Lessons learned from SB 675 shed light on the importance of Tribal-state policy

Tribal sovereignty is a simple, yet complex term. At its essence, it means the right to self-govern, but when practiced, it looks different from Tribal nation to Tribal nation. Recognizing this, it’s important to continue to be careful when reviewing proposed state legislation to determine what its effects could be to individual Tribal citizens and each Tribal Nation.

Similar to 2024’s legislative session, more can be done to foster Tribal-state policy collaboration. There is a continued need for shared, strategic decisions that will shape the state’s current and future policy-making with Tribal nations. For example, the processes, or lack thereof, surrounding Senate Bill 675 shed light on both lessons that should be learned around respecting Tribal sovereignty and engaging in direct Tribal consultation before making decisions that directly affect Tribal Nations. SB 675, authored by Sen. Darcy Jech, R-Kingfisher, would have allowed the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety to provide privileged public safety information to the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority (OTA) for the purpose of toll collection, specifically for toll collection on vehicles tagged as Tribally owned. This is not a public safety function.

Data sharing requires Tribal consultation, consent, and following the law

Respecting Tribal data sovereignty through meaningful consultation builds trust and strengthens intergovernmental relationships. The root of this issue with SB 675? Data sharing requires Tribal consultation and consent. The OTA did not conduct Tribal consultations before transitioning to its new cashless PlatePay system that uses photos of license plates to invoice the vehicle’s owner.

OTA officials attempted to work around this initial shortcoming by unsuccessfully introducing Senate Bill 1907 in 2024 and pressing the issue again this year with the nearly identical SB 675 In both cases, the bills were introduced without communication or consultation with each Tribal Nation that issues Tribal vehicle tags.

OTA’s communications with Tribes and legislative efforts occurred well after it began its PlatePay initiative

If consultation had happened before the 2021 launch of its PlatePay transition, leaders of Tribal Nations – who also prioritize public safety – could have raised concerns with OTA on the proposed state legislation’s underlying issues. Both bills are fundamentally flawed, given the current state laws protecting the use of Oklahoma Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (OLETS) data. OLETS Tribal license plate data is ONLY used for law enforcement and public safety purposes. SB 675 – and SB 1907 before it – raised significant issues about the legality of sharing law enforcement records with non-law enforcement personnel, which is a criminal act in Oklahoma.

Tribal consultation is critical to intergovernmental coordination

Simply put, OTA failed to plan for the PlatePay system in a way that respected Oklahoma’s intergovernmental landscape before it began transitioning to its new system. Strengthening Tribal-state relations and policymaking requires regular Tribal-state consultation to properly coordinate and improve shared policies across agencies for the state and sovereign Tribes. Advancing policy that respects Tribal sovereignty means including Tribal consultation in the early stages of the process, not after plans are well in motion. The State Department of Transportation has had a Tribal Advisory Board since 1999, which acts in an advisory capacity to the state’s transportation director on matters of policy and procedure for its programs that affect Tribal governments. It also allows officials to discuss areas of mutual concern. The impacts of implementing this new PlatePay system are precisely the kind of issues the Tribal Advisory Board should address.

There are 38 federally recognized Tribal Nations in Oklahoma. Each Tribal Nation is entitled to the same level of information sharing and consultation on Tribal-state agreements, compacts, and memoranda of understanding (MOUs). To truly respect Tribal sovereignty means that Oklahoma officials must ensure each Tribe – not just a few of the Tribes – participate in critical conversations about public policy that impacts their operations, their land, or their citizens.

Tribal Nations maintain and track all of their license plate data for the vehicle tags they issue, as an act of Tribal sovereignty and overall good Tribal governance. Many Tribal Nations have entered into agreements, MOUs, and compacts with the state for a broad range of shared issues and policies, including Tribal tag data information for public safety purposes with OLETS – not OTA toll collections.

OTA should have consulted Tribal Nations before transitioning to the PlatePay system

Under the PlatePay system, if a vehicle owner has not paid for accrued tolls, OTA places a hold on the vehicle registration, and the outstanding balance is sent to a collection agency. It was after the cashless system was implemented that OTA targeted Tribal tag vehicles, officials realized they did not have registration information for vehicles with Tribal tags. Instead of reaching out directly to Tribes, the proposed legislation was introduced by OTA to strongarm Tribal Nations.

Overview of some of the OTA agreements, compacts, and MOUs with Tribal Nations

While a handful of Tribal Nations have reached agreements and/or compacts on their toll fees, there are still several other Tribal nations that haven’t, such as Absentee Shawnee, Caddo, Citizen Potawatomi, Delaware Nation, Eastern Shawnee, Iowa, Kaw, Kickapoo, Muscogee (Creek), Osage, Ottawa, Pawnee, Peoria, Ponca, Quapaw, Seminole, Seneca-Cayuga, Shawnee, Tonkawa, United Keetoowah Band and Wyandotte nations. It remains to be seen whether the OTA has directly contacted each of the remaining Tribal nations.

It was a disservice to all Oklahomans for OTA officials not to directly communicate and consult with Tribal Nations on issues that directly affect Tribal government agencies (Tribal Tag Offices) and Tribal citizens (those with Tribal tags). Tribal consultation is essential because it recognizes and respects government-to-government relationships with Tribal Nations. Tribal consultation is a vital step towards recognizing Tribal sovereignty, fostering trust and collaboration, and ensuring better policy outcomes. The attempt to use legislation to strong-arm Tribal Nations circumvents their right to sovereignty. This multilayered issue requires consultation on how to reconcile payment for tolls that weren’t collected from drivers with Tribal tags not registered with OTA, and a path forward where Tribal vehicle data can be shared without releasing privileged law enforcement data.

Tribal consultation ensures trust, respect, and shared responsibility

Tribes entering into agreements with the OTA that address both Tribal citizens’ outstanding PlatePay toll bills and share Tribal tag data are a good way for the Tribes and the state to move forward collaboratively. By involving Tribal Nations in the decision-making process, the state can gain valuable insights and perspectives that enhance its understanding and inform its actions, including how each Tribe’s vehicle registration process is a vital revenue source for many Tribal nations.

Collecting tolls from Tribal tag owners does not need to be divisive. The state can maintain respectful relationships and ensure Tribal sovereignty is honored by consulting directly with each Nation. Consulting with Tribal Nations emphasizes trust, respect, and shared responsibility. Through our shared history of the United States, Treaties, and United States Supreme Court rulings, our state has a legal and moral obligation to engage with Tribal Nations as equal, sovereign governments.

The members of the Oklahoma House of Representatives’ Public Safety Committee and the hundreds of non-Tribal and intertribal advocates who contacted the committee to ask them to vote no on SB 675 clearly understood this. Through shared advocacy with our intertribal partners, advocates successfully convinced the committee to vote against SB 675 with a “do not pass” designation, ensuring that this bill will not return in the 2026 Legislative Session. That said, the essence of this bill could always appear again in new legislation, and advocates will need to remain vigilant to ensure Tribal sovereignty is respected.