Quantcast
 

Most of those responding to this week’s online Argus-Courier poll thought that the city should not give voters the opportunity to extend the urban growth boundary, including sewer and water, to the Dry Creek tribe if it would negate the potential for a casino on land south of Petaluma. About 66 percent thought doing so would be a bad idea, while 31 percent approved of the idea. Three percent was not sure. Here were some of the comments.
——
“A no-brainer if it would really negate the casino.”
——
“Anything to not have another casino!”
——
“Don’t trust them. The Indian speaks with a forked tongue. They broke every treaty they made with the white man. Oh, wait, that was the other way around, wasn’t it.”
——
“How can we be sure they won’t build a casino? What are the guarantees? I think it’s already a done deal, and it is a terrible thing. Having a casino at that location will be awful!”
——
“It will only make it easier for them to establish a casino there.”
——
“May sound good now but it would open the door for future litigation and chances are the casino advocates would win and all the city would be left with is a near capacity sewer treatment plant and lawyer’s fees.”
——
“We could use the construction and casino jobs.”
——
“No need to vote. The council should just say “no.” Of course they want to build a casino.”
——
“Please no more casinos. We do not need one in every town up and down the 101 Highway. Are we encouraging gambling in this state?”
——
“These Indian casinos are getting as common as Starbucks — enough! But of course it’s a foregone conclusion that they will get their casino (in the worst possible location in this case) no matter what how much we protest.”
——
“We can negate a potential casino without extending the Urban Growth Boundary. This giving away of city water and sewer capacity does not need to be a bargaining chip if we have adequate negotiators on the Council. The council majority of 2011 did not show negotiation skills, period. They only knew how to give pieces of our city away to any developer or other entity that asked. Pathetic leaders.”
——
“No! We never have enough water for the people who are here now and you want to give more away? Maybe this whole water shortage is just a big lie! Why would you stress conserving water because we will not have enough for residents and you are more than willing to make it so we will have even less? Don’t water, don’t flush, don’t wash your car, don’t, don’t, don’t — but move in more people to use up what we have tried so hard to conserve!”
——
“What about “Federal Trust” do you not understand? Any agreement and local law can be ignored. At any time, tribal leaders can back out of the agreement and build a casino. Are we then going to shut off the water and sewer service, remove all the installed infrastructure? I think not. Another thing our ineffectual retiring Congresswoman failed to do was to stop the process sooner.”
——
“And while we’re at it, include the proposed Dutra Plant and nix it, too.”
——
“Extending services would cause a much bigger problem than a casino. No way!”
——
“Why not, the city needs money.”
——

Be Sociable, Share!