HEARTH Act Approval of Jamul Indian Village of California Business Leasing Ordinance, 35129-35130 [2019-15545]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2019 / Notices such Person for injuries inflicted as a result of intoxication by the consumer of such Alcoholic Beverage. C. Sale to Minors. Any Person who sells, furnishes, gives, or causes to be sold, furnished, or given away any Alcoholic Beverage to any Person under the Legal Age is guilty of a violation of this Act. D. Violation of Liquor License Terms and Conditions. Any Person who violates the terms and conditions of a liquor license shall be guilty of a violation of this Act. SECTION 5-403 PENALTIES A. The Board is authorized to make written determinations and enforce civil penalties or damages for violations of this Act. B. Penalties may include, but are not limited to, revocation or suspension of liquor license, forfeiture or confiscation of Alcoholic Beverages, fines, monetary damages, and injunctive relief. C. Civil penalties/fines may not exceed $5,000. D. The Board may bring an action in Tribal Court to enforce any duly assessed civil penalties determined in accordance with this Article. ARTICLE V MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS SECTION 5-501 AMENDMENT This Act may only be amended pursuant to a duly enacted amendment by Tribal Council and, to the extent required by Federal law, certification by the Secretary of the Interior and publication in the Federal Register. SECTION 5-502 SEVERABILITY If any part or provision of this Act is held by any agency or court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, such adjudication shall render such provisions inapplicable to other Persons or circumstances. The remaining provisions shall be unaffected and shall remain in full force and effect. jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES SECTION 5-503 PRIOR INCONSISTENT ENACTMENTS Any prior Tribal laws, resolutions or ordinances, to the extent they are inconsistent with this Act, are hereby repealed. SECTION 5-504 TRIBAL COURT JURISDICTION The Tribal Court shall have jurisdiction to hear appeals arising under Articles III and IV of this Act. The Tribal Court shall also have jurisdiction to hear any claim, cause of action, or enforcement action brought by the Liquor Control Board for violation of this Act. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:11 Jul 19, 2019 Jkt 247001 35129 llllllllllllllllll process, and then must obtain the Secretary’s approval of those regulations Legislative History: prior to entering into leases. The 10/26/2018 Thirty (30) day public review HEARTH Act requires the Secretary to phase begins. approve Tribal regulations if the Tribal 11/15/2018 Public hearing held at Tribal regulations are consistent with the Office. 11/25/2018 Thirty (30) day public review Department of the Interior’s phase ends. (Department) leasing regulations at 25 11/29/2018 Seven (7) day final review CFR part 162 and provide for an phase begins. environmental review process that 12/20/2018 Tribal Council passes Act by meets requirements set forth in the Resolution No. 2018–69 by vote of 6 for, HEARTH Act. This notice announces 0 against, 1 abstaining. that the Secretary, through the Assistant [FR Doc. 2019–15543 Filed 7–19–19; 8:45 am] Secretary—Indian Affairs, has approved BILLING CODE 4337–15–P the Tribal regulations for the Jamul Indian Village of California. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [190A2100DD/AAKC001030/ A0A501010.999900] HEARTH Act Approval of Jamul Indian Village of California Business Leasing Ordinance Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: On June 14, 2019, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved the Jamul Indian Village of California (Tribe) Business Leasing Ordinance under the Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible Tribal Homeownership Act of 2012 (HEARTH Act). With this approval, the Tribe is authorized to enter into business leases without further BIA approval. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, 1849 C Street NW, MS 4624–MIB, Washington, DC; telephone: (505) 563– 3132. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Summary of the HEARTH Act The HEARTH Act makes a voluntary, alternative land leasing process available to Tribes, by amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The HEARTH Act authorizes Tribes to negotiate and enter into agricultural and business leases of Tribal trust lands with a primary term of 25 years, and up to two renewal terms of 25 years each, without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary). The HEARTH Act also authorizes Tribes to enter into leases for residential, recreational, religious or educational purposes for a primary term of up to 75 years without the approval of the Secretary. Participating Tribes develop Tribal leasing regulations, including an environmental review PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes The Department’s regulations governing the surface leasing of trust and restricted Indian lands specify that, subject to applicable Federal law, permanent improvements on leased land, leasehold or possessory interests, and activities under the lease are not subject to State and local taxation and may be subject to taxation by the Indian Tribe with jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 162.017. As explained further in the preamble to the final regulations, the Federal government has a strong interest in promoting economic development, self-determination, and Tribal sovereignty. 77 FR 72,440, 72,447–48 (December 5, 2012). The principles supporting the Federal preemption of State law in the field of Indian leasing and the taxation of lease-related interests and activities applies with equal force to leases entered into under Tribal leasing regulations approved by the Federal government pursuant to the HEARTH Act. Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. 5108, preempts State and local taxation of permanent improvements on trust land. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston County, 724 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). Similarly, section 5108 preempts State taxation of rent payments by a lessee for leased trust lands, because ‘‘tax on the payment of rent is indistinguishable from an impermissible tax on the land.’’ See Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Stranburg, No. 14–14524, *13–*17, n.8 (11th Cir. 2015). In addition, as explained in the preamble to the revised leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162, Federal courts have applied a balancing test to determine whether State and local taxation of non-Indians on the reservation is preempted. White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM 22JYN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 35130 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2019 / Notices balancing test, which is conducted against a backdrop of ‘‘traditional notions of Indian self-government,’’ requires a particularized examination of the relevant State, Federal, and Tribal interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to the surface leasing regulations, 77 FR at 72,447–48, as supplemented by the analysis below. The strong Federal and Tribal interests against State and local taxation of improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased under the Department’s leasing regulations apply equally to improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased pursuant to Tribal leasing regulations approved under the HEARTH Act. Congress’s overarching intent was to ‘‘allow Tribes to exercise greater control over their own land, support self-determination, and eliminate bureaucratic delays that stand in the way of homeownership and economic development in Tribal communities.’’ 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 (May 15, 2012). The HEARTH Act was intended to afford Tribes ‘‘flexibility to adapt lease terms to suit [their] business and cultural needs’’ and to ‘‘enable [Tribes] to approve leases quickly and efficiently.’’ Id. at 5–6. Assessment of State and local taxes would obstruct these express Federal policies supporting Tribal economic development and self-determination, and also threaten substantial Tribal interests in effective Tribal government, economic self-sufficiency, and territorial autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024, 2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (determining that ‘‘[a] key goal of the Federal Government is to render Tribes more self-sufficient, and better positioned to fund their own sovereign functions, rather than relying on Federal funding’’). The additional costs of State and local taxation have a chilling effect on potential lessees, as well as on a tribe that, as a result, might refrain from exercising its own sovereign right to impose a Tribal tax to support its infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043–44 (finding that State and local taxes greatly discourage Tribes from raising tax revenue from the same sources because the imposition of double taxation would impede Tribal economic growth). Similar to BIA’s surface leasing regulations, Tribal regulations under the HEARTH Act pervasively cover all aspects of leasing. See 25 U.S.C. 415(h)(3)(B)(i) (requiring Tribal regulations be consistent with BIA surface leasing regulations). Furthermore, the Federal government remains involved in the Tribal land VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:11 Jul 19, 2019 Jkt 247001 leasing process by approving the Tribal leasing regulations in the first instance and providing technical assistance, upon request by a tribe, for the development of an environmental review process. The Secretary also retains authority to take any necessary actions to remedy violations of a lease or of the Tribal regulations, including terminating the lease or rescinding approval of the Tribal regulations and reassuming lease approval responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary continues to review, approve, and monitor individual Indian land leases and other types of leases not covered under the Tribal regulations according to the Part 162 regulations. Accordingly, the Federal and Tribal interests weigh heavily in favor of preemption of State and local taxes on lease-related activities and interests, regardless of whether the lease is governed by Tribal leasing regulations or Part 162. Improvements, activities, and leasehold or possessory interests may be subject to taxation by the Jamul Indian Village of California. Dated: June 14, 2019. Tara Sweeney, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. [FR Doc. 2019–15545 Filed 7–19–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337–15–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR [190A2100DD/AABB003600/ A0T902020.999900.253G] Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: This notice publishes the Delaware Nation Beverage Control Act of 2019 (Alcohol Ordinance). The Alcohol Ordinance regulates and controls the possession, sale, manufacture, and distribution of alcohol on Delaware Nation trust lands in conformity with the laws of the State of Oklahoma where applicable and necessary. Although the Alcohol Ordinance was adopted on March 5, 2019, it does not become effective until published in the Federal Register. DATES: This Alcohol Ordinance takes effect on August 21, 2019. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sherry Lovin, Tribal Government Officer, Southern Plains Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Post Box 368, Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005, telephone: Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Authority: 18 U.S.C. 1161 The Delaware Nation Beverage Control Act of 2019 shall read as follows: Findings: Delaware Nation; Beverage Control Act of 2019 PO 00000 Dated: June 25, 2019 Tara Sweeney, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. Alcohol Ordinance of the Delaware Nation Bureau of Indian Affairs SUMMARY: (405) 247–1534, fax: (405) 247–1534; or Ms. Laurel Iron Cloud, Chief, Division of Tribal Government Services, Office of Indian Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW, MS–3645– MIB, Washington, DC 20240, telephone: (202) 513–7641. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Act of August 15, 1953, Public Law 83–277, 67 Stat. 5886, 18 U.S.C. 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall certify and publish in the Federal Register notice of adopted liquor control ordinances for the purpose of regulating liquor transactions in Indian country. On March 5, 2019, the Delaware Nation Executive Committee duly adopted the Delaware Nation Beverage Control Act of 2019. This Notice is published in accordance with the authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I certify that the Delaware Nation Executive Committee duly adopted by Resolution No. 2019–031 this Delaware Nation Beverage Control Act of 2019 on March 5, 2019. The Delaware Nation (hereinafter ‘‘the Nation’’) is a federally-recognized Indian tribe, exercising jurisdiction over all Tribal Lands as specified herein. The Nation’s Constitution, Article VI, Section 2, empowers the Executive Committee of the Nation to promulgate ordinances and resolutions for the Nation. The sale of Alcohol subject to the terms and provisions of this Alcohol Ordinance and all applicable laws, shall provide funds for the continued operation and strengthening of the Tribal government and the delivery of Tribal government services. It shall also produce capital which the Nation can use to further develop its economy. The enactment of this Alcohol Ordinance will also increase the ability of the Nation’s government to control the distribution and possession of Alcohol within the Tribal Lands. NOW THEREFORE, to permit the sale of Alcohol subject to the necessary controls and to promote the health, safety and welfare of its members, the E:\FR\FM\22JYN1.SGM 22JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 140 (Monday, July 22, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35129-35130]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15545]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

[190A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900]


HEARTH Act Approval of Jamul Indian Village of California 
Business Leasing Ordinance

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On June 14, 2019, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved 
the Jamul Indian Village of California (Tribe) Business Leasing 
Ordinance under the Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible Tribal 
Homeownership Act of 2012 (HEARTH Act). With this approval, the Tribe 
is authorized to enter into business leases without further BIA 
approval.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of 
Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, 1849 C Street NW, MS 
4624-MIB, Washington, DC; telephone: (505) 563-3132.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of the HEARTH Act

    The HEARTH Act makes a voluntary, alternative land leasing process 
available to Tribes, by amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 
1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The HEARTH Act authorizes Tribes to negotiate and 
enter into agricultural and business leases of Tribal trust lands with 
a primary term of 25 years, and up to two renewal terms of 25 years 
each, without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior 
(Secretary). The HEARTH Act also authorizes Tribes to enter into leases 
for residential, recreational, religious or educational purposes for a 
primary term of up to 75 years without the approval of the Secretary. 
Participating Tribes develop Tribal leasing regulations, including an 
environmental review process, and then must obtain the Secretary's 
approval of those regulations prior to entering into leases. The HEARTH 
Act requires the Secretary to approve Tribal regulations if the Tribal 
regulations are consistent with the Department of the Interior's 
(Department) leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162 and provide for an 
environmental review process that meets requirements set forth in the 
HEARTH Act. This notice announces that the Secretary, through the 
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, has approved the Tribal 
regulations for the Jamul Indian Village of California.

II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes

    The Department's regulations governing the surface leasing of trust 
and restricted Indian lands specify that, subject to applicable Federal 
law, permanent improvements on leased land, leasehold or possessory 
interests, and activities under the lease are not subject to State and 
local taxation and may be subject to taxation by the Indian Tribe with 
jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 162.017. As explained further in the preamble 
to the final regulations, the Federal government has a strong interest 
in promoting economic development, self-determination, and Tribal 
sovereignty. 77 FR 72,440, 72,447-48 (December 5, 2012). The principles 
supporting the Federal preemption of State law in the field of Indian 
leasing and the taxation of lease-related interests and activities 
applies with equal force to leases entered into under Tribal leasing 
regulations approved by the Federal government pursuant to the HEARTH 
Act.
    Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. 5108, 
preempts State and local taxation of permanent improvements on trust 
land. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston 
County, 724 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mescalero Apache 
Tribe v. Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). Similarly, section 5108 preempts 
State taxation of rent payments by a lessee for leased trust lands, 
because ``tax on the payment of rent is indistinguishable from an 
impermissible tax on the land.'' See Seminole Tribe of Florida v. 
Stranburg, No. 14-14524, *13-*17, n.8 (11th Cir. 2015). In addition, as 
explained in the preamble to the revised leasing regulations at 25 CFR 
part 162, Federal courts have applied a balancing test to determine 
whether State and local taxation of non-Indians on the reservation is 
preempted. White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 
(1980). The Bracker

[[Page 35130]]

balancing test, which is conducted against a backdrop of ``traditional 
notions of Indian self-government,'' requires a particularized 
examination of the relevant State, Federal, and Tribal interests. We 
hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to the surface 
leasing regulations, 77 FR at 72,447-48, as supplemented by the 
analysis below.
    The strong Federal and Tribal interests against State and local 
taxation of improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased 
under the Department's leasing regulations apply equally to 
improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased pursuant to 
Tribal leasing regulations approved under the HEARTH Act. Congress's 
overarching intent was to ``allow Tribes to exercise greater control 
over their own land, support self-determination, and eliminate 
bureaucratic delays that stand in the way of homeownership and economic 
development in Tribal communities.'' 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 (May 15, 
2012). The HEARTH Act was intended to afford Tribes ``flexibility to 
adapt lease terms to suit [their] business and cultural needs'' and to 
``enable [Tribes] to approve leases quickly and efficiently.'' Id. at 
5-6.
    Assessment of State and local taxes would obstruct these express 
Federal policies supporting Tribal economic development and self-
determination, and also threaten substantial Tribal interests in 
effective Tribal government, economic self-sufficiency, and territorial 
autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024, 
2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (determining that ``[a] key 
goal of the Federal Government is to render Tribes more self-
sufficient, and better positioned to fund their own sovereign 
functions, rather than relying on Federal funding''). The additional 
costs of State and local taxation have a chilling effect on potential 
lessees, as well as on a tribe that, as a result, might refrain from 
exercising its own sovereign right to impose a Tribal tax to support 
its infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043-44 (finding that State and 
local taxes greatly discourage Tribes from raising tax revenue from the 
same sources because the imposition of double taxation would impede 
Tribal economic growth).
    Similar to BIA's surface leasing regulations, Tribal regulations 
under the HEARTH Act pervasively cover all aspects of leasing. See 25 
U.S.C. 415(h)(3)(B)(i) (requiring Tribal regulations be consistent with 
BIA surface leasing regulations). Furthermore, the Federal government 
remains involved in the Tribal land leasing process by approving the 
Tribal leasing regulations in the first instance and providing 
technical assistance, upon request by a tribe, for the development of 
an environmental review process. The Secretary also retains authority 
to take any necessary actions to remedy violations of a lease or of the 
Tribal regulations, including terminating the lease or rescinding 
approval of the Tribal regulations and reassuming lease approval 
responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary continues to review, approve, 
and monitor individual Indian land leases and other types of leases not 
covered under the Tribal regulations according to the Part 162 
regulations.
    Accordingly, the Federal and Tribal interests weigh heavily in 
favor of preemption of State and local taxes on lease-related 
activities and interests, regardless of whether the lease is governed 
by Tribal leasing regulations or Part 162. Improvements, activities, 
and leasehold or possessory interests may be subject to taxation by the 
Jamul Indian Village of California.

    Dated: June 14, 2019.
Tara Sweeney,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2019-15545 Filed 7-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P