US prepares for review of proposed Medford casino

MEDFORD, Ore. (AP) – The Coquille Indian Tribe’s proposal to build a casino in Medford is taking a step forward as the Bureau of Indian Affairs prepares for an environmental review of the plan.

The federal agency is seeking public comment as it works to determine the extent of the review.

The Medford City Council wants a thorough review looking at the casino’s impacts on transportation, public safety and socio-economic issues, such as the impact on minorities and low-income families.

“We want to make sure we’re looking pretty broadly at what the impacts are for the community,” Medford Councilor Daniel Bunn told the Mail Tribune.

Under gambling compacts with the state, each Oregon tribe is allowed one Class III casino, which permits craps, roulette, blackjack, other table games and video gambling. The Coquille tribe’s Class III casino is in North Bend.

The tribe proposes a Class II casino, which is limited to video gambling, on 2.4 acres of land in south Medford.

The casino proposal has been opposed by local governments, Gov. John Kitzhaber and the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, which operates the nearby Seven Feathers Casino.

While questions have arisen about whether Medford was part of the Coquille tribe’s historical lands, the tribe itself has maintained it has strong roots in this area.

Susan Ferris, spokeswoman for the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, said federal law requires a casino be built on ancestral land.

“This is not Coquille ancestral land,” she said. “We are hopeful the (U.S.) Department of the Interior will make the lawful decision and not allow this project to proceed.”

According to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the areas of environmental concern that will be analyzed in the review include land resources, water resources, air quality, noise, biological resources, cultural/historical/archaeological resources, resource use patterns, traffic and transportation, public health and safety, hazardous materials and hazardous wastes, public services and utilities, socioeconomics, environmental justice, visual resources/aesthetics and cumulative, indirect and growth-inducing effects.

–––

Information from: Mail Tribune, http://www.mailtribune.com/