Spokane Regional Networking, Social Media, Professional and Business Development
I have recently learened that Spokane Tribes is trying to anex land near Fair Child AFB, that could if allowed force the base to close.
The Military has a Law that prevents any base to be with in a certain proximity to gambling establishments. Not only that but their current building plans will encroach on the base and its flight patterns. Forcing the government to put it on its Brac list if it is not already. That means the Government could already be evaluating to keep the base here or not. I think this would be a great loss to our community if we allowed this to happen.
We already have three large Casinos in our area. They state it will create 2500 new jobs. But fail to mention that it will cost us just as many jobs, including all of the benefits the base brings to our local economy. Including the taxes and revenue, from the family's who are stationed their. Many of whom do live off the base right here in our local community.
Can our economy really support another casino, should we allow this to happen?
I am trying to raise awarness of this current issues. If you have any questions or want more information please feel free to contact me.
Thank you for Reading.
With respect - I'm confused.
This is an important issue. But, - is it one tribe vs another? Or Fairchild vs the casino? Or a vocal group opposing the casino on moral grounds? I have not idea. Unfortunately, all I've seen so far is opinion. How are we to determine what facts (if any) are at the root of the opinions?
Has anyone seen any actual criteria for any base closing or remaining opened. If none exists, then it's all of this is subjective and you can't live your life - make an important decision - based on what you HOPE OR THINK OR FEAR a politician will think at the time the decision is made.
So - where are the facts? The Spokesman Review pieces is not an "article" that has been vetted. It's an Op Ed. With respect for the Colonel, we do not know his motivation for expressing himself, and he gave no valid criteria. So, who has actual facts or decision criteria. Guidance like, "Washington might not like it" is just not good enough.
Right now what needs to happen is it needs to become a Spokane issue. As it stands this currently seems to be just between the tribes and our local politicians.
Their are multiple facts involved including that the Spokane city council passed a resolution opposed to the Spokane tribes building so close to the base just a couple weeks ago. The fact that GSI, is trying to also raise awareness of this issue. This however has not stopped them from trying to do it anyway.
As I am sure you know a resolution is a first step in stopping this but does not guarantee it. Also another issue that seems obvious to me, is do we really need or want another casino in this area.
So perhaps the confusion lies in the fact of who the fight is between. This I understand. Right now as it stands it is between local politicians and the Local tribes wanting to build the proposed sight. If you read the GSI article it does give you some more detailed facts including the image of the proposed building site. It also includes some facts of the case.
In regards to the Colonel in his information that you mentioned, I think it is important to note that he was stating possibilities, or potential outcomes if this proposed building plan was to go through.
I hope this helps some as I do believe the biggest thing right now is to raise awareness of this issue, so that it is not only the politicians voice being heard. But also the voice of a community, our community to decide if this is really what we need and or want.
Did you share this discussion with the Veterans group on LP?
With respect to you as well, Michael.
I believe, as you mention, there are several forces at work here. Tribe vs. tribe, Fairchild AFB’s fate vs. the casino/tribe and of course there will always be the vocal, moral groups standing in opposition. I am also in agreement that it is not prudent to make impactful decisions based on hearsay or the threat of what might happen if…
However, Colonel Schwalbe's specific education and experience in the military would seem to position him to comment with credible insight, regardless of his motivation.
I have seen the proposed land use map for the casino and its proximity to FAFB and flight patterns. Regarding future consideration, geography alone is enough to send up a red flag even to an ambiguous observer. While not impacting the base immediately the location would be enough to negatively affect Fairchild, in a future ”apples to apples” BRAC assessment in comparison to other facilities
Candidly, in my humble opinion, it would be reckless to even consider an action such as this that could jeopardize the fate of FAFB and all that it means to Spokane and the local economy.
I'm wondering if the tribe has conducted a study of how many customers they would lose if Fairchild was closed. I have no idea what those numbers are. They might be insignificant. Seems they are not impactful enough to influence their plans.
I agree, the Colonel Schwalbe's opinion should be relevant, but in the end, it's still just an opinion. I think we agree on most points. I don't have an opinion, and, I'm not leaning one way or the other. Just don't know enough facts.
Still, it's a rousing topic!
Sorry, I was actually picturing a separate discussion there, rather than only here. Perhaps the Entrepreneurs group would also appreciate this. After all, if Fairchild disappeared, Spokane businesses would lose a ton of business. They might be motivated to take a close look at the issue.