Casino Enterprise Management

Sovereignty in Indian Country is an issue that has long been contested and attacked — perhaps never as harshly as now, a time when Indian Gaming is bringing unprecedented prosperity and opportunity to tribes that own casinos. As the battle to maintain sovereignty is fought from the local to the federal level, we introduce you to the Washington Indian Gaming Association (WIGA) and its executive director, Ernie Stebbins, who are doing everything in their power to protect tribal gaming rights.

Casino Enterprise Management: WIGA’s single most important goal is to protect tribal sovereignty and advocate on its behalf, particularly with respect to Indian Gaming. Why, specifically, is this important to WIGA?
Ernie Stebbins: Indian Gaming is not an end unto itself but rather a manifestation of tribal sovereignty that provides the necessary financial resources for tribes to exercise their own governmental authority and responsibilities. In many cases in the Pacific Northwest, gaming is either the most significant or one of the most significant sources of revenue to the tribal government. We have to protect that exercise of sovereignty to the best of our ability.

CEM: What is WIGA’s foundation for achieving this mission?
ES: We do this first by creating an organization and atmosphere where all tribes are welcome at the table and then provide tribal leaders the information and analysis that they need to make good decisions on public policy matters. Externally, we advance the government-to-government relationships between the tribes and the state of Washington by opening channels of communication to the governor’s office, legislative leadership and state agencies.

CEM: How does WIGA know which channels need to be opened and when to open them?
ES: We monitor the state Legislature for all tribal-related bills, the rulemaking of the Washington State Gambling Commission and the Washington State Lottery Commission. During recent compact negotiations, we facilitated meetings between the governor’s office and the tribes in a process that spanned approximately 18 months. We also monitor the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) in cooperation with the National Indian Gaming Association (NIGA) and watch anything coming through the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs and House Resources Committee. We communicate weekly — and sometimes daily — by e-mail with our members and brief them in person at regular monthly meetings. When it is necessary to take action, we coordinate our efforts and our message.

CEM: Large organizations can have trouble making calls to action heard — how does WIGA avoid the common pitfalls?
ES: We have developed a contact list of dedicated friends at every tribe whose responsibilities are directly related to gaming. Our “action team” is appointed by WIGA Chair W. Ron Allen, who is also chair of the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe. The team is made up largely of support staff, tribal attorneys and tribal lobbyists and, with guidance from two elected tribal leaders on our board, conducts the research, shares ideas and develops strategies to address our common problems.

We work normally by e-mail and conference calls. Between meetings of the board, any member of the team can call for a conference on new developments. During the legislative session, which runs from January to May, we work even more closely together. Team members must be able to communicate freely with their individual tribal councils on calls to action. We split the team into working groups when we are facing a specific project, and the working groups then report back to the whole team. Ultimately we bring reports and action items back to the board.

CEM: Why is it so important for WIGA to be proactive in its fight to protect sovereignty?
ES: While tribal governments have made great strides in recent years in exercising their government-to-government relationships with the state and local governments, there is still much to be accomplished in that regard. In the Tribal-State Gaming Compacts, there is always some give and take between our tribal regulators and the Washington State Gaming Commission on the interpretation and implementation of compact rules and policy. Some members of the legislature see the tribes as “special interest groups” and want to treat them as commercial gaming companies, not understanding that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act  (IGRA) was about sovereignty, not commercial gaming.

Of course, you have seen the NIGC constantly try to expand its authority into areas where IGRA clearly intended the tribes to be the primary or sole regulators.

There is also a certain amount of general misunderstanding on the part of the public, particularly when tribal governments act like state or local governments — implementing tax statutes on the reservation, seeking control of tribal curriculum in public schools, for example, and of course, conducting and regulating gaming on Indian lands. I think people outside of tribal communities have trouble accepting how quickly the tribes have progressed to where they have become political and economic factors in many areas of public policy. The leadership was always there, but before gaming, the resources needed to participate were not always there.

Still, every time a tribal government concludes a successful transaction with state or local government, it broadens the understanding of their elected officials and trickles down to the general public.

CEM: Do you think this will always be the case?
ES: There will always be forces desiring to limit or roll back tribal sovereignty and there will always be private gaming interests wanting to expand their business. Unfortunately that puts tribes in a defensive posture, and our role must be one of constant vigilance. … When we get to the point that the general public understands that tribes — historically and today — are functioning governments providing the same sorts of services as other government entities, then we will have made some real progress.

CEM: Is WIGA currently working on any other major projects?
ES: We are facilitating a process through which the Tribal Gaming commissions and the Washington State Gambling Commission staff are writing new Minimum Internal Control Standards (MICS) to accommodate the additional features of the recently adopted compacts — cash handling, security, surveillance, audits, things like that. We are also watching the process that NIGC and the Tribal Advisory Group on Class II gaming are going through to be sure that the advances in technological aids to Bingo are not thrown out in a re-write of MICS.

CEM: Can you share some of WIGA’s recent success stories?
ES: In 2004 we were the core group that created a successful campaign to defeat a ballot initiative which would have placed 18,000 slot machines in taverns, restaurants and private card rooms all over Washington, to the detriment of Tribal Gaming. We registered a political action committee, invited all tribes to participate and worked together under a unified strategy. It was a real-world lesson that tribes are stronger when they come together.

In 2006 we contracted with a nationally recognized researcher on Native American economic development subjects, Jonathan B. Taylor, who identified the contribution that tribes make to the economy and to the tax base of Washington state. The tribes collectively employ 30,000 people and add $141 million annually to state and local tax collections. That opened the eyes of many opinion leaders and quieted many of our critics who liked to assert that “tribes do not pay taxes.”

This year we worked with the state Legislature to extend the state’s agreement to address any gaming compact disputes in the jurisdiction of the federal courts. While we have a respectful relationship with the current governor, this measure should prevent any “Seminole”-type stonewalling from future administrations. As I mentioned previously, the Washington tribes recently concluded a successful renegotiation of gaming compacts between the state of Washington and 27 tribes. The tribes obtained a modest increase in the number of player terminals while the state obtained a dedicated source of funding for problem gambling treatment programs, as well as payments into smoking cessation programs. The state also retained the community impact and charitable contribution clauses that pass on tribal funds to non-tribal programs.

CEM: Is there anything else you’d like to add?
ES: Only that it is a privilege to be associated with an inter-tribal organization in Washington at this significant time, as tribes actively pursue their own agendas to strengthen their tribal governments, just as the proponents of IGRA anticipated.

The Washington Indian Gaming Association (WIGA) is committed to advancing the lives of Indian people in Washington state economically, socially and politically. As a trade association, it also aims to educate and disseminate information to the Indian Gaming community, federal and state governments, and the general public; and acts as an advocate for Indian Gaming before government bodies and agencies at the state, local and federal levels. A non-profit organization, WIGA is made up of the tribal leaders of Washington’s federally recognized tribes. For more information, visit www.washingtonindiangaming.org.


Ernest J. Stebbins, Executive Director
Stebbins has served as Executive Director of the Washington Indian Gaming Association since April 2003. He began his non-profit management career in 1984 with the National Hardwood Lumber Association in Memphis, Tenn. He served for 10 years as Executive Director and was the founding Executive Vice President of the Hardwood Forest Foundation, a non-profit public educational foundation. In 1997 he was recruited by the nearby Mississippi casino industry to start and establish the Mississippi Gaming Association, where he served as Executive Director, before going to work for the Washington tribes.