HOPI TRIBAL COUNCIL RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the negotiations between the Hopi Tutsqua Task Team, the Navajo families, and the United States Government, have produced a proposed Settlement Agreement for consideration by the Hopi Tribal Council as a means of resolving the question of continuing Navajo residents on Hopi Partitioned Lands and as a means of ending the longstanding and costly lawsuits of the Hopi Tribe against the United States Government; and WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement (copy attached and incorporated herein by reference) has been reviewed by the Tribal Council, and in the opinion of the Tribal Council the Settlement Agreement obtains important objectives of the Hopi Tribe and the Council is of further opinion that it is in the best interest of the Tribe to accept the terms of the proposed Settlement Agreement. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Hopi Tribal Council that it hereby approves the Settlement Agreement between the Hopi Tribe and the United States Government as attached hereto. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Hopi Tribal Council hereby authorizes the Tribal Chairman to sign the Settlement Agreement on behalf of the Hopi Tribe. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Hopi Tutsqua Task Team is directed to begin the immediate implementation of the settlement agreement according to the time lines established in the Settlement Agreement. HOPI TRIBAL COUNCIL RESOLUTION CERTIFICATION The foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Hopi Tribal Council on November 27, 1995, at a meeting at which a quorum was present with a vote of 7 in favor, 5 opposed, 0 abstaining (Chairman presiding and not voting) pursuant to the authority vested in the Hopi Tribal Council by SECTION 1(a) and (c) of ARTICLE VI-POWERS OF THE TRIBAL COUNCIL of the Hopi Tribal Constitution and By-Laws of the Hopi Tribe of Arizona, as ratified by the Tribe on October 24, 1936, and approved by the Secretary of the Interior on December 19, 1936, pursuant to Section 16 of the Act of June 18. 1934. Said resolution is effective as of the date of adoption and does not require Secretarial approval. ATTEST: Ferrell Secakuku, Chairman Mary A. Felter, Tribal Secretary I am writing in response to your letter of April 10, which my office received on April 22. What follows are the Hopi Tribe's responses to your questions as well as those asked by Senator Kyl. It is the Tribe's hope that with the answers to these questions you will feel comfortable moving forward with legislation giving the Hopi Tribe 75-year leasing authority. The sooner the 75-year leasing authority is granted, the more time the Navajo families have to consider their options. This will make it more likely that the settlement will be successful. The Tribe looks forward to receiving the requested legislative authorization and to putting this longstanding dispute behind it. Question 1 -- Why is this settlement different from the settlement in 1992? There are three major differences between the current settlement and the one reached in 1992. Two of those differences relate to the settlement agreement between the United States and the Hopi Tribe. First, unlike the 1992 settlement, no federal lands will, or can, be taken into trust for the Hopi Tribe. Second, unlike the 1992 settlement, the State of Arizona has been consulted and is supporting the agreement. The other difference relates to the accommodation agreement between the Hopi Tribe and the Navajo families. Since 1992, the families, their representatives and the Tribe have had numerous face-to--face meetings at which they have had an opportunity to air issues and discuss concerns. As a result of those meetings, there is a higher level of trust and a better level of communication. In addition, the parties have clarified the meaning of several of the provisions in the agreement. Also, unlike the 1992 settlement, the Navajo families have had a chance to vote and indicate they are willing to proceed. All of this bodes well for the relations between the Navajo families and the Hopi Tribe in the future. Question 2 - What factors did the Hopi Tribe rely on in arriving at a $50 million settlement number? Senator McCain The $50 million settlement number is the product of several meetings between the Tribe and its attorneys. It takes into account the cost of litigating the Damage, Rental, and Claims Court cases, as well as the cost of bringing an action against the United States for failing to relocate all of the Navajo families. It takes into account the strength of the Tribe's claims. It also takes into account the uncertainties in the litigation process as well as the time delay in receiving the benefit of any judgments the Tribe might obtain against the United States. Question 3 -- What problems are resolved in the settlement agreement and the accommodation agreement? As between the United States and the Tribe, the following issues are resolved by the Settlement agreement: a) b) d) the liability of the United States in the Damage case (Ninth Circuit Docket No. 94-17032), the liability of the United States in the Claims Court cases (Claims the liability of the United States for failing to relocate the Navajo from the HPL pursuant to the 1974 Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act, the failure of the United States to issue timely rental determinations pursuant to the 1974 Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act, e) the conditions pursuant to which the United States is required to take land into trust for the Hopi Tribe, f) g) the scope of the continuing responsibility of the United States to assist the Hopi Tribe with management of its lands and to give the Tribe its fair share of resource allocations, and the responsibility of the United States to complete the voluntary relocation of Navajos from the HPL and the relocation of resisters by a date certain -- the year 2000. As between the Hopi Tribe and the Navajo families, the accommodation agreement resolves the following issues: Senator McCain a) b) e The current lack of Hopi jurisdiction over Hopi land and Navajo the limitations imposed on the Navajo families by the federal district court's new construction orders, the limitations imposed on the Navajo families by the grazing permit system put in place in 1974 and the problems with dual grazing jurisdiction on the HPL, the lack of communication between the Navajo families and the Hopi Tribe, d) e) what uses of Hopi land the Navajo families will be allowed, f) h) who is eligible to stay on the HPL and enter into the accommodation agreement. when the relocation program ends and what Navajo families are the Manybeads lawsuit. Question 4: What issues are not settled by the settlement agreement and the accommodation agreement? With regard to the United States, the following issues are not resolved by the settlement agreement: a) b) Any liability of the United States created after 1996 (none known at this time), and Any issue related to the 1934 litigation. With regard to the Navajo families, the Hopi Tribe is unaware of any issues left unresolved by the accommodation agreement. Question 5: How many families reside on the HPL and why the imprecision? The difficulty in stating the exact number of families is that the Navajos and the Office of Relocation use different definitions of what constitutes a "family." To |