THE SUPREME COURT LEFT OPEN THE QUESTION OF HOW THE STATE WAS TO ENFORCE THE TAXATION OF SALES TO NON-INDIANS.
YOUR FIRST QUESTION, AS REWORDED, ASKS IF A MUNICIPAL FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO RESPOND TO AND EXTINGUISH A FIRE AT AN INDIAN OWNED AND OPERATED BUSINESS, SITUATED ON INDIAN COUNTRY, BUT WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THAT MUNICIPALITY. THE ISSUE OF WHETHER A MUNICIPAL FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO RESPOND TO ANY FIRE WITHIN, ITS LIMITS WILL NOT BE DISCUSSED HERE. I WILL ASSUME FOR THE PURPOSES OF ARGUMENT THAT THERE IS A DUTY TO RESPOND TO EMERGENCIES OF RESIDENTS WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY, PARTICULARLY IF THOSE RESIDENTS PAY FOR THE SERVICES.
IN HIS TREATISE ON INDIAN LAW, COHEN STATES:
"ONE EXAMPLE OF LIMITED STATE COURT JURISDICTION OVER INDIANS IN INDIAN COUNTRY IS WHERE INDIANS EXERCISE RIGHTS AS STATE CITIZENS OR RESIDENTS."
AND, AT THE FOOTNOTE TO THE ABOVE PASSAGE:
"RESERVATION INDIANS ARE RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS OF THE STATE AND ENTITLED TO RIGHTS AS SUCH EXCEPT WHERE THE EXERCISE OF SUCH RIGHTS WOULD INTERFERE WITH TRIBAL SELF-GOVERNMENT."
F. COHEN, HANDBOOK OF FEDERAL INDIAN LAW 350 (1982). INDIANS LIVING IN INDIAN COUNTRY WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF A MUNICIPALITY CAN LEGITIMATELY EXPECT TO RECEIVE THE SAME SERVICES AND PROTECTIONS AS PERSONS WHO DC NOT RESIDE IN INDIAN COUNTRY, UNLESS THE PROVISION OF SUCH SERVICES BY THE MUNICIPALITY INTERFERES WITH THE RIGHTS OF THE TRIBES TO GOVERN THEMSELVES. SEE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION V. ALASKA NATIVE BROTHERHOOD, 666 P.2D 1015 (ALASKA 1983); SANGRE DE CRISTO DEVELOPMENT V. SANTA FE, 503 P.2D 323, 330 (N.M. 1972); WILLIAMS V. LEE, 358 U.S. 217, 79 S.CT. 269, 3 L.ED.2D 251 (1959).
WHETHER OR NOT THE PROVISION OF THOSE MUNICIPAL SERVICES WOULD INTERFERE WITH THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS OF A TRIBE IS A COMPLEX QUESTION, WHICH WOULD INVOLVE TESTIMONY REGARDING TRIBAL OPERATIONS AND SERVICES, ETC. FOR EXAMPLE: DOES THE TRIBE PROVIDE FIRE AND/OR POLICE PROTECTION? HAVE THERE BEEN ANY AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE TRIBE OR HOUSING AUTHORITY AND THE MUNICIPALITY REGARDING THE PROVISION OF SERVICES? DOES THE INDIVIDUAL INDIAN BUSINESSMAN OR RESIDENT RESIDING IN INDIAN COUNTRY PAY FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES? HAVE MUNICIPAL SERVICES BEEN PROVIDED IN THE PAST? THUS, YOUR QUESTION CANNOT BE ANSWERED DEFINITIVELY BY THIS OFFICE.
I WILL, HOWEVER, ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE SOME GUIDANCE. IN MANY HOUSING AUTHORITY SITUATIONS (WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT QUALIFY AS INDIAN COUNTRY AS A DEPENDENT INDIAN COMMUNITY), ARRANGEMENTS ARE OFTEN MADE WITH THE HOST CITY TO PROVIDE WATER, FIRE AND POLICE PROTECTION, ETC. EAVES V. STATE, 795 P.2D 1060, 1061 (OKL.CR.1990).