![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oneida fee lands jurisdiction
goes local WASHINGTON A federal judge on Friday gave approval
for a local government in Wisconsin to assert jurisdiction over
fee lands owned by the Oneida Nation. In a 47-page decision, Judge William Griesbach acknowledged
that the Indian Reorganization Act put an end to allotment of the
tribe's 64,000-acre reservation. But he said the tribe must go through
the land-into-trust process before asserting properties it recently
acquired. "Congress established a procedure which would
permit the orderly return of reservation lands to protected status
by the Secretary of the Interior upon consideration of the interests
of all concerned," Griesbach wrote in describing the provisions
of the IRA that authorized the land-into-trust process. The decision relied in part on a U.S. Supreme Court
ruling from 2003 in which the Oneida Nation of New York was told
to follow the IRA process. The tribe is now waiting on action from
the Bureau of Indian Affairs to have about 13,000 acres in two counties
placed in trust. The Oneidas of Wisconsin have submitted land-into-trust
applications in the past but not for every parcel the tribe owns
in the Village of Hobart. Until all of the land is placed in trust
by the BIA, the village has jurisdiction, Griesbach ruled. The village "has condemnation, special assessment
and taxation authority over lands purchased in fee ... unless and
until the tribe's application to place such land in trust pursuant
to 25 U.S.C. § 465 is granted," the decision stated. Thanks to gaming revenues, the tribe has reacquired
about 6,800 acres in the village of Hobart. But only 1,034 acres
are actually in trust, according to the court decision. The tribe has paid more than $1 million in special
assessments on the parcel since 2001, according to the decision.
That hasn't stopped the village from trying to condemn the land
in order to develop the industrial park. Griesbach, however, said such a holding runs contrary
to the Supreme Court's decision in Sherrill v. Oneida Nation and
other jurisdictional disputes. "Unless a state or local government
is able to foreclose on Indian property for nonpayment of taxes,
the authority to tax such property is meaningless, and the [Supreme]
Courts analysis ... amounts to nothing more than an elaborate
academic parlor game," he said. "Since it hardly seems likely that the Court
was simply playing a game in those cases, I conclude, contrary to
the district court in the Oneida Indian Nation cases on remand from
Sherrill, that implicit in the Court's holding that Indian fee lands
are subject to ad valorem property taxes is the further holding
that such lands can be forcibly sold for nonpayment of such taxes,"
he added. The Hobart case is being closely watched by Indian law practitioners. The Native American Rights Fund and the National Congress of American Indians, through their joint Tribal Supreme Court Project, helped the Great Lakes Intertribal Council file a brief in the case.
|
Friday Oneida fee lands jurisdiction goes local Meskwakis approve alcohol at casino Bison slaughter program faulted in new GAO report Sterling, Colo., man sentenced in stolen artifacts, marijuana case |
|
| Home | Daily News | Archive | Subscribe | All contents property of the
Gallup Independent.
Any duplication or republication requires consent of the Gallup Independent. Please send the Gallup Independent feedback on this website and the paper in general. Send questions or comments to ga11p1nd@cnetco.com |