Florida-Seminoles sports betting deal gets federal greenlight, set to launch Oct. 15

F

ederal regulators have approved the gambling agreement between the state of Florida and the Seminole Tribe to take effect on Friday, August 6.

This will allow for sports betting to begin, and will give the Tribe the opportunity to add roulette and craps to its Florida casinos, starting October 15. Moreover, it will set off potential court battles and on the ballot over what direction sports betting will take in Florida.

Florida aims at joining dozens of other states in offering sports betting. The Seminoles could begin sports betting and sports wagering at horse tracks, jai alai frontons and former dog tracks for a share of the income. Online sports betting operated by the tribe also will be allowed.

The Department of Interior ruled Friday that it will neither approve nor deny the compact, resulting that it is considered to have been approved “by operation of law to the extent that it complies with IGRA (Indian Gaming Regulatory Act) and existing Federal law.”

Governor Ron DeSantis had worked out the gambling compact with the Seminole Tribe, afterwards approved by the Florida House and Senate. It will now become effective upon the publication of the letter in the Federal Register, expected next week, reports Bakersfield.

“The final approval of this historic gaming compact is a big deal for the State of Florida,” DeSantis said in a statement. “This mutually-beneficial agreement will grow our economy, expand tourism and recreation and provide billions in new revenue to benefit Floridians.” It is expected that the state may potentially receive over $20 billion over the next three decades.

Despite these steps taken, a scenario in which the agreement may be blocked still exists. Moreover, a lawsuit is pending in federal court, as well as at least two ballot initiatives that attempt to undermine the Seminole Tribe’s position on sports betting due to it being considered a monopoly.

The Department of Interior has also raised concerns about vendor contract provisions in the compact and rejected two specific parts of the agreement: it does not endorse a provision that requires “the Tribe to contract with Qualified Pari-mutuel Permitholders to provide marketing services for the Tribe’s sports book,” as well as rejecting a legal liability that “addresses tort remedies for patrons of the Tribe’s gaming facilities and provides that upon a written notice process, the Tribe and patron will have one year to resolve the dispute.”

Under this deal, parimutuels will be allowed to take 60% of the proceeds from each bet with the Tribe receiving the remaining 40%. The department believes this revenue sharing agreement “should not be considered a model for other states to generally impose on tribes.”

On the issue of legal liabilities, the Department considers compacts not to be “the appropriate vehicle to shift patron dispute and tort claim jurisdiction to the states.’’ The Department “must uphold its trust responsibility to tribes and ensure that states do not inappropriately attempt to leverage compact negotiations to have tribes submit to state jurisdiction in areas that are not directly related to the operation of gaming,” further adds the concern raised.