Native Housing Reauthorization, Poarch, Catawba, Pechanga, Cherokee Bills

Good afternoon everyone. Committee comes to order. Today the committee will consider S fifty-three fifty-four, the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-determination Modernization Act of twenty twenty six. This is legislation that I have introduced with Vice Chairman Schatz to reauthorize and modernize the primary federal housing law that serves Native communities. Last week the committee held a hearing on S fifty-three fifty-four. fifty-three, fifty-four, and on housing needs in Native communities more broadly. We received important testimony from Deputy Principal Chief Brian Warner of the Cherokee Nation, Hilary Atkin from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Doctor Alicia Puente-Kekle from the Government Accountability Office. One thing was clear from that hearing, and that is that Congress needs to act. The testimony highlighted both the significant housing needs facing Native communities and opportunities to improve the way federal housing programs operate. I'm going to be offering an amendment to make a couple of small changes to the bill. First, it would raise Nehasda's outdated five thousand dollar de minimis threshold to twenty-two thousand five hundred, and allow HUD to establish a higher amount for a good cause. Second, it would make a technical correction to one of the bill's Native Hawaiian homelessness provisions. As fifty-three fifty-four as amended will reauthorize and modernize Nehasda, which for nearly thirty years has served as the cornerstone of federal housing assistance in Indian country. The bill recognizes that housing challenges look very different from one Native community to another. In Alaska we routinely hear about overcrowding, extraordinarily high construction costs, homelessness, and difficulties that communities face in providing housing for teachers, health care workers, law enforcement officers, and other essential workers who are making a little too much to qualify for some assistance programs. This legislation responds to these challenges and reflects extensive bipartisan work and engagement with Native communities. So I appreciate Vice Chairman Schatz, our colleagues, for their continued partnerships, as well as everyone who has contributed to the strong legislative record that we have developed. So I'm hopeful that we will advance this very important legislation today. I'll now turn to the Vice Chairman for his opening comments.

Thank you, Chair Murkowski, for convening uh today's business meeting, uh what an important purpose it is to advance our new Nahasda reauthorization and modernization effort uh to the full senate for native families housing isn't just shelter, it's the foundation for everything else. Their health, their children's education, a steady job, and the chance to build a life close to home and culture. Right now too many families in Indian country, Alaska and Hawaii are waiting, doubling up or going without. And that's why Nahasda matters so much. For thirty years it has delivered billions of dollars to tribes and Native Hawaiians and it has worked, because it puts decisions in the hands of the communities that know their needs best. But Nahasda's programs have not been reauthorized or updated in thirteen years, and this uncertainty impacts how and whether Native communities plan and build for the long term. Reauthorizing this law is not a new idea, and it is not a partisan one either. In twenty-three we advanced Nahasda to the full senate, uh uh with a vote of eighty six to eleven and on the twenty twenty four national defense authorization act. S five three five four picks up where that bipartisan work left off. It reauthorizes the Indian housing block grant program and the native Hawaiian housing block grant program to through twenty thirty three, and cuts red tape. It also gives tribes and native Hawaiians the tools that they ask for, from lease to own pathways to stronger loan guarantees and support for native veterans. and unhoused American Indians, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska Natives. This modernization effort will help to make home ownership and stable housing a reality for more Native families in their homelands. I urge my colleagues to support this bill so we can pass Nahasda out of the Senate, for a second time.

Thank you, Vice Chairman. We are still waiting the arrival of one more member, uh, so that we have a quorum to constitute business. Uh, if there are any members who wish to make any comments about Nahashtra, this would be an ideal time so that you don't have to do it afterwards. Senator Smith, I knew you would oblige.

I um generally don't favor the filibuster, Madam Chair, but I uh would like to just take the opportunity while we're all here to uh just thank you and um Chair Schatz uh Vice Chair Schatz for um work on this and I know I hear from uh Minnesota, tribal nations all the time the importance of reauthorizing this. It is really an act of um an act of good faith that Congress takes this step forward. Um tribal nations around the country and certainly in Minnesota look to us to pass this bill as a sign that we truly do take our trust and treaty responsibility seriously, and that we understand fully our obligations um uh as the government of the United States of America to live up to those obligations. So Um, I hope that we can not only get a quorum to pass this out of committee, but that we can find a path forward, um, um, all the way through the Senate and the House to, um, do this important reauthorization.

Thank you, Senator Smith. I think it's important to note, and it was it was acknowledged at the hearing last week, uh, that following on the road to housing that was signed into law, uh, to make sure that we are doing right, as you say, Senator Smith, um on our on our tribal trust um responsibilities when it comes to to the issue uh of housing so this is is more than timely as is the arrival of Senator Cantwell.

Mm-hmm.

We now have a quorum present so we can get started. I would ask um uh I we'll start with the amendment that I have filed to S fifty three fifty four so I would ask unanimous consent to take up Murkowski amendment MR MIR two six eight O eight to agenda item number one S twenty S fifty three fifty four. Is there an objection? Hearing no objection, the question is on agreeing to this amendment by voice vote. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye. On any opposed say nay. The ayes appear to have it, they do. The amendment is agreed to. I now ask unanimous consent to take up agenda item number one S fifty three fifty four, Native American Housing Assistance and Self-determination Modernization of Act of twenty twenty six as amended is there any objection hearing no objection the question is on agreeing to agenda item number one S fifty three fifty four as amended all those in favor say aye aye

Aye

any nays the a's the i's appear to have it they do the bill is agreed to are there any members wishing to be recorded otherwise seeing none that concludes our business meeting for today uh and I appreciate uh the patience of colleagues and uh the the interruption from other business that you were doing so we can conduct this very very important um message. So that concludes our business meeting. And I'm going to invite uh up to the to the table our witnesses today as I begin my statements. Thank you. Um and we will call to order this uh committee hearing. We are here today to receive testimony on four bills. Uh first on the agenda is S seventeen fifty, the Porch Band of Creek Indians Parity Act. This is introduced by Senator Britt. The bill would provide a tribe-specific fix to the uncertainty created by the US Supreme Court decision. In Carcieri versus Salazar. Specifically, the bill would expressly apply the Indian reorganization act to the porch band of Creek Indians, reaffirm the validity of the tribe's existing trust lands, and confirm the secretary of the interior's authority under the IRA to take additional lands into trust for the tribes in the future. S thirty eight fifty nine, introduced by the Sa- the late Senator Lindsey Graham, would amend the uh Cat- Catawah Catawa

Catawba.

Catawba?

Catawba.

Catawba. Thank you for that. Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina Lands Claims Settlement Act of nineteen ninety-three to remove federally imposed restrictions on future tribal membership and allow the Catawba Nation to determine its own membership requirements. And then we have S forty fifty-three that's introduced by Senator Padilla which would take approximately eight hundred and sixty acres of land in Southern California currently managed by the Bureau of Land Management. into trust for the Pechanga Band of Indian. The land is adjacent to the Puesca Mountain, which is sacred to the tribe and is also held in trust. The lands transferred under the bill would be maintained as open space and managed to preserve archaeological, cultural and wildlife resources. And then finally we have HR two two six, which is the Eastern Band of Cherokee Historic Lands Reacquisition Act. This is sponsored by Congressman Chuck Fleischman. It would take approximately seventy-six acres of federal land, managed by the Tennessee Valley Authority, along with approximately twenty acres of permanent easements along the shores of the Little Tennessee River and the Telico Reservoir in Monroe County, Tennessee. Taking it into trust for the benefit would be used to memorialize and interpret the history and the culture of the Cherokee people in the lower Little Tennessee River area. So I'm gonna thank our witnesses for traveling here today. We look forward to your testimony and I'll now turn to the Vice-Chair for his opening statement.

Thank you, Chair Murkowski, for convening today's hearings on uh a hearing on four bills, all of which support an enhanced tribal sovereignty and self-governance. I wanna briefly comment on Cartieria versus Salazar and reiterate my support for a legislative fix for all tribes. But I also recognize that after more than seventeen years of Congress not taking action, tribes like the Porch Band are starting to seek individual fixes to address urgent concerns that prevent the full exercise of their economic self-determination. Senator Britt's bill would align with successful past efforts at tribal-specific legislation and I look forward to learning more about it and to hearing from the BIA about its views. Thank you to our witnesses for being here today.

Thank you, Senator Padilla. Welcome to the committee. I understand that you would like s- to make remarks regarding your bill.

Yes, uh thank you Chairman uh uh Murkowski and uh Vice Chairman Schatz uh not just for having me but for including the Pechanga Band of Indians Land Transfer Act, uh, as part of today's hearing, and appreciate the opportunity to come and address the committee about the bill. Uh, first I wanna recognize uh my longtime friend, Chairman Mark McCarroll of the Pechanga Band of Indians, who will be testifying today, and I don't wanna give too much of the pitch and the need for the bill and steal his thunder. Uh, but let me uh recognize Chairman McCarroll as a tremendous leader, not just of the Pechanga tribe and throughout uh California, but uh for Indian country nationally. He's currently serving as president of the National uh Congress of American Indians. Now since time immemorial, Pechanga has been a dedicated steward of the land and water resources in the Temecula Valley. After nearly a hundred years of colonization though, the tribe's population was decimated by disease, starvation, and cultural separation in the nineteenth century. And when the reservation was created in eighteen eighty-two, it only included a small fraction of the vast ancestral homeland that stretches several hundred square miles. Considering their commitment to stewardship, however, the tribe has worked in recent years to unify isolated parcels of land adjacent to the reservation in order to better protect, preserve and restore sacred sites. In twenty twelve, for example, the tribe purchased uh Puesca Mountain, which you referenced, Madam Chair, one of the most sacred places in the. religion. This followed a years-long fight over a proposed open pit mine that would have decimated the mountain and stripped it of its cultural significance and physical beauty. The tribe was able to place that land into trust in twenty fifteen and it has also since been listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The bill on the agenda today would continue the tribe's stewardship by placing eight hundred and sixty acres of Bureau of Land Management land in Riverside County into trust for the Pechanga band of Indians. This would consolidate most of Puesca mountain into tribal trust land, allowing Pechanga to manage this land as open space, improve environmental monitoring, and conduct active resource management on the mountain. This bill has secured bipartisan support. Uh, Congressmember Darrell Issa, a Republican House member from California, leads the companion bill, which passed the house on suspension in June. The bill is also supported by the City of Temecula and the National Congress of American Indians. So thank you again Madam Chair uh Mister Vice Chair for your work on this committee and allowing me to testify um requesting support of this measure. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Padilla. We are also joined uh on the committee today by Senator Britt. It's good to have you here as an advocate uh for for the porch band, and happy to hear your opening statement.

Thank you so much. I really appreciate the opportunity, um, chair and vice chair, um, and appreciate the work that you do for so many across our country. Today I am honored to be here to introduce my friend, Stephanie Bryan, the tribal chair and CEO of the Porch Band Creek Indians. Stephanie, it's an honor to introduce you. You are a force and have been a force for good within our state. to watch your business acumen, to watch your heart, um, to watch you get into every single, uh, possible position you can to do better for the people of our state and the people that you have the honor of serving and representing has, um, been truly incredible. Chairwoman Bryan is here to discuss my bill, S one seven five zero, the Porch Band of Creek Indians. Parity Act. This bill is intended to clarify that the Porch Band of Creek Indians should be considered as now under federal jurisdiction for the purposes of the Indian Reorganization Act. The Porch Band of Creek Indians is a critical part of Alabama's culture and heritage. As a leader of the Porch Nation, Chairwoman Bryan has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to advancing key tribal issues while working extensively with each level of government to address unique challenges. By using her various positions on many national boards, state boards, her advocacy for tribal issues has become well known across the entire country. In Alabama, her dedication to service and community is truly incredible. Under Chairwoman Bryan's leadership, the tribe has delivered on its goals to provide better quality health care and even created an assisted living facility for its tribal elders. It built a boys and girls club that serves over five hundred children, makes targeted investments in higher education for tribal members, and has donated millions to charitable organizations that focus on building a stronger community. And those are just a few of the things. In twenty twenty four, Business Alabama recognized her as the publication's first ever CEO of the year. This is a testimony to her leadership and her ability to identify Chairwoman Bryan's business acumen and effective leadership have resulted in exponential growth for the Porch Creek Indians' business portfolio, which supports the Department of War, NASA, and a wide range of other industries. Chairwoman Bryan, thank you so much for testifying here today. We are certainly grateful for your service to the state of Alabama, our nation, and your tribe. I urge all of my colleagues to support this measure, It's long overdue. Thank you, Chairwoman.

Thank you, Senator Britt. Appreciate you. We will now turn to our witnesses. Uh, we have with us today, Mr. Brian Mercier. Uh, Mister Mercier is the Director of the BIA, the Department of Interior, and uh, uh, a frequent uh, testifier here before the committee, welcome back. Uh, as as Senator Britt has very ab ably introduced, we have the Honorable Stephanie Bryan, the Chairwoman of the Porch Band of Creek Indians. Uh, we also have the Honorable Patricia Leach, who is the Assistant Chief of the Catawaba, uh Catawba Nation Rock Hill in South Carolina. I apologize for my mispronunciation here today. We also have Mark Macarro, the Chairman of the Pechango Band of Indians. Uh, uh, Mister Maccaro, you, too, are a frequent flyer here in the committee. We appreciate your leadership. And, and the Honorable, uh, Michell Hicks is the Principal Chief of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians from North Carolina. Again, welcome to the committee. We do have your full uh written testimony as part of the official hearing record. We'd ask that you try to keep your comments to less than five minutes, so that we do have opportunity for questions. Mister Mercier, if you wanna lead off our panel today. Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman Mikalski. Uh, Chairman Mikalski, Chairman, Vice Chairman Schatz, members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss legislation affecting tribal nations. My name is Brian Mercier, an enrolled member of the Confederate tribes of the Grand Rock community of Oregon. And I am joined today by fellow Oregonian Lucia Crespo sitting behind me. She uh is a student at the University of Southern California in history and political science and uh is the daughter of a uh friend of mine that I played soccer with for many, many years. So I'm really honored to have her behind me supporting me here today. Uh I'm a I am curious if she's gonna support the USC Trojans or the Oregon Ducks this weekend, so I'm gonna ask her afterwards uh where she's at on that. Um Madam Chairman, I I serve as the Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs at the United States Department of the Interior. Uh the BIA carries out the federal government's trust and treaty responsibility across fifty six million acres of trust land held for federally recognized tribes and individual American Indians. Through our programs and partnerships we work to strengthen stra- strengthen tribal sovereignty, promote self-determination, and support the sustainable economic development and stewardship of tribal lands and resources. I'm here today to discuss four bills that would affect tribal lands, land claims, and tribal communities. Uh, the first bill, S thirty eight fifty nine, a bill to amend the Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina Land Claims, Settlement Act of nineteen ninety three. The second bill is S seventeen fifty, Porch Band of Creek Indians Parity Act. Third bill is uh Senate forty fifty three, a bill to take certain land in the state of California into trust for the benefit of the Pechanga Band of Indians. And the final bill being H R twenty two twenty six, Eastern Band of Cherokee, Historic Lands Reacquisition Act. As each of those bills is a mouthful, I'm gonna refer to them by their numbers going forward and appreciate the indulgence of the committee. First, uh s- Senate bill thirty eight fifty nine. The Department supports thirty eight fifty nine. which amends the n- nineteen ninety-three Catawba Land Claims Settlement Act. The bill would remove the requirement under current law that after establishment of the tribe's base membership role, a person may be eligible for membership only if the me- individual is a lineal descendant of a person on the base membership role and has maintained political relations with the tri- with the tribe. Membership criteria are fundamental to inherent tribal sovereignty. S thirty eight fifty nine r- removes that requirement Modernizing tribal enrollment in line with self-determination without altering the tribe's land base federal funding, or government to government relationship. Next, S seventeen fifty. Um the Indian Royal Organization Act provides the secretary of with the discretion to acquire land into trust, promoting tribal sovereignty and self-determination. Under the Supreme Court's Carcieri Versalzar decision, that authority is limited to tribes under federal jurisdiction in nineteen thirty four. Making these determinations requires substantial time and resources, creating ongoing administrative burdens and uncertainty across Indian country. S seventeen fifty designates the Porch Band of Creek Indians as having been under federal jurisdiction in nineteen thirty-four and ratifies ratifies prior trust acquisitions. We recognize the tribe's interest in obtaining certainty regarding its lands. However, the department notes that the impacts of the carciary decision extend beyond any single tribe. and raises broader questions regarding the secretary's land into trust authority under the Indian Reorganization Act. The department supports a comprehensive legislative solution related to the secretary's authority to take land into trust for tribes, and welcomes the opportunity to work with the committee to discuss potential legislative approaches to provide greater clarity and certainty in the broader land into trust process. Congress in exercising its plenary authority over Indian affairs, has the authority to evaluate and amend the Indian Reorganization Act, including determining whether the secretary's existing land at the trust authority should be clarified expanded or otherwise modified. The department looks forward to working with the committee and the bill's sponsors and the tribes on these important issues. Next, Senate Bill forty fifty-three. Um, on Senate Bill forty-three fifty-three, the bill directs the transfer of approximately twelve hundred and sixty-one acres of PLM lands in Riverside County, California. into trust status for the Pechanga Band of Indians, while prohibiting gaming on those lands. These lands encompass sacred sites, wildlife corridors, and open space vital to the tribe's cultural heritage and identity. Department recognizes the intent of forty fifty-three as consistent with our trust responsibilities and federal policies promoting self-determination, and we look forward to working with the sponsor and the committee on effective implementation. Finally, HR Two twenty-six, the department supports, H R two twenty-six, which directs the transfer of approximately seventy-six acres of federal land managed by the Tennessee Valley Authority in Monroe County, Tennessee, into trust for the eastern band of Cherokee Indians. These parcels uh uh hold profound cultural, religious and historical signif significance. The bills preserve critical TVA flowage easements and guarantees public access, and the department stands ready to execute the trust conveyance upon enactment. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and I welcome

Just barely. You're pretty well pretty well practiced. Thank you. Appreciate that. And next we will hear w- from Chair Chairwoman Bryan. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Chairwoman Murkowski, Vice Chair Schatz, and members of the committee. My name is Stephanie Bryan, and I'm honored to serve as the Chair and CEO of the Porch Band of Creek Indians, the only federally recognized tribe in Alabama. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to testify today about the Porch Band of Creek Indians Parity Act. Here with me today are Vice Chair Robbie McGee, Councilmember Christina Flintlow. I would also like to thank Senator Britt for her kind introduction and her efforts on our behalf. We also thank Senator Tuberville for his strong support. I applaud the Interior Department's support for a national cartierry fix. Our tribe has been a leading advocate for national fix for seventeen years to clarify that the Indian Reorganizational Act applies to all federally recognized tribes. Until then, our tribe, like others, has been forced to take a different approach by working with our congressional delegation to clarify that the IRA applies to us. Today, We're blessed to be able to provide our tribal citizens and neighbors with essential services that include police and fire protection, health care, elder care, education, and infrastructure. We've made careful decisions about how best to use our resources, but we have a limited land base. And at this point, we can't meet the growing needs of our citizens. We are thankful that our tribal citizens want to come home. But we have more of a demand for housing and other infrastructure than we have land. For example, in two thousand and eighteen, it became clear that we needed to expand our boys and girls club, but there was no more buildable trust land and we were forced to fill in the ponds around the community center at a cost of more than one million dollars. Also, our people Our people grow older. We need more land to provide quality health care for our elders, including memory care and nursing home facilities. We're not alone. Tribal governments nationwide have a shortage of usable trust land and seek to acquire trust lands to meet basic needs of our people. The Supreme Court's two thousand and nine cartier decision upended the interior department's land and de-trust process. That decision placed a cloud of uncertainty over tribal trust lands, impeding investment in economic development in Indian country, and it's led to a lot of frivolous lawsuits, challen challenging the status of these trust lands. The tribe has already spent more than ten million dollars to defend ourselves against meritless attacks on our sovereignty. Thankfully, every court reviewing these frivolous costly cases has upheld the status of our lands, which the Interior Department placed into trust more than four decades ago. However, these lawsuits have taken a real toll, and that's why our tribe is seeking a legislative solution that will provide us with much needed certainty. Those frivolous lawsuits have not just hurt us. They've cost taxpayer dollars because the Interior Department and Department of Justice, have had to use their budgets to defend our trust lands. Our bill affirms that the IRA applies to our tribe and it allows us to be treated fairly, like other federally recognized tribes. This bill has strong support from the Alabama congressional delegation and the cities and counties that surround us. I respectfully ask the committee to mark up S seventeen fifty and pass the bill before the end of the year. On behalf of the tribe, I'm honored to speak with you today, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Madoe.

Thank you, Chairwoman. Next, we will hear from Patricia Leish Leitch, uh Assistant Chief.

Good afternoon. Chairman Mikulski, Vice Chairman Schatz, and members of the committee. On behalf of the Catawba Indian Nation, I want to thank the committee for holding this hearing and for considering S thirty eight fifty nine a bill to amend the Catawba Lands Claims Settlement Act of nineteen ninety three. I want to thank Congressman Ralph Norman who led the House companion bill, H R forty four sixty three, and the members of Congress in the House that passed that version of the bill by voice vote. That bipartisan House action confirms what the nation has said from the beginning, this is a narrow, straightforward bill that restores tribal sovereignty for the Catawba Nation and grants us the same authority over our tribal membership that nearly every other tribal nation enjoys. Um finally we are especially grateful to the late Senator Lindsey Graham who recognized the importance of this legislation and urged in a June twenty-ninth letter that this committee add S thirty eight fifty nine to its business meeting agenda. S thirty eight fifty nine strikes an outdated portion of a single sentence from our nineteen ninety three settlement act. That clause currently prevents a nation from enrolling any new citizen unless that person is of lineal descent of an individual on the nineteen sixty-two final role, and has maintained continued political relations with the tribe. If enacted, the bill would restore to the Catawba Indian Nation the authority to determine its own citizenship criteria under its constitution. That authority is one of the most basic attributes of sovereignty, respected by the federal government for virtually all tribal nations. The bill does not rewrite the Catawba Nation's constitution, does not create any new federal program, and does not affect any other provision of the settlement act. Congress enacted the settlement act in nineteen ninety-three to resolve the nation's long-standing land claims, restore the federal trust relationship, and provide for a monetary settlement. The federal enrollment language in section seventy was included to identify a fixed number of individuals, entitled to share in settlement-related distributions, and provide it an administrable federal standard for the act. Those monetary distributions were completed decades ago, vacating the need for a fixed membership standard, and today we are ham hamstrung by a membership requirement that is needlessly restrictive. The provision also includes the phrase " continued political relations", a standard that is undefined in the act and difficult to administer. Tribal staff must determine whether an applicant has demonstrated a sufficient political connection to the nation, even though that standard is not clearly defined by Congress. Removing this language will allow the nation to administer citizenship through its own constitution and laws rather than through an outdated federal mandate, mandate that most other tribal nations do not have. We understand that members may ask whether this bill would create an unchecked expansion of enrollment. It will not. The Catawba constitution remains in full force and will continue to govern citizenship. Under that constitution, membership is tied to Catawba ancestry, requiring supporting documentation and, where appropriate, DNA verification. Those requirements are strict and enforced by the nation under its established enrollment process. Over the past several years, the nation has enrolled approximately two hundred new citizens per year. Denials based on the federal clause have been rare. Most rejections result from a lack of documentation or DNA results disproving claimed parentage. For that reason, the bill is not expected to meaningfully alter the nation's overall enrollment trajectory but it will allow the nation to formally recognize individuals deserving of Cat Catawba citizenship. To conclude, S thirty eight fifty nine is a narrow bill with an important precedent. It removes an outdated federal restriction that no longer serves the purpose for which it was enacted and restores to the Catawba Indian nation the authority to determine its own citizenship under its constitution. This bill is consistent with the long-standing federal policy of tribal self-determination and with the principle that tribal nations should decide who belongs to their own political community. We respectfully urge the committee to support S thirty eight fifty nine and move it forward. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I'd be pleased to answer any questions.

Thank you, Assistant Chief. We'll next turn to uh Chairman McCarroll.

Good afternoon, Chairman Murkowski, Vice Chairman Schatz, and members of the committee. My name is Mark McCarroll and I'm the current Tribal Chairman for the Pechanga Band of Indians in Southern California, and thank you for the opportunity to testify in I want to begin by s- by thanking Senators Padilla and Schiff, as well as um our Congressman uh Darrell Issa uh Padilla and Schiff for introducing the bill and Congressman Issa for leading the House companion which is HR fifty-six, eighty-two. The House passed that measure by a voice vote on June second. We respectfully ask this committee to advance S forty-fifty-three so Congress can complete this land restoration effort this year. S forty fifty three would take approximately eight hundred and sixty acres of federal land administered by the BLM into trust for the Pechanga Band of Indians. This parcel is in Riverside County. It's next to our existing trust land, reservation lands on Puesca Mountain. Uh, you said the name of that mountain earlier, uh, just perfectly, I wanna note. It would become part of our reservation. For Pechanga, this is a matter of protecting a sacred place and restoring our responsibility for for part of our ancestral homeland. Our people, uh we now call ours, we refer to ourselves uh using our original name of and uh the older term is Lucenio, which we no longer use. Um we have called the Temecula Valley home for over ten thousand years, and I would note that today's hearing falls on the anniversary date to the day of the bands of our ancestors' forced removal from one of our ancestral villages in fact it was our last ancestral village in eighteen seventy-five when twenty armed men arrived at one of at the village and they forced all our people out of our homes at gunpoint and threw our uh belongings onto wagons they forced our ancestors to walk behind these wagons while throwing stones at them and and marched the procession down two to three miles away from that village to land which we have since brought back into our reservation but they dumped our our people and our belongings there. Um, so that's called the Temecula eviction, took place in eighteen seventy five under a decree of ejectment from a federal court in San Francisco. Uh, they led us to to the boundaries of a rancho that belonged to a man named John McGee. He was a local rancher and uh thankfully, Mister McGee allowed our people, uh the evictees, to live near his h- his house. He had an adobe house and there was a spring there, and that spring kept our people alive, the Tavishpa spring. Um, but all our homes, our crops, our orchards, our cattle, our livestock, everything had had been taken or burned uh at the village site. So we had nothing at that point in time. Our people had to uh uh l- rebuild brush homes and live in their in the brush homes and and live off the land, deer, small game, uh other fruits of the land. And then nearly eight years later in eighteen eighty-two, President Chester Arthur issued the executive order that set aside uh the lands that would establish Pechanga reservation. Uh and shortly thereafter Pechanga families moved from the spring and uh adjacent to Mister McGee's uh uh ranch and uh moved on to Pechanga reservation and near a spring on that piece of land called Pechaha. The Pechaha spring is the namesake for Pechanga um and means place where the water drips is the name of that spring. So I tell you this story not because I want your sympathy but Because I wanted, I want you to see uh how our people have have persevered um through these things, uh with determination and resilience uh not only to survive but thrive in the modern day. Now Poeska Mountain is among the most sacred places in our history. It's tied to our creation story, too long to go into here, and it's tied to el- knowledge that have been passed from our elders to our children across generations. Um that sacred place once faced destruction in two thousand and seven. Granite construction proposed a quarry, a massive open pit mine as you heard. We joined, Pechanga joined the city of Temecula to s- and save our Southwest Hills, um, a a local coalition and fought the mine. We ultimately lost the the permitting battle, but we were able to buy three hundred and sixty-four acres in the center at the top of the mountain, and uh the mining company went away as a result of that purchase. Um, I think I'm about to run out of time, so I'm gonna skip ahead here. Um, let me say that the Pechanga people, we have proximity, we have commitment, we have a deep connection to the lands in question. Uh, we will protect its cultural resources. We will preserve its open character. Uh, we will support responsible fire and resource management and pass our knowledge of Poeska on to future generations. Chairman Murkowski, Vice Chairman Schatz, and members of the committee, I respectfully ask you to approve uh Senate Bill forty fifty-three and thank you for your consideration and for recognizing

Thank you very much, Chairman. And finally, we will hear from Principal Chief Hicks. Welcome.

She only got Dioloshki dogledo. My Cherokee name is Woodcarver.

Jim Hicks, Jim Hick.

There you go. My Cherokee name is Woodcarver Di Dioloshki. Uh thank you for the opportunity to testify on HR uh t uh two twenty uh two two two six. I'm the Principal Chief of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians. I'm I'm at the end of my fourth term. Uh I've worked on this issue for about forty years of my career. Uh the lands we uh we asked Congress to return are a small part of our ancestral homelands. They include Chota, once the political and cultural heart of the Cherokee people, Taunasi, which gave the state of Tennessee its name, and the birthplace of Sequoia, who single-handedly created the Cherokee syllabary, our written language. These places are part of who we are, and that connection endured through the forced removal of thousands of Cherokee people from our homelands in the eighteen thirties, where one third of our people perished. The ancestors of the Eastern Band resisted removal, remained in these mountains and found their way home because of their determination and we are still here. Today, the Eastern Band is a sovereign tribal nation. We have our own government, our language, culture, a land base, and a perpetual responsibility to protect the places that remain important to our people. That responsibility did not end with the removal. Generations later, our people were called to defend these lands again. In nineteen sixty-seven, the TVA began construction of the Teleco Dam on the Little Tennessee River. The project would create a reservoir stretching more than thirty miles through the Little Tennessee River Valley, including historic Cherokee townsites of Chota and Taunasi and lands connected to Sequoia's birthplace. Our people opposed the project and warned that it would harm burial places, medicinal plant uh plants and and areas, and cultural and historical places throughout the valley. Despite those efforts, the project moved forward. And in nineteen seventy-nine, the Telco Dam was completed and the rev- reservoir flooded portions of our ancestral homelands. Of course, the damage was was permanent. Places our ancestors had known for generation were changed forever. In the years that followed, the Eastern Band continued working to protect these places and maintain our connection to them. We worked with the TVA, we invested in the Sequoia Birthplace Museum, which has served as an educational resource in Tennessee since nineteen eighty-six. We cared for these historic places and continued telling their story. Since the mid-nineteen eighties, Eastern Band has managed most of the properties includen in included in this legislation through permanent easements granted by the TVA. These lands would ultimately be placed in the trust for our tribe, and we have continued working to get them back. This effort did not begin with me, and it did not begin with this Congress. Tribal leaders before me have worked tirelessly toward the reacquisition of these lands. Our tribe has maintained these places, invested in them, and return to Congress repeatedly seeking approval. H R two two six would place approximately seventy-six acres of federal land managed by TVA and Monroe County, Tennessee, in the trust f- for our tribe. Those lands include the Sequoia Birthplace Museum and and the Chota and Taunasi Memorial sites. The legislation also provides permanent easements for additional lands as shows associated with Chota and Chota-Taunasi homelands. But we do not measure the importance of these these places and acres. We measure it in generations, generations fought to protect these places and generations of our people have worked to get them back. When our children visit Chota, Taunasi, or the birthplace of Sequoia, I personally do not want them to see places only as somewhere Cherokees used to be. I want them to understand that they are standing on Cherokee land, and there is a difference. There are Cherokee people who fought for these places, who did not live to see them returned. There are tribal leaders who worked towards re- acquiring them who did not get to finish the job this job. I think about them every day. One day someone else will be will serve in my capacity as principal chief. Our children will become our elders and generations of Cherokee people will never will never meet w- w- with uh with lives, with the uh decisions we make today. I want them to inherit the story of of this land that has been lost. This Congress cannot change what happened to our people. It cannot undo the removal and it cannot put back what was flooded by Teleco Dam. But this Congress can do something meaningful today. It can return these lands to our tribe and with these lands a return, we will fulfill the responsibility that comes with this land And I want to acknowledge the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I want to acknowledge the TVA and the relationships that we have built. And it's taken decades to build strong relationships to re-acquire these lands. I know I'm getting close on on time, but I wa- I wanna say I also wanna thank Congressman Fleischmann for stepping up. This this uh bill has passed the House multiple times. And I'm here today to say, you know, you know, from from my heartfelt, you know, perspective and position, this has been fifty years since this promise has been made to our tribe. And, Chairlady, I heard you last week saying, you know, with with Nehasda and and the housing, uh, ti- time is up, it's it's time for for this to move forward and make things right. And and I appreciate everybody's time today and and I appreciate all the the words that are spoken today. many heartfelt words here today to regain lands that are so important to our people. Shki. God bless each one of you.

Well said. Thank you, Principal Chief, and I um I appreciate all of the comments from our tribal leaders here this afternoon. Um uh it is it is clear that uh these are these are long, hard-fought efforts and um we hope to be able to provide some level of finality and and clarity. Um, let me begin my comments this, or my questions this afternoon, uh, directed to you, um, Director Mercier, uh, let's begin with the Porch Band of Creek Indians Parity Act. Um, you you have said in your written testimony, you said here today that the department supports a comprehensive legislative uh solution to to clarify the land into trust authority. So does this mean that the department supports amending the IRA so that the secretary may take land into trust uh for any federally recognized tribe regardless of whether or not that tribe was under federal jurisdiction back in nineteen thirty four?

Thank you for the question, Chairman. Uh potentially. Uh I think we're mostly interested in having a conversation with the committee um and at your request for technical assistance to explore what would be necessary to f to to provide a universal comprehensive fix uh of the carcerary uh issue.

So i i i So then uh what I I get what you're saying in terms of the back and forth with the committee, I understand that. Uh is there a preference for comprehensive uh legislative solutions? Um Uh as opposed to then the tribe specific legislation, such as we have with seventeen thirty.

Yes, Chairman, there there would be a preference for the comprehensive universal fix. Um I think our concerns would largely lie in the fact that if we were to move forward in a piecemeal fashion we could inadvertently leave some tribes still out of that afi that fix um uh there are a number of tribes that are impacted by this decision and we feel uh the best path forward is to fix it for all of them.

So uh so let me then ask you the question um uh chairwoman. Bryan, you um you have described the litigation that uh the porch band has faced over overlands. Um uh you've indicated the the the not only the legal uncertainty, I think you mentioned the Boys and Curl Girls Club uh issue. You also mentioned I think it was ten million dollars spent on on litigation. So when you hear um uh Director Mercier say we wanna do the comprehensive long-term as opposed to tribal specific, where where does that put you and your efforts?

Our ef our efforts still remain to do a comprehensive national fix. I mean, we've been leading the charge, as I stated. for seventeen years and we'll continue to support that. But at the same time we have challenges that we've, you know, that we have faced legally. Um, and this just provides clarity if, you know, it's a port specific bill. Unfortunately, in seventeen years we've not had luck with the national comprehensive passage for whatever reason. And so, therefore, in order to commi continue to meet the demands and the needs such as lack of you know trust land for housing um nursing skilled nursing programs, unfortunately with the state of where things are um our people wanna come home and building more housing and meeting the needs of our tribal citizens is so important and we have a large elder population that we care And as you all know that it's prominent in Indian Native um Americans' diabetes, um heart issues, and we're starting to see a lot of people with dementia, so having land that we could build to assist our elders as well as housing with skilled nursing programs is would be very beneficial for us and our tribe. Um and we're hopeful that And we'll continue to work and strive to work for a national fix. Um, but unfortunately at this time nothing has passed, um, a national comprehensive fix has not passed.

We recognize that and that has uh that has obviously been a challenge, as you point out, uh not only with the the porch but with other tribes as well. Let me let me get one more question to you here, uh uh Director Mercier, um this is regarding S thirty eight fifty nine. you support, the department supports the bill. Uh are there any concerns that you may have that this change to uh the Catawba uh enrollment criteria could be used to dis-enroll current members or withhold memberships for any reasons beyond simply not meeting the c the criteria for enrollment it sounded like you were pretty supportive of there but i are there any concerns that would That it could have unintended consequence?

Uh, no, uh, Chairman, uh, you know, w- we believe firmly that, uh, what the tribal citizens, those determinations are made as an inherent sovereignty decision that each tribe makes on their own. So I I would say that we don't have any concerns. Uh, and again, we we very much, uh, honor and support that sovereign authority that a tribe has to determine its own citizenship.

Great, thank you. Let me turn to the Vice Chair.

Thank you, chair. Thank you to all the testifiers. Um uh, chairwoman Bryan, I understand the importance of addressing the cartieris fix specifically for your tribe, but a full fix for Indian country is also needed. Um I know you've said this before. I wanna get it on the record. You support a full cartieris fix?

Yes, sir, we support a full cartieris fix. But also at the same time, another seventeen years of

I got it.

getting, you know, nowhere is very difficult. I mean, with the tens of millions of dollars we're spending in frivolous lawsuits, and we've, you know, we have overcome those issues and but it's costing, um, the United States money as well every time we're in court because Ju- Department of Justice and Interior has to show up, um, at those cases. So we definitely thank you for this time and, um, would really like for you guys to consider the passage.

I got it. You need your bill regardless of whether or not we can get our act together. Uh that's that's that's my question for Mister Mercier. Like your your testimony is a little um opaque to me. It sounds as though what you're saying is that the administration supports a car cherry fix. Fine, I think everyw mostly everybody on this committee, mostly everybody in this room does. Do you support this individual bill that would resolve this question for for the porch band of creek Indians.

Thank you for the question, um, Vice Chairman. Uh, uh, a- again, w- you know, we support the universal fix, and I think that's a bold statement by this administration to actually go on the record here and support the the comprehensive uh legislative fix. Um, uh, on on the individual uh bill before us today, Um, uh, I I I can't say more than, uh, we we don't oppose. We don't support. Uh, but we would rather that our effort be put into a comprehensive, uh, fix for all tribes that are impacted by the carcerary decision.

I'm a little alarmed, but I'm gonna not make this wor worse by putting a fine point on this. Uh, you're clearly, I think, probably gonna have to do a little inter-agency work on the particulars of this bill, and you may not be in a position to say yes. So, we'll just take this under advisement and work with Senator Britt and the Chairwoman um to get you to yes. And I that is not a question. Um, I didn't mean that in a in an obnoxious way.

And and I accept I accepted the premise of it as well.

I'm just saying no, no need to, yeah, got it, okay, got it.

Thank you sir.

Um, Chairman McCarroll, um, you testify that your sacred mountain was placed on the National Register of Historic Places as a traditional cultural property. Why is the category so important to tribal nations

A TCP, traditional cultural place, um is uh a more expansive way of talking about uh a sacred place and a sacred landscape and versus uh simply a sacred place or point on a map. Well we've we've we found over the years, over the decades in in sacred place and cultural resources advocacy, trying to mitigate destruction, desecration, and things like that. Um, we often end up in front of agencies, hold up a map and say, you know, here's this mountain, it's a sacred place, Puesca, and typically, you know, it'll be represented by a dot on a map.

They try to work around it.

Yeah, and and and it it we found that we were missing the forest for the trees, w- if you would. Um, and so a s- a TCP itself is is a more expansive term, because in our case here with Puesca Mountain, That's where the first funeral of the first person in humanity passed away, and they had that first funeral on Puesca Mountain. But right below the north flank of the very same mountain is the birthplace of our people. And and then our first ancestral village is adjacent to that. So there's this whole complex of cosmological creation that is embedded that the landscape is. And so uh it's hard to define that by saying, well here here is a place name for your sacred place. The TCP is what is necessary to convey uh on on on paper uh or on a map, a digital map, exactly what we need and uh

Thank you. Very helpful.

Yeah, OK.

Um Uh, Mr. Mercier, um the National NAGPRA Review Committee completed its FY twenty-five report to Congress in November of last year. We have not received the report yet. What what's the status of the report?

Uh, thank you for the question, uh, Vice-Chairman, I I I'll have to get back to you on that. Uh, the the NAGPRA review community is a part of a different bureau within the interior, but I'll take that back to the department and follow up with you.

Is uh next week a reasonable time frame for you to get back to me?

I would assume so. Yeah, w I think next week we can get back to you first.

I saw a nod, but it wasn't an enthusiastic

We will get back to you next week then, yes.

Okay, it has it's been a while and it is a statutory requirement. I also understand that the NOFO for NAGPRA grants has not been published. People are starting to freak out about this.

Okay.

Um Uh, can you figure out what's happening?

I will do that for you, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you. Senator Armstrong.

Thank you, Chairwoman. Um, first of all, great questions and it answered several of the questions that I had today, but um, first of all to Chairwoman Bryan, I I know that the that there's a court case in front of the eleventh um circuit right now and curious about we we know right now about the timing of that and how that it might affect the the bill on this.

I wish we knew the timing. Uh, it was ten years before we heard anything before. Um, and it's one of those cases. Um, our bill ha has no impact on this lawsuit. Um, our lands were placed in trust over forty years ago and multiple courts have affirmed our existing trust lands. So, this this legislation has nothing to do with this actual bill. we've prevailed before and feel strongly we will again, but this bill will also, um, show clarity,

Uh-huh.

um, an interpretation of the, um, cartieria under federal jurisdictions. So, this this case has nothing to do with this bill.

Okay, um, and and I it's good to see you again and I I know we got got to visit on this early,

Good to see you as well.

and I'm not I'm not asking this in a confrontational way to be clear about that, I really am just trying to understand If if the bi- if the lawsuit didn't go your way, what impact that would have on this and whether this should be heard or not? Cuz I I really don't know the answer to that question.

Um, uh, uh, there's so many uncertainties. It's about interpretation, but as I said, we have won in the lower courts and I feel strongly that we'll prevail, um, in this case at the district court

Okay. Okay.

or circuit court, I'm sorry.

Okay. Um. So I guess, you know, maybe I'll turn to uh, Mister Mercier. What, how would you all view that in terms of acting Congre- asking Congress to take action on something while there's pending le- legislation?

Yeah, thank you for the question, Senator. Uh, I'm y- I'm to be honest, I'm not familiar with the um the the the litigation um,

Yeah, okay, great, thank you. And then uh uh next question uh uh s sticking with you, Director Mercier, um You know, Oklahoma has a lot of uh removed tribes and and I know there's issues and conflict now around uh, burial grounds and ancestral, um, sensitive places that that have been disturbed or claim to have been disturbed. And I'm curious, uh, I know there's no law today effectively protecting a tribe from uh, efforts of another tribe, which is kind of strange from my perspective, but curious h how the how your agency thinks about that and your department thinks about that issue and what what could be done to to make sure there's fair and reasonable notice amongst tribes?

Yeah, that's a very good question, Senator. And and what we we are often asked to intervene or referee disputes between tribes over lands and we often we do our darnedest to stay out of that and try to have the tribes of sovereigns themselves work through that. Uh, so what we typically do is we notify the tribal historic preservation officers of multiple tribes when we have an action, and we try to consult with all of them. and resolve it amongst those depos and the s- the state historicization officer as well. So we are best, we do our best to work diplomatically with all of the tribes on a government government basis uh to to try to address their concerns but um we um we try not to be

Mm-hmm.

in the position of calling balls and strikes on some of those disputes if we can.

And and so who who would you suggest sh- should be calling balls and strikes and it seems like a pretty unresolved issue if I if I got a lot of you know, important tribal members and leaders here today, how would you suggest that does get resolved? Cuz it seems like a pretty sticky issue for the government to have rules about disturbing uh historical sites on the one hand and on the other hand saying, well, it's tribe to tribe, we're not gonna weigh in. So I'm just I'm wondering what what the best way the the tribes would suggest to try to deal with that.

Is that to me, Senator?

Yes, yeah.

Yeah, uh, so I mean, we often go to the uh ACH So that was at the American Council on Historic Preservation, uh, for their guidance on such situa- similar situations. So that would be something that we would probably look for guidance from them on.

Okay. Um, do you, do you have any thoughts on that?

Oh yeah. We don't have time for all of those, but I will say that, uh, the arborses should be the tribes. When a tribal people tell you their place is sacred, believe that.

Yeah.

End a story. You get the government involved and and things start to get convoluted. You get a predatory government involved and things go sideways. You have agendas and things like that that come into the picture. But first and foremost, uh, uh, tribes know best, we know our land, we know our people, and we know what is sacred. And uh, and believe us when we say it.

Yeah, well, I I certainly do. My question is, it seems like there's an unresolved dispute now between the Muscogee Creek tribe and and uh porch tribe relative to to um impact on some of those. And I I'd love for it to be resolved. I'm not sitting here saying who's right or wrong. I'm sitting here saying it seems like there's not really a good law or process to resolve it and I don't disagree with you that it would be great if tribe to tribe could resolve it I just don't see it getting resolved and and uh would love to f have a process to know that that could be solved so you are.

Yes, I am very anxious to have a comment here on the record because, Okay, thank you. Thanks. Please, thank you. um, I myself personally have, um, talked with them about carrying the torch to strengthen NAGPRA. When you have rules in place and you follow those and, you know, as I said, I've I've offered to carry the torch to strengthen NAGPRA, which helps with, you know, protecting sacred grounds. And so to to no resolve, that's not happened. But um you know, I am um a chairman that has inherited this issue and I've been very passionate about resolving it to no avail.

Mm-hmm.

And um you know, it would be about like me telling Mark McCorrow what he can do it with his land in California. Like That's not gonna happen. And so this is a sovereignty attack on our sovereignty as the Porch Band of Creek Indians a federally recognized tribe in the state of Alabama that has overcome many challenges and we have truly created a tribe that truly come from poverty to prosperity and we have created growth there where when I was a a baby there we were totally grant funded. And now maybe ten percent of our budget is from grants. The rest is from our economic development, our hard work and growth.

A- and you have a lot to be proud of and I'm not trying to take any of that away, or condemn, I simply am trying to say this seems like a dispute that doesn't have a a good way for both parties to say yes we're comfortable with the way it's resolved. And I'd love for there to to, you know, be that way. I love what you're saying. So uh so I I'm I'm sorry to I didn't think so, I I'm sorry. to pick on a scab there, but I I really would love to see that get resolved, because I certainly hear it from our tribes in Oklahoma that they have sacred grounds. Oh, that's what's that scab to be healed to thank you, Okay. some of us, Thank you. for your comments. Yeah, thank you. That's all I have. Thank you. Sorry.

No, thank you, Senator. I appreciate that. Uh, I just have a few more um uh comments here that I'd like to to make sure we get out on on the record. Um Uh Just finishing up with you, Director, um regarding S forty fifty three. You supportive, wanna ensure effective implementation, do you have any concerns that could impact or or have any um uh have any issues about the implementation or the transfer? Um you feel we pass this, you're gonna be able to implement it pretty pretty readily.

Yeah, thank you, Chairman. Yeah, from our perspective we we don't have any technical concerns and and

Okay.

we would work with our colleagues at the Bureau of Land Management to look

How long do you think it would actually uh take to to from

Yeah, mandatory

enactment to fully transfer, what do you figure?

Yeah, mandatory acquisitions move fairly quickly, but we would need to get with BLM just get the the survey and all that completed,

Okay.

the initial site assessment. There's there's there are some steps to that we need to complete, but uh it I I don't wanna give you a a a a a rough estimate and be wrong.

But it's relatively easy.

It's it's fairly quickly, yeah.

Okay. Um, let me turn to you, uh, Assistant Chief, uh, Leitch. Um, in your written testimony, um, uh, the You you explained that the federal enrollment language, uh, to get uh, seeking to get rid of what was mostly used to determine the number of individuals uh who would receive a share of the settlement funds So you've talked about all that. You've mentioned that these distributions are complete. Um, just wanna confirm that there's no litigation that's still outstanding or any challenges as to how those funds were distributed that could be affected by, by this legislation. So is everything clear?

Yes, ma'am, everything is clear.

Great, so we don't need to worry about that. Wonderful. Um Uh, yeah, you raised the issue of the phrase continued political relations and how uh a terminology like that that is not clearly defined creates its own set of of issues and and problems so uh thank you for for raising that. Uh Chairman McCarroll um uh you have have talked about the significance uh of these lands and um uh the responsibility of the tribe to manage and protect them for for future generations. As you're, as the tribe is looking to develop uh plans for the lands, how do you how do you intend to coordinate with with either the neighboring communities you mentioned, um uh uh coordinating with uh matters like wildfire response, but uh public safety, other shared needs, how do you work that?

Well, in essence, we're already doing that because uh as as you know there are there's a portion of the reservation that's already contiguous with the the lands in question. Um what we have right now is a patchwork of tribal land, county land, state land, BLM land, and um when there's an issue in that area um our tribal rangers for instance, if it's law enforcement uh uh they'll be among the first responders to illegal dumping or something that's going on up there like that. Uh if it's an environmental issue, uh uh an issue of species for instance, you know by the way this this tract of land uh is part of uh is extremely unique, it's it has extreme it um it has pure indigenous flora and fauna on it that was untouched by um either the Spanish, well mostly the Spanish import of of European animals. So all all the plant life on this mountain um I guess because it's at elevation and it's not easy to, it wasn't farmable in the eighteen hundreds, uh it it was spared. And then a a piece of land about five five miles away shares that distinction of having this unique uh flora and fauna on it because it didn't get, didn't get farmed, didn't get ranched, uh cattle didn't chew up all the native vegetation. So um as a result, you know, it it's it's extremely valuable environmentally. Um but you know Our environmental department, for instance, has has been proactively monitoring and trying to treat uh a pest. It's been coming for the last twenty-two years in Southern California, where oak trees are. It's the golden spotted oak borer beetle. It's Gsob for short. The Gsob beetle. Bores ten holes or more in an oak tree and the tree dies. There's no saving it. Um and so our monitoring, there's thousands of oaks on our reservation, off our reservation. on this mountain and uh we are already monitoring um and and so we will continue to do that and that's one example of of being proactive in terms of you know how we engage there. One last note um our fire department, Pechanga Fire Department is part of the California State Mutual Aid System, uh we're also part of the FEMA um R uh SAR team uh and and and the the wildland interface the wildland urban interface fire department operates in, um, that's one of the response areas that we would get called to. We have been called to, uh, during fires and, um, wildland fires. So, um, what we are already doing in terms of management,

Very good.

we would do it officially, um, and and continue to do that. Uh, but there would be less of a patchwork of jurisdictions.

Good, thank you for that. And and and Chief Hicks, um, uh, I knew that this this, uh, legislation has been a priority for a while. I hadn't realize that you've been working on it for four decades. So, um, that's a, that's a lifetime endeavor. And, uh, I know that you are truly looking forward to getting this over the finish line. And you, you mentioned, um, Congressman Fleischmann. Uh, he has been dogged in, uh, in reminding me that, uh, the House has done its job over there and, and, uh, the importance of being able to advance this. Um, uh, I don't mean to be, uh, making light of it, but, uh, w- w- what is this gonna mean to, to, to you and, and to the tribe once this is complete? I was gonna say, you know, now that you've got this done, what are you gonna do? But, but seriously, what, what will the significance of finally resolving this after decades of of pushing to advance it, I mean.

You know, as you if I if I could just simplify, and and I've given a lot of thought to this and again, you know, something that's been working really difficult or or, you know, over over a long period of time, but if you just think about a a piece of fabric and you think about, you know, the spiritual aspect of the fabric, you think about, you know, the graves, you think about the cultural sites, if you, as you've heard today, And a piece of that fabri fabric has been missing for decades. That's what it means to us. We're starting to uh regain, especially these areas that mean so much to our tribe. And um as a tribal member, as an elder of the tribe now, to to know that we can bring this back and our children can learn from those histories. whether good or bad, and they can go celebrate, you know, the memorials of of former former chiefs, they can know that in perpetuity that they can pr protect this former capital of our people. That's what it means to us. And again, in in in comparison to, you know, touching eight states historically the Cherokee people did, this is a, you know, just just a drop in a bucket, but when you think about it from the perspective of what it means to us as a people, it's bigger than those eight states. And so that that's my response.

Thank you.

So

I'm glad I asked the question then. I appreciate your response. Um, I I appreciate the time each of you have given. Uh, our tribal leaders, thank you. Thank you for making the trip to Washington DC. Uh, Director Mercy uh Mercy, thank you for um for handling some of these uh again matters that have been around for a long time. Uh I think you have a committee here who is willing to to work with you to help advance some of these um some of these legacy items. We would all like to see um quicker resolution whether it's uh what the Cherokee have been facing for forty years whether it's what the porch uh band uh have been working on for seventeen um uh, legacy issues, but we wish that that they were not quite as as lengthy in time and duration. Um, because you've reminded us that while we try to navigate some of the the politics of these issues, that for the people that are impacted, it is a very real, very personal, um, part of of who they are, their culture, their identity. So, let's keep working together and, um, without the committee, stands adjourned. We will uh hold the committee record open uh for a couple weeks in case there's additional questions for the witnesses. With that, we stand adjourned.