"If we get the green light, we would hope to have it up in 18 to 20 months," said Ron Brainard of Lebanon, tribal council chairman for the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians. "It will be about the size of the (Coquille Tribe's) Mill Casino in North Bend." The speedy time line is possible because one of the last acts of former Gov. John Kitzhaber before leaving office was to sign a compact with the 800-member tribe that would allow gaming at the site - but only if the tribe and the U.S. Department of Interior prevail in the lawsuit, filed by the Kitzhaber administration last April challenging federal approval of the land for gaming.

The tribe plans to ask newly elected Gov. Ted Kulongoski to withdraw the state lawsuit. "We would certainly like to try to convince (Kulongoski) that Gov. Kitzhaber's perspective doesn't serve anybody's interest - not  the state's or the tribe's," said Bruce Greene, a Denver attorney  representing the tribe.

MardiLyn Saathoff, general counsel to Kulongoski, said the governor is considering the matter but isn't ready to comment on it. Stephanie Striffler, special counsel to Attorney General Hardy Myers, said Kitzhaber agreed to sign the new compact at the request of the tribe as a courtesy, to expedite the casino project if the court upholds the Department of Interior approval.  Striffler said no matter what the District Court decides, it may be appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Whether the state would appeal would be decided by the new governor in consultation with Myers, she said.

Map: The Register Guard

Out of nine federally recognized tribal organizations in Oregon, the Confederated Tribes is the only one still without a casino. The tribe has been trying since 1995 to locate a casino in the Florence area and at one time even considered a Springfield site.
Brainard said the tribe plans a 50,000-square-foot casino near the junction of North Fork Siuslaw River Road and Highway 126. He estimated the cost at about $24 million and said the casino would provide employment for 300 to 400 people, with the majority of the jobs being "family wage."

The state compact - which approved the site contingent on the lawsuit being settled in favor of the tribe - would allow a full range of gaming, from video slots to blackjack, craps and roulette. Up to 850 video slot machines also would be permitted.
Brainard said the tribe plans to build a large, permanent casino  operation from the start rather than begin in a smaller, temporary building as some tribes have done. "We're the last guy on the block," he said, "and we're going to have to compete with everybody else."

A hotel may be part of the initial development, Brainard said. If not, he said, the hotel will come later, as well as a cultural center. For the first few years, he said, management of the casino will be contracted to a Las Vegas-based gaming consultant, R.O.I. Gaming Inc.. He said the tribe plans to secure financing through banks, but those arrangements cannot be made until the legal obstacles are cleared. Brainard expects the tribe to win the court battle. The legal question to be decided by federal judge Tom Coffin will be whether the site can qualify as "restored land" under the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and therefore be eligible for gaming activity.

The Indian gaming law doesn't generally allow gaming on lands acquired by tribes and taken into trust by the federal government after 1988, unless they were specifically approved for gaming by Congress - a route taken by some of the Oregon tribes. However, the federal law includes a provision for an exception  that allows gaming on land recognized by the government as "restored" to a tribe. The Confederated Tribes is the only Oregon tribe to seek an approved gaming site by that route. The question is whether,  to be classified as restored land, it has to have been owned or acquired by the tribe at the time it regained federal recognition. That happened in 1984.

The state has taken the position that the restoration of the  tribe and the land should take place at the same time if the land is to qualify for gaming. The Department of Interior ruled that, because of the tribe's ties to the land on the North Fork of the Siuslaw River, it could qualify as restored land even though it was not purchased until 1998.  Greene said the state has the burden of proving that in making its decision, the federal agency acted "arbitrarily, capriciously, abusively or otherwise not in accordance with the law."  The judge's obligation, he said, isn't to determine whether the agency's decision was right or wrong, but whether the decision can be supported by the record of information on which the contested ruling was made. If material in the record can serve as a foundation for the agency ruling, Greene said, it will likely stand.  "The court is not supposed to substitute its judgment for that of the decision maker," he said. "But how the court will see it and how a case will unfold is always anybody's guess."  Rulings in similar cases in other states have supported the tribes, he said. He expects Coffin to rule within 60 to 90 days of  the hearing.

Neither the city of Florence nor Lane County has taken a position on the proposed casino site, although both opposed an earlier attempt to secure approval for a site within the Florence city limits. Mayor Alan Burns said that if the tribe secures approval for the casino and asks the city to extend its utility services outside  the city limits, the city has an obligation to consider the  request. Brainard said "the majority of folks" in Florence support the project now because of the economic benefits it would bring to the area.

Even though other tribes have casinos in the coastal communities of Lincoln City and North Bend, Brainard said, market studies have shown the Florence location could succeed by drawing customers from tourist traffic and the Eugene-Springfield area, as well as the rest of western Lane County. Source:  2/7/03, The Register Guard, by Larry Bacon

Editor's Note:  Also see CFF Casino Page

 The double Peace event on the 8th follows the first Peace Wave at Waldport. The rolling peace event has received national radio mention on San Francisco’s KGO this week. Newport planner Lynn Jeffress says "We expect to move the Peace Wave into Washington and California, while keeping energy here in Oregon. Newport activities include music, food, peace poetry and an organized high school student contingent singing group. More traditional ways of expressing opinion against this unnecessary war will also occur, including signs and a silent vigil." Newport activities will start at the intersection of Highways 101 & 20, at 11:30 a.m.

Afterwards,  Newport participants are encouraged to visit the Newport Visual Arts Center in Nye Beach for the free "Children of the Gulf War" photo exhibit byTakashki Morizumi ( open until 5 P.M. 3rd floor). Takashi Morizumi, as a photojournalist, began investigative coverage of US military bases and the environmental problems associated with them. He has documented the children of Iraq since 1998.  At 7 P.M. Patriots for Peace are sponsoring another free event at the Visual Arts Center, "The Health Effects of War," with Catherine Thomassen, MD, of Physicians for Social Responsibility.
 Bandon events start at the City Hall at noon says spokesperson Janet Bates: "Artists are creating custom posters; we will march and sing, and various working and professional groups are issuing challenges for others around the state to come and gather in this beautiful setting and state their opposition to an unnecessary war. The medical professionals and retired persons in the area are quite united on this and play a major part."

Coos Bay/North Bend events on the 15th  start at 1:00 p.m. by the downtown waterfront at the “Boardwalk” by Hwy 101 and Commercial. Traditional peace and vigil activities are planned by a coalition of individuals and groups including the Human Rights Advocates of Coos County and the Pacific Green Party chapter. Some of the speakers include  Bill Bradbury and Tom Matosec, Vietnam Veteran. Harry Stamper, a national political musical treasure will share billing with all those singing and voicing restraint to “shoot first” preemptive warfare. Contact Maggie Bagon,  welmama@yahoo.com or 541- 751-1052
Bates of Bandon can be reached at 541-347-6155 or jankenb@msn.com; Dorothy Mack of Newport can be contacted at 541-765-2383 or  dmack@centurytel.net. Florence car-pooling and Peace Caravan will leave from Salmonberry Naturals store at 821Quince Street, Florence, at 9:30 A.M. heading north, and 10:00 A.M. heading south. Rand Dawson, for Florence Citizens Democracy Watch, says there also will be a Florence silent vigil at the intersections of 101 and 126 that Saturday, from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00. Betty Crooks has information about the vigil, at 541-902-7811. More information on all events can be had from Dawson: 541-997-3950 or rdawson@oregonfast.net. Dawson says "When we start hitting the national media on events of this nature we can feel some accomplishment. The Bush consensus for a rush to preemptive war is a myth. People need to make their positions known." Source:  News Release, Citizens Democracy Watch.  Editor's Note:  Also see Florence Peace March on MLK Day - Photos

Prescott suggested that Ikea substantially reduce the size of its stores and locate them in or adjacent to town centers. While planning and development is strictly a state and local matter in the United States, in England, local policies must follow broad national guidelines.

The government's recent rejection may reflect a renewed interpretation of "Planning Policy Guidance Note 6: Town Centres and Retail Development" (PPG6), a national policy that requires town centers be given preference for all new development, followed by edge-of-town sites (defined as within walking distance of the downtown). Out-of-town development is allowed only if the developer demonstrates a need that cannot be satisfied with a more centrally located project.
http://www.planning.odpm.gov.uk/callins/oct2_2002/index.htm
PPG6: http://www.planning.odpm.gov.uk/ppg/

It found big box retail generates a net annual deficit of $468 per 1,000 square feet, and shopping centers produce an annual drain of $314 per 1,000 square feet.  By far the most costly type of development, according to the study, are fast-food restaurants, which have a net annual cost of $5,168 per 1,000 square feet.  The two main factors behind the higher costs are higher road maintenance costs (due to more trips) and greater demand for public safety services.

In contrast, specialty retail, a category that includes small-scale Main Street businesses, has a positive impact on pubic revenue (i.e., it generates more tax revenue than it costs to service). Specialty retail produces a net annual return of $326 per 1,000 square feet. Source:  Tischler and Associates, Inc.  http://www.tischlerassociates.com

That's the conclusion of a new study conducted by Civic Economics and published by Livable City in Austin, Texas. The study, "Economic Impact Analysis: A Case Study," examines the local economic impact of two of Austin's venerable independent businesses---Waterloo Records, widely considered to be the best music store in the nation, and Book People, a
beloved, 32-year-old bookstore. The study compares their contributions to the local economy with the economic return the community would receive from a typical Borders store.
http://www.liveablecity.org/projects/aas_121102.htm
http://www.civiceconomics.com

If the city does not satisfy the complaints and FOLC forwards its petition to the commission, the land use watchdog group is asking for a two-year ban on annexations to Lebanon, followed by an interim limitation on hearings on annexation requests for an unspecified period of time. The interim limitation would require that the Department of Land Conservation and  development approve of all annexations and concurrent zoning map amendments until it certifies that the city is making decisions based on statutes, goals, the city's comprehensive plan and local ordinances. In addition, FOLC wants all annexation requests to be considered at one time, once a year, with approvals at the next meeting, not on the hearing date.

Allegations in the document include:
· The city's findings, or proof, that an annexation proposal complies with city land use regulations are insufficient or are not
supported by substantial evidence.
· The city considers only streets, drainage, water and sanitary sewer as urban services that must be available to serve the area.
It fails to consider whether police, fire, parks, schools and other services are adequate.
· The city fails to require specific development proposals accompany annexation requests.
· The city finds that annexations meet compact growth pattern requirements without substantial evidence and even though infill
and developable land exists within city limits.
· The city allows rights-of-way for vehicular and pedestrian traffic to be provided as the property is developed rather than at
annexation.

FOLC cites 18 requests for annexation and concurrent zone assignments from January 2000 to January 2003 as evidence for
its point of view. Thirteen were approved. Five are pending appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals. One was appealed to
LUBA and returned to the city for a new hearing.

In its notice, FOLC claims the city's violations result in disorderly development and low-density commercial and residential
sprawl and increased costs to taxpayers for infrastructure and services for taxpayers.  Development that is denser or closer to the center of town is less costly, said Jim Just, a representative of FOLC who has opposed the six most recent annexations. If a developer must extend infrastructure a great distance, the cost is passed along, for example to residential buyers.  The spread out pattern of development adversely impacts existing neighborhoods and commercial areas, degrades the quality
of life in the community and threatens the ability of the city to provide urban services to citizens, FOLC alleges.

Just said the city should be spending its energy on services such as fixing existing streets and sidewalks, improving library
services, and rehabilitating existing areas rather than on approving new annexation requests.  "The city ought to be taking care of the citizens it has," he said.

Information about the action by FOLC was presented to the Lebanon Express and Albany Democrat-Herald last Thursday by seven people representing FOLC, the Friends of Lebanon and the Lebanon Citizens for a Voice in Annexation. Irina Just, president of FOLC, said the city's comprehensive plan and annexation policy are good, but the city pays little attention to the criteria in hearings.

The notice to the city is "very much hand-in-hand with our petition drive," she said, in reference to the effort to put a measure
on the ballot asking city voters if they would like to vote on all proposed annexations.  Gloria Olson said more citizen involvement is needed in the planning process. "We don't want to be seen as a group who are causing problems. We want to help solve problems," she said.

The action initiated by FOLC could set precedent for other cities in Oregon, Jim Just said in an interview.  "This area of conversion of urbanizable land to urban land is really an area of law that is pretty untested," he said. "There hasn't
been a lot of litigation. We are breaking some new ground here." Urbanizable lands are those outside the city limits and within the Urban Growth Boundary.

The City of Lebanon and Friends of Linn County will try to resolve their differences locally before FOLC takes to the state the land use issues laid out in its Intent to Petition the Land Conservation and Development Commission for an Enforcement
Order.  Friends' representative Jim Just said the city has 60 days to respond to the notice.  "If we're satisfied with the response, everything goes away," Just said.  The city doesn't necessary have to make all the changes FOLC asked for, he said. There is some room for compromise.  If the Friends are not satisfied with the city response, then it will proceed to petition LCDC for an enforcement order.  The LCDC director first determines whether the commission has good cause to proceed. If so, then a contested case hearing is held, with FOLC presenting its case and the city defending itself before the commission. Just said the director's determination is appealable but he was not sure about the commission's decision.  Source: By A.K. Dugan, Lebanon Express Writer