Court rules casino MOU invalid … again

The Cowlitz gambling syndicate has lost a vital part of its application for a casino in Clark County, and it could be a deal breaker.

Thurston County Superior Court today affirmed a June decision invalidating the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Cowlitz Tribe and Clark County. The initial decision had been issued by the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board. The growth board had determined that the county had not allowed for sufficient public participation -- as required by state and county law -- before it approved the MOU in March 2004.

The county then appealed the June decision arguing that the Growth Board, an appointed body, should not be able to override a decision made by the County Commission, an elected body. Thurston County Superior Court Judge Gary Tabor denied Clark County's appeal.

When considering gaming-related land acquisitions, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) “requires agreements between tribes and local governments regarding jurisdictional and land use issues … ,” according to a 2005 memorandum to all regional Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) directors.

A top DOI official recently characterized the loss of this MOU as a potential deal-breaker.

Resuscitation attempts

Since the growth board issued its opinion in June, the Cowlitz gambling syndicate has been trying frantically to keep the contents of the MOU alive.

First it attempted to insert them into its gambling ordinance, which originally was approved by the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) in November 2005. It withdrew this proposal, however, after hearing negative feedback from DOI decision-makers.

More recently the syndicate took the contents of the MOU and made them into unilateral tribal ordinances, whose enforceability and irrevocability are debatable. We are told that these ordinances are not viewed by DOI as being comparable to an MOU.

Next steps

The Cowlitz gambling syndicate will have to decide what tack to pursue. One option would be to convince Clark County to continue its legal spending spree and appeal today’s ruling in another court. If the county commissioners agree to such a maneuver, they will have made clear their allegiance to the syndicate.

Another option would be to step back and survey the situation. So far three nearby cities, a school district and a port district have passed resolutions opposing the proposed casino, in addition to a dozen area chambers of commerce and community groups who have declared their opposition or have favored a business park at the La Center site.

If the Cowlitz gambling syndicate truly cares about getting this project under way and providing for the tribe, it will consider a different site -- one closer to its current population and in its aboriginal territory.

Read about the beginnings of the MOU.

Read about the county's backroom casino dealing.

Read about the June invalidation of the MOU.

Read about the county commissioners' decision to appeal the MOU's invalidation.

Check out our timeline and see the evolution of the MOU.