as to the specifics are first needed. We also believe that any rule should provide protections for tribal governments experiencing discrete hardships resulting in reduced gaming revenue. The likelihood of a condition affecting all tribal governments is fairly low, but many conditions may result in individual tribal governments to suffer from severely reduced revenue. We urge the NIGC to provide for accommodations made upon written request, such as: 1) reduction in payment of fees; or 2) payment of fees on an extended payment schedule. We believe that, in order for such a regulatory change to be practical, circumstances leading to the variation in assessable gross revenue need to be sufficiently broad so as to be inclusive of the varied experiences of tribal governments throughout Indian Country. For example, unexpected and/or extreme variations could be the result of government action or restriction, public health guidance, natural disasters, suspensions of utilities or other emergency or sanitation services, or other traditional force majeure causes. 2. “The Commission proposes mandating a process for reporting on the amounts the NIGC has available to carry over at fiscal year-end. The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act provides that fees “shall be available to carry out the duties of the Commission, to remain available until expended.” 25 U.S.C. § 2717a. In addition, the Commission proposes requiring that NIGC budget commitments maintain a two-quarter transition fund. This reporting and budget requirement is intended to better inform tribes of the NIGC budget and to better prepare the NIGC for unexpected budgetary impacts.” We support NIGC transparency in all matter, particularly its finances. We have long been concerned that with the cessation of the Biennial Report to the Congress, the agency’s transparency has suffered. Furthermore, the NIGC’s Green Book submissions provide very little information other than the total amount of the budget and the number of FTE’s. Given that tribal governments provide 100% of the NIGC’s funding, we support the issuance of a Biennial Report not to Congress, but to Tribal Governments. To the extent that the NIGC wishes to maintain a permanent reserve fund, we urge that a high degree of transparency is essential for tribal support. 3. “The Commission proposes revising the fee regulations to incentivize electronic submission of fee payments, provide for flexibility in quarterly payments under certain circumstances, and provide guidelines for the fee rate calculation for self-regulated tribes. The Commission believes that increased adoption of electronic submission of fee payments will result in administrative cost savings for both the NIGC and tribal gaming operations and seeks tribal input on a means to incentivize electronic payment adoption. The Commission further proposes exploring options for providing gaming operations with increased flexibility in the timing of the quarterly payments in response to extreme industry-wide impacts such as the global pandemic. Finally, the Commission seeks tribal input on fee rate calculations for self-regulated tribes and whether additional guidance or regulatory changes are warranted to incentivize self-regulation.” In general, these concepts are worth of favorable consideration. As long as the means for making an electronic payment is safe and secure, we doubt this proposal will receive resistance. We do believe that the NIGC should reconsider its Self-regulation program to determine why so few tribal
5
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs