Activists cautious on casino proposal

Environmentalists take wait-and-see attitude on tribe's plan, impact
March 14, 2004

By CLARK MASON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Environmental groups, which united to fight a proposed Indian casino near Sears Point last year, are taking a more cautious stance on the tribe's current plans to build a gambling resort outside Rohnert Park.

Since the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria announced plans to build a Rohnert Park casino, opposition from environmental groups has been low key, at least compared to what the tribe encountered at its original choice near Sears Point.

At a public hearing Wednesday in Santa Rosa to gather information for a federal environmental study, only two prominent environmental groups -- the Sierra Club and the Greenbelt Alliance -- spoke out against the Rohnert Park project.

They were joined by the local OWL Foundation, which is primarily concerned with ground water being depleted by the casino's wells.

In contrast, 16 environmental groups joined forces last year to loudly oppose the tribe's original plan to build its casino on former wetlands next to San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge. After the environmental groups rallied, the tribe withdrew from Sears Point, and shortly afterward decided to buy 360 acres next to Rohnert Park for its casino.

At the time, some members of environmental groups who had opposed the Sears Point location said the Rohnert Park site was preferable to the bay lands.

Environmental groups that are on record against the casino have a list of concerns about the Rohnert Park site, located on agricultural land in a community separator next to the Laguna de Santa Rosa.

But some Rohnert Park residents fighting the casino complain the environmental community isn't protesting loudly enough.

"Are they quiet over here? Yes, they are. Way too quiet," said Rohnert Park resident Linda Lamb, an opponent of the casino who is worried how the project will affect quality of life.

Environmental groups have heard the complaints, as well as the suspicion that they are being co-opted by the tribe.

"We've even been accused of being bought off and sold off. That's not true," said Dan Schurman, executive director of the Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation, whose organization has taken no position on the casino.

Schurman said his foundation is taking a "wait-and-see attitude" toward the casino and hotel planned by the Graton Rancheria in conjunction with Station Casinos of Las Vegas.

"The tribe says it is willing to mitigate all adverse consequences and go beyond that and participate in the restoration of the laguna," he said. "We'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt."

Schurman said the tribe is a potential investor to help fund the foundation's vision of protecting 10,000 acres of the Laguna, the largest freshwater wetlands complex on the North Coast. About 4,000 acres of land in the laguna are permanently protected in the 14-mile waterway that stretches from Cotati to Forestville.

But the foundation wants to see how the tribe plans to lessen environmental impact before taking a stance, Schurman said. He is optimistic that the tribe, which enjoys sovereign rights exempting its project from local and state review, will do the right thing.

The laguna "is part of their ancestral lands," Schurman said. "Their elders grew up on its banks. They have an interest in seeing it preserved and restored."

Environmental leaders said opposition to the San Pablo Bay site was better organized because the casino site was in the middle of a large ongoing federal and state wetlands restoration project and involved conservation groups from both Marin and Sonoma counties.

After the tribe abandoned its plans there, it agreed to give the Sonoma Land Trust its option to buy almost 1,700 acres and said it will eventually donate another 321 acres to be preserved as open space.

A tribal leader last week cited the donation and other plans for open space preservation in the laguna as part of its willingness to partner with leading environmental groups.

The Madrone Audubon Society was one of the groups that opposed the Sears Point site, but it has taken no formal position on the Rohnert Park location.

Diane Hichwa, conservation committee chairwoman for the organization, said she isn't convinced either place is good for development. She said, however, the Sears Point location was much farther away from any urban setting and services, which automatically made it inappropriate for a casino.

Environmental groups also give the Graton Rancheria credit for holding public meetings on the casino and submitting to an intensive federal environmental review, which the tribe says it isn't required to undertake.

The groups are hopeful the review will lead to a lessening of the environmental impact.

"This tribe has certainly done things in a more diplomatic and conciliatory manner than we've seen in Alexander Valley," said Peter Ashcroft, chairman of the Sierra Club for Sonoma County.

He said although the Graton Rancheria has been more cooperative than the Alexander Valley tribe with its River Rock Casino, the Sierra Club still is opposed to the Rohnert Park location for a number of reasons, including ground water depletion, traffic increases and impacts on endangered species.

The Sierra Club and Greenbelt Alliance both oppose the Rohnert Park site because a casino and hotel would violate the county's general plan and the site is outside the urban growth boundary.

Sonoma County Conservation Action officials didn't speak at last week's meeting, but will submit their written opposition.

Executive Director Jim Duffy said Conservation Action canvassed Rohnert Park to publicize its opposition after the tribe announced its plans.

But he acknowledged when it comes to Sears Point and Rohnert Park, "if you had to pick between the two, which horrible option do you take? Sears Point is probably the worst of the two."

Source: Santa Rosa Press