Another reason why the Cobell Settlement shouldn't pass

One provision of the Cobell payout will pay some but not all. And it's not favorable or judicial the way it will pay out. Let's say my sister and I are .30 (30/100) undivided interest owners on our land. My aunt is .10 (10/100 ) and my convicted-in-prison cousin is a .30 (30/100) undivided interest owner.

My aunt and I each get direct pay from our farmer. My sister who lives in Arizona and my cousin who is a convict in Florida State Prison each get paid on their crop leases through their IIM (individual Indian Money) accounts through the Office of Special Trustee. They always have. My aunt and I have always gotten direct pay since we live on our rez.

So under the Cobell Settlement, any money that passed through the IIM account during 2000-2009 will count toward the settlement. My convict-cousin and my California sister will each get paid based on our land lease for all the money that passed through their IIM account. My aunt and I will not get paid at all because we got direct pay from the farmer to us. My aunt and I make up .40% of the ownership. My sister and my cousin make up 60% of the ownership. The farmer sent the lease (which was unethical) to my sister and cousin to sign. Since they control over 50% of the ownership, they controlled the lease. They didn't know better so they signed the unethical lease.

Now, as part of the Cobell settlement, they will also get paid because they had their payments made through their IIM accounts.

My aunt and I will not get a penny from a portion of the Cobell settlement because we were paid directly from our farmer. We also didn't have a voice into whether the unethical lease got approved or not.

Elouise Cobell argued for justice and accountability. The current settlement will further erode many peoples' trust in the Federal Government and Elouise Cobell if she continues to argue for what is now an unethical settlement.

Shame is on who?

Who is in charge of the Office of Special Trustee?

Sometimes it becomes comical, the happenings in the Great Puzzle Palace. Is it really okay to give the keys to the Ofice of Special Trustee to Donna Erwin? It seems like just yesterday that she was reprimanded for some less-than-favorable actions with some no-contest contractors at OST. And now she's in charge. I want to know if it should really be ok with Tribal Land Owners that the trustee's office is in the hands of the Fearsome-Foursome (see Office of Inspector General Memorandum, Fraud in New Mexico, and An Ugly History, and a related story on POGO Blog: Discipline Awaits for Indian Trust Officials Snagged in Corruptino Scandal)

The optimum Easter Bunny Present is that the Office of Special Trustee be swallowed up by some other agency who can run it through an industrial-strength shredder and we can forget the good idea ever was. "Sure it was a good idea at the time."

History, however, shows OST hasn't ever lived up to it's potential unless you're a contractor with friends in the Office of Special Trustee whom you can ply with golf outings. For the rest of us, well, we will have to once again hold our breath and see what happens when yet another group of Executive Level employees "Screw Up to Move Up."

In case you forgot, here are some reminders (below) of why the current situation is an important one and why the President of the United States needs to crack the whip over at the Interior so we can get some ethical, respectable, leadership in the Office of Special Trustee.

Here's How You Manage Leasing!
Two Cheers for Dirk Kempthorne!
Good Indians
An Administration's Task
The Poorest of the Poor
A Grand Contracted Mess
Return to the Scene of the Crime
A Penny For Your Appraisal

Where is the Trustee, or rather where WAS the Trustee?

The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held a video conference yesterday asking where is the Trustee? It seemed appropriate when you got done watching the live telecast. Oh, but then wait a minute, we don't exactly have a Special Trustee right now. We have Donna Erwin who has been "acting" for quite a while now at the Trustee thingy.

Let's see, we had George Skibine, acting everything, and doing a fine job of it; Vicki Forrest, newbie to the big picture, and Carl the-former-secretary Artman.

Ross Swimmer is busy running a bank, Donna Erwin is, is...where was Donna? Did anybody check the clubhouse? See if the missing foursome, might still be playing together.

We heard "enhancements" a great many times during the BIA presentation. What does the Office of Special Trustee have to say about that? We heard encumbrances hinder the Fee to Trust process. We heard the BIA does not control the Appraisal process. We heard the the NEPA processing takes time. (especially since they require "professionals" now complete even a basic Environmental ASSESSMENT) (different than a full blown EIS)

We didn't hear from the Office of Special Trustee (OST). We didn't get an explanation for why tribes and tribal land owners are not considered "clients" of their own appraisals on their own land. It's in 25 CFR for those intrepid enough to acutally see the truth. The problem with that is that if you want to see the appraisers notes, especially in States of non-disclosure, you won't. You are not the client, the OST is, as stipulated in the CFR. You have to somehow compell the OST staffer that they should go ask the contractor for those notes. And since the Cobell lawsuit, they won't even give you directions to the nearest water fountain let alone "notes" on your own appraisal.

You have to somehow also convince the OST that their contracted appraiser should not sub-contract two levels below him either. It has happened, a contractor for appraisals sub contracted to someone who sub-contracted to another pair of mostly appraisal-illiterate individuals. It's not a transparent process as outlined in the US Professional Appraisal Practices handbook.

We didn't hear about how "acting on behalf of tribal land owners," leasing specialists are taking a single bid for a lease and calling that a comptetitive bid. Ross himself said one single bid is not a competitive bid. Donna agreed with him. We didn't hear how that has been changed today. We also didn't hear how "acting in our best interest," leasing specialists will take the low road and just accept the appraised value for bids, no negotiating going on, just accept what they give us, after they share the appraisal with the farmers' advocates. It was unanimous when Gerald Ben from the Northwest Regional Office said all the BIA has to do is make sure leases meet the appraisal value. It has become the maximum instead of the minimum. You should always settle for the appraised value, not bargain up to it.

So, yes, I have to agree with the title of the conference, where WAS the Trustee?

And pose today's question: "Where IS the Trustee?"

Peabody Coal and the Office of Surface Mining's activities are again called to question

The controversey around Peabody Coal still not only simmers, it has once again boiled over, or at least it looks to if things don't change in the immediate future.

More leaders need to know, as it has been pretty rampant as of late, that not every Indian speaks for EVERY Indian. If indeed the Life of Mine provision, addressed in this latest Indian Country Today Opinon Piece by the Hon. Ben Nuvamsa, was passed in the dark hours of a passing administration, then the powers that be, need to request clarification from the Hopi Tribe that this is what the Hopi Tribe is in agreement with.

Perhaps a referendum should be initiated from the new Hopi tribal administration to reveal what the true voice of the people is concerning the provisions of the Black Mesa Area Mining permit. This is the truest path to discovering if the Hopi people really want to grant such broad sweeping permission to the Peabody Coal Company.

Alternatively, if the Hopi Tribe's process permits it, the Hopi people should present an immediate Direct Initiative to determine their own opinion on how to supply the needs of the Mohave Generating Station, while still addressing the natural resource needs of the people in a way that is transparent, respectful of all that will be impacted, and in the end run is in the best opinion of an informed Hopi tribal population. (A Direct Initiative will go directly to a vote and circumvent the legal maze that many will not be familiar with or have the patience to endure)

A tribal law will hold status that should weigh heavily in any pending lawsuit

Both sides of the issue should be most supportive of a Direct Initiative because the majority will come out on top, and if either side believes it really is correct then this is the ultimate mechanism for putting money where mouth may be. Then there will be no questions left to answer.

No questions will be left except-what will the Hopi people do either with or without their resources in either scanario?

Senate Committee on Indian Affairs & Job Training

Bravo to Rep Lynch, Stephen F. , MA; Rep Kaptur, Marcy OH; Rep Lipinski, Daniel IL; Rep Quigley, Mike IL; and Rep Shuler, Heath NC. These distinguished people had an issue and they came up with a solution. They needed (?) Native American Iron workers. Or they wanted them, or they just saw an opportunity to help some Indians in need of work. At any rate, they have begun the long legislative journey to provide a means to that end: H.R.1129.

H.R.1129
This fancy piece of social work just passed by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and they liked it. This will provide (with "available" funds) an annual grant to someone, some corporation, some entity (National Training Center?) to train Indians how to become Iron Workers and then assist them with job placement. BRAVO! BRAVO!

Why didn't anybody do this instead of the current Non-Tribal-Contractor-Friendly Cadastral Surveying Program?

We can do that? We can provide necessary training for a specific need? We don't have to accept all these non-native contractors who will hold their hand out for money every year when we NEED cadastral surveys conducted? We don't have to accept State, County, and City Surveyors who are trained as CFEDS surveyors, and who also hold the distinction of having a conflict of interest as it relates to releasing the survey information publicly, and representing entities with whom we may have border disputes, and tax disputes? Wow!

Someone should make up a bill like this to replace the horrible CFEDS program. It's only feeding contractors annual jobs on our reservations and we get nothing more than a survey from it. We aren't becoming empowered; we really are at the mercy of a bunch of people, even within the federal government who will subvert our sovereignty, or who will release our National information to several government entities that never were empowered to sign treaties with us.

I'm sure that the Senate Committe on Indian Affairs would gladly look a bill like this over and pass it along. The Tribes would.

"Think outside the box because the box probably belongs to a contractor"

This isn't new; read more here:

Surveys on a reservation A penny for your appraisal

A Grand Contracted Mess Yet More Motivations

President Obama's Contract Reform memo, a fix to the Grand Contracting Mess

Kimberly Teehee is actually the #2 position in Indian country

Jackie Johnson Pata said [Kim Teehee's] job was really going to hone in on those [domestic] policy issues. Pata also said, Kim's job was like the No. 1 position in Indian Country.

Well that was before Larry Echohawk's second [or were there more?] swearing in ceremony, after which Larry issued his first editorial declaring that "The historical Cherokee Nation as it existed in 1934 no longer exists as a distinct political entity."

Echo Hawk declared a new nation, a new government, a new-tribe-that-will-have-to-negotiate-a-treaty-because-they-didn't-exist-before, until now, when Larry says they do! Larry presented the "New and Improved" Cherokee Nation with two governments for the price of none! A drum roll should have played before he declared the C-N-O! The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and the United Keetoowah Band!

Wow! Shiny enit?

So, I'm curious, if Kim Teehee is No.1, what does she do if an "underling" declares her tribe "moot?" If there is no Historical Cherokee Tribe, since he just dissolved it in his own mind, which tribe does Kim Teehee declare herself a part of? And how does Larry handle the real No.1 position in Indian Country from such a long distance from the President's desk?

Now I'm confused, is there a historical Cherokee Tribe and if it did "sunset" doesn't that mean that since it dissolved, they don't have trust status? If it dissolved, they don't have a government-to-government relationship with the Federal Government right? So, if it really did dissolve before our very eyes, Larry Echo Hawk just outran Congress in the race to dissolve a Tribe.....wow.......he's quick.

Didn't a past BIA employee declare plenary decision-making over tribal governments such as the Northern Cheyenne? Are we right back where we were trying to get away from? Wow, he does work quickly.

Have a "nice" day, and thank you for visiting the "historical" Cherokee Tribe formerly known as a sovereign nation, declared "moot" by a second and successive Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs, Larry Echo Hawk.

Larry Echo Hawk A Poor Choice Among Many Great Ones

[Click here for most Recent article on Larry Echo Hawk's (Re)Confirmation hearing...]

Well, it was a surprise when the news bounced around the inauguration balls that Department of the Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar was considering Larry Echo Hawk for Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Bureau of Indian Affairs. It was an upleasant surprise.

It was once said Larry Echo Hawk had three strikes against him: He's Indian, He's Democrat, He's Morman. They had two out of three correct anyway.

There are a multitude of casinos out there. There are just as many tribes exercising sovereignty and managing casinos.

Larry Echo Hawk is Pawnee from Oklahoma. Now here's an interesting fact: There are Pawnee Indian-owned casinos...That's strange. Why wasn't Larry Echo Hawk openly opposing those casinos? Why wasn't Larry helping Oklahoma raise a legal battle against the Pawnee Indians?

He did it before in Idaho. He openly opposed casinos in Idaho. It was rumored that he had made promises to remain neutral, which to date are unsubstantiated. When he was elected to Idaho State Attorney General, he did not remain neutral on the subject of Indian Casinos. He did not openly support the Tribes. Instead, he openly opposed Indian Gambling in Idaho. Then when the Federal Government (Department of the Interior) had determined that Idaho could not legally oppose Tribal Gambling, Larry Echo Hawk helped the state negotiate a loophole that would create a state statute to oppose Tribal Gaming. This occured as Idaho was itself conducting it's own gambling.

Larry is Pawnee from Oklahoma. That is significant. They have what around 600-800 acres of land? Not Thousands of Acres, not hundreds of thousands of acres, not millions of acres. They have less than a thousand acres. They probably have approximately five 160-acre allotments. Wow! And now Larry is supposed to act like he knows what our issues are on reservations with over Three hundred thousand acres, over Seven hundred thousand acres, over a million acres? He has no cultural imprint from which to draw personal experience. He has probably never personally managed land leases on reservations on a daily, or yearly basis. He is probably not familiar with what it is to account for land held in trust. Has he ever personally had an interest in having land transferred into Trust Status. He couldn't have had land waiting 19 years to be transferred into trust? Could he? If not, how could he manage an agency that is supposed to be doing that and to date, is frought with mistakes, misinformation, and misguided principles? How does Larry Echo Hawk know what it means to have a Tribe's appraisals done by a third or fourth party contractor? How does Larry Echo Hawk know what it means to have surveys done by contractors who for all their efforts want all their survey information to be public knowledge; to have state elected officials performing cadastral surveys for reservations because the Federal survey certification is open to virtually every surveyor breathing?

So what does Larry Echo Hawk know? He knows he's a Morman. He knows he opposed Idaho Tribes gambling options. In his formative years, Larry Echo Hawk heard Robert Kennedy say: 'Some men see things as they are and say, 'Why?'
I see things as they could be and say, 'Why not?' "

Maybe this explains why, in a region where Indians have always had gambling as part of their culture, before Mormons arrived here, Larry Echo Hawk looked and thought this state could oppose Indian gambling with a bit of legal wrangling so "why not?"

I am in admiration for his bit of legal wrangling, what I fail to understand is why he could not simply resign if his "religious" beliefs were in opposition to any Tribe's Sovereign Right to continue our gambling tradition. Yes it is a tradition. (stick games, horse races, foot races, and myraid other gambling opportunites dot our history) We are conducting the gambling ON OUR RESERVATIONS, and if Larry Echo Hawk didn't like it, he should never have set foot on the reservation.

But now, he will oversee many many gambling issues. Does he turn a blind eye yet again to every tribe who proposes to start gambling? Does he come down with the wrath of Joey Smith? What is an Indian to do? When an Oil Industry Surveyor's Son is faced with the truth behind how detrimental contractual surveying is to Tribes (conducted by Bureau of Land Management), does he turn away from the truth, or does he turn his back on the Tribes who are all suffering at the hands of so many Contracted Surveyors? Does Larry Echo Hawk understand the connection between lack of Trust Responsibility and forcing Tribes to pay for trust services like surveying, or appraising, or gathering records, or contracting for land leases, or oil leases?

It is doubtful that a landless-tribal member can enter this ring with any sense of what is expected of him. It is embarrassing that a "tribal member" who stood with a State Authority against multiple tribes, in direct opposition to their sovereignty, is now being considered for appointment to Bureau of Indian Affairs Secretary. We made treaties with the United States, NEVER WITH THE STATE OF IDAHO. Does Larry Echo Hawk's blatant lack of understanding of Tribes' sovereignty, of Tribes' land issues finally become obvious?

I think there should be much support for Scott Crowell and his statement in opposition to Appointment of Larry Echo Hawk to Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs.

I agree with Scott Crowell that there may be wide-ranging support for Larry Echo Hawk, but just as in 1994, it may come from "Outside Idaho, [where] Mr. EchoHawk's candidacy has energized Indians throughout the West and become a cause," because very rarely does every tribe hear of every transgression and those who commit them against us. Maybe Ken Salazar has no idea what Larry Echo Hawk did either.

Today, it would not be hard to find tribal members from the Pacific Northwest, tribal members from large land-based reservations, that don't want Larry Echo Hawk in office messing up Tribal Sovereignty from a non-traditional, foreign religion's view of oppression.

No Indians should support the appointment of "an Indian" who will just as easily turn on their sovereignty at the National Level. He cannot be our voice. All of Indian Country should be hoping that Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar will look into more than the fluff and see the core issues of our problem with Larry Echo Hawk. If they don't they could find themselves on the receiving end of Larry's rebuke against Indian Gambling. Indian Country should be hoping members of the Senate Committe on Indian Affairs will consider another candidate for this post because Larry has shown he can put a State on his back while he runs haphazardly over Tribal Sovereignty.

The Sovereign masses

In part of his introduction to the book Sovereign Bones titled Rolling Those Sovereign Bones, Eric Gansworth wrote:

those people from indigenous communities who have chosen the artist's life understand that theirs is a gamble for survival. Their subversive acts, keeping their cultures alive, by necessity, use the tools of the oppressors: the English language, written forms of communication, Western publishing models, digital technology, film, the blog, installation, and myriad other forms of current information transmission. The risk inherent in learning to use the oppressors' tools so fluently and naturally...is that often our own people become suspicious of our motivations.

And I believe it. There is a point where if you argue with Native Americans in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, you're seen as the rabble-rouser. There is a point where if you say a person in a position who just happens to be an Elder did something wrong, you are the person who is wrong. Let me tell you there are Elders who were not doing good things when they were young, so what is the difference if they do that now?

There are always people who will say that people just point their fingers just to be pointing fingers. If you are pointing at a Tribal member in the Bureau of Indian Affairs who is really doing something disastrous to Tribal members' rights, are you really the bad guy?

When realty staff tell tribal members "just sign the lease, stop being so difficult," I have an issue with that. When OST staff misquote 25 CFR (their guiding bible) I have an issue with that. When the Regional Directors of Bureau of Indian Affairs do not budget for a superintendent for every reservation, I have an issue with that. When tribes are submitted to a process with obvious blind spots such as the Cadastral Surveyor process which would put people with political conflicts of interest on our reservation surveying and acquiring sensitive information, I have an issue with that. When the Office of Appraisal Services neglects to protect tribes' appraisal contracts from being sub-contracted to two levels away from the contractor, I have an issue with that. When the same appraisal office neglects to identify how an appraisal firm came to a appraisal decision in a State of non-discolsure I have an issue with that. When tribes everywhere are not included on appraisal contracts as clients, I have an issue with that.

When the Federal Government loses all original surveys for three reservations, a Trust duty, and then require Tribes to pay for re-surveys, I have an issue with that.

When the Federal Government requires the Tribes to gain comments on Fee to Trust from local lower governments (mainly states and counties and towns) I have a problem with that because nobody asked us the impact that moving from Trust to Fee would have on us when they took our land.

When they continually put people into the office of the Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs who have never worked at the ground level I have an issue with that.

These are Native Issues. If you are on the government side of the Native Issues, you had better be prepared to actually defend your stance with a proper citation of Title 25 the Code of Federal Regulations. If you are the realty specialist who told a land owner to just sign an agricultural lease without being difficult, the shame should be on you. If you are the person who could change the surveying scheme, and you don't do anything about it, you are the problem.

In the Army Drill sergeants tell new privates, "if you see a piece of garbage on the ground, it is now your garbage." In Native issues if you see something and don't do anything about it, it is your fault.

If you are a land owner who will sign a lease and then later complain because of what is in the lease, you need to start reading your lease. If you are not going to read your lease, then don't point a finger at the people who would warn you when your farmer takes full advantage of you on the lease you signed.

Am I confrontational? You had best bet that I am just as confrontational as the obstacle to change is toward me.

The risk in learning to use the oppresors' tools so fluently and naturally...is that often our own people become suspicious of our motivations.

Well know this, we should all be confrontational to the processes undertaken by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Office of Special Trustee with the right balance of confrontation just to sway the effect to justice.

I would hope that the Native Issues that are problems would be addressed. I would hope that if you are part of the problem in a Native Issue, you would read your bible, 25 CFR whether you're a land owner, or a Federal employee in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, or Office of Special Trustee or any of their supposedly beneficial Contractors.

Do you want to know the quickest way to shut up a "finger-pointer?" Give them the responsibility. They'll either take the responsibility with the thought that their name is on it or they will fail miserably and then they won't complain.

Well, it would seem....ready for this?....that the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee have stopped complaining....because they are failing miserably. Understand, there are a multitude of people who are trying and looking out for their fellow tribal people. But the people who need to admit that many of the tasks carried out by Bureau of Indian Affairs and Office of Special Trustee are not beneficial, are not working, and are failing miserably, have stopped complaining.

Even if it was to complain that there is too much work to be done, those leaders need to be complaining and stop labeling. Quite to the opposite, your whining and labeling come back to you in the way of medicine, self administered. It is good to advocate for Native Issues. It is not good to fail to admit that the Native Issues exist.

The truth just keeps coming back to you no matter how many times you deny it.

If it wasn't true, you should just say so.

Two cheers for Dirk Kempthorne!

The United States Department of the Interior released a report today, "Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne Initiates Action Following Receipt of Inspector General Reports."

Dirk Kempthorne will get two cheers for now and the third? Well, I think he deserves a third cheer when he e x p a n d s his display of leadership ethics and exercises justice over the fiasco over unethical behavior at the Office of Special Trustee.

What makes it different? Is it that they wasted resources, time, and the reputation of an otherwise sound agency belonging to the United States instead of from Native Americans? I am not saying it is, I'm just asking, why now, why this agency and why not before when equally damaging behavior happened at the Office of Special Trustee?

Was it equally damaging? Well I would think that to the people who filed reports with the Inspector General, Earl Devaney, putting their jobs at risk, it would be equally damaging to their quality of life. To the people who were waiting for objective management of their resources, it would be equally damaging. To people who were expecting just treatment of disciplinary problems, when Ross Swimmer assigned "corrective training," for Donna Erwin and Doug and Jeff Lords instead of real disciplinary action, yes it is my opinion that it was equally damaging. And when one of the three Ringling Trustees recently got promoted, well that was too much.

So, while Mines and Minerals Management Service gets scrutiny, Native Americans everywhere wait for a little bit of attention on our fire. We wait for justice, we wait for the Trust to be put into the Office of Special TRUSTee.

Background Check for Ross Swimmer

This article on Indianz.com titled, Swimmer can't recall Navajo involvement
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2003 is what should have come up to the Public and Administration's minds before Ross Swimmer came to acquire his position as Special Trustee, Office of Special Trustee (OST). Well, it should have come up and then he should have been rejected for any position of advocacy for Indians. It probably did come up. Everyone from the President on down probably knew about it, but still welcomed him into the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and eventually the OST. They probably gave him a pat on the back as he was welcomed and said, "you're doing a heckuva job there Swimmer!"

It should be of note that at a recent Intertribal Trust Monitoring Association (ITMA) (of Trust Funds) meeting in April, 2008 in Albuquerque, NM, Ross Swimmer actually said that appraisal values should not be what people negotiate for on their agricultural leases. He said appraisal values should be the low end you receive for leases. This despite the fact that he may as well have worn the shoes of the LOBBYIST for PEABODY COAL when he screwed the Navajo Tribe, out of the royalty rate for coal. The LOBBYIST convinced an Indian Advocate, who went down swinging for our cause (feigning a twisted arm--anybody recognize Ross Swimmer?) may rest well only for a lack of conscience:

"In this case, the Court of Federal Claims found that the government met “secretly with parties having interests adverse to those of the [Nation], adopt[ed] the third parties’ desired course of action in lieu of action favorable to the [Nation], and then misle[d] the [Nation] concerning these events.

the [Navajo] Nation asked that the royalty rate be adjusted to a reasonable level, and Peabody had consented to such a reasonable adjustment explicitly in Lease 8580

Prior to the ex parte interference, (and the in-office interference) the Bureau of Indian Affairs had deemed proper and approved an increase in the royalty rate to 20%. Despite the mandate of § 1300(e) and the Nation’s request for an adjustment to a reasonable royalty rate, however, it is undisputed that Secretary Hodel refused to make this royalty adjustment permanent after meeting with Peabody’s representative, (There were probalby two Peabody Representatives when you think even for a second about it) whom the government conceded was “a former aide and friend of Secretary Hodel.

...the Secretary approved lease amendments with royalty rates well below the rate that had previously been determined appropriate by those agencies responsible for monitoring the federal government’s relations with Native Americans"

No Way? Really? He did that? All by himself? And then through a sudden change of heart over the course of time, he comes out telling Indians at the ITMA conference that they should negotiate leases advantageously, above the appraised value? In the words of Borat, wowie wow wow wow! Did he learn his lesson or is he merely attempting to put lipstick on a pig? Because no matter how well you dress up a pig, it's still a pig.

Your'e doing a heckuva job there Ross, heckuva job.......

details at 11 on indianz.com.

A Grand Contracted Mess

Remember back when I discussed the contracting of CFEDS surveyors and even Appraisers? Remember when I said that accountability walked out the door, when Office of Special Trustee and Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Bureau of Land Management all CONTRACTED their work out?
Here is what happens when anyone, I mean anyone, contracts work out to civilians who are under no authority to be reprimanded. Boo Hoo! Their contract service goes away and then you wonder what happened to their stolen documents, the stolen information, the breach of security of sensitive documents, sensitive information. It happened at the State Department as seen on Yahoo, news page by the Associated Press Writers, titled 3 CANDIDATES PASSPORT FILES BREACHED.
Now for any Natives out there, ask yourself if you want a CONTRACTOR to the Federal Government who also has an elected position in their county, their state, their city, to come on the reservation and survey your land. If this contractor who works for another government does come on the reservation and surveys your land, he is now privy to information such as the title of the land, and the description, and the owner. If you are the owner who has been waiting for years to have your land changed from Fee (tax) to Trust land, congratulations, the tax man just came onto your land!
If you are a County Treasurer wondering how much you should charge that crazy Indian living in the corner of your county that is on the reservation for land that he didn't know was out of Trust, congratulations! With a quick phone call to the appraising firm that works for the BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, or the OFFICE OF SPECIAL TRUSTEE, you are also on the list of people who will gain access to this information.
If you are with Office of Special Trustee, DO NOT TELL ME IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, DON'T TELL ME IT WON'T HAPPEN, DON'T SAY ONE WORD!
Look at the State Department. You think you're more intimidating than Condoleeza Rice? You think you can control someone who isn't an employee of yours?
If you do, then you're stupid. What am I saying "if?"
For those of you on reservations, listen up. They, meaning Office of Special Trustee, Bureau of Land Management, and the Glorious Bureau of Indian Affairs have all been contaminated with a dose of guillability.
We currently have CONTRACTORS performing
ALL OUR APPRAISALS
ALL OUR SURVEYS
on our reservations. Well maybe not all the appraisals, maybe not all the surveys, but they could................
Makes you wonder if they'll be walking your property next week don't it?

P.S. Ever wonder how power companies get easements? They have to provide appraisals, and surveys. Ever wonder who did that for them? Look at their employee records. In the words of Borat, Wowwie Wow Wow Wow! They have appraisers and surveyors on staff! How come they didn't contract out for that? And more importantly, why didn't a Federal Surveyor and a Federal Appraiser do it for us? Check your power lines, check your negotiations for payments on the land that these power companies use. There better be a Federal survey, and a Federally reviewed appraisal.

P.P.S. IT CAN GET REALLY DEEP AROUND HERE SO PUT YER WADERS ON!!!!!!!

The poorest of the poor.

I listened to a human rights activist, whose heart is in the right place speak about some work he was doing in Africa. He said when he got there he was continually surprised to see the local population was always happy, always smiling, even though they had very little in material means.

My question then is, why would you change that? If they really are happy having school under a tree, why would you give them a modern building with doors that separate classes, separate cultural mentors from younger children, separate the student from the environment?

And then I reflect on how the reservation effects affected many of our tribal nations. The Navajo lost much of their culture when they were put in houses with separate rooms separated by doors. What was once a family classroom 24 hours a day in a one room hogan, was replaced by a "modern" house which instilled that "this room is mine, and this house is my family's, and this is our food in our refrigerator.

The Nisqually Indian Tribe were already in houses. So while reservations were made to centralize most other Indians, the U.S. Government created the Nisqually Indian Reservation and then gave them houses because they were too close, so while the effect was to herd up plains Indians, it was also to spread out other coastal tribes.

And now here we sit today and place values on the crops we cultivate on our reservations. Only, "we" is an appraiser contracted by the Office of Special Trustee to come in here with no exposure to a closed tribal market and place a S.W.A.G. (scientific wild ass guess) on the value of our land, our crops, our leases, our timber, our resources lost as a result of rights of way, and easements.

Now my only caution to any of you is that when you take an appraisal from the Office of Special Trustee, take the appraisal and neatly file it away in a quiet, secluded, dark corner, locked away for eternity.

An appraisal is the MINIMUM AMOUNT YOU SHOULD BE GETTING, NOT THE STANDARD! Think about it. Ever bought land? When you did, did you ask if the land had been appraised? Of course you did, because that is the maximum amount you wanted to pay. If you're a savvy buyer, then you pick the property apart to refute or even LOWER the amount you will offer to below the appraised value.

Ever looked at land to sell and wondered how to increase the appraised value if you were selling? Of course you did! You knew the appraised value held some value because it will be used against you. You will want your appraised value to be as high as possible because you know that a buyer will hedge against that value.

If you're sneaky, you don't get an appraisal, and sell to a unwitting buyer who either has a lot of money to throw away or has the credit line to swallow your enthusiastic selling attempt.

So, when your reservation gets a reservation wide appraisal, glance at the amount that land is going for, but don't stare at it. We don't want to get used to that amount. We want to actually NEGOTIATE like we mean it. If all else fails let BIA tell everyone that the lease meets the appraisal quote, like Gerald Ben said they do in this article on The Authentic Voice.

Gerald said, "The only thing the bureau has to do is make sure the rate meets the minimum approved rate."

hmmmm....would that minimum rate be the APPRAISED QUOTE? Hmmm?

That doesn't sound like much of a negotiation does it? Well let's hope that Gerald Ben isn't the one "negotiating" for your best lease on your land. As a matter of fact, lets hope that more tribal members are empowered with knowledge so that like Ernestine Werelus, we all negotiate the most advantageous leases from an obviously lucrative resource that all tribes share in common, the land.

And yet, he challenges us to question appraisals: at an ITMA Listening Conference at Wild Horse Resort in 2004, he responded to...
...a question from the audience about appraisals showing Indian land as less valuable than off-reservation land, Gerald Ben stated that if a landowner has questions about an appraisal, “ask them to come back and explain to you so you know for yourself that what you sold your property for was really what it was worth.” He said that the BIA is trying to get local appraisers how know the reservation to work on contract so that appraisals can be done more quickly.

But then he would never question the fact that BIA sends out requests for Authority for BIA to negotiate your leases for you; insted the BIA will merely sign off on leases that went to bid, with no respect to the the minimum approved rate because it is "in your best interest," according to 25 CFR.

And they smile at us at every conference, at every public engagement. They smile at fellow Indians whose leases rob them of the chance to be prosperous.

I would think that much like our fellow human beings in Africa, we'd be better smilers too if we had far less to deal with. Let me live on the land, let me be poor, just don't let someone else profit at my expense--it makes me feel abused. I guess my thanks for that feeling go to my friends, my fellow human beings, my fellow tribal members at the BIA who fail to speak up for me and for all tribal people. Don't feel guilty, just act for me, act for my aunties, my cousins, your relatives.

Restore the smiles we all had wayyy back when.

Run the numbers

Ok,
lets run some numbers.
In the 26th Status Report to the Court which is supposed to show Trust Reforms being taken to help settle the Cobell Lawsuit, Donald A. Buhler, Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Bureau of Land Management ( BLM ) signed off on his portion of that same report that says that $16.4 millions dollars were proposed for appropriation to complete surveys in 2007/8/9. The value of the Indian Trust projects would total about $127.4 million dollars. For $16.4 million dollars we're going to fix $127.4 million dollars worth of property pieces. They fix them by performing surveys which is their contribution to managing the land.
But, what if we divided $16.4 million dollars by 200. $16,400,000/200=$82,000 dollars.
$16.4 million dollars
200________________
$82,000 dollars.
16.4 MILLION DOLLARS
200 SOMETHINGS
$82,000 dollars
What does it mean? Lets divide $82,000 dollars by 1/3. $82,000/3=$27,333 dollars
the other 2/3 looks like $54,666 dollars.
So we have $54,666 dollars per 200 somethings to play with.
What are those somethings? Why is 1/3 being set aside for those 200 somethings?

Give up?

If we divide $16.4 million dollars by 200 FEDERALLY-EMPLOYED-SURVEYORS we have a total of $82,000 dollars per surveyor to play with. Of that $82,000 dollars per surveyor we take 1/3 for benefits away leaving us with $54,666 dollars per surveyor for salary. If you look at a recent job advertisement on USA JOBS for a surveying technician in Cherokee North Carolina, I think the pay grade was GS 4/5 which is right around $30,000 dollars.
hmmmmm.....

Spend the Indians' money and make sure that they have to come back next year and spend more money

OR

Spend the money enabling them to do it themselves.

You could be the reason for 200 new federal surveyors in the Bureau of Indian Affairs or you could be anther one who spent the entire "tribal" priority allocation piece by piece, sending it out the window and down the street to a bunch of private firms who will show up next year to do the same thing next year. What do you do? That your final answer?

Spend the Tribal Priority Allocation Funds the way they were supposed to be spent and start up a new division in the BIA (we'd even let you design a cool unit patch for your Survey Crew) or continue to be the lackey who has a hand in destroying the Tribal Priority Allocation Funds' checking account. Maybe the Office of Special Trustee or the Bureau of Indian Affairs Trust Services needs to have the truth explained to them. Maybe even they don't know how these funds are going out the window, keeping Indians dependent on the Federal Government. Not much trusteeship going on here right now, maybe they're not even busy so it might be easy to get into an office way up there at the top of Office of Special Trustee. Somebody "s'plain this to them," and wait for the virtue and beauty to roll out the door! Yeah, well, maybe not in this generation eh?

Maybe it's because Honorable Bill Anoatubbe, Governor of Chickasaw Nation of OK; Bobby Brooks at Bank of Oklahoma; Mr David English, Law professor at the University of Missouri-Columbia; Honorable Jim Gray, Chief of the Osage Nation, OK; Mr Edward Holland CEO Chota Capital Company; Mr Fred Matt, Confederated Tribes of Salish-Kootenai Tribes of Flathead Reservation, MT; Honorable Richard Milanovich, Chmn Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, CA; Mr. Loren "Bat" Pourier, owner Muddy Creek Oil and Gas Inc.; and Ms. Helen Sanders Chmn Allottees Association and Affiliated Tribes of the Quinault Reservation; who are all members of the Special Trustees Advisory Board don't know that this is going on right under their noses. Who knows?

At any rate, if I was in charge of spending my grandma's money at the store to get something to clean the counter off with, I damn sure wouldn't buy cheap napkins-I'd get maybe one or two dish towels so I could have something a year or two from now to do the job.

I would think the decision would be an easy one...but then methinks I think too much.

Yet more MOTIVATIONS!

Take a look around and you will see that the Certified Federal Surveyors Program (CFEDS)is supposed to be self funded. Self Funded? No budget from the great white father? Cut off? For real? Why would they do that? Why would the great white father create a program in the federal government that isn't funded? What gives? Come on now, you can't create a school traffic warning sign without some sort of maintenance fee in this country. Why would you create a program and "hope" it grows up on its own?

1. Instead of enriching the program, instead of empowering tribes to become self sufficient, instead of teaching them how to fish, you drain their checkbook paying for each and every fish. Instead of putting funding into training tribal surveyors so that tribes can become self sufficient in at least one more area, you take TPA funds away from tribes across the board, and you pay those TPA funds into overpriced surveys on a piece-meal basis. Tribal Priority Allocations were meant in their infancy in the 1970s to pursue Indian self-determination by offering ways to set [TRIBAL] priorities and allocate funds for those activities they [TRIBES] wanted to fund, in consultation with BIA. BIA was supposed to give TRIBAL PRIORITY ALLOCATION FUNDS to tribes by funding TRIBALLY OPERATED ACTIVITIES or through SERVICES PROVIDED BY BIA as well as some of Bureau of Indian Affairs' management and administrative costs, according to A 1998 GAO report. The consultation went out the window. I know two years ago that when a regional BLM surveyor-type was made aware of the elected officials who would now be conducting boundary surveys, he said "I wasn't aware of that." And now apparently, neither is anybody else aware of the problem (the results) built into the Certified Federal Surveyor Program. Does the Certified Federal Surveyor program meet the test of being a TRIBALLY OPERATED ACTIVITY or a SERVICE PROVIDED BY THE BIA? Afraid not. Somebody at the Office of Special Trustee has made a horrible case for this program which will take a serious link out of the Indian Self Determination which Tribal Priority Allocations was supposed to create.

2. Instead of doing it outright, in front of GOD AND EVERYBODY, you make it sophisticated, covert, and you make believers of even the smartest people that it is in the best interest of the Indian population, when in reality it isn't. I really feel sorry for my friends at the Certified Federal Surveyor Program. I hope and I do pray that their eyes are opened to the sophisticated effects that are at work here. Remember it isn't the rules we care about in Indian Country. It's the RESULTS that we're concerned about. Do my friends, the Certified Federal Surveyor Program Coordinators really know what we're talking about here? Do they really know how they're being used to facilitate this egregious infraction against Indian Self -Determination? Why else would they willingly participate unless they didn't know? Why else would otherwise very intelligent, professionals so willingly participate? Why else would they cash the checks from the Tribal Priority Allocation funds like a Federal Spendthrift instead of advocating for these funds to be turned around and sent back to the Tribal Priority Allocation Fund coffers where some really advantageous work can be done?

3. Could it be because, the Certified Federal Surveyor program is now supposed to be SELF FUNDED? Could it be because the reputation as a manager, is on the line for a Certified Federal Surveyor Program Coordinator and staff? Could it be because they really put one over on him and his staff when they gave him about $400,000 dollars to start it up, and then "sell" the program to every state licensed surveyor who is at this moment clamoring to get in the class to "pad their resume?" Could it be because the Certified Federal Surveyor Program Coordinators on the ground level really aren't as experienced as they thought they were? Like maybe they didn't realize that the funds that went into starting this program now provides "the customers to raid the cash register?" Believe it- now the funds have been shifted through the Office of Special Trustee into paying for outrageous surveys. We pay now in some cases $15,000 dollars per survey and get what? Instead of providing funding at say $45,000 -$60,000 per surveyor per year to have them in-house in the tribes, or at BLM. Then if they screw things up, we have some accountability. As it stands now, we take away their contract and point and say "bad surveyor!" In a normal situation that would be sufficient. But in a Fiduciary Trust Model under the ownership of the Office of Special Trustee, it reaks of irresponsibility, and under-handedness, and a general lack of ethical fortitude.

We look for motivators to constantly evaluate how well we work for the "common good." Or do we? It isn't an easy thing to admit we've been hoodwinked. It isn't easy unless we think we have backing, unless we think we have support...when in reality we really do already have that support, that backing, when we withdraw from something less than honest (in a fiduciary trust model). All that support, all that backing will come from all those people we are supposed to remember we are supporting. When we really do come out in their corner, we find that they're there like they've always been: waiting for us to fight for them.

I'd shake the hand of somebody like that. I think the TRUE MOTIVATION is there for a whole "helluva lotta dem dere Indians" to shake the hand of someone who champions our cause, because then the results, the negative results, the disastrous results, would have one less protagonist.

Socrates would be proud.

Return to the scene of the Crime

"and if you dig deep enough, you too will fall into the hole over your head"


The appraisal system is really not a sound system as we can see from the information on smart money's website in their article titled FRAUD IN NEW MEXICO. It seems that the Office of Special Trustee's responsibility to oversee objective appraisals has indeed fallen by the wayside, and you better not dare question them on it.

Deborah Lewis, an appraiser with the Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians (OST), a branch of the Interior Department, filed an affidavit⁸ with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia detailing allegedly illegal activities she uncovered in 2002.

Lewis's 18-page affidavit chronicling her assignment at the Navajo Regional Office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs in Gallup, N.M., reveals that she had found...improper appraisal methodologies that allegedly violated federal law and resulted in consistently low values for rights-of-way easements used by oil and gas companies on Indian land.

This article was put out by Smart Money in 2004.

And if you dig further, you find that Office of Special Trustee has had some less-than-ethical practices going on from the top down in 2005 as shown in a memorandum from the Office of Inspector General for the Department of the Interior. The memorandum details how Donna Erwin, Doug Lords and Jeff Lords created an appearance of preferential treatment to the firm of Chavarria, Dunne and Lamey, LLC while a non-competitive contract was repeatedly awarded to the firm for trust fund accounting and risk management services to the tune of $6 million dollars.

As if that hole weren't deep enough, they had the gall to challenge the employees who questioned their actions of drinking and golfing with the contractors. Donna had the nerve to ask a really junior employee why he was "bitching" that she was drinking with the firm. So, now we move to my phone call with an Office of Special Trustee employee who yelled at me asking if I was an expert appraiser and acquainted with United States Professional Appraisal Practices. Well, no, but I can read! I'm not the only one that they like to throw their weight around with. Apparently they also said the Special Master was not an expert or authorized to opine on appraisal issues. "They" now includes an Interior Department spokesman [Dan Dubray] who is reported to have told the trade journal Gas Daily that "we believe the report is faulty and biased. The special master has no authority or expertise on appraisal issues."

Accountability. Can't we just all agree to do things "ethically?" As society would accept them? When you look at an organization's ethics and the effects it has like the effect that the Office of Special Trustee has had in failing their trust responsibility, you kinda wonder how many times "them there Indians was right."

I wonder how many times we have to be right in demanding trust responsibility finally be enacted; how many times we have to scream that the rules mean less and less when following rules has the effect of violating the trust responsibility before someone (?) listens.

So, how many counties will consent to having a city perform a survey to resolve a boundary dispute between the county and a city in the county? How many states will consent to having a county resolve a boundary dispute between themselves? How many states will have a county's preferred contractor-survey firm resolve a boundary dispute between the state and a county?

But if it 's a tribe, well then just write a rule that says a firm separated by five levels from you will just to do things the way you want them to. So, Department of the Interior tells Office of Special Trustee to settle the policies, Trustee tells BLM what they're going to do, Trustee then tells BIA to tell Tribe to pay for it and when it's paid, they have to settle for an "appearance" of less-than-ethical behavior. By making the tribes pay for it, the Federal Government has just released itself of the trust responsibility that it swears to at the start of so many of their documents.

We'll leave it at that for now and pursue this in a follow up. While you're waiting for the follow up, your homework will be to read An Ugly History, which details exactly what happened in the unfair appraisals in the Navajo Regional Office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs in Gallup, NM. This was also published in Dec of 04 on Smart Money.

A penney for your appraisal

For today's discussion I will be drawing information from the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, which is located on the appraisal foundation's web page. Now, there a few things you need to know when a firm is contracted to perform a reservation-wide appraisal to determine leasing stipulations.

Appraisals for Tribes/reservations are located under the Office of Special Trustee, office of appraisal services.


Now, you should also know that when an reservation-wide appraisal is performed, that office is also the "Client," not the actual tribe where the reservation-wide appraisal is done. So any requests for information must be done through the Office of Special Trustee's office of appraisal services. Ahhh, therein lies the ugliness of the process.

I looked at a reservation wide appraisal, and at first I was surprised at the fact that they sampled 15 different farming operations for determining fair value for leases. Unfortunately, the appraisal firm forgot to tell everybody that they were only talking to 6 farmers in all actuality. This meant that when questioned for fair market value, each farmer would get two votes for their 1/4, 3/4 crop share lease plan. 3 farmers would get three votes to cast for leases more favorable for them. That is an important omission of fact in my book. Now maybe it is not an "error of omission" as the USPAP would see it, but it is an omission never-the-less.

Now before you assume that I am being harsh, you should also know that I called the appraisal firm up to ask where they got their information to back up their recommendation that the leases should be 1/4, 3/4. Currently leases on the reservation usually go for 1/3, 2/3. Instead of calling me back, they called the office of appraisal services, because they are the client of the appraisal firm, not the tribe. We never did get an answer on this subject. I recommend to all land owners that if they want 1/3, 2/3 crop share then that is what they should ask for and if the farmers give their usual excuse that times are hard and they can't afford to pay 1/3, 2/3, then be fair and ask the farmer to open his books up to show that. Prove that 1/3, 2/3 is too much. So far, no farmers have opened their books. And neither did the appraisal firm that performed the appraisal. They can make recommendations to the Office of Special Trustee which they will use to tell BIA how much leases should go for, but they can't tell the tribe how they got that conclusion. That is hardly in the true essence of "employing those recognized methods and techniques that are necessary to produce a credible appraisal;" That would be standard 1-1 a for those of you following in the good book of USPAP. Credible means offering reasonable grounds for being believed according to a dictionary definition. I would like to believe the appraisal firm, but just show me one time how you came to your conclusion when you never interviewed any objective source.

Another strange thing is that Idaho is a non-disclosure state. So how did the appraisal firm come to their conclusion? If they used available information to come to their conclusion, lets all take a look at it. Because if not, then it could fall under the color of a secret hand shake. Now listen to that carefully. It's not that all appraisal firms work in collusion with farmers to screw the tribes. It just looks that way for now. It is that their process cannot be independently substantiated by the tribes who will later be regulated by their decision. It is that their process, especially in my case, will be advantageous to the local farmers, and not to the tribal Land Owners.

You see they can't have it both ways. The appraisal firms use farmer-fed-suggestions to arrive at a new leasing recommendation that the tribes must comply with, but they don't give the tribes any due process to refute these alleged facts, to have the real facts disclosed by farmers (open them books up!), to negotiate fair leases. I am not a fan of non-disclosure rules and apparently neither are a fair share of other people whose states are a changin' their ways.

A good read for realtors, appraisers, people interested in knowing how hard your realtor will work for you, and tribes would be Freakanomics. It is especially enlightening to the effects that knowing the secret price has on the sale of your property.

Now, what is the fix? How do we make this objective? Can everybody be happy? I don't know about happy. But then that should concern people. Why is it many farmers are so happy and so many tribal members are very unhappy with their leases? (or in many cases oblivious to the whole process)

The fix, is to have farmers back up their claims with an opening of their accounting books. Let's see where their money is really going. If it was so un-profitable, why do they keep coming back? We won't change the non-disclosure any time soon. So make them open their books. Not much else is going to change either so let's put the tribes on the contract as a co-client. Office of Special trustee should give tribes due process.

Ah, now you're thinking that tribes should just ask for this now anyways. Interesting, so that works in all situations except where BIA offices handle the leasing provisions for the tribes.

My friend Ron in the CFEDs program needed to hear that the tribes will not necessarily know things similar to this are happening, just like they don't know about the CFEDS appraiser selection process, and even if they are handling their own leasing office, they won't know in all situations that they should have some recourse. They won't understand how the process works enough to stand up and ask for their rights to be restored. The tribes have a right to be objectively, and culturally regulated and have leases negotiated by the BIA, with OST that defer to the landowners' determination that the lease is in their best interest, to the maximum extent possible.

Go forth and do not concquer, simply cooperate, and if you don't get cooperation, stand your line until they come to the line prepared to offer everything contained in the term fiduciary responsiblity.

Ground work

Before we get started, lets get one thing clear from the outset. This identification of "issues" is not personal. There is practically nobody in the Bureau of Indian Affairs Offices whom I do not have good feelings for, on a personal level. There is at least one person in the Office of Special Trustee Office with whom I feel I will never have good feelings for, but he's not Tribal so I think the problem is that the whole Native protection concept goes right over his head.

When I identify "issues" (some of you call them problems, screw ups, fluster clucks, etc), it is just that. I am identifying some thing, some action, lack of action, mistake, that could be done differently, better, quicker, or slower. I identify the issue and I will try not to blame anybody for the issue. I will clarify that by saying if it was my best friend doing the same thing in that position, it is the issue I am identifying. So don't think if your'e a BIA employee in any of these positions that I am slamming you. If you got replaced next week, and the FNG did the same thing you did, I would still be identifying the issue that is happening. It's not because of you, it's because the issue will affect us that I will identify issues.

There is no danger in trying to do something better. There is no shame in mistakes. There may be guilt, or responsibility assessed. Because like I've said before, guilt is feeling badly for having done something wrong. SHAME is feeling bad about who you are.

No shame, no foul, and hopefully no harm comes from looking at land "issues" objectively and asking all of ourselves,

"How can we do it better?"