Three days after the San Benito County Board of Supervisors
unanimously opposed a Miwok casino near Hollister, the city council
says it will continue to wait for more information before showing
its hand.
Hollister – Three days after the San Benito County Board of Supervisors unanimously opposed a Miwok casino near Hollister, the city council says it will continue to wait for more information before showing its hand.
At Tuesday night’s council meeting, about eight residents took the microphone urging the council to sign a resolution opposing the proposed casino like the supervisors had done earlier that day. Mayor Pauline Valdivia waited until the end of the council meeting to respond.
“Yes, it’s true that we have not taken a stance. And as the mayor of this fair city, I cannot make a decision until I have more information. We need to look at this as far as what benefits it’s going to bring to the community, if any,” Valdivia said, adding she’d like to see a detailed business plan, an economic analysis, and a proposal of how the casino’s investors intend to mitigate negative impacts. “Believe me, I have my reservations about this … (but) this community really needs jobs, and it’s unfortunate that a casino had to come in here instead of something else.”
The proposed casino would be the result of a partnership between the five-member California Valley Miwok tribe and investment group Game Won. The two groups want to build a resort/casino on 200-plus acres off Highway 156 across from the Hollister airport. The casino could be similar in size to Yolo County’s Cache Creek Casino, which is over 74,000 square feet with 2,200 slot machines.
Gov. Schwarzenegger has said he will not negotiate gaming compacts with tribes outside of their indigenous areas without overwhelming support from the locals. The Miwoks have not yet proven their ancestral ties to San Benito County, and the Board of Supervisors passed its resolution to demonstrate to the governor that there is little local support for the project.
But California Valley Miwok Project Manager Gary Ramos said immediately following Tuesday’s supervisors’ meeting the investors’ next stop would be the Hollister and San Juan Bautista City Councils. Ramos also attended the council meeting Tuesday night, and as the lone voice of support for the casino present, asked the council not to make a hasty decision without all the facts.
The majority of the council members seemed to agree with Ramos’ assertion that the council did not yet have all the information it needed to take a stance one way or the other.
After Valdivia’s comments, the remaining four council members followed suit.
District 4 Councilman Doug Emerson did add to his so far neutral stance that he would like to “push the envelope” and get the project’s investors to bring forward the documents they’ve promised, such as an economic impact report and a detailed business plan, Emerson said.
“On one hand I’ve got the wait and see attitude, but on the other hand I’m a little impatient,” he said.
Still, the council members kept their poker faces on.
“We haven’t really had any formal presentation yet,” said Dist. 1 Councilman Brad Pike. “But right now, my list (of benefits the Miwoks would have to bring) would be very high in content. We need to turn this community around as a community; we’re not going to let anyone come in and do it for us.”
District 5 Councilwoman Monica Johnson told the council she hadn’t received phone calls from anyone in her district either for or against the casino, but found in talking to people in her neighborhood that her district was split.
“We’ve heard a lot of things against the casino, and a lot of that is valid. But whether or not we want to believe it, we already have a drug problem. We already have prostitution. Downtown is already losing business,” she said. “Even if I don’t morally agree with it, the state of California says this is a legitimate business, and we need to look into it. What I don’t want is for this to become another Measure G.”
District 2 Councilman Robert Scattini said he believes the majority of his constituents want the casino, saying he has received letter after letter from residents of his 74 percent Hispanic district. His residents want jobs, he said, and if it came down to a council vote he’d be representing his district. Still, he said, this doesn’t mean he’s for the casino, nor does it mean he’s against it.
“I think we should afford them (the tribe and its investors) the opportunity to tell their story. We should at least give them the professional courtesy of listening to them,” Scattini said. “What I’m leaning towards right now is, if it’s going to be so controversial, put it up to a vote and let the people decide. I really don’t know what the outcome would be,” he said.
Emerson also said he would support putting the issue to a vote, provided the tribe and its investors finance the special election.
“Right now it seems like most of the people in San Benito County are against (the casino). So then it would be up to the investors to prove that wrong,” Emerson said.
In an e-mail Thursday, Gary Ramos replied, “None of the details regarding the proposed resort destination casino have been released, so there would be nothing for the public to vote on.”
Jessica Quandt covers politics for the Free Lance. Reach her at 831-637-5566 ext. 330 or at [email protected].
