Resolution No. 038-2000 — Revenue Allocation Plan

Legislative History

Section GMG.02.03(a), (A)(1), (A)(2), (C), (D), Section GMG.02.04(a), (A)(1), (A)(2), (B)(1), (B)(2), Section GMG.02.05(a), (A)(1), (A)(2), Section GMG.02.06(a), (A)(1), Section GMG.02.07, Section GMG.02.08 [now Section GMG.02.07] (A), (A)(1), (A)(2), (A)(3), (B), (C), (C)(1), (C)(3), (D), (E) amended. Section GMG.02.09 became Section GMG.02.08, Section GMG.02.10 became Section GMG.02.09, Section GMG.02.11 became Section GMG.02.10, Section GMG.02.12 became Section GMG.02.11, Section 27.13 became Section GMG.02.12. On November 9, 2000 BIA, Indian Gaming Management (Washington DC) determines that the Revenue Allocation Plan does not comply with IGRA and 25 C.F.R. 290. Specifically, the BIA determination affects Section GMG.02.07(b)(2), (C)(4). Further, the BIA determination states that the "plan must include and/or establish a process for dispute resolution…in accordance with 25 C.F.R. 290.12(b)(5).

[HTML Unavailable]