Kevin Stitt’s Education Board Appointee

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

snuffy

Calf fries are the original sack lunch.
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Feb 28, 2007
36,025
30,412
1,743
Oklahoma
#21
Should the contracts with the tribes be renegotiated or not and if not why not?
First the money:
House Minority Leader Emily Virgin, D-Norman, issued a statement urging him to drop his legal actions.

“The governor’s compact negotiations are starting to look like a stimulus package for trial lawyers,” she said. “Having already spent $1.5 million, the governor is wasting money that could be spent on resources that help our citizens.
https://oklahoman.com/article/5667799/gov-kevin-stitt-loses-another-tribal-gaming-lawsuit/amp
Should they be renegotiated, maybe. The money has helped Oklahomans. But legally and without antagonism. If. We do want more more money going about it the way Stitt was completely counterproductive.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
7,043
3,432
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#22
He obtained control of the hiring and firing at agencies and has been dismantling agencies and replacing them with people with "business" experience, ie, made more than a $1 million by the age of 30 but without any experience in the agency they have taken over. And, if it was only the execs that might not be too bad. But, instead the firing is occurring at many levels and they are replacing experienced non-political people with people without degrees or experience who are political followers. And, frequently paying them more and giving them a new assistant as they aren't able to do the job. I know of a situation of the removal of a head of a department who was replaced at a higher salary and then the replacement was given an assistant at the salary of the former head.

Sure, what is in the newspaper about accountability and transparency sounds great. It just does not appear to be what is happening in the trenches at all.
Politics is now an industrial machine. The new mold has been cast. Not just the administration changes but the administration changes everything.
 
Nov 8, 2007
3,531
1,152
1,743
Bartlesville
#23
We do want more more money going about it the way Stitt was completely counterproductive.
This x100 - If you followed the nonsense from the beginning, you would see that there was never an attempt to renegotiate. Stitt said "I want it this way or no way". That's not negotiating. Then when the tribes called his bluff, he signed new compacts with small tribes that ARE NOT legal as he does not have the authority to do that.

Being a tribal citizen that works for a different tribe, I followed closely. The tribe that I work for was making preparations for an actual negotiation. I was involved in some of that planning...only for it not to matter because Stitt wasn't interested.

All Stitt accomplished was that now the State is not collecting ANY casino money. It is all being held in escrow until the whole thing gets settled. Think about that, the State quit collecting on 1/1/20. Almost an entire year of ZERO revenue from the gaming compacts.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,340
2,007
1,743
#26
All Stitt accomplished was that now the State is not collecting ANY casino money. It is all being held in escrow until the whole thing gets settled. Think about that, the State quit collecting on 1/1/20. Almost an entire year of ZERO revenue from the gaming compacts.
The state is receiving the money. They are simply not moving it over to the Education fund. Saying almost an entire year of zero revenue is factually inaccurate. Pretty typical that funds are placed in escrow when there are disputes.
 
Nov 8, 2007
3,531
1,152
1,743
Bartlesville
#29
The state is receiving the money. They are simply not moving it over to the Education fund. Saying almost an entire year of zero revenue is factually inaccurate. Pretty typical that funds are placed in escrow when there are disputes.
It was widely reported that if the State does anything other than keep the funds in escrow, that it is a legal acceptance of the current compact.

So, yes, the state is "receiving" the money, but is not able to use it because of Stitt's dispute. I don't believe what I said is factually inaccurate.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,340
2,007
1,743
#30
It was widely reported that if the State does anything other than keep the funds in escrow, that it is a legal acceptance of the current compact.

So, yes, the state is "receiving" the money, but is not able to use it because of Stitt's dispute. I don't believe what I said is factually inaccurate.
My statement was about your last sentence of “almost an entire year of ZERO revenue from the gaming compacts”.

Money received from an entity, even when placed in escrow, is “booked” as revenue. Even thought the state is placing the money in an escrow account it is revenue from this year.
 
Nov 16, 2013
4,803
2,435
743
35
tractor
#32
It was widely reported that if the State does anything other than keep the funds in escrow, that it is a legal acceptance of the current compact.

So, yes, the state is "receiving" the money, but is not able to use it because of Stitt's dispute. I don't believe what I said is factually inaccurate.
The exclusivity fees are being placed in the 1017 Fund and being distributed just as they are supposed to be