E-mail this article to a friend | Printer friendly format | Submit A Comment

By DJ Becker

Wendy Alexander/Madera Tribune File Photo A crowd gathers at Chukchansi Gold Resort and Casino for a "topping out" ceremony Oct. 2007, celebrating the construction of the 11-story expansion on the south side of the resort.

Wendy Alexander/Madera Tribune File Photo North Fork Rancheria tribal secretary Katrina Lewis, left, tribal treasurer Maryann McGovran, center, and tribal chairwoman Elaine Bethel-Fink converse after a press conference last month.

The placement of a new casino and resort complex on state Route 99 in Madera would have a devastating effect on the existing casino operations of the Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians and the community of Coarsegold, according to Chukchansi tribal council member Sam Lawhon.

Lawhon questioned whether complete due diligence was done by the Madera County Board of Supervisors regarding the proposed project's impact on the existing tribes' casino revenues.

However, a spokesman for the North Fork Mono Rancheria Indians, which proposed the casino, said the tribe is operating by federal rules, and that the Chukchansi tribe is trying to put up roadblocks to a project that will benefit the county economically.

Lawhon implored supervisors Tuesday to reconsider their memorandum of understanding, and ultimately to reverse their decision to recommend that the casino project go forward.

The memorandum of understanding amounts to a contract between the tribe and the county for certain contributions in exchange for services and for support of the casino project.

At Tuesday's meeting, Supervisor Ronn Dominici assured Lawhon that he thought each member of the board had adequately considered the complex casino issues and impact at length before the memorandum of understanding was signed.

Lawhon said he understood why supervisors would want a casino project in their district.

"I understand that negotiating a memorandum of understanding is part of the process. There's other stuff going on. But to see (Supervisor) Tom (Wheeler) take a stance against someone in his district, without consulting us, that really put us in a bad spot. My constituents weren't happy with what happened at that meeting. I wasn't here when you voted to support that. Maybe I should have been," Lawhon said.

Wheeler was not present at Tuesday's meeting due to jury duty...

To read the rest of the story... you'll have to have an online subscription to The Madera Tribune. See below for details.