Another Deadline For Cobell Settlement Approval To Expire

Despite a July 9 deadline from the parties, approval by Congress of the landmark settlement in the Cobell v. Salazar Native trust asset case is not imminent.  The tax-related legislation to which the approval amendment was attached has stalled in the Senate, and the recent death of Senator Robert Byrd made passage of the bill by the latest deadline essentially impossible. 

A half-dozen deadlines set by the Cobell legal team have now come and gone, and the settlement is no closer to Congressional approval than it was nine months ago.  The deadline concept has no discernible impact on the members of Congress, and setting unenforceable deadlines appears to have become a waste of time.  A change in tactics is clearly needed, either through attaching the settlement authorization to legislation that is ready for near-term passage, or by calling on President Obama to utilize his political capital to push for Congressional approval.

Cobell Settlement Deadline Extended Again, Now 15 June 2010

Congress failed to act prior to the Memorial Day recess to approve the $3.4 billion settlement in the Cobell v. Salazar lawsuit, so the deadline has again been extended to June 15, 2010. This is the fourth extension of the deadline for Congress to approve the settlement. Although the House of Representatives voted to approve the deal prior to the deadline, the Senate did not.

Dennis Gingold, the lead lawyer for the Native American plaintiffs, previously said that if Congress did not meet the May 28 deadline that had previously been set, the case would proceed toward trial. However, the plaintiffs agreed to another extension in light of the perception that Congress is close to approving the deal.

The Senate returns to business on June 7, but a list of other items -- such as confirmation hearings for President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee – may be acted on first. Also, Vice Chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs John Barrasso (R-Wy) has expressed concern about aspects of the deal such as attorney fees and incentive awards for the lead plaintiffs, and may seek to have the deal modified in the Senate legislation.
 

Cobell Settlement - How Much Should The Lawyers Be Paid?

With the Cobell litigation settlement still awaiting ratification by the US Congress, another question has arisen – how much of the settlement funds should be paid out to lawyers?

The Cobell class-action lawsuit represents up to as many as 500,000 Native Americans who own property held in trust by the US government. The Department of Interior leases that land to others to farm or develop resources, and the Native landholders are supposed to have money generated by the land deposited into Individual Indian Money trust accounts, or IIMs. A federal District Court ruled in 1999 that the government had breached its trust duties, a ruling that was affirmed in 2001. The fight went on over whether the government had to provide an accounting to the IIM holders - the District Court ruled in 2008 that it did, which the appeals court reaffirmed last year.

The plaintiffs had originally sought $47 billion to compensate the affected Native Americans. The settlement signed in December 2009 allocates $1.4 billion to IIM holders; $2 billion is allocated to buy up fractionated lands from individual owners willing to sell; and $60 million will endow a scholarship fund for Native students.

The lead attorney for the plaintiffs is Dennis Gingold, a banking attorney who has been involved dating back to a 1992 meeting called by the first Bush administration in an attempt to sort out the trust money dispute. Gingold teamed up with lead plaintiff Eloise Cobell in bringing suit, and promised he would stick with her, even if there was no money to pay him. "Nobody in his right mind would want to do this," he told The Associated Press. "I thought it was important for my kids to understand that there are things worth fighting for." The14-year legal fight has included more than 3,600 court filings; 220 days of trial; 80 published court decisions; and 10 interlocutory appeals.

Some have questioned how much Gingold and his team of lawyers would receive in this settlement. Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming has proposed capping lawyer's fees at $50 million. Republican Rep. Doc Hastings of Washington sent a letter to Gingold saying it was reasonable to limit those fees so the Native Americans would receive more. Gingold and Cobell both say Congress doesn't have the authority to change the agreement, and that the proposed fee of just under $100 million would represent just 3 percent of the total settlement. "He has really uncovered the entire behavior of the United States government when it comes to managing Indian Trust assets," Cobell said of Gingold.

In addition to the legal fees, the Blackfeet Reservation Development Fund must repay at least $11 million in grants and loans from various foundations that helped fund the lawsuit. The settlement allows up to $15 million to repay those debts. The deadline for Congress to authorize the settlement and allocate the funds has been extended twice by the court. Cobell and Gingold are hopeful the settlement will be approved this time, but they say if the May 28 deadline passes without a vote, the deal could be terminated and years of additional litigation could ensue.

Is the Cobell Settlement Another Bad Deal For Native Americans?

In a pointed editorial in Indian Country Today, Angelique EagleWoman criticizes the $3.4 billion settlement between the federal government and the Cobell lawsuit's Native American trust account plaintiffs as “a scam”.  Ms. EagleWoman is a citizen of the Sisseton-Wahpeton Dakota Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation in South Dakota, is an attorney licensed in Washington, D.C., Oklahoma, North Dakota and South Dakota, and teaches Civil Procedure and Native American Law at the University of Idaho.

In her critique of the Cobell settlement, she notes that the normal rules for class-action lawsuits appear not to have been followed in the case, depriving individual plaintiffs of the right to “opt-out” of the case.  This prevented individual Native Americans from pursuing their own separate legal remedies for the government’s alleged mismanagement of Native trust accounts and lands. She asserts that when the $1.4 billion allocated to trust account payments is broken down among the number of Native Americans with claims, the per-person dollar amount averages out to a mere $1,000.00 – with some plaintiffs to receive as little as $500.

Based on the above, I call the Cobell Proposed Settlement a scam. As a Dakota woman, a lawyer, and a law professor, I am appalled that the U.S. government would attempt to push this through Congress. The U.S. government has imposed the trust relationship on Indian peoples in mid-North America. Surely, the highest fiduciary duty is owed to individual Indians whose lands are managed by the U.S. At every step, the U.S. government has used its attorneys to fight this simple action asking for an accounting. Here in the latest round, Interior wants to sneak through this proposed settlement and stop the accounting, the claims for mismanagement, and the rights of those who are most at the mercy of the U.S. trust responsibility. This would be on par with the bleakest eras of U.S. Indian policy such as removal, assimilation and termination. We need the eagle whistle-blowers to come forth in Indian country to stop this great wrong from being perpetrated by the U.S. government. – Angelique EagleWoman

Another Deadline Passes, But Congress Still Has Not Ratified Cobell Settlement

Despite the passage of three deadlines agreed to between the federal government and the plaintiffs, Congress has still not ratified the landmark $3.4 billion settlement in the decades-long Cobell Native American trust litigation. The previous deadlines for congressional ratification were December 2009, February 2010, and April 2010.

A new deadline of May 31, 2010 has been agreed to by the plaintiffs and the federal government, but it will likely be the last extension. “The district judge [Judge James Robertson, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia] declared that he does not want further extensions of the December 7, 2009 settlement agreement, and he set a date certain in that regard,” says Dennis Gingold, lead counsel for the plaintiffs.

“That is a fair decision in view of representations made by the government that our settlement would be ratified by Congress on or before the end of December 2009. If the settlement agreement expires, plaintiffs will resume intense litigation against Treasury and Interior on all matters relevant to the case, including the renewal of matters that remain unresolved and the refiling of motions that have been dismissed without prejudice as a necessary predicate to settlement.”

The settlement agreement calls for the federal government to provide $1.4 billion in compensation for individual Native American trust fund beneficiaries, and $2 billion for a land consolidation program to be overseen by the Department of the Interior to buy back fractionated trust lands.

Podcast: Details and Depth On The $3.4 Billion Cobell Native American Trust Lawsuit Settlement

The University of California Irvine radio station KUCI’s legal program The Docket has aired an extended segment on the settlement of the landmark Cobell lawsuit between 300,000+ Native Americans and the U.S. government. Host Evan Simon interviewed Foster Pepper PLLC’s Native American Group Chair Greg Guedel regarding the background of the case, the details of the settlement, his discussion with lead plaintiff Eloise Cobell, and what work remains to complete the settlement and lay the groundwork for improved relations between the federal government and Native Americans. The interview can be accessed HERE, or via the Foster Pepper podcast page on iTunes.

Cobell Trust Lawsuit Resolved In Multi-Billion Dollar Settlement

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and Attorney General Eric Holder today announced a settlement of the long-running and highly contentious Cobell class-action lawsuit regarding the U.S. government's trust management and accounting of over three hundred thousand individual American Indian trust accounts. Also speaking at the press conference today were Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes and Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli.

“This is an historic, positive development for Indian country and a major step on the road to reconciliation following years of acrimonious litigation between trust beneficiaries and the United States,” Secretary Salazar said. “Resolving this issue has been a top priority of President Obama, and this administration has worked in good faith to reach a settlement that is both honorable and responsible. This historic step will allow Interior to move forward and address the educational, law enforcement, and economic development challenges we face in Indian Country.”

“Over the past thirteen years, the parties have tried to settle this case many, many times, each time unsuccessfully," said Attorney General Eric Holder. "But today we turn the page. This settlement is fair to the plaintiffs, responsible for the United States, and provides a path forward for the future.”

Under the negotiated agreement, litigation will end regarding the Department of the Interior’s performance of an historical accounting for trust accounts maintained by the United States on behalf of more than 300,000 individual Indians. A fund totaling $1.4 billion will be distributed to class members to compensate them for their historical accounting claims, and to resolve potential claims that prior U.S. officials mismanaged the administration of trust assets.

In addition, in order to address the continued proliferation of thousands of new trust accounts caused by the "fractionation" of land interests through succeeding generations, the settlement establishes a $2 billion fund for the voluntary buy-back and consolidation of fractionated land interests. The land consolidation program will provide individual Indians with an opportunity to obtain cash payments for divided land interests and free up the land for the benefit of tribal communities.

By reducing the number of individual trust accounts that the U.S must maintain, the program will greatly reduce on-going administrative expenses and future accounting-related disputes. In order to provide owners with an additional incentive to sell their fractionated interests, the settlement authorizes the Interior Department to set aside up to 5 percent of the value of the interests into a college and vocational school scholarship fund for American Indian students.

The settlement has been negotiated with the involvement of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. It will not become final until it is formally endorsed by the court. Also, Congress must enact legislation to authorize implementation of the settlement. Because it is a settlement of a litigation matter, the Judgment Fund maintained by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Treasury will fund the settlement.

“While we have made significant progress in improving and strengthening the management of Indian trust assets, our work is not over,” said Salazar, who also announced he is establishing a national commission to evaluate ongoing trust reform efforts and make recommendations for the future management of individual trust account assets in light of a congressional sunset provision for the Office of Special Trustee, which was established by Congress in 1994 to reform financial management of the trust system.

The class action case, which involves several hundred thousand plaintiffs, was filed by Elouise Cobell in 1996 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and has included hundreds of motions, dozens of rulings and appeals, and several trials over the past 13 years. The settlement funds will be administered by the trust department of a bank approved by the district court and distributed to individual Indians by a claims administrator in accordance with court orders and the settlement agreement.

Interior currently manages about 56 million acres of Indian trust land, administering more than 100,000 leases and about $3.5 billion in trust funds. For fiscal year 2009, funds from leases, use permits, land sales and income from financial assets, totaling about $298 million were collected for more than 384,000 open Individual Indian Money accounts and $566 million was collected for about 2,700 tribal accounts for more than 250 tribes. Since 1996, the U.S. Government has collected over $10.4 billion from individual and tribal trust assets and disbursed more than $9.5 billion to individual account holders and tribal governments.

The land consolidation fund addresses a legacy of the General Allotment Act of 1887 (the “Dawes Act”), which divided tribal lands into parcels between 40 and 160 acres in size, allotted them to individual Indians and sold off all remaining unallotted Indian lands. As the original holders died, their intestate heirs received an equal, undivided interest in the lands as tenants in common. In successive generations, smaller undivided interests descended to the next generation.

Today, it is common to have hundreds—even thousands—of Indian owners for one parcel of land. Such highly fractionated ownership makes it extremely difficult to use the land productively or to provide beneficial use for any individual. Absent serious corrective action, an estimated 4 million acres of land will continue to be held in such small ownership interests that very few individual owners will ever derive any meaningful financial benefit from that ownership.

Additional Information is available at the following sites: www.cobellsettlement.com.
The Department of the Interior website: www.doi.gov. The Office of the Special Trustee website: www.ost.doi.gov
 

Accounting Ordered For Federal Trust Land Mismanagement

Eloise Cobell (Photo by Karen Kuehn)

A class-action suit regarding mismanagement of lands affecting 500,000 Native Americans recently got a boost, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has ruled in the Cobell litigation that the federal government must provide an accounting for land royalties owed to individual plaintiffs.

The lawsuit was filed 13 years ago and claims compensation for Native Americans for land-related royalties from the profits of oil, gas, grazing, and timber – commodities that were taken from Tribal lands that the government has managed in trust for Tribal members since the 19th Century. In 2008, U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled that an accurate accounting by the Department of Interior was impossible, and awarded the group of plaintiffs $455 million, a fraction of the $47 billion+ being claimed in the lawsuit.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit disagreed with this result, and found that the lower court erred in eliminating the government accounting. Chief Judge David B. Sentelle said the decision essentially allowed the Interior Department "to throw up its hands and stop the accounting." "Without an accounting, it is impossible to know who is owed what," Sentelle wrote. "The best any trust beneficiary could hope for would be a government check in an arbitrary amount."

The D.C. Circuit panel acknowledged that the task is complicated and the Interior Department should focus on the "low-hanging fruit", dealing with clear cases where compensation is owed. "We must not allow the theoretically perfect to render impossible the achievable good," Sentelle wrote.
 

Cobell Appeals On Track For Spring Hearing

Appeals in the landmark case of  Cobell v. Kempthorne are likely to be argued before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in the Spring of 2009.  The first briefs are to be filed on Jan. 21 and the last by April 7, 2009, with oral argument to be set at the earliest practical date thereafter.  At issue is a District Court order that awarded $455.6 million to thousands of Native American plaintiffs, who are pursuing claims that the government breached its trust responsibility to an estimated 500,000 Native Americans who had individual Indian Money Accounts managed by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Treasury.  In terms of the number of plaintiffs and the dollars sought, the case has been called the largest class-action lawsuit in American history.  The plaintiffs have appealed on the basis that the award is far too small to adequately compensate Native Americans across the country for the loss of funds that were to be handled by the government for their benefit; the government has also appealed, asserting that the plaintiffs are owed nothing and that the federal departments are immune from suit.