[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]