CRIT: Colorado River Indian Tribe

August 31, 2010: Ltr. Director Bishop BLM

"...our organization wishes to express serious concerns over the limited character and method of procedure for the cadastral survey of the “disputed area”. It appears the purpose of this survey is to provide the Colorado River Indian Tribes (CRIT) with a manageable western boundary of its reservation. However, the instructions are inapplicable. This is explained below. Additionally, serious questions of CRIT’s jurisdiction over the land within the survey area are currently before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals as well as the Interior Board of Indian Affairs (IBIA). "

August 26, 2010: Lt-Federal Actions affecting Boundary Dispute

 

August 25, 2010 Tuttle Briefing Schedule

 

August 23, 2010: Blythe Boat Club Reply to CRIT

Blythe Boat Club is a non-profit organization with 100 members and their families, has been at its present location for over 63 years. We provide unlimited access to the river for the Riverside County Sheriff Department, Bureau of Reclamation, and Department of Fish and Game to name a few. Attached please find our letter of response to the CRIT along with a copy of the CRIT: Notice to Quit Premises, a copy of our Record of Survey recorded with the County of Riverside and the letter from The Holt Group addressing their discovery

August 23, 2010: Public Acts Request of Riverside County

 

August 18, 2010: William C. Tuttle Appeal

 

August 12 2010: CRIT to Blythe Boat Club

Evicition Action

August 12, 2010: Water Wheel Reply Brief

 

August 9, 2010: Congresswoman Bono-Mack to Salazar and Holder

 

August 1, 2010: WBHA letter to Congresswoman Bono-Mack

The determination included in the DoJ letter remains consistent with the position asserted by the Department of the Interior since the infamous '69 Secretarial Order. However, there are gross deceptions and distortion of facts that I would like to address here. The single most offensive factual distortion in the letter is the contention that the '69 Secretarial Order established a meander line western boundary for the full 25 miles of "west bank" from Riverside Mountain to the La Paz Arroyo. The fact is that Secretary Udall only used the Benson Survey for the northern 2/3 of the western boundary. The southern 1/3 (8 miles) is not the meander line, not the Benson Survey, but riparian according to the Dept. of the Interior. The reason for this deception is explained below.

July 29, 2010: Riverside Sheriff On CRIT Law Enforcement Officers

Letter to CRR4J Board Member

Riverside County Document - Cites California Lands

Page 1-5 Riverside County Policy as it pertains to the handling of our specific situation Page 6 Email from Lieutenant Hubbard as to California’s Eviction Process Page 7 Memo from Joe Rank – Riverside County Counsel Page 8 Law Citation that states Indian Lands in California will adopt California Law Page 9-10 Potentially Applicable Landlord Tenant Laws

July 23, 2010: CRR4J Request to Federal Grand Jury

Colorado River Residents For Justice requests a federal grand jury investigation into the deprivation of citizen’s rights under the alleged color of law by the Colorado River Indian Tribe (“CRIT” or "Tribe"). Violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 18 USC § 242. by the CRIT Attorney General, CRIT Tribal Chairman, CRIT Police, CRIT Fish & Game, CRIT Environmentalist.

July 20, 2010: Diversion of State Money CRIT

The language of the compact is plain and direct. "Federally recognized tribes that are operating fewer than 350 Gaming Devices are Non Compact Tribes." There is no language stating on which side of a State boundary the gaming devices must be. There is no language that states there must be jurisdiction over the gaming devices. It is a request for a number, a verifiable number. CRIT has 475 gaming devices; Fort Mojave has 1,100 gaming devices, verifiable in the Tribes' Arizona Tribal State Compact or through the Arizona Department of Gaming.

July 20, 2010: The Lower Colorado River Land Use Plan Summary

The Report is available below - it was issues by the US Dept. of the Interior in 1964. The plan intended to lease the lands in question to Riverside County to manage the development of commerical and recreational facilities. All State Laws, i.e. CEQA were to apply. Conflicts were to be resolved in Local Courts.

July 19, 2010: Tuttle IBIA - agency action

BIA inserts itself to terminate a lease in good standing - without authority to do so.

June 18, 2010: WBHOA-to-Chairman-Enas

Clarifications

July 13, 2010 WBHA ltr Sup Benoit

 

Feb.5, 2004 WBHA ltr to Wilson - Attachment to July 2010 Letter

 

July 2010: Survey of Blythe Yacht Club (Filed 7-19-1948)

The purpose of this record of survey is to establish and monument the property described in instrument No. 2399 and filed in BK 995 PG 370 Recorded 7-19-1948 Official Records of Riverside County.

June 30, 2010: Letter to Riverside Cap. Vigue

Why has the policy of the Riverside Sheriff changed?

June 28, 2010: Water Wheel's reply brief

 

June 14 2010 CGCC Number of Gaming Devices.pdf

The Compacts created a framework where certain tribes (Compact Tribes operating "Gaming Devices" pursuant to licenses drawn from the license pool) would pay into the RSTF and others (Non-Compact Tribes) would receive money from the RSTF. Within this framework, "Non-Compact Tribe(s)" and "Gaming Devices" must only be considered to the extent that they are in the State of California. Your reference to an older device certification form (CGCC-C2005.02) impliedly makes this clear. Simply put, California has no jurisdiction over "Gaming Devices" in other states nor do the Compacts speak to limiting payments based on "Gaming Devices" in other states.

June 7, 2010: 2.2 Million Improper Diversion of State Money.pdf

 

May 27, 2010: Trespass Notice

CRIT is expanding its eviction process to include numerous residents along the River.

May 24, 2010: United States Amicus v. Water Wheel

 

May 21, 2010: CRIT- Amicus v Water Wheel

 

April 22, 2010: New Briefing Schedule

For the 9th Circuit

May 14, 2010: Water Wheel v CRIT

 

May 11, 2010: Riverside Sheriff Sub Station Expense

The Colorado River sub station was budgeted 5.1 million dollars 2008/2009, however the actual cost of service to the taxpayers is another question. The Station handeled 5299 service calls.

March 23 2010 EPA to Water Wheel.pdf

 

Oct. 23, 2009: Notice of Appeal re Water Wheel by Plaintiffs

 

Oct. 22, 2009:Notice of Appeal re Water Wheel by Defendants

 

Oct. 15, 2009: Brief Summary of CRIT Land Dispute

 

Oct. 6, 2009: Water Wheel responds to court decision"

PALO VERDE TIMES NEWS October 6, 2009

Oct. 3, 2009: WHAT THE FEDERAL COURT DID, AND DID NOT, DO ON THE WATER WHEEL LITIGATION

 

Sept. 29, 2009: Court speaks- CRIT and Residents see judgment differently

John Wright · Tuesday, September 29, 2009 Parkerville News

Sept. 22, 2009: Water Wheel Camp Recreation Area Inc. Robert Johnson v. Honorable Gary La Rance

On September 23, 2009, we received a ruling from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. The Judge ruled that the CRIT Tribal Court had no jurisdiction over Robert Johnson personally, and ordered that the judgment against him in the tribal litigation is null and void. He ordered that portion of the Tribal Court judgement vacated and specifically directed CRIT to pursue no further action against Robert Johnson. In short, CRIT cannot take any action against Robert Johnson which is associated with his presence at Water Wheel Resort, or its operations. However, the court concluded that there was Tribal Court jurisdiction over Water Wheel Resort because it had operated under the Lease for 32 years and was by this time a holdover tenant. However, there is no execution of judgment provision in the Federal Order, meaning that CRIT currently does not have authority to evict Water Wheel. With this, it seems clear that CRIT cannot evict Water Wheel Resort unless it first obtains an Order of Eviction from a state court. However, filing such an action constitutes a tribal waiver of sovereign immunity, which in turn would establish a legal right by Water Wheel Resort to defend the suit on the issues associated with the boundary issue -- including that the land is not held in trust and it is not within the Colorado River Indian Reservation. The federal laws prohibiting the CRIT Reservation from expanding into California would be fair game in that litigation.

August 6, 2009: Federal Court Order

United States District Judge Campbell requests additional briefing from parties. He wishes to consider the merits of this action to determine if CRIT tribal court has jurisdiction over the Public Domain lands in California (not in trust and not part of the reservation) that has been leased to non tribal citizens by the United States Department of the Interior. Briefs are due August 21, 2009.

July 16, 2009: BLM Order # Group 1584

Instructions for resurvey and posting of signs for the Western Boundary of the Colorado River Indian Reservation - This is troubling as there has been no congressional legislation or court ruling to resolve the western boundary as required in the 1999 Settlement Agreement in the Az v CA court ruling. (as of 3-2010)

June 2009: CGCC responds to CRIT's Eligibility for RSTF Monies

 

March 27, 2009: Water Wheel Camp Recreational Area v Hon. Gary Larance, CRIT

Seeks declaration that no tribal jurisdiction exists over Water Wheel or Robert Jonson and declares Tribal Court has no jurisdiction over Water Wheel or Robert Johnson in the Tribal Court Action or any subsequent action arising from a dispute under the Water Wheel's Lease.

March 2009: Carcieri Decision Impacts

 

Feb. 2009 Letter to Riverside County Counsel

 

Feb. 2009: Reply from SOI to Stand Up For California

 

October 2008: Stand Up For California Request for formal investigation

 

2008: Letter Campaign

All elected officials agree the land is in dispute.

Oct. 2008: Stand Up For California to Riverside County

Questions regarding disputed area and County jurisdiction

Sept. 2008: Colorado River Citizens For Justice to CGCC

INQUIRY AS TO ELIGIBILITY OF THE COLORADO RIVER INDIAN TRIBE (CRIT) TO RECEIVE REVENUE SHARING TRUST FUND (RSTF) MONIES AS A NON-COMPACT TRIBE

June 16, 2008: US DOJ to Congresswoman Mary Bono

 

Feb. 22, 2008: Congresswoman Bono Mack to US Attorney

 

Oct. 2006: Colorado River Residents for Justice

CRIT Boundary Dispute AZ v. California Settlement Agreement explained

May 23, 2006: Stand Up For California to the City of Blythe

Stand Up For California writes to this honorable Council today to alert you to serious questions regarding the validity and enforceability of the Municipal Service Agreement (MSA) between the City of Blythe (City) and the Colorado River Indian Tribes (CRIT).

May 2006: Stand Up For California Request of the Governor

Certification of CRIT California Indian lands and verification of status as a non compact tribe

May 5, 2005: MSA between the City of Blythe and CRIT

 

April 27, 2006: Governor to Mr. French

We have carefully reviewed your proposal to address the land dispute between residents in the area and the Tribe to satisfy the independent public policy criteria outlined in the Governor's Proclamation. While we appreciate the homeowners' situation and understand that resolution of the land dispute would greatly benefit the residents in your association, we do not believe that resolution of the land dispute alone substantially serves an independent public policy that would warrant the Governor's consideration of a Section 20 concurrence for the Tribe. Moreover, any increased economic benefits to the County would not satisfy the independent public policy criteria.

March 4, 1999, memorandum in Support of Joint Motion to Recommend approval of Stipulation and Agreement

A Feb. 23, 1999 Stipulation and Agreement in the Arizona v. California case (Arizona III) The Settlement Agreement at page three provides: “C. Disputed Boundary the parties agree not to seek adjudication in this phase of the litigation of the validity, correctness, or propriety of the January 17, 1969 Order of the Secretary of the Interior. Western Boundary of the Colorado River Indian Reservation from the tip of Riverside Mtn. Through section 12 T.5 S., R23 E SBM CA. No 90-1-5-668, 41-54 (1969 Secretarial Order – (this should be solicitor opinion)) The united States, but not the other parties to this Stipulation and Agreement, agree that the lands described in the 1969 Secretarial Order, are included within the Reservation set aside by the Executive Order of May 15, 1876 and are held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Tribes. The State of California disagrees, and expressly reserves the right the challenge the validity, correctness, and propriety of the 1969 secretarial Order.”

Jan. 1999: US. Supreme Court Memo in support of Jt. Motion

This motion reccomends approval of the Stipulated Settlement Agreement, signed by Attorneys for Metropolitian Water District of Southern California,

Feb. 23, 1999: Stipulation and Agreement

Includes signatures of all affected parties.

1-1997 West Bank HM v CRIT.pdf

 

Feb. 8, 1997: CRIT Agenda on Settlement Agreement

 

1997: Public Lands Order

A clean up order for withdrawal of lands needed by the Bureau of Reclamation

LtFromCongress1996.pdf

 

Sept. 20, 1993: Memo Order 14, by Special Master Frank J. McGarr

Concludes: The Executive Order of 1876 which is controlling in this dispute, established the western boundary of the Colorado River Indian Reservation as a riparian boundary and not as a fixed line.

NEW: March 31, 1983: Final Interagency Agreement BR & BLM

This agreement is the result of over 3 years of intensive negotiations and reviews by the Washington office staffs and several reviews by the field staffs. The agreement provides for cooperative efforts between Reclamation and BLM which should improve the efficiency of land management, enable reimbursement for services rendered to each other, improve management of intermingled lands, and provide for the exchange of a wide range of specific services. The provisions of this agreement should be implemented immediately in dealing with the BLM. Attached documents are the Congressional Authorizing Statutes and Public Land Orders.

NEW: 1976:Congress creates - California Desert Conservation Area

As soon as practicable after October 21, 1976, the Secretary shall file a revised map and a legal description of the California Desert Conservation Area with the Committees on Interior and Insular Affairs of the United States Senate and the House of Representatives, and such map and description shall have the same force and effect as if included in this Act. Correction of clerical and typographical errors in such legal description and a map may be made by the Secretary. To the extent practicable, the Secretary shall make such legal description and map available to the public promptly upon request.

Lt2DeptIntDenham1975.pdf

 

USvDenJudgement1974.pdf

 

USDOJSettlement1974.pdf

 

1969: Solicitors Opinion on Western Boundary

 

March 30, 1966 US DOJ to Congressman Udall

The meander line

1964: PL 88-302 Leasing Lower Colorado River Lands Requirments

SEC. 5. The Act of June 11, 1960 (74 Stat. 199), as amended by the Act of September 5, 1962 (76 Stat. 428), is amended to read as follows: "The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to approve leases of lands on the Colorado River Indian Reservation, Arizona and California, for such uses and terms as are authorized by the Act of May 11, 1938 (52 Stat. 347; 25 U. S. C. 396a et seq.), and the Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 539), as amended (25 U. S. C. 415 et seq.) including the same uses and terms as are permitted thereby on the Agua Caliente (Palm Springs), Dania, Navajo, and Southern Ute Reservations: Provided, however, That the authorization herein granted to the Secretary of the Interior shall not extend to any lands lying west of the Page 1005 present course of the Colorado River and south of section 25 of township 2 south, range 23 east, San Bernardino base and meridian in California, and shall not be construed to affect the resolution of any controversy over the location of the boundary of the Colorado River Reservation: Provided further, That any of the described lands in California shall be subject to the provisions of this Act when and if determined to be within the reservation."

NEW: Jan. 1964: The Lower Colorado River Land Use Plan

The Lower Colorado River Land Use Plan is a far reaching program for conservation and recreation development along 265 miles of the Lower Colorado River, encompassing both banks of the river from the southern edge of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area to the Mexican border. See related items below for details of land use and status. Maps.

March 12, 1963: Interstate Compact AZ and CA

Part 1, defining the boundary between the State of California and Arizona.

March 12, 1963: Interstate Compact AZ and CA

Part 2, Exhibits - Defining the boundary between the State of California and Arizona.

1937 Secretarial Order

 

Dec. 5, 1960: AZ v CA Special Master Rifkind Report

Part Two: Pages 269 - 278 Riparian Boundary

1904 Act - Diminish Reservation Lands

 

1876 Executive Order defines Reservation Boundaries

 

1865 Act creates CRIT Arizona Reservation