[House Report 116-492]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


116th Congress }                                          { Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
  2d Session   }                                          { 116-492

======================================================================
 
               BLACKWATER TRADING POST LAND TRANSFER ACT

                                _______
                                

 September 8, 2020.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Grijalva, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3160]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 3160) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to 
take certain land located in Pinal County, Arizona, into trust 
for the benefit of the Gila River Indian Community, and for 
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 
thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 3160 is to direct the Secretary of the 
Interior to take certain land located in Pinal County, Arizona, 
into trust for the benefit of the Gila River Indian Community, 
and for other purposes.

                 BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION\1\

    H.R. 3160 authorizes and requires the United States to 
place 55.3 acres of land, commonly referred to as the 
Blackwater Trading Post, into trust for the benefit of the Gila 
River Indian Community of Arizona. The land is contiguous to 
the exterior boundaries of the Community's reservation. 
Legislation is required, as the Community's water settlement, 
which Congress passed in 2004,\2\ explicitly requires that any 
lands located outside the Community's existing reservation 
boundaries be taken into trust through congressional action.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Also see generally Hearing Before the Subcomm. for Indigenous 
Peoples of the U.S. of the H. Comm. on Nat. Res., 116th Cong. (2019) 
(not printed) (written testimony of Stephen Roe Lewis, Governor, Gila 
River Indian Community), https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II24/
20191016/110080/HHRG-116-II24-Wstate-LewisS-20191016.pdf, of which the 
above text is largely excerpts.
    \2\Gila River Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act of 2004, 
Pub. L. No. 108-451, tit. II, 118 Stat. 3499 (2004), https://
uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=118&page=3499 (codified at 
various, see https://uscode.house.gov/table3/108_451.htm).
    \3\Id. at Sec. 210(a), 118 Stat. at 3523, https://uscode.house.gov/
statviewer.htm?volume=118&page=3523 (not codified).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Gila River Indian Community was congressionally 
authorized by statute in 1859\4\ and formally established by 
Executive Order in 1876,\5\ and its lands currently encompass 
approximately 375,000 acres. The Community is comprised of the 
Akimel O'odham (Pima) and the Pee Posh (Maricopa) people. They 
are the largest Indian Community in the Phoenix metropolitan 
area, with an enrolled population of over 22,000.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Act of Feb. 28, 1859, ch. LXVI, Sec. Sec. 3-4, 11 Stat. 388, 401 
(1859), https://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=11&page=401.
    \5\Exec. Order of Aug. 31, 1876, reprinted in GPO, Executive Orders 
Relating to Indian Reserves, From May 14, 1855, to July 1, 1902, at 11 
(1902), available at http://lcweb2.loc.gov/service/gdc/scd0001/2012/
20120509002ex/20120509002ex.pdf (permalink: https://lccn.loc.gov/
34008449). See generally H.R. Rep. No. 115-817, at 2 (2018) https://
www.congress.gov/115/crpt/hrpt817/CRPT-115hrpt817.pdf (definition of 
``Reservation''); id. at 5.
    \6\Tiller's Guide to Indian Country (Veronica E. Velarde Tiller 
ed., 3rd ed. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Part of the Community's history involves the Blackwater 
Trading Post. The land on which the Trading Post sits is 
surrounded on three sides by the Community's reservation, with 
the frontage road of SR-287 bordering the fourth side. The 
Trading Post most likely began operation shortly after the 
highway was built in 1926, and it first appeared on maps 
starting in 1937.\7\ Before its closure, the Blackwater Trading 
Post had been selling and buying goods with the people of the 
Community since at least 1930 and was owned and operated by the 
Ellis family for roughly 60 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\A depiction of Pinal County in 1937 showed a building in the 
correct location along the north edge of SR-87.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2010, the Ellis family sold the Blackwater Trading Post 
to the Gila River Indian Community. The Community then closed 
the Trading Post in order to conduct an inventory and to 
evaluate whether the Trading Post needed rehabilitation in 
order to continue operating. At the time of the inventory, the 
commercial portion of the Trading Post occupied a single 
building consisting of a grocery, a tack shop, a deli, a walk-
in cooler/freezer, a store, and a museum. The museum collection 
contained more than 1,000 items, including 126 Akimel O'odham 
baskets. Because the Community was able to purchase the 
Blackwater Trading Post and all of the items within the museum, 
this collection of artifacts is now within the Community's 
Huhugam Heritage Center.
    The Community is unsure whether it will ever reopen the 
Blackwater Trading Post, but they would like to take the land 
into trust to ensure that it always be preserved as an 
important piece of Community history. H.R. 3160 will bring this 
historically and culturally significant land into trust status 
as part of the Community's reservation.
    The Community has already performed a Phase I and Phase II 
environmental site assessment, and no significant environmental 
hazards were found. There is also explicit language in the 
legislation to preclude gaming on the land.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 3160 was introduced on June 6, 2019, by Representative 
Tom O'Halleran (D-AZ). The bill was referred solely to the 
Committee on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the 
Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States. On 
October 16, 2019, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill. 
On January 15, 2020, the Natural Resources Committee met to 
consider the bill. The Subcommittee was discharged by unanimous 
consent. No amendments were offered, and the bill was adopted 
and ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives 
by unanimous consent.

                                HEARINGS

    For the purposes of section 103(i) of H. Res. 6 of the 
116th Congress--the following hearing was used to develop or 
consider H.R. 3160: legislative hearing by the Subcommittee for 
Indigenous Peoples of the United States held on October 16, 
2019.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

                  COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND 
                        CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT

    1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act. 
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the Committee has received the following estimate for the 
bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, September 1, 2020.
Hon. Raul M. Grijalva,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3160, the 
Blackwater Trading Post Land Transfer Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jon Sperl.
            Sincerely,
                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                                                          Director.
    Enclosure.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

    H.R. 3160 would direct the Department of the Interior (DOI) 
to take into trust approximately 55 acres of land in Pinal 
County, Arizona, owned by the Gila River Indian Community. 
Under the bill, DOI would hold title to that land for the 
benefit of the tribe. The bill would require the tribe to 
fulfill reporting and surveying requirements in order for DOI 
to take the land into trust, and would prohibit certain types 
of gaming on those lands. Using information provided by DOI, 
CBO estimates that the administrative costs to implement H.R. 
3160 would not be significant.
    H.R. 3160 would impose an intergovernmental mandate as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) by 
prohibiting state and local governments from taxing land taken 
into trust for the Gila River Indian Community. Information 
from Pinal County about taxes and other receipts associated 
with the land indicates that those foregone revenues would 
total less than $20,000 annually, which is far below the annual 
threshold established in UMRA ($84 million in 2020, adjusted 
annually for inflation).
    The bill contains no private-sector mandates.
    On September 1, 2020, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for 
S. 2912, the Blackwater Trading Post Land Transfer Act, as 
ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on 
July 29, 2020. The two bills are similar, and CBO's estimates 
of their budgetary effects are the same.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Jon Sperl (for 
federal costs) and Brandon Lever (for mandates). The estimate 
was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Director of Budget 
Analysis.
    2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goals and 
objectives of this bill are to direct the Secretary of the 
Interior to take certain land located in Pinal County, Arizona, 
into trust for the benefit of the Gila River Indian Community.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.

                 UNFUNDED MANDATES REFORM ACT STATEMENT

    According to CBO, H.R. 3160 would impose an 
intergovernmental mandate as defined in the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act (UMRA) by prohibiting state and local governments 
from taxing land taken into trust for the Gila River Indian 
Community. CBO estimates that those foregone revenues would 
total less than $20,000 annually, which is far below the annual 
threshold established in UMRA ($84 million in 2020, adjusted 
annually for inflation). The bill contains no private-sector 
mandates. CBO's full analysis is reproduced above.

                           EXISTING PROGRAMS

    This bill does not establish or reauthorize a program of 
the federal government known to be duplicative of another 
program.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

               PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW

    Any preemptive effect of this bill over state, local, or 
tribal law is intended to be consistent with the bill's 
purposes and text and the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the 
U.S. Constitution.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    If enacted, this bill would make no changes to existing 
law.

        SUPPLEMENTAL, MINORITY, ADDITIONAL, OR DISSENTING VIEWS

    None.

                                  [all]