And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 11:37:01 -0800 >From: Tom Schlosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: Morisset Schlosser Ayer & Jozwiak, 801 2nd Ave., Ste. 1115, Seattle, WA 98104, 206 386 5200, (206 386 7322 fax) >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) >To: Triballaw mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: USDOJ joins Oneida land claims suit--finally >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Comment: Nevada Indian Environmental Coalition > > January 13, 1999 > > U.S Government Joins Oneida Indians' Suit Against New York State > By JAMES DAO > > NEW YORK -- The federal government has joined the Oneida Indians in a >lawsuit that contends the state and local governments unlawfully >acquired 270,000 acres of land in central New York from the Indians >nearly 200 years ago, whittling down what had been a sprawling >reservation into a meager 32-acre plot. > > The New York Times Though the Oneidas' land claim has been wending >its way through federal courts since 1970, the victim of fruitless >settlement negotiations between the Indians and three different New York >governors, the intervention of the Justice Department has galvanized the >attention of state and local officials on the case. > > In particular, lawyers for the Justice Department and the Oneidas have >provoked widespread anxiety and anger among private landowners by >seeking to expand the suit to name not just the state, but also some >20,000 property owners in central New York as defendants. > > The Justice Department and the Oneidas adamantly maintain that they >have no interest in evicting people from their homes or forcing them to >pay rent to the tribe and say the suit really is intended to pressure >the state into reaching a settlement. But such assurances have not >stopped people from believing that their homes and farms are in danger, >that they will be unable to buy or sell property or that banks will stop >making loans. > > "This is very emotional issue and no amount of assurances are going to >completely allay people's anxieties," said State Sen. Raymond Meier, a >Republican from Oneida County. "The only way to do that is to bring this >to a rapid and complete conclusion." > > The expansion of the suit to include individual land owners -- which >would have to be approved by U.S. District Judge Neal McCurn in Syracuse >-- comes at a time of simmering tensions between the Oneidas and some >business owners, who contend the Oneidas' tax-free status is putting >them out of business. The Oneidas, who have become one of the region's >largest employers, run a casino and hotel as well as several stores, >restaurants and gas stations where customers do not pay sales tax. > > "Ten or twelve family-owned businesses are now gone because the Indian >businesses have an unfair advantage," said Assemblyman David Townsend, a >Republican from Oriskany. "And they flaunt it in people's faces by >advertising tax-free goods." > > But the Justice Department's involvement has now made the Federal >Goverment a target of the anger. "It's amazing that they basically sided >with a foreign nation against us.," said Lisa Jensen, a 31-year-old >landowner. "You hit yourself on the head and you ask where do my tax >dollars go? Against me?" > > The Oneidas contend that New York State violated the federal Trade and >Intercourse Act of 1790, which prohibited states from acquiring land >from Indians without federal approval. They argue that between 1795 and >1840, the state and local governments entered into 26 treaties and >several purchase agreements with the Oneidas to acquire all but 32 of >the 270,000 acres now in dispute. > > Almost none of those transactions were approved by Congress, lawyers >for the Justice Department and the Oneidas say, making the sales >invalid. > > In 1985, the Supreme Court upheld that argument in a "test case" filed >by the Oneidas that named Oneida and Madison counties as defendants and >claimed just 900 acres. At that point, the state opened negotiations >with the Oneidas and the litigation was put on hold for the next 13 >years, until the Oneidas and the Justice Department moved to expand the >case last month. > > The Justice Department's actions have prompted finger-pointing between >the administration of Gov. George Pataki and the Oneidas, with each side >blaming the other for stonewalling the talks. > > The governor's office contends that negotiations have stalled largely >because there are three groups of Oneidas who are parties to the lawsuit >-- one in New York, one in Wisconsin and one in Ontario, Canada -- and >that they have often feuded over strategy and goals. But aides to the >governor contend that even fractured talks with the Oneidas are >preferable to the new legal tack chosen by the Justice Department. > > "We think the federal government has turned its back on the people of >central New York," said Michael McKeon, a spokesman for Pataki. "We >think it would be much more productive if they played a helpful role in >negotiations rather than taking sides." > > But Raymond Halbritter, the elected leader of the Oneida Indian Nation >of New York, asserted that Pataki had been poorly served by his legal >advisers, who did not recognize the Oneidas' frustration with the >turtle-paced negotiations. > > "We regret that we have to litigate," said Halbritter, whose >grandmother, Mary Cornelius Winder, began advocating the land claim more >than 70 years ago. "These are our neighbors and friends; we would like a >future here. We know they are angry. But we think that most reasonable >people, once they know the history, know we didn't want to sue so many >property owners. But we really had no choice." > > In the past 25 years, the federal government has resolved at least 10 >such Indian land claims in Connecticut, Maine and other states, usually >by creating funds with state and federal money that allow tribes to >purchase land in proscribed areas from willing sellers, Justice >Department officials said. > > The lands acquired that way have then become part of their federally >recognized reservations, exempt from local sales and property taxes and >eligible for a variety of federal services. Officials said they knew of >no cases in which people who have purchased land in disputed areas have >been forced to give it back to the Indians. > > Officials in Oneida and Madison counties, which contain the 270,000 >acres, said there was no evidence yet that the suit had caused title >insurance companies to stop issuing policies or banks to withhold >mortgages. They also said there was no indication that property values >had been affected by the suit or that people were having trouble selling >land. > > But Ralph J. Eannace, the Oneida County executive, said he had heard of >numerous cases of property owners canceling contracts to expand or >improve their homes or commercial buildings. > > "There is no question that the uncertainty raised by the possession >claim is doing damage," Eannace said. "It has worried people, caused a >great deal of anxiety and had a chilling affect on our economy." > > Oneida officials have asserted that the land claim area has an assessed >value of more than $1 billion. But they have signaled a willingness to >accept less money than that in exchange for other concessions from the >state. For instance, Halbritter has floated the idea of creating a large >economic development zone, where the Oneidas could use an array of tax >incentives to attract large manufacturers to the region. > > Last year, Halbritter also suggested that the suit could be resolved if >the state allowed the Oneidas to open a casino at the Monticello >racetrack in Orange County. But Halbritter said the Pataki >administration demanded that 90 percent of the profits go to the state, >which the Oneidas rejected. > > State and Indian officials have also said privately that a land claims >settlement could be used to resolve several longstanding issues between >the Oneidas and the state. For instance, the Oneidas have sought state >approval to install slot machines and sell alcohol in their Turning >Stone casino in Verona. And the state has been seeking Oneida approval >for a system to collect sales taxes on gasoline and other products sold >on Oneida land to non-Indians. > > What is engendering some of the bitterness among property owners toward >the Oneidas now is the Indians' new affluence. When the suit was first >filed, the Oneidas had dwindled to a few hundred families, many of them >living in trailer homes on the nation's 32-acre plot. > > Today, the nation operates a successful casino, two hotels, a >convention center, a T-shirt printing plant, five gasoline stations and >eight restaurants. It employs 3,000 people. > > But several local officials praised the Indians for bringing jobs to >the economically struggling region. And they said the Oneida's latest >legal maneuver had at least forced public officials to focus on the >problem. > > "I was very unhappy with the suit the Oneidas filed," Representative >Sherwood Boehlert, a Republican from Utica, said. "But the silver lining >is that it has prompted everyone to pay attention." > > > ><<<< To remove your name from this list send a message to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" with the message "unsubscribe triballaw" >>>> > <<<<=-=-=FREE LEONARD PELTIER=-=-=>>>> If you think you are too small to make a difference; try sleeping in a closed room with a mosquito.... African Proverb <<<<=-=http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ =-=>>>> IF it says: "PASS THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW...." Please Check it before you send it at: http://urbanlegends.miningco.com/library/blhoax.htm
