The Clark County commissioners make no bones about it: The proposed Cowlitz casino-resort would not be a welcome addition.
In comments sent this week to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), the county says the casino-resort alternatives described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) “do not serve the tribe’s interests, nor do they serve the interests of the community.”
CARS has focused largely on community impacts, and Clark County hits on many high points regarding transportation, housing, social services and schools.
Community impacts
The county’s comments repeatedly note that the Final EIS fails to address most of its previous comments. Its criticisms include the following:
- “The Final EIS underestimates the potential need for social services and housing for workers who will make wages near poverty level.”
- “The EIS masks the practical necessity for the majority of casino-resort workers to move to Clark County.”
- “[T]here is no discussion of how the jurisdictions will deal with the need for almost 3,000 units of affordable housing for new employees and their households.”
- “These impacts will ripple to other providers of education and social services. Multiple school districts may be influenced by an influx of children of casino-resort employees.”
- “[T]he Final EIS fails to adequately portray or mitigate the traffic impacts on the site.”
- “The Final EIS does an inadequate job of assessing impacts of the replacement of the I-5 bridge, which will coincide with the development and opening of the casino-resort.”
An appendix titled “Transportation Arterial Plan comments” states that traffic to the proposed development would exceed the capacity of the interstate between La Center and Ridgefield “likely triggering failure.”
The county’s comments extend to the potential loss of local leadership. In a section regarding La Center, the county writes, “A large casino resort near La Center, operated by a Connecticut corporation [Mohegan] and owned by a tribe that has a minimal local resident population [Cowlitz], cannot mitigate the impact of the loss of local business and leadership through mitigation dollars.”
Please write
The deadline for submitting comments is Aug. 11. If you have not yet sent yours, please do so now. Comments should include the caption “FEIS Comments, Cowlitz Indian Tribe Trust Acquisition and Casino Project” and be addressed to:
Mr. Stanley Speaks, Northwest Regional Director
Bureau of Indian Affairs911 NE 11th Ave.
Portland, OR 97232
We encourage you to send copies to:
Mr. James Cason, Associate Deputy Secretary (James_Cason@ios.doi.gov), and Mr. George Skibine, Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs (George_Skibine@ios.doi.gov). Both can be reached via U.S. mail at:
Department of the Interior
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240
Read Clark County's comments.
Read "County continues to criticize Cowlitz
casino study" in The Columbian.
Read The Columbian
editorial "Complaints about casino statement put
focus on Connecticut tribe's role."
