you ensure that young people aren't allowed to drink or gamble? • (Contrast with other tribes) We've all heard horror stories of Indian tribes building casinos and not caring about the impact on the local community? What makes this project different? • (Enforceability of MOU) How can we be sure that you'll keep your promises? You say you'll sign an MOU, but can we enforce that in court? ® (Jobs/wages) How can we be sure that these "good -paying jobs" will be going to Rohnert Park citizens? W O V l QV l1 , J 00. See Reverse Y COUNCIL ✓ NC[L SPEAKER CARD Date: �'� y Name: Address:17 S Phone: l: F1. l )S` TOPIC:.. s I See Reverse —> Address: (9�1 SC7 CO, Y1\.- (YS 4 -Ir Phone= -ot ' 1 w I„ See Reverse -� Brief Summary of Comments: CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Name: 5 q i Vb 9 rOPIC: Date: P) - Brief Summary of Comments: I . ;VIAA-u 0�e-r 4; Re- +( V,( I L'i 1 e Reverse f CITY C- O-UNCM SPEAKER CARD Date: A) j C., . ( 1q ame* , ' r — H-4=: T d r�s: 03 0 hone: 7 - Sc -'— MIC: /,-L- ief Summary of Comments: V14 'Vne See Reverse ---> CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Name: Address: 4q I' bwne-,-1 G+ .S -F 0,-A q4l t7 Phone: —+(5.-T3l -7155 TOPIC:- rP-Ve-r)LA(5 Brief Summary of Comments: I VA 9 Name: Addre Phone: See Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD "a TOPIC: AdIall /7'0 Brief Summary of Comments: / "ald bke— ./o 11 I 9/flm (-aj1'ftq j /-%p- - A ,Cee Reverse --), See Reverse CITYY:COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date': address: Z Z- ?hone. conic: Brief Summary. of Coi men See Reuerce. Addri.ess: A7A " �J'/_ Phone: CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Name: D-4d'Ar V A Add.eess, 13 TOPIC: Pho e:6- o "3 17 BrK e Summary ummaof"CL.ommepts:' TOPIC:. Brief Summary of Comments:: i 1101�7_'s-­ AA) 14' `6 ........... See Reverse Addri.ess: A7A " �J'/_ Phone: TOPIC: BrK e Summary ummaof"CL.ommepts:' :41 ir `6 ........... &e Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKERICA" Date: Reverse, . CITY_COUNCIL SPEAKER. A 21 Date:: 77 me.j.. 7 TOPIC . Brief:Summary of;Comments 5 . ec, See Reverse . Name:_ Address• TOPIC: Brief Summary:o -ter. 71 CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD .17: Date` ?j )UNC .EL SPEAKER.CARD Abl See.Reverse -� No S tj6 See Reverse'; See Reverse Name:_�-� Address• . ��o Phone: TOPIC: D CI OUNCIL SPEAKER CARR.. Dater �-c f AA ; CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD, Date:.: CITY COUNCILSPE' CARD. </i Address, A7 Phone: TOPIC: kf'S.0fCommen,..,:,, Br0 htl�lj 6 SJ See Reverse WON n w See Reverse See Reverse See Reverse —� Address' -: Phone '�3;_;`1rFr�, See Reverse"' -� See Revere -3 Iwo A -MV 11 See Reverse Na See Reverse —� neRtS See. Reverse See Reverse -� Brief Summary of Comments: See Reverse —?o Brief Sum'mary;of Comments: CITY—COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD A 7 TOPIC: Brief Summary -' f'C ts: See':Reverse —� TOPIC :- Brief Summary: of Comments... _ See Reverse -> CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD A YOPIC: See Reverse--* ;CITY COUNCIL; SPEAKER CARD Date:.. I N -,r / / n ZA 1 OJUv uty. COUNCIL:: SPEAKER CARD Date: z Phone: .�-Y,104 4 , eee-Reverse ---). trief Summary of Comments: See Reverse --> CITY. COUNCIU PEAKER CARD_ Date: TOPIC Brief Sum k t OR "WIN G i { r d a my too Ams n yt f G c v, � r a a � � At �P - CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD - (7 Address- ® e Phone: TOPIC:. . Brief Summary of Comments: /��•`�, See Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD. nate:. See Reverse —� CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Address: Phone: TOPIC: 0,Z1,Y1 0 Brief Summary of Comments: �(i�P,y-cL c l C;��2QPififZs _ See Reverse —). a Brief Suin miark,'. of f Comm'ients: IYCOUNCIL SPEAKER CARD �y c I Date: -7 kloo Address.;:: Phone: 0 TOpic:, Brief. Sutntnary of Comments: See Reverse ---), brief Su'mmar "ofCom men—. See ,Rever's',e -4 U.:/ CIT . Y COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Na Wor-T Address: 'S* Pf V - :Ss: l C L Phone: rOPIC: Brief Summary of Comments: I Ile -e A' V 0 c co c+ -2, 14 S jl-?' C-0 ee Reverse �7) CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: ame* 7 d r s: go 44-b I -A r hone: -7 - a5� APIC: /, : (" 'd -ief Summary of Comments: -CIO 47y) -A See Reverse —)� CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Name: Address: Oq Tlwne--( S+ S -F 0,-A L 411-7 TOPIC: Y-P-\le-r)Ue- Share r) Brief Summary of Comments: See Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Name: V Addresdj celv"pw,-le '707 7?5-1,�,41e,7�1 Phone - !TOPIC: AdIali cAsIllo Brief Summary of Comments: AG See Reverse ---), Nam -e. -- Address: - Phone:• — TOPIC:,. yv �:Brie'fSummarypf ornmielntS' See Reverse -4 IF, TOPIC.- m._ tc r. See Reverse — . CITY CO.UNCIL'SPEAKER C Date: O. TOPIC , 4' 1 TY COUNCEL SPEAKER -CARD, . Date.��'- See Reverse TEAKERCARD - Date: Name: =( .yyl V Address:'. ° E(s C, Phone: 5'7�DS TOPIC:. C ze- I kvo - Brief Summaryof Comments: See Reverse -4 See Reverse.-- CI'T'Y COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Name: e�'&hh ..S'h1 . J/•}SaN. N Address: Qohneti' PSK Chi; 9�9Z�; Phone• / A �C o 77 y} P .TOPIC T Brief Summary of Comments o��- �CGAR ��'n��•_� a .1.�-c U�Aas v��s S sCUD. - n P AJ —, — S'ee Reverse :-� I, CI'T'Y COUNCIL SPEAKER.CARD, .. Date: Z'� Tame.. ►ddress: 'hone: 70PIC: trief Summary of Comments: U- 2 J .dee Reverse -� See Reverse m CITY CO7NO. L SPEAKER.C, R 7 - r See Reverse -� See.Reverse i See Reverse See Reverse —> See Reverse --> QITY COUNCIIs SPEAKER-.CARD Reverse ---* See Reverse —> CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD. '27 Date:— L . PWAN OW 0— PMM ff IF- - BrI' e, U- M-, I See .Reverse .—), CI,T,-.y COUNUL SPEA KER CARD Date: (T - Name Iii CITY COUNCIL •SPEAKER CARD 0-7 . , .. 7 Date• Z Name TOPIC.-.; Brief5ummary`of Comments: See Reverse --> CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Name Address: Phone: TOPIC: OCki'kl d Brief Summary of Comments: Oppose / 6ve,!:�::a c l C;�'�2Q�ifins See Reverse —). v4 5Gt- �L�.e__ THE PRESS DEMOCRAt " MONDAY. A"UGUST 251:2063t • fi t: � : ,, �, :. DRUM 8y. RICH LOWRY i , %.4A � an hldians have, alwaysc ied: an outsized 'placein y A:eripc r imagination, usually as a': oble people, at one, with.' a > . pristine North American. continent,: prior to the, arrival. of the .white man. .It"s time to upgrade'the'image. Forget' buffalo, eagle feathers and tribal. dances. Think slots;: Harrah s and dirtypolitics The California recall : is` providing: `0. , the nation an intense'education`in con ( ? w .�1Z y temP orar Americ politics, : and Y .. .. . � p... °� 1 high on the list of lessons i§, that Indi- antribes have, lucratively, sold their c souls to .gambling and can buy off or: defeat anyone who might. `want to stand in their way:'. California tribes make some.$5 bil- lion a year in gambling revenue and �� have . poured' more than. $120"' million S into. state political campaigns since 1998. Across the country, from•Minnesota to Oklahoma, it's much the same sto- to ry. It's time to ditch the fiction of trib- ry.rib al alsovereignty and .welcome them into e=� the American family like used -car salesmen, . Hollywood and ,telephone marketers A 25 -member California tribe, the Cabazons, created the predicate for'. the explosion of.Indian gambling by ' rr winning a Supreme Court„decision in 1987 allowing tribes:to run..gambling operations that otherwise would vio- late state, law. Congress, soon" passed legislation sayingahat gambling must be allowed. on reservations; and states millions of dollars to pass`two proposi_ coming the West .Coast's Las Vegas, should reach "compacts" with tribes. tions opening_the state to more Indian,.:with an Indian inflection. Thea tribes over the details: gambling, and they bought new Gov. oppose the expansion of anyone else's In California, Republican. Gov. Pete Gray Davis ($i.8;millfoin in tribal cash . gambling in the state, but aggressively Wilson was a tough bargainer, with for his re-election last year); who cut a . generous compact with them in 1999: push their own. . the tribes, so.they took matters' into The specter of recall has Davis ea - their own hands. They spent. _-tens of ,,; California is now o11 ahe way .to be- .. ger to cut deals for more Indian gam- a - 7 1� MATT WRINGTON / Los Angeles rimes Syndicate as he hears the footsteps of Dem- ratic recall candidate Lt. Gov. Cruz istamante (roughly $500,000 in tribal ntributions from. the Barona and iejas bands alone since 1998). Indian gambling.is an ill -disguised am. Some so-called tribes have 30 B7 people or less: They. basically .rent their names to Las Vegas casinos that ftin their.. gambling'. operations` for as much as a 40 percent cut'of the take. Gambling revenues are supposed to go to the welfare of the tribes, but:. any ex- cess can be .pocketed by. individuals, thus enriching a lucky few. Across the country, outside casino interests have beeninvolved in the invention of new tribes simply to provide more. plat- forms for gartibling. Because: the. tribes are -supposedly sovereign, they pay no taxes in Califor- nia, so the state has gained: nothing from the explosion of gambling. All that has happened is that tribes have been empowered to buy whatever they want. The San Manuel Band of Serra- no Mission Indians --: 67 members strong,— spent half a million dollars a member to pass ;the . two California gambling propositions. The ultimata answer -to the Indian scam in California Iand elsewhere is to end the fiction of tribal sovereignty. If the tribes are sovereign nations, why are they allowed to interfere in'Ameri- can elections by ., contributing. huge amounts of money? When another. sov- ereign nation, like China, .pours mon- ey into American, politics, as it did in 1996, it's a national scandal and cause for an FBI investigation. Sovereignty has not only allowed tribes to make an end run around laws against gambling, but has perpetuated arbitrary:. Third World -style,_ govern- ment on reservations. that makes it im- possible for businesses io operate there. End tribal sovereignty;.and;per- haps .Indians can begin to find, less sketchy ways to make.moneythan slot machines, and theh.our image of Indi- ans can once again be something more noble. Rich Lowry is theeditor of the; . National Review.. Email him. at comments.lowry@ nattonalreview.com. 8/26/2003 Rohnert Park City Council 6750 Commerce Boulevard. Rohnert Park, California 94928 Dear City Council Members; rateO.W.L. Foundation President, H.R. Downs Secretary, Deborah Hunt Treasurer, Heidi Dieffenbach -Carle www.Penngrove.Info Regarding future proposed development schemes that have appeared in the press, one that includes houses and another concerning a hotel/casino complex, I would like to remind the City Council of Rohnert Park of the court order that resulted from a settlement with the citizens of Penngrove in litigation about the Rohnert Park General Plan EIR. Particularly this section: G. The EIR anticipates that maximum pumping from the City's municipal wells will not exceed 2.3 mgd to accommodate City water needs pending the anticipated receipt of 15 mgd from the SCWA. (EIR at p.4-142 , AR17:7291.) Consistent with the EIR, and based on substantial evidence, the City shall not approve any discretionary project outside of the 1999 City boundaries whose net consumptive water use impact on City's water supply will contribute to the City exceeding an average annual groundwater pumping rate of 2.3 mgd from municipal wells and any private wells permitted by the City subsequent to the entry of Judgment. This provision shall not be interpreted as a determination or an agreement that pumping at 2.3 mgd at any point in time is, or is not, safe yield. One newspaper report claimed that the hotel/casino complex, for example, would sink multiple thousand -foot wells. If this were to actually transpire, the City of Rohnert Park would be required to make substantial cutbacks to comply with the 2.3 mgd limit. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Regards, H.R. Downs President O.W.L. Foundation 1�-2,1 WESTON BENSHOOF ROCHEFORT RUBALCAVA MACCUISH ATTORNEYS AT LAW August 27, 2003 Rohnert Park City Council 6750 Commerce Boulevard Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Re: Proposed Hotel and Casino Project Dear City Councilmembers: (213) W6.1005 ecasey@wbeounsel.com -2149 This law firm represents the O.W.L. Foundation in connection with various water -related issues in Sonoma County. We understand that a presentation. will be made at your Council hearing tonight concerning a proposal by an Indian tribe to site a hotel/casino complex. Since that project raises significant water supply concerns, we are submitting this letter to address those concerns. First, the City's consideration of the hotel/casino project may trigger the provisions of the Stipulated Judgment entered in the lawsuit previously brought by the South County Resource Preservation Committee and John King against the City of Rohnert Park. Relevant to the casino project, the Stipulated Judgment provides that if the City is preparing a CEQA document for a project located outside its boundaries, then the CEQA documentshall fully analyze the water demand associated with the proposed project and determine whether the total water supplies during normal, dry and multi -dry years during a 20 -year projection will meet the projected water demands associated with the proposed project. Further, the Stipulated Judgment provides that the City shall not approve any discretionary project outside its boundaries whose net consumptive water use impact on the City's water supply will contribute to the City exceeding an average annual groundwater pumping rate of 2.3 mgd from municipal wells and any private wells permitted by the City subsequent to the entry of the Stipulated Judgment. While it is unclear to us whether the City will be exercising any permitting authority over the hotel/casino project, we demand that these. provisions of the Stipulated Judgment be strictly followed if the City does, in fact, plan to exercise any land use approval or other regulatory permitting authority over the project. 333 SOUTH HUI'E STREET • SIXTEENTH FLOOR • LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 O TEL 213 576 1000 G FAX 213 576 1 t001 28WthWNSGATE" ROAD, SUITE 215 Y WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 91 361 C TEL 805 497 9474 • FAX 805 497 8804 www.wbcounsel.com Rohnert Park City Council August 27, 2003 Page 2 Similarly, if the City is going to exercise such permitting authority, then it must also comply with the requirements of the new state statute commonly referred to as SB 610. (Refer to Cal. Water Code Section 10910 et "se That statute requires that for projects of the size of the proposed hotel/casino that a detailed water supply analysis be prepared to ensure that there are adequate water supplies both for the proposed project as well as existing and other future projects. Again, if the City is going to exercise any permitting authority over the proposed project, then we demand that the City strictly comply with the provisions of SB 610. Please note two issues concerning the Stipulated Judgment and SB 610. First, since the provisions of both the Stipulated Judgment and SB 610 are triggered by the need to prepare a CEQA document, then any decision by the City to enter into an agreement, whether verbal or written, with the applicant for the hotel/casino project would trigger the requirements of CEQA. CEQA Section 21080 unequivocally provides that a CEQA document (such as an EIR) be prepared for any "discretionary" action or approval by a public agency. Clearly, approval of an agreement by the City with any developer constitutes a discretionary action within the meaning of CEQA. Second, the requirements of SB 610 must. be complied with regardless of whether the City or the County acts as the land use permitting agency. Either way, some agency must follow SB 610. Finally, we want to bring to your attention again to the serious nature of the overdraft problem that exists in the Santa Rosa groundwater basin. That problem is not limited to the east side of Rohnert Park. Instead, the City's own environmental consultant clearly stated in a 2000 EIR that groundwater has been and continues to be extracted, at a far greater rate than the basin is being replenished.' That study concluded that the groundwater in that regional basin is being extracted at a rate of at least over 2.5 times more than is being recharged into that basin. Therefore, if the hotel/casino project requires new production .wells in that groundwater basin, there can be no assurance that there will be adequate water to serve the casino project. From a technical perspective, there may simply not be enough groundwater from this overdrafted basin to serve the project. From a legal perspective, such a serious overdraft condition may trigger, in the future, a court action to determine all water rights in the basin, and those entities that are the last to sink wells and begin extraction may lose any right to extract water from the groundwater basin. M1WESTON BENSHOOF ROCHEFORT RUBALCAVA A AT TOHNETS AT LAW 436269A 1 Y Rohnert Park City Council August 27, 2003 Page 3 We ask that you take all of these important water supply issues into consideration when you hear about the proposal for the hotel/casino complex. Very truly yours, Edward J. Casey WESTON BENSHOOF ROCHEFORT RUBALCAVA & MacCUISH LLP EJC/gh `.J WESTON BENSHOOF ROCHEFORT Ru6ALCAVA MACC SH ur. ATTORNEYS AT LAW on" t Statement of Jake Mackenzie, Council member, City of Rohnert Park. August 27,2 3�` "Where am I going and what am I doing in this hand basket" The last 9 months have been a roller coaster ride for this council member. I alone have unsuccessfully challenged the gutting of the senior management team of this city . Over the past 2 years I alone have unsuccessfully argued for a cessation in salary increases for all city staff while the city was and is still enmeshed in a fiscal crisis.. It was in the context of this on-going and unresolved fiscal crisis that I suggested , not facetiously but certainly with some trepidation , in a Budget Workshop meeting on June I01h,that the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria consider Rohnert Park as a possible , alternative casino site. The other reason for my suggestion is that the the site proposed at 37 and Lakeville is unacceptable .. I have consistently stated that an alternative site be located in the 101 corridor. .1 have been cross-examined at length by reporters about the site I suggested. My answer was and I quote, "NW Rohnert Park, near the Walmart and Home Depot stores might be a good location". I was contacted by Tribal representatives and asked what land I had in mind. I met with Jay Wallace of Kenwood Investments on June 20th at the Doubletree Hotel. I invited Mayor Flores and City Manager Leivo to join me. Mr. Wallace had already been contacted by Jimmie Rogers to talk about land parcels. I asked Manager Leivo to show Mr. Wallace the area of Rohnert Park I envisioned as a possible casino site. I mentioned the NW Specific Plan area and its environs. As far as I know they toured that area as part of the Tribe's efforts to explore alternative sites .Since that day , June 20`h ,I have not talked to ,nor met with representatives of the Tribe nor with land brokers nor with land ownersto discuss land options,.nor have I been party to any negotiations behind closed doors with other elected officials either from this city or the county. Two months have passed and a fully formed proposal has now been revealed much to the dismay of many of you here tonight. That being said , I also realize that , after attending yesterdays meeting of the BOS, a change has occurred . The county now stands ready, albeit unwillingly, to negotiate with the Tribe,I fully realize the passions unleashed on both sides of this issue. But if this project comes to pass , we must be in a position to insist and insure that it have the best G , possible outcome for this ,our community i Lod I am willing to be a negotiator on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park in this matter ��`�`� �..� The following concerns need to be addressed. in any agreement signed by this city: -The need for a legally binding agreement between governments . 5 -The need for a process to involve the community , both Rohnert Park and Sonom County citizens. It must be transparent -in plain words — an open process. -The need for an environmental review process based on Tribal ordinances which require consideration of both alternatives and mitigation measures equal to those required by both NEPA and CEQA.. -the need for funding to be in place to achieve the mitigation measures and to operate them in the long term. -The need to fully involve our State and Federal elected representatives as part of our negotiations. 2002 Annual Report A' ir40 • V. a.. 0 Vol Ile- .00. 40 Fro., 40 q *- 00 0 0 v -6 *%OW• 0 0• 0• 40 • • 0• 0 . , a 0 04P jt STATION CASINOS, INC.' 2411 West Sahara Avenue Las Vegas, Nevada 89102 P.O. Box 29500 Las Vegas, Nevada 89126-3300 702.367.2411 or 800.544.2411 www.stationcasinos.com ow T�' ..r .l• a ~ • •ate .�-.>�� 7s.�;' e.� •i .-r,� +:�. .' r •�+ ti .., i� - .,0• _ : �• .a �y�±.��•i .%T.. �r•'�• �:. ;.'7►}.,..,s .1•"� •.F .. SIMM• ;�.� + M . • i •:» •� I •.'•Ma '•. •,t • n•! —"t :� _ yrs i•,�s �r j•1..•�� .lr.a�•' 'rflr�'i ••lNa,,•'," • .- i . dome• bow jiF �. twit•1• • w•'• �. •w•.. 00 +. R••* • • • , ••. ' • • •.) ,� T •_• '•.+ _�. •. ' r ,'+ ' A OR lie A. At 6. 410 • �•••`i•J a•+• i�ai+; .. ,�!•�, .�•�•-�•�i d..� •N* :••��w�•• O1•• u.a,. '•i ••.. • • a• . • ••, - • yam• • �IP1. w • 00 00 • •• 40 � _ • a• • • . � � +� • flu •i • m , m - AIUL OL - - - - - - - - - - - - ti 4t -A Arld Awl *'10 0 .,WWONOON woo-*' 2411 West Sahara Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada 89102 O. Box 29500, Las Vegas, Nevada 89126-3300 702.367.2411 or 800.544.2411 wvu �tation casinos. CO m i m ,-: m �� ,� � tsr¢'��1^t �t 4 F J I p �. t I rI � • 4 .� P i r� f� �".yF �y t Z,. r 4 I V �+ 4 }•"'� jO Y. &' S T%3' � F�t R F iL t• E '. ti e Y �A .'4 b, y i'X ,f Mh r. .., '! T F' S �1'' t , •� c ,�'.a� ,4. � Y'' S Cdr �41y ;�i �i f.. ,, ... �.'£ fx Ark—F 4i- - r . t ,x N,rx-: I 1. ,1 it 0j,4; ,pis ' to Q oS f i 4 7 { t a � a t J t L 4: S y AAA 0 tiu ei t.� r' Cid -t 1 r r d .o if, Pla r a � _ a ff . G S A F h J't� Y 1S•V. 1 4•. WAS � 1 �` n ' �^ C'i. P A lryl aL p ,..L •f I f .i 3 t + err do r r T 9 �. y, d F'CA. P I, µ'n .. is `f\5. � +Ry f Mon! I Ni F*, S' C.(' i. 3 H Y 1. !1 .i 1 Ash, s l r � . f. `.r. ar of a r JAIr P'1R „v"•3t..+Fc .- g •rpt a �'Cn gu*,„w t.�. i�' y`^£ in �'e ��M, �i_t,J �, vL. rsn.�_44a3 q ,£,�',r ,y �'r�t •, �7� t} ++1 �'y � {fix i x 't •+�Y.. �S �4�' 1 �,�'j' 13 4:!' "x'kw ,r S• 'r t 1 t x ? +� tri MW C .� 'r• I •'�� � r- 1 5 '�'r ,r / y Lgij d � 9, y.s 1 .a'� 'i •+x �� 4� � r ' a i 4 l r v.P7r +r ":, yl i � Jhai-"�. "rte � �,�rl.r�_.:°57 ��s'-. +sp � s S f• a �••,i n�',�, a� 1 •� -. 7' J �. 7 Yn vivo� h''khi' �+r ..i `� lam., rv}� �';t 35 ?, �•” _ Statement of Jake Mackenzie, Council member, City of Rohnert Park. August 27,2 3�` "Where am I going and what am I doing in this hand basket" [_2 The last 9 months have been a roller coaster ride for this council member. I alone have unsuccessfully challenged the gutting of the senior management team of this city. Over the past 2 years I alone have unsuccessfully argued for a cessation in salary increases for all city staff while the city was and is still enmeshed in a fiscal crisis.. It was in the context of this on-going and unresolved fiscal crisis that I suggested , not facetiously but certainly with some trepidation, in a Budget Workshop meeting on June I 01h that the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria consider Rohnert Park as a possible , alternative casino site. The other reason for my suggestion is that the the site proposed at 37 and Lakeville is unacceptable .. I have consistently stated that an alternative site be located in the 101 corridor. .1 have been cross-examined at length by reporters about the site I suggested. My answer was and I quote, "NW Rohnert Park, near the Walmart and Home Depot stores might be a good location". I was contacted by Tribal representatives and asked what land I had in mind. I met with Jay Wallace of Kenwood Investments on June 20`h at the Doubletree Hotel. I invited Mayor Flores and City Manager Leivo to join me. Mr. Wallace had already been contacted by Jimmie Rogers to talk about land parcels. I asked Manager Leivo to show Mr. Wallace the area of Rohnert Park I envisioned as a possible casino site. I mentioned the NW Specific Plan area and its environs. As far as I know they toured that area as part of the Tribe's efforts to explore alternative sites .Since that day , June 201h ,I ha`e not talked to ,nor met with representatives of the Tribe nor with land brokers nor with land ownersto discuss land options,.nor have I been party to any negotiations behind closed doors with other elected officials either from this city or the county. Two months have passed and a fully formed proposal has now been revealed much to the dismay of many of you here tonight. That being said , I also realize that, after attending yesterdays meeting of the BOS, a change has occurred . The county now stands ready, albeit unwillingly, to negotiate with the Tribe.I fully realize the passions unleashed on both sides of this issue. But if this project comes to pass , we must be in a position to insist and insure that it have the possible outcome for this , our community I am willing to be a negotiator on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park in this matter, The following concerns need to be addressed in any agreement signed by this city: -The need for a legally binding agreement between governments . -The need for a process to involve the community , both Rohnert Park and S County citizens. It must be transparent -in plain words - an open process. -The need for an environmental review process based on Tribal ordinances which require consideration of both alternatives and mitigation measures equal to those required by both NEPA and CEQA.. -the need for funding to be in place to achieve the mitigation measures and to operate them in the long term. -The need to fully involve our State and Federal elected representatives as part of our negotiations. THE PRE55DEMOCRAT'* MONDA-Tp UGU5T,25 2003 FORUM y�F l..i n t ;:i '� :•:i S. ;.3 4 7! R ' ,- +i H :•, t�,4 ii r ( f��"x 5� r J.,I 1 VBV RICH LOWRY' � t a , merlcan'IndianS.hBve; always s occupledian outsized place m our imagination, usually, as -A,s oble people, at':one with a kr s t pristine •North American continents prior the arrival;of the white man 1 It's time to upgrade the•image"' ' Forget buffalo;' eagle feathers and tribal dances: Think slots, Harrah s r r a zt t. grid dirty politicsA+ The ; California recall;is providing,, 4�' i , the nation an intense education�in 66n-',\ i temporary American politics, ..and-,-, 2 high on the list of lessons'is that`Indi an tribes!have,'lucratively, SOld'•their i` souls to;:gainbling;.and.can buy, off or' I:; a Cz r ii , i defeat, anyone "who,' might' `want to stand n -:their wayi,. Cal&fo ia.tribes;make some,$5 bil lion a year m gambling' revenue and r > have -poured' more than .$120 million into state political, campaigns since r 1998. Across the country, from Minnesota to,'Oklahoma, it,'s,.much'thefsame ry It's' mie to ditch the fiction' of trib al sovereignty aiid:welcome them into,i `; the American.. faniily like", used car h salesmen,. Hollywood. and telephone marketers:' r i} A 25 niember' California tribe; Cabazons, 'created the.; predicate for �U the explosion of .Indian, gambling by winning a Supreme; Court decision ui 1987 allowing. tribes to. run. .,gamblmg _ operations ,that otherwise would vio late state law. Congress"soon passed legislation saying that gamliluig must 'timilhons of doliars'to pass two propose' `,�;commg •.the West .Coast's L aas : Vegas, should reach' ` co'rvations, and states 'tions opening the state to more Indian ,with an Indian' inflection'.` The; tribes be"allowed. on reser "mpads wrth� tribes over'the'details': "' 'gambling,-,and!,:they ;bpught new, Gov oppose the expansion of anyone else's f. + E Gray Davis ($18+million in tribal'cash • gambling in the state, but aggressively In California; Republican Gov.:Pete `for h1s're election last'year); :who cut a � ,push their;own'.-•, Wilson :was a tough bargainer ;with generous`compact with them in 1999 the; tribes, 'so they took, matters' into' : r s r , , Th'e specter `of recall -has Davis ea - their own hands. They ,spent tens of ' California is now on the way to be—.gen to cu . 'deals for more.Indian gam w. I S over, :a people or less They;asically ;,rent "' `' their;names to Las`:Vegas Iasi os1hat . rini`.their.: gamblinge operations` for as much as a'40 percent ''cuVof the take. Gambling revenues are supposed to go tothe welfare ofahe tribes; but_:any ex cess can •be,'pocketed.rby�.ii dividuals, thus enriching a lucky few:: Across ,the r. country, outside casino interests have - been: involved in the invention of new - tribes simply to provide more -plat- forms for'gambling. : Because: the, tribesare supposedly sovereign,.they pay no taxes in. Califor- nia:, sothe• state, hasgained. nothing the explosion of gaiiibling..' tVP. that has happened is.that tribes have been empowered-to;buy:;whatever,they want.,The' San:MV Lnuel Band of:Serra- G no;,. Mission Indians ; 67 members strong spent half.a million dollars a 7 member ..to pass :; the ,,two California gambling propositions The ultimate..answer to the Indian scam, in California andelse'where.is to end the fiction oftrib'al sovereignty. If the tribes are sovereigri:nations,;;why 4. are:theY;allowed to mterfere ui Ameri , can elections. by;. contriiiuting= Huge amounts of,money?.When an ikeot e'r sov- ereign nation, lChina, .pours mon- ey into American politics, as it did in 1996, it's a'national scandal and cause j S� for an FBI investigation. u 1 Sovereignty .' has.'not only!,:allowed tribes to make an,end run around laws against gambinig,,.but has perpetuafed arbitrary. Third World7s; govern- ment on reservations that makes if im possible for businesses to operate MATT HARRINGTON Los Argues Times Syndicate . there. End tribal. sovereignty, and per haps Indians• can; begin ito find `less bling, as he hears the footsteps of Dem- , sketchy ways'to make money thanslot ocratic recall candidate.Lt. Gov. Cruz .machines,.and then our image of ]ndi- Bustaniante (roughly $500,000 in tribal ans can once again be something more contributions from .the Ba"rona and noble ' Viejas bands.alone since 1998).;.:... ,Rich Lowry, is titor, of the Indiangambling'.is an ill-disguised National Review.; &miiil him, at:;`.` scam. Some so-called tribes :have .30 : conimenis.lowry@ nationalrevieiu:com... ;, .. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS - 8/2612003 D ®- e Distributed With Misc. - 8115/03 Distributed With Packet - Distributed at Meeting - 8/26/03 A. 1R.P. Chamber of Commerce Ribbon Cutting Ceremony & Grand Opening, Wed., 9/17 @ Panda Expr. y QM .' �� SUBJECT q AMA Distributed With Misc. - 8/15/03 1. Paul D. Stutrud/Resident Protest against proposed Spanos Corp. multi -family project 2. Comcast Change in FCC regulatory fee Distributed With Packet - 8/21103 (for 8/26/03 Meeting) 3. Marlyn Keller Committee on the Shelterless (COTS) information Distributed With Packet - 8121/03 (for 8/27/03 Meeting) 4. Geraldine Duncann/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 5. Eunice Edgington /Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 6. Mary Harvey/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 7. Charles Murray/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 8. Marilee Montgomery/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 9. John Ruiz/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 10. Kathleen/McClarnon In opposition of ResorUCasino 11. Andrea Delgado/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 12. Ron Kennedy/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 13. Alan Colton/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 14. Jeff Hardy/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 15. Jean Reed/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 16. Dana Curtis/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 17. Steve Wilde/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 18. Alfred Kottman/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 19. Annette Murray/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 20. Robert Aherne/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 21. C. Jensen/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 22. John Ruiz/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 23. John Ruiz/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 24, Federated Indians of Graton[A] Letter requesting opportunity to meet with Council Distributed At Meeting - 8126/03 (for 8/27103 Meeting) 25. Vernal Pool Technologies Mitigation broker offering services to assist the City of. R.P. w/Casino 26. Kathy Donely/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 27. Diana Bonnici/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 28. Anonymous/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 29. Patricia Cassinelli/Resident In favor of ResorUCasino 30. B. Wright Schneider/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 31, Sharona ES/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 32. Sandra Gunderson/Resident In favor of ResorUCasino 33. Roger Branscomb/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 34. George Russell/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 35. Lynn Russell/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino 36. Douglas Cresta/Resident In opposition of ResorUCasino SUBJECTS ® e Distributed At Meeting - 8/26/03 (for 8/27/03 Meeting) 37. Jennifer Davis/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 38. Walter Davis/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 39. Donna W. Mitchell/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 40. Mara Walls/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 41. Narda Clark/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 42. Ann M. Cresta/Resident In.opposition of Resort/Casino 43. Dennis O'Connor/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 44. Tamara Lovitt/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 45, Jennifer Dorn/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 46. Pamela Desmond/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 47. Mary Harvey/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 48. William Flath/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 49. Helen Flath/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 50. Michael & Wendy Kellerman Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 51. Meagan O'Connor/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 52. Eric Wan/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 53. Lewis Epstein/Resident Re proposed location of Casino 54. Linda L. Chaput/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S..1342 55. Bill & Laura Goode/Resident In favor of Resort/Casino 56. Florence Kimball/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 57. Lewis Kimball/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 58. Phyllis Burt/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 59. Jeff Carroll/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 60. Tony Burns/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 61. Paul D. Stutrud/Resident Call for Moratorium on Construction/In opposition of Resort/Casino 62. Debbie Dra o/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 63. Dr. Wallace Drotts/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 64. Kim Meister/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 65. B. Wright Schneider/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 66. Debbie Clarkson/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 67. Laura Carroll/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 68. Roger Bran scomb/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 69. Roy/Evelyn Schneckloth/Res. In opposition of Resort/Casino 70. Joan Brent/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 71. Candi Burns/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 72. John Cregan/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 73. Rosemary Davis/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 74. Briggs Family/Residents In opposition of Resort/Casino 75. Jennifer Cary/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 76. Carolyn Cheader/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 77. Steve McLaughlin/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 78. Joyce D. Roberts/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 79. Audrey L. Brewee/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 80. Linda McLaughlin/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 81. Suzzane Kitchens/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 82. Loretta Cale/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 83. Maurice A. Strange/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 84. John Peterson/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 85. LaDonna Muller/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 86. Suzanne LaBone/Peterson In opposition of Resort/Casino 87. Gary W./Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 88. Michael D./Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 89. Jane Irwin/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 90. Jewell Troxel/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino Alk WFORMA At Meeting'- 8/26/03 (for 8/27/03 Meeting) 91. Lisa Donner/Resident In opposition of Resort/C.asino 92. Teresa Hall/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 93. Jeanette/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 94. Marjorie Kauakee/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 95. Irene Matheny/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 96. Bob/Arilla Aherne/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 97. Virgil Mathen/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 98. Jeffrey Black/Resident In.opposition of Resort/Casino 99. Richard Sommerhalder In opposition of Resort/Casino 100. Assorted Phone Messages received at City Hall regarding Casino Distributed At Meeting - 8/26/03 101. Debbie Bailey/Resident Concerns re low income housing development 102. Chris Lee Offering assistance with potential baseball stadium construction Distributed At Meeting - 8/27/03 103. Cathleen Guthrie/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 104. David Wohlschlaeger/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 105. Joerg Olson/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 106. K. Jackson/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 107. David/Carol Bentley/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 108. Anne Marcalo/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 109. Cora Lee Root/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 110. Barbara James/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 111. Cathleen Springer/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 112. Steve Moore/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 113. Millie Moore/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 114. Judy Vargas/Resident In opposition of Resort/Casino 115. William Dawes/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 116. Jennifer Dawes/Resident Re amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act S. 1342 117. Marilee Montgomery In opposition of Resort/Casino 118. Updated phone call list In opposition of Resort/Casino [A] = Agenda * = Previously Distributed Lidster, Beth RECEIVED From: Cathleen@inreach.com .AUG 2 7 2003 Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 11:47 AM CITY OF To: admin@rpcity.org Rf3HNERT PARK Subject: RP city contact form submission The Following information was submitted from the RP city site: Submitted by: Cathleen Guthrie Email Address: Cathleen@inrcach.com Address: 6586 Joyce Court City: Rohnert Park State: Ca Zip: 94928 Phone: 707 586-1458 Fax: 707 586-1458 Page 1 of 1 Council: X DateBy Miscellaneous Communications Agenda Copy to: Copy to: Comments: I am writing to protest the possibility (reality?) of a gambling casino, Native American or otherwise, in our city_ I am a 34 year resident of RP,.a retired CRPUSD teacher with 25 years working with our youth, and a concerned citizen. Not only will our gridlock traffic be even more difficult to deal with on 101, Stony Point, and the Expressway, but any increased income will necessitate increased public services eating up new revenue to our City. We also need to ask the moral question: do we embrace becoming the gaming capital of the North Bay? Is this the image which RP wishes to project? Who benefits REALLY? Choose carefully. Will "big box" retailers be pleased when their customer base cannot access their locations due to increased traffic? Surely we can find a more sane option to increase our revenue. Thank you. Cathleen Guthrie 8/27/2003 Lidster, Beth From: dschlag@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 3:09 PM To: admin@rpcity.org Subject: RP city contact form submission RECEIVED Miscellaneous AUG 2 7 2003 Clic' OF I Copy to: PCHN'=RT PAPS Conv to: Page 1 of 1 The Following information was submitted from the RP city site: Submitted by: David Wohlschlaeger Email Address: dsehlag@aol.com Address: 4437 Stony Point Road City: Santa Rosa State: CA Zip: 95407 Phone: 707-206-9677 Comments. I request and/or challenge one or all of you to make a public statement to the people whose farms surround the land at which you would like to plunk a hideous casino. This land was to remain green - - and you should be ashamed of yourselves for being excited about the prospect of a casino being forced upon the families who live. in that area_ My grandparents purchased their property in the 1940s, and now I may have to move because you have made a back alley deal to construct a federally protected casino for a Vegas conglomerate about 1/2 mile from my home. Put the bank book down long enough to consider how you are damaging the people whose reality might be looking across the street at a casino. Rohnert Park might make some money from this deal, but only at the expense of families who do not even live in Rohnert Park Thank you. David Wohlschlaeger 8/27/2003 Lidster, Beth RrECR E From: a014978@allstate.com AUG 2 7 2003 Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 2:30 PM To: admin@rpcity.org CITY OF Subject: RP city contact form submission ROHNERT PARD. The Following information was submitted from the RP city site: Submitted by: Joerg Olson Email Address: a014978@allstate.com Address: 1435 Santa Rosa Ave City: Santa Rosa State: CA Zip: 95404 Phone: 707-568-2800 Fax: 707-568-2804 Page 1 of 1 Council: X Date B ' eHanea Communications 7a3 Agenda Copy to: copy to: Comments: I am sure there are many people living in Northern California who are rightly proud of their native American heritage, and I am sure some of them call themselves the The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria? Who are the Gratons? Lets not forget they are a recent re-creation. In 1958 the members of the Federated Graton band of Indians requested to sell their reservation for profit, and to take the reservation off the Federal Reservation Trust. The reservation was sold and the money distributed the three remaining members (all of whom are deceased now) of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. Today their web site indicates there are 336 members of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. From 3 in 1958 to 336 in 2003. What happened in the meantime? Possibly the 2000 Indian Advancement Act underwritten by big-time gambling interest and real estate developers (Barbara Boxer & son Inc.) , which bestowed Federal Recognized Tribe" status on the Gratons_ Now, as planned by the big -money Gambling interests and their puppet -front "band of Indians" our local population is at their mercy. The Gratons say on their Web site that, "The Graton membership has long been concerned with cultural History." Where does going to bed with Big - business gambling money fit in their "cultural history"_ It is time to do away with antiquated Indian reservation system—a failed solution to a tragic past which is morphing into a perverted present. Lets recognize these people for what they are— another big monied special interest (Casino shills) who stand to make a fortune at our expense. Joerg Olson Olson Insurance Agency 1435 Santa Rosa Ave, C-6 Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Ph. 707-568-2800 Fx. 707-568- 2803 A014978@allstate.com 8/27/2003 Page 1 of 1 Laster, Beth From: kjackson@co.marin.ca.us AUG 2 7 2003 COUNCIL: Sent: Tuesday, Aug ust26, 2003 4:38. PM To: admin@rpcity.org CIT`f OF MISCELLANEOUS Subject: RP city contact form submission ROHNERT PARK COMMUNICATIONS AGENDA The Following information was submitted from the RP city site: COPY TO: Submitted by: Armando Flores COPY TO: Email Address: kjackson@co.marin.ca.us City: Rohnert Park State: CA Comments: I am totally opposed to the casino in Rohnert Park. I feel you have sold out the people of Sonoma County for money. A casino will put 24 hours drivers on rural roads, cause more accidents. Will there be alcohol like the casino in Hopland. Originally, they were not going to serve alcohol and now they do. I am not opposed to all casinos, but I am opposed to this one and I can't believe you have invited them to Rohnert Park. Gambling does not fit the image of the friendly, family oriented town and I see greed fueling these casinos and forever changing Sonoma County and California. Do you really want more drunk drivers on the road? This will be a facility were smoking is allowed and contributing to more lung cancer deaths among workers and patrons_ Isthis how you help the people of Rohnert Park, by bringing in health problems and contributing to the already congested highways and adding drunk drivers to the mix. I hope your conscious can handle all that. 8/27/2003 RECEIVED COUNCIL: w /Aust 26, 2003 AUG 2 7 2003 CITY OF i;;OHNERT PARK MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS AGENDA COPY TO: Armando Flores, Mayor COPY T0: City of Rohnert Park 6750 Commerce Boulevard Rohnert Park, CA 94948 Subject: Opposition to the Proposed Gambling Casino Dear Mayor Flores: d & Carol Bentley Edith Court ,iert Park, CA 94928 We are opposed to construction of a gambling casino adjacent to Rohnert Park. We oppose the casino on moral grounds. The citizens of Rohnert Park, under your long-standing leadership and that of your predecessors, have worked long and hard to make Rohnert Park a family - friendly community. You, and we, have been successful - it is a wonderful place to raise children. The proposed gambling casino is contrary to all that we have worked to attain. While perhaps not a fashionable view, it is none the less clear that gambling weakens the ethics of work, industry, thrift, and service—the foundation of our national and local prosperity—by holding out the seductive lure of something for nothing. It promotes greed and covetousness. Greed afflicts governments, too – apparently even Rohnert Park. The lure of development fees to solve our budget problems is seductive. But if gambling comes to our fair City, local government services will begin to count on its revenues; yet, no matter how much money comes in, the City's appetite seems to keep growing. And as the need for more and more "painless" tax revenue rises, or as profits from the gambling casino diminish, the City will find itself in the position of aggressively promoting gambling, where it had earlier simply tolerated it. Instead of protecting our citizens from being victimized by the lure of gambling, those citizens who otherwise would have forsaken gambling may instead embrace it because of your endorsement. Gambling is a regressive form of taxation; it takes a higher percentage from poorer citizens' incomes than from middle- and upper-class citizens' earnings. An editorial on lotteries in USA Today stated: `Lotteries aren't painless—the overwhelming majority of players always lose. The game takes bread and money from the poor. And it is one more temptation for the compulsive gamblers who ruin careers and families with their addiction.' In this context, it is a moral issue. Former FBI Director William Webster stated: "Gambling is still the largest source of revenue for organized crime." We look to our City Fathers to protect us. Please rethink your support of this proposal. el o -� David & Carol Bentley c: Greg Nordin, RP Vice Mayor Jake Mackenzie, RP City Council Arnie Spradlin, RP City Council Vicki Vidak-Martinez, RP City Council Tim Smith, 3rd District Board of Supervisors Mike Kearns, 2nd District Board of Supervisors Odocuments and settingsladministratodmy documentsldlb\gambling Itr - flores.doc Page 1 of 1 .... — 9VE Lidster, Beth = 7 2003 Council• . Miscellaneous From: avanmar�attg.net '�!Rf� Communicatio Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 9:14 AM Agenda To: admin@rpcity.org Copy to: Copy to: Subject: Casino meeting tonight Dear Rohnert Park City Council members, I five in Rohnert Park and have lived all of my life in the northbay. I oppose the building of a casino in our city. Those of you who are for this have no insight as to the ultimate negative impact this will have. Crime WILL rise. Property will depreciate, especially housing, because of the non -family effect of the casino. This will attract a low life part of society I want nothing to do with. I know this city is strapped for money,. but there has to be another way to, do this without negatively impacting our community. From the article in the Press Democrat today, I did get the impression that the council is looking at this just because of the $$$$$. Well you have been bought out. 1 would much rather see a spa or sport resort built. For example, why not build an Olympic size horse park, which could house Training, Dressage, Jumping, and Three day events. I know there is one in the mating in Monterey: This whole county has one of the largest horse populations per acre, in the country. My point -is to do something that will get families and communities involved. We can all do this as a city, but we do need more people involved to do it. On another note, l oppose this developer to build more homes in Rohnert Park in exchange for another ball park. We are getting sold out again by you guys if you approve this. Where will the water come from when the next drought occurs? How will the sewage and garbage effect our community with the continued growth? We can barely handle what we already have. Yours, Anne Marcalo 1503 Gladstone Way Rohnert Park, CA 8/27/2003 RECEJ ED AUG 2 7 2003 CITY Or, ROi NERT PARK To the Rohnert Park City Council: August 27, 2003 I am a voting resident of Rohnert Park and I have some questions for you. Is it true that the word gaming is used instead of gambling to lesson the impact of the casino; that the reason for the casino being built at all is, simply, for the customer to lose money? Is it true that it is hardly "entertainment" to lose money that was originally intended to pay the rent or to buy food or clothing? Is it true that the hundreds of thousands of dollars promised to "help" the community will come from the pockets of people who truly cannot afford to lose it gambling? Is it true that cities that embrace gambling also embrace the attendant crime? Is it true that in Louisiana, there are wonderful parks built by gambling interests that no one uses because it is too dangerous to go there, even in daylight? Is it true that gambling produces losing people, desperate people who will turn to desperate measures to gamble again? Is it true that there will be a need for more police because there will be more crime and less safety for the citizens on the streets? Is it true that the politicians and the real estate movers and shakers are already counting up their own pieces of the money -pie cooked up by the establishing of a casino resort? Is it true that the city council, literally, doesn't care where money comes from or even how, as long as it comes in? Is it true that the city council finds it easier to turn the city over to the gambling mob than to address the many, large and small, mistakes they have made in the past and create and use a realistic budget? If you did read this, thank you for your time. Cora Lee Root 6351 Country Club Dr. 208 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 FROM : COGBILL» FAX SYSTEM PHONE HO. AUG 2 7 2003 707 836 1143 Aug. 27 2003 10:06AM P1 August 27, 2003 CITY OF ROi-lNERT 4PARK TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF ROHNER.T PAR [ti. Council: X Date By Miscellaneous Communications Agenda Copy to: Copy to: I'm writing regarding this travesty that's happening with the Indian Casing. The first and most importantthing to a political body is always, of course, that they get to BE the political body ... which means getting re-elected. If this casino happens, believe me .... this City Council will never get to be on the council again. Does Steve Benjar in, the spokesman for the electrical workers union (who, by the way, says the tribe is jusi trying to be good neighbors.) live and vote in this area? At least Sears Point was "relatively" in the middle of nowhere ---- compared to this settled area! The traffic would be LNBELIEVABLY UNlE3>F<.AItABLE! Valerie Brown led the charge against Lakeville Road; .Diane Feinstein on the Fedcr;,l level --,- where is she now, where is our supervisor. Unlike our City "leaders" surely there's someone who isn't led by greed, Council members,---- think twice before you sell out. August 25, 2003 Senator Diane Feinstein One Post Street Suite 2450 San Francisco, CA 94104 RE: S. 1342 Dear Senator Feinstein: . RECEIVED AUG 2 7 2003 CIT OF ROHNUIT PAR' Council: X Date By Miscellaneous Communications z7 Agenda Copy to: Copy to: Thank you for authoring. S. 1342, an amendment to the Graton Rancheria Restoration Act. support this bill because. as a resident of Rohnert Park, CA, 1: would like to see the Secretary of the Interior work with our local officials to ensure that the proposed casino will not be detrimental to the surrounding community (traffic, water and sewer concerns). Please do all that you can to get the bill passed and signed into law as soon as possible. Also, please keep me posted on the progress of the bill. Sincerely yours, Cathleen Springer 6478 Meadow Pines Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 cjspringer@ neteze.com cc: Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey Secretary Gale Norton Mayor Armando Flores on PR5i��=?A T?FCE1 %ED AUG 2 7 2003Copy to: Copy to: CITY OF Ri3i- NER s' FARK City of Rohnert Park Attention: Mayor and City Council 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 .. DearlMayor and City Council of Rohnert Park, I wish to express my deepest concern about the potential approval of a gambling casino in the Rohnert Park area. It is my truest conviction that though such an establishment might appear to have some financial benefit to our community, the moral damage will be irreparable. Let's keep Rohnert Park a family friendly community. If we allow a casino, with its gambling, increase of traffic, alcoholism, prostitution and petty crime into our community, we will spend more to deal with the problems than will be realized as a monetary profit to the city. Please vote no to any type of gambling casi in our area. Sincerely, X 1 Date Miscellaneous Communications RECEIVED toAUG 2 7 2003 [EAg.4 to: CITY OF RONNEERT PARK City of Rohnert Park . Attention: Mayor and City Council 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Dear Mayor and City Council of Rohnert Park, I wish to express my deepest concern about the potential approval of a gambling casino in the Rohnert Park area. It is my truest conviction that though such an establishment might appear to have some financial benefit to our community, the moral damage will be irreparable. Let's keep Rohnert Park a family friendly community. If we allow a casino, with its gambling, increase of traffic, alcoholism, prostitution and petty crime into our community, we will spend more to deal with the problems than will be realized as a monetary profit to the city. Please vote no to any type of gambling casino in our area. Sincerely, , Co"" X Date _Miscellaneous Communications ry t 'RFC'RECEIVEDcopopy to:o: AUG 2 7 2003 cls (,F ROHNERT PARK City of Rohnert Park Attention: Mayor and City Council 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Dear Mayor and City Council of Rohnert Park, I wish to express my deepest concern about the potential approval of a gambling casino in the Rohnert Park area. It is my truest conviction that though such an establishment might appear to have some financial benefit to our community, the moral damage will be irreparable. Let's keep Rohnert Park a family friendly community. If we allow a casino, with its gambling, increase of traffic, alcoholism, prostitution and petty crime into our community, we will spend more to deal with the problems than will be realized as a monetary profit to the city. Please vote no to any type of gambling casino in our area. Sincerely, 1 r August 25, 2003 Senator Diane Feinstein One Post Street, Suite 2450 San Francisco, CA 94104 William P. Dawes 6477 Meadow Pines Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 wpdawes@yahoo.com RECEIVED AUG 2 7 2003 CITY OF RCHNtRT PARK RE: Amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act Dear Senator Feinstein: Council: X I Date I By Miscellaneous Communications Atenda kiw to: Thank you for authoring S. 1342, an amendment to the Graton Rancheria Restoration Act. The ability of local communities to provide input regarding proposed casino locations helps both the community and the tribe make good economic decisions. The inclusion of community creates a venue for expression of concerns that the tribe can address during the proposal stages. In addition, prevents a strong backlash from rising against the casino after it is open. As a constituent of Sonoma County, California living in Rohnert Park I support the tribe's proposed casino plans. A casino will be good for the tribe and for Rohnert Park economically. The casino will bring jobs to the area, thus boosting the local economy. However, I do have concerns regarding the environmental impact and the traffic congestion created by the casino. Again, thank you for authoring the amendment to the Graton Rancheria Restoration Act. Thank you, William P. Dawes cc: Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey Secretary Gale Norton Mayor Armando Flores Jennifer P. K. Dawes 6477 Meadow Pines Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 jpkdawes*yahoo.com RECEIVED AUG 2 7 2003 CITY OF August 25, 2003 ROHNERT PARK Senator Diane Feinstein One Post Street, Suite 2450 San Francisco, CA'94104 RE: Amendment to Graton Rancheria Restoration Act Dear Senator Feinstein: Council: X Date B Miscellaneous Communications L o Agenda Cop to: Thank you for authoring S. 1342, an amendment to the Graton Rancheria Restoration Act. The ability of local communities to provide input regarding proposed casino locations helps both the community and the tribe make good economic decisions. The inclusion of community creates a venue for expression of concerns that the tribe can address during the proposal stages. In addition, .prevents .a strong backlash from rising against the casino after it is open. As a constituent of Sonoma County, .California living in Rohnert Park I support the tribe's proposed casino plans. A casino will be good for the tribe and for Rohnert Park economically. The casino will bring jobs to the area, thus boosting the local. economy. However, I do have concerns regarding the environmental impact and the traffic congestion created by the casino. Again, thank you for authoring the amendment to the Graton Rancheria Restoration Act. Sent by: Marilee Taylor Montgomery 8/26/03 8:20:07 PM Page 1 Marilee Taylor Montgomery RECEIVED ouncil: X. Date By Miscellaneous Communications P o A ends Copy to: L r, 2 2n03 Cp W;152 re enue Fax 707-588-9926 CITY OF Home Phone 707-588-9926 RO's iii=t�T PARK Email donegal@peoplepc.com FOR G:OOPM CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY, 8/27/03 URGENT FAX -PLEASE DISTRIBUTE IMMEDIATELY DATE: August 27, 2003 TO: Armando Flores, Mayor Greg Nordin, Vice Mayor Vicki Vidak-Martinez, Council Member Jake MacKenzie, Council Member Arnie Spradlin, Council Member Fax: 588-2263. FROM: Marilee Montgomery, Environmental Liaison Stop the Casino 101 Coalition Phone: 707-588-9926 re: Rohnert Park Casino - selling your heritage Page One of Four Today is turning point in Rohnert Park's history. Should you vote in favor of the Casino, you will effectively decimate property values, which always plummet when a casino comes to town, and you will place the economic health of this municipality at the mercy of an entity that does not have a good track record throughout the state and the country for following through on its promises of money to local governments and one that has proved almost uniformly to be a bad neighbor. What is even more distressing is that you may have sold out your constituents for nothing. To the best of my knowledge, the Graton Rancheria tribe does not have a compact with the State of California. Without this compact, they cannot have slots. In a very quiet move some time ago, Governor Davis imposed a moratorium on new compacts for sixty-four tribes still without casinos. This move was the result of litigation now in the courts. This litigation is expected to take years. In a letter to the sixty-four tribes, Shellyanne Chang, chief deputy legal affairs secretary to the Governor, wrote that, "This litigation has the potential to extinguish the constitutional foundation for allowing California Indian tribes to conduct banked and percentage card games or to operate slot machines.". If the litigation is successful, it would signal the end to Las Vegas -style gaming in our state, and we'll wind up with a 350 acre bingo hall on vernal wetlands, and nowhere near the money you all thought you'd have. That is, if they chose to give us any at all. Perhaps the tribes are counting on the recall of Governor Davis, but that might not happen. Perhaps they're banking on the election of Cruz Bustamonte, who is pro -Indian gaining, but that might not happen. For example, I will not vote for Mr. Bustamonte specifically because of his pro -gaming stance, and although I will vote "No" on the recall, I plan to vote Republican in this election.. In fact, although I am a life-long Democrat, I will never vote for any candidate who backs casinos. Sent by: Marilee Taylor Montgomery 8/26/03 8:21:30 PM Page 2 of 4 Had you really done your homework, you would know that there is a groundswell movement to repeal Prop 1A, with financial backing almost ensured from Reno casino owners. In the year 2002, the State of Texas closed down two of its three Indian casinos that had house -funded games. The remaining casino is bingo and player -pool Twenty -One. Texas accomplished this using the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which allows Indian tribes to regulate gaming only if it is not prohibited in their state as a matter of criminal law and public policy. We Californians will also be able to use this Act to close casinos for good when Prop IA is repealed. And it will be repealed, because people are fed up with having these mega -projects shoved down their throats. If you vote to support the casino, you've sold your city out for, at the most, a few years of money IF the tribe decides to give you any at all. RE -PRINT FROM GAMBLING MAGAZINE Governor Halts New Gambling Compacts SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Gray Davis has quietly imposed a moratorium on new Indian gambling compacts, suspending indefinitely the hopes and plans of some of the state's poorest tribes. In identical letters mailed this month to at least nine tribes, an administration attorney indicated formal compact negotiations would not resume until a lawsuit challenging Proposition IA runs its course. That could take years. The first hearing in the case is not scheduled until September. Proposition I gave California tribes the right to offer slot machines and house -banked card games. The measure, a constitutional amendment, was approved in March 2000 with nearly 65 percent of the statewide vote. Almost a year later, a group of Northern California card clubs filed a federal lawsuit that alleges the measure gave tribes an unfair monopoly on slots and Nevada -style card games. In a stark warning, the administration suggested the legal challenge threatens the state's 61 existing compacts and its thriving Indian gambling industry. "This litigation has the potential to extinguish the constitutional foundation for allowing California's Indian tribes to conduct banked and percentage card games or to operate slot machines," Shelleyanne Chang, the governor's chief deputy legal affairs secretary, wrote to the tribes. "While we do not suggest that all discussions of a compact must await final resolution of the court challenge, commencing formal negotiations at this time, amidst the uncertainty ... would not, in our view, be prudent," she added. The administration's move comes as its new gambling commission struggles to establish an effective regulatory system for California's 47 Indian casinos and 120 cardrooms. Sent by: Marilee Taylor Montgomery 8/26/03 8:22:54 PM Page 3 of 4' But the letters have infuriated tribes, some of whom first asked for compacts months before the lawsuit was filed. "We've been kind of shunned by the Governor's Office for more than a year now and that was the first response we got back," said James Hill, business manager of San Diego County's La Posta Band of Mission Indians. A small tribe with just 24 members, La Posta has a remote, 3,500 -acre reservation 65 miles east of San Diego. Hill said the tribe wanted to reserve the 350 slot machines they were automatically entitled to under a broad agreement Davis negotiated with the tribes. "Investors don't want to talk to you if you don't have a compact," Hill said. "Maybe the governor knows that." Another San Diego tribe, the Santa Ysabel band, received the same letter. Santa Ysabel also has had its compact request pending for a year, attorney Thomas Weathers said. "We feel stymied and, short of litigation, we don't know what to do," Weathers said. Santa Ysabel has 950 members on a 15,500 -acre reservation near Julian. Regardless of any lawsuit, the law could be changed at any time, Weathers said. "Voters could vote next year to repeal Proposition IA. So to say'We're not going to let any compacts go forward pending this lawsuit' is a little bit disingenuous, especially if the lawsuit is as weak as some people have told me." Seven other tribes from around the state received the same letter between May 1 and May 14. The list, however, did not include the Torres -Martinez band of Thermal, which earlier threatened to sue the administration for refusing to negotiate a compact. All but one of the state's established gaming tribes signed compacts more than a year ago after Davis and the tribes reached agreement on general terms in September 1999. In addition to immediately affected reservations, the freeze could loom ominously for two other tribes. The Lytton Band of Pomo Indians is attempting to take over an existing card club just outside San Francisco. The controversial acquisition would represent Indian gambling's deepest penetration into urban California. The Lyttons have not yet applied for a compact nor do they need one to buy and operate the club, Casino San Pablo. A.compact, however, is required to introduce slots. If the Lyttons seek a compact while the Proposition IA lawsuit is pending, they can expect "the same response" the other tribes just received from the administration, said Hilary McLean, a spokeswoman for the governor. "Lytton is purchasing -an ongoing business," said Tony Cohen, the tribe's attorney. "The fact that they don't immediately have a compact ... is not as disastrous as it would be if they were counting on a compact to begin the process." Sent by: Marilee Taylor Montgomery 8/26/03 8:24:18 PM Page 4 of 4 The Coyote Valley tribe of Mendocino County rejected the general compact terms and continues to operate a casino while it battles the state in federal court. It's unclear what would happen if Coyote Valley lost its legal fight while the administration is not signing new compacts. "That's going to be a tough question if we get to that point," McLean said. article # 14/1424 Editor: Editor(a,GamblingMagazine.com Publisher: PublishergGamblingMagazine.com Telephone: U.S.A. (212) 208-4414 PHONE MESSAGES 9/18/03 RE: RESORT/CASINO 1. 3:55PM The Mayor and City Mgr CAN NOT speak for the people of RP. She doesn't care what income a casino would bring to the city! A CASION WOULD BE A DISASTER. (no name) 2. 5:55PM saw the Mayor speak on TV. And the Mayor said: "A casino would bring people to RP and they would spend $$ and use other facilities, like the swimming pool, parks, ball courts. THAT'S NUTS! 3. 6:49pm Charles Murray 793-9791 Mr. Murray lives on the west side of Cotati bordering RP and is not represented by RP, but would like to voice his opinion: I do not think a Casino would benefit the area. I am a SSU graduate. My wife & I chose to stay in the area because of its small ness and charm. A Casino would change that and we would like to voice our opinion. Would like to have Mayor call him if possible 8/20/03 1. 8:24AM Ms. Diamond. Just read today's paper and what is going on behind the seen in RP. SHE WANTS TO VOICE HER STRONG OPINION AGAINST THE CASINO she cannot believe that.this being considered without an environmental impact study being done. She will be getting out and see that every person on the city council is voted out of the council. RP is supposed to be a place to raise a family this is not good for the city. 2. 8:45AM I just read in the paper that a casino is going in to the west side of RP I wish to voice my strong opinion against this. She lives2 miles west of RP Expressway, has 4 children and is in RP daily spending $$$$$ shopping, eating, and playing in RP. If this casino happens I will never enter RP again and will encourage my friends and family to do the same. RP is supposed to be a "Family Friendly City" a Casino will make RP a family unfriendly city. All the traffic with children on bikes what are you thinking of. 3. 8:59AM I am a resident of RP for 25yrs. And outraged that the city would consider a resort and casino. 4. 9:16AM Tami — has lived in RP for 30yrs and just bought 1/2millon dollar property west of stony point so could live in country. Does not want a casino — it would ruin the City of Rohnert Park. Thinks Joe Netter should be put back in as City Mgr. 5. 11:10AM Marilee Montgomery 588-9926 -Strongly opposes the casino on the proposed environmentally sensitive site. I urge you to reconsider. Itis going to cause multiple problems one being the ground water; this will affect many others and mine drinking water. I hope the City Manager re considers his stance because he will be fighting an uphill battle. The citizens against this will not be put off. 8/21/03 1. 9:25AM Stephen Fitzgerald- Would like Mayor to contact him at 584-0182. Would like his questions answered in regards to the gaming facility 2. 11:10AM Judy Thomas called to voice her opinion regarding the casino. She feels it is completely ridiculous. What kind of mentality does the city council have to consider bringing a casino to Rohnert Park. RP is a nice quite family oriented city and she wants it to stay that way. 8/22/03 1. 8:45AM Harold Dance — is a home owner in RP and wanted to voice his objection to the casino. Will be at the meeting on 8/27/03 2. 11:15AM Alyce Shepardson phoned to voice her opposition to the casino. I sent her flyer of 8/27/03 meeting 8/23/03 1. 11:45 AM — Judy Cerico (?) 654 Huns RP - This message is to Mayor Flores, City Council and Planning Commission, What are you thinking about??? I have been sitting on the freeway for 45min do to a five car pile up. A casino will only mean more accidents more traffic... 8/24/03 2. 11:05AM Peter R. 3342 Stony Point we do not want a casino. My wife and I own some apartments in RP. We do not want trouble. Stop that.