Gross Gaming Revenue Press Conference

Moderator: Jonodev Chaudhuri

July 19, 2017

10:09 am CT

Coordinator: I would like to inform all participants that your lines have been placed on a 

listen only mode until the question and answer session of today’s call. 

Today’s call is also being recorded. If you do have any objections, you may 

disconnect at this time. Please stand by. The call will begin shortly.

(Ms. Meyers): Operator are you ready on the line?

Coordinator: Yes. You may go ahead.

(Ms. Meyers): Great. Thank you. Thank you for joining us for our fiscal year ’16 

announcement of Indian Country Gross Gaming Revenue or GGR. This event 

is being broadcast through Adobe Connect and through conference audio. It 

will be recorded for video playback and transcribed. The video and press 

materials will be available on our on-line media center at NIGC.gov/media 

after this event. Indian Country’s 2016 Gross Gaming Revenue numbers will 

be presented to you by the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming 

Commission Jonodev Osceola Chaudhuri, Vice Chair Kathryn Isom-Clause, 

and Commissioner Sequoyah Simermeyer. The commissioners as well as 

NIGC’s Director of Finance, Yvonne Lee, will be available for questions after 

the announcement. Ladies and gentlemen thank you for attending. I give you 

the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission.

Jonodev Chaudhuri: Thank you (Ms. Meyers). Good afternoon (unintelligible). I would to start 

off by saying thank you to the tribal leaders, regulators, members of the

regulated community, and organizational representatives including the 

Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Association, (Mr. Arnie Stevens), 
who are joining us here today both in person and virtually. My name is 

Jonodev Osceola Chaudhuri and I am a proud citizen of the Muscogee Creek 

Nation. I am honored to serve as Chairman of the National Indian Gaming 

Commission. Joining me today are my fellow commissioners, Vice Chair 

Isom-Clause, and Commission Sequoyah Simermeyer, who will provide 

additional remarks in a moment. 

We are here today to report on the 2016 Gross Gaming Revenue numbers for 

Indian Country. However, he would be remised if we didn’t put those 

numbers into historical context. Gross Gaming Revenue success is due -- at 

least in part -- to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act promotion and tribal selfdetermination principals. Modern Federal Indian Law and Policies built on 

the government to government relationships between the United States and 

tribal nations. Self-determination is a fundamental pillar of federal Indian law 

and policy that informs wide ranging legislation including the Indian Gaming 

Regulatory Act or IGRA. 

When congress passed IGRA almost 30 years ago, congress expressly cited in 

its findings and purposes the longstanding federal policy goals to promote 

tribal economic development, tribal self-sufficiency, and strong tribal 

government. This goal is a self-determination principal. IGRA crafted this 

framework on the heels of the (Watershed) Supreme Court Case California

versus Cabazon which recognized the inherent authority of tribes to regulate 

gaming on their lands. Accordingly, IGRA specifically noted that numerous 

tribes had already been conducting lawful gaming on Indian lands as a means 

of generating governmental revenue. In keeping with the Cabazon decision, 

IGRA recognized tribe’s inherent sovereignty to regulate their own gaming 

and although it did give states a role in the industry, it preserved the roll tribes 

as the primary regulators of their gaming. It further created the specific 

federal obligation to help protect tribal assets and operations. 
So, IGRA statutory framework emerged from an environment in which legal 

tribal gaming already existed. The inherent sovereign authority of tribes to 

regulate that gaming had already been affirmed and the policy of tribal selfdetermination had been firmly established. This reinforcement of selfdetermination policy -- that formed the basis of IGRA -- guides our day-today work here at NIGC and informs our ongoing efforts to work with our 

regulatory partners to protect the Indian Gaming Industry as a means of 

generating tribal revenue. 

The continued prosperity of the industry is revealed year after year in our 

annual announcement of Gross Gaming Revenue. The GGR provides a 

window into the economic health of Indian gaming and the commissioners 

and I are pleased to share that with you today.

So, here it is. Revenues have once again exceeded those of the previous fiscal 

year. We are happy to announce that the fiscal year 2016 Gross Gaming 

Revenue is $31.2 billion. The fiscal year GGR shows a 4.4% increase over 

the previous fiscal year. This is the highest GGR on record and it reflects how 

well the longstanding principals of tribal self-determination worked in Indian 

Country. This -- of course -- is excellent use for someone in tribal nations and 

local communities who rely on Indian gaming. However, it must always be 

remembered that not all tribes game, the majority of tribes that do have 

modest operations, and gaming revenue was never intended to supplant other 

programs and policies that further self-determination. With that, I would like 

to ask Vice Chair, Isom-Clause, to speak to you further about what Gross 

Gaming Revenue means and the importance of gaming revenues to tribes.

Kathryn Isom-Clause: Good afternoon. I’m Kathryn Isom-Clause. I’m Vice Chair of the 

commission and I’m Taos Pablo. In 2016, Gross Gaming Revenue is 
calculated based on 484 independently audited financial statements from 491 

gaming facilities. These facilities are owned by 244 tribes in 29 gaming 

states. The GGR is the amount wagered minus winnings returned to players. 

GGR is the figure used to determine what a gaming operation earns before 

salaries for employees and other operating expenses are paid. It is important 

to remember that GGR is not an indicator of profit available to tribes but an 

overall indicator of the well-being of the industry. It also reflects the positive 

impacts that extend beyond tribal communities and into surrounding local and 

state economies. Indian gaming creates a foundation for employment and 

business development -- including vendors, entertainment, retail, and beyond -

- providing economic opportunities in some of the most underserved areas in 

the United States.

The majority of Gross Gaming Revenue comes from smaller gaming tribes 

often located in rural areas. In fact, 57% of all tribal gaming facilities make 

less than $25 million in revenue annually. For small and rural tribes -- who 

may have limited economic opportunities to support self-sufficiency --

gaming operations have been a lifeline. Revenues from Indian gaming

supports tribal program budgets allowing tribes to provide important 

governmental services for their citizens such as family services, education, 

cultural and language revitalization, infrastructure, and more. I would now

like to introduce Commissioner Simermeyer who will provide recent specific 

information. 

Sequoyah Simermeyer: Thank you commissioner. Hello. Good afternoon. I’m Sequoyah 

Simermeyer Associate Commissioner of the National Indian Gaming 

Commission and a member of the Coharie Tribe of North Carolina. For 

administrator reasons, the National Indian Gaming Commission is divided 

among seven geographic regions. The regions help the agencies to provide on 

the ground regulatory oversight to all of Indian Country gaming. 
Each of the seven administrator regions reported growth. The Sacramento 

region -- which includes all tribal gaming operations in California and 

Northern Nevada -- showed the highest percentage increase at 6.3% growth 

for the GGR of $8.4 billion. 

Operations in the Oklahoma City and Portland regions showed a 5.7 and 5.1% 

growth in their GGR’s respectively. 

The remaining regions all showed growth ranging from 1.1% to 4.4%. Tribal 

empowerment to federal self-determination policies -- as well as tribe 

steadfast efforts and creative entrepreneurial (spirits) -- continue to be driving 

forces in the success of the Indian gaming industry. Many factors can 

contribute to a tribal gaming operation’s increase as well gaining revenues. 

Improved local economies and growth in other businesses and tourism as well 

as sound decision-making by tribes with regard to new gaming facilities, 

expansions, or renovations can all cause a GGR increase. Indian gaming’s

continued success provides not only revenue for tribal government services, 

its success also provides resources statewide and local economies.

The National Indian Gaming Commission supports Indian gaming by 

providing training, technical assistance, and enforcement. The agency’s work 

helps tribes to remain the sole beneficiary for their gaming revenue, protect 

the integrity of tribes getting facilities, and ensures safe and fair play for 

consumers - all of which support a strong market and industry. The National 

Gaming Commission’s regulatory activities -- along with 30 years of 

regulatory experience and governmental partnerships -- help to provide stable 

expectations for a healthy and vibrant industry. Thank you. I will turn this 

back over to the chairman for his closing comments.
Jonodev Chaudhuri: Thank you fellow commissioners. All of Indian Countries worked very 

hard to reach the significant milestone of $31.2 billion and could be very, very 

proud. Our partnerships with tribes and tribal regulators has strengthened 

Indian gaming. As a result, it has become the most important economic driver 

of modern day. There is no other driver that has been able to do what Indian 

gaming has done for Indian Country. The commission and I are honored to be 

a part of such a significant milestone and successes of Indian gaming since 

Cabazon prove that the foundational principals of Federal Indian Law and 

Policy should continue as goals for IGRA and all other laws that hope to 

implement IGRA. Thank you to everyone for attending today’s press 

conference and we welcome your questions.

(Ms. Meyers): Ladies and gentlemen, we will now open the floor to questions from our inperson audience and our virtual audience. In order to ensure that as many of 

you as possible have the opportunity to ask questions, please limit yourself to 

one question and one follow-up. If time remains, we will come back around 

for additional questions. Please raise your hand and I will acknowledge you 

and provide your name and affiliation for the record and to whom your 

question is directed. For those wishing to participate virtually through Adobe 

Connect, please provide your name and affiliation when you type your 

question in the chat box. We will alternate questions between in the room 

attendees, our virtual conference room, and those that have called in our 

conference line. We will now take the first question. (Mr. Beck).

(Tony): I know that we don’t (block) on Capitol Hill but I’m curious of these very 

encouraging numbers for Indian Country. How much would it need in tribal 

casinos of countries if congress had the Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act which 

would accentuate exempt the tribal casinos from the tribal relation.?
Jonodev Chaudhuri: Well, I appreciate that question (Tony). I mean - we’re here today to talk 

about the GGR numbers and you’re right that we stay in our lane and don’t 

step into congressional matters unless asked. But I would point to a couple of 

key themes that we touched on in our opening statements. One, the role of 

larger self-determination and sovereignty pertinent principals that helped 

formed IGRA in the first place and the success of those principals on the 

ground in terms of the economic landscape that has been created by the 

regulatory structure of IGRA.

So, I think there are important takeaways from (unintelligible), tribal selfdetermination (unintelligible) sovereignty in a way that ensures a fair playing 

field. That’s about all I can say about that. But we made that point for a 

reason through the principals of self-determination have been a success and 

those need to be considered in terms of configuring what the next 30 years 

should look like on the policy and legal landscape (unintelligible). I don’t 

know if that helps.

(Tony): Yes. If I could follow-up. With these encouraging numbers, what do you see 

say over the next 30 years - what do you see as the biggest obstacle or the 

biggest challenge (unintelligible) the NIGC and tribal gaming in general?

Jonodev Chaudhuri: Well, again, sure to talk about the GGR but the ongoing challenge has 

always been supporting tribe’s ability to perform their wake at their work in a 

manner consistent with true self-determination principals and part of that 

involves the underlying goals of supporting strong tribal economic 

development, tribal self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments. For that, 

you need to be as flexible as possible when one considers the historic

development of Indian policy and the very different histories all tribal nations 

have in terms of how they develop their land basis. 
I would strongly recommend that flexibility be incorporated into any proposed 

ideas that haven’t improved the process for flexibility in terms of taking into 

account the unique historical nature of all Indian lands so that any efforts to 

support tribal economic development or self-sufficiency truly reflects the very 

differently situated tribes that are among the 567 tribal nations that are 

recognized. So, flexibility -- consistent with self-determination consistent 

with the ability to have tribes -- determine the best use of your community’s 

resources should be the hallmark. So, I know I’m not giving much specific --

many specifics -- but I am -- for one -- don’t advocate for a one size fits all 

when it comes to addressing issues of how to enhance self-determination. 

Additional questions (Tony)?

(Tony): No.

Jonodev Chaudhuri: Okay.

(Ms. Meyers): Thank you. Operator -- by chance -- are there any calls on the line at this 

time?

Coordinator: At this time -- on the phone line -- if participants would like to ask a question, 

please do so by pressing * followed by 1. You will just be prompted to record 

your name. Ensure for phone is unmuted and please record your first and last 

name. One moment to see if there is any phone questions. There are no 

questions on the phone line.

(Ms. Meyers): Thank you. By chance, are there any questions coming from the Adobe 

Connect conference room? Okay. Then I’ll come back. Any questions? 

Yes. Mr.
(Sherman): I’m (Sherman (unintelligible) Gaming Association. I just wanted to -- you 

were indicating emphasis that there was still so much work to do in your 

presentation by Chairman Chaudhuri today. Bit I would to just quickly ask 

your -- when we go back to the - the National Indian Gaming Association 

goes back to the era where we would want to prepare ourselves for some of 

the challenge so just except for not just the $31 billion industry but the 

regulation and the things that were are doing out there now. 

These are things that were planned and these are things that were worked 

through by the leadership not just with the National Indian Gaming 

Association but the (National Commerce of American Indians), our National 

Regulators Association. So, we’re very proud of this number and we are very 

excited to be here with you today. But I just - if you could just give us a little 

bit of a summary of some of your working relationship with the primary 

regulators in Indian Country that oversees the tribal - had the tribal oversight. 

I appreciate your knowledge, Mr. Chaudhuri, regarding the work that still 

needs to be done yet.

Jonodev Chaudhuri: Thank you chairman. So, excellent question. Let me touch on some of the 

things that we already discussed to provide the lead into the discussion. So, 

we mentioned how IGRA flowed out of self-determination principals and 

IGRA was reflective of self-determination policies. But we never intended to 

supplant policies or programs that also support self-determination. That’s an 

important point because what IGRA did is recognize the longstanding

principal -- of principal goal -- of supporting strong tribal government, selfsufficiency, and strong tribal economic development and created a regulatory 

framework to support that larger policy goal. Within that regulatory 

framework, IGRA preserved the tribe’s position as the primary regulators of 

Indian gaming. It also carved out the role for all of us as federal regulators to 

do whatever we can to protect tribal assets and resources.
So, because of the framework that was created by IGRA -- that itself was 

intended to further advance a very important self-determination policy -- we 

recognized not only the policy value but the practical value of working with 

our regulatory partners. So, each one of our agency representatives works 

very hard to maintain positive working relationships with tribal regulators --

there are approximately 6,000 tribal regulators in the field -- as well as other 

folks who play an important role in the regulation of gaming always with 

tribes as the primary regulators. 

So, that includes -- in some cases where -- because of the nature of certain 

compacts there are state officials involved, date regulators, local law 

enforcement. We work hard to maintain strong collaborative relationships 

and that’s not just a matter of feel good policy, that’s a matter of pragmatism. 

Because if our goal is to achieve compliance, to support the larger federal 

policies -- strong tribal governments, self-sufficiency, and economic 

development -- we need to address compliance issues before they become 

significant. And the best way to do that is work with the regulators on the 

ground who have the strongest interest of anybody as tribal regulators in 

protecting tribal assets and operations. 

So, we enhance those relationships through training, through technical 

assistance, and even through enforcement actions. We never shirk from our 

enforcement responsibilities but when we do bring an enforcement action the 

groundwork has already been laid so that our regulatory partners in Indian 

Country know that we bring those enforcement actions with the goal of 

strengthening the industry as a whole. So, those are some of the things that 

we do from the top down -- as an agency -- to strengthen the regulatory 

framework in Indian Country and do it in a way that is supportive of our 

underlying federal policy mission as well as respectful of the specific 
capacities and authorities of our tribal regulatory partners. And that’s very 

important to us and thanks for that question (Sherman).

(Ms. Meyers): At this time, operator, I will turn back to you to see if we have any questions 

on the line.

Coordinator: There are no questions currently. Just as a reminder, please press * followed 

by 1 if you would like to ask a question.

(Ms. Myers): Any questions from the Adobe conference room? We do have one? Okay. 

Stand by.

Woman 1: (Unintelligible) 

(Ms. Meyers): Can you repeat the question please?

Woman 1: (Unintelligible)

Jonodev Chaudhuri: Thank you for that question. As mentioned before, our agency was created 

by congress as a regulatory agency and so we are independent agency housed 

within the Department of the Interior but when we were created a lot of 

thought was put into our structure. Our structure -- I believe -- by design is 

non-partisan. It’s - our structure enhances our ability to support compliance, 

support regulation in a way that is independent of political factors. That is 

why there is diversity of perspectives, diversity of party affiliation already 

built into our agency structure so our terms are statutory terms that don’t track 

the larger administration’s terms and that allows us to focus first and foremost 

on the regulation of Indian gaming and supporting an industry that, you know, 

is so important not just to Indian Country but to the general public in a way 

that truly incorporates fundamental federal policies as well as protects public 
safety and welfare and we do that in a way independent of other things in the 

air. 

So, right now we are in the process of formalizing some of the objectives and 

initiatives that have guided our agency for frankly several years and those 

objectives include our initiatives which is protecting against anything that 

amounts to (unintelligible) on the backs of tribes. It is a regulatory phrase for 

ensuring IGRA’s requirement that tribes retain their primary beneficiary 

status. We also are fully committed to staying ahead of the technology curve. 

We are fully committed to strengthening and advancing a strong workforce 

both among are regulatory partners and within the agency and we are 

committed to strong rural outreach. In addition to that, we are working on a 

strategic plan that highlights operational excellence as another pillar objective 

of the agency.

So, there have been no changes in terms of our commitment to achieving 

compliance in a way that is truly efficient and the manner it uses all of our 

agency authorities but also -- at the same time -- respectful of the capabilities 

our partners sovereign tribal nations. Thank you for that question.

(Ms. Meyers): Thank you. At this time, I would like to turn it back to our live audience to 

see if there are additional questions. Great. Operator, do you have any 

questions on the line?

Coordinator: We do. Our first question is from (Aaron Stanley). You may go ahead.

(Aaron Stanley): Yes. Hi everyone. (Aaron Stanley) with (CDC Gaming Reports) here. I’m 

just hoping you could give a bit more color on kind of the image in all seven 

districts -- or all seven jurisdictions reported increases in revenue during the 

fiscal year. And I was just hoping you kind of give a bit more color. I’m sure 
of this will be in, you know, the reports that you post later on. But if you 

could offer a bit more color into, you know, perhaps what was kind of driving 

some of the growth in California and some of other regions that really 

produced strong years.

(Ms. Meyers): Yes. Thank you for that question. I will turn that over to Ms. Yvonne Lee our 

Director of Finance.

Yvonne Lee: Our region across the board showed GGR growth in 2016 which is an 

indicator of the overall health of the industry. We divided a nation into seven 

geographic regions purely for administrative reasons. The GGR growth of 

individual regions should not be interpreted as the indicator of local economy 

for that specific region. There are several factors that could impact the GGR 

growth in any specific region. Economic factors could be one of them but 

there are also factors such as new casinos, casino expansions, or casino 

constructions or even change in physical year-end date. All those could 

impact the GGR number. 

(Aaron Stanley): I mean, can you - I mean that’s helpful but, I mean, is there any additional, 

you know, color that might be useful in kind of writing a story on - I mean, 

that’s just not all that exciting I guess. I mean, is there anything else you guys 

can offer?

Jonodev Chaudhuri: I think they want you to (unintelligible) with them, Yvonne. Yes. Let me 

just -- Jonodev again. So, obviously, the kind of inferences that may be drawn 

from the specific breakdown or up to the writers and the readers and the larger 

media world. But what I can say is the fact that there was a broad increase in 

GGR that says at least two things. One, that there continues to be a stable 

steady growth in the Indian gaming industry that transcends geographic 

boundaries first and foremost. And second that connection between strong 
regulatory structure of Indian gaming and a fair and predictable industry has 

yielded benefits on a national scale so much so that geographic benefits are 

pretty evenly shared. So, I think those are two fair takeaways but in further 

speculation you probably decline to engage in (unintelligible). I don’t know if 

you want to add anything to that Director Lee but okay. Okay. 

(Ms. Meyers): Thank you. Sir, yes, those charts will be available on the media center on our 

NIGC web site. 

(Aaron Stanley): Okay.

(Ms. Meyers): Any specific questions that you have please just contact Director of Public 

Affairs. At this time, I need to move on to the next question. 

(Operator): There are no questions further on the audio side. Again, please press * 

followed by 1 if you do have a question.

(Ms. Meyers): No questions coming from the Adobe conference room. Any in the room?

Jonodev Chaudhuri: Again, I would just like to thank everybody who is in the room today and 

joining us virtually. I would especially like to thank fellow commissioners for 

their work day in and day out to lead the agency and I would like to thank the 

agency too for putting together today this press conference.

I do want to say, you know, there is a lot in the air and I’m sure folks would 

us to speak on a number of discussions that are going on. We always stay in 

our lane at NIGC. We are regulators first and foremost and I think that’s 

where are credibility within the larger landscape comes from - our ability to 

regulate and ensure compliance in a fair and even manner. 
But I do want to say that in terms of things that impact the success of Indian 

gaming - which is, you know, really created by the primary regulators of 

Indian gaming. The things that may impact Indian gaming are relevant to us. 

I mean, we are governed by a statute that -- as I said before -- grows out of 

self-determination principals but a lot of larger discussions affect Indian 

gaming. 

So, all I would like to say is the idea that self-empowerment isn’t just a 

removal of federal restrictions in Indian Country, it is an important one. Selfdetermination brings with it a recognition of the special relationship between 

the Federal Government and tribal. That special relationship is reflected in 

the obligations that NIGC to support tribal activities and resources and so 

there are no easy answers when considering how to shape the next 30 years of 

Indian policy. 

But I would urge anybody who is considering doing so to keep in mind that 

self-determination involves flexibility for tribal nations to do the best that they 

can -- given the unique histories and resources -- but also flexibility so that 

there isn’t a one size fits all approach to the concourse of tribal nations and 

there is a recognition of the unique histories of all tribal nations so that if the 

idea is to support strong tribal economic development -- self-sufficiency in 

strong tribal governments. And the unique histories of land loss, movement, 

unique geographic and market considerations is considering a one size fits all 

solutions are, you know, I mean we get away from the one size fits all 

solutions. I would just like to leave with that note and again, thank you all for 

being here today and thank you.

(Ms. Meyers): Yes. Thank you all for participating in our fiscal year ’16 Growth Gaming 

Revenue press conference. As a final reminder, the Growth Gaming Revenue 

material are available on-line at our media center at NIGC.gov/media or you 
can contact the Division of Public Affairs at (202) 632-7033 if you have any 

additional questions or follow-up for the commission. Thank you again for 

your time today. Have a wonderful afternoon.

Coordinator: Thank you. You may - thank you all for your participation in today’s 

conference. You may disconnect at this time. 

END