PROPOSED CIVIL FINE ASSESmENT 

Ref. No. : NOV-97-X02 

June 27, 1997 

To: James P. Weissan 

President 

JPW Consultants, Inc. 

3801 North 44th Avenue 

Hollywood, Florida 33021 

Respondent 

1. Under the authority of 25 U-S.C. 2713.(a) of the Indian 

Gaming Regulatory Act (IG2A) and 25 C.F.R. part 575, the ViceChairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission (Commission) 

hereby provides notice of his intent to assess a civil fine 

against the JPW Consultants, Inc., located at 3801 North 44th 

Avenue, f!ollywood, Florida 33021 (hereinafter referred to as "JPW 

or the Respondent") , for violations of 25 C.F.R. §Sf 3.6 (a) (7) and 

25 C.F.R. §573.6(a) (11) as set forth in detail in Notice of 

Violation No. 97-M02 issued on May 30, 1997. 

2. Under 25 U.S.C. 2713(a) and 25 C.F.R. 9575.4, the Vice- 

*,,+ Chairzian may assess a civil fine, not to exceed $25,000 per 

violation per day, against a tribe, management contractor, or 

individual operating Indian gaming for each violation cited in a 

notice of violation issued under 25 C-F-R. 5573.3. In the 

subject proceeding, the gaming operation is owned by the Seminole ' 

Tribe of Florida (Tribe) and is located on tribal lands in 

Hollywood, Florida (hereinafter referred to as the leHollywood 

gaming operation1')- The Respondent is a management contractor 

and has managed the Hollpood gaming since approximately July 2, 

1996. 

In arriving at a proposed civil fine, the Vice-chairman has 

considered the factors prescribed in 25 C.F.R. S575.4, as 

follous: 

i. Economic benefit of noncomoliance. The economic 

benefit to the Respondent is reflected in the financial reports 

of :he Hollywood gaming operation prepared by accountants for the 

Tribe. These documents reflect that the Respondent received 

approxinately S850,OOO per monih in managenent fees curing the 

period Zuly 2, 1996 to May 30, 1997. This results in a total 

benefic io the Respondent of approximately S S?,300,000. 

ii. Seriousness of the violation. This is a serious 

violaiion. Throughout the violation period the Respondent has 

w managed the ~ollywood gaming operation withcut an approved 

concract since July 1996. Such an acrion threatens the integrity 

of Indian gaming by circumventing the managenent contract revies 
process specifically included in Indian Gaming Regulatory 

bd Act(1GRA) and the commission's regulations to ensure the 

suitability of individuals and entities involved in Indian 

gaming. 

In addition, the Respondent installed and operated a variety 

of video machines which are electronic or electromechanical games 

of chance at the Hollywood gaming operation- There is no compact 

beydeen the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the State of Florida. 

By offering Class 111 games in the absence of a tribal-state 

compact the Respondent is disregarding the basic regulatory 

scheme of the IGRA. 

iii. Historv of violations. The Chairinan of the 

Commission issued a Notice of Violation dated May 30, 1997, to 

the Respondent alleging that the Respondent was operating without 

an approved management contract and that Class 111 games were 

being operated at the Hollywood gaming operation in the absence 

of a tribal-state compact. Although JPW has no history of 

previous violations, the omm mission has determined that for 

several yezrs the president of JTW hzs bean directly involved in 

the inscallation and operation of illegal gaming machines in the 

Hollywood gaming operation . 

iv, Nealiaence or willfuhess. The Respondent hzs 

submitted various agreenents to the Connission for review as 

cj inznagenenrr contracts including the present agreement with the 

Tribe. Such actions indicate that JPW understood it was involved 

in management accivities 2t the Boll~i00d o~eraticn and 

recognized the need to obtain governmental approval before such 

accivities would be lawful. The fact that the Respondent 

knowingly disregarded this requirement denonstrates that this was 

willful violation. 

v. ~ood faith. The Vice-Chairsan of the Commission 

may adjust a fine based on the degree of good faith of the 

Respondents in attempting to achieve rzpid voluntary compliance 

after a Notice of Violation has been issued. Although the 

Respondent has informally advised the NIGC that it has 

discontinued the unauthorized management, to date it has not 

provided evidence which substantiates this fact. Accordingly, as 

of the date of this assessnent, tbe Respondent has not 

demonstrated a gccc faith effort to come inco conpliance with the 

Commission's regulations. 

THEREFORE, the Vice-chairman, having carefully reviewed the 

above factors, has determined that a fine in the amount of 

$25,C?OU per day is assessed on the Res7ondezt. This amount 

re2resents zn apcropriate balancin? of :he factors cited above. 

'C. 

For purposes of assessing this fine, tke Vice-Chairxan has 
determined that a violation occurs each day that JPW continued to 

U manage the Hollywood gaming operation without an approved 

contract and to offer Class I11 games at this facility in the 

absence of a tribal-state compact. The Chairman hereby proposes 

to assess fines in the amount of $25,000 per day, beginning on 

the day the unauthorized management began and continuing for each 

day that the noncompliance cited in the Notice of Violation 

continued. This results in a total Current fine assessment of 

$8,500,000. 

Under 25 C.F.R. s575.4, fines for continuing violations may 

be assessed in an amount up to $25,000 per day of noncompliance, 

Under 25 C.F.R. s577.3, the Respondent may appeal the 

proposed fine to the full commission within 30 (thirty) days 

after service of this Notice of Proposed Civil Fine Assessment, 

by submitting a notice of appeal to the National Indian Gaming 

Commission, 1441 L Street, N.W., Ninth Floor, Washington, D.c. 

20005. The Respondent has a right to assistance of counsel in 

such an appeal. A notice of appeal must reference this Notice of 

proposed Civil Fine Assessment. Within ten (10) days after 

filing a notice of appeal, the Respondent must file with the 

Commission a supplemental statement that states, with 

particularity, the relief desired and the grounds therefore and 

thac includes, when available, supporting evidence in the forn of 

affidavits. If the Respondent wishes to present oral testinony 

or witnesses at the hearinq, the respondent must include a 

%d request to do so rith the supplemental statement. The request to 

present oral testimony or witnesses must specify the names of 

proposed 3itnesses and the general nature of their expected 

testimony, and whether a closed hearing is requested and why, 

The Respondent may waive his or her right to an oral hearing and 

instead elect to have the matter determined by the Commission 

solely on the basis of written submissions. 

I 

Thomas J. FoleyV I 

Vice-chairman I National Indian Gaming Commission