[Senate Report 116-67]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 166
116th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 116-67
======================================================================
TO TAKE LANDS IN SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, INTO TRUST AS PART OF THE
RESERVATION OF THE LYTTON RANCHERIA OF CALIFORNIA, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
_______
July 29, 2019.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hoeven, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1388]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which referred the bill
(H.R. 1388) to take lands in Sonoma County, California, into
trust as part of the reservation of the Lytton Rancheria of
California, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that
the bill do pass.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the bill, H.R. 1388, is to provide
congressional authorization for the U.S. Department of the
Interior (DOI) to take land owned in fee by the Lytton
Rancheria of California (Lytton Rancheria or Tribe) into trust
for the benefit of the Tribe.
BACKGROUND
The Lytton Rancheria is a federally recognized Indian
Tribe. In 1958, the Lytton Rancheria, along with 40 other
Indian Tribes in California, were the subject of Congressional
action that sought to end the reservation status for tribal
lands and the trust relationship with the Federal government.
After the passage of the 1958 California Rancheria Act\1\ and
through a series of tragic land transactions that followed, the
Lytton Rancheria lost all lands located on their traditional
homelands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\California Rancheria Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-671, 72 Stat.
619, 619-21 (1958).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the late 1960s, the Federal government pivoted from
assimilation and termination policies to a policy of tribal
self-determination. As a result of this policy shift, Congress
``restored'' the federal trust relationship with some Indian
Tribes; others sought to restore this relationship through
litigation.\2\ In 1987, the Lytton Rancheria joined other
Indian Tribes in a Federal lawsuit that challenged the
termination of their federal statuses. In 1991, the Scotts
Valley, Guidiville, and Lytton Rancherias settled the lawsuit
and had their federal recognition statuses restored under the
stipulated judgment.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\See Amador County, California v. Salazar, 640 F.3d 373, 375
(D.C. Cir. 2011) (discussing the 1983 stipulated order in Hardwick v.
United States, No. C-79-1710 (N.D. Cal.)).
\3\Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians of the Sugar Bowl Rancheria
v. United States of America, No. C-86-3660-WWS (N.D. Cal. Mar. 15,
1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The settlement reached between the parties state that the
termination of the Lytton Rancheria was illegal and that the
descendants of the Tribe were entitled to the rights and
benefits as individual Indians.\4\ While the settlement
provided that the Tribe could organize under the Indian
Reorganization Act, the agreement also assured nearby
landowners, who intervened in the lawsuit, that the Lytton
Rancheria would not conduct gaming in Alexander Valley except
when in compliance with the County of Sonoma's general plan and
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).\5\ Since the court
entered its judgment in 1991, the DOI has listed the Lytton
Rancheria as a federally recognized Indian Tribe in the Federal
Register each year such notices were issued between 1992 and
2018.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\According to the district court in Artichoke Joe's, the 1961
termination was illegal because Public Law 85-671 Sec. 3(c) required
the federal government to ``install or rehabilitate . . . irrigation or
domestic water systems'' before the land was distributed, or within a
reasonable time after the land was distributed. Artichoke Joe's
California Grand Casino v. Norton, 278 F.Supp.2d 1174, 1177 (E.D. Cal.
2003) (detailing the history of litigation and describing the
settlement). The federal government never constructed the required
water system improvements on the Lytton Rancheria's lands, according to
the Tribe. Id.
\5\See Artichoke Joe's, 278 F.Supp.2d at 1177 (detailing the
history of litigation and describing the settlement).
\6\The list is published each year pursuant to the Federally
Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-454, 108
Stat. 4791, codified at 25 U.S.C. Sec. 479a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To date, no land has been returned to the Lytton Rancheria
resulting from the settlement or stipulated judgment. But in
2000, Congress passed the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act, which
directed the Secretary of the Interior to take 9.5 acres of
land in San Pablo, California into trust for the Tribe,
declared those lands to be part of the Tribe's reservation, and
deemed the land to be eligible for gaming under IGRA. The
following year, Congress clarified that the provisions of IGRA,
but not those relating to the land's eligibility for class III
gaming, apply to future gaming on the San Pablo Property.\7\
Consequently, the small parcel of 9.5 acres that was taken into
trust for the Tribe was used to build a Class II gaming
operation. Because the Tribe does not have any additional trust
lands available to house its membership, it is seeking
legislative action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\Section 128 of the Department of the Interior and Related
Agencies Appropriation Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-63, 115 Stat. 414,
442 (Nov. 5, 2001) (``2001 Amendment'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
On February 27, 2019, Representative Jared Huffman
introduced H.R. 1388, the Lytton Rancheria Homelands Act of
2019. The bill was referred to the Subcommittee for Indigenous
Peoples of the United States of the Committee on Natural
Resources in the House of Representatives. On March 26, 2019,
the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1388, by a vote of
404-21.
On March 27, 2019, the Senate received H.R. 1388 and the
bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
(Committee). On June 11, 2019, Senators Feinstein and Harris
sent a letter to Senators Hoeven and Udall requesting the
Committee to schedule a business meeting and give favorable
consideration to H.R. 1388 at the earliest convenience.
On June 19, 2019, the Committee held a duly called business
meeting to consider H.R. 1388. No amendments were filed to the
bill. The Committee passed H.R. 1388 by voice vote and ordered
the bill to be favorably reported.
At this time, there is no Senate companion bill.
115th Congress. Representative Denham introduced H.R. 597,
the Lytton Rancheria Homelands Act of 2017 on January 20, 2017.
The bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular,
and Alaska Native Affairs of the Committee on Natural Resources
in the House of Representatives. The House Committee on Natural
Resources favorably reported the bill on June 27, 2017, without
amendment. H.R. 597 was passed by the House of Representatives
on July 11, 2017.
On July 12, 2017, H.R. 597 was received in the Senate and
referred to the Committee. On April 25, 2018, the Committee
held a legislative hearing on the bill. Following the
legislative hearing on H.R. 597, the Lytton Rancheria and
County agreed to further amend the memoranda of agreement to
prohibit gaming in the county, in perpetuity, so long as the
Lytton Rancheria is not involuntarily prohibited by
governmental decision or action from operating its current
casino located in San Pablo, California, pursuant to IGRA. The
amended memoranda of agreement was ratified by the Lytton
Rancheria and the County.
In addition, the Department of Justice sent comments to the
Committee regarding provisions within the bill. These comments
concerning the gaming restrictions, liabilities on the land,
and other technical matters did not require amendments to the
legislation. On July 11, 2018, the Committee held a duly called
business meeting to consider H.R. 597. The bill was passed
without amendment by the Committee and placed on the Senate
Legislative Calendar under General Orders. No further action
was taken on the bill.
114th Congress. The Lytton Rancheria Homelands Act of 2015,
H.R. 2538, was introduced by Representatives Huffman and Denham
on May 21, 2015 and referred to the Subcommittee on Indian,
Insular and Alaska Native Affairs of the Committee on Natural
Resources of the House of Representatives. Representative
Thompson was added as a co-sponsor on June 9, 2015.
The House Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native
Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 2538 on June 17, 2015. On
February 2, 2016, the House Subcommittee discharged the bill
and the full Committee on Natural Resources considered H.R.
2538 during a mark-up session, at which the bill was ordered to
be reported, as amended, by unanimous consent. On June 21,
2016, H.R. 2538 was placed on the Union Calendar where no
further action was taken on the bill.
SUMMARY OF THE BILL
The bill, H.R. 1388, would place 511 acres of land into
trust for the benefit of the Lytton Rancheria through a
mandatory trust acquisition by the DOI. This fee land is
located adjacent to the Town of Windsor, near the tribe's
original homelands. The land, once it is held in trust for the
Tribe, will assist in reestablishing a permanent homeland for
the Lytton Rancheria, with housing, government facilities, and
economic development opportunities, including viniculture. The
legislation will also make the lands part of the Lytton
Rancheria's reservation. H.R. 1388 includes a permanent gaming
prohibition on the lands described in the legislation and on
future trust acquisitions for the Tribe in the County.
The Lytton Rancheria has spent years negotiating with the
County, local school district, and local fire department to
form three memoranda of agreements that provide for the
mitigation of any potential off-reservation impacts from the
uses of the trust land.
On May 27, 2015, Governor Jerry Brown, Jr. sent a letter to
Rep. Huffman supporting the Lytton Rancheria Homelands Act of
2015, a bill similar to H.R. 1388. Both the Lytton Rancheria
Tribal Council and the County Board of Supervisors voted
unanimously to support the memoranda of agreement and needed
Federal legislation to take the lands into trust for the
benefit of the Tribe.
NEED FOR LEGISLATION
Taking the land into trust, as described in H.R. 1388,
would allow the Lytton Rancheria to rebuild their community by
constructing homes and government facilities, expand economic
development, and create areas to practice traditional and
religious teachings.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
This section cites the Act as the ``Lytton Rancheria
Homelands Act of 2019.''
Sec. 2. Findings
This section explains the history of Lytton Rancheria, a
federally recognized Indian Tribe, and how they lost their
trust status and homelands. Through litigation, the Lytton
Rancheria and other Indian Tribes challenged the loss of their
trust status. In a stipulated judgement, the court restored the
Lytton Rancheria's trust relationship with the United States
and held that the Tribe would have the ``individual and
collective status and rights''' it had prior to its
termination. The stipulated judgement expressly contemplated
the acquisition of trust lands for the Lytton Rancheria.
Sec. 3. Definitions
This section provides for definitions used throughout the
Act, including the term ``County'' to mean the Sonoma County,
California; the term ``Secretary'' to mean the Secretary of the
Interior; and the term ``Tribe'' to mean the Lytton Rancheria
of California, a federally recognized Indian Tribe.
Sec. 4. Lands to be taken into trust
This section specifies the land that will be taken into
trust; the land owned by the Tribe and depicted on the map
titled ``Lytton Fee Owned Property to be Taken into Trust,''
dated May 1, 2015. The land to be taken into trust are part of
the Lytton Rancheria's reservation and shall be administered in
accordance with the laws and regulations generally applicable
to property held in trust by the United States for an Indian
Tribe.
Sec. 5. Gaming
This section explains that the lands taken into trust under
this Act are not eligible for gaming under the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act.
This section also provides for a permanent gaming
prohibition on the Tribe for any future land into trust
acquisitions in the County.
Sec. 6. Applicability of certain law
This section states the Memorandum of Agreement, and any
addenda and supplement or amendment, entered into by the Lytton
Rancheria and the County concerning the trust land is not
subject to review or approval of the Secretary in order to be
effective, including review or approval under (25 U.S.C.
Sec. 81).
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following cost estimate, as provided by the
Congressional Budget Office, dated July 12, 2019, was prepared
for H.R. 1388:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, July 12, 2019.
Hon. John Hoeven,
Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1388, the Lytton
Rancheria Homelands Act of 2019.
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. 1388 would take into trust, for the benefit of the
Lytton Rancheria of California, a federally recognized Indian
tribe, certain land located in the county of Sonoma,
California. The act would specify certain prohibitions on
gaming on the affected land, consistent with an existing
memorandum of understanding between the tribe and the county.
Using information from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, CBO
estimates that implementing H.R. 1388 would have no significant
effect on the federal budget. CBO estimates that any change in
the agency's administrative costs under the act, which would be
subject to appropriation, would not exceed $500,000.
H.R. 1388 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 Lytton Rancheria. CBO estimates the costs of
the mandate would be well below the threshold established in
UMRA ($82 million in 2019, adjusted annually for inflation).
The act contains no private-sector mandates as defined in
UMRA.
The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Jon Sperl (for
federal costs) and Rachel Austin (for mandates). The estimate
was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant Director
for Budget Analysis.
REGULATORY AND PAPERWORK IMPACT STATEMENT
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires each report accompanying a bill to evaluate the
regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in
carrying out the bill. The Committee believes that H.R. 1388
will have minimal impact on regulatory or paperwork
requirements.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
The Committee has received no communications from the
Executive Branch regarding H.R. 1388.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
On February 6, 2019, the Committee unanimously approved a
motion to waive subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate. In the opinion of the Committee, it is
necessary to dispense with subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate to expedite the business of the
Senate.
[all]