[House Report 115-319]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
115th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 115-319
======================================================================
SANTA YNEZ BAND OF CHUMASH INDIANS LAND AFFIRMATION ACT OF 2017
_______
September 21, 2017.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bishop of Utah, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted
the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1491]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 1491) to reaffirm the action of the Secretary of
the Interior to take land into trust for the benefit of the
Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do
pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians
Land Affirmation Act of 2017''.
SEC. 2. REAFFIRMATION OF STATUS AND ACTIONS.
(a) Ratification of Trust Status.--The action taken by the Secretary
on January 20, 2017, to place approximately 1,427.28 acres of land
located in Santa Barbara County, California, into trust for the benefit
of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians is hereby ratified and
confirmed as if that action had been taken under a Federal law
specifically authorizing or directing that action.
(b) Ratification of Actions of the Secretary.--The actions taken by
the Secretary to assume jurisdiction over the appeals relating to the
fee-to-trust acquisition of approximately 1,427.28 acres in Santa
Barbara County, California, on January 30, 2015, is hereby ratified and
confirmed as if that action had been taken under a Federal law
specifically authorizing or directing that action.
(c) Ratification of Actions of the Secretary.--The actions taken by
the Secretary to dismiss the appeals relating to the fee-to-trust
acquisition of approximately 1,427.28 acres in Santa Barbara County,
California, on January 19, 2017, is hereby ratified and confirmed as if
that action had been taken under a Federal law specifically authorizing
or directing that action.
(d) Administration.--
(1) Administration.--The land placed into trust for the
benefit of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians by the
Secretary of the Interior on January 20, 2017, shall be a part
of the Santa Ynez Indian Reservation and administered in
accordance with the laws and regulations generally applicable
to the land held in trust by the United States for an Indian
tribe.
(2) Effect.--For purposes of certain California State laws
(including the California Land Conservation Act of 1965,
Government Code Section 51200, et seq.), placing the land
described in subsection (b) into trust shall remove any
restrictions on the property pursuant to California Government
Code Section 51295 or any other provision of such Act.
(e) Legal Description of Lands Transferred.--The lands to be
transferred pursuant to this Act are described as follows:
Legal Land Description/Site Location:Real property in the
unincorporated area of the County of Santa Barbara, State of
California, described as follows: PARCEL 1: (APN: 141-121-51
AND PORTION OF APN 141-140-10)LOTS 9 THROUGH 18, INCLUSIVE, OF
TRACT 18, IN THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AS SHOWN ON THE MAP SHOWING THE SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CANADA DE
LOS PINOS OR COLLEGE RANCHO, FILED IN RACK 3, AS MAP 4 IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. THIS LEGAL IS
MADE PURSUANT TO THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
RECORDED DECEMBER 5, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 01-105580 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL 2: (PORTION OF APN: 141-140-10)LOTS 1
THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, OF TRACT 24, IN THE COUNTY OF SANTA
BARBARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP SHOWING THE
SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CANADA DE LOS PINOS OR COLLEGE RANCHO,
FILED IN RACK 3, AS MAP 4 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAID COUNTY.THIS LEGAL IS MADE PURSUANT TO THAT CERTAIN
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE RECORDED DECEMBER 5, 2001 AS
INSTRUMENT NO. 01-105581 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL 3:
(PORTIONS OF APNS: 141-230-23 AND 141-140-10)LOTS 19 AND 20 OF
TRACT 18 AND THAT PORTION OF LOTS 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, AND 15
THROUGH 20, INCLUSIVE, OF TRACT 16, IN THE COUNTY OF SANTA
BARBARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP SHOWING THE
SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CANADA DE LOS PINOS OR COLLEGE RANCHO,
FILED IN RACK 3, AS MAP 4 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAID COUNTY, THAT LIES NORTHEASTERLY OF THE NORTHEASTERLY
LINE OF THE LAND GRANTED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY AN
EXECUTOR'S DEED RECORDED APRIL 2, 1968 IN BOOK 2227, PAGE 136
OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.THIS LEGAL IS MADE PURSUANT
TO THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE RECORDED DECEMBER 5,
2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 01-105582 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL 4:
(APN: 141-240-02 AND PORTION OF APN: 141-140-10)LOTS 1 THROUGH
12, INCLUSIVE, OF TRACT 25, IN THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP SHOWING THE
SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CANADA DE LOS PINOS OR COLLEGE RANCHO,
FILED IN RACK 3, AS MAP 4 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAID COUNTY.THIS LEGAL IS MADE PURSUANT TO THAT CERTAIN
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE RECORDED DECEMBER 5, 2001 AS
INSTRUMENT NO. 01-105583 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL 5:
(PORTION OF APN: 141-230-23)THAT PORTION OF LOTS 3 AND 6 OF
TRACT 16, IN THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AS SHOWN ON THE MAP SHOWING THE SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CANADA DE
LOS PINOS OR COLLEGE RANCHO, FILED IN RACK 3, AS MAP 4 IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, THAT LIES
NORTHEASTERLY OF THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND GRANTED TO
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY AN EXECUTOR'S DEED RECORDED APRIL 2,
1968 IN BOOK 2227, PAGE 136 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID
COUNTY.THIS LEGAL IS MADE PURSUANT TO THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE
OF COMPLIANCE RECORDED DECEMBER 5, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 01-
105584 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
(f) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this Act shall--
(1) enlarge, impair, or otherwise affect any right or claim
of the Tribe to any land or interest in land that is in
existence before the date of the enactment of this Act;
(2) affect any water right of the Tribe in existence before
the date of the enactment of this Act; or
(3) terminate or limit any access in any way to any right-of-
way or right-of-use issued, granted, or permitted before the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(g) Restricted Use of Transferred Lands.--The Tribe may not conduct,
on the land described in subsection (b) taken into trust for the Tribe
pursuant to this Act, gaming activities--
(1) as a matter of claimed inherent authority; or
(2) under any Federal law, including the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) and regulations
promulgated by the Secretary or the National Indian Gaming
Commission under that Act.
(h) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
(1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
the Interior.
(2) Tribe.--The term ``Tribe'' means the Santa Ynez Band of
Chumash Mission Indians.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 1491 is to reaffirm the action of the
Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for the
benefit of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
The 99-acre Santa Ynez Reservation was formally established
in 1901 under the authority of the Act of January 12, 1891, for
members of the Chumash Tribe. The Chumash people, however, have
resided along California's Central Coast prior to contact with
European settlers in 1769 where approximately 22,000 Chumash
lived in villages between Malibu and Monterey, California.
Like many California Indians, European diseases took a
large toll on the original population of the Chumash people,
falling to approximately 2,788 by 1831.\1\ Today, the Tribe has
approximately 140 enrolled members and more than a thousand
descendants (i.e., individuals of Chumash ancestry who do not
qualify for membership in the Tribe), and the Tribe's
reservation of about 138 acres is located in Santa Ynez (Santa
Barbara County).\2\ The Tribe constructed a casino and hotel
resort on its reservation pursuant to the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), which has lifted the
Tribe from historic poverty to economic success. With other
private investments in the region, the Tribe has become one of
the largest employers in Santa Barbara County.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Tiller's Guide to Indian Country, 3rd Edition, at 340 (2015).
\2\Written statement of Vincent Armenta, Chairman, Santa Ynez Band
of Chumash Indians, Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs
oversight hearing on ``Indian lands: Exploring resolutions to disputes
concerning Indian tribes, state, and local governments, and private
landowners over land use and development,'' August 2, 2012.
\3\Tiller's Guide to Indian Country 3rd Edition. Veronica E.
Valarde Tiller at 340 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current reservation also hosts dense tribal housing
that was originally built through Department of Housing and
Urban Development low income grant programs (grants obtained
prior to the Tribe's successful operation of gaming). The Tribe
reports that relatively few of its members reside on the
reservation.
In 2010, the Tribe purchased a 1,400-acre tract of land
known as Camp 4, located about two miles from the reservation
in an unincorporated area of Santa Barbara County, from the
Fess Parker estate.\4\ At present, the landscape of Camp 4 is
mainly agricultural. Under California state law and Santa
Barbara County zoning rules--including the Williamson Act--the
property may not be easily converted to the kind of developed
status the Tribe says it desires to pursue. The Williamson Act
provides certain property tax relief for California landowners
who agree to maintain their property for open space or
agriculture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\http://www.chumashea.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/site-and-
vicinity.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2011, to divest the State and county of its regulatory,
zoning and tax jurisdiction over Camp 4, the Chumash Tribe
delivered a proposed cooperative agreement to the County of
Santa Barbara as an initial offer to mitigate any potential
impacts of taking the land into trust.
In June 2013, after waiting more than two years for a
response from Santa Barbara County to the Tribe's proposed
mitigation agreement, the tribe submitted a fee-to-trust
application for the Camp 4 property. The Tribe has testified it
intends to use Camp 4 for suitable tribal housing for its
current and future members. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
published a Notice of Availability for the initial
Environmental Assessment (EA), prepared under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.), and invited comments through an extended comment period
ending on November 18, 2013.
In response to comments and changes in the plan for
development of Camp 4, the BIA conducted another EA. A revised
EA was published in May 2014, and comments on the revised EA
were accepted through an extended comment period ending July
14, 2014. Based on the comments submitted to the revised EA for
the proposed federal action to accept the fee-to-trust transfer
for the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians, the BIA issued a
``Finding of No Significant Impact'' on October 23, 2014.
In December 2014, the Pacific Region Director for the BIA
approved an application by the Tribe to accept title to the
Camp 4 property in trust after making a Finding of No
Significant Impact under the revised EA.\5\ The revised EA
describes the reasonably foreseeable consequence of the trust
acquisition as being for ``tribal housing on five or one-acre
lots and associated facilities. The housing project would
include up to 143 residential units, as well as supporting
infrastructure including on-site wastewater treatment and reuse
of recycled water and development of groundwater to meet
potable water demands.''\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\http://www.chumashea.com/
\6\http://www.chumashea.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/FONSI.pdf at
5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Interior Department's rules, a decision by a
Regional Director of the BIA to acquire land in trust for non-
gaming purposes may be appealed administratively.\7\ When an
administrative appeal is pending, title to the land does not
yet transfer to the U.S. in trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\Once BIA acquires land in trust, however, a tribe may convert
the land to another purpose than that stated on its trust application,
as long as the actual use is not otherwise restricted under federal
law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the BIA's approval of the Tribe's application to
acquire Camp 4 in trust, Santa Barbara County voted 3-2 to file
an administrative appeal and to file litigation against the BIA
action.\8\ Additionally, other individuals and nearby property
owners also filed an administrative appeal, which argues among
other things that the BIA violated NEPA.\9\ Subsequently, the
Tribe requested legislation from Congress to have title to the
land placed in trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\http://www.independent.com/news/2015/jan/26/county-appeals-
federal-camp-4-approval/.
\9\See Opening Brief of Appellant Santa Ynez Valley Concerned
Citizens, U.S. Department of the Interior, Assistant Secretary of the
Interior--Indian Appeals, December 31, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 19, 2017, the Principal Deputy Assistant
Secretary-Indian Affairs dismissed these appeals and affirmed
the December 2014 BIA Pacific Region decision to place the land
into trust. On January 28, 2017, Santa Barbara County filed a
lawsuit in federal court, while certain private individuals
sought additional administrative review of the BIA action. This
last administrative appeal was dismissed by the Acting
Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs. H.R. 1491 therefore affirms
the BIA's action to place title to Camp 4 in trust. It is
expected that upon enactment of H.R. 1491, the County's suit
will be dismissed by the court.
The Committee on Natural Resources considered similar
legislation, H.R. 1157 (Congressman Doug LaMalfa), in the 114th
Congress. On June 17, 2015, the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular
and Alaska Native Affairs held a hearing on H.R. 1157, after
which the County of Santa Barbara and the tribe held a number
of meetings in an effort to resolve their differences
concerning the status and proposed uses of Camp 4. The County
formed an ad hoc Subcommittee to facilitate these
discussions.\10\ The Natural Resources Committee favorably
reported H.R. 1157 on September 6, 2016 (H. Rept. 114-715).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\https://www.countyofsb.org/tribal-matters.sbc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 1491 was introduced on March 10, 2017, by Congressman
Doug LaMalfa (R-CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on
Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee
on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs. On July 25, 2017,
the Natural Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The
Subcommittee was discharged by unanimous consent. Congressman
LaMalfa offered an amendment designated #1; it was adopted by
unanimous consent. No further amendments were offered, and the
bill, as amended, was ordered favorably reported to the House
of Representatives by unanimous consent on July 26, 2017.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT
1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act.
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, the Committee has received the following estimate for the
bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, September 20, 2017.
Hon. Rob Bishop,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1491, the Santa
Ynez Band of Chumash Indians Land Affirmation Act of 2017.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Robert Reese.
Sincerely,
Keith Hall,
Director.
Enclosure.
H.R. 1491--Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians Land Affirmation Act of
2017
H.R. 1491 would affirm the decision made by the Department
of the Interior (DOI) to take into trust approximately 1,400
acres of land owned by the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission
Indians (Chumash Tribe) in Santa Barbara County, California.
Under the bill, DOI would hold the title to that land for the
benefit of the tribe. The bill would prohibit certain types of
gaming on those lands and end any administrative appeals of
DOT's decision about this property. CBO estimates that
implementing the bill would have no significant budgetary
effects related to holding the land in trust.
Enacting H.R. 1491 would not affect direct spending or
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. CBO
estimates that enacting H.R. 1491 would not increase net direct
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive
10-year periods beginning in 2028.
H.R. 1491 would impose intergovernmental and private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
CBO estimates that the cost of the mandates would be
insignificant and thus would fall below the annual thresholds
established in UMRA for intergovernmental and private-sector
mandates ($78 million and $156 million in 2017, respectively,
adjusted annually for inflation).
The bill would impose an intergovernmental mandate by
preempting the authority of state and local governments to tax
land taken into trust for the Chumash Tribe. Information from
Santa Barbara County about taxes and other receipts associated
with the land indicates that such revenues total less than
$500,000 annually.
The bill also would impose an intergovernmental and
private-sector mandate by eliminating the ability of public and
private entities to appeal the federal government's decision to
take land into trust for the benefit of the Chumash Tribe. By
ratifying DOT's decision to take the land into trust, the bill
would effectively extinguish any existing or future appeal of
that decision. The costs of the mandates would be the value of
forgone compensation and settlements associated with such
appeals if they would have been successful under current law;
however, because no monetary award is available for such
challenges to the administrative procedures and decisions of
the federal government, CBO expects that the mandate would
impose no costs.
The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Robert Reese
(for federal costs), Rachel Austin (for intergovernmental
mandates), and Amy Petz (for private-sector mandates). The
estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or
objective of this bill is to reaffirm the action of the
Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for the
benefit of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians.
EARMARK STATEMENT
This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives.
COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
COMPLIANCE WITH H. RES. 5
Directed Rule Making. This bill does not contain any
directed rule makings.
Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was
not included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law
98-169) as relating to other programs.
PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
If enacted, this bill would make no changes to existing
law.