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?"

Here's how you manage leasing!

If you ever wanted to know why land owners complain about the BIA leasing process, about Gross Revenue Crop Share versus Cash Rent Leases, read about how the Fort Hall Landowner's Alliance led by Ernestine Werelus has been effecting major change in how the leasing process is conducted on their land.

Read about how nefarious deals between a willing or un-educated employee and a farmer who bids low is now being stopped. Farmers will mail bids to the owners. No more Agency Letterhead sent to land owners who mistakenly have believed the bids to be under the approval of the agency employees.

A cautionary note to all landowners: make sure that the appraisals are kept under lock and key (literally) so farmers do not have access to the information of which they are not clients. (REMEMBER OFFICE OF SPECIAL TRUSTEE DOES NOT EVEN LIST THE TRIBE AS A CLIENT ON APPRAISALS THAT PASS THROUGH THEIR OFFICE SO IN ALL EQUALITY, KEEP THE INFORMATION FROM BEING SHARED OPENLY WITH THE FARMERS)

There are a lot of subtle changes that make a vast world of difference: BIA and OST officials should not allow single-low-bids to substitute for competitive bidding. Ask Donna and Ross if they have audited any agencies who are allowing single bids to be a competitive bid. They have been made aware of this practice, and so have BIA officials but we still don't seem to have any changes, a year later.

One more note of caution: Somebody should really explain to the rest of the world after they explain to Indians, how appraisers reach appraisal Fair Annual Rental Rates in states of Non-Disclosure. Idaho is one such state so, if nobody is required to disclose information, how do appraisers reach conclusions?

An Administration's task

I am sitting here wondering who the next Special Trustee will be for the Office of Special Trustee. I'm already wondering who will replace Ross Swimmer. I'm wondering where Donna Erwin will go. I'm wondering where Doug and Jeff Lords will go. I'm hoping that the Carl Artman replacement will stay longer than it takes to confirm him. I'm hoping Majel Russell continues to do good things for Indian Country in any place but the Bureau of Indian Affairs Offices (which by the way are inside of Wash. D.C.). Who will President Elect Barack Obama appoint to replace all of them?

I'm hoping that somebody will finally hear what we've been saying for so long. Heck way back in 1999 even Senator Larry Craig had a good idea. So some of his time was well spent wherever he thought this quote up as reported in '99 on FCW.com by L. Scott Tillett:

"...Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, questioned whether the management of the funds "really belongs within the government."

"There are no excuses. There should be no excuses," said Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho). Many companies manage trust funds without so much as "a dime" out of place, Craig said.

"Why can't we be smart enough to hire the right people to do the job?"

At issue is nearly $2.4 billion in money that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) cannot accurately account for, although Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt said it has not been stolen."

Amen to the words from Larry Craig back then. And then I wonder what Bruce Babbitt meant when he said the 2.4 billion wasn't stolen? That must have meant that he knew where it was. If it wasn't accounted for, then how do you know it wasn't stolen? It must have meant that Bruce Babbitt knew it was being "borrowed." It wasn't stolen so what other excuse is there? Borrowed to pay down government debts, which they now say is not a measurable benefit when Eloise Cobell asks where all the unaccounted for funds are at.

And the management of the [trust] funds: didn't belong within the government? Thanks Frank, but the loss from hundreds of years of mismanagement should have been straightened out before the government decided to get out of the trust fund mis-management.

So who does President Elect Obama appoint to Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Bureau of Indian Affairs in 2009? Who does he appoint to replace Ross Swimmer and Donna Erwin at the Office of Special Trustee in 2009? Who does he appoint who can accept the resignation of Doug and Jeff Lords? Who can say?

The only thing I would hope for is that it isn't a self serving Coal Chairman (wonder where Ross will go?) or a golf-happy trio (they need a fourth to tee off) that gets left at Office of Special Trustee. My hope is in Barack Obama to do the right thing when it comes to cleaning office at the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of the Special Trustee in 2009.

I would hope like Senator Larry Craig said in 1999, that we're now "smart enough to hire the right people to do the job."

“The soul of Indian Country is at stake”
-Sally Willet from the Missoulian,
Administrative Law Judge
and Indian Land Working Group consultant

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.

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.

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.

Surveys on a Reservation

The latest craze to sweep federal surveyors offices is the program called CFEDs. It's a training program for certifying surveyors to perform federal surveys, cadastral services, BLM surveys, surveys for Tribes.

The requirements for becoming a CFEDs surveyor are really loose. REALLY really loose. REALLY REALLY REALLY LOOSE!

Why is this so important? Well if your tribe needs a survey performed that is of a Federal survey type, or a cadastral survey for oh, lets say a border dispute between the Tribe (reservation) and a state or a county, BLM usually is the one to do that. BLM has always done tribal cadastral surveys I am told. This CFEDs program replaces BLM surveyors with CFEDs surveyors because BLM cannot keep up with the demand for surveys from tribes. Basically, they are contracting out their services, their role in the fiduciary responsibility of the federal government, their oversight of an ethical survey. (remember the ethics part, I'll address this later in this entry)

So how loose are the requirements for becoming a CFEDs surveyor? Well if you look at the CFEDs Site you'll find that you have to meet two requirements:
1. be a licensed surveyor in any state
2. have no (negative) disciplinary actions in any state regulatory board or court in the last five years.

That is all that is required. For anything else, the sky's the limit. hmmmmmmm.


"Anything else" covers a lot of ground doesn't it? It does indeed!

What is meant when I said "anything else?" Let's say you're a CFEDs surveyor working at your normal job, and you get a call from Bureau of Land Management, or a tribe to go to a reservation to settle a border dispute between the Tribe and the State. You go in you do your thing, you check titles, you check monuments, you recheck titles, you do everything to uphold the integrity of your profession and decide that the land in dispute goes to the State. Easy right? Too easy!

How can you uphold the integrity of your profession...recommend a boundary dispute resolution in favor of a state, between a tribe and the state, as a CFEDs surveyor...when you are a state or county elected-surveyor? Remember the only requirements are listed above. There are no restrictions on anything else! So, elected surveyors, and state and city employee-surveyors, can (AND ARE) participating in the CFEDs process!

Which God will this surveyor serve? Will he serve the state, county or city he is an employee at, or an elected official of, or will he serve the Tribe for whom he is under contract through the BLM?

I brought this up quite a long time ago (2 years ago at a BIA realty conference in Lincoln City Oregon) and there was no answer. Now the first class has graduated from the CFEDs course and within the first four pages of my print out from the list I have found three CFEDs surveyors who meet the ethical dilema I have described here. I have also found several who have written questionable material as it relates to Tribal cultures.

So, what about that crazy word "ethics?" Let's see what one of the coordinators of the CFEDs program has to say about ethics. Dennis Mouland, one of the training coordinators has a venerated book called Ethics for the Professional Surveyor. He also has a fan, William Schmidt, who wrote a glowing review of the book, for Professional Surveyor Magazine.

He describes Dennis Moulan's "thoughts" on the subject of ethics as a word that '...originally meant habit, or the way someone is disposed to act.' He also says the word means the "right way," or "the approved or a proven way."

Well I have news for Dennis Mouland. I do not approve of the way that they are randomly creating a plethora of ethical dilemas for a bunch of surveyors whose real jobs may depend on how they are "disposed to act," during a border dispute between the Tribe and their real employers.

And really now, how can anybody who works for any state (say California) understand the real complexities of a border dispute between a tribe and another state (say Idaho) when they are working for another state?

I don't know, what do you think? What is your stand on this?

What about background checks? How many people serve on organizations that purport to deny tribal jurisdiction exists and are on the list of CFEDs surveyors? (I'm looking at you--you know who you are, and it's only a matter of time before this becomes painfully evident to the world)

Talk to your tribal councils, talk to your chairmen, your presidents, your program directors, ask them if they understand how screwed up this program is in its implementation from the ground up.

A friend of mine from Haskell Indian Nations University who shall remain nameless to protect Cricket's identiy, (Hi Cricket!) has this on her page and I think it's only too appropriate:

He who serves two masters has to lie to one.