|
|
Post by mdenney on Dec 9, 2009 15:04:38 GMT -5
'Descendants' appeal to Supreme Court Submitted by sfiecke on November 13, 2009 - 1:57pm. » Read similar stories filed under: General news Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community By Shannon Fiecke, Correspondant A group claiming rights to tribal land in Prior Lake as lineal descendants of the “Loyal Mdewakanton” Dakota have appealed their case to the U.S. Supreme Court. More than 20,000 plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages against the Unites States. They filed a petition Nov. 6, asking the high court to review a March decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court has 30 days to determine whether it will hear the case. The petitioners claim to be descendants of Native Americans who helped settlers during the 1862 Sioux uprising. The lawsuit, Wolfchild vs. U.S., was originally filed in 2003 by the Minnesota Mdewakanton Dakota Oyate (MMDO), and includes land on the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux reservation in Prior Lake. The suit is named for Lower Sioux tribal Chairman Sheldon Peters Wolfchild, the main plaintiff in the lawsuit. The MMDO said it could prove its members are descendents of the Loyal Mdewakanton listed on the 1886 census. The group claimed the government breached its trust when it created an act in 1980 affirming that the land belongs to the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux, Prairie Island and Lower Sioux communities. A federal judge ruled in 2007 that the plaintiffs could sue the U.S. government for mismanagement of tribal lands now occupied by the Shakopee, Prairie Island and Lower Sioux tribes in Minnesota. The appeals court reversed that decision, ruling that the Interior Department does not owe trust land or money to the descendents even though appropriation acts created in 1888, 1889 and 1890 stated the federal government was supposed to hold land for the “permanent benefit” of the Minnesota Mdewakanton listed on the census. Minneapolis attorney Erick Kaardal said his clients are asking the Supreme Court to resolve whether courts can get involved in land disputes between Native American land beneficiaries and the Department of the Interior. “The beneficiary disputes at Shakopee go back to at least 1969,” he said. “We’re saying the U.S. Supreme Court should resolve once and for all who has beneficiary status at Shakopee.” Willie Hardacker, the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community’s attorney, said the tribe opposes the petition. “I am confident the U.S. Supreme Court will not take the appeal,” he said. “I believe the Court of Appeals decision was well-reasoned.” The issue stems from the 1862 Sioux uprising, after which Congress terminated the trust status of the Sioux reservation. At the same time, Congress allowed the Loyal Mdewakanton to remain in Minnesota and later created the appropriations acts of 1888-90 to permit the secretary of the interior to buy land, cattle, horses and agriculture for the Loyal Mdewakanton. Over the years, the Mdewakanton and others formed the three federally recognized tribes involved in the case. The appellate court ruled that even if early appropriation acts could be interpreted as creating a trust for descendents, a 1980 act approved by Congress confirms the land belongs to the reservations operated by the Shakopee, Prairie Island and Lower Sioux. In addition to his 2007 ruling allowing the descendents to sue, U. S. Court of Federal Claims Judge Charles F. Lettow granted requests by the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux and Prairie Island communities to stay out of the lawsuit. He granted the two communities’ request to quash a summons that would have required them to be defendants in the lawsuit. Kaardal said the petitioners were granted an extension following the appellate court ruling to allow their 14 lawyers to collaborate on the appeal. They ended up filing two petitions because they couldn't come to an agreement, he said. The Oglala Lakota Sioux of the Pine Ridge reservation in South Dakota, who have descendants among them, have signed on to support the petitioners, Kaardal said. The attorney believes a recent Supreme Court ruling that denies Narragansett Indians special status for land in Charlestown, R.I. could play a role in this case. Kaardal claims that ruling is important because it shows tribal community governments like Shakopee do not have all the power associated with historical tribes. Hardacker said the Court of Appeals analyzed the recent Carcieri V. Salazar case and found it did not apply to the Wolfchild case. “I agree,” he said. www.plamerican.com/news/general-news/descendants-appeal-supreme-court-111 |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Dec 9, 2009 15:14:28 GMT -5
Personal photos land in AT&T ad campaign Sunday | Star Tribune ... plant, has been feted by Friends of the Minnesota Valley. Koda, a $60 million joint venture of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux and neighboring Rahr Malting, opened earlier this year and generates 24 megawatts at peak output in a far cleaner and more ... Comment? Personal photos land in AT&T ad campaign Minneapolis photographer Per Breiehagen inadvertently turned some personal shots in his native Norway into the AT&T holiday ad campaign. Breiehagen, who has covered assignments from the North Pole to Antarctica for National Geographic and the New York Times Magazine, was taking personal shots of his daughter, Ana, approaching a tame reindeer during a visit to Norway last year. AT&T's advertising agency discovered Per's ''homeland'' photo on his website, www.breiehagen.com. "It started out as sort of a personal project with my daughter," Breiehagen said last week. "I was born in Norway and we grew up with tales of the little 'nisse' [Santa-like figures]. And they have over the last 200 years been romanticized because of their red cheeks and red hats and they come out at Christmas time." It also meant a six-figure payday, the best ever for Breiehagen, who also has photographed Will Steger expeditions to Greenland, the North Pole and Antarctica. Green commendations Koda Energy, a clean-burning power-and-heating plant, has been feted by Friends of the Minnesota Valley. Koda, a $60 million joint venture of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux and neighboring Rahr Malting, opened earlier this year and generates 24 megawatts at peak output in a far cleaner and more efficient process than coal-fired plants. Rahr Malting uses the juice to power its malt plant, which supplies beer companies, and warms the plant with the waste heat instead of natural gas. Xcel Energy buys the surplus power. Koda Energy will consume 50,000 tons of barley malt waste supplied by Rahr over a year, and more than 100,000 tons of oat hulls from General Mills cereal plants and waste wood. Fifteen-employee Koda, which opened in May, plans to eventually burn harvested switch grass that will be planted for crop rotation and to buffer farm chemicals from lakes and rivers. "Koda Energy demonstrates the kind of conservation partnership, innovation, and leadership that characterizes the Leadership in Stewardship Award and the mission of Friends of the Minnesota Valley," said Lori Nelson, executive director of the 1,800-member organization. "We see benefits not only in the reduced carbon footprint ... but we are also confident that Koda Energy will provide landowners in the Minnesota Valley with an economically and environmentally beneficial production alternative to traditional row-crop agriculture. Ultimately, this can help improve the water quality of the Minnesota River." 'Hopenhagen' cameo Local ad agency Colle+McVoy has a cameo role in the United Nations' Climate Change Conference that begins Monday in Copenhagen, Denmark, among representatives of 180 nations who will spend a week trying to hammer out a global-climate treaty. Colle+McVoy is part of a global consortium of communication agencies who have created a Web campaign behind the global-warming talks in Copenhagen. C+M is overseeing the social media components of Hopenhagen.org, the website and related media campaign that also gives citizens, governments, nonprofits and businesses the tools to rally support for a "positive outcome" at the conference. The city of Copenhagen has adopted Hopenhagen, which is being used to transform the City Hall square as the global stage for this week's conference. "We participated in this large project on a pro bono basis," C+M's Jen Stack said. "It was a big investment and we're proud of it." Leno Garage auction Eden Prairie-based Stratasys plans to auction the Dimension SST 1200es 3D printer used in "Jay Leno's Garage" and donate the proceeds to a charity. The winning bidder (minimum bid is $10,000) will receive a Dimension 3D printing system and a NextEngine 3D scanner. Dimension 3D Printers create plastic models directly from computer-aided design programs. "The Dimension 3D printer has been a great help," said Leno's California garage manager Bernard Juchli. "We printed models of a heat exchanger for a White steam car and used them to make patterns for sand casting. On that one job, we saved about $5,000 in casting costs alone." Leno is a renowned motor head and environmentalist. The auction (at item #280429201810) will benefit Bailey's Café, an educational and cultural organization in Leno's old Brooklyn neighborhood. Stratasys makes fabrication machines for designing and manufacturing plastic parts. NEAL ST. ANTHONY Continued: Personal photos land in AT&T ad campaign Koda Energy demonstrates the kind of conservation partnership, innovation, and leadership that characterizes the Leadership in Stewardship Award and the mission of Friends of the Minnesota Valley," said Lori Nelson, executive director of the 1,800-member organization. "We see benefits not only in the reduced carbon footprint ... but we are also confident that Koda Energy will provide landowners in the Minnesota Valley with an economically and environmentally beneficial production alternative to traditional row-crop agriculture. Ultimately, this can help improve the water quality of the Minnesota River." 'Hopenhagen' cameo Local ad agency Colle+McVoy has a cameo role in the United Nations' Climate Change Conference that begins Monday in Copenhagen, Denmark, among representatives of 180 nations who will spend a week trying to hammer out a global-climate treaty. Colle+McVoy is part of a global consortium of communication agencies who have created a Web campaign behind the global-warming talks in Copenhagen. C+M is overseeing the social media components of Hopenhagen.org, the website and related media campaign that also gives citizens, governments, nonprofits and businesses the tools to rally support for a "positive outcome" at the conference. The city of Copenhagen has adopted Hopenhagen, which is being used to transform the City Hall square as the global stage for this week's conference. "We participated in this large project on a pro bono basis," C+M's Jen Stack said. "It was a big investment and we're proud of it." Leno Garage auction Eden Prairie-based Stratasys plans to auction the Dimension SST 1200es 3D printer used in "Jay Leno's Garage" and donate the proceeds to a charity. The winning bidder (minimum bid is $10,000) will receive a Dimension 3D printing system and a NextEngine 3D scanner. Dimension 3D Printers create plastic models directly from computer-aided design programs. "The Dimension 3D printer has been a great help," said Leno's California garage manager Bernard Juchli. "We printed models of a heat exchanger for a White steam car and used them to make patterns for sand casting. On that one job, we saved about $5,000 in casting costs alone." Leno is a renowned motor head and environmentalist. The auction (at item #280429201810) will benefit Bailey's Café, an educational and cultural organization in Leno's old Brooklyn neighborhood. Stratasys makes fabrication machines for designing and manufacturing plastic parts. NEAL ST. ANTHONY www.startribune.com/business/78553527.html?page=1&c=ywww.startribune.com/business/78553527.html?page=2&c=y |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Dec 9, 2009 15:21:44 GMT -5
Editorial: Act quickly on Indian trust fund settlement Wednesday, December 9, 2009 Filed Under: Cobell | Opinion "It's hard to overstate the importance in Indian Country of news that the federal government intends to pay $3.4 billion to settle claims from more than 120 years of mismanaged Indian trust money. If approved by Congress and OK'd by federal courts, the historically large and long-running lawsuit would result in payments to about 300,000 individual Native American Indians. The lead plaintiff, Elouise Cobell of the Blackfeet Reservation, filed the class-action case 13 years ago, saying the Indian people were owed tens of billions of dollars in royalty and lease payments paid on lands held in trust by the federal government. She has seen the case through thick and thin — as well as through several judges and contempt citations against successive secretaries of the Interior for bad faith in the case. Terms of the settlement reached Monday night by plaintiffs and the Obama administration include payment of $1,000 to each member of the class action and additional amounts based on the amount of land owned. That would take care of $1.4 billion. A portion of the remainder would go to the plaintiffs' lawyers in an amount to be set by a judge. The rest would go into a fund that would be used to buy out landowners whose stakes are so fractionalized through the generations that administering the trust payments would cost more than the payments are worth." Get the Story: 64.38.12.138/News/2009/017692.asp |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Dec 9, 2009 15:37:37 GMT -5
Indian trust checks aren't in mail yet, but they're in plans It's hard to overstate the importance in Indian Country of news that the federal government intends to pay $3.4 billion to settle claims from more than 120 years of mismanaged Indian trust money. If approved by Congress and OK'd by federal courts, the historically large and long-running lawsuit would result in payments to about 300,000 individual Native American Indians. The lead plaintiff, Elouise Cobell of the Blackfeet Reservation, filed the class-action case 13 years ago, saying the Indian people were owed tens of billions of dollars in royalty and lease payments paid on lands held in trust by the federal government. She has seen the case through thick and thin — as well as through several judges and contempt citations against successive secretaries of the Interior for bad faith in the case. Terms of the settlement reached Monday night by plaintiffs and the Obama administration include payment of $1,000 to each member of the class action and additional amounts based on the amount of land owned. That would take care of $1.4 billion. A portion of the remainder would go to the plaintiffs' lawyers in an amount to be set by a judge. The rest would go into a fund that would be used to buy out landowners whose stakes are so fractionalized through the generations that administering the trust payments would cost more than the payments are worth. Land acquired and consolidated in such a way then would be turned over to the tribes. An Interior deputy secretary gave the example of one 40-acre parcel that's worth $20,000 and has 439 listed owners. Individual payments from leasing the land total less than a dollar a year, and it costs the government $40,000 a year to administer those payments. In the typical way of out-of-court settlements, no one is thrilled by the agreement. "We are compelled to settle by the sobering realization that our class grows smaller each day as our elders die and are forever prevented from receiving just compensation," Cobell told the New York Times. And Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said: "The United States could have continued to litigate this case, at great expense to the taxpayers. It could have let all of these claims linger, and could even have let the problem of fractionated land continue to grow with each generation. But with this settlement, we are erasing these past liabilities and getting on track to eliminate them going forward." President Obama put a more positive spin on the settlement: "As a candidate, I heard from many in Indian Country that the Cobell suit remained a stain on the nation-to-nation relationship I value so much. I pledged my commitment to resolving this issue, and I am proud that my administration has taken this step today." There are many other stresses between the federal government and American Indians, but this one has been a dark cloud over the relationship for decades. We encourage Congress and the courts to move quickly to sign off on the settlement and put the issue to rest. www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20091209/OPINION01/912090304/ |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Dec 9, 2009 22:33:30 GMT -5
Just looking at ruleing on indian cases INDIAN RIGHTS INDIAN RIGHTS Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma et al. v. Leavitt and Leavitt v. Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma Docket Nos. 02-1472 and No. 03-853 Reversed: The Tenth Circuit in 02-1472 Affirmed: The Federal Circuit in 03-853 Argued: November 9, 2004 Decided: March 1, 2005 For Case Analysis: See ABA Preview 112 Is the government legally bound to pay "contract support costs," which are the reasonable costs an Indian tribe incurs (that a federal agency would not have incurred) in supplying services normally provided by the Department of Health and Human Services' Indian Health Service? Yes. In these cases, the government had refused to pay the full amount promised to the Tribes because Congress had not appropriated sufficient funds, but the Court decided that the government is legally bound to pay the "contract support costs" at issue. From the opinion by Justice Breyer (joined by Justices Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, and Ginsburg): The Government does not deny that it promised to pay the relevant contract support costs. Nor does it deny that it failed to pay. Its sole defense consists of the argument that it is legally bound by its promises if, and only if, Congress appropriated sufficient funds, and that, in this instance, Congress failed to do so… The Tribes point out that each year Congress appropriated far more than the amounts here at issue (between $1.277 billion and $1.419 billion) for the Indian Health Service "to carry out," inter alia, "the Indian Self-Determination Act." These appropriations Acts contained no relevant statutory restriction… f it is nonetheless to demonstrate that its promises were not legally binding, [the Government] must show something special about the promises here at issue. That is precisely what the Government here tries, but fails, to do.
Concurring in part: Justice Scalia
Taking no part: Chief Justice Rehnquist
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
INDIAN RIGHTS
City of Sherrill, New York v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York et al.
Docket No. 03-855
Reversed: The Second Circuit
Argued: January 11, 2005
Decided: March 29, 2005
For Case Analysis: See ABA Preview 198
Are lands recently re-acquired by the Oneidas within a treaty-acknowledged reservation subject to state and local property taxes?
Yes. The Court decided that the Oneida Tribe is precluded from unilaterally reviving its ancient sovereignty over the land at issue, which it purchased on the open-market from current titleholders. Therefore, regulatory authority over the property resides in the city of Sherrill, and the land is subject to local property taxes.
From the opinion by Justice Ginsburg (joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, and by Justices O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, and Breyer):
Today, we decline to project redress for the Tribe into the present and future, thereby disrupting the governance of central New York's counties and towns. Generations have passed during which non-Indians have owned and developed the area that once composed the Tribe's historic reservation. And at least since the middle years of the 19th century, most of the Oneidas have resided elsewhere. Given the longstanding, distinctly non-Indian character of the area and its inhabitants, the regulatory authority constantly exercised by New York State and its counties and towns, and the Oneidas' long delay in seeking judicial relief against parties other than the United States, we hold that the Tribe cannot unilaterally revive its ancient sovereignty, in whole or in part, over the parcels at issue. The Oneidas long ago relinquished the reins of government and cannot regain them through open-market purchases from current titleholders.
Concurring: Justice Souter
Dissenting: Justice Stevens
www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/summary/2004-2005/hi.html#indian |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Dec 9, 2009 22:41:15 GMT -5
United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe, No. 01-1067 United States v. Navajo Nation, No. 01-1375 Another legal doubleheader took place December 2, 2002, when the Court heard back-to-back arguments in two important Native American Indian rights cases that ask the Court to clarify the "trust relationship" between Native American tribes and the federal government. In one case, the United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe, No. 01-1067, the tribe seeks damages for the U.S. failure to protect and preserve Fort Apache. In the other, United States v. Navajo Nation, No. 01-1375, the Navajo Nation seeks damages for the government's mismanagement of a tribal mineral lease. To say that the federal government has a "trust" responsibility to Native American tribes means that it has a legal obligation to act in the tribes' best interests with respect to tribal funds and resources. While this relationship between the federal government and Native American tribes has been recognized in treaties and statutes, the precise remedy available in the event the government breaches this duty has been much less clear. Like virtually every Native American law case to reach the Supreme Court, the issues in United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe, No. 01-1067, are grounded in history. Fort Apache was built in 1870 to be a base from which the U.S. Cavalry could conduct its running battles with the Apache warrior Geronimo and other Apache bands. In 1960, Congress declared the fort "to be held by the United States in trust for the White Mountain Apache Tribe, subject to the right of the Secretary of the Interior to use any part of the land and improvements for administrative or school purposes for as long as they are needed for that purpose." Among other things, the tribe would now like to develop the fort's potential for tourism. In 1976, portions of the fort were named a national historic district; and in 1993, the tribe adopted a plan to rehabilitate the buildings that had been allowed to fall into disrepair while under the government's control. The United States said that while it was willing to transfer some of the buildings to the tribe, it was not willing to pay for any repairs. In 1999, the tribe sued the United States for the $14 million in damages caused by the government's failure to preserve and repair the fort. The government responds that it cannot be made to pay damages because the 1960 law that created its trust relationship with the tribe did not specifically say it could be subjected to such liability. Similarly, in United States v. Navajo Nation, No. 01-1375, the United States has argued that even if it did mismanage a tribal mineral lease, as the Navajo allege, it still cannot be made to pay damages because the laws that created its trust relationship with the tribe did not mention money damages. In 1964, the Navajo Nation entered into a fixed-price lease entitling the Peabody Coal Company to mine coal from Navajo land for twenty years at a royalty rate of 37.5 cents per ton. When the lease came up for renewal in 1984, federal studies concluded that a 20-percent royalty increase would be reasonable. However, after the secretary of the interior attended a secret ex parte meeting (that is, a meeting with only the coal company officials and no representatives from the Navajo Nation), he decided to delay issuing a final decision approving that 20-percent increase and later approved a much lower royalty rate. The tribe is seeking $600 million in damages for the secretary's alleged breach of trust in a suit that claims he suppressed "a well-supported decision raising Navajo coal royalties from extremely low rates, deceived the Navajo Nation and withheld from it key information, forced it to negotiate at a decided disadvantage, and ultimately approved a lease of Navajo coal for far less than every federal study had found reasonable, all in violation of applicable statutes, departmental regulations, and the core trust duties of loyalty, candor, and care." Together, the Apache and Navajo cases have enormous importance, both to the tribes who are seeking to hold the federal government to a high standard of care and to the United States, which fears it could face huge liabilities if forced to pay damages when it violates its trust responsibilities to Native American tribes. Resources for the Apache Case Read the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals' Opinion holding that the Apache Tribe can maintain a suit for damages in the Court of Federal Claims. Read the United States Brief arguing that the tribe should not be allowed to sue the United States on these grounds. Explore the White Mountain Apache Tribe's Official Web Site. Read the transcripts from the December 2, 2002, Oral Arguments in the Apache case. Read the Court's March 4 Decision rejecting the government's argument that no statute or regulation could fairly be read to authorize compensation for its breach of its legal obligation to maintain or restore the property it held in trust at Fort Apache. Resources for the Navajo Case Read the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Decision that a trust relationship exists with the Navajo Nation and that monetary damages are an available remedy for breach of this trust. Read the United States Brief arguing that the tribe should not be allowed to sue the United States on these grounds. Explore the Navajo Nation's Official Website. Read the transcripts from the December 2, 2002, Oral Arguments in the Navajo case. Read the Court's March 4 Decision accepting the government's argument that no statute or regulation could fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation for the government's alleged breach of trust in approving a lease of Navajo coal for far less money than every federal study had found reasonable. www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/school/native_us0203.html |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Dec 9, 2009 22:45:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by cwiley525 on Dec 11, 2009 20:16:18 GMT -5
U.S. Government waivers it,s right to response to the petition.
|
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Jan 3, 2010 1:26:46 GMT -5
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Help Lower Brule Tribe November 4, 2009 By the Associated Press Your rating: Select ratingCancel ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesomeCancel ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesome Average: 5 (1 vote) Email Print SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — The Lower Brule Sioux Tribe in South Dakota has been selected to receive a grant of $940,000 from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of Prior Lake, Minn. The money is for economic development and community infrastructure. According to a release, most of the grant will help fund a new convenience store near the tribal government offices and housing area. Lower Brule officials say they hope the store can open by the middle of next year. Also, Lakota Foods, owned and operated by the tribe, will get $100,000 for marketing and advertising. Lakota Foods markets popcorn and buffalo products from the 7,000-acre Lower Brule Farm. www.reznetnews.org/article/shakopee-mdewakanton-sioux-help-lower-brule-tribe-40860 |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Jan 3, 2010 1:36:20 GMT -5
Indian Tribes Buy Back Thousands of Acres December 28, 2009 By Timberly Ross of the Associated Press Your rating: Select ratingCancel ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesomeCancel ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesome Average: 5 (1 vote) Email Print OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Native American tribes tired of waiting for the U.S. government to honor centuries-old treaties are buying back land where their ancestors lived and putting it in federal trust. Native Americans say the purchases will help protect their culture and way of life by preserving burial grounds and areas where sacred rituals are held. They also provide land for farming, timber and other efforts to make the tribes self-sustaining. Tribes put more than 840,000 acres — or roughly the equivalent of the state of Rhode Island — into trust from 1998 to 2007, according to information The Associated Press obtained from the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs under the Freedom of Information Act. Those buying back land include the Winnebago, who have put more than 700 acres in eastern Nebraska in federal trust in the past five years, and the Pawnee, who have 1,600 acres of trust land in Oklahoma. Land held in federal trust is exempt from local and state laws and taxes, but subject to most federal laws. Buying Back Land Preseves Culture Three tribes have bought land around Bear Butte in South Dakota's Black Hills to keep it from developers eager to cater to the bikers who roar into Sturgis every year for a raucous road rally. About 17 tribes from the Dakotas, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana and Oklahoma still use the mountain for religious ceremonies. Emily White Hat, a member of South Dakota's Rosebud Sioux, said the struggle to protect the land is about "preservation of our culture, our way of life and our traditions." "All of it is connected," White Hat said. "With your land, you have that relationship to the culture." Other members of the Rosebud Sioux, such as president Rodney Bordeaux, believe the tribes shouldn't have to buy the land back because it was illegally taken. But they also recognize that without such purchases, the land won't be protected. 562 Recognized Tribes Hold 55 Million Acres in Trust No one knows how much land the federal government promised Native American tribes in treaties dating to the late 1700s, said Gary Garrison, a spokesman for the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs. The government changed the terms of the treaties over the centuries to make property available to settlers and give rights-of-way to railroads and telegraph companies. President Barack Obama's administration has proposed spending $2 billion to buy back and consolidate tribal land broken up in previous generations. The program would pay individual members for land interests divided among their relatives and return the land to tribal control. But it would not buy land from people outside the tribes. Today, 562 federally recognized tribes have more than 55 million acres held in trust, according to the bureau. Several states and local governments are fighting efforts to add to that number, saying the federal government doesn't have the authority to take land — and tax revenue — from states. In New York, for example, the state and two counties filed a federal lawsuit in 2008 to block the U.S. Department of Interior from putting about 13,000 acres into trust for the Oneida Tribe. In September, a judge threw out their claims. Local Governments Lose Revenue from Trust lands Putting land in trust creates a burden for local governments because they must still provide services such as sewer and water even though they can't collect taxes on the property, said Elaine Willman, a member of the Citizens Equal Rights Alliance and administrator for Hobart, a suburb of Green Bay, Wis. Hobart relies mostly on property taxes to pay for police, water and other services, but the village of about 5,900 lost about a third of its land to a trust set up for the state's Oneida Tribe, Willman said. So far, Hobart has been able to control spending and avoid cuts in services or raising taxes, Willman said. Village leaders hope taxes on a planned 603-acre commercial development will eventually help make up for the lost money. The nonprofit White Earth Land Recovery Project has bought back or been gifted hundreds of acres in northwestern Minnesota since it was created in the late 1980s. The White Earth tribe uses the land to harvest rice, farm and produce maple syrup. Members hope to become self-sustaining again. Winona LaDuke, who started the White Earth project, said buying property is expensive, but it's the quickest and easiest way for tribes to regain control of their land. Growing Populations Need More Services Tribal membership has been growing thanks to higher birth rates, longer life spans and more relaxed qualifications for membership, and that has created a greater need for land for housing, community services and economic development. "If the tribes were to pursue return of the land in the courts it would be years before any action could result in more tribal land ... and the people simply cannot wait," said Cris Stainbrook of the Indian Land Tenure Foundation based in Little Canada, Minn. Thirty to 40 tribes are making enough money from casinos to buy back land, but they also have to put money into social programs, education and health care for their members, said Robert J. Miller, a professor at the Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland, Ore., who specializes in tribal issues. "Tribes just have so many things on their plate," he said. Some tribes, such as the Pawnee, have benefited from gifts of land. Gaylord and Judy Mickelsen donated a storefront in Dannebrog, Neb., that had been in Judy Mickelsen's family for a century. The couple was retiring to Mesquite, Nev., in 2007, and Judy Mickelsen wanted to see the building preserved even though the town had seen better days. The tribe has since set up a shop selling members' artwork in the building on Main Street. "We were hoping the Pawnee could get a toehold here and get a new venture for the village of Dannebrog," Gaylord Mickelsen said. Timberly Ross is an Associated Press staff writer. www.reznetnews.org/article/indian-tribes-buy-back-thousands-acres-42140 |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Jan 3, 2010 1:57:54 GMT -5
Podcast: Details and Depth On The $3.4 Billion Cobell Native American Trust Lawsuit Settlement Posted on December 22, 2009 by Greg Guedel www.nativelegalupdate.com/The University of California Irvine radio station KUCI’s legal program The Docket has aired an extended segment on the settlement of the landmark Cobell lawsuit between 300,000+ Native Americans and the U.S. government. Host Evan Simon interviewed Foster Pepper PLLC’s Native American Group Chair Greg Guedel regarding the background of the case, the details of the settlement, his discussion with lead plaintiff Eloise Cobell, and what work remains to complete the settlement and lay the groundwork for improved relations between the federal government and Native Americans. The interview can be accessed HERE, or via the Foster Pepper podcast page on iTunes. www.foster.com/audio/20091217/20091217_GregGuedel.mp3 |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Jan 3, 2010 2:42:04 GMT -5
Grant to aid finishing Lower Brule center Story Discussion Journal staff | Posted: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 11:00 pm | (0) Comments Font Size: Default font size Larger font size A $60,000 grant from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community in Minnesota will help the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe to complete a youth recreation center. The grant will provide $15,000 for furnishings, $5,000 for computers and a security system, $10,000 for cultural supplies and $20,000 for construction of an outdoor basketball court. The center will be in the West Brule community on the Lower Brule Indian Reservation, which spans parts of Lyman and Stanley counties in western South Dakota. The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community over 12 years has donated more than $156 million to charitable organizations and Native American tribes, including more than $14 million this fiscal year. rapidcityjournal.com/news/local/article_7ded26b1-9bfd-5523-a627-85add65d8227.html |
|
|
|
Post by mdenney on Jan 3, 2010 2:49:35 GMT -5
Tribe embarks on casino project Story Discussion Posted: Tuesday, December 7, 2004 11:00 pm | (0) Comments Font Size: Default font size Larger font size WATERTOWN (AP) - Work has started on a $15 million project to expand gambling and add a hotel and indoor 1,500-seat concert hall at Dakota Sioux Casino north of Watertown. Construction of a 92-room, $7.9 million hotel is expected to be completed by next summer. Other components of the five-year construction plan include a bowling alley, water park and expanded RV parking. Sisseton-Wahpeton tribal officials say the projects are being financed with loans from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Tribe, which owns Mystic Lake Casino at Shakopee, Minn. rapidcityjournal.com/news/state-and-regional/article_9bab8b54-bd26-5d2e-b5e4-add1f09f8c79.html |
|
