Hoopa appendix supporting summary judgment - Schlosser Law Files

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DRAFT REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR PURSUANT TO SECTION 14(c) OF PUB. L. 100-580 1. Introduction. The landmark Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act adopted by the 100th Congress was intended to partition certain reservation lands between two tribes in Northern California, the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe and the Yurok Tribe, to resolve lengthy litigation between the United States, the Hoopa Valley Tribe, and a large number of individual claimants, and to remove the legal impediments to Hoopa Valley Tribe and Yurok Tribe self-governance. Congress accurately foresaw that the Settlement Act would be tested in court. Now that such litigation is completed, this is the report required by § 14(c) of the Act, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1300i-11(c).’ 1 Section 14(c) provides: (1) The Secretary shall prepare and submit to the Congress a report describing the final decision in any claim brought pursuant to subsection (b) of this section against the United States or its officers, agencies, or instrumentalities. (2) Such report shall be submitted no later than 180 days after the entry of final judgment in such litigation. The report shall include any recommendations of the Secretary for action by Congress, including, but not limited to, any supplemental funding proposals necessary to implement the terms of this subchapter and any modifications to the resource and management authorities established by this subchapter. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 2517 of Title 28, any judgment entered against the United States shall not be paid for 180 days after the entry ofjudgment; and, if the Secretary of the Interior submits a report to Congress pursuant to this section, then payment shall be made no earlier than 120 days after submission of the report. 25 U.S.C. § 1300i-11(c). -1-
This report will summarize the Settlement Act, the litigation concerning it, the final decision and claims regarding it, and the recommendations of the Secretary for action by Congress. As set forth below, the Secretary recommends that funding be provided for preparation of the plan for economic self-sufficiency of the Yurok Indian Tribe; that Bureau of Land Management parcels adjacent to the reservations be conveyed to the tribes; and that consideration be given to legislation to address the consequences of the Yurok Tribe’s refusal to enact the claim waiver required by § 2 of the Settlement Act to obtain certain benefits and to clarify the resource and management authorities approved through ratification of the Hoopa Valley Tribe’s Constitution in § 8 of the Act. 2. Reasons for the Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act. The lengthy and complex crisis that led to the Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act grew from a single source: federal actions construed in the Short case. The Hoopa Valley Reservation, as it existed from 1891~1988,2consisted of three parcels, of which the “Square” was the largest. The first parcel, the Kiamath River Reservation was reserved by Executive Order in 1855. In 1864 Congress passed a statute authorizing only fourreservations for the Indians in California and later that year the Square was identified as one of them. An Executive Order in 1876 formally defined the boundaries of the Square. The third parcel, a thirty-five mile strip along the Kiamath River between the two reservations, gained reservation status in 1891 by an Executive Order that joined 2 The reservation consisting of the Square, the former Kiamath River Reservation, and the Connecting Strip has been referred to variously as the “Hoopa Valley Reservation,” “former Reservation” and “Joint Reservation.” For clarity, this Report uses the term “1891 Reservation” to refer to the three-parcel reservation as it existed between 1891 and 1988. -2-
Page 1 and 2:
Electronically Filed April 2, 2008
Page 3 and 4:
Exhibit 12 Notice to Convene Genera
Page 5 and 6:
Exhibit 37 Letter of Special Truste
Page 7 and 8:
2 Account 7153 - Proceeds of Labor,
Page 9 and 10:
App. 4
Page 14 and 15:
3 II 100TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION S. 2
Page 16 and 17:
5 3 1 (4) “Hoopa Valley Tribe”
Page 18 and 19:
7 SEC. 2. RESERVATIONS; PARTITION A
Page 20 and 21:
9 7 1 shall thereafter he held in t
Page 22 and 23:
11 1 SEC. 3. PRESERVATION OF SHORT
Page 24 and 25:
made pursuant to subsections (c) an
Page 26 and 27:
15 13 1 from applicants not include
Page 28 and 29:
1 can meet any of the enrollment cr
Page 30 and 31:
(4) Any person making an election u
Page 32 and 33:
21 19 1 (b) INTERIM CouNcn~EsT~LIsi
Page 34 and 35:
(5) Vacancies on the Interim Counci
Page 36 and 37:
25 1 merge with the Yurok Tribe and
Page 38 and 39:
27 25 1 SEC. 13. LIMITATIONS OF ACT
Page 194 and 195: United States Department of the Int
Page 196 and 197: REPORT TO CONGRESS HOOPA-YUROK, Pur
Page 198 and 199: Subsequent to enactment of the Act,
Page 200 and 201: IV. That Congress in coordination w
Page 202 and 203: FINANCIAL INFORMATONA.L SHEET - “
Page 204 and 205: —2— The balance due vas distrib
Page 206 and 207: YIJROK TRII3E -- ~ ~ ~ ~ 15900 Hwy
Page 208 and 209: BACKGROUND April 2, 2001 Page 3 rec
Page 210 and 211: REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE HOOPA-YUR
Page 212 and 213: In 1892, Congress opened the Kiamat
Page 214 and 215: esource management, and spending of
Page 216 and 217: The HYSA established procedures for
Page 218 and 219: Consistent with this reasoning, the
Page 220 and 221: On April 18, 2000, a sharply divide
Page 222 and 223: the funds. While the balance ofthe
Page 226 and 227: the Kiamath River and Hoopa parcels
Page 228 and 229: No. C 80 2908 TEH (N.D. Cal.). The
Page 230 and 231: the Yurok Reservation on December 7
Page 232 and 233: By memorandum to the Area Director,
Page 234 and 235: United States, 982 F.2d 1312, 1321
Page 236 and 237: claims brought pursuant to 25 U.S.C
Page 238 and 239: secured under the Constitution ofth
Page 240 and 241: After due consideration, the Secret
Page 242 and 243: The existing governing documents of
Page 244 and 245: On February 28, 2001, the Ninth Cir
Page 246 and 247: S. HRG. 107-648 HOOPA-YUROK SETTLEM
Page 248: C O N T E N T S Page Statements: Ca
Page 251 and 252: 2 STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE
Page 253 and 254: 4 ership and management of the Squa
Page 255 and 256: 6 The U.S. Court of Federal Claims
Page 257 and 258: 8 is not entitled to further distri
Page 259 and 260: 10 Mr. MCCALEB. Senator, I was hopi
Page 261 and 262: 12 never implemented. For example,
Page 263 and 264: 14 nues derived from one reservatio
Page 265 and 266: Mr. Schlosser. 16 STATEMENT OF THOM
Page 267 and 268: 18 The committee said while it didn
Page 269 and 270: 20 big conference. In some places t
Page 271 and 272: 22 plus in timber revenues projecte
Page 273 and 274: 24 courts have said. No Indian trib
Page 275 and 276:
26 Be that as it may, we pray Congr
Page 278 and 279:
APPENDIX ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMIT
Page 280 and 281:
31 Unfortunately for all concerned,
Page 349 and 350:
100
Page 351 and 352:
102
Page 358 and 359:
II 108TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION S. 287
Page 360 and 361:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 362 and 363:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 364 and 365:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 366 and 367:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 368 and 369:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 370 and 371:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 372:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 18 mo
Page 384 and 385:
43 C.F.R. § 4.318, which allows th
Page 386 and 387:
the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affa
Page 388 and 389:
Special Trustee’s letters make no
Page 390 and 391:
In Short VI, plaintiffs pointed to
Page 411:
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby cer
show all

Hoopa appendix supporting summary judgment - Schlosser Law Files

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?