Arkansas State Police graduate new class of State Troopers

LITTLE ROCK — Thirtyseven recruits became Arkansas State Troopers on March 27 during a graduation ceremony held in the State Capitol rotunda.

After being tested and interviewed, this class of new Troopers was chosen from a pool of 420 applicants. The recruits started their training program on October 13, 2024, at the State Police Training Academy in Little Rock. Over the course of the 24-week program, they engaged in a comprehensive and rigorous curriculum designed to prepare them for the realities of serving as Arkansas State Troopers. The program included approximately 1,200 hours of specialized instruction and practical training, covering topics such as criminal law, traffic law, accident investigation, firearms training, and defensive tactics.

The graduates were sworn in under oath as Arkansas State Troopers by Arkansas Supreme Court Justice Cody Hiland. Colonel Mike Hagar, Secretary of the Arkansas Department of Public Safety, Major Roby Rhoads, Sergeant Nick Brown, and Corporal Keon Thompson addressed the class during the ceremony. ASP senior command staff, troop and company commanders, the training section cadre, ASP Commissioners, and ASP Foundation members were among the audience.

Clint Bruce, a former NFL athlete, U.S. Navy Seal, entrepreneur, and founder of the HighgroundHQ Foundation, served as the keynote speaker.

Special recognition and awards were presented to the recruits who attained the highest scores within the respective training categories listed

as follows:

Justin Jarvi.

Christopher Belt.

Joshua Fitzgerald.

Physical fitness:

Jacob Garcia.

Zachary Roy.

Hunter Schwantz.

Firearms:

Billy Puckett. Logan Loftis. Jacob Garcia.

Emergency Vehicle Operator Course (EVOC):

Justin Jarvi.

Sheldon Phipps.

Steven Plyler.

The recruit graduates, their hometown, and their first post assignments are listed as follows: Troop A

Katorious Bluford, Little Rock.

Timothy Brown II, Little Rock.

Joshua Fitzgerald, Hot Springs.

See STATE, page A3 STATE

From page A2

Noah Fricke, Rogers.

Ethan Hiland, Conway.

Derrick Jacobs, Hensley.

Jonathan Johnson, Hot Springs.

Logan Loftis, Little Rock.

Brandon Loy, Jacksonville.

William Roark, Little Rock.

Nicholas Ade, Batesville.

Roman Charmello, Hot Springs.

Rafael Garcia, Des Arc.

Hunter Hill, Forrest City.

Ke’von Medley, Wheatley. Steven Plyler, Gurdon.

Damion Potts, Salem.

Billy Puckett, Imboden.

Hunter Schwantz, Helena-West Helena.

Eli Thomas, Searcy.

Troop E

Jacob Garcia, Redfield.

Gage Sanders, Pine Bluff.

Ronald Weast Jr., Star City. Troop F Trevor Monk, Woodlawn.

Connor Nash, Mena.

Angel Ramos, Bismarck.

Joshua Smeltzer, Malvern.

Troop G

Holly Romero, Texarkana. Trey Williams, Fouke.

Troop H

Zachary Roy, Fort Smith.

Troop I Justin Jarvi – 2024-B Class Leader, Mt. Pleasant.

Troop J

Anthony Freeman, Pottsville. Ty Lynch, Danville.

Troop L

Christopher Belt, Van Buren.

Sean Palmer, Hector.

Sheldon Phipps, Eldridge, Iowa.

Keegan Puryear, Hindsville.

Upon reporting for duty at their respective troop headquarters, the new Troopers will be placed with a certified departmental Field Training Officer (FTO). Each graduate will work in tandem with their respective FTO for a transitional period before being released to their assignment.

***

Casino trial concludes in federal court

LITTLE ROCK — The bench trial for the casino lawsuit brought by Cherokee Nation Business (CNB), Cherokee Nation Entertainment (CNE) and Jennifer McGill concluded Thursday in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas with final testimonies fol-

See STATE, page A9 STATE

From page A3

lowed by closing arguments.

Jennifer McGill, a key party in the case, was the first witness to take the stand on Thursday.

McGill, who remains employed by Cherokee Nation businesses as a community relations specialist, testified about the potential impact of Amendment 104 on her job.

She confirmed that if the amendment passes, the Russellville office where she works would close, potentially terminating her position. McGill and one other employee are currently the only full-time staff in that office, which was contingent on obtaining a casino license.

During direct examination by the plaintiffs’ attorney, McGill reviewed the Amendment 104 marketing materials issued by Local Voters in Charge. When asked about a statement that “Issue two does not affect existing jobs, revenues or casinos,” McGill testified, “It’s not true because it affects my job directly, and my co-workers’ job directly.”

Attorney for the plaintiffs then asked her, “If issue two were to pass, what would happen to your job?” to which McGill responded, “I will not have a job.” She further testified her job has been in existence since 2019, and would be eliminated if the amendment stands.

During cross-examination, the state asked McGill to review her employee contract, discussing its at-will nature and the contingencies surrounding her position. McGill acknowledged her job was initially contingent on obtaining a casino license. When questioned about the potential impact of Amendment 104, she testified no one had explicitly told her she would be fired, but she understood the office would cease to exist if the amendment stood.

In addition to her employment details, McGill was also asked during cross-examination about her involvement with two ballot question committees: the Arkansas Canvassing Compliance Committee (ACCC) and Investing in Arkansas.

The state asked McGill to examine marketing materials issued by ACCC. McGill acknowledged the advertising efforts, which included television commercials, direct mailers and text messages. She testified the purpose was to “educate the public on Issue Two and to correct any perceived misleading information.”

When asked if anyone had told her they were misled by the marketing done by Local Voters in Charge, McGill testified, “Not personally.” She also confirmed she had not identified anyone who believed they were misled by the marketing done by Local Voters in Charge.

McGill acknowledged that claims about job elimination in ads issued by ACCC were not based on existing positions, but rather on potential future jobs that did not yet exist.

The second witness to testify Thursday was Pope County Judge Ben Cross, who detailed his role in the selection of a casino operator for Pope County and explained why he offered exclusive support to Cherokee Nation Businesses (CNB) in 2019.

Cross testified that following the Racing Commission’s call for applications in 2019, five casino operators expressed interest in Pope County. These included Gulfside Casino Partnership, the Kehl family of Iowa, Warner Gaming, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and Cherokee Nation Businesses. Cross testified each group presented proposals to him and the quorum court.

Cross testified he ultimately offered exclusive support to Cherokee Nation Business after evaluating the proposals, consulting constitutional attorneys and releasing the applications for public inspection.

“I sent all the proposals out for public inspection in July 2019, where they remained open for inspection at the courthouse for a 30-day period,” he said. He added that input was also solicited from local officials, including mayors, school superintendents, nonprofit leaders and volunteer fire departments.

See STATE, page A10 STATE

From page A9

Cross testified Cherokee Nation Business was the only applicant that presented a diversified business portfolio not solely dependent on gaming.

“There’s only one of the five applicants that produced a business portfolio beyond gaming, and that’s Cherokee Nation Businesses,” he said. “All of the other four entities were primarily involved in the gaming industry.”

He testified that CNB’s broader business operations and financial stability also made it a more attractive long-term partner.

The county judge testified the decision to support CNB was finalized after the Pope County Quorum Court passed a resolution of support, followed by the signing of an economic development agreement (EDA). That agreement included a $38 million payment to local entities, along with ongoing contributions such as $2 million annually to nonprofits and a commitment to hire a percentage of employees with disabilities.

When asked whether he expected CNB to receive the license, Cross responded, “Yes, sir.” He also confirmed the agreement included termination clauses if the Arkansas Racing Commission awarded the license to another operator. Under cross-examination by attorneys for the state, Cross was questioned about his prior stance on casinos in Pope County. In 2018, before taking office, he confirmed his support for a resolution which required a public vote before any local officials could issue letters of support for a casino applicant.

He also acknowledged a citizen-led initiative resulted in a local ordinance requiring such a vote, which passed in November 2018. However, he testified he did not believe the ordinance prevented him from later issuing exclusive support for CNB, adding that he viewed the requirements of Amendment 100 as taking precedence.

When the state asked Cross whether he issued a letter of support simply to avoid litigation, he acknowledged that legal concerns were a factor in his decision. He testified that offering support to multiple applicants could have reduced the county’s role in the process.

“If I had given [support] to every vendor who came down, then I would quickly grow irrelevant and [the decision would be] given to the Arkansas Racing Commission, and we could have potentially ended up with a vendor the community didn’t want,” he said.

The state questioned whether the move to back Cherokee Nation Businesses exclusively was motivated, at least in part, by a desire to avoid further legal disputes, including possible challenges from other applicants such as Gulfside Casino Partnership.

ADuring closing arguments, plaintiffs’ attorney Scott Richardson argued that CNB followed the law, made significant financial investments and was unfairly stripped of its license through no fault of its own.

“Cherokee Nation Businesses came to Arkansas with the understanding and the hope that we’d be treated fairly, followed the rules and did what it was supposed to,” Richardson said. “Unfortunately, that’s not what has happened.”

He contended that CNB complied with Amendment 100 and the state’s casino gaming regulations, yet still lost its license after investing tens of millions of dollars into pursuing the project.

“The license was still taken away after they had spent tens of millions of dollars in pursuing the license and contracting and purchasing to pursue the project … from no fault of their own,” he said.

Richardson also reiterated the plaintiff’s argument that Amendment 104 was misleading to voters.

“The text of Amendment 104 makes very clear – choice is not an option,” he said. “No one is having

See STATE, page A21 STATE

From page A10

any elections over casinos.

They definitely cannot – for the next two years.”

Richardson claimed the measure was specifically crafted to revoke CNB’s Pope County license while presenting itself as a local control amendment.

“They never told anybody that,” he said. “All the marketing materials never revealed [that it] revoked the Pope County casino license.”

Responding for the state, attorney Ryan Hale argued that Amendment 104 was a valid exercise of the voters’ will and not an unconstitutional effort to target CNB.

“Ultimately, this is an issue that was presented to voters through Issue Two and Amendment 104,” Hale said.

“They chose to control their own fate.”

Hale said any claims of misleading content had already been reviewed by the Arkansas Supreme Court, which approved the ballot language.

“The Arkansas Supreme Court said this is good enough,” he said. “So the Arkansas voters, when they went to the ballot box, could read that and understand what they were about to vote on.”

In response to arguments that the amendment unfairly punished CNB, Hale said its backers were motivated by opposition to gambling in general, not to Cherokee specifically.

“They have long held, deeply held beliefs about vice and gambling,” he said. “They’ve been advocates against any and all casinos.”

Hale argued CNB knowingly accepted the risk that came with the license process and noted that the company continued investing even after its own polling suggested the ballot measure would succeed.

“This was really a calculated business risk from the beginning,” he said. “They had a very solid understanding of what was at stake and that they were losing.”

In rebuttal, Richardson pushed back on the argument that the risk was foreseeable.

“The risk must be reasonable and not marginal,” he said.

“Casino licenses are hard to get, even harder to lose.”

He again described the amendment as misleading and self-contradictory.

“It’s justified on the theory of curbing casino gaming, but it’s sold on the theory of, ‘We’re going to give you local control,’” he said.

“Those two things are selfcontradictory.”

Richardson concluded by warning that allowing Amendment 104 to stand would set a dangerous precedent.

“It’s very clear what happened here – an out-of-state competitor has used the political process to target its in-state competitor,” he said. “If the court says that’s fine, then I think you open up the opportunity for other competitors to use the political process to their business ends.”

The court is expected to issue a ruling at a later date. Both parties are required to submit post-trial briefs to Judge D.P.

Marshall Jr. by April 11.