They make it sound like local opinion will have no effect on any gambling compact the FIGR might get or their casino plans in general.

The FIGR is, as usual, failing to tell the whole truth.

Getting the compact from the governor is just the first part of a two-step process. The second part is getting the compact ratified by our state Legislature. Although the governor may be required by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to negotiate in good faith, the state Legislature is under no such imperative, and is not required at all to approve any tribal gambling compact.

In 2005, the Lytton Band of Pomo Indians shelved the gambling compact the governor gave them that would have allowed them to have 2,500 slot machines at their casino in San Pablo. Under stiff pressure from the public and Sen. Dianne Feinstein and State Assemblymember Loni Hancock, ratification of the Lytton’s gambling compact had no chance in the state Legislature. Although the Lytton’s casino is open, it only has bingo machines. It cannot operate slots or table games.

People in this community are legitimately concerned about the problems Class III gambling would bring to the community. The FIGR has continually minimized the social impacts of Las Vegas-style gambling, the increases in costs to local governments, and the impact of 24/7 casino traffic on Highway 101 and local roads.

In exchange for 4,000 jobs, a casino would have following in its wake loan sharks, illegal gambling including illegal sports books, thieves, prostitutes, increased drug and alcohol addiction, as well as ever-increasing numbers of gambling addicts and the resulting child abuse and neglect, spousal abuse, bankruptcy, divorce, embezzlement and suicide. The FIGR’s own NEPA study indicates there is a 43 percent increase in drug arrests following the opening of a casino.

It seems a stiff price to pay for 4,000 mostly dead-end service jobs.

A recent report from the Rockefeller Institute indicates that payments from casinos are a bad way to balance a municipal budget. The additional costs caused by a casino in law enforcement, the criminal justice system, the burden on social programs, increased wear and tear on public roads, etc. increase year to year because of inflation, but casino payments in agreements such as the FIGR has with Rohnert Park never increase. The result Is an ever-expanding red bottom line for local government.

The FIGR is being deceptive when it states that the current site is consistent with Rohnert Park’s development plans. The site, currently county land zoned Rural Residential and Agricultural, has the potential to be re-zoned if and when the property is annexed by Rohnert Park, something that will not happen if the land is taken into federal trust for the FIGR.

Even under the Rohnert Park General Plan, there was never envisioned this kind of enormous high-impact project that would attract in excess of 10,000 patrons every single day, using resources equivalent to that of a small town.

Social problems, government budgets and land use are all local issues. The public has never had an opportunity to actually vote on the non-conforming casino project itself or on the agreements with Rohnert Park and the county of Sonoma. Had they been allowed to vote, the outcome would have been much different for the FIGR, because as it well knows, there is overwhelming opposition to this casino.

What the FIGR fears most is a local vote, and that is why they have worked so hard to prevent it.

(Marilee Montgomery is a founding member of Stop the Casino 101 Coalition (www.stop thecasino101.com) in Rohnert Park and secretary of Stop Predatory Gambling (www.stop predatorygambling.org).

In exchange for 4,000 jobs, a casino would have following in its wake loan sharks, illegal gambling including illegal sports books, thieves, prostitutes, increased drug and alcohol addiction, as well as ever-increasing numbers of gambling addicts and the resulting child abuse and neglect, spousal abuse, bankruptcy, divorce, embezzlement and suicide. The FIGR’s own NEPA study indicates there is a 43 percent increase in drug arrests following the opening of a casino.

It seems a stiff price to pay for 4,000 mostly dead-end service jobs.

A recent report from the Rockefeller Institute indicates that payments from casinos are a bad way to balance a municipal budget. The additional costs caused by a casino in law enforcement, the criminal justice system, the burden on social programs, increased wear and tear on public roads, etc. increase year to year because of inflation, but casino payments in agreements such as the FIGR has with Rohnert Park never increase. The result Is an ever-expanding red bottom line for local government.

The FIGR is being deceptive when it states that the current site is consistent with Rohnert Park’s development plans. The site, currently county land zoned Rural Residential and Agricultural, has the potential to be re-zoned if and when the property is annexed by Rohnert Park, something that will not happen if the land is taken into federal trust for the FIGR.

Even under the Rohnert Park General Plan, there was never envisioned this kind of enormous high-impact project that would attract in excess of 10,000 patrons every single day, using resources equivalent to that of a small town.

Social problems, government budgets and land use are all local issues. The public has never had an opportunity to actually vote on the non-conforming casino project itself or on the agreements with Rohnert Park and the county of Sonoma. Had they been allowed to vote, the outcome would have been much different for the FIGR, because as it well knows, there is overwhelming opposition to this casino.

What the FIGR fears most is a local vote, and that is why they have worked so hard to prevent it.

(Marilee Montgomery is a founding member of Stop the Casino 101 Coalition (www.stop thecasino101.com) in Rohnert Park and secretary of Stop Predatory Gambling (www.stop predatorygambling.org).