+405 642 9592
Kenneth@BCMSports.net
Integrity of the game…
Brian Crawford Memorial
  • Home
    • Home
  • Research
    • Research Hub
    • Better Together — Oklahoma Youth Sports
    • Directors & Organizations
    • Sports Facilities
    • Municipalities & Public Assets
    • Officials & Workforce
    • Data & Methodology
    • History & Archives
  • Case Studies
    • Case Studies Research Library
    • From Facility User to Community Asset Steward
    • The Shawnee Minutes
    • When a Memorial Became a Mission
  • Publications
    • Publications Hub
    • The Journey
    • Youth Sports Transparency
    • Reports & Executive Summaries
    • Lectures & Presentations
    • Podcasts & Video
  • About
    • About Baseball Heaven
    • Kenneth R. Crawford
    • Professional Resume & Leadership Portfolio
    • Contact
  • Participate
    • Community Forum
    • Survey
    • Survey Results
    • Submit Public Records & Source Documents
    • Challenge, Correct or Verify Data
    • Open Research Requests
    • Share Your Story / Historical Knowledge
    • Support Baseball Heaven
  • Blog
    • Case Studies
    • Fields of Accountability
    • Oklahoma’s Counties of Accountability
    • The Journey
    • The Shawnee Minutes
    • USSSA Directors – The Public Record
    • Youth Sports Transparency
  • Home
  • Research
  • Case Studies
  • Publications
  • About
  • Participate
  • Blog

Osage County – Skiatook’s Field-Use Agreements, the $206,200 League-Gate Model & the Public-Benefit Ledger

Posted on Today at 12:45 pm
Oklahoma’s Counties of Accountability · Day 15 · Osage County

Osage County: Skiatook’s 2015 Field-Use Rules, the $206,200 League-Gate Model & the Public-Benefit Ledger

Youth sports · publicly managed facilities · city-approved user agreements · model transparency · stronger local programs

October 30, 2026 · Research draft / not published · Included source span 2010–2021 (2022–23 multi-county event overlaps excluded) · September 20, 2026 Hidden Valley dataset

County metricsEconomic impactCity ordinanceSource register
Prominent methodological and legal notice: Every historical entry fee, admission, concession, officiating, sanction and visitor-spending figure below is sourced or calculated from a modeled tournament/division dataset—not independently verified receipts, tax revenue, actual profit, economic additionality, proven lost public funds or criminal conduct. No inference of misconduct follows from model assumptions, missing records, a league label or a request for records. No agency, director, youth organization, public officer or property owner is accused of wrongdoing in this report. Sports-facility ownership and legal title must be independently documented by parcel/deed records.

1. Executive summary — why the Osage County record matters

The September 20, 2026 Hidden Valley archive contains 59 distinct provisional Osage event URLs, 123 division records and 611 team participations with the single county label Osage. Every included division identifies the municipality Skiatook and the source facility Skiatook Sports Complex. Modeled source revenues aggregate to $85,284 in gross team-entry fees, $321,800 in gross gate and $160,900 in gross concessions. The visitor-spending model separately totals $237,695; it is not a finding of actual economic benefit.

A more actionable public-accountability question is raised by an independently published city ordinance. On April 28, 2015, Skiatook adopted ordinance 2015-05, requiring City Council-approved athletic facility use agreements for youth sports organizations using city-owned venues and requiring city-manager written permission for third-party tournament hosts under §8-6-3(A)(27). The historical dataset identifies tournament activity before and after that date; it does not contain executed agreements, permissions, deposits or city receipts. No violation can be inferred without a date-specific documentary comparison. [S1] [S2]

Three independent tests: (1) Was each tournament’s primary playing facility actually in Osage County, rather than merely listed among several possible venues? (2) Which year-specific agreements, notices and written permissions governed the use of municipal fields? (3) Were the community outcomes—affordable local league play, scholarships, access, public maintenance and safety—documented in a way that can be compared fairly with actual public costs?

2. Countywide 2010–2021 activity and financial scenario ledger

Countywide historical metricValue
Distinct source EventUrl values59
Division records123
Team participations611
Calculated gross entry fees$85,284
Modeled gross gate$321,800
Modeled gross concessions$160,900
Scenario-net concessions — 30%$48,270
Scenario-net concessions — 50%$80,450
Scenario-net concessions — 70%$112,630
Source-estimated minimum games1,173
Official assignment slots2,021
Modeled umpire costs$80,840
Modeled USSSA sanction fees$10,535
Modeled day-trip spending$74,410
Modeled overnight spending$163,285
Modeled gross visitor spending$237,695

Source-coded Osage-only rows; 2010–2021. Team entries are participations (not distinct teams); official slots are assignments (not individual officials).

Gross income and partial net, separate from visitor spending: the source TotalEventIncome is $567,984 (= entry fees + modeled gate + modeled concessions). Source TotalEventNet is $476,609 (= gross modeled income − modeled umpire costs − modeled sanction fees). This so-called net is not a full cost-accounting profit: facility lease/rent, concession cost of goods, staff, insurance, maintenance, taxes, travel, field preparation, scholarships, utilities and capital assets are not reconciled. Ownership of hypothetical cash cannot be determined from a director or event label.

3. Municipality and facility attribution — identical totals, no double counting

The municipality and facility breakdown is deliberately explicit even where there is only one included municipality/facility. All included source rows identify Skiatook; all included facility labels read Skiatook Sports Complex. Thus the following three perspectives reconcile exactly on both the event/finance and the game/official/economic-impact sides. A single municipality listed in a dataset is only an analytical attribution rule, not verified legal title. In this instance Skiatook’s municipal code independently characterizes the athletic-facility category as city owned; the underlying parcel chain of title and historical ownership dates still require recorded instruments. [S1] [S3]

3A. Complete event, participation, receipt-scenario and concession reconciliation

Geographic viewEventsDivisionsTeamsEntry feesGross gateConcessions grossConcessions net 30%Concessions net 50%Concessions net 70%
County — Osage59123611$85,284$321,800$160,900$48,270$80,450$112,630
Municipality — Skiatook59123611$85,284$321,800$160,900$48,270$80,450$112,630
Facility — Skiatook Sports Complex59123611$85,284$321,800$160,900$48,270$80,450$112,630

Geographic views are identical overlapping perspectives on the same 123 division rows, not three revenue streams; do not sum across the three rows.

3B. Game, officiating, sanction and modeled economic-impact reconciliation

Geographic viewMinimum gamesOfficial slotsUmpire costsSanction feesDayImpactOvernightImpactTotal visitor spending
County — Osage1,1732,021$80,840$10,535$74,410$163,285$237,695
Municipality — Skiatook1,1732,021$80,840$10,535$74,410$163,285$237,695
Facility — Skiatook Sports Complex1,1732,021$80,840$10,535$74,410$163,285$237,695

Geographic views are identical overlapping perspectives on the same 123 division rows, not three revenue streams; do not sum across the three rows.

4. Dedicated countywide modeled visitor-spending / “economic impact” section

This section independently sums the three actual stored CSV columns DayImpact, OvernightImpact and TotalEconomicImpactPerEvent over exactly 123 included division records. Despite the name, TotalEconomicImpactPerEvent is stored on each division row; do not treat it as one unique event-level value or multiply it by distinct event count. The separate geographic views are reconciled, not accumulated.

Geographic view (same included rows)Division rowsΣ DayImpactΣ OvernightImpactΣ TotalEconomicImpactPerEvent
Osage County — included123$74,410$163,285$237,695
Skiatook municipality — included123$74,410$163,285$237,695
Skiatook Sports Complex — included123$74,410$163,285$237,695

Exactly $74,410 + $163,285 = $237,695. The three views reconcile to the county total; summing the three displayed rows would triple-count.

4A. Exact row-level equations and worked historical example

Day-trip scenario per division row: TeamsEntered × DayTripRate × DayStay = DayImpact.

Overnight scenario per division row: TeamsEntered × NightTripRate × OverNightStay = OvernightImpact.

Stored combined scenario per division row: DayImpact + OvernightImpact = TotalEconomicImpactPerEvent.

Example: April 29, 2011, Woodbat Freebee, 10AA division: 12 teams × $85/day-trip rate × 1 day-stay = $1,020 DayImpact; 12 × $289/overnight rate × 2 overnight-stay units = $6,936 OvernightImpact; row total $7,956. This is a formula demonstration and not a verified expenditure survey. [S15]

4B. Preserve actual rate and stay variation from the historical CSV

Source columnActual observed source values (row frequency)
Day-trip rate$25.00: 25 division rows
$85.00: 98 division rows
Overnight rate0: 17 division rows
$289.00: 106 division rows
Day-stay multiplier1: 106 division rows
2: 4 division rows
4: 1 division rows
27: 2 division rows
28: 3 division rows
29: 2 division rows
32: 2 division rows
33: 3 division rows
Overnight-stay multiplier(blank): 1 division rows
0: 35 division rows
1: 67 division rows
2: 20 division rows

No uniform rate or stay length has been substituted. Several league day-stay multipliers run 27–33; these are dataset inputs, not verified spending days.

The source file’s OverNightStay is blank for one March 24, 2014 preseason division (7 teams). Its stored overnight impact is $0 and the multiplication can be reproduced numerically using an empty-to-zero computational convention, but a blank should not be described as evidence of an observed zero-night stay. This record is included in the review watchlist. There are no arithmetic mismatches in the day, night and combined impact fields across the 123 included rows.

4C. What this does and does not establish

The $237,695 total is best described as modeled gross team-associated visitor spending under the CSV assumptions. It does not establish that all teams traveled from outside Osage County, whether trips were displaced from other Oklahoma communities, what share was spent locally, lodging occupancy, taxes collected, actual receipts, incremental benefit, public return on investment, or profits. Detailed economic-impact analysis would require verified origins, room nights, actual visitor surveys, spending geography, substitutions/displacement, leakage and incremental-tax methodology. Do not add the modeled $321,800 gate, $85,284 entry fees, $160,900 concessions or $476,609 partial event net to the visitor-spending scenario without an itemized overlap/double-counting study. The source fields are different scenarios, not additive public income.

5. The $206,200 league-gate modeling test

The countywide LeaguePhase split is material: eight League Play event URLs comprise 21 division records and 73 team participations, with zero modeled team-entry fees but $206,200 in modeled gate—64.1% of the countywide total. Two additional League Preseason event URLs add $6,800 modeled gate. Actual admission policies, ticket prices, weather/rainouts, repeat spectators, complimentary entry, youth league schedules and financial custody remain unverified.

Source classificationEventsRowsTeamsEntry feesModeled gateGross concessionsGross visitor spending
Ordinary tournament / other listing4998511$81,389$108,800$54,400$206,720
League Play82173$0$206,200$103,100$29,275
League Preseason2427$3,895$6,800$3,400$1,700
Countywide total59123611$85,284$321,800$160,900$237,695

League classification preserves the source LeaguePhase. This is a model partition, not a finding of collections.

5A. Individual league-event ledger — original event links

Event / original listingDivision rowsTeam participationsModeled gateModeled day spendingMax source event days
Skiatook League (4/1/2010)422$85,800$55039
Skiatook 8U League (4/7/2014)312$39,600$9,90033
Skiatook League (4/1/2015)28$25,600$6,40032
Skiatook 8U League (4/1/2013)28$23,200$5,80029
Skiatook rec league (4/2/2012)35$14,000$3,50028
League (4/1/2012)24$10,800$2,70027
Skiatook USSSA Ring Tournament (6/4/2018)411$6,600$2756
Skiatook League (3/23/2013)13$600$1502

These 8 source-coded league events account for $206,200 / $321,800 = 64.1%. Original event listings are not evidence of gate receipts. The day count is a source model multiplier, not proof of paid attendance on every day.

The largest modeled league entry is Skiatook League starting April 1, 2010: 4 division rows, 22 team participations and $85,800 modeled gate. Its row assumptions use $5 admission, 39 modeled event days and 20 daily fans per entered team; the gate formula for a 4-team division is 80 DailyFans × $5 DailyAdmissionFee × 39 TotalEventDays = $15,600, not an actual deposits ledger. Its total modeled visitor spending is only $550 because the source day-trip parameter uses $25 per team × 1 day per division, a further reason not to conflate income and visitor-spending scales. This particular event predates the April 2015 city ordinance; applying the later ordinance retroactively without an earlier law or agreement would be improper. [S14]

6. City ownership controls, municipal agreements and third-party hosts

Under Skiatook Code §8-6-2, the city’s youth sports organizations (YSOs) must have City Council-approved athletic facility use agreements to utilize city-owned athletic fields, including the Sports Park at 3020 W. 133rd St. North. The cited chapter’s adoption is Ordinance 2015-05, April 28, 2015. Code §8-6-3 includes city retention of ownership/access, up-to-one-year renewable agreements, nonexclusive scheduling, city-manager resolution of competing scheduling requests, background checks, city/YSO maintenance assignments and liability insurance. Section 8-6-3(A)(27) calls for written city-manager permission when a YSO allows third-party tournament hosts or nonlocal practices. The code publisher warns that a definitive officially printed copy is controlling; request the original ordinance and amendments. [S1] [S2]

Time-specific verification, not a breach claim: Obtain all executed agreements and extensions effective from April 28, 2015 through 2023, each City Council approval date, city-manager written third-party consent, whether a given director was the contracting YSO or separate host, and permission scope for each event. The April 1, 2015 league listing itself predates the ordinance’s April 28 adoption date. The archive does not prove any required approval was missing. For 2010–April 27, 2015 events request the older rules and specific historical agreements before asserting any applicable contractual duty.

6A. Two addresses for one named venue — map, deed and entrance verification

All 123 included Osage-labeled rows show source Address variants around 3020 W 133rd St N, consistent with the facility address in §8-6-2. However, the City’s separate published Sports Complex facility listing gives 2907 133rd Street North. Different entry gates, postal addressing, later development phases or a source transcription could explain the difference; none is established here. The discrepancy calls for a geocoded parcel map, historical field-number maps, tax parcel / deeds and original tournament field assignments, not a claim that the facility is misplaced or privately owned. [S1] [S3] [S13]

7. Unresolved Osage/Tulsa and multi-county event-location queue — excluded from county totals

An additional 44 Osage-referencing division rows across 18 distinct cross-county event URLs are excluded: 36 source rows explicitly list multiple counties and eight display Osage alone but share five EventUrls with Tulsa/cross-county records. They are explicitly excluded from the exact Osage county total because the primary playing fields were not independently validated. Many entries list both Owasso and Skiatook, while one multi-county label mentions Muskogee/Osage/Tulsa and another four counties. The listed school fields are school-labeled location candidates, not proof of school-district title, booked games or primary hosting. The correct assignment rule is one event → one verified primary facility county, never fractional assignment based on comma-separated locations; unresolved stays unresolved.

Source county labelsEvents*RowsTeamsEntryGross gateGross cons.GamesSlotsUmpire costSanctionsDayNightTotal impact
Muskogee, Osage, Tulsa1162$27,714$18,600$9,300185370$14,800$695$5,270$35,836$41,106
Osage5885$16,072$19,700$9,850233466$18,640$925$7,225$32,368$39,593
Osage, Rogers, Tulsa, Washington1164$31,936$19,200$9,600191382$15,280$715$5,440$36,992$42,432
Osage,Tulsa1334334$55,481$277,000$138,5001,2552,240$89,600$4,015$73,625$119,357$192,982
Unresolved preview (excluded)1844545$131,203$334,500$167,2501,8643,458$138,320$6,350$91,560$224,553$316,113

*The excluded view combines source county Osage rows from five cross-county event URLs and explicitly multi-county rows; individual grouped event counts are not additive where the same EventUrl appears in multiple groups. All excluded groups are NOT added to the Osage totals.

Misallocating the excluded preview to Osage would add $316,113 of separately calculated modeled visitor spending, but that would be an unsupported Osage allocation. These excluded event URLs include five that also carry source Osage-only division rows; all of those eight rows are withheld from the county ledger so an event is not split among counties. Excluded preview event counts cannot be added to the included ledger without verified site allocation. Record-level review and original brackets/field schedules are required to establish a single county for each event. The full unassigned list (including source-Osage rows from cross-county events), plus 18 corresponding Tulsa-only division rows supplied strictly as contextual companions, is in the accompanying watchlist CSV; the Tulsa-only companions are excluded from the Osage financial preview as well.

8. Municipal collaboration, youth programs and public-benefit standards

A public-benefit review should compare access and actual expenses across the City of Skiatook, Osage County, youth sports organizations, independent tournament hosts, nearby municipal partners and school districts—but should not blur legal distinctions. City municipal property and city agreements are governed through Skiatook records; county commissioners and county auditors are a different government; a private operator may hold separate records outside city custody; and tribal governments retain independent ownership and jurisdiction. A facility hosting players from multiple cities is not itself a jointly owned facility.

A distinct Osage Nation example demonstrates why ownership overrides are necessary: on October 27, 2021 the Nation described planned outdoor sports amenities on about 30 acres it owned in Pawhuska and reported coordination with the City of Pawhuska. That documentation concerns a different site and sovereign property owner; it does not transfer ownership of Skiatook’s fields or place Pawhuska tournaments into the Osage USSSA ledger. The Nation’s October 2024 Outdoor Health Complex news is a separately documented milestone and must not be treated as proof that the original 2021 proposal and later facility are identical without parcel/project records. [S10] [S16]

8A. Public benefit should be measured with records, not only tourist-spending scenarios

Decision ledger categories: annual youth participation from within Skiatook/Osage County; affordable registration and access; scholarships and accommodations; field hours dedicated to community league versus external tournament calendars; maintenance/repair budgets; school and nonprofit partnerships; emergency access, safety and background-check compliance; disability accessibility; historical capital expenditures and debt; actual operator payments/fees/concession remittances; audited city ledger entries; and documented local procurement and visitor tax receipts. The research has not established these outcomes or their values. City action is a responsibility to document fair public use—not a presumption that tournament activity was harmful.

9. Public finance: municipal audit versus county State Auditor report

9A. Skiatook FY2023–24 independent audit

The City of Skiatook publishes FY2023 and FY2024 audits. Its FY2023–24 financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2024 received an unmodified audit opinion on a modified cash basis, a basis other than U.S. GAAP. The auditor’s Government Auditing Standards report dated May 7, 2025 did not identify deficiencies considered material weaknesses or reportable noncompliance under that limited scope. This is not an event-by-event audit, an unqualified finding about internal control effectiveness, or evidence that receipts managed by any YSO/director were included in City accounts. Ask for the facility’s chart-of-accounts, transaction detail, contracts, receipts and work orders. [S4] [S5]

9B. Oklahoma State Auditor: Osage County FY2021

The Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector transmitted an Osage County FY2021 report on August 30, 2023. It gave an unmodified opinion on the statutory/regulatory accounting basis and an adverse GAAP opinion because that prescribed basis differs materially from GAAP—not by itself evidence of fraud. The report’s finding 2021-003 concerned sheriff inmate trust and commissary controls. This is a county sheriff fund finding, not ballpark concession revenue, and cannot be attributed to the City of Skiatook or any youth sports operator. Its account and event scope are different. [S6]

10. Organizations, district-attorney jurisdiction and official court disposition checks

Original USSSA division rows contain TournamentDirector, EventUrl and tournament names; those labels can support follow-up with event organizers but do not establish who contracted with the city, handled gates, owned concessions, held tax accounts or disbursed funds. City-approved YSOs, any independent event organizer, relevant nonprofits, school entities and tribal offices should be identified by their own dated instruments, rather than automatically linked by dataset names.

The state lists Mike Fisher, District Attorney for Oklahoma District 10, serving Osage and Pawnee counties. County criminal charging and prosecutorial decisions require applicable law, jurisdiction and substantiated evidence; a district attorney is not a substitute for the City Council, city manager, municipal records custodian, independent auditor or administrative contract review. Likewise, civil contract disputes and tribal/federal matters may belong in different fora. [S7]

Official court cases and outcomes: This source-constrained review did not establish a verifiable Osage/Skiatook sports-facility court case number, party match, final order or disposition arising from the analyzed 59 source events. That is not a claim that no cases exist. Any specific allegation or historical lawsuit should be labeled unverified until matched to an official OSCN docket and operative order, federal PACER record or appropriate Osage Nation court docket. Do not equate complaint filing with adjudicated guilt, and do not borrow unrelated statewide sports allegations as an Osage County finding. [S8] [S9] [S17]

11. Targeted Oklahoma Open Records Act requests — drafts only, not submitted

City of Skiatook, 2010–2026 requested categories: (1) certified parcel maps/deeds/easements and both 2907/3020 address histories; (2) adopted 2015-05 original, revisions and pre-2015 facility-use rules; (3) all executed YSO agreements, renewals, insurance certificates and council approval minutes; (4) third-party tournament written permissions signed by the city manager, with dates and named organizers; (5) booking calendars, permits, individual field allocations, schedule changes, canceled events and access rules; (6) gate, concession, parking and registration policies and City-maintained remittance records; (7) rent, insurance, electric, water, maintenance, infrastructure, fence, turf and capital improvements paid from public funds; (8) procurement, grants, donations and public works authority financial data; (9) public access/community program/scholarship reporting; and (10) record retention, searches performed and custodian of non-city records. [S11] [S12]

Osage County records custodians: recorded parcel instruments, county contribution agreements and applicable expenditures only if maintained by county offices. School districts: field rental and permission records if a school site is corroborated and custodian has them. Osage Nation: separately requested tribal land/project records under that government’s own procedures; the Oklahoma municipal public-records request is not assumed to bind a sovereign tribal government. Private organizations: seek voluntary cooperation or city-held copies, rather than claiming every private ledger is automatically a public record. Status as of October 30, 2026: proposed requests only, none transmitted during this drafting process. Actual municipal response and completeness require later documentation.

12. Computational methodology, source column crosswalk and validation controls

  1. Snapshot and scope: authoritative September 20, 2026 historical AIUSSSA - HVIOG 9-20-2026(6).csv with 20,305 total division records, narrowed to exact text County = Osage (123 rows). For event count use distinct nonblank EventUrl, not division-row count; overlapping URLs do not sum across geographic views.
  2. Participation and receipts: sum TeamsEntered (participations, not unique clubs) and TotalTeamEntryFee = team fee calculation. TotalEventGate agrees on all 123 rows with DailyFans × DailyAdmissionFee × TotalEventDays. Fans are a modeling input, not verified turnstile admissions. TotalEventConcession agrees on every included row with 0.50 × TotalEventGate; this is a gross concession assumption, not a documented business inventory or actual sales total.
  3. Scenario-net concession margins: 0.30 × gross concessions, 0.50 × gross concessions and 0.70 × gross concessions. These are illustrative retained-fraction scenarios before establishing actual cost of goods, staffing, rent, shrinkage or taxes. The phrase “net” is shorthand for scenario-retained amounts only.
  4. Games and officiating: sum TotalMinimumGamesPlayed (a source guarantee-based calculation, not observed completed contests); TotalEventUmpires is an assignment-slot count and reconciles on each row to TotalMinimumGamesPlayed × UmpiresPerGame. TotalEventUmpireFees reconciles to TotalEventUmpires × UmpirePayPerGame. These are modeled labor slots/cost, not evidence of assignments paid to identified people or W-2/1099 reporting.
  5. Sanction and synthetic event income: sum TotalUSSSASanctionFees; TotalEventIncome = TotalTeamEntryFee + TotalEventGate + TotalEventConcession; TotalEventNet = TotalEventIncome − TotalEventUmpireFees − TotalUSSSASanctionFees. This partial net is not profits or municipal operating income.
  6. Modeled visitor spending: preserve each row’s DayTripRate, NightTripRate, DayStay and OverNightStay with TeamsEntered to recompute DayImpact and OvernightImpact; sum their combination in TotalEconomicImpactPerEvent. Reconciliation is exact for all 123 rows, with one source blank overnight-stay field flagged—not substituted as an observed value.
  7. Primary site rule / ownership: only singly labeled Osage rows in the county ledger; 36 explicitly multi-county plus 8 cross-county-event rows separately excluded pending verified primary host facility and county. Municipality display is not proof of fee-simple title; independent city code supports municipal control for current Skiatook category; documented tribal, county, school or private ownership would supersede a generic municipality assumption once evidence is verified. No fractional county distributions or double counts.
  8. Verification hierarchy and exclusions: source-coded events are leads, source formula amounts are models, independently executed government contracts and official audits are evidence of their narrow scope, and original time-specific deed/permit/receipt records are needed for actual title, collection and compliance. Source year and event date determine which ordinance applied. An unresolved facility or missing contract is not a legal finding.

13. Right of response, corrections and reproducibility

The research welcomes corrections and original dated documents from Skiatook city officials, Osage County government, Osage Nation, youth sports organizations, tournament directors, school partners, players’ families, umpires and independent accounting professionals. No comment request or reply has been sent or received as part of this draft. Corrections should cite the event URL/division ID, year-specific field, source financial line item, governing contract, amount, court case number (if any) and published evidence. Keep a transparent visible change log with original statement, correction, reason and date; retain every dataset baseline and unresolved record for reproducibility.

Priority follow-up records: Skiatook 2015–2023 executed YSO agreements and third-party tournament permissions; 2010–2014 prior agreements; 2010 Skiatook League gate practices and the unusual 39-day multiplier; 2907-versus-3020 parcel/field map; the 44 withheld Osage-referencing rows and 18 Tulsa-only companion divisions; actual concession rights, prices, receipts and corresponding City ledger accounts; official court outcome documents for any later identified case. These are research questions, not accusations.

14. Primary-source and official-evidence register

Controlling statistical source: user-supplied authoritative historical file AIUSSSA - HVIOG 9-20-2026(6).csv, source version dated September 20, 2026; exact County = Osage filter. All unassigned potential Osage rows are separately excluded and in the companion watchlist. External links below are published primary government / organizer records, not inferred transactions.

  1. S1. Skiatook code §8-6-2: city-owned athletics and City Council-approved use agreement.
  2. S2. Skiatook code §8-6-3: agreement terms, city rights, written third-party host approval.
  3. S3. City of Skiatook, official Sports Complex facility listing (2907 133rd St North).
  4. S4. City of Skiatook Finance Office: budgets and municipal audit archive.
  5. S5. City of Skiatook FY2023–24 independent audit, issued May 7, 2025 (PDF).
  6. S6. Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector: Osage County FY2021 report (PDF), dated August 30, 2023.
  7. S7. Oklahoma District Attorneys Council: District 10/Osage and Pawnee, Mike Fisher.
  8. S8. Oklahoma State Courts Network: official docket search.
  9. S9. PACER: official U.S. federal court records portal.
  10. S10. Osage Nation October 27, 2021 release: Pawhuska sports-complex planning on tribally owned land.
  11. S11. Oklahoma Department of Libraries: Oklahoma Open Records Act (51 O.S. §§24A.1 et seq.).
  12. S12. City of Skiatook Agenda Center: council actions and minutes.
  13. S13. Skiatook city Parks and Recreation: Sports Complex and geographic context.
  14. S14. USSSA 2010 Skiatook League original historical event ID 71966.
  15. S15. USSSA 2011 Woodbat Freebee original historical event ID 83398.
  16. S16. Osage Nation: 2024 Outdoor Health Complex ribbon cutting (different documented milestone).
  17. S17. Osage Nation judiciary / official court docket access.

Day 15 conclusion: Osage County’s provisional event-level single-county USSSA ledger contains 59 source events and $237,695 in modeled gross visitor spending, while eight league-play event URLs drive $206,200 of modeled admissions. Skiatook’s documented 2015 field-use rules provide a practical, fair records roadmap. Neither the numeric estimates nor an unproduced written approval establishes a violation. The next substantive accountability result must be a reconciled public-benefit ledger connecting verified primary site, executed municipal consent, real collections and expenses, access for local children, and independently measured economic outcomes.

Publication and outreach status: October 30, 2026 research draft; not published to WordPress. No public-records request, right-of-response message or court filing was submitted by preparation of this article. This is public-interest research, not a legal, tax or audit opinion.

Previous Post
Sallisaw, Oklahoma – The $4.96 Million Public Investment, the Youth-League Agreement, and the Community-Access Test

Recent Posts

  • Osage County – Skiatook’s Field-Use Agreements, the $206,200 League-Gate Model & the Public-Benefit Ledger October 30, 2026
  • Sallisaw, Oklahoma – The $4.96 Million Public Investment, the Youth-League Agreement, and the Community-Access Test October 30, 2026
  • Jeff Warden Claremore Baseball, 55 Historical Event Records, Free-Entry Listings & Public-Facility Accountability October 30, 2026
  • Mustang, Oklahoma: Wild Horse Park, Nonexclusive Agreements, and the True Cost of Community Access October 29, 2026
  • Paul Marshall Sallisaw Softball, 55 Historical Events, Public Investment & Financial Transparency October 29, 2026 | Baseball Heaven — USSSA Tournament Directors: The Public Record October 29, 2026

Categories

  • Case Study (23)
  • Oklahoma's Counties of Accountability (15)
  • Oklahoma's Fields of Accountability (24)
  • The Journey (27)
  • The Shawnee Minutes (5)
  • Uncategorized (1)
  • USSSA Tournament Directors – The Public Record (18)
  • Youth Sports Transparency (8)

Doctoral Research

Integrity of the Game vs Economic Impact (Politics), The Oklahoma Business Plan.

Doctoral Study-Research

Facebook
YouTube

© Integrity of the Game… by Professor K…

Contacts

Kenneth@BCMSports.net
+405 642 9592