Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt recently asked for legislative approval of tribal gaming compacts with the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians (UKB) and Kialegee Tribal Town (KTT), which were rejected by the state Supreme Court in 2020.
In letters to the Oklahoma Joint Committee on State-Tribal Relations, Senate President Pro Tempore Greg Treat and House Speaker Charles McCall, Stitt wrote, “I’m proud of the compacts Chief Bunch, Mekko Yahola and I negotiated for Oklahoma, the UKB and the KTT. These compacts are better for all Oklahomans, requiring a higher percentage of gaming revenue to be remanded to the state while opening up this industry to the UKB and the KTT.
“Additionally, these compacts reflect our good faith efforts and demonstrates our ability and willingness to reach agreements with tribes. I look forward to continued collaboration with our tribal partners and I call on the Joint Committee to convene and promptly endorse the compact.”
Neither tribe operates a casino or belongs to the Oklahoma Indian Gaming Association (OIGA); membership is not required. However, the compacts would allow them to participate in the state’s gaming industry.
UKB previously operated a casino but “that was shut down due to legal action brought about by the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. Since then, we’ve explored other gaming opportunities, and continue to do so, so that we are able to provide critical services to our tribal members,” a UKB spokesperson said. Only 25 tribes are members of the OIGA.
Currently, the model compact governing 25 active gaming compacts in the state require exclusivity fees from 4 percent to 10 percent. Under Stitt’s two proposed compacts, exclusivity fees would range from 12 percent to 15 percent.
Stitt’s Communications Director Abegail Cave said, “They are better deals for all Oklahomans. Governor Stitt worked with leaders of the UKB and KTT tribes to negotiate these compacts and reach deals that gave them access to the gaming industry while providing reasonable revenues to the state.”
The two compacts Stitt has sent to legislators are the same as the ones he presented in 2020, Cave said. In fact, at the bottom of both compacts are signatures dated from three years ago. Cave added once the Joint Committee convenes and approves them, as requested by Stitt, Bunch and Yahola, the Oklahoma Supreme Court likely would approve them.
“The only reason it had to go to the Joint Committee was because it differed from the model compact. If it was the same as the model compact, there would be no need for it to go to the committee,” she said, according to KFOR.
In a broadcast interview, OIGA Chairman Matthew Morgan said, “I think initially when this was done back in 2020, we were a little disappointed. From a legal perspective, while those two tribes have never been members, you know, we do have a model compact that we have been offered from the state to tribes back in 2004. We always thought it was viable.”
But with regard to Stitt’s proposed compacts, Morgan told KFOR, “Their fees are higher. There was also some mention of some games in the earlier ones that are not allowed under the model compact. In addition, some fees to trust benefits he was pre-approving on behalf of these tribes. I understand why they liked it. But it was against the model compact.
“Ultimately the Oklahoma Supreme Court found those documents to be illegal. There’s no way you can revive them by sending them to the legislature, as the courts have already ruled on their legality.”
Morgan continued, “We continue to be disappointed in Governor Stitt’s actions. We don’t think from our perspective that a lot of the things we worked with the state on are difficult. There’s a path that’s been clearly delineated through tribal and state relations, and he fails to uphold what we’ve seen as traditionally been the path. I understand that he’s always claiming to want to do something different, but it comes off as disrespectful to tribal leaders in the way that he’s acting.”
Morgan said the OIGA will not get involved in the issue of the two compacts. “But we always hope the rule of law is followed and we feel like this matter was settled by the Oklahoma Supreme Court during its Treat I and Treat II hearings,” he said, per KFOR.
Robert Gifford, an attorney specializing in Native American law, said the state actually could negotiate terms that differ from the model gaming compact.
He told KFOR, “The gaming compact is basically a guideline, so there is flexibility there. I would anticipate there’s going to be challenges no matter what. This is a very highly controversial issue. By the governor negotiating with the tribes and getting this through the legislature, and if they do get approved, is demonstrating that there is a higher yield being returned to the state, which is one of the things the governor was trying to do with the rest of the tribes.
“Now, of course, what the governor wanted to do was strike all the compacts together and start all over. It might be an attempt by the governor to divide and conquer.”
A spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office said, “Attorney General Drummond will review the compacts and other relevant information to determine their legitimacy before making any comment.”
Treat’s spokesman said, “We are reviewing the compacts and communicating with the attorney general to see how these differ from the previous compacts that were ruled unconstitutional.”
