Cherokee Nation Council hears proposal for new district courthouse in Catoosa

The Cherokee Nation Council on Thursday heard a discussion-only presentation recommending Catoosa as the preferred site for an additional Cherokee Nation District Court to be built under provisions of the Cherokee Nation Trust Settlement Act of 2025.

Secretary of State (name not specified) told the council the site the nation owns in Catoosa would reduce average travel distance for citizens from about 55 miles to roughly 38 miles and would place more citizens within a 25-mile radius of a court. “All things pointed to Catoosa being the number 1 ranking spot for another district court site,” the secretary of state said.

The presentation, given at the council’s request following the passage of the trust-settlement legislation, reviewed qualifying factors used to pick a site: accessibility, local citizen population, referral and caseload data, and existing tribal land with utilities and infrastructure. The presenter said the recommended parcel totals about 3.8 acres for the courthouse build site, is adjacent to the Catoosa tag office and already has upgraded water and other utilities.

Judge Bartow, Attorney General Chad Harsha and staff member John Aspow joined the briefing and answered council questions. Project staff said the initial design proposal calls for one large, jury-capable courtroom plus offices for court staff, marshals and the attorney general’s office and satellite office space for probation and other services. Project staff said a multipurpose jury-pool room could serve as additional waiting area or community meeting space when not in use.

Council members pressed for operational details. Councilor Kendra McGaty asked whether the nation had data on missed court appearances tied to transportation barriers; the presenters said the nation had not systematically tracked missed-court events but that continuance requests are often granted to avoid issuing warrants when a citizen cannot appear. Councilman Joe Deere and others supported the Catoosa choice, citing proximity to major highways and heavy use of the adjacent tag office. A council member asked how jury trials would be handled with only one courtroom; the presenters said the building would be jury-capable and could take entire dockets originating west of the Grand River, and the multipurpose room would support jury operations.

The council voted to amend the agenda to add the courthouse discussion as a discussion-only item by voice vote. The motion to amend the agenda passed on a voice vote; individual roll-call tallies were not specified in the meeting record. Earlier in the meeting the council also voted to approve minutes by voice vote.

Presenters said the recommendation is part of an ongoing, data-driven site-selection process; they said the fuller written report, including renderings and estimated project cost, will be distributed to the council. No formal appropriation or construction authorization was requested or voted on during the meeting; council members emphasized the presentation was informational and a first step toward potential future actions.

Project staff and council members also discussed operational possibilities to reduce travel burdens, including continuing arraignment dockets over video for certain Monday and Tuesday morning matters. Staff said afternoon dockets that require private conversations between defense counsel and prosecutors are not suitable for remote handling.

The council’s discussion reflected concerns about capacity and security at existing facilities in Jay and Tahlequah; several councilors said the Jay facility was originally a community center and lacks space, parking and security features expected of a purpose-built courthouse. Councilors described the Catoosa site as a start toward relieving pressure on courts in Rogers, Mayes and Tulsa counties and toward broader improvements across the reservation.