Spokane Tribe of Indians

P.O. Box 100 + Wellpinit, WA 99040 + (509) 458-6500 » Fax: (509) 458-6575

February 28, 2018

Chairman Jonodev Osceola Chaudhuri
Attn: Vannice Doulou

National Indian Gaming Commission
1849 C Street NW

Mail Stop #1621

Washington, DC 20240

Delivered by Electronic Mail to:

Vannice Doulou@nigc.gov
Re: — Spokane Tribe’s Comments in Response to Notice of Consultation Sessions for 2018
Deat Chairman Chaudhuri

I write on behalf of the Spokane Tribal Business Council to provide the Spokane Tribe’s
written response to the December 22, 2017 Notice of Consultation Sessions for 2018. These written
complements supplement testimony provided by Spokane tribal officials at the January 25th
consultation in Portland, OR and the February 21st consultation in Milwaukee, WI.

1. Proposed Changes to Management Contract Process

We agree that clatity is needed when an existing management conttact is extended by
amendment beyond the five, or in rate instances seven, year term mandated by IGRA. While IGRA
imposes a definite limit to the term of a management agreement, IGRA does not impose a prohibition
on the length of a business relationship between the Tribe and a manager. We understand that some
Tribes have longstanding partnerships with gaming managers, and we understand that certain of those
Tribes have questioned the need to modify the current amendment process set forth in Part 535.
Spokane urges the Commission to carefully consider these well taken comments within the context of a
robust consultation.

We agree that increased efficiencies in the management agreement review process are necessary.
To that end, we suppott the concept of background investigation tiers based on risk levels, background
tequirements only for those individuals or entities that own 10% or more interest in the management
entity, and billing management contractors for background costs rather than requiring deposits.


2. Audit Submissions

We support additional amendments to 25 C.F.R. Part § 571.12 to allow additional small
operations to submit unaudited or CPA compiled (tather than reviewed) financial statements and to
increase the maximum GGR for allowing submission of reviewed (rather than audited) financial
statements to $3 million.

3. Management & Sole Proprietary Interest

First, we support opening a discussion on whether the NIGC should develop regulations to
clarify what constitutes “management.” One goal should be to reduce demands for NIGC review of
financings and other complex transactions, which not only place increasing demands on NIGC
resources but also ultimately increase transaction costs for tribes. We note the need for clarity in this
area given the increased vender demand for control over placement and operation of leased gaming
machines.

Second, we support consideration of regulations to clarify “sole proprietary interest.” Despite
the guidance the NIGC and federal courts have provided in this area, there continues to be
fundamental misconceptions about this bedrock requirement of IGRA.

Third, we request that the NIGC consider clarifying the tetms and conditions under which
individually-owned gaming is allowed under IGRA, and the application of those terms and conditions
to the operation of state lotteries on Indian lands.

We look forward to further consultations with the NIGC throughout 2018 on these important
issues.

Respectfully,

vay
Carol Evans
for Chaitwoman