```

[House Report 106-677]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-677

======================================================================

 
                    GRATON RANCHERIA RESTORATION ACT

                                _______
                                

 June 19, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 946]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 946) to restore Federal recognition to the Indians of the 
Graton Rancheria of California, having considered the same, 
report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that 
the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 946 is to restore Federal recognition 
to the Indians of the Graton Rancheria of California.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    H.R. 946 would restore federal recognition to the Indians 
of the Graton Rancheria of California. The Graton Rancheria is 
one of over 40 Indian tribes which were terminated in 1958 by 
Public Law 85-671. Today there are approximately 355 members of 
the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria living in the general 
vicinity of Santa Rosa, California.
    H.R. 946 provides that the service area for the Tribe shall 
be Marin and Sonoma counties, that nothing in the legislation 
shall expand, reduce, or affect any hunting, fishing, trapping, 
gathering, or water rights of the Tribe, that real property 
eligible for trust status shall include certain Indian-owned 
land, and that the Secretary of the Interior shall compile a 
membership roll of the Tribe. The bill also provides for an 
Interim Tribal Council, the election of tribal officials, and 
the ratification of a constitution for the Tribe.
    Section 5(d) of H.R. 946 provides that real property taken 
into trust for the benefit of the Tribe pursuant to the bill 
shall not have been taken into trust for ``gaming'' purposes 
pursuant to section 20(b) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act 
(12 U.S.C. 2719(b)).

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 946 was introduced on March 2, 1999, by Congresswoman 
Lynn Woolsey (D-CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources. On May 16, 2000, the Full Resources Committee held a 
hearing on the bill. On June 7, 2000, the Full Resources 
Committee met to mark up the bill. No amendments were offered 
and the bill was ordered favorably reported to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations 
are reflected in the body of this report.

                   CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

    Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

    1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and 
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be 
incurred in carrying out this bill. A cost estimate has been 
requested but has not been received. However, the Committee 
does not believe that enactment of H.R. 946 would not have a 
significant effect on the federal budget.
    2. Congressional Budget Act. As stated above, a cost 
estimate has been requested from the Congressional Budget 
Office but has not yet been received. The Committee does not 
believe that the bill contains any new budget authority, 
spending authority, credit authority, or an increase or 
decrease in revenues or tax expenditures.
    3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause 
3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee has received no report of 
oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on 
Government Reform on this bill.
    4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act 
of 1974, the Committee has requested but has not yet received a 
cost estimate for this bill from the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing 
law.

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

    Documentation of Miwok peoples dates back as early as 1579 
by a priest on a ship under the command of Francis Drake. Other 
verification of occupancy exists from Spanish and Russian 
Voyagers in 1595, 1775, 1793, and 1808. Missions established 
from 1809 to 1834 used Coast Miwok and Southern Pomo tribal 
people as a labor source. These records assist us today in 
substantiating Native genealogical persistence. After the 
Mission period (1769-1834) local Indian people continued in 
servitude to Mexican land grant owners throughout their 
confiscated tribal territories. Mexican and American period 
records show that a Coast Miwok, Camilo Ynitia, secured the 
land grant for Olompali near Novato within Coast Miwok 
homelands. Olompali is the site of a large village, extending 
from prehistoric times into the Spanish/Mexican periods, and 
continues today as an important historic locale. Another 
important locale was Nicasio (northwest of San Rafael). Near 
the time of secularization (1835) the Church granted the San 
Rafael Christian Indians 20 leagues (80,000 acres) of mission 
lands at Nicasio. About 500 Indians relocated to Nicasio. By 
1850 they had but one league of land left. This radical 
reduction of land was a result of illegal confiscation of land 
by non-Indians under protest by Indian residents. In 1870, Jose 
Calistro, the last community leader at Nicasio, purchased the 
small surrounding parcel. Calistro died in 1875, and in 1876 
the land was transferred by his will to his four children. In 
1880 there were 36 Indian people at Nicasio. The population was 
persuaded to leave in the 1880s when Marin County curtailed 
funds to all Indians (except those at Marshall) who were not 
living at the Poor Farm, a place for ``indigent'' peoples.
    By the beginning of California statehood (1850) the 
Marshall, Bodega, and Sebastopol peoples, along with their Pomo 
and Patwin neighbors were making the best of a difficult 
oppressive situation, by earning their livelihoods through farm 
labor or fishing, within their traditional homelands. William 
Smith, a Bodega Miwok, after force relocation to Lake County 
during the late 1800's, returned to Bodega Bay where he and his 
relatives founded the commercial fishing industry in the area. 
By the early 1900's a few people pursued fishing for their 
livelihoods; one family continued commercial fishing into the 
1970's, while another family maintained an oyster harvesting 
business. When this activity was neither, in season nor 
profitable, Indian people of this area, sought agricultural 
employment, which required an itinerant lifestyle. The 
preferred locality for such work was within Marin and Sonoma 
counties.
    In May 1920, Bureau of Indian Affairs Inspector John J. 
Terrell proposed the purchase of a 15.45 acre tract of land 
near the small rural Sonoma County town of Graton, for the 
``village home'' of the Marshall, Bodega, Tomales, and 
Sebastopol Indians. Through the purchase of this land, put into 
federal trust, the government consolidated these neighboring 
traditionally interactive groups into one recognized entity, 
Graton Rancheria. In June 1923, a Bureau of Indian Affairs 
census of the Sebastopol Indians of Round Valley Agency, 
California, included seventy-five individuals of Marshall, 
Bodega, and Sebastopol descent, and demonstrates their 
congregation in the vicinity of the Graton Rancheria.
    The United States government terminated the tribes' status 
in 1966 under the California Rancheria Act of 1958 (Public Law 
85-671, as amended; 72 Stat. 619). The Bureau of Indian Affairs 
approved a plan to distribute the assets between three 
distributees (now all deceased). This act in effect called the 
Coast Miwok extinct, ending their rights as a tribe. Today, the 
membership of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria 
comprises approximately 366 individuals. Many of thee people 
have maintained their identities as California Indians from 
birth as shown by their having roll numbers on the 1933 Census 
Roll of the Indians of California, the 1955 California Combined 
Roll, and the 1972 California Indian Judgment Rolls. Members 
born after the last roll numbers were issued in 1969, have 
provided birth certificates and/or baptismal certificates 
connecting them with roll number bearers and have been included 
on the Graton tribal roll.
    The Federated Coast Miwok and Federated Indians of Graton 
Rancheria, is recognized socially and politically as an Indian 
group by outside Indian and non-Indian groups, scholars, 
organizations, and federal, state, and local agencies/
governments. The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria have 
endured through time as a distinctive tribal group. Restoring 
Federal recognition will provide the tribe with much needed 
health, education, and housing benefits.
    The Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Kevin Gover, 
testified on behalf of the Administration at the hearing on May 
16, 2000 in favor of passage of H.R. 946. In part Secretary 
Gover stated, ``I am pleased to report that after careful 
review of the information submitted by the Federated Indians of 
the Graton Rancheria (the successor name), the documentation 
shows that the group is significantly tied with the terminated 
tribe known as the Graton Rancheria. Therefore, we support 
their restoration of tribal status.'' Mr. Gover did, however, 
recommend the deletion of Section 5(d) of the bill stating, 
``We see no reason to single this Tribe out for gaming 
restrictions.''
    Section 5(d) of H.R. 946 provides that real property taken 
into trust for the benefit of the Tribe pursuant to the bill 
shall not have been taken into trust for gaming purposes 
pursuant to section 20(b) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. 
This language places restrictions on gaming activities on 
certain lands taken into trust. It is included due to the 
particular circumstances of this situation and at the request 
of the Tribe. We do not intend this language to serve as a 
precedent to be used in future restoration acts.

                                                     George Miller.

                                  

```