R.P. casino advisory measure unlikely

<p>The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors apparently is not interested in rekindling a discussion about putting an advisory measure regarding the proposed Rohnert Park casino on the Nov. 4 ballot, but a local attorney hopes that the board will reconsider its position.</p><p>“I have polled my colleagues, and three of them are not interested in putting the matter on our agenda,” said Supervisor Mike Kerns, adding that Supervisor Mike Reilly is the only supervisor who might support such a discussion.</p><p>An advisory measure would need to be approved by the board of supervisors by Aug. 8, 88 days before the election. Board meetings are scheduled for July 22 and Aug. 5. Board members discussed a possible measure at their Feb. 26 board meeting, but didn’t take a vote when it became clear that there wasn’t enough support.</p><p>Even if the matter is put on an upcoming agenda, three of the five supervisors would need to support an advisory measure for it to be placed on the ballot. And supervisors have questioned the significance of such a measure, although casino opponents contend that a strong opposition vote could influence Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has said that he will take public opinion into consideration when deciding whether or not to sign compact agreements regarding casinos.</p><p>Some supervisors also have expressed concerns over the cost involved — previously estimated at $100,000 — and have indicated their preference to intensely focus on getting the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit measure passed.</p><p>“The cost of putting the measure on the ballot might be much less, because other local measures will be sharing the expense,” Kerns said.</p><p>Former Petaluma City Council member Mike Healy feels that the projected $100,000 cost of putting the casino measure on the ballot is “wildly exaggerated,” and says that property tax being paid on the land proposed for the casino could be used to place the measure on the ballot.</p><p>On June 7, attorney Stephan Volker filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Stop the Casino 101 Coalition and other plaintiffs. He argued that the Bureau of Indian Affairs, part of the Department of the Interior, acted unlawfully on May 7 by taking the land in Rohnert Park into federal trust for the Federated Branch of Graton Rancheria tribe before a compact agreement was reached with Schwarzenegger and before the state Legislature ratified such an agreement.</p><p>“As a result, the land in Rohnert Park hasn’t actually been taken into trust, and taxes are still being paid on it, at the annual rate of $893,000,” Healy said. “If the land is taken into trust, then property taxes would not need to be paid.”</p><p>If the casino is to be built, Schwarzenegger must negotiate a compact agreement and the state Legislature must ratify the agreement. In May, Healy said that he and other casino opponents planned to craft an advisory measure that would ask Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state Legislature to pay close attention to how negative impacts of the casino would be mitigated. </p><p>“But now I prefer to simply see if people would support or oppose another casino in Sonoma County,” Healy said. </p><p>Meanwhile, the Department of the Interior has until Aug. 6, 60 days from the time Volker’s lawsuit was filed, to provide an answer or another response in federal court.</p><p>Other lawsuits might be filed once the environmental impact statement is released.</p><p>“We’ll need to look at it, and see if it adequately addressed environmental impacts of the casino. If it doesn’t, it will prompt a lawsuit,” Healy said.</p><p>Sonoma County officials told Marilee Montgomery, media relations representative for Stop the Casino 101 Coalition, that the EIS would be ready in August, at the earliest.</p><p>(Contact Dan Johnson at dan.johnson@arguscourier.com)</p>