Hoopa appendix supporting summary judgment - Schlosser Law Files

11
from the timber fund after 1988, the partitioning actually occurred
in 1988 by act of Congress.
The CHAIRMAN. There are two time periods
Mr. MCCALEB. Yes; there are.
The CHAIRMAN. Can you tell the committee what disbursements
have been made from the settlement fund, when the disbursements
were made and to whom these disbursements were made
Mr. MCCALEB. From the settlement fund, $15 million was disbursed
to individual Indians who elected to become Yurok. There
was another $10.6 million distributed to individual Indians who
elected to buy out. That $10.6 million was offset by a $10-million
direct appropriation of Congress. There has been another $1.5 million
distributed to the Yurok Tribe since 1991 given they were provided
about $500,000 a year for 3 years to help them in the process
of establishing their tribal government.
The CHAIRMAN. Anything distributed to the Karuk Tribe
Mr. MCCALEB. None directly to the Karuk to my knowledge.
There was another $34 million distributed to the Hoopa Tribe,
$34,651,000 pursuant to their signing their waiver in keeping with
the act.
The CHAIRMAN. Given the Department’s position as set forth in
the Secretary’s report that neither the Hoopa Valley Tribe nor the
Yurok Tribe is entitled to the balance of the funds remaining in the
HYSA fund, what benefits of the act or activities authorized in the
act does the Department envision should be carried out and funded
by the recommended two separate permanent funds to fulfill the
intent of the original Act in full measure
Mr. MCCALEB. I think all the funds should be distributed that
are in the settlement fund. I don’t think there is much debate over
that. I think the issue is over the distribution, how the money
should be distributed.
The CHAIRMAN. How shall the distribution be made
Mr. MCCALEB. I guess if you go to our third recommendation, it
touches as closely as anything on that:
The settlement fund should be administered for the mutual benefit of both tribes
and the reservations taking into consideration prior distributions to each tribe from
the fund.
If you assume that 30–70 percent distribution was appropriate
originally and take into consideration the prior distribution of the
funds, that would provide some guidance in that area.
The CHAIRMAN. In your opinion, were all the provisions of the
Act benefiting the Hoopa Valley Tribe implemented
Mr. MCCALEB. Yes.
The CHAIRMAN. Would you say the same of the act benefiting the
Yurok Tribe implemented
Mr. MCCALEB. No; that’s not correct.
The CHAIRMAN. So the Hoopa Valley got all the benefits, Yurok
did not
Mr. MCCALEB. One of the provisions was the partitioning of the
tribal lands. That was done, that was accomplished but the Yuroks
got none of the money except for the $1.5 million I indicated. There
were other provisions for economic development that were supposed
to be carried out pursuant to an economic development plan
submitted by the Yuroks. The plan was never submitted, so it was