has limited opportunity to influence mitigation measures or
seek compensation for adverse environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Parties acknowledge that given the scope of the proposed Tribal
economic development projects, specific impacts are not always subject to
precise measurement and that the mitigation measures agreed upon below are
intended as good faith approximate mitigation of identified impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Parties recognize that this Agreement is an important step in
furthering a government-to-government relationship and building trust, mutual
respect and
1
cooperation that is intended to benefit the Tribe, its members and the entire
Sonoma County community;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
I.
PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
1.1
THE PURPOSE OF THIS AGREEMENT IS TO:
1.1.1
MEMORIALIZE UNDERSTANDINGS THAT ARE INTENDED TO RESOLVE AND SETTLE
A RANGE OF DISPUTES BETWEEN THE TRIBE AND THE COUNTY;
1.1.2
ASSURE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MEASURES FOR MITIGATING THE
OFF-RESERVATION IMPACTS OF THE EXISTING CASINO, THE DUGAN PROJECTS, AND THE
RESORT PROJECT;
1.1.3
ESTABLISH A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE PROCESS TO IDENTIFY AND MITIGATE
POTENTIAL OFF-RESERVATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF FUTURE TRIBAL ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, INCLUDING, WITH RESPECT TO THOSE WHICH ARE ON-RESERVATION
GAMING PROJECTS, A PROCESS THAT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE PROCESSES REQUIRED UNDER
THE COMPACT;
1.1.4
CREATE A PROCESS TO RESOLVE FUTURE DISPUTES THAT MAY ARISE BETWEEN
THE COUNTY AND THE TRIBE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT;
1.1.5
CREATE A FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING AND MAINTAINING A MUTUALLY
BENEFICIAL GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIBE AND THE
COUNTY; AND
1.1.6
IDENTIFY WAYS FOR THE TRIBE AND THE COUNTY TO WORK TOGETHER TO
PROVIDE SERVICES AND BENEFITS TO THE TRIBAL COMMUNITY AND SONOMA COUNTY
RESIDENTS.
II.
ISSUES IN DISPUTE
2.1
THE TRIBE AND COUNTY ARE INVOLVED IN A NUMBER OF LEGAL DISPUTES
WHICH ARE SUMMARIZED BELOW.
THIS AGREEMENT IS INTENDED TO SETTLE THESE DISPUTES
AND TO PROVIDE A MECHANISM TO RESOLVE OTHER CONTROVERSIES THAT MAY ARISE UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT IN THE FUTURE.
THE DISPUTED ISSUES INCLUDE:
2.1.1
ALCOHOL LICENSE:
IN THE MATTER OF THE PROTEST OF SHERIFF BILL
COGBILL, ET AL. AGAINST THE PERSON TO PERSON AND PREMISES TO PREMISES TRANSFER
OF A GENERAL PUBLIC EATING PLACE ALCOHOL LICENSE - THE COUNTY SHERIFF, FIRE
CHIEF, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE ALEXANDER VALLEY ASSOCIATION ("AVA") EACH
PROTESTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL ("ABC") THAT THE RIVER
ROCK CASINO SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED A LIQUOR LICENSE.
THE TRIBE CONTENDS IT IS
QUALIFIED TO OBTAIN THE APPLIED FOR LICENSE.
THE PROTESTS ARE PENDING BEFORE AN
ABC ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE.
2.1.2
DUGAN PROPERTY TRUST APPLICATION:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CONSERVATION, ET AL. V. ACTING PACIFIC REGIONAL DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN
AFFAIRS - THE STATE OF
2
CALIFORNIA, COUNTY AND AVA EACH ARE APPEALING A BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS ("BIA")
DECISION TO TAKE 18 ACRES OF LAND (THE "DUGAN PROPERTY"), ADJACENT TO THE
RANCHERIA, INTO TRUST FOR THE TRIBE.
THE MATTER IS PENDING BEFORE THE
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BOARD OF INDIAN APPEALS ("IBIA").
2.1.3
FIRE SAFETY INSPECTIONS:
IN THE MATTER OF THE SONOMA COUNTY FIRE
CHIEF'S APPLICATION FOR AN INSPECTION