[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 929, ``PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS
LAND INTO TRUST CONFIRMATION ACT OF
2023''; H.R. 2882, ``UDALL FOUNDATION.
REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2023''; AND
H.R. 3579, ``TRIBAL TRUST LAND.
HOMEOWNERSHIP ACT OF 2023''
=======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AND INSULAR AFFAIRS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
Wednesday, July 12, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-45
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
or
Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
53-920 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman
DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member
Doug Lamborn, CO Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
Tom McClintock, CA CNMI
Paul Gosar, AZ Jared Huffman, CA
Garret Graves, LA Ruben Gallego, AZ
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS Joe Neguse, CO
Doug LaMalfa, CA Mike Levin, CA
Daniel Webster, FL Katie Porter, CA
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM
Russ Fulcher, ID Melanie A. Stansbury, NM
Pete Stauber, MN Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
John R. Curtis, UT Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY
Tom Tiffany, WI Kevin Mullin, CA
Jerry Carl, AL Val T. Hoyle, OR
Matt Rosendale, MT Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Lauren Boebert, CO Seth Magaziner, RI
Cliff Bentz, OR Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Jen Kiggans, VA Ed Case, HI
Jim Moylan, GU Debbie Dingell, MI
Wesley P. Hunt, TX Susie Lee, NV
Mike Collins, GA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL
John Duarte, CA
Harriet M. Hageman, WY
Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director
Tom Connally, Chief Counsel
Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director
http://naturalresources.house.gov
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AND INSULAR AFFAIRS
HARRIET M. HAGEMAN, WY, Chair
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, PR, Vice Chair
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, NM, Ranking Member
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
Doug LaMalfa, CA CNMI
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR Ruben Gallego, AZ
Jerry Carl, AL Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Jim Moylan, GU Ed Case, HI
Bruce Westerman, AR, ex officio Raul M. Grijalva, AZ, ex officio
----------
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Hearing held on Wednesday, July 12, 2023......................... 1
Statement of Members:
Hageman, Hon. Harriet M., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Wyoming....................................... 2
Grijalva, Hon. Raul M., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Arizona........................................... 3
Johnson, Hon. Dusty, a Representative in Congress from the
State of South Dakota...................................... 8
Prepared statement of.................................... 9
Kilmer, Hon. Derek, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Washington........................................ 10
Ciscomani, Hon. Juan, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Arizona........................................... 31
Statement of Witnesses:
Thompson, Heather Dawn, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, DC............................................. 4
Prepared statement of.................................... 6
Questions submitted for the record....................... 7
Rose, Charles, Chair, Board of Trustees, Morris K. Udall and
Stewart L. Udall Foundation, Tucson, Arizona............... 11
Prepared statement of.................................... 12
Questions submitted for the record....................... 14
Vogel, Sharon, Executive Director, Cheyenne River Housing
Authority, Eagle Butte, South Dakota....................... 21
Prepared statement of.................................... 23
Questions submitted for the record....................... 25
Rideout, Hon. James, Tribal Council Member, Puyallup Tribe of
Indians, Tacoma, Washington................................ 28
Prepared statement of.................................... 29
Questions submitted for the record....................... 30
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 929, TO TAKE CERTAIN LAND IN THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON INTO TRUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUYALLUP TRIBE OF THE
PUYALLUP RESERVATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, ``PUYALLUP TRIBE OF
INDIANS LAND INTO TRUST CONFIRMATION ACT OF 2023''; H.R. 2882, TO
REAUTHORIZE THE MORRIS K. UDALL AND STEWART L. UDALL TRUST FUND, AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES, ``UDALL FOUNDATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2023'';
AND H.R. 3579, TO REQUIRE THE BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS TO PROCESS AND
COMPLETE ALL MORTGAGE PACKAGES ASSOCIATED WITH RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS
MORTGAGES ON INDIAN LAND BY CERTAIN DEADLINES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES,
``TRIBAL TRUST LAND HOMEOWNERSHIP ACT OF 2023''
----------
Wednesday, July 12, 2023
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs
Committee on Natural Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:25 p.m., in
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Harriet
Hageman [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Hageman, LaMalfa, Gonzalez-Colon,
Moylan; Leger Fernandez, and Grijalva.
Also present: Representatives Johnson, Ciscomani; and
Kilmer.
Ms. Hageman. The Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs
will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
The Subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on
three bills: H.R. 929, H.R. 2882, and H.R. 3579.
Under Committee Rule 4(f), any oral opening statements at
hearings are limited to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority
Member. I therefore ask unanimous consent that all other
Member's opening statements to be made part of the hearing
record if they are submitted in accordance with Committee Rule
3(o).
Without objection, so ordered.
I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Arizona,
Mr. Ciscomani; the gentleman from South Dakota, Mr. Johnson;
and the gentleman from Washington, Mr. Kilmer be allowed to sit
and participate in today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I will now recognize myself for an opening statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. HARRIET M. HAGEMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING
Ms. Hageman. Today, the Subcommittee is meeting to consider
three bills: H.R. 929, the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Land Into
Trust Confirmation Act, would place 17 acres of land in Pierce
County, Washington into trust for the Tribe. The land is
currently owned in fee simple, and the Tribe intends to use the
land for economic development purposes to benefit the Tribe and
local area. Their plans include developing a deepwater port in
the Port of Tacoma, a restaurant which would integrate
traditional tribal foods, and a sea plane terminal.
The land that would be placed into trust has evidence of
environmental contamination, as most industrially-developed
land in the Tacoma area has. Because of that likely
contamination, the Bureau of Indian Affairs would require a
full remediation of the land before taking it into trust
through their administrative fee to trust process. However, a
full remediation would be prohibitively expensive to the Tribe
and should not be necessary for the Tribe to move forward in
their plans for the acreage.
The bill also provides that the United States shall not be
liable for any environmental contamination that has occurred on
the land and prohibits gaming pursuant to the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act from occurring.
Second, we have H.R. 2882, the Udall Foundation
Reauthorization Act of 2023. This bill would reauthorize the
Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation and would
extend three authorizations of appropriations for the Udall
Foundation at their current levels, as subject to
appropriations through Fiscal Year 2028.
The Udall Foundation was first established in 1992 and was
most recently reauthorized in 2019. The Udall Foundation has
four major programs: the Education Trust Fund, the Native
Nations Institute for Leadership Management and Policy, the
Udall Center for Studies and Public Policy, and the John S.
McCain III National Center For Environmental Conflict
Resolution.
The Education Trust Fund provides funding for Native
American student internships, including the Native American
Congressional Internship Program, as well as fellowships for
Native American graduate students pursuing advanced degrees in
health care. The other Institute and Centers focus on research,
science policy connections, leadership resources, and conflict
resolution related to natural resource management, public
lands, and tribal governments.
Our final bill, H.R. 3579, the Tribal Trust Land
Homeownership Act of 2023, this bill would require the BIA to
process and complete all mortgage packages on Indian land in a
timely manner. This bill would only impact land held in trust
because additional approvals from the BIA are generally needed
when someone seeks a mortgage on trust lands. Unlike leasehold,
rights-of-way, and mortgages, there are currently no statutory
time frames for the review and approval of trust land
mortgages. This bill would put time frames in place and align
them with private industry standards.
Current industry practices process mortgage packages within
a month and it is important that the BIA moves to replicate
this. The BIA published their mortgage handbook outlining non-
binding timelines for each step in the mortgage process.
However, we have heard that these timelines are arbitrary and
often exceed the guidelines. H.R. 3579 will ensure there are
statutory time frames in place and that will help promote
opportunities for homeownership on trust lands and in tribal
communities.
I want to thank all of the witnesses for appearing before
the Committee and I look forward to a robust discussion on
these important topics.
The Chair now recognizes the Ranking Minority Member for
any statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. RAUL M. GRIJALVA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Mr. Grijalva. Thank very much, Madam Chair. I appreciate
the opportunity and the agenda before us in terms of this
hearing.
I want to thank the witnesses for joining us to testify
before the Subcommittee on three important bills impacting
Indian Country. It is only fitting that today's hearing takes
place in the Morris K. Udall Hearing Room while we discuss H.R.
2882, a bill that will reauthorize Morris K. and Stewart L.
Udall Foundation's Trust Fund through 2028 and introduced by
Representative Ciscomani.
Congress established the Udall Foundation in 1992 to honor
Morris K. Udall's impact on the nation's environment and his
support for rights and self-governance of tribal governments.
Moe Udall spent 30 years in the House, including several years
as Chair of this Committee. His legacy lives through the Udall
Foundation. I was proud to lead a nearly identical bill last
Congress that passed out of the House with bipartisan support.
I want to thank Mr. Charles Rose, the Foundation's Board of
Trustee's Chair for being here to testify on this legislation.
The Udall Foundation's Native American Congressional
Internship has provided over 300 Native American internships on
the Hill and across Government, including many in our
respective offices. The Foundation serves as a critical
resource for tribal governments, Federal agencies, and the next
generation of policy leaders. Greater engagement in public
service will only help our ability to serve our communities.
The Udall Foundation provides critical opportunities for
Indigenous youth to develop important skills to do just that.
Skills that they can take back to their communities or they can
use in Federal Government service at agencies like the Bureau
of Indian Affairs and across all Federal agencies in the
Federal Government.
Which brings me to the next bill on the agenda, H.R. 3579,
Representative Johnson's Tribal Trust Land Ownership Act. This
bill codifies deadlines for the BIA to process and complete all
mortgage packages associated with residential and business
mortgages on Indian land. Indian Country experiences serious
issues with housing availability and accessibility, so it is
critical that BIA works to make sure that they review and
process mortgages in a timely and expedited manner.
I will also note that we must also make sure that BIA has
the resources and capacity to get that goal done. I look
forward to hearing Ms. Vogel's testimony on this important
legislation.
The final bill on the agenda is Representative Kilmer's
H.R. 929, which will take land into trust from the Puyallup
Tribe in Washington. The Tribe seeks to restore 17 acres of
their homelands which were taken through misguided acts of
Congress. Restoration will allow the Tribe to grow economic
opportunities on restored lands, from shipping, to cultural
cuisine, to a sea plane terminal. I look forward to hearing
about the future the Tribe plans for these lands. And thank
you, Council Member Rideout, for being with us today.
From economic support in Indian Country to opportunities to
the next generation of tribal leaders, these bills continue to
demonstrate this Subcommittee's work to uplift tribal
communities across this nation.
With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Hageman. I will now introduce our witnesses for our
panel. Ms. Heather Dawn Thompson, Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior in
Washington, DC; Mr. Charles Rose, Chair of the Board of
Trustees, Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation,
Tucson, Arizona; the Honorable James Rideout, Tribal Council
Member, Puyallup Tribe of Indians, Tacoma, Washington; and Ms.
Sharon Vogel, Executive Director, Cheyenne River Housing
Authority, Eagle Butte, South Dakota.
Let me remind the witnesses that under Committee Rules,
they must limit their oral statements to 5 minutes, but their
entire statement will appear in the hearing record.
To begin your testimony, please press the talk button on
the microphone. We use timing lights here. When you begin, the
light will turn green. When you have 1 minute left, the light
will turn yellow. And at the end of 5 minutes, the light will
turn red, and I will ask you to please complete your statement.
I will allow all witnesses on the panel to testify before
Member questioning.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Heather Thompson for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF HEATHER DAWN THOMPSON, ACTING DEPUTY ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, INDIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Thompson. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Ranking Member,
and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for this
opportunity.
[Speaking Native language.] I am Heather Dawn Thompson and
I am a citizen of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. I am a South
Dakotan and a neighbor to Wyoming, and I am delighted to be
here with you here today.
I am pleased to testify on these important bills, which
together reflect our shared trust and treaty responsibility to
Indian tribes and Indian people. Regarding the Puyallup Tribe
of Indians Land Into Trust bill, the Department supports H.R.
929. Our trust responsibility is perhaps at its greatest when
it comes to protecting the ability of tribes and their citizens
to maintain their lifeways on lands the United States holds in
trust for their benefit.
Due to the significant legacy pollution, the Department
advised the Puyallup Tribe to pursue congressional action to
transfer these approximately 17 acres into trust as the
anticipated remediation plan to the lands would be cost-
prohibitive. This bill would prevent a long and costly
remediation process and ensure that the Puyallup Tribe was able
to continue to rebuild and develop their homelands. It also
stipulates that the Federal Government is not liable for any
environmental contamination that occurred on the lands prior.
Balancing our Federal fiscal responsibility regarding
liability or our tribal trust responsibility when we are
talking about land transfers can be quite challenging, so we
very much appreciate Congress' leadership on indemnification
and supporting the Puyallup Tribe.
Regarding the Tribal Trust Land Homeownership Act, the
Department supports the intent of H.R. 3579. The lack of access
to housing and to financial institutions is a long-standing
issue with which we all tackle, and it results in a whole host
of socioeconomic challenges. The Department welcomes this
opportunity to be a good partner in addressing and finding
solutions.
We share Congress' interest in ensuring that the mortgage
packages are reviewed and processed in a timely manner. The
processing deadlines in this bill are consistent with those
that exist in our handbooks and our policies. We also support
the funded ombudsman position, and we certainly welcome any
additional appropriations that Congress sees fit to ensure that
we have adequate mortgage staff, IT, and the resources to
digitize the records in order to provide the level of customer
service that we all seek in this situation.
Regarding access to the TAAMS database, we understand and
support the interest in accessing land records relevant to
mortgages and we share that. TAAMS, however, is a multi-purpose
database that contains much more than land database records. It
also includes PII, protected historical documents, private
financial information about our tribal members. Oh, hi, Dusty.
Hi, Congressman.
So, we would like to work together with Congressman Johnson
from my home state of South Dakota to provide some technical
assistance to tailor the language a little bit to make sure it
is targeting land records specifically, and make sure that the
partners that you have listed do, in fact, have access to those
land records as well as balancing the Department's privacy act
and trust obligations, and protecting our systems from external
cyber threats.
Regarding the Udall Foundation's Reauthorization Act, the
Department supports H.R. 2882. The Udall Foundation has been
instrumental in building expertise and capacity in Indian
Country. The Department welcomes Udall interns each summer, and
I am actually accompanied today by one of them, Elise
Blasingame, a citizen of the Osage Nation.
The Udall programs have also been instrumental in building
the Department's most senior leadership. Our Assistant
Secretary for Indian Affairs, Bryan Newland; our Principal
Deputy, Wizipan Little Elk Garriot; and the Secretary's own
Senior Advisor, Heidi Todacheene are all former Udall interns,
among many others at the Department. This bill would extend the
authorization of the Udall Foundation and the Department
supports that.
In conclusion, Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member, and
members of the Subcommittee, Congressman Johnson, thank you so
much for inviting the Department today to have this
conversation on these important bills.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Thompson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Heather Thompson, Office of the Assistant
Secretary--Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior
on H.R. 929, H.R. 3579, and H.R. 2882
Good morning, Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Fernandez and
members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to present
testimony regarding H.R. 929, the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Land into
Trust Confirmation Act of 2023, H.R. 3579, the Tribal Trust Land
Homeownership Act of 2023, and H.R. 2882, the Udall Foundation
Reauthorization Act of 2023.
H.R. 929, Puyallup Tribe of Indians Land into Trust Confirmation Act of
2023
H.R. 929 directs the transfer of approximately 17.264 acres of
Puyallup Tribe fee lands in Pierce County, Washington to be taken into
trust for the Tribe's benefit. The lands will be part of the Puyallup
Reservation and will not be eligible for class II or III gaming under
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Importantly, H.R. 929 stipulates that
the federal government is not liable for any environmental
contamination that occurred on the lands prior to the date that land is
taken into trust.
Environmental assessments conducted by the Puyallup Tribe
identified potential soil and ground water contamination from petroleum
products, fuels, and wood preservatives that may have been used at the
historical mill on the lands. The environmental assessment also
identified undocumented fill and potentially ``refuse fill'', and
potential arsenic and metals contamination in the soil possibly
associated with the Tacoma Smelter Plume. An additional environmental
assessment by the Puyallup Tribe identified gasoline and diesel-range
hydrocarbons, various metals, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
contamination in the fill materials, as well as diesel-range
hydrocarbons and naphthalene in the groundwater on the lands.
The Department has previously advised the Puyallup Tribe that
congressional action to transfer the Pierce County Tribal fee lands
into trust is a better option than the Department's fee-to-trust land
acquisition process due to legacy pollution identified in the
environmental assessments. The anticipated remediation plan on the
lands would be cost-prohibitive for the Puyallup Tribe.
H.R. 929 would prevent a long and costly remediation process and
ensure that the lands are restored to the Puyallup Tribe as they
continue to rebuild and develop their homelands. The Department
supports H.R. 929.
H.R. 3579, Tribal Trust Land Homeownership Act of 2023
H.R. 3579 would impose a series of statutory requirements on the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (Bureau) related to the processing and review
of mortgage packages. This legislation would codify current processing
deadlines for mortgages; require an annual report to be submitted to
Congress regarding the mortgages reviewed by the Bureau; establish a
Realty Ombudsman position reporting directly to the Secretary; and
provide access to the Bureau's Trust Asset and Accounting Management
System (TAAMS) for relevant agencies and Tribes.
We appreciate Congress' shared interest in ensuring that mortgage
packages are reviewed and processed in a timely manner. Notably, the
mortgage application review and processing deadlines in this
legislation are reflected in the Bureau's existing handbooks and
policy.
One specific concern the Department has with H.R. 3579 is that it
would mandate read-only access to TAAMS for the Department of
Agriculture, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and
Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as Tribes. The Bureau currently
provides limited TAAMS access to Tribes and relevant agencies after the
clearance of a background check. Access to TAAMS should be contingent
on IT security training and limited to avoid Privacy Act issues.
The Department supports the intent of H.R. 3579 and looks forward
to working with the Committee to provide technical assistance.
H.R. 2882, Udall Foundation Reauthorization Act of 2023
H.R. 2882 would extend the authorization for the Morris K. Udall
and Stewart L. Udall Foundation (Udall Foundation) to 2028. The Udall
Foundation is an independent executive branch agency created by
Congress to carry on the legacy of Morris and Stewart Udall's work on
the environment, public lands, and policies in support of the rights
and self-governance of Native Americans. The Department supports the
Udall Foundation and its mission. Since the Udall Foundation's
inception, the Department has had the privilege of hosting Udall
Foundation Interns and employs multiple Udall Foundation alumni. In
addition, by operation of law the Secretary of the Interior or their
designee is a member of the Udall Foundation Board of Trustees.
The Department supports H.R. 2882.
Conclusion
Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Fernandez, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department's
views on these important bills. I look forward to answering any
questions that you may have.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record to Heather Dawn Thompson, Acting
Deputy Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs
Ms. Thompson did not submit responses to the Committee by the
appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record.
Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman
Question 1. Regarding H.R. 2882, one of the four non-appointed
board members to the Udall Foundation includes, by statute, the
Secretary of Interior, or one of their designees. Currently, Assistant
Secretary Bryan Newland, the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs,
serves on the board.
1a) Please elaborate on the specific role that Mr. Newland has as a
board trustee.
1b) Please expand on what the Department's strategy is toward the
Udall Foundation noting the responsibility and jurisdiction you hold by
being on the board.
Question 2. Regarding H.R. 3579, the Department's testimony states
the Department supports the intent, but not H.R. 3579 itself.
2a) Can you go into detail on how the Department thinks that the
goals of this legislation can benefit tribes?
2b) What further accountability measures do you think would be
helpful to ensure that the BIA meets these mortgage approval timelines
that already exist?
Question 3. The Department's testimony states the Department has
concerns with H.R. 3579 related to privacy, because the legislation
mandates read-only access to the Bureau's Trust Asset and Accounting
Management system, or TAAMS. However, during the hearing, you mentioned
that you are not objecting to read-only access for TAAMS, just that
that the read-only access of non-Bureau entities should be more limited
to protect personal identifying information.
3a) What legislative language do you propose to meet this goal?
3b) Are there other aspects of TAAMS needs to be updated to ensure
privacy compliance and would assist in meeting private industry
standards of best practices for mortgage applications?
Questions Submitted by Representative Grijalva
Question 1. Does the Bureau of Indian Affairs have a process in
place to track legacy pollution and the parties responsible for that
pollution?
Question 2. What factors are considered when determining the costs
of remediation should be borne by a tribe, the federal government, or
other involved parties?
Questions Submitted by Representative Leger Fernandez
Question 1. Ms. Thompson, your testimony stated, ``the Department
has previously advised the Puyallup Tribe that congressional action to
transfer the Pierce County Tribal fee lands into trust is a better
option than the Department's fee-to-trust land acquisition process due
to legacy pollution identified in the environmental assessments.''
Can you expand how the BIA works with Tribes regarding fee-to-
trust-acquisitions when legacy pollution is identified? If the cause or
the party responsible for the legacy pollution is identified, are they
liable? And what role would BIA have with the responsible party once
they are identified?
Question 2. Would you please provide any changes to existing
statute that would have enabled the Department to more easily place
lands into trust for the tribe in this instance?
Question 3. Please provide legislative recommendations to improve
the Department's ability to place land into trust when legacy pollution
is present while maintaining safeguards to prevent a tribe or the
federal government from assuming an inappropriate level of
environmental liability.
______
Ms. Hageman. Thank you. I apologize for Mr. Johnson running
over the witnesses.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Johnson for 5 minutes for a
statement. Thank you for being here.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. DUSTY JOHNSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA
Mr. Johnson. Madam Chair, thank you, and I do apologize to
Ms. Thompson for distracting her with my boisterous hello as I
walked in. And it is an honor to have both she and Ms. Vogel
here. They have just been tireless advocates for Indian
Country.
I would start by talking about something that I think we
all have an emotional connection to, and that is the American
dream. I mean, the idea that people can make a better life for
themselves, it is really hard to do that if you don't have a
roof over your head and a stable living situation. It is really
hard to do. And particularly in this country where it can be so
hard to save.
One of the key ways for Americans to get ahead from an
equity perspective is to have home ownership. And, Ms. Vogel,
what she has done for a lot more years than a lot of has been
involved in anything has just been talking about how powerful
home ownership can be. And I know that in all of our districts
we hear about how housing is a problem, but gang, in Indian
Country, it is different. It is much worse. It is much more
dire.
And in Ms. Vogel's testimony she talks about how many
families are scratching, trying to get ahead, trying to make it
work in Indian Country, in South Dakota, might be living under
one roof. And about how even the most dedicated tribal housing
agencies, who are working and maintaining hundreds of homes,
are meeting a tiny fraction of the needs of their people. And
we have a Federal Government that is making it more difficult,
day in and day out, for dedicated professionals to help family
realize their dreams.
So, the bill that, Madam Chair, thank you, that is before
the members attempts to streamline some of this bureaucracy,
because right now out in the private sector, out of Indian
Country, you can get the types of records that you need to
finalize a mortgage, and you can get that in a matter of hours.
It is not hours when you are dealing with Indian Country. It
can be days and it can be weeks. I think Ms. Vogel has said
that the South Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition has
experienced delays anywhere from 30 to 365 days to get the kind
of documents that are needed to close these purchases.
This bill attempts to shave off some of the most jagged
edges of that bureaucratic delay, and I am just so grateful
that there have been dedicated people willing to provide
expertise, technical advice, and counsel to us. I am grateful
for Senator Thune for really running with this bill, and I am
honored to have the House companion. And with that, of course,
I would stand by for any questions or comments that my
colleagues would have for me, although the real experts are
sitting at the other end of the room.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Hon. Dusty Johnson, a Representative in
Congress from the State of South Dakota
Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Fernandez, and Members of the
Indian and Insular Affairs Subcommittee,
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before the subcommittee
today. I am here to speak on my bill, the Tribal Trust Land
Homeownership Act.
It is no secret there is a housing availability and affordability
crisis across the country. However, this is especially true in Indian
Country where poverty rates and lacking housing infrastructure have
presented unique challenges.
South Dakota, home to nine tribes, knows this all too well. As
Sharon Vogel noted in her testimony, on the Cheyenne River Reservation,
a three-bedroom house designed for a family of five or six is often
occupied by three or more families--sometimes as many as 15 individuals
sharing the house. This challenge is echoed through reservations across
South Dakota. The Standing Rock Housing Authority testified before
Congress in March, stating they manage 810 housing units throughout
their Reservation, but are only able to serve around 12 percent of
their population.
This is not acceptable. Congress should be working to address
housing insecurity on reservations and uphold our commitment to Indian
Country. That is why I joined my colleague Senator Thune to introduce
the Tribal Trust Land Homeownership Act.
Currently, mortgages involving property on tribal trust land must
be reviewed and approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) in order
for the mortgage to be finalized. This pertains to residential,
commercial, and right-of-way mortgages, to name a few. The BIA Mortgage
Handbook establishes timelines for BIA offices to process and approve
these mortgages. However, these timelines are not always adhered to,
causing significant delays, and leaving lenders in the dark.
Native people should not have reduced access to homeownership
opportunities if they live on tribal trust land. Off reservation,
county assessors' records allow title records to be seen within minutes
and for title policies issued by title companies that timeline is
usually within two to four weeks. The South Dakota Native Homeownership
Coalition has experienced delays anywhere from 30 to 365 days to
receive comparable documents from the BIA.
This is an important bill, and I want to thank my partners in this
effort. I want to thank my friend Senator John Thune for leading this
effort in the Senate. Further, Sharon Vogel is here today in her
capacity as the Chair of the Board of Directors of the South Dakota
Native Homeownership Coalition. She has been a tireless advocate for
the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation and for native homeownership
generally for decades. I am honored she is here to speak in support of
my bill.
Thank you again for holding this hearing. I look forward to working
with the committee on passing my bill to improve homeownership outcomes
for natives.
______
Ms. Hageman. Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Kilmer for 5 minutes for a
statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. DEREK KILMER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks for holding
this hearing and allowing me to join today to share my thoughts
on legislation I introduced, and thanks to the witnesses for
being here today.
Before we hear from the witnesses, I wanted to briefly
introduce Council Member James Rideout, a member of the
Puyallup Tribe of Indians and a staunch advocate for his
people. As a member of the Puyallup Tribal Council, thank you,
Council Member, for being here today. And he is joined by other
members of the Tribal Council.
I am here to discuss an issue that is close to my heart,
and actually quite crucial for thousands of folks in the
district I represent. My legislation, the Puyallup Tribe of
Indians Land Into Trust Act, intends to return over 17 acres of
land currently owned by the Puyallup Tribe back into trust,
restoring a portion of the Tribe's ancestral homeland. This
will further enable the Tribe to pursue significant economic
development and job creation opportunities at the Port of
Tacoma and along the Tacoma Waterfront.
I know members of this Committee are familiar with the
concept of land into trust. Essentially, this is when land is
transferred to the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs to be held in
trust for the benefit of the Tribe. The process is fundamental
in reinforcing the Tribe's sovereignty and allows them an
access to a range of Federal programs and services.
Now, why is this not being handled by the BIA?
Unfortunately, there were legacy contamination issues on that
site, so the BIA was unable to take this land into trust via
the standard process. The Bureau sent a letter to the Tribe in
2022 and said, you can take this land in trust, but it is going
to take congressional action, and that would be, in their
words, the most viable option.
That is the challenge that brings me here today, seeking
your support for this legislation. Restoring this land to the
Puyallup Tribe isn't merely a matter of righting historical
wrongs, it is about building a better future for our entire
region. Our actions here can help ensure that the Puyallup
Tribe is able to diversify and expand economic opportunities,
which in turn means more jobs, greater economic opportunity
throughout the Pacific Northwest.
And we know that we all stand to benefit when part of our
community thrives, and the passage of this legislation
underscores that belief. I am pleased to report that this
proposal has broad regional support. The city of Tacoma, Pierce
County, the Port of Tacoma have all backed this initiative, and
that unity across various levels of government demonstrates a
shared commitment to supporting the Tribe and the broader
community.
This is about fulfilling our Federal Government's trust in
treaty obligations. It is about championing the rights of
Indigenous communities and ensuring their voices are heard and
that their needs are met. To the Puyallup Tribe and to Council
Member Rideout, who we will hear from in just a bit, I just
want to reiterate, we are committed to working with you to
achieve those shared goals. And when we support each other,
especially those who have been historically marginalized, we
make our entire community stronger.
So, I am here today to just ask your support for the
Puyallup Tribe of Indians Land Into Trust Act. It represents a
strong step in the right direction for our community, it
emphasizes our shared commitment to honor and uphold the rights
and sovereignty of Indigenous communities. So, thank you, Madam
Chair, for your time and consideration. I look forward to
hopefully working with you to get this across the finish line.
I yield back.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you, Mr. Kilmer.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Charlie Rose for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF CHARLES ROSE, CHAIR, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, MORRIS K.
UDALL AND STEWART L. UDALL FOUNDATION, TUCSON, ARIZONA
Mr. Rose. Good afternoon. Thank you. I appreciate the
opportunity to testify, Chair Hageman, and greetings to the
Ranking Member and other members of the Subcommittee here. I
also want to extend our gratitude on behalf of the Foundation
to Representative Ciscomani for supporting H.R. 2882, and to
the original co-sponsor, Representative Stansbury.
As the Chair and Ranking Member indicated, the Udall
Foundation was established in 1992 by an Act of Congress, and
it was established as an independent executive branch agency to
honor Morris K. Udall's lasting impact on this nation's
environment, public lands, natural resources, and his support
of the rights and self-governance of Native Americans and
Alaska Natives. In 2009, Congress amended the legislation to
add his brother, Stewart L. Udall, to the name of the agency in
honor of his accomplishments in Indian Country and on behalf of
the nation's environment.
The Udall Foundation is governed by a 13-person board of
trustees. Nine are appointed by the President with the advice
and consent of the Senate, and then four of our trustees are in
place by operation of law, representative from the CQE, the
president of the University of Arizona, representative from the
Department of the Interior and also from the Department of
Education.
The Udall Foundation enabling legislation was most recently
amended in 2019, and I want to thank Ranking Member Grijalva
for his leadership and support of our reauthorization in 2019.
H.R. 2882 will further amend the enabling legislation to extend
our authority through Fiscal Year 2028. H.R. 2882 makes no
other changes to our law, only to extend the authorization
through Fiscal Year 2028.
An extension of the Udall Foundation's authority through
Fiscal Year 2028 will allow the agency to continue its
congressionally-mandated mission to promote public service
through research, education, and programs that foster
leadership, education, collaboration, and conflict resolution
in the areas of environment, public lands, Native Nations, and
natural resources. It will also allow us to support the
development and self-governance, and to strengthen our Native
Nations, and assist Federal agencies and others to resolve
environmental conflicts.
Just a few brief examples of our accomplishments over the
last several years. We have engaged in over 800 cases,
consultations, and trainings through the John S. McCain III
National Center for Environmental Conflict Resolution. We have
awarded almost $10 million in scholarships to over 1,800
undergraduate students. We have funded over 300 Native American
congressional interns who have served in 70 legislative and
executive branch agency offices, and there are a few that are
here today. We have funded 36 graduate fellows from 20 colleges
and universities, including Representative Stansbury, who was a
2009 Udall fellow.
We have also provided nation-building services to 65
percent of federally recognized tribes in this country and in
35 of the lower 48 states. We have also provided services to
over 9 percent of the tribes in Alaska, and we have supplied
over 460,000 pages of Indigenous governance database materials
for the Udall Senators' Native Nations Institute Program.
With that, I would like to thank the Subcommittee again for
inviting us to testify in support of this reauthorization of
H.R. 2882, and I am happy to answer any questions that the
Subcommittee may have. Thanks again, Madam Chair.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rose follows:]
Prepared Statement of Charles P. Rose Chair, Board of Trustees, Morris
K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation
on H.R. 2882
Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Fernandez, and Members of the
Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs, on behalf of the Board of
Trustees and the employees of the Udall Foundation, I want to extend
our gratitude to you and the staff of the Subcommittee for scheduling
this hearing on H.R. 2882 today. I also want to extend our gratitude to
Representative Ciscomani for sponsoring H.R. 2882 and to the original
co-sponsor Representative Stansbury.
Overview of the Enabling Legislation
The Morris K. Udall Foundation was established by the U.S. Congress
in 1992 as an independent executive branch agency to honor Morris K.
Udall's lasting impact on this Nation's environment, public lands, and
natural resources, and his support of the rights and self-governance of
Native Americans and Alaska Natives. In 2009, Congress enacted
legislation to also honor Stewart L. Udall for his half century of
distinguished national leadership in environmental and Native American
policy. The agency is known today as the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L.
Udall Foundation (Udall Foundation) and is headquartered in Tucson,
Arizona. The Udall Foundation's enabling legislation is codified at 20
U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 5601-5609.
The Udall Foundation is governed by a Board of Trustees comprised
of 13 members, nine of whom are appointed by the President with the
advice and consent of the Senate. The other four are designated by law
and include the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality, the
President of The University of Arizona, and the Secretaries of the
Department of the Interior and the Department of Education or their
designees.
H.R. 2882 amends Section 13 of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L.
Udall Foundation Act (20 U.S.C. Sec. 5609) to extend the authority of
the Udall Foundation through Fiscal Year 2028. H.R. 2882 makes no other
changes to the Act.
An extension of the Udall Foundation's authority through Fiscal
Year 2028 will allow the agency to continue its Congressionally
mandated mission to promote public service through research, education,
and programs that foster leadership, education, collaboration, and
conflict resolution in the areas of environment, public lands, Native
Nations, and natural resources to encourage the continued use and
appreciation of our Nation's rich resources; support the development of
self-governance to strengthen Native Nations; and assist Federal
agencies and others to resolve environmental conflicts.
Overview of the Udall Foundation's Programs
The Udall Foundation accomplishes its mission through the following
programs:
John S. McCain III National Center for Environmental
Conflict Resolution (National Center), which provides
impartial collaboration, consensus-building, training, and
conflict resolution services on a wide range of
environmental, natural and cultural resources, Tribal, and
public lands issues, conflicts, and disputes involving the
Federal Government. The National Center's range of services
includes consultations, assessments, process design,
convening, mediation, facilitation, stakeholder engagement,
Tribal consultation, and other related collaboration,
consensus-building, training, and conflict resolution
activities authorized by the Udall Foundation's enabling
legislation.
The National Center has been involved in over 800 cases,
consultations, and training programs since 1999. In a
typical year, the National Center assists about 30 other
Federal agencies in the resolution of environmental issues,
conflicts, and disputes. It has worked in all 50 states and
the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Guam.
Education Programs, including the Morris K. Udall and John
S. McCain III Native American Graduate Fellowship in Tribal
Policy (Native American Graduate Fellowship), which is
awarded annually to outstanding Native American and Alaska
Native graduate students who intend to pursue advanced
degrees in health care and Tribal public policy, including
law and medicine; the Native American Congressional
Internship (Internship), which is awarded annually to
deserving and qualified Native American and Alaska Native
undergraduate, graduate, and law students in order to
provide them with practical experience with the Federal
legislative process; the Stewart L. Udall Parks in
Focus' Program (Parks in Focus'),
which fosters greater understanding, appreciation,
stewardship, and enjoyment of the Nation's public lands and
natural resources by connecting youth to nature through
photography, positive outdoor experiences, and
environmental education; and the Udall Undergraduate
Scholarship (Scholarship), which is awarded annually to
outstanding students who intend to pursue careers related
to the environment, Tribal public policy, or Native health
care.
The Udall Foundation has awarded $9.975 million in Scholarships
to 1,843 undergraduate students since 1996. The recipients
have been from 374 colleges and universities in all 50
states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and 93
different Tribal Nations and Alaska Native villages. Since
1996, the Udall Foundation has provided funding to 306
Native American Congressional Interns from 134 Tribal
Nations and Alaska Native villages and 107 colleges and
universities, and they have served in 70 participating
Congressional and Executive Branch agency offices. The
Udall Foundation has also provided funding to 36 Graduate
Fellows representing 20 colleges and universities since
1997, including a total of six Morris K. Udall and John S.
McCain III Native American Graduate Fellowships in Tribal
Policy for the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 academic years.
Parks in Focus' has served 6,071 participants
and provided them with 10,732 hours of activities in 11
states and 45 National Parks, Monuments, Refuges,
Wilderness Areas, and Federal Public Lands.
Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy (Udall Center),
a unit of The University of Arizona under the Senior Vice
President for Research, Impact, and Innovation, which
supports policy-relevant interdisciplinary research,
science-policy dialogues, and other endeavors that link
scholarship and education with decision-making. Areas of
expertise include water resources, land management,
biodiversity, public health, and renewable energy, with a
focus on the Southwest and U.S.-Mexico border region. The
Udall Center has produced 431 publications, made 752 public
presentations on environmental policy research and new
conceptual approaches, and hosted over 75 science-policy
meetings since 1996.
Native Nations Institute for Leadership, Management, and
Policy (NNI), a program of the Udall Center, which is a
resource for self-determination, governance, and economic
development for Native Nations. NNI's programs of policy
analysis and research, education, digital resources, and
Tribal and direct services are grounded in its research
findings. The Udall Foundation and The University of
Arizona cofounded NNI in 2001, building on the research
programs of the then Harvard Project on American Indian
Economic Development and extending the legacies of Morris
K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall.
NNI has provided nation-building services to individuals and
groups representing 65% of Federally Recognized Tribes in
35 of the Lower 48 states and to 9% of Tribes in Alaska.
Over 900 Native leaders have participated in NNI's
Indigenous Governance programs since 2013, and since 2014
NNI's Indigenous Governance database has had over 184,000
visitors who have reviewed over 460,000 pages of material.
Udall Archives at The University of Arizona Libraries,
Special Collections, which provides primary research
materials and holds multiple collections relating to
political and legislative figures including the papers of
Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall. The collections
include professional and personal papers and
correspondence, legislative and administrative files,
media, and memorabilia. The Udall Archives play a leading
role honoring the dual legacies of Morris K. Udall and
Stewart L. Udall in partnership and ongoing collaboration
with the Udall Foundation and Udall Center.
I am attaching a Fact Sheet prepared by the Udall Foundation to
provide the Subcommittee and the public with more information on our
programs, services, and annual funding.
Conclusion
We thank the Subcommittee and the sponsors of H.R. 2882 for your
time and interest in the Udall Foundation, and your support of the work
Congress has directed us to undertake. We are available to provide
information or to respond to questions at any time. We look forward to
continuing to work with the Subcommittee and the Committee on Natural
Resources in the months and years ahead.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record to Charles P. Rose, Chair, Board of
Trustees, Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation
Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman
Question 1. In your testimony you stated that the John S. McCain
III National Center for Environmental Conflict Resolution works to
resolve disputes and conflicts among stakeholders and the Federal
Government.
Answer.
Background
Since its original Congressional authorization in 1998, the John S.
McCain III National Center for Environmental Conflict Resolution
(National Center; formerly the U.S. Institute for Environmental
Conflict Resolution) has provided nonpartisan collaboration, consensus-
building, training, and conflict resolution services to the Federal
Government on a wide range of environmental, natural and cultural
resources, Tribal, and public lands issues, conflicts, and disputes.
The Udall Foundation's enabling legislation defines collaboration as,
``to work in partnership with other entities for the purpose of--(A)
resolving disputes; (B) addressing issues that may cause or result in a
dispute; or (C) streamlining and enhancing Federal, State, or Tribal
environmental and natural resource decision-making processes or
procedures that may result in a dispute or conflict.''
Environmental, public lands, and natural resource-based conflicts
are likely to increase in the future as Federal decisions impacting
infrastructure, drought, wildfire response, energy development, water
resources, ocean and coastal management, recreation, transportation,
forest management, and other critical environmental and development
issues expand in number, complexity, and scale impacting a greater
number of Americans. Unresolved conflicts can be costly, lead to
Government inefficiencies, and result in unsustainable outcomes that do
not serve the interests of impacted stakeholders. These governance
challenges led the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to issue a Memorandum on
Environmental Conflict Resolution in 2005 directing Federal agencies to
expand collaborative problem solving and the use of environmental
conflict resolution. This memorandum was updated and reissued in 2012
to reinforce and expand on this guidance.
The National Center is a leader among Federal programs in the
delivery of environmental collaboration and conflict resolution (ECCR)
services. This includes work conducted specifically in response to the
directives established and updated by OMB and CEQ in 2005 and 2012 as
well as through its facilitation of the Federal Forum on Environmental
Collaboration and Conflict Resolution (ECCR Forum). As detailed below,
the National Center saves the Government time and resources, improves
outcomes, and strengthens relationships.
1a) What is the percentage rate of successful conflict resolution
by which litigation is avoided?
1b) How successful is the McCain Center in avoiding the costs
associated with litigation?
Answer. The National Center works on approximately 30 collaboration
and conflict resolution cases annually. Most of the National Center's
cases seek to enhance collaborative outcomes outside the threat of
litigation or to address potential conflicts and resolve issues
collaboratively prior to the threat of litigation.
Because litigation connected to the National Center's work is rare
and typically occurs outside of the collaborative process, and because
each case involves unique circumstances, there are insufficient data
points to conduct a meaningful direct cost comparison between
litigation and mediated or facilitated processes and outcomes on
specific National Center cases. Rather, the National Center tracks
metrics that indicate the success of ECCR processes relative to each of
its projects.
A critical measure that is compiled and reported annually in the
Udall Foundation's Performance and Accountability Report is an
evaluation of agency and stakeholder perceptions of whether the
National Center's services supported progress toward prevention or
resolution of the environmental issue, conflict, or dispute in
question. The National Center has exceeded its 85% performance target
in five of the last six fiscal years:
FY 100%
2022:
FY 100%
2021:
FY 100%
2020:
FY 78%
2019:
FY 95%
2018:
FY 100%
2017:
Although ECCR services provided by the National Center and others
achieve high settlement rates, ranging from between 66% to 93% of
measured cases as reported by the Federal Forum on Environmental
Collaboration and Conflict Resolution (Federal Forum) in 2018, we
recognize that these services are not successful in reaching agreement
in every instance. In many cases, the best hope is to make progress on
the issue(s), improve relationships, and push forward toward a future
resolution. For example, a study of land use cases highlighted by the
Federal Forum suggests that the use of ECCR can help parties make
progress even when it does not lead to a complete settlement of a
matter. In that study, 64% of survey participants, including those that
had participated in cases that did not reach full settlement, indicated
they were still able to make significant progress and improve
relationships through the collaborative process brought to bear by the
National Center.
1c) Please provide the total dollar amount the McCain Center has
saved the Federal Government in relation to conflict resolution.
Answer. Environmental conflicts cost the Federal Government
millions of dollars annually in project delays, litigation costs, and
staff time. In a 2011 report the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
found that the Department of Justice spent more than $43 million on
legal fees representing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
between 1998 and 2010, and the Department of Treasury paid $14.2
million to plaintiffs in environmental cases from 2006 to 2010.
In 2018 the Federal Forum, which is convened by CEQ with assistance
from the National Center, published Environmental Collaboration and
Conflict Resolution (ECCR): Enhancing Agency Efficiency and Making
Government Accountable to the People which highlighted the quantifiable
benefits of ECCR tools and techniques in Government processes. Using
input from a broad contingent of agencies working with the ECCR Forum,
the Federal Forum report articulated ECCR lessons learned and best
practices from more than 10 years of experience across the Federal
Government. The Federal Forum report highlighted the outcomes of
several independent studies evaluating government cost savings and
process efficiencies realized through the use of ECCR compared to
litigated or conventional decision-making processes, including:
The State of Florida, local governments, and private
parties saved an estimated $150,000 per enforcement dispute
when they used mediation instead of litigation.
In a study of 123 ECCR participants, 75% of waste
management negotiations saved time, compared with the most
likely conventional process for making decisions, and 81%
of these cases saved money.
As compared to litigation, EPA found that ECCR cases
required 45% less time to reach a decision, 30% fewer staff
members, and 79% fewer lead attorney hours than litigation.
In addition to substantial process benefits, the Federal Forum
report highlights economic and environmental outcomes produced from
robust and creative ECCR activities. For example, ECCR cases analyzed
by the Department of the Interior, EPA, and the State of Oregon,
``showed comparative improvement in improved natural resource
management practices, environmental results, and economic benefits.''
The Federal Forum report authors also found that ECCR services
often lead to broadly acceptable, better informed, and more sustainable
solutions along with improved relationships with stakeholders. Such
relationships between Federal agencies and stakeholders serve to
enhance decision making, build trust, and create additional
efficiencies on future endeavors. The Federal Forum report supported
these findings noting that, ``in one study, more than 700 participants
in collaborative land planning cases had 82% overall agreement that the
process improved existing relationships and created new ones.'' A
second cited study suggested that among Federal and State ECCR cases,
``the majority of respondents reported that their ability to work
together on the issues and levels of trust increased.''
The ECCR services provided by the National Center over its 25-year
history strongly align with the broad findings of the Federal Forum
report, including how ECCR services perform as compared to litigated
processes and unresolved disputes. Several National Center case studies
are cited in the report including a facilitated process between the
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, National Park Service (NPS), and U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with respect to the Everglades Restoration
Transition Plan and a transportation development project between USFWS
and the Ohio Department of Transportation that resulted in a broadly
beneficial outcome that both streamlined roadway development and
improved protections for endangered species.
Additional Information
We thank Representative LaMalfa for his questions during the
subcommittee hearing related to the outcomes of the Tulelake Municipal
Airport (Tulelake Airport) facilitated process, including the absence
of a settlement, lack of progress in improving stakeholder
relationships, and eventual decision by one stakeholder group to
litigate certain issues that occurred subsequent to the National
Center's involvement.
The Tulelake Airport facilitated process arose from an array of
stakeholder concerns related to aviation safety, environmental
protection, historic preservation, and local economic and community-
based interests. The Tulelake Airport, a critical resource for the
local community and the Modoc Nation, is also the site of the Tule Lake
Monument which marks the location of one of ten Japanese internment
camps that were in operation in the United States between 1942 and
1946.
The National Center convened and facilitated five meetings between
April 2016 and March 2017 among Federal agencies (Federal Aviation
Administration, USDA Forest Service, NPS, USFWS), California state,
county, and municipal agencies and governments, Tribal governments, and
stakeholders including agricultural interests, community groups, and
Japanese American groups interested in protecting and preserving the
legacy of the Monument. The participants agreed to work collaboratively
on these challenging and highly sensitive topics until it was clear
that consensus would not be achieved.
The National Center concluded its direct involvement in the
Tulelake Airport facilitated process after the March 2017 meeting.
Litigation was filed in response to the July 2018 sale of the airport
from the City of Tulelake to the Modoc Nation of Oklahoma.
We acknowledge that the National Center's efforts did not result in
a collective agreement in this instance and recognize the unresolved
needs of the impacted stakeholders and decision makers including those
with a critical role in helping convene and support these processes. We
would be happy to meet with Representative LaMalfa and his team to
further address any questions or concerns they may have.
Question 2. In your written testimony, you noted the impact the
Udall Foundation has on its native communities, particularly in the
youth population.
2a) Can you further expand on that impact and provide specific
examples of how the Udall Foundation has benefited Native American
youth?
Answer. As I noted in my oral testimony, the Udall Foundation has
had a profound impact on youth through its Stewart L. Udall Parks in
Focus' program, including on Native American youth.
Parks in Focus' connects K-12 youth to nature
and our Nation's public lands through photography and
outdoor learning. Photography inspires the Parks in
Focus' curriculum and serves as a relevant and
engaging tool for youth to observe, document, and learn
about the natural and cultural resources of the sites they
visit, hike, camp, and explore. Photography also provides a
powerful outlet for youth to express their creativity,
connect with each other, and to share stories about their
lives and their new outdoor experiences.
Several key partners of the Parks in Focus'
program, including Boys & Girls Clubs, Big Brothers Big
Sisters, and YMCAs, are organizations who serve Native
American youth either through primary programming or as a
component of their broader missions. While we do not
collect demographic information directly from our
participants and partner organizations, and recognizing
that demographics vary among each partner, I can say that
most Parks in Focus' participants are 10 to 14
years old, come from low-income households, and/or are
experiencing other hardships.
The impact of Parks in Focus' varies from
student to student but almost always includes new
experiences, such as visiting a national park, camping in
tents, or stargazing for the first time. For many, Parks in
Focus' inspires them to pursue and express their
creativity and a more active lifestyle. Ultimately, Parks
in Focus' experiences aim to spark new interests
in public lands, photography, and outdoor recreation, a
deeper connection and appreciation of nature, and enhanced
confidence through new skills and outlets to express their
creativity.
In addition to Parks in Focus', the Udall Foundation's
Scholarship, Internship, and Fellowship Programs have also provided
significant benefits to Native American undergraduate, graduate, and
law students.
Udall Undergraduate Scholarship. The Udall Foundation has
awarded $9.975 million in Scholarships to 1,843
undergraduate students since 1996. The recipients have been
from 374 colleges and universities in all 50 states, the
District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and 93 different
Tribal Nations and Alaska Native villages. The scholarship
provides up to $7,000 for eligible academic expenses as
well as the opportunity to attend a five-day networking and
skill-building experience alongside their Scholar class.
Native American Congressional Internship. Internships are
awarded annually to deserving and qualified Native American
and Alaska Native undergraduate, graduate, and law students
in order to provide them with practical experience with the
Federal legislative process. Since 1996, the Udall
Foundation has provided funding to 306 Native American
Congressional Interns from 134 Tribal Nations and Alaska
Native villages and 107 colleges and universities, and they
have served in 70 participating Congressional and Executive
Branch agency offices. The Native American Congressional
Internship is the only Federal program of its kind in
Washington D.C. The program provides housing, a living
allowance, transportation to and from Washington, D.C., and
an educational stipend. This support helps eliminate
important barriers that may prevent many students from
participating in internship programs in Washington, D.C.
Morris K. Udall and John S. McCain III Native American
Graduate Fellowship. Fellowships are awarded annually to
outstanding Native American and Alaska Native graduate
students who intend to pursue advanced degrees in health
care and Tribal public policy, including law and medicine.
Since the program's inception in 2021, a total of six
Morris K. Udall and John S. McCain III Native American
Graduate Fellowships in Tribal Policy have been awarded.
Finally, the Native Nations Institute for Leadership, Management,
and Policy, a program of the Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy
at The University of Arizona, also provides impactful programming
throughout the year for Indigenous youth. These include:
Native American Youth Entrepreneurship Program: This five-
day intensive workshop for Indigenous high school students
builds entrepreneurial skills and allows them to gain real-
world experience learning from Indigenous professionals.
Project Youth Act: This program for Native youth ages 13
to 18 helps advocate for social justice and addresses key
issues in Native communities by strengthening critical
analysis, decision making, and multimedia and communication
skills.
Future Native Nation Builders: This two-day seminar for
undergraduate degree-seeking students provides a forum to
learn how tribal governments work and how to become
involved in local Tribal governance.
2b) What further challenges and opportunities is the Foundation
looking to address in this area?
Answer. The Udall Foundation plans to expand its Parks in
Focus' programming to reach more Native youth and
communities in Arizona and beyond. Specifically, we intend to expand
the program's existing partnerships with Tribes and Native-youth
serving organizations as well as recruit volunteers, interns, and term
employees who are interested and able to develop and lead culturally
relevant programming with our Native-youth serving partners.
The Udall Foundation also remains committed to providing financial
and educational support to Indigenous undergraduate, graduate, and law
students through its Scholarship, Internship, and Fellowship programs.
One of the most significant challenges for these programs is there is
typically more interest and a greater number of qualified candidates
than the Udall Foundation can accommodate in a given year; to address
this, the Udall Foundation is working to maximize the interest earnings
generated on its Trust Fund in future years. We have also seen an
increasing number of requests from Member, Committee, and Federal
agency and congressional offices to host future Native American
Congressional Interns, and to expand the Internship program outside of
its traditional 10-week summer session. The Udall Foundation is in the
early stages of exploring opportunities to adapt the Internship program
to address these interests and needs.
Finally, the Udall Foundation's network of program alumni and its
reach continues to grow. Many former Scholars, Interns, Fellows, and
Parks in Focus' participants are now leaders across Indian
Country; it is vital that they remain connected to the Udall Foundation
to help improve its programs to better meet the needs of the next
generation of Native youth. The Udall Foundation is in the early stages
of piloting its authority to accept, hold, solicit, administer, and
utilize grants, gifts, and donations, and will look to Native program
alumni in those efforts.
Question 3. The Native Nations Institute for Leadership,
Management, and Policy in the Udall Foundation works to provide
economic development training to tribal members. Noting the enhanced
importance of economic development for tribes and Native Americans, can
you elaborate on the specific ways the Institute is providing tribal
members economic development training and support?
3a) Please provide the committee with specific examples of how this
training and support is evolving into tangible economic development in
the real world for tribes and Native Americans.
Answer. Since its establishment in 2001, in partnership with the
Udall Foundation, as a program of the Udall Center for Studies in
Public Policy at The University of Arizona, NNI has gathered and shared
information to equip tribal leaders, program directors, and business
professionals with the ideas they need to build more prosperous and
self-sufficient futures through local control.
NNI's impact can be understood through the many tribal officials
and business leaders who now know and understand the principles of
``Native nation building,'' the central importance of strengthening
core governance foundations for community and economic development.
Past participants in NNI programming now use this knowledge to make
decisions that build the capacity of their tribal governments,
businesses, citizens, and workforces.
Examples of NNI services specific to economic development include:
Policy analysis and research providing practical, usable
guidance to tribal and other policy makers on governance,
economic, and community development topics. NNI's work
identifies the conditions under which Native nations
successfully initiate and sustain economic, social, and
community development, catalog the methods and policies by
which Indigenous leaders can continue to improve their
tribes' capabilities for self-determination and self-
governance, provide practical policy analysis to arm
Indigenous decision makers with knowledge and tools for
nation building, and educate various publics about the
issues affecting Native nations. Notable outcomes of NNI's
policy analysis and research efforts include Creating
Private Sector Economies in Native America: Sustainable
Development through Entrepreneurship, Access to Capital and
Credit in Native Communities, and Rebuilding Native
Nations.
Assessment tools such the Governance Analysis for Native
Nations, which assists Indigenous nations with identifying
and assessing governance challenges, goals, planning, and
actions, and the Strategic Analysis for Native Nations and
Project Selection Filter, an analytical tool for use by
Native nations, Native-owned or -operated corporations and
companies, Native American entrepreneurs, and other Native
entities seeking to promote economic development in Native
communities.
Tribal and Direct Services program offering seminars
designed to equip tribal leaders and community members with
the nation building knowledge necessary to address
contemporary needs and lay the foundation for sustained
development. Seminars include Native Nation Building
Approach general seminars, Remaking Tribal Constitutions
designed to assist tribes in assessing their current
systems of governance and strengthening their
constitutions, and Emerging Leaders focused on
understanding the governmental scope, powers and
authorities of Native nations, strategies to strengthen
Native nations governance, the impact of key Federal Indian
laws, and the fiduciary responsibilities of leaders.
Facilitation of tribal priorities, including those focused
on economic sufficiency. NNI's direct services to Native
governments, organizations, and communities support
discussions on making tribal governments and organizations
more efficient and effective through critical functions
such as finance, executive management, and constitutions,
codes, policies, and procedures. NNI regularly facilitates
Native leaders in the drafting of action plans for their
implementation of priorities, monitoring and
accountability.
Rebuilding Native Nations online courses that offer a
self-paced professional development-focused curriculum
along with group learning activities for classroom and
community settings. Courses specific to economic and
business development include Tribal Enterprises and Citizen
Entrepreneurship.
Teaching courses via NNI's January in Tucson program,
which is offered in collaboration with The University of
Arizona's Indigenous Peoples Law and Policy program.
Courses can be taken for continuing education credit or
applied toward a graduate certificate or degree in
Indigenous governance; recent offerings have included
Native Economic Development, Creating Indigenous
Entrepreneurs, and Business Ethics and Indigenous Values.
Workshops for Native high school youth to introduce them
to entrepreneurship. Anecdotal reports from former students
and their parents indicate that the program was
instrumental in decisions to complete high school, pursue
business degrees, enhance their micro-businesses, and
undertake work for Native nations governments and
industries in various capacities.
Multimedia resources, such as policy briefs, scholarly
publications, interviews, and seminar videos, made
available at no cost through NNI's Indigenous Governance
Database and Constitutions Resource Center.
In addition, NNI has engaged in numerous direct educational
services to contribute to the economic development of Native nations,
such as with the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo (Texas), Osage Nation
(Oklahoma), and Yavapai Apache Nation (Arizona). We would be happy to
provide the committee with additional information related to NNI's
work.
Questions Submitted by Representative Grijalva
Question 1. Mr. Rose, in your written testimony, you state that the
John S. McCain III National Center for Environmental Conflict
Resolution, ``has been involved in over 800 cases, consultations, and
training programs since 1999. In a typical year, the National Center
assists about 30 other Federal agencies in the resolution of
environmental issues, conflicts, and disputes.'' You also stated at the
hearing you are retained for the services provided by the National
Center.
1a) Can you provide the committee with a full list of retainees?
Answer. The Udall Foundation's enabling legislation states that
Federal agencies, ``may use the Foundation and the National Center to
provide assessment, mediation, collaboration, or other related services
in connection with a dispute or conflict related to the environment,
public lands, or natural resources, or with a Federal, State, or tribal
process or procedure that may result in a dispute or conflict.'' In
addition, ``[n]on-Federal entities, including state and local
governments, Native American tribal governments, and nongovernmental
organizations and persons . . . may use the Foundation and the National
Center to provide assessment, mediation, or other related services in
connection with a dispute or conflict involving the Federal Government
related to the environment, public lands, or natural resources.''
The Udall Foundation has determined that the National Center should
be responsive to such requests to the greatest extent practicable. The
below list of agencies or organizations have retained the National
Center's services since 2011, when the Udall Foundation created its
current electronic project management system. The National Center has
worked with many of the listed retainees on more than one occasion.
Federal Agencies
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
BLM Alaska State Office
BLM Arizona State Office
BLM Colorado State Office
BLM Denver Federal Center
BLM Idaho State Office
BLM Oregon State Office
BLM Washington Office
Bonneville Power Administration
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau of Justice Assistance
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Bureau of Reclamation
Council on Environmental Quality
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Department of Health & Human Services
Department of the Interior
Department of the Interior Office of Hearing and Appeals
Department of Justice
Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Highway Administration--Maryland Division
Federal Highway Administration--Texas Division
Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council
Marine Mammal Commission
National Marine Fisheries Service
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Park Service
NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Office of Surface Mining
U.S. Air Force
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
U.S. Department of Justice
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Marine Corps
U.S. Navy
U.S. Army Environmental Command
U.S. Department of Transportation
USDA Forest Service
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Services
USDA Office of Ecosystem Services
Western Area Power Administration
State Agencies
Arizona Game and Fish Department
California Department of Toxics Substances Control
California Department of Transportation
California Department of Toxic Substances Control
Ohio Department of Transportation
State of New Mexico
Texas Department of Transportation
______
Ms. Hageman. Well, and thank you. We look forward to
further questioning and answers.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Sharon Vogel for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF SHARON VOGEL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CHEYENNE RIVER
HOUSING AUTHORITY, EAGLE BUTTE, SOUTH DAKOTA
Ms. Vogel. Madam Chair, Ranking Member Leger Fernandez, and
members of the Subcommittee, my name is Sharon Vogel. I am the
Executive Director of the Cheyenne River Housing Authority in
Eagle Butte, South Dakota. I am here today in my capacity as
the chair of the South Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition,
which is a membership organization with the mission to increase
homeownership opportunities for South Dakota's Native people.
We are a diverse group of public and private institutions,
including tribal, state, and Federal agencies, non-profit
organizations, lenders, and community development financial
institutions. We appreciate the opportunity to express our
strong support for H.R. 3579. I would like to thank
Representative Dusty Johnson and Senator John Thune, from my
home state of South Dakota, for their leadership. This bill and
the Senate companion bill, S-70, will streamline the Bureau of
Indian Affairs mortgage-related processes.
Native Americans living in tribal areas experience some of
the greatest housing needs in the country. This is why offering
opportunities to families who qualify for mortgage financing to
build or purchase their home is so important. At Cheyenne
River, we are able to leverage our Indian Housing Block Grant
funds by providing downpayment assistance to our families to
make homeownership more affordable for them. Overall, we
applaud H.R. 3579 for prioritizing the mortgage processes
within the BIA and setting a tone of accountability.
The following provisions have the potential to offer great
solutions:
(1) the bill establishes timelines for reviewing and
processing guidelines for leasehold mortgages, right-of-way
documents, land mortgages, title status reports, and mandates
on annual report to Congress about the volume of mortgage
package documents and whether the applicable time frames were
met. We appreciate the inclusion of this congressional
oversight.
(2) we strongly support the provision that requires BIA to
give tribes and Federal agencies read only access to Trust
Asset and Accounting Management System, or TAAMS, terminals.
(3) we are pleased to see the requirement for the first
certified TSR to be issued within 14 days. Off reservation
county assessor records allow one to see title records within
minutes, and title policies are issued by title companies for
underwriting purposes, usually within 2 to 4 weeks. Receiving
comparable documents from the BIA has varied widely by BIA
region from 30 days to 365 days or more. This is unacceptable.
(4) we strongly support the bill's mandate for a GAO study
about the needs and cost for the digitalization of mortgage-
related documents and urge Congress to appropriate the funds
necessary to implement the findings of the GAO study as quickly
as possible. We also encourage BIA to expand their practice of
allowing documents to be submitted electronically through a
secured portal, including for uploading and transmitting any
mortgage-related documents, residential leases, and TSR
requests.
(5) we strongly support the establishment of a realty
ombudsman to ensure compliance with time frames and to receive
inquiries from tribal citizens, tribes, lenders, and tribal and
Federal agencies. We would like to see the ombudsman have the
authority to utilize automatic waivers and assumed approval if
timelines for reviewing mortgage packages are not being met.
(6) due in part to the duty to serve regulations, the
Government Sponsored Enterprise, or GSEs, Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, are expanding their conventional loan offerings on
tribal trust land. In addition, in South Dakota last year,
nearly 85 percent of the mortgage loans on tribal land were
originated by Native CDFIs. Therefore, we recommend that H.R.
3579 explicitly include the GSEs and Native CDFIs as eligible
recipients of services offered to other lenders and Federal
agencies in the bill.
Finally, (7) we recommend that the legislation create a
mortgage advisory committee, which would include private
lenders, Native CDFIs, tribes, TBHEs, Federal agencies, and
GSEs to work with the BIA to identify additional innovative
solutions to streamline the mortgage processes in Indian
Country.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to testify. We
look forward to working with you to provide homeownership
opportunities for Native people wherever they may reside. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Vogel follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sharon Vogel, Board Chair, South Dakota Native
Homeownership Coalition
on H.R. 3579
Introduction
Madame Chair, Ranking Member Leger Fernandez, and members of the
Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs, my name is Sharon Vogel. I
am the executive director of the Cheyenne River Housing Authority in
Eagle Butte, SD on the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation. I am here
today in my capacity as the Chair of the Board of Directors of the
South Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition.
I am also the Chair of the United Native American Housing
Association (UNAHA), with 33 member tribally designated housing
entities (TDHEs) from the states of North and South Dakota, Nebraska,
Montana, Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado. In addition, I am serving my
first term on the Board of Directors of the National Low Income Housing
Coalition (NLIHC) and continue my service as a Board Member of the
National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC).
Started in 2013, the South Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition is
a membership organization with a mission to increase homeownership
opportunities for South Dakota's Native people to build strong and
healthy communities. We're a diverse group of public agencies and
private institutions. Our stakeholders include approximately 75
representatives of South Dakota's tribes, federal and state agencies,
TDHEs, nonprofit organizations, housing developers, residential
construction professionals, lenders, and community development
financial institutions (CDFIs).
We appreciate the opportunity to express our strong support for
H.R. 3579, the Tribal Trust Land Homeownership Act of 2023. Before I
begin, I would like to thank Representative Dusty Johnson and Senator
John Thune from my home state of South Dakota for their leadership on
H.R. 3579 and the Senate companion bill S. 70 to streamline the Bureau
of Indian Affairs' (BIA's) mortgage-related processes in order to
promote homeownership opportunities for Native people living on tribal
land. We are so appreciative that they both recognize that a strong
housing development strategy in Indian Country must include
homeownership as a component.
Background
Native Americans living in tribal areas and remote Alaskan villages
experience some of the greatest housing needs in the country, with high
poverty rates, low incomes, overcrowding, lack of plumbing and heat,
and unique development issues. Overcrowding of available housing
stresses both the occupants and the structures themselves. Homes on the
Cheyenne River Reservation require much more maintenance than the
average wear-and-tear to remain safe and livable. This is not for lack
of property management; it is because there are not enough homes to go
around.
A three-bedroom house is designed for a family of five or six, but
often because of overcrowding these units are occupied by three or more
families--sometimes as many as 15 individuals sharing the house. This
is why offering opportunities for families who qualify for mortgage
financing to build or purchase their own home is so important in Native
communities. At Cheyenne River, we are able to leverage our Indian
Housing Block Grant funds by providing downpayment assistance to our
families to make homeownership more affordable for them.
Feedback on H.R. 3579
Now, I'd like to talk more specifically about H.R. 3579. We commend
the emphasis this bill places on designing new BIA systems and
streamlining existing processes in a way that is compatible with
private mortgage industry practices. Native people should be able to
enter mortgage transactions just as any other citizen in this country.
Unfortunately, that is not always the case due to extreme and
unjustifiable delays and inconsistencies within the BIA's processes. As
our trustee, the BIA has a fiduciary duty to protect tribal land and
prevent it from leaving its trust status. However, this trust
responsibility should not impede tribal members' ability to utilize
their property rights to achieve their dreams of homeownership.
H.R. 3579 will go a long way to build on the momentum we are seeing
across Indian Country to increase the homeownership rates of Native
families. Overall, we applaud the legislation for prioritizing the
mortgage processes within the BIA and setting a tone of accountability.
The following provisions have the potential to offer some great
solutions:
Review and Processing Timeframes. The bill establishes timelines
for review and processing guidelines for leasehold mortgages, right-of-
way documents, land mortgages, and Title Status Reports (TSRs). It also
mandates an annual report to Congress about the volume of mortgage
package documents and whether the applicable timeframes were met. We
appreciate the inclusion of this congressional oversight and hope that
it is adequate to ensure compliance with these statutory requirements.
To date, the BIA's administrative Mortgage Handbook (52 IAM 4-H) issued
in 2019 sets out similar timeframes, which have not been adhered to in
many cases.
We recommend that the Congressional oversight committees monitor
compliance closely and consider more stringent enforcement mechanisms,
as appropriate.
TAAMs Terminals. We strongly support the provision that requires
BIA to give tribes and the federal agencies ``read only'' access to
Trust Asset and Accounting Management System (TAAMS) terminals. It is
critical for the BIA to take the steps necessary to provide access to
TAAMs terminals as expeditiously as possible to ensure that mortgage
processes are not unnecessarily stalled, including to tribes who have
adopted their own leasing processes under the Helping Expedite and
Advance Responsible Tribal Home Ownership Act of 2012 (HEARTH Act).
1st Certified Title Status Report. Another key element we are
pleased to see is the requirement for the 1st certified TSR to be
issued within 14 days. Off reservation, county assessors' records allow
one to see title records within minutes, and title policies are issued
by title companies for underwriting purposes usually within two to four
weeks. Receiving comparable documents from the BIA has varied widely by
BIA Region from 30 days to 365 days or more in many cases. Lenders
require certified Title Status Reports to document title for
underwriting purposes. These reports are submitted to loan underwriters
along with the loan application and traditional underwriting
information. Requiring a 14-day timeline for obtaining the 1st
certified TSR moves the process one step closer to the timing of the
industry experiences on fee simple land for home loan transactions.
Shift Toward Digitization. We strongly support the bill's mandate
for a GAO study about the need and cost for digitization of mortgage-
related documents. The BIA must modernize and enter today's world of
technology so that it can provide the appropriate level of service
necessary to support homeownership transactions for Native families. We
urge Congress to appropriate the funds necessary to implement the
findings of the GAO study as quickly as possible. We also encourage BIA
to expand their practice of allowing documents to be submitted
electronically through a secure portal, including for uploading and
transmitting any mortgage-related documents, residential leases, and
TSR requests.
Realty Ombudsman. Often, homebuyers on trust land feel like their
mortgage packages fall into a ``black hole'' somewhere within the
depths of the BIA. Therefore, we strongly support the establishment of
a Realty Ombudsman to ensure compliance with timeframes and to receive
inquiries from tribal citizens, tribes, lenders, and tribal and federal
agencies. It will be important, however, for this position to have the
authority to take action where appropriate. For example, we would like
to see the Ombudsman have the authority to utilize automatic waivers
and assumed approval if timelines for reviewing mortgage packages are
not being met.
Recommendations
The South Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition once again commends
Representative Johnson for introducing H.R. 3579, and we would like to
offer two additional suggestions.
1. Include Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) and Native CDFI
Lenders. Due in part to the Duty to Serve regulations, the
GSEs--Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--are expanding their
conventional loan offerings on tribal trust land.
Specifically, Fannie Mae offers its Native American
Conventional Lending Initiative, and Freddie Mac recently
announce its new HeritageOne mortgage program for Native
borrowers living in tribal areas. In addition, in South
Dakota last year, nearly 85% of the mortgage loans on
tribal land were originated by Native CDFIs. These local
lenders are certified by the U.S. Department of the
Treasury and are critical players in the mortgage lending
industry on tribal land.
Therefore, we recommend that H.R. 3579 explicitly include the
GSEs and Native CDFIs as eligible recipients of:
TSR reports in Section 3(c),
Read-only access to the Trust Asset and
Accounting Management System (TAAMS) in Section 3(d), and
services from the proposed ``Realty Ombudsman'' in
Section 4(b).
2. Create BIA Mortgage Advisory Committee. We recommend that the
legislation create a Mortgage Advisory Committee which
includes private lenders, Native CDFIs, tribes, TDHEs,
federal agencies, and the GSEs (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac)
to work with the Bureau of Indian Affairs to identify
additional innovative solutions to streamline the mortgage
processes in Indian Country. The Committee could also make
recommendations about potential improvements to bring BIA
systems into the 21st century with the technology needed to
support residential mortgage transactions.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to testify. We look
forward to continuing to work with our South Dakota delegation, this
Subcommittee, and all of Congress to improve homeownership
opportunities for Native people wherever they may reside.
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record to Sharon Vogel, Board Chair, South
Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition
Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman
Question 1. The Bureau of Indian Affairs published their Mortgage
Handbook on their website, detailing a step-by-step timeframe for
processing mortgages. However, tribal members have stated often that
these guidelines are not met.
1a) During which specific steps in the process have you seen the
longest wait times and, in your professional opinion, why are these
steps stalled?
Answer. We have seen delays occur during every step of the process
including residential lease approvals, mortgage encumbrance approvals,
and the issuance of initial and certified Title Status Reports (TSRs).
The BIA is not following the timelines published in the Mortgage
Handbook. BIA has never been transparent or accountable with these
review processes, and there are often unexplained gaps in timing. One
national lender partner shared that lease approvals can take anywhere
from three months to five years. One tribe requested a meeting with its
BIA Agency Office to see what the tribe could do to expedite the steps
in the process. They found 25 mortgage-related documents stalled on the
desk of the BIA Agency Superintendent.
Reasons for delays in these steps of the process include:
Most BIA offices do not accept electronic copies so there
are delays as packages are mailed within BIA offices from
the Agency Office to the Regional Office and back to the
Agency office and eventually back to the requester.
Most BIA offices have inadequate staffing levels and
capacity to support mortgage-related transactions.
BIA does not provide adequate training for staff involved
with mortgage-related transactions. They don't understand
the time sensitivity involved with mortgage-related
transactions. Borrowers could be impacted by rising
interest rates due to delays or may have to resubmit their
loan application materials if the loans take too long to
process.
Many leases are rejected by the BIA because the legal
descriptions are not accurate. Increased read-only access
to the TAAMS for tribes and lenders may help to mitigate
this problem.
1b) Where should the BIA focus their efforts to improve the
mortgage process and ensure mortgages are processed in a timelier
manner?
Answer. The BIA should focus their efforts on improving the entire
process, streamlining reviews between the Agency Offices, Regional
Offices, and Land Title Records Offices (LTROs). Generally, this
process should be electronic and should eliminate unnecessary stops in
the review process. For example, BIA should not require requests for
TSRs to be routed through Agency Offices. Similarly, LTROs should be
able to send TSRs directly to the requester instead of sending them
through the Agency Office. One lender received a certified TSR in July
2023 with a certification stamp dated March 2023. That means it took
four months for the requester to get the certified TSR because it had
to go through the Agency Office from the LTRO instead of directly to
the requester.
More specifically, the BIA should focus its efforts on improving
the issuance of certified TSRs. This delay has significant implications
for the lenders. To perfect a mortgage loan, the lender must receive a
certified TSR from the BIA. If the loan is not perfected within 12
months of closing, the secondary market investor requires the lender to
indemnify the loans. If the delay exceeds 36 months, the lender will
have to repurchase the loans. One of our lending partners is still
waiting for certified TSRs for 33 loan files closed back in 2022. This
delayed process definitely has a chilling effect on future lending
opportunities on tribal land.
Another area of focus should be on the front end of the lending
process when the homebuyer requests information from the BIA including
approved lease documents and initial TSRs. The BIA Mortgage Handbook
does not even cover this stage in the process which can be very
frustrating for tribal members who may have to wait years before they
can apply for a mortgage loan. If they were off reservation, they could
close their mortgage loan in days or weeks rather than years.
Question 2. During the 116th Congress, members of the Fort Belknap
Indian Community testified in front of the U.S. Senate Committee on
Indian Affairs that it took over a year to obtain a certified Title
State Report. Yet at the same hearing, the BIA stated that TSRs are
processed in a timely manner.
2a) In relation to TSRs, what is the average timeframe you have
seen recently?
Answer. The timeframe to receive both original TSRs at the
beginning of the loan process and subsequent certified TSRs after the
loan is closed and recorded is anywhere from six to 18 months and in
some cases up to two years. Part of the challenge is that there is no
consistency across the country. One Regional Offices may be faster than
others, but this changes frequently due to staff turnover.
2b) What solutions would you like the BIA to implement in order to
decrease the timeframe that TSRs are received?
Answer. We recommend that the BIA create a flow chart for each type
of document required for a specific BIA transaction. This flow chart
should be provided to any entity submitting a request. The flow chart
would include each desk required to receive the document, required
action (review, signatures), allowed time for each desk, and an
estimate of total time for approval for each type of document. Existing
Title Status Reports should be nearly immediate, while certified TSRs
and final recording might have more steps. The exercise of creating the
flow chart should require the BIA to determine if any of the approvals
can be delegated to local BIA staff.
We recommend that the BIA take the following additional actions:
Create a senior position within the BIA Central Office to
oversee all mortgage related transactions nationwide and
designate a mortgage specialist position in every region
with knowledge of the mortgage lending process.
Provide adequate training and capacity building for staff
at all levels. Tie staff performance reviews to adhering to
review deadlines with penalties for non-compliance.
Digitize the process so that mortgage related paper
documents are not sitting on someone's desk. Expand and
improve the use of electronic portals for submission of
documents.
Give tribes, tribally designated housing entities (TDHEs),
lenders, and government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) read-
alone access to the land records in TAAMs.
Explore collaborating with the National American Indian
Housing Council to provide HUD-funded training and
technical assistance on the local level to tribes and TDHEs
about the leasing and mortgage lending processes and
include BIA staff in the training.
Create an Ombudsman, as proposed by H.R. 3579, to provide
accountability and assist tribes, TDHES, tribal members,
lenders, and federal agencies to track down and expedite
mortgage related documents. Give the Ombudsman the
authority to issue ``assumed approval'' if deadlines aren't
met.
2c) How do you see H.R. 3579 helping to alleviate the problems?
Answer. H.R. 3579 establishes a level of accountability that the
BIA has not had during the 25-year history of mortgage lending on
Tribal Trust and Restricted Lands. As the title company for Indian
Country, the BIA has a responsibility to all Native Americans who
aspire for the American dream of homeownership to meet industry
standards for providing accurate title information. H.R. 3579 codifies
timeframes that the lending industry can rely on which creates an
environment of predictability and encourages the flow of mortgage
capital. Our best estimate for FY2022 is that there was less than one
mortgage loan per Federally Recognized Tribe from all Federal Agencies
and GSEs.
We also acknowledge that to accomplish this predictable environment
that some additional investments may be required in technology, human
resources, and training through adequate levels of congressional
appropriation.
Question 3. H.R. 3579 would create a specialized position at the
BIA to facilitate communication between the BIA, tribes, tribal
members, lenders, and federal agencies who operate tribal housing
programs.
3a) Can you further elaborate on the necessity of this proposed
position?
Answer. The proposed Ombudsman position would provide a dedicated
staff person within the BIA to assist lenders and borrowers to locate
missing and delayed mortgage packages. The Ombudsman would have the
authority to escalate the requests to provide a level of
accountability. There are supposed to be mortgage contacts in every BIA
region, but this structure has not been fully implemented due to
understaffing and suffers from high turnover and a lack of
understanding about the mortgage process. Having an Ombudsman would
provide lenders and borrowers with a central place to go to get help.
In addition, this position could also help to identify causes for
delays and propose solutions and consistency across every region.
3b) Could you provide examples of past situations in which this
position would have facilitated the mortgage process in a timelier
manner?
Answer. Mortgage packages are lost all the time within the BIA,
especially since they are most often paper submissions. In one case, a
mortgage package was sitting on the desk of an agency office staff
person from March until July, when the person finally opened their mail
from the area office.
Another example occurred when a tribal member wanted to take a
parcel of land out of trust to be able to transfer it to her grandson
who was not enrolled. The process went on for two years with no
results. Sadly, the tribal member passed away before the transfer
occurred and the land is now up in probate. Another tribal member
waited over two years for a BIA area office to approve a land transfer
to a family member. If these transactions were off reservation, they
could have happened in a few weeks.
An Ombudsman within the BIA certainly would have been able to help
in each of these situations.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to respond to follow-up
questions from the July 12 hearing. We look forward to continuing to
support your efforts to see this legislation through to enactment in
order to assist Native homebuyers with achieving their dream of
homeownership no matter where they live, including on tribal land.
______
Ms. Hageman. Thank you, Ms. Vogel.
The Chair now recognizes Council Member James Rideout for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JAMES RIDEOUT, TRIBAL COUNCIL MEMBER,
PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS, TACOMA, WASHINGTON
Mr. Rideout. [Speaking Native language.] Good afternoon. I
am Councilman James Rideout. I bring to you the greetings of
our Chairman, Bill Sterud, and our Vice Chairwoman, Sylvia
Miller, who could not be with us today. But I want to
acknowledge my fellow Council Members, Council Member Fred
Dillon and Council Member Annette Bryant who are here today.
I would like to thank Chairwoman Hageman and Ranking Member
Fernandez for the opportunity to present this testimony. I also
want to thank Chairman Westerman for visiting the Puyallup
Tribe last year, for seeing firsthand our territory and the
land that is the issue with this legislation. I would like to
thank Congressman Kilmer for the support of the Puyallup Tribe,
and H.R. 929 specifically. Finally, I would like to thank
Congressman Strickland for being an original co-sponsor of this
legislation.
The Puyallup Tribe is a signatory to the Treaty of Medicine
Creek. Under this treaty, the Tribe reserved a 20,000-acre
reservation, which was a permanent homeland for my tribe.
However, in ink barely dried, the treaty and the efforts
undertaken to take the Tribe's lands over the next 50 years
after the treaty, most of the lands within the reservation were
taken.
But in 1983, the Tribe's title to the bed of the Puyallup
River, including lands within the Port of Tacoma, was confirmed
by the Federal court. This decision gave to the rise of the
historic Puyallup Settlement Agreement, which was enacted by
Congress in the Settlement Act and restored to the Tribe nearly
1,000 acres of land, including lands within the Port of Tacoma.
And today, while the Puyallup Reservation consists of
approximately 28 square miles, 1,200 acres are now held in
trust. Our efforts to restore our homeland to the trust is
complicated by the fact that the city of Tacoma was the
location of major industrial activity. Thus, most of the
Tribe's territory is contaminated by legacy pollution, which
means while the land is now cleaned up to the Federal, tribal,
and state standards, some measures of contaminants can still be
detected.
When our land was taken from us, it was clean, and it
breaks our elders' hearts that the land had any contamination
on it. H.R. 929 will restore the Tribe's place along
Commencement Bay and will expand the Tribe's presence along the
Blair Waterway, which we have the support of the city of
Tacoma, Pierce County, and Port of Tacoma, and the state of
Washington.
Our plans for these lands are exciting. The property along
Blair Waterway will fulfill the promise of the Puyallup Land
Claims Settlement Act, which recognized the Tribe's right to
engage in foreign trade. This land is adjacent to our existing
Settlement Act trust land, which is designated as a Foreign
Trade Zone. By adding this land into the port, the Tribe will
be well-positioned to develop a 21st century shipping terminal
and become the first international travel trade center in
modern times.
The property along the Commencement Bay will be the first
Puyallup Tribe Trust land along the sacred waters in more than
100 years. On this property, we are planning for an Indigenous
food-inspired restaurant, which will introduce the food of my
people to the people from around the world. Celebrated chef Roy
Yamaguchi is a partner in this venture.
We will have an inaugural flight for our newly designated
sea plane terminal this summer, a first for Indian Country. We
are so excited about the opportunities, but it is the
restoration of the lands to the tribal trust status that means
the most to us. We have lost so much in our land; it is the
Tribal Council's goal to restore as much as we can in our
lifetime. By doing this, we are fulfilling the hopes and the
dreams of our ancestors. When we signed the treaty, that
reserved these lands and our permanent homelands.
Thank you, and I will be open for questions.
[The prepared statement of the Puyallup Tribe follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sylvia Miller, Vice-Chairwoman,
Puyallup Tribe of Indians
on H.R. 929
Good afternoon, my name is Sylvia Miller. I am the Vice-Chairwoman
of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians. I would like to thank Chairwoman
Hageman and Ranking Member Leger Fernandez for the opportunity to
present this testimony on H.R. 929. I would also like to thank
Congressman Kilmer and Congresswoman Strickland for their support of
this bill and the Tribe.
The Puyallup Tribe is a federally recognized Tribe located in
Pierce County, Washington along the shores of Commencement Bay, a large
inlet of the Puget Sound. The Tribe is a signatory to the Treaty of
Medicine Creek, Dec. 26, 1854, 10 Stat. 1132. Under this Treaty, the
Tribe reserved the lands for its Reservation, which was established by
two subsequent Executive Orders. Exec. Order Jan. 20, 1857; and Exec.
Order Sept. 6, 1873. Pursuant to the Treaty, the Puyallup Tribe secured
its approximately 20,000-acre Reservation as a permanent homeland for
our Tribe. However, the ink had barely dried on the Treaty and the
Executive Orders when concerted efforts were undertaken to take the
Tribe's lands. Over the next fifty years after the Treaty, most of the
land within our Reservation was taken as a result of spurious Acts of
Congress, illegal sales of reservation land, and outright theft. See
H.R. Rep. No. 101-57, at 3 (1989).
Despite these land takings, in 1983, the Tribe's title to the bed
of the Puyallup River and adjacent exposed lands, including lands
within the Port of Tacoma, was confirmed by the federal court. Puyallup
Tribe v. Port of Tacoma, 717 F.2d 1251 (9th Cir. 1983). This decision
gave rise to a historic Settlement Agreement between 12 parties
including the Tribe, the City of Tacoma, the Port of Tacoma, the State
of Washington, and the Federal Government, which was enacted by
Congress. Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, Pub. L.
101-41 (1989). The Settlement Act restored to the Tribe nearly 1,000
acres of land, including lands within the Port of Tacoma. Today, the
Puyallup Reservation consists of approximately 28 square miles in
Pierce County, Washington, and includes parts of six cities including
the cities of Tacoma, Fife, and Puyallup. Unfortunately, only 6% or
1,200 acres of the Tribe's Reservation land is held in federal trust by
the United States for the Tribe and its nearly 6,000 members.
Thus, the recent history of the Puyallup Tribe is largely a history
of a people struggling to overcome the adverse effects of losing most
of our lands. Having suffered for generations from the loss of lands
caused by the federal government, the Tribe's top priority is restoring
our homelands, in particular land that is along Commencement Bay and
the Blair Waterway.
Our efforts to restore our homeland to trust is complicated by the
City of Tacoma being the location of multiple kinds of industrial
activities, including timber mills and a copper smelter, that took
place throughout the 19th and 20th century. Thus, most of the Tribe's
territory is contaminated by legacy pollution, so while the land is now
cleaned up to Tribal, Federal and State standards, there remains some
measure of the contaminants that can still be detected. I would like to
include for the record of this hearing a letter on this issue from
Assistant Secretary Newland to Chairman Sterud. This remnant of legacy
pollution is one reason this legislation is needed as it will let us
begin to heal the wounds of the 19th century and have our land fully
protected by trust status.
H.R. 929 concerns approximately 17.2 acres of land that will
restore the Tribe's place along Commencement Bay and expand the Tribe's
presence along the Blair Waterway. The Tribe's acquisition of these
lands was historic. But restoring these lands to federally protected
trust status will be monumental. It will help correct some of the many
wrongs that the United States inflicted on the Puyallup Tribe. This
legislation is supported by the City of Tacoma, the Port of Tacoma,
Pierce County, and the State of Washington. The Tribe has built
relationships with these stakeholders. I would like to include these
letters in the record of this hearing.
Our plans for these lands are exciting. The property along the
Blair Waterway is a critical component of fulfilling the promise of the
Puyallup Land Settlement, which recognized the Tribe's right to engage
in foreign trade. These lands are adjacent to our existing Settlement
Act trust land which is designated a Foreign Trade Zone. By adding
these lands in the Port, the Tribe is well positioned to develop a 21st
century shipping terminal that will help address the backlog facing our
Nation's ports. Placing this land into trust will make this land the
first international tribal trade center in modern times. We want to
thank Chairman Westerman for visiting the site last summer. We look
forward to welcoming anyone else who wants to visit and hear about our
exciting economic development plans.
The property along Commencement Bay will be the first Puyallup
Trust land along these sacred waters in more than 100 years. On this
property we are planning a first of its kind Northwest Indigenous/
internationally inspired restaurant, which will introduce the food of
my people to people from around the world. Celebrated Chef Roy
Yamaguchi is our partner in this exciting venture. We are also proud to
be working with key stakeholders, including Kenmore Air, to bring a
seaplane terminal to our lands. This will be the first seaplane
terminal in the south Puget Sound. This terminal will further open the
beautiful Puget Sound to visitors from around the country and around
the world. We will take our inaugural flights from this terminal this
summer.
We are so excited about these opportunities, but it is the
restoration of these lands to Tribal trust status that means the most
to us. We lost so much of our land. It is the Tribal Council's primary
goal to restore as much as we can in our lifetime. By doing this, we
are fulfilling the hopes of our ancestors when they signed the Treaty
that reserved these lands as our permanent homelands.
I again want to thank the Committee for your tireless work on
behalf of the Puyallup Tribe and all of Indian Country. I am happy to
answer any questions that you might have.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record to James Rideout,
Councilmember, Puyallup Tribe of Indians
Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman
Question 1. In your written testimony, you noted that the H.R. 929
enjoys the support of the City of Tacoma, the Port of Tacoma, Pierce
County, and the State of Washington. Are you aware of any opposition to
the H.R. 929 legislation, and if so from who?
Answer. I am not aware of any opposition to the legislation and am
grateful by the amount of support from our neighboring jurisdictions
and each of the elected officials that have written on our behalf and
offered positive encouragement in our efforts.
Question 2. The legacy environmental contamination on the land of
the Puyallup Tribe is seeking to place into trust has complicated the
process and lengthened the timeline for these acres to be placed into
trust. Could you please elaborate further on the impact and challenges
your tribe has faced by seeking to put land that has legacy
environmental contamination into trust?
Answer. These are extremely important issues that get at the heart
of the matter and I appreciate your asking and willingness to address
each of these in part below.
2a) How has that affected the trust process for the tribe in
regards to timeline and finances?
Answer. Legacy contamination is an issue for a majority of our
properties. It is a normal part of our practice to clean the lands we
acquire back, but as you can imagine this does have a significant
impact on both our timelines and finances. Each of our property
acquisitions go through a lengthy and arduous process to determine all
risks associated with purchasing the property. Additionally, we have to
assess how much it will cost to clean the property to our standards,
which oftentimes exceed other governmental standards. It is during this
process that we decide whether to pursue placing the land into trust,
the major factor in this decision is if the property could pass the
environmental testing.
Due to our location, as an urban tribe in the heart of an
industrial boom, our homelands are riddled with legacy contamination
caused by other parties. Despite our best efforts to clean the
properties, this naturally limits our ability to buy back our land as
it is not only costly to acquire, but also to clean the property as
well. Timelines are also impacted as shown with the property in
question: the original fee-to-trust application was started in 2015.
After the legacy contamination issues were raised, the BIA staff sought
feedback from the Tribe, but ultimately informed us their hands were
tied as there was not a process in place to resolve this issue.
2b) What would you recommend Congress do to assist in remedying
these issues?
Answer. We humbly ask that you approve H.R. 929 and encourage
others to support it to remedy the immediate issue. However, that does
not fix the larger issues. As I have testified, the current federal
regulations do not allow for a process for the BIA to take land into
trust. This hinders our ability to acquire our homelands and adds a
burden that the bad actors/polluters do not have to meet. While we have
shown with our track record, we are proud stewards of the land and will
go to great lengths to clean the lands, we would recommend:
A process be adopted for the BIA to take the issues
defined above into consideration and approve for lands to
be brought into trust status.
Since each Tribe is unique, we recommend allowing
flexibility in the process for the BIA and Tribes to find a
pathway forward to allow for land to be taken into trust.
The process involve maintaining current environmental
reports detailing the cleanup efforts and the contaminants
on the site.
Thank you for your consideration in this sensitive matter.
______
Ms. Hageman. All right. The Chair now recognizes Mr.
Ciscomani for 5 minutes for his statement to discuss your bill.
Thank you so much for being here.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JUAN CISCOMANI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you so much, Madam Chair, and thank
you all for allowing me to speak real quick.
Congressman, good to see you, my fellow Congressman from
Arizona. We share a city, share a region in southern Arizona.
Good to see you, sir.
And also thank you to all the Subcommittee members for
allowing me to speak and participate today, and thank you to
the witnesses for taking the time to speak on each of these
bills as well.
I am here in support of my bill, H.R. 2882, the Udall
Foundation Reauthorization Act of 2023. This bill provides a
clean reauthorization to the Udall Foundation for the next 5
fiscal years. Since 1992, the Udall Foundation has continued
the lasting legacy in mission of former Representatives Moe and
Stewart Udall. Through their advocacy, they made a meaningful
impact in conserving our natural lands and empowering the next
generation of Native American leaders.
The Foundation, which is headquartered in my hometown of
Tucson, is doing incredible work. From their undergraduate
scholarships, which has awarded over $9 million, almost $10
million to over 1,800 scholars, to their congressional
internship and fellowship programs, they are helping to prepare
our next generation of success and leadership. And with the
John McCain III National Center for Environmental Conflict
Resolution, they help improve collaboration and resolve
environmental, public lands, and natural resource issues,
conflicts, and disputes.
These programs and resources are vital to our tribal and
Native communities. That is why I am proud to sponsor
legislation to continue the life-changing work of the Udall
Foundation. Our partners in the Senate have passed this
legislation unanimously, and I am committed to getting ours
across the finish line. I am proud of the bill's
bipartisanship, having introduced this bill with Representative
Stansbury, who herself is a Udall Foundation alumni.
Thank you so much for the time, Madam Chair, and I yield
back.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you. I want to thank the witnesses for
their testimony. The Chair will now recognize Members for 5
minutes for questioning, beginning with myself.
My first question is for Ms. Heather Dawn Thompson.
Beginning with H.R. 929, my understanding is that the BIA's fee
to trust acquisition process prohibits the agency from
acquiring land into trust that is environmentally contaminated
without first having full remediation. If Congress were not to
pass H.R. 929, what steps would the Tribe need to take to make
the land eligible to be taken into trust through BIA's
regulatory process?
Ms. Thompson. Thank you for the question, Madam Chair. If
you were not to pass, the Tribe would be required to mediate,
and thus far, the estimates go as high as $10 million. So, it
is quite cost prohibitive. We run into this situation very
frequently, as you can imagine, with tribes that do want to put
land into trust because of that regulatory requirement. And we
certainly welcome a TA request for a conversation for a path
forward beyond the Puyallup Tribe.
Ms. Hageman. Well, I sure like the idea of the economic
development that you have described, Mr. Rideout, and the
projects that you are proposing. The idea of another deep-water
port, and the other things, the restaurant all sound very
exciting. I think it is fantastic. I am a strong advocate for
additional economic opportunities for our tribal members and
appreciate this particular bill for doing that.
Again, Ms. Thompson, turning to H.R. 3579, your testimony
mentions that the BIA's mortgage handbook lays out clear
timelines for the mortgage review process and that this bill
would essentially codify the current timelines. Does BIA meet
all of those timelines for all mortgage applications at this
time?
Ms. Thompson. Madam Chair, we do not meet all of the
timelines at this time, but we have dramatically improved them.
And we certainly welcome the challenge to have it codified.
Ms. Hageman. Do you have any information you can share with
the Committee about how BIA has or hasn't met the handbook
timelines? What are some of the problems?
Ms. Thompson. There are probably four general challenges
that we meet, Madam Chairwoman. The first one is staffing,
which is an appropriation not an authorization issue. But we
estimate that we need approximately 80 FTEs in order to provide
the customer service that we would really like to. We are also
trying to improve our technology, and we are doing that without
the appropriations, but we are doing it nonetheless and
providing some portals.
Then there is one that is rather systemic which is
challenging, which you are probably aware of in Wyoming, which
is the fractionization of land.
Ms. Hageman. Yes.
Ms. Thompson. So, unfortunately, it is just not as
efficient as in the private sector. And then, finally, probably
the last one is that sometimes we get from lenders the lease
and the mortgage at the same time, and it just takes a moment
to do the lease first and then get caught up with the mortgage.
Ms. Hageman. Well, we definitely encourage the agency to be
able to process these in a timely manner. I think that Ms.
Vogel made some very good points in her testimony, and we want
to encourage the homeownership that provides certainty,
stability, and all of those things. So, thank you for your
efforts in that regard.
Mr. Rose, in December 2012, the DOI's office of the
Inspector General found that the Foundation was not meeting
certain Federal requirements in relation to monitoring and
assessing spending and creating safeguards against fraud and
mistakes. A follow up on it completed by the Governmental
Accountability Office found various deficiencies across the
Foundation's accountability procedures. How did the Foundation
respond to these findings?
Mr. Rose. The Foundation I think responded in two respects:
(1) the Foundation engaged in a concerted effort to overhaul
its internal procedures and policies in order to respond to the
GAO findings; and (2) the Foundation embraced the audits that
were performed by the Department of the Interior Inspector
General, and we implemented the findings and corrected some of
the recommendations that the IG from Interior made along the
way. And, in fact, in the last reauthorization, 2019, there was
an audit requirement, and the IG from Interior came out and,
during a 1\1/2\- to 2-year period, issued a report with no
material weaknesses and no major findings.
There were 11 recommendations, primarily process
documentation, which we responded to, and the Interior IG
determined that we satisfactorily resolved and implemented the
recommendations.
Ms. Hageman. We appreciate the efforts of the Foundation to
meet the audit concerns and to address those and hope that you
can continue to stay in compliance as you need to.
With that, I am out of time. I had some other questions for
Ms. Vogel, but perhaps some of the other Members will allow me
to do that, but if not, I know they have some good questions,
too.
With that, I yield back, and I am going to call on Ms.
Leger Fernandez for her questioning.
Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you so very much. And my
apologies for not being here at the beginning of the hearing,
but I actually had a markup in another committee and had to be
there to vote. But I rushed right over because this is an
exciting panel because what it is doing is looking at what do
we need in Indian Country to make sure that we provide economic
opportunity, that we grow the middle class in Indian Country,
which is needed more than perhaps elsewhere because we have
been underserved, under-sourced for too long, so you range from
homeownership, which is key if you are going to sort of build
wealth and stability, as noted.
So, thank you very much for coming and sharing the
experience that you have had with homeownership and things that
can be done to make it better, to make it faster, we should not
be slowing those down. It is too important. Interest rates can
go up or down in the meantime.
You did point out that it would be very useful to have
read-only TAAMS access for the CDFIs and for some of the other
organizations. The Federal agencies are already covered, but it
would be nice to have that.
And I would ask you Ms. Thompson, whether you have any
objection to that, because I can see the focus of it, where are
the places that, if this is already done, it can be easily
accessed to those outside of the Federal agency?
Ms. Thompson. Thank you so much for the question. We would
like to offer language to narrow it to the land records. No
objection to accessing the land records. The challenge is that
TAAMS itself is just much bigger, it has a lot of private
information. But we welcome the opportunity to provide access
to the land records and narrow that language with the
Committee.
Ms. Leger Fernandez. OK, that would be great, and perhaps
we can work on that so that we can expedite the mortgages in
the future.
I also wanted to ask a bit about the Udall Foundation. And
it is great, right. We have all received the benefits. If you
live in New Mexico, if you live in Arizona, if you work in
Indian Country, you know what the benefits are. And part of the
issue is that Native Americans have many barriers to interning
in DC. I want to work on maybe creating more opportunities in
addition to the Udall Foundation.
But can you tell us why some of those barriers will limit
the ability of students to intern here? And then that limits
kind of what we might call the pipeline so that we could see
our Native Americans working in all of our offices, leading and
running for Congress, and doing everything that they might want
to do in the future, creating the opportunity. Mr. Rose, can
you speak to that?
Mr. Rose. Sure. Thank you very much for the question. I
think there are three points we would like to make in response
that. One, is overcoming a barrier through exposure, and even
before interns and scholars are eligible for Udall programs,
finding ways to expose them to Washington. Our Parks and Focus
Program I think is a good way that we work with youth in the
area to expose them to our national parks and through
curriculum and the like. But I think exposure is one.
Second, is that we try to remove barriers at the Foundation
through supporting financially the 10 weeks that they are here
so it doesn't cost them anything. And then supporting their
transition and experiences in Washington through a full-time
aide from the foundation. So, more of those support programs.
And then third, is working with our partners in the Federal
Government, from Interior, to CEQ, to Education, and the like,
to really expose the interns and scholars that are here to the
benefit of the programs that they have experienced and the
opportunities that present to them.
Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you.
And, Council Member Rideout, thank you for bringing to our
attention the great interesting economic development
opportunities. We all are going to want to go see them. But I
think this issue of saying you are willing to take on the
liability of the properties because you see what the potentials
are, and you understand that. Your tribe is completely
comfortable with that, knowing exactly what is on that land, is
that correct?
Mr. Rideout. Yes, that is correct. It would cost billions
to buy back all of our land, and has cost us a significant
amount of money to get to this point. And we are truly
committed to always cleaning up the land that is there, and we
are asking for Congress to put in this Congressional Act.
Keep in mind, it suppresses us from our usual and
accustomed area where it primarily would be the Indigenous
presence we want it to be. So, as we do this today, it also
opens up other opportunities to take and reacquire our aquatic
properties and land base back so we can always maintain a food
source for our lineage and accustomed to our way of life, and
our shellfish and our other species that have been forced out
of this area. So, economic diversity gives the opportunity to
expand and maintain our cultural foods in our region.
Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you very much. My time is
expired. I may submit additional questions in writing. Thank
you.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Mr.
LaMalfa for 5 minutes of questions.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would like to direct my questions on H.R. 2882 to Mr.
Rose on some of the aspects of what is being sought in the
appropriations. It looks like according to my notes you have it
divided into four divisions: Education, Trust Fund, Native
Nations Center for Studies and Public Policy, and the
Environmental Conflict Resolution Center. And I think that is
where it comes in with our experience in my office is that an
issue where Udall was brought in on a land issue up in my
district.
Essentially, Udall came in and convened several meetings in
order to establish I guess a dialogue with some sides on an
issue, and it was supposed to head off litigation, which ended
up happening anyway and is just now being resolved after 8
years over a simple land issue, over something that was
actually being mandated by the Federal Government. So, my
office's experience is that one of my staffers attended the
first preliminary meeting, which my understanding is there were
actually no Udall folks there in order to stand in for a
different staffer whose area this was.
The staffer who then tried to attend the meetings on an
ongoing basis was told, oh no, you can't come in, we have
already established the group, even though Udall wasn't
directly involved at the first meeting, because we built a
``trust,'' OK? Even though it was a preliminary meeting where
hardly anything happened. So, we couldn't put the staffer in
the meeting that we chose to, they had to say, oh, we have to
stick with this staffer who was just there as a substitute. So,
that wasn't very productive nor really establishing a dialogue
with our office and the people involved, our constituents,
trying to get something done.
So, after 2 years of meetings, basically talking about each
other's feelings and things like that, no consensus was reached
besides basically we are farther apart after than what they
started with. And I believe that came out of the purview of the
McCain National Center for Conflict. Would that be its type of
jurisdiction? Am I reading that right, sir?
Mr. Rose. I think so, yes. I am not familiar, to be honest
with you, with the situation, but yes, that sounds like the
jurisdiction of the----
Mr. LaMalfa. Well, what is the success ratio of heading off
litigation? I suppose you are looking for resolutions.
Mr. Rose. Right.
Mr. LaMalfa. What kind of success ratio have you shown for
that?
Mr. Rose. Congressman, I don't have a specific percentage
for you, but my----
Mr. LaMalfa. Well, you are asking for $4 million to
continue doing that in that division, correct?
Mr. Rose. That is correct.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK. So, you can't give us an idea of the
success ratio or whatever?
Mr. Rose. I can give you a general idea. My understanding
is that the center reaches resolutions more often than not
without litigation. That is certainly the effort that the
McCain Center for Environmental Dispute Resolution is engaged
in, that is how they are trained, and that is how they work
with the constituents that are retaining the Udall Foundation's
services in order to achieve a resolution to a particular
environmental dispute.
Mr. LaMalfa. Environmental dispute. All right. In our
experience, it did not remove anybody in the room. Instead
brought a greater angst and litigation for somebody from
outside of the area that really has no stake in it, other than
they wanted to establish one. And there was at least 2 years of
delay caused by everybody, like well, let's see what comes from
that. Does that sound like a win to you?
Mr. Rose. Well, Congressman, what I would like to do, if it
is OK with you, is talk with our team at the Udall Foundation
and then respond in writing to your question. Because I don't
think that I can fairly respond to the situation that you are
describing, including the role of the Udall Foundation without
that kind of information. But I do consider it an obligation on
my part to respond to your question, and I will do that.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Well, the group purports to be helping
tribes and ended up in this particular situation of going
against the Tribe that was trying to establish an enterprise
there that was opposed by out-of-towners for some really very
flimsy reasoning.
So, the other areas of issue you have in your mission here
look OK to me, but I would like to recommend to my Committee
colleagues that the $4 million portion of the appropriation for
the environmental conflict resolution be struck because it was
not productive and indeed drove people farther apart.
With that, Madam Chair, I would like to yield back.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you, Mr. LaMalfa. The Chair now
recognizes Mr. Grijalva for 5 minutes of questioning.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Assistant Secretary Thompson, one of the questions that I
have on the trust side of the issue is the very real case that
you run into a lot with legacy pollution. Finding liability in
who is responsible is almost an impossible task, who then
shifts it either to the agency to do the remediation or in this
instance the Tribe to do the remediation, that is cost-wise
almost impossible to meet.
Are efforts conducted to trace responsible parties so that
they have some responsibility for that legacy pollution left
behind?
Ms. Thompson. I don't know the answer to that specific
question, Congressman, so I will ask and get you the answer
that you are requesting.
Mr. Grijalva. You can't just walk away sometimes and shift
the costs, whether it is a tribe or most of the time if it is a
trust land issue, it is a tribe that you shift the cost to. But
the legislation is good, Councilman, and I support it very
much.
The other issue, Secretary, has to do with capacity that I
mentioned in my opening statement. As we expedite more
efficient, and you mentioned the FTEs that are needed, a
mandated, codified law that sets the timelines, which I
support, without the capacity to meet those guidelines, aren't
we in the same situation, with a codified law, the pressure to
meet those deadlines and the capacity not there to deliver?
Ms. Thompson. It is a challenge, sir. It is certainly a
challenge. And we would welcome any additional appropriations
to make sure that we have the appropriate staffing and
technology to serve our customers.
Mr. Grijalva. I think the intent is excellent. I think the
mandate codified into law is appropriate and right, but you
hate to set up not just the agency but the expectations in
Indian Country that now with this mandated timeline, things
will move faster, they will be more efficient, and yet we are
going to lack the capacity to actually keep our promise with
that regard to Indian Country.
I would, Madam Chair, think that that is an important
adjacent letter that this Committee can send to appropriators
relative to this very important question so we can back up this
very good piece of legislation.
Mr. Rose, thank you for being here, and I am a fan of Udall
and a beneficiary of interns and fellows and the Institute as
well, and they have been great contributors to policy and to
legislation on this Committee, and I congratulate you and the
Udall Foundation for the generations of Indigenous people that
are assuming leadership across this country.
My question is kind of following up on Mr. LaMalfa on the
conflict resolution issue. I think it is an important function.
You said we are retained for those services. For the
information of the Committee, a list of the retainees, who are
the people that retain your services? Is it private sector, is
it governments, is it tribes, is it non-profits? What is that
list of retainers? I think it is important to see the breadth
of who is asking for the services. And sometimes, at least my
experience with a conflict matter in Arizona having to do with
perpetual conflicts having to do with a mine, the Udall Center
was brought in at the behest of parties at the most embittered
part of the conflict. And their chance of success at that point
was limited. The conversations occurred, there was no
resolution, because the lines had been drawn already.
Mr. Rose. Right.
Mr. Grijalva. And I think the conflict resolution that I
have seen work from the Udall Foundation early on, the meeting,
the collaboration, and work that out. When you come into a
situation that is already embittered and divided, and the lines
have been drawn, I don't know how you do that.
Mr. Rose. Yes, it is very difficult to move forward. And,
Congressman, in response to your request, we will provide you
with a list.
Mr. Grijalva. I appreciate it.
I yield back now, Chairwoman.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Moylan
for 5 minutes of questioning.
Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank the witnesses
for their explanations on these three measures. That is very
helpful and understanding that these 17 acres will save money
by going through the trust for residential and business usage.
Hopefully through the conflict resolution, that these families
were able, and businesses would be able to get their mortgage
to build the economy and help the families put a roof over
their heads. So, I thank you very much.
With that, Madam Chair, I wish to yield the remainder of my
time to you. Thank you.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you very much.
I do want to say one thing about the conflict resolution as
a long-term trial attorney and someone who tends to represent
landowners, resource producers, and things like that. I do
think that is extremely important for an organization that is
dedicated to dispute resolution, that you understand the local
issues that are involved with many of these things. And,
oftentimes, when outside environmental groups come in and
attempt to dictate the outcome on some of these, I think it is
extremely important that the local tribal issues, the local
landowner issues, the local water issues are kind of front and
center in the efforts to resolve those matters because they are
critical to the success of those areas in the long term. And in
the long term, they are critical to our ability to protect our
environment as well. So, I would follow-up with Mr. LaMalfa on
that.
Ms. Vogel, I just have a couple of questions for you.
Again, I appreciate your testimony. I also think that
homeownership is so critically important, and it is always
frustrating to me when I read about or learn about there being
barriers to people being able to obtain the housing that they
need, and I get especially frustrated when those barriers are
from the government. And I understand the challenges there and
encourage you to continue to work with folks like Ms. Vogel to
resolve them.
In your testimony, you mentioned long delays and
inconsistencies with the BIA mortgage process that have been
experienced by tribal members. Can you further elaborate on
what those experiences have been like for tribal members?
Ms. Vogel. Thank you for the question, Madam Chair. As we
know, the mortgage process is time sensitive, and when you
start the process, your financial records may only be good for
3 months, and then you have to renew everything. That is where
the frustration comes in is having to renew the time sensitive
documents that your lender may require.
But also, I am encouraged by something, and it happened
with our own BIA agency staff, is as more tribal members become
homeowners and go through that process, they have an
appreciation for it, and they understand it, and then they know
the importance of getting it done. So, a lot of work has to be
done to make home ownership possible, opportunities possible.
And as more and more professional staff, that before didn't own
their home, and step into that, then they become our
supporters. So, in those areas where you have had that
happening, you see better results.
Ms. Hageman. Success begets success.
Ms. Vogel. Yes.
Ms. Hageman. Well, that is wonderful to hear. I think that
is fantastic to know that just the personal experience is
making a difference there where people can help the next
generation into homeownership. Can you give us an average time
that it takes for a tribal member to obtain a mortgage?
Ms. Vogel. As I stated, it really varies from region to
region. And where you have partnerships at the local level that
are working to do homebuyer readiness and getting families
ready and help them understand the mortgage process so that
they know what to expect on what their responsibilities are,
they understand what the lender is expecting, so as they move
through that process, they understand the time frame, and it
just works when you have that active engagement by partners.
So, with the South Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition,
our work is all around that, making sure that lenders
understand the processes on tribal lands, identify more lenders
to enter in so that you have better competition, and when you
have Federal and state agencies working alongside tribal
agencies, then we all are able to help each other and advocate
for policy change or what other changes are needed. So, there
is progress being made, and there is still work that has to be
done, but it is worth the effort. Thank you.
Ms. Hageman. Well, I appreciate that.
And very quickly, Councilman Rideout, could you please give
us a timeline in terms of your restaurant, because I am kind of
a foodie, and I would like to come and visit it.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Rideout. Yes, we are looking at the first quarter of
next year.
Ms. Hageman. Fabulous.
Mr. Rideout. That is what Roy Yamaguchi says.
Ms. Hageman. All right.
Mr. Rideout. And along with the sea plane, too, so if you
want to take a ride.
Ms. Hageman. I will take a sea plane before dinner. And
then I will come and eat at the restaurant.
Mr. Rideout. But I will leave you with this, and it is
really critical to our Vice Chair. When it comes to our youth,
our vocational training is the most imperative thing that we
could possibly do because our future is in our youth. So, as we
develop this and encourage them to take this opportunity in a
very gridlocked reservation. I was talking to Ms. Vogel, and
the size of her reservation is astronomical.
And like it was stated in the record, there were 1,200
acres of land on our reservation. And all of these are
opportunities to make sure we can acquire everything that we
potentially can back and do it the right way. But we work well
with all the municipalities. And I want to thank each and every
one of you today.
Ms. Hageman. And I want to thank you for your dedication to
your tribe, and your area, and for the next generation.
With that, I want to thank the witnesses for your valuable
testimony, and I also want to thank all the Members for your
questions today.
The members of the Committee may have some additional
questions for the witnesses, and we will ask you to respond to
those in writing. And Mr. Rose, I think you are going to be
providing some additional information. And Ms. Thompson, there
might have also been a request for you.
Under Committee Rule 3, members of the Committee must
submit questions to the Subcommittee Clerk by 5 p.m. on Monday,
July 17, 2023, and the hearing record will be open for 10
business days for those responses.
If there is no further business, without objection, the
Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:31 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]