The city government of LaCenter: a wholly-owned tribal subsidiary?

.
Yesterday, there was a big brouhaha about LaCenter implementing a system of initiative and referendum.

On the surface, it's difficult to argue against this. It's only when one drills down into the morass of what's really going on in LaCenter where the hackles raise as a result of the Boss Hogg-style government, now entirely controlled by the Cowlitz casino effort, where one questions the judgement.

Read this article, put into the paper yesterday.

Of particular note is that, for the most part, the local mouth piece on this issue is Erin Noland... and not an official member of city government.

The article and the quotes are pure, grade A, bull. The reporter, Marissa Harshman, was as manipulated as the electorate of La Center.

Erin Nolan and her husband, high ranking deputies in the Clark County Sheriff's Office, both moved to LaCenter shortly after the now abortive MOU was adopted by the former Clark County commissioners some 6 or 7 years ago. Their sole reason and mission for moving there was to do everything they could to gain compliance with the megacasino agenda.

Why?

Because the megacasino developers successfully bought their support.

How?

Under the terms of the MOU, the construction of the megacasino would result, allegedly, in the megacasino paying for an additional 17 FTE's for, you guessed it, the Clark County Sheriff's office.

From the original MOU:




Is it sheer coincidence that the Nolans moved to LaCenter after the MOU was put into place?

I will be the first to admit that the Clark County Sheriff's office is badly understaffed, particularly in comparison to other counties. They need more deputies on the road.

But selling out your community; particularly when that sell out will result in the constructing of a massive, bottomless economic black hole, sucking millions out of our community; millions that will have no tangible benefit to anyone besides the casino developer (recovering in Seattle from a massive brain injury) a California tribe (The Paskenta) and a Connecticut tribe (The Mohegans) financing this nightmare... besides, of course, the unions building this thing; is not the way to go.

Critical elements left out of the article were these:

First, the petition wasn't presented before the election. Why?

Simple, really: The "petition" was primarily used to provide the Nolan - casino campaign with a list.

They presented it in terms of a way to allow the people to have a voice. The real purpose was somewhat more insidious: it was used exclusively as a campaign tool.

They had a list of almost everyone who supported their position. To get their people, also owned by the megacasino types elected, all they had to do was work their list in this low turn out, off-year election.

It was a brilliant plan, brilliantly conceived and executed. But it remains the "dirty little secret" the Nolans, Irish and the rest of the tribal lackeys don't want you to know.

Until those manipulated into signing this petition find out the truth, they will continue to think these people are actually doing their will, when in fact, the reverse is the truth... and it explains perfectly why the "petition" wasn't presented until AFTER the election.

In this case, the people are doing the will of the megacasino supporters, of which each and every member of their city government, without exception, can be counted.

They've been scammed. They've been duped. They've been manipulated by a smooth operator who is jerking their strings like puppets.

The "presentation" of the petition is a joke as well. The petition didn't NEED to be "presented." The megacasino city council will now vote in lock step for whatever the megacasino wants, whenever and however they want it. But appearances, no matter the deception, must be served.
One indicator is that this story was emailed out and around yesterday by a fellow named Rod VanMechelen.

Who is Rod?

Rod is a member of the Cowlitz Tribal Council and has been one of the main cheerleaders of the megacasino. Of course, hating competition, he was also one of the most hypocritical voices in opposition to I-892, the "level-the-playing-field-with-the-tribes" initiative, where he whined and moaned like a cut cat against gambling expansion... but has no trouble expanding it when he stands to benefit directly... like, by supporting the construction of one of the largest casinos on the face of the planet right here in Clark County.

Like the vast majority of tribal members, Rod does not and never has lived here. But he has no difficulty damaging our community by ramming this steaming crap pile down our throats with bogus claims that this area has a tribal tie... when they are obviously from the Vader area, some 50 miles or more north of where they're claiming.

Why is any of this about VanMechelen relevant?

Because he's the guy that sent the story around yesterday.

And why would he do that? I mean, if this is all about the people of LaCenter getting this done...

...why would VanMechelen care? Unless, of course, this had been the plan all along.

The Whole World wonders.
.

I want to congratulate the town of Megacasino (Formerly LaCenter) on their new, entirely Barnett-owned government.

.
Tuesday night was an election blood bath in LaCenter, which will henceforth become known as the town of "David Barnett's Bitch," or "Megacaino" for short.

With the exception of Linda Tracy, every single member of the elected government of Megacasino is buried in Barnett's pocket, including a high ranking Clark County Sheriff who moved to LaCenter to aid Barnett's effort to take over the town.

Barnett and the Mohegans need an MOU with any community he can get. Since he owns the entire government of LaCenter, minus Linda Tracy, it's reasonable to expect a couple of things: first, it's likely there will be an MOU where the city government hands over Megacasino to Barnett in any way he wants by COB January... since the mayor, Birdwell, Nolan, Luis and "Poop" Vining ALL LIED about "opposing the casino."

Second, expect a massive tax increase designed to put the card rooms out of business.

I expect that part of the MOU will include immediate implementation of payments in lieu of taxes the moment the card rooms go under.

Of course, the city, even owned by Barnett, has to comply with the Growth Management Act... so they, like Clark County, should keep that in mind. But that won't be enough to stop them from entering an agreement given the guy who's calling all the shots.

So, again, congrats to the sheeple of Megacasino. You were handled expertly. Now, I look forward to the next election for Clark County Sheriff where I will hang a certain candidate as being neither democrat or republican, but entirely tribal.
.

Another pro-bridge replacement, pro-light rail puff piece by The Columbian that fails to mention the opposition.

Another day, another pro-bridge puff-piece that fails to mention the opposition.

"Design group far from consensus?" How about a more accurate, more relevant headline, like:

"New bridge? Community far from consensus."

Last week, Lou Brancaccio acknowledged his failure to cover the opposition.

I'm not here to say we always get it right. We try to ask the tough questions and hold folks accountable. Something else to consider, there isn't always "equal" opposition on issues. So we often hear "why didn't you quote the other side?" There isn't always another side. If you take school bonds and levies for example there usually is a very organized side in favor of them. Not so much on the other side. So it's not always easy to find the other side. And it's even more difficult to find equal numbers on the other side. There may be hundreds of folks mobilized on the pro side of a school bond. You might be lucky to find one or two on the other side.

I don't know... somehow the phrase "disingenuous" doesn't quite cover it.

ZERO coverage of the opposition is to infer that no opposition exists. Month after month of doing nothing to determine the opposition when, for example, Commissioner Tom Mielke and Senator Don Benton's opposition to this crap is well known.

Hundreds of people from a wide variety of locations on the political spectrum met a couple of weeks ago to protest this massive waste. This one meeting of pro-bridge leg humpers received more coverage.

Bias plays a MASSIVE part in this drama. Saying you CAN'T find opposition when clearly, you've made no effort to LOOK for it, is the quintessential cop out.

Arrogance plays the rest, in that many Federal officials who should know have told these morons that there's no money for their grand designs. Clearly, they're incapable of listening to ANYONE who doesn't share their bizarre vision.

The worthlessness of the article, below, is that the idiots behind this monstrosity are arguing over a crap pile that faces long odds of ever seeing the light of day and that those who are forced to use it do not want.

Without community support, it doesn't matter what this bridge looks like. If it ever is built, it will reflect a governmental tyranny that is a full-blown stain on democracy.

If, as I devoutly hope, no shovel of dirt is EVER turned on this steaming heap, then these morons will have wasted $100 MILLION plus.

But since it ain't their money... do you think they'll give a damn?

Local News

Portland mayor wants other bridge options

Design group far from consensus

Saturday, April 18 12:06 a.m.

BY JEFFREY MIZE
COLUMBIAN STAFF WRITER

One of the proposed design features for the I-5 bridge, a path for pedestrians and cyclists on a deck underneath a freeway span, was a bone of contention at Friday’s meeting. (Touchstone Architects/Columbia River Crossing)

Bridge planners came to a Friday design meeting seeking consensus on a new Interstate 5 Bridge.

There wasn't much to be found.

Portland Mayor Sam Adams, co-chairman of the Urban Design Advisory Group, said he wants to consider placing cyclists and pedestrians on a path at road level, not tucked underneath one of the two freeways spans.

Several others said they didn't care for the work to date and wanted to be more involved in the design process.

Current planning has focused on two "stacked" bridges, with light-rail tracks under the southbound freeway span and a "world-class" bicycle-pedestrian path under the northbound bridge.

Projections indicate that as many as 1,000 pedestrians and 5,000 cyclists could use the path during a nice summer day in the year 2030.

But Adams said having the path underneath a bridge "was not even close to a world-class option."

Ron Anderson, consultant project manager for the Columbia River Crossing, said placing cyclists and pedestrians next to freeway traffic creates "a very mean environment: road spray conditions, noise, dirt."

Adams said a bicycle-pedestrian path could be separated from freeway traffic to create a pleasant environment.

Mark Masciarotte, who represents the Vancouver Aviation Advisory Committee on the design group, said he would much rather be walking or riding underneath the bridge during the Northwest's rainy weather.

"For six months of the year, it is not pleasant up on that upper deck," he said.

"So we're going to bike to the bridge to get out of the rain?" Adams replied.

"I might get to the point where I can support this," Adams said, "but I get really concerned about a process that leads us to here without looking at other options."

Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard, the design group's other co-chairman, said the bistate panel previously expressed a preference for a stacked option.

"Sometimes I'm not sure what the hell 'world-class' means," Pollard added.

"World-class also means looking at the options," Adams said.

Bridge planners have turned to a stacked design to reduce costs and minimize the project's footprint and eliminate having a third bridge for light-rail trains, pedestrians and cyclists.

But there also are concerns that a stacked option would isolate cyclists and pedestrians and heighten worries about safety and crime, which in turn could discourage use.

Bridge planners say they might be able to place bicycle-pedestrian paths at road level, depending on how much separation would be required from freeway lanes and how wide each path would be.

Peg Johnson, who represents the Jantzen Beach Moorage Association Inc., mentioned the possibility that an underneath path could provide a refuge for homeless people.

"To me, this is a place for people to throw down their newspapers and sleep," she said.

Several group members, most notably Carrie Schilling of Works Partnership Architecture in Portland, said they wanted to be more closely involved as the design work moves ahead.

Adams, noting that "I've got a lot of controversial projects on my plate," said he likes quite a bit of bridge architect Bradley Touchstone's work.

But the Portland mayor, who last week suggested the team that designed a planned light rail-bicycle-pedestrian bridge over the Willamette River might take a crack at the I-5 project, stopped far short of embracing Touchstone's work.

"I've seen Bradley's designs for bridges," he said. "I don't think we've gotten the best out of his yet."

Portland officials have long called for an asymmetrical design that provides for an architectural statement across Portland Harbor, connecting Hayden Island to the rest of the city.

Because of the close proximity of Pearson Field on the Washington side, bridge engineers have little room to play with to make a structure high enough to prevent traffic-choking bridge lifts but low enough not to substantially interfere with the airspace designated for Pearson traffic.

Adams indicated that adding architectural flourishes to the main bridge won't be enough.

"I've stated from the very beginning I wouldn't be bought off with great lighting," he said. "I wouldn't be bought off with mosaics and gargoyles."

Johnson said she believe designers are paying too much attention to where the bridge touches down as the "iconic focal point."

"I like you guys a lot, but I'm not impressed with your bridge," she said.

It was all a bit much too much for Dick Pokornowski, who represents the Vancouver City Center Redevelopment Authority.

"I think at some point we have to move ahead," Pokornowski said. "Right now, I think we're going back. I'm very frustrated."

Jeffrey Mize: 360-735-4542 or jeff.mize@columbian.com.

Show 14 Comment(s)

You must register before you can post a comment.

Hopefully, the Silver Bullet has been fired: Supreme Court ruling raises questions about Cowlitz casino

The massive and damaging Barnett/Paskenta/Mohegan/Cowlitz megacasino would be a crushing financial and social blow to Clark County were ever to get approved.

The Cowlitz Tribe no more has a presence here then the fact that I drove through Orange County once gives me historical ties.

So the announcement that the US Supreme Court has narrowed application of the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act to tribes recognized at the time of passage comes as a pleasant surprise and a vicious blow to the few special interests interested in sucking our local economy dry.

The article speaks for itself. And contrary to avowed tribal supporters perspectives, I cheerfully disagree with their statement that this is not a probable "silver bullet."

Though Daniel Kearns, who has been fronting for LaCenter Mayor Jim Irish, avowed casino supporter tells us:

he had not read the decision, but suspects it will not be a “silver bullet” for casino foes because the tribe could argue it has been restored to federal recognition.

that has no application here, since the language of the decision indicates:

"Justice Clarence Thomas said in his majority opinion that the law “unambiguously refers to those tribes that were under the federal jurisdiction” when it was enacted."

That the Cowlitz came under federal jurisdiction 68 years later means they, and many other corporate tribes, are out of luck.

And thank God for it. To those of you who've wasted millions attempting to ram this garbage down our throats... my condolences.

Back to the drawing board, guys.



Supreme Court ruling raises questions about Cowlitz casino
Court limits federal ability to hold land in trust for tribes

Tuesday, February 24 | 11:57 a.m.

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, THE COLUMBIAN

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday limited the federal government’s authority to hold land in trust for Indian tribes, a victory for Rhode Island and other states seeking to impose local laws and control over development on Indian lands.

The court’s ruling applies to tribes recognized by the federal government after the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act.

The U.S. government argued that the law allows it to take land into trust for tribes regardless of when they were recognized, but Justice Clarence Thomas said in his majority opinion that the law “unambiguously refers to those tribes that were under the federal jurisdiction” when it was enacted.

The implications of Tuesday’s ruling for the proposed Cowlitz casino west of La Center were not immediately clear.

The federal government formally recognized the Cowlitz Indian Tribe in January 2002, some 68 years after passage of the Indian Reorganization Act.

Phil Harju, the tribe’s vice chairman and casino spokesman, said he and others were digesting the opinion and might have a statement later Tuesday.

Dan Kearns, La Center city attorney, said he had not read the decision, but suspects it will not be a “silver bullet” for casino foes because the tribe could argue it has been restored to federal recognition.

Tuesday’s ruling involves the Rhode Island-based Narragansett Indian Tribe and a 31-acre tract of land that the tribe purchased in rural Charlestown, about 40 miles south of Providence.

At issue was whether the land should be subject to state law, including a prohibition on casino gambling, or whether the parcel should be governed by tribal and federal law.

More: