The Osage Nation and one of its business entities are on the verge of divorce.
On July 19, Attorney General Clint Patterson sent Frank Freeman, the chair of Osage, LLC, a harsh letter saying that the Nation intends to terminate its $405,000 contract with Osage Nation Environmental Services because its failure to perform an environmental survey of the 43,000-acre Osage Nation Ranch.
“To date, the Nation paid ONES $266,080.50 and the Nation has not received any deliverables from ONES,” the letter says.
Paul Yates, the former director of ONES who was terminated by Freeman last year, said the study had been going well and the initial drafts were praised by both the tribal Real Estate Services and Natural Resources departments. The work had been done in concert with a company called Reagan Smith out of Oklahoma City that performs environmental assessments and other regulatory consulting, often with tribes.
Reagan Smith was also fired and, according to Patterson, threatened legal action. That demand resulted in a recent settlement for an undisclosed sum with ONES.
“We did a tremendous amount of good work on that contract, and we had the right partner with Reagan Smith, but Frank and (current ONES Chief Executive) Russell Goff wanted to take the company in a different direction,” Yates said.
“Frank told the Chief (Geoffrey Standing Bear) that we weren’t doing the work.
“The crazy thing is that ONES was doing a great job and things were on track. I had uniquely qualified people to do the work, people who knew the fee-to-trust process. It would have been the best way to get this work done and get land into trust.”
Standing Bear said the environmental survey is of paramount importance to the Nation and the process of getting the ranch put into trust – and a critical part of growing the Nation’s sovereignty.
If any part of the process goes awry, he said, the rest of what is essentially a complex legal and regulatory ballet can fall apart and wind up costing the Nation more money and more time. “We have to go through a lot of different hoops to have it converted to legal title in the United States for the benefit of the Osage Nation,” Standing Bear said.
And the United States, he added, has been hesitant to accept the land because of the environmental damages inflicted on the land over the past 120 years or so. About three or four years ago, the Bureau of Indian Affairs estimated that cleaning up the land would cost $40 million while another estimate came in at $23 million. The chasm between the estimates is what prompted the BIA to ask for the survey for which ONES was hired.
Standing Bear said he had received a copy of Patterson’s letter to ONES but otherwise was uninvolved in the matter.
“I have not talked to the Attorney General since I got a copy of the letter and I have not talked to Frank Freeman,” said Standing Bear.
Stern language and warnings
Patterson’s letter demands that ONES cease all work on the contract and deliver all work product within 10 days – or demonstrate that it is able to fulfil the contract by its deadline, Sept. 30 – a goal the letter deemed “impossible” to meet.
“Failure to respond in the afforded time, or failure to otherwise satisfactorily demonstrate present ability to fulfill the Contract, will be construed as repudiation, and will be treated as a material breach,” the letter says. “The Nation reserves the right to seek to damages for any injuries sustained as a result of the Contract.
“UPON RECEIPT OF THIS LETTER, YOU MUST PRESERVE ALL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, REGARDLESS OF TYPE OR FORM, RELATED IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER TO THE CONTRACT. Do not discard documents or electronically stored information that is relevant. Do not delete, overwrite, alter, or destroy such materials. Failure to adhere to these evidence preservation instructions could result in serious legal consequences for ONES and/or its officials and employees.”
The letter ends on a friendlier note: “The Nation appreciated the opportunity to work together and hoped we could have a better working relationship. We wish you and ONES best of luck in the future.”
On July 22, Patterson lamented the situation with ONES.
“It’s just disappointing we aren’t seeing a beneficial relationship between the Nation and our LLCs,” he told the Osage News. “I don’t want to rely exclusively on gaming for the Nation’s future.
“Hopefully, we can see a turnaround soon.”
Subcontractor not approved
The letter from Patterson says that ONES also violated the terms of the contract by hiring a subcontractor without the written consent of the Nation.
Reagan Smith had been approved by the Nation but after that company was canned, ONES contracted with another environmental company based in Connecticut called TRC; that subcontractor was never approved by the Nation, Patterson said.
Patterson said he wasn’t entirely sure but that it appeared all of the work done by Reagan Smith had been jettisoned by ONES and that the environmental survey had started from scratch after that company and Yates were terminated.
“The whole thing was designed to divert that contract to someone that Frank and Russell Goff knew somewhere back East,” Yates said.
Goff, who was hired by ONES right before Yates was fired, was elevated to CEO of ONES and two other subsidiaries of Osage, LLC: Osage Pinnacle Design Group and the newly minted Osage Government Services.
Goff declined to discuss the termination letter, saying he was going to let Freeman and attorneys address it.
Freeman did not respond to a text message seeking his comment; Patterson said that he had spoken with Adam Marshall, the lawyer for Osage, LLC, and that they planned to have a meeting Monday.
The ONES contract has not been the only issue to be questioned about the performance of Osage, LLC. Two of the three former members of the Osage Nation Ranch Board, who became an advisory board last fall after the ranch was put under the LLC and then were fired by Freeman in June, have also spoken out about mismanagement. They questioned the private sale of more than 700 head of fall-born calves when they had always sold the cattle at auction for a premium because they felt that was the most honest and profitable practice, and they raised other questions about Freeman’s judgement.
While the two former ranch advisors were outspoken about Freeman, Yates was even more critical.
“Frank always wants to fix something.
“He doesn’t consult with anyone, and he doesn’t know what he’s doing. He’s a mess. “And I’ve lost faith with members of Congress who continue to support him.”
