HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/06/1996 TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ.REG.SESSION SI IAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 6, 1996
Mayor Jeff Henderson presiding
1] Roll Call at 4:30 P.M.
2] City Administrator Contract
3] Indian Litigation
4] Other Business:
5] Adjourn to Tuesday, June 18, 1996.at 7:00 P.M.
Barry A. Stock
Acting City Administrator
A
MEMORANDUM
TO : MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Karen Marty, City Attorn / /
DATE : June 6, 1996
RE : Indian Litigation
BACKGROUND:
Last summer the City filed suit against the United States and
the Bureau of Indian Affairs to prevent nearly 600 acres of land
from being put into trust for the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community. If the land had been placed into trust, it would become
exempt from all state and local taxes and regulation, including our
zoning ordinance .
While our case was pending, the Eighth Circuit Federal Court
of Appeals ruled that the United States could not place land in
trust . The decision related to land in South Dakota, but the
decision also applies to us . We promptly obtained a stipulation
from the United States attorney opposing us in our case that our
case would not go ahead until the South Dakota case was finally
resolved.
The United States had until June 3 , 1996, to decide whether to
appeal the Eighth Circuit decision to the United States Supreme
Court . Our attorneys at the Perkins Coie lawfirm in Washington,
D.C. now have notified us that the United States did file a
petition for certiorari in the South Dakota case . That keeps our
own case on hold for a while longer.
The Supreme Court may choose to grant certiorari and hear the
case, it may choose to deny certiorari and leave the lower court' s
decision as the final decision (which would be fine with us) , or it
can affirm or deny the lower court' s decision without hearing the
case . If the Supreme Court grants certiorari, the issue before it
will be whether the Bureau of Indian Affairs has authority to place
land into trust .
The Supreme Court' s decision in the South Dakota case is
extremely important to us, since it will determine whether and how
land can be placed into trust for a tribe . We may be able to help
get a favorable decision if we participate in the lawsuit . We
could file an amicus brief now, opposing granting certiorari .
Litigation experts in the Perkins Coie office do not think this
would be worth the approximately $18 , 000 it would cost the City.
However, we also may be able to help South Dakota by obtaining
suggestions from Perkins Coie as to items to address or include in
t
the South Dakota brief . Perkins Coie' s litigation department
contains attorneys who have clerked in the United States Supreme
Court, and they have reviewed petitions for writs of certiorari for
the Justices . Their experience allows them to have some excellent
suggestions as to what needs response and how to respond to the
information in the United States' brief .
In October the Supreme Court will decide whether to grant
certiorari . If they do, at that time we should seriously consider
filing an amicus brief in support of the State of South Dakota.
ALTERNATIVES :
1 . Move to direct staff to file an amicus brief regarding
certiorari in the South Dakota case.
2 . Move to direct staff to obtain suggestions from Perkins
Coie regarding items to address in the South Dakota case, and
forward this to the South Dakota Attorney General in order to
assist in the case .
3 . Take no action.
RECOMMENDATION:
This is a policy decision, based upon how strongly the City
Council wishes to pursue keeping land out of trust, and therefore
staff has no recommendation.
[6MEMOI - -2-