THE NATIVE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION OF ARIZONA (NABA-AZ)
WOULD LIKE TO INVITE YOU TO A HAPPY HOUR!
WHERE: Macayo’s — 300 South Ash Avenue, Tempe
WHEN: February 26, 2010
TIME: 5:30 p.m. — 8:30 p.m.
The winners of the 2010 NABA-AZ
Scholarships will be announced at the mixer!
Hope to see you there!!
Please RSVP to Jeanette Jackson at 602-229-5544, or jeanette.jackson@quarles.com
by February 24th
ILP Lunch Presentation
Miranda v. Nielsen
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Room 105
12:15 — 1:15
Lunch will be served!
One free CLE credit!
Assistant Federal Public Defenders Dan Kaplan and Keith Hilzendeger will discuss the Indian Civil Rights Act and the issue of “stacking” sentences. The recent case of Miranda v. Nielsen, 2010 WL 148218 (D. Ariz. 2010) held that Indian tribes do not have authority to sentence convicted criminals to consecutive sentences amounting to more than 1 year (the limit set by the Indian Civil Rights Act). Mr. Kaplan and Mr. Hilzendeger represented the tribal prisoner (Miranda) who was convicted on all counts of an eight count indictment in Pascua Yaqui Tribal Court. Some of her sentences were stacked consecutively, for a total term of 910 days. One free credit of CLE will be offered for this event. Please contact Ann Marie Downes at ann.m.downes@asu.edu or 480.727.0616 for additional information.
ILP Lunch Presentation
Discussion of Tribal Law & Order Act
Monday, February 15, 2010
Room 118
12:15 — 1:15
Lunch will be served!
One free CLE credit!
Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., introduced major bipartisan legislation in 2009 aimed at strengthening law enforcement and justice in Indian communities. LL.M. in Tribal Policy, Law and Government student Peter Whitney will offer participants some perspectives on the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed legislation.
Please contact Ann Marie Downes at ann.m.downes@asu.edu or 480.727.0616 for additional information.
Lawmaker: Restrict profit from tribal ceremonies
By JONATHAN J. COOPER and FELICIA FONSECA
The Associated PressTuesday, January 19, 2010
PHOENIX – An Arizona lawmaker introduced a bill Tuesday to regulate the use of traditional Native American practices after three people died last year in a northern Arizona sweat lodge ceremony.The measure from Sen. Albert Hale, D-St. Michaels, seeks to sanction the use of Native American ceremonies off tribal land for profit without permission.Self-help guru James Arthur Ray charged people more than $9,000 each to attend his five-day “Spiritual Warrior” retreat near Sedona that culminated in a sweat lodge ceremony on Oct. 8. Participants said they trusted that Ray, who touted training under a Native American shaman, knew what he was doing.Three people died and 18 others were hospitalized after becoming overwhelmed in the 415 square-foot sweat lodge that was covered with tarps and blankets. The deaths and illnesses sparked outrage among American Indians, who drew distinctions between what Ray did and what would be considered a traditional Native American sweat lodge.Hale, a member and former president of the Navajo tribe, said the bill is partly an effort to protect people from false advertising.”This process has been a perversion of our traditional ways,” he said. “The dominant society has taken all that we have: Our land, our water, our language, and now they’re trying to take our way of life.”The Yavapai County sheriff’s office has focused a homicide investigation on Ray, who has made millions of dollars by convincing people his words will lead them to spiritual and financial wealth. Ray has hired an investigative team to find out what happened, and his lawyer said the deaths were the result of a tragic accident, not criminal negligence.Hale’s proposed restrictions would not apply to ceremonies taking place on tribal land or with the authorization of a tribal government.It’s unclear exactly how the law would be enforced. The bill leaves those details up to the Arizona Department of Health Services and the Arizona Commission of Indian Affairs, but Hale said a violation would likely be a civil offense similar to a traffic ticket.
Carl Artman, an Indian law professor at Arizona State University, said the bill opens the door for protections similar to those for Native American arts and artifacts. Any regulations should be a balance between a tribe’s culture, spirituality and history, and an individual’s First Amendment rights, he said.”If passed, it will be how the regulations are written that we’ll see if it has staying power and benefits for the tribes,” he said. If nothing else, Artman said the bill would force a discussion on the issue.
Sweat lodges are commonly used by Native American tribes to cleanse the body and prepare for hunts, ceremonies and other events. They typically hold no more than a dozen people, compared with more than 50 people inside the one led by Ray. The ceremony involves stones heated up outside the lodge, brought inside and placed in a pit. The door is closed, and water is poured on the stones, producing heat aimed at releasing toxins in the body. In traditional ceremonies, the person who pours the water is said to have an innate sense about the conditions of others inside the sweat lodge, many times recognizing problems before they physically are presented.”We need to be respected,” Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley Jr. said. “Our ways cannot be abused.”
Request for Proposal (RFP) for Legal Assistance in the Area of Environmental Law for the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community.
The Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (“SRPMIC” or “Community”) is seeking proposals from attorneys licensed in Arizona. Applicants must have three or more years of substantive experience in environmental law, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Federal Insecticide Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and other federal environmental laws. Prior experience working for or with an American Indian Tribe is desired. Applicant will supervised by the SRPMIC Office of the General Counsel.
BACKGROUND
The Community is located in Maricopa County and is bounded by the cities of Scottsdale, Tempe, Mesa and Fountain Hills. The Community encompasses 52,600 acres, with 19,000 held as a natural preserve, and has 12,000 acres of active farmland. With two distinct backgrounds and cultures, the Community is comprised of two Native American tribes: the Pima, “Akimel O’Odham” (River People) and the Maricopa, “Xalychidom Piipaash” (People who live toward the water). Today, more than 9,000 individuals are enrolled tribal members.
The Community is constitutionally-organized under Section 16 of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934. Comprised of the President, Vice President and seven elected Council members, the Community Council governs the Community.
SCOPE OF WORK
The Community seeks legal assistance in the following areas: 1) the review and revision of existing amendments to the proposed SRPMIC Pesticide Ordinance; 2) legal advice regarding the Clean Air Act, including treatment as a State (TAS), Minor New Source review, permitting and development of a Tribal Implementation Plan, knowledge of Tribal Authority Rule is needed; and 3) legal advice regarding the Clean Water Act, including treatment as a State, review and submittal of surface and ground water quality standards, nonpoint source and groundwater issues, stormwater and permitting.
SUBMITTAL FORMAT AND CONTENT
All respondents are required to follow the format specified below. Applicants shall base their submittals on the “Scope of Work.”
I. Cover Page. The Proposal shall include the Request for Proposal Title, submittal due date, and name, address, fax number, and telephone number.
II. Resume: Qualifications and Experience. This section will contain a description of the Applicant’s educational background, training, and experience in environmental law and working with American Indian tribes.
Applicant (and/or Applicant’s Team). Applicant will provide a list of individuals that would be assigned to this project and what their roles and responsibilities would be. In addition to the Applicant’s professional qualifications, experience and any other information pertaining to their ability to perform the duties shall be provided.
Past Experience. Applicant will discuss a list of at least two (2) representative projects, which are similar in scope and nature to the services requested by the Community. For each past project discussed, the Applicant shall specify the services contracted for, the start and completion dates, and the name, address and telephone number of a contact person.
Arizona Bar Admission. The respondent must be in good standing and licensed to practice law in the State of Arizona.
III. Conflicts of Interest. The respondent must disclose any potential conflicts of interest which might arise if they were to accept an award of a contract with the Community.
IV. Certification. The respondent will provide a certification that the statements contained in their proposal are true and correct to the best of their knowledge.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Choice of Law. The contract regarding these services will be governed and construed in accordance with and pursuant to the laws of the SRPMIC.
Non-Binding. The Community retains the right to reject all submittals. Selection is also dependant on the negotiation of a mutually acceptable contract between the Applicant and the Community.
Consultant’s Responsibility. The consultant shall be responsible for obtaining a SPRMIC Business License and a SRPMIC Privilege Tax Permit prior to commencing work on the project and complying with the provisions of applicable SRPMIC ordinances and regulations.
Proprietary Information. Any restrictions on the use and ownership of the information contained within the Applicant’s response to this Request for Proposal must be clearly stated within the response. All other material contained in the proposal shall become property of the SRPMIC.
V. Contract Price. During FY 2010, the SRPMIC has only $36,000 available to fund the environmental services requested above. Work will end when available funds are exhausted. Additional funds may become available in FY 2011.
SUBMITTAL SCHEDULE & PROCESS
The evaluation of submittals will follow the following schedule. Dates shown are subject to change.
Distribution/Advertisement: January 4, 2010 — January 25, 2010
Submittal Deadline: January 25, 2010 at 4 p.m. 3 　 　
Five (5) originals of the submittal must be received no later than 4:00 p.m. on January 25, 2010 to:
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community
Office of the General Counsel
Attn: Michael Shiel, General Counsel
10,005 E. Osborn Road
Scottsdale, Arizona 85256
Copies received by FAX shall not be deemed delivered or received.
SUBMITTAL EVALUATION CRITERIA
Representatives of the Community will review the responses to this RFP which meet the outlined requirements and are received before the designated closing date and time.
Evaluation Factor Score
Conformance to the specified RFP format & Organization and Presentation of the Content
5
Education, experience, and technical competence in the following: 1) Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, FIFRA and other federal environmental laws; 2) the type of services being requested in this RFP; and 3) record of performance, including reference checks and the strength of the credentials.
65
Knowledge and understanding of federal Indian law.
20
Competitive salary range based on experience and credentials.
5
Indian Preference.
5
Total Score
100
Indian Preference. In accordance with the SRPMIC Procurement Policy and Section 7(b) of the Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 USC 250 (b)), SRPMIC shall give preference when awarding contracts in the following order:
A. Certified Community-owned businesses;
B. Certified Community Member-owned business or individual Community Members;
C. Other certified native American-owner businesses or individual Native Americans and
D. A firm or individual seeking certification as a Community Member-owned or Native American-owned business enterprise shall submit a completed application to the SRPMIC’s Purchasing Department.
Preference in the award of contracts shall be given to qualified Indian organizations and Indian-owned economic enterprises as defined in Section 3 of the Indian Financial Act of 1974 (25 USC 1452)
　
Carl Artman testified at an oversight hearing on Wednesday, December 9th.
Where’s the Trustee? Department of Interior Backlogs Prevent Tribes from Using their Lands View Webcast
WitnessesPanel 1MR. GEORGE SKIBINE Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC Accompanied by: MS. VICKI FORREST, Deputy Bureau Director for TrustServices, Ll.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC
Panel 2MR. CARL J. ARTMAN Esquire, Professor of Practice, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona
THE HONORABLE DEREK BAILEY Chairman, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Peshawbestown, Michigan
Robert Clinton Professor Robert Clinton was quoted in The New York Times and The Arizona Republic in articles about the historic multi-billion dollar settlement of a 13-year-old lawsuit filed over mismanagement of the American Indian trust funds.
The Dec. 9 article in The New York Times, by reporter Charlie Savage, called the lawsuit “one of the largest and most complicated class-action lawsuits ever brought against the United States.” It involved hundreds of thousands of land trust accounts that date to the 19th century.
The lawsuit would pay $1.4 billion to compensate Indians for claims of historical irregularities, and use $3 billion to buy back portions of land that have been fractionalized over several generations.
As Savage explained in his article, one 40-acre parcel today has 439 owners, most of whom receive less than $1 a year in income from it. The parcel is valued at about $20,000, but costs the government more than $40,000 a year to administer those trusts.
Savage quoted Clinton as saying that the settlement alone will not resolve the trust problem because many of the heirs who own tiny interests in parcels may not be willing to sell them.
Read The New York Times article here.
Feds, Indians reach $3.4 billion settlement in royalty suit
Dan Nowicki – Dec. 9, 2009 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic
More than 300,000 American Indians, including about 20,000 in Arizona, would settle their long-standing complaints about U.S. mismanagement of their trust accounts for $1.4 billion, under an agreement announced Tuesday by the Obama administration.
The settlement, which must be approved by Congress and a federal judge, would end a complicated and bitter class-action lawsuit that dates to President Bill Clinton’s administration.
The suit alleges that sloppy bookkeeping by the federal government has robbed the Indians of more than a century’s worth of revenue from mining, grazing, logging and other uses of their land.
Also, as part of the settlement, the federal government will introduce a $2 billion program to buy back and consolidate Indian land that had been “fractionated” into multiple individual owners over generations, making it difficult to develop.
The Interior Department would reform its accounting practices to ensure better quality control of individual Indian trust accounts and assets.
“Today is a monumental day for all of the people in Indian country who have waited so long for justice,” said Elouise Cobell, a Blackfeet Tribe member from Browning, Mont., and the lead plaintiff who filed the lawsuit in 1996.
A database released by the Interior Department’s Office of Special Trustee for American Indians shows 20,393 Native Americans who live in Arizona hold Individual Indian Money Accounts that would qualify them for compensation under the proposed settlement.
That number includes members of out-of-state tribes who reside here, as well as members of Arizona-based Indian communities living in the state.
Republican Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl of Arizona applauded the prospect of a settlement, which was announced by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Attorney General Eric Holder.
“The settlement not only resolves past issues but charts a way forward in a manner intended to prevent future disputes,” Kyl said.
As then-chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, McCain introduced legislation in 2005 in an unsuccessful attempt to resolve the dispute.
“The financial mismanagement of American Indian trust accounts has long plagued relations between the U.S. government and American Indians,” McCain said.
“I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs to determine the next steps for congressional action on this matter.”
Among the Arizona tribes with the highest number of affected members are the Gila River Indian Community, the Navajo Nation, the Tohono O’odham Nation, the White Mountain Apache Tribe, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community and the San Carlos Apache Tribe.
President Barack Obama called the development “an important step towards a sincere reconciliation
<http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/12/09/20091209cobell1209.html#> between the trust beneficiaries and the federal government” that will lead to better future management of Indian assets.
He urged Congress to take swift action to “correct this long-standing injustice” by endorsing the settlement.
The money for the settlement would come out of a litigation fund maintained by the Justice and Treasury departments and wouldn’t require a new congressional appropriation.
“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,” Obama said in a written statement. “I pledged my commitment to resolving this issue, and I am proud that my administration has taken this step today.”
The proposed $3.4 billion settlement represents a small percentage of what the Indians say they’ve lost since 1887. In the past, Cobell and her lawyers <http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/12/09/20091209cobell1209.html#> had claimed the Interior Department owed Indian landowners more than $100 billion.
For her part, Cobell said she personally would have preferred to “litigate for another 100 years.” But many of her fellow beneficiaries are elderly, and the majority live in poverty. They need their money and probably can’t wait for the court case to drag on for 20 more years, she said.
The conciliatory attitude of the Obama administration, which she characterized as a refreshing change from President George W. Bush’s Interior Department, also helped make the time right for a settlement.
“Did we get all the money that was due us? Probably not, but . . . there are too many individual Indian beneficiaries that are dying every single day without their money,” Cobell said. “At least this settlement will give those particular people a payment of that money that has been due them for a number of years.”
John Lewis, executive director of the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, called the settlement “a positive action, a good sign for this administration.” His non-profit group, overseen by Arizona tribal leaders, promotes Indian self-reliance.
The Interior Department says it oversees approximately 56 million acres of Indian trust land and $3.5 billion in trust funds and administers more than 100,000 leases. The Cobell class action charged that, for more than 100 years, the federal government did not accurately keep track of royalties <http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/12/09/20091209cobell1209.html#> owed to the Indians for farming, grazing, mining, logging and other activities.
Under the settlement’s $1.4 billion payout, the typical individual in the historical accounting class would get $1,000. The exact number of Indian beneficiaries is unclear. The Interior Department put the figure at more than 300,000, but it could be more than 500,000.
The settlement’s land-consolidation provision is an attempt to undo the consequences of the Dawes Act of 1887, which cut up tribal lands into pieces of 40 acres and 160 acres and allotted them to individual Indians.
Over the years, the properties were divided among their children, grandchildren and subsequent generations until the point where some parcels now have so many owners that productive development is all but impossible. The new program would allow the government to buy back pieces, if the owners wanted to sell, and assemble larger, more useful tracts that the Indian communities would control.
Robert Clinton, an Arizona State University professor who specializes in Indian law, was skeptical that the plan would eliminate the problems associated with the fractional allotments.
“Not immediately,” he said, “and not totally.”
Republic reporter Dennis Wagner contributed to this article.
On November 4th, Professor Patty Ferguson-Bohnee testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, at an oversight hearing on “Fixing the Federal Acknowledgment Process.” She did an outstanding job and everyone here at the Indian Legal Program and Indian Legal Clinic is extremely proud to have her as a colleague. Watch her testimony at http://www.law.asu.edu/?id=2102