April 2007
INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
ITMA 17TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE
The Board of Directors of the Intertribal Monitoring
Association on Indian Trust Funds (ITMA) have an-
nounced the dates for the 17th Annual Conference. The
session scheduled for October 24-26, 2007 will be held
at the Golden Nugget Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, NV.
Obtain updated information regarding the confer-
ence at (www.itmatrustfunds.org)
“WHEREABOUTS UNKNOWN”
FORT BERTHOLD FIDUCIARY TRUST
OFFICER AUSTIN GILLETTE UNITES
ACCOUNT HOLDERS WITH THEIR MONEY
Eloise Ogden, Regional Editor of the Minot Daily
News has written a major feature story starring the Of-
fice of Special Trustee and the Fort Berthold Agency
fiduciary trust officer, Austin Gillette. A former tribal
chairman and long-time tribal councilman for the Three
Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, Gillette
has for the past year and a half been OST’s fiduciary
trust officer at the Fort Berthold Agency.
According to Ogden’s article, Mr. Gillette has united
previously unlocated IIM account holders with more than
one million dollars of their money. While the total num-
ber of “whereabouts unknown” account holders at Fort
Berthold was not known by ITMA, Ms. Ogden’s article
recites that Mr. Gillette and his staff have contacted
more than 2,000 people in the course of tracking down
266 actual Indian account holders, many of whom had
no idea the government had held money in trust for
them, often for years. Gillette told the Minot Daily News
that he and his staff had located Fort Berthold account
holders in states as far away as Alaska. Some were
found to be incarcerated, others had been adopted at
birth and lived with adoptive names all their lives. Some
of them had never had any contact with the reservation
or the community, Gillette said. On the other hand,
some of them were found to have been living on the
Fort Berthold Reservation, raising a question about
the vigor of previous efforts to locate them.
After Gillette and his staff locate individuals whose
whereabouts were previously unknown, but for whom
the Office of Special Trustee held money in trust, OST
then has to verify their identities before their money is
released to them. This verification process takes
time, but to date the Fort Berthold fiduciary trust offi-
cer’s staff have been responsible for the actual distri-
bution of more than $1million to account holders
whose whereabouts were previously unknown.
Mr. Gillette credited his three-person staff for his
success. Paul Goodiron is the office assistant for auto-
mation and records maintenance at the Fort Berthold
OST, Ira Fox and Vicki Alberts are accounting techni-
cians who constitute “the heartbeat of the operation,”
Gillette told the Minot reporter. Nationally, there are
now fifty-two fiduciary trust officers located in BIA
agency offices throughout the nation. In the past three
years, Ogden reports, OST has distributed more than
$79 million to individual Indians whose whereabouts
was previously unknown, sometimes for many years.
A few of these individuals had more than $100,000 in
trust and even more had more than $50,000 in their
accounts. Today 54,000 names remain on the Where-
abouts Unknown list. With Indian trackers like Austin
Gillette on their trail, perhaps OST will reach its
unlikely sounding goal. Gillette advised the Minot pa-
per, “Our goal is zero.”
ITMA Chairman Mervin Packineau addresses ITMA meeting participants.

INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
DOI Regulatory Initiative Trust Fund Accounting and Appeals Part 112
The Department of Interior has announced its plans
to publish proposed regulations in early summer 2007
to govern trust fund accounting and appeals. A draft of
these regulations was circulated in late 2005 and was
the subject of consultation meetings around the country
in 2006. Presumably, the Department has given seri-
ous consideration to the many comments received in
those meetings and in writing. Originally proposed as
Part 116 of Title 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
the original draft was subsequently revised to omit ref-
erence to individual Indian accounts and re-circulated
as proposed Part 112 of Title 25 CFR. ITMA staff have
advised Department officials that the proposed regula-
tions will cause even more tribes to file suit against the
government to protect current rights that the regulations
appear designed to extinguish.
The Department of Interior explains the regulations
as a means of the government’s achieving finality with
respect to historic tribal trust account balances and
reducing significantly the number of IIM accounts in the
Department’s Indian trust portfolio. Under the regula-
tory regime set forth, the Department’s Office of Histori-
cal Trust Accounting (OHTA) will advise all tribes of the
opportunity to request either an “expedited” account
settlement proposal or a “negotiated tribal accounting
plan.” Tribes that request an expedited settlement pro-
posal will receive priority treatment, and for them the
Department will review a requesting tribe’s accounts
and make an offer for settlement of all account bal-
ances. If the offer is accepted, the tribe must agree to
accept the offered balance as accurate “in all respects”;
to release or waive all claims for any acts or omissions
from August 13 to the date of acceptance; to execute all
necessary documents to bind the acceptance; to dis-
miss any pending litigation; and further agree not to
take any funds received in settlement into trust.
A second option available to all tribes, including
those who do not accept any expedited offer, is to re-
quest a “negotiated tribal accounting plan,” that will
specify at a minimum the accounts to be examined,
identify issues to be reviewed, methodologies to be em-
ployed, documents to be collected for examination, a
work schedule, estimated costs of the accounting work,
Page 2
the nature and format of any reports to be delivered, and
procedures for modifying the plan as it proceeds. The De-
partment will then undertake to perform the accounting re-
quired by the plan and submit its findings to the tribe which
will have 30 days to comment on it. The Department may
then revise the report. The Department and the tribe will
have 90 days after delivery of the final report to exchange
settlement proposals, and 180 days after that 90-day period
to conclude negotiations or agree to extend the period.
All tribes that fail to achieve settlement under one of
those two approaches will receive from the Department a
“historical statement of account,” which will include a state-
ment of opening and closing balances, gains and losses,
receipts and disbursements, but apparently not investment
transactions. The Department will schedule meetings to
discuss these historical statements of account within 90
days of their delivery, and tribes will have 60 days after that
meeting to submit written comments on their statements.
The Department will revise the statements if it deems nec-
essary, and a tribe will have an additional 30 days after re-
ceiving a revised statement to make written comments.
Following receipt of a final historical statement from
OHTA, a tribe will have 90 days to make written objection to
OHTA’s Tribal Branch Chief setting forth all the errors or
omissions claimed along with supporting documents or ar-
guments. Following a final decision from the OHTA Branch
Chief, a tribe may take further appeal to the Indian Board of
Indian Appeals within 45 days.
TTFS Project meeting participants.
 INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
Trust Fund Accounting and Appeals
(Continued from page 2)
No review by federal courts will be available until
these administrative remedies have been exhausted,
and the only basis for review by the courts will be
whether the Department acted in a manner that was
“arbitrary, capricious, and otherwise not in accordance
with law.” Any tribe that fails to advise the Department in
written detail of its concerns or objections within the time
limits set by these regulations will be “deemed” to have
accepted the account statement as accurate and com-
plete for all purposes; will have “abandoned” all rights for
further review within the Department; and will have
“failed” to exhaust all its administrative remedies,
thereby precluding any review at all by the federal
courts.
Individual account holders will not be presented with
the “expedited” or “negotiated” settlement options, but
will be presented with a historical statement of their land-
based accounts that were open after June 23, 1938 and
remained open on October 25, 1994, as well as for ac-
counts opened after October 25, 1994 and before Janu-
ary 1, 2001.
This entire regulatory scheme was obviously de-
signed to put a regulatory barrier between tribes and the
federal courts, and almost certainly was a factor in many
tribes’ decision to institute litigation in December 2006.
In addition, the regulations seem to be intended to re-
place the current six-year statute of limitations with a
regulatory strait jacket that will virtually preclude future
tribal litigation over trust fund balances. Many tribes
have questioned whether the Secretary has the authority
to promulgate such regulations and have indicated that
court challenges are a virtual certainty if the regulations
are adopted as presented. ITMA has advised the De-
partment that publication, even as proposed regulations,
in the summer of 2007 will very likely be counter-
productive of constructive efforts now underway.
Page 3
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE (GAO)
ACKNOWLEDGES KEY REFORMS BY OST, BUT
QUESTIONS REMAIN ABOUT THE FUTURE
In December 2006, the GAO issued a report to members
of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs in response to
repeated concerns expressed by tribal organizations
about the Office of Special Trustee. These groups had
questioned the duration and cost of trust reform efforts in
OST, and had expressed concern as well that OST in-
creasingly appeared to be managing the trust, and not
merely overseeing reform efforts.
The GAO reported that “several key trust fund man-
agement reforms” had been implemented, but concurred
that no timetable for completion had been prepared. Spe-
cifically the GAO report acknowledged that a new trust
funds accounting system had been implemented as early
as 2000, and that a centralized trust asset and accounting
system has been developed for managing land title re-
cords for ownership and encumbrances, and data verifi-
cation was expected to be completed by October 2007. A
non-exhaustive list of OST accomplishments included:
• Automated daily sweeping of cash for investment;
• Conversion of all accounts to automated trust accounting sys-
tem;
• Automated system for generating disbursements and state-
ments;
• Annual independent audit of trust fund portfolio;
• Daily, weekly, and monthly reconciliations;
• Elimination of commercial CD’s as investment instruments;
• Completed clean-up of all IIM administrative files;
• Implemented automated system for electronic check retrieval;
• Established internal controls;
• Automated special deposit tracking and reporting;
• Hired nationwide cadre of trust and fiduciary officers;
• Established wire transfer to beneficiaries capabilities;
• Established nationwide professional trust training for employees;
• Established national lockbox for daily deposit of receipts.
(Continued on page 4)

INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
(GAO) ACKNOWLEDGES KEY REFORMS BY
OST, BUT QUESTIONS REMAIN ABOUT THE
FUTURE (Continued from page 3)
The GAO report also indicated that the Special Trustee
advised that the Office of Special Trustee will likely be
retained, even when all the reform measures are com-
pleted unless Congressional directives and current Sec-
retarial Orders are rescinded. The report also raised
some eyebrows in Indian country with its report of per-
formance awards to OST employees in years from 1999
to 2005. Perhaps because of this attention, ITMA is
un aware that any OST senior official received any merit
bonus awards for the year 2006.
BUSH ADMINISTRATION GOES ON RECORD
FOR COBELL SETTLEMENT
Almost two years after Senators McCain and Dorgan
introduced S. 1439, the proposed Indian Trust Manage-
ment Reform Act of 2005, the Bush Administration has
unveiled its counteroffer. In a letter signed by both Attor-
ney General Alberto Gonzales and Department of the
Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, the two Cabinet offi-
cers advised Chairman Byron Dorgan of the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs, “the Administration is will-
ing to invest up to $7 billion, over a ten year period,” to
settle all Indian trust claims and pending litigation and to
make significant changes in the federal-Indian trust rela-
tionship. The Gonzales-Kempthorne letter couches the
Administration’s position in terms of a glowing future for
Indian trust administration, a future of “economic pros-
perity, empowerment, and self-reliance for tribes and
individual Indians.” The letter contains no details, but did
include a one-page summary of legislation that the Of-
fice of Administration and Budget has agreed not to op-
pose.
The legislative summary provides that the government
need not conduct any historical accountings and, in-
stead, suggests legislation that “deems” all account bal-
ances accurate as of the date of enactment. The legisla-
tion would settle all cash and land-based mismanage-
ment claims for both tribes and individuals.
Page 4
In addition, the legislation contemplated by the Ad-
ministration would “close loopholes tightly” to prevent any
future mismanagement liability for the government’s
“residual responsibilities.”
Reaction to release of the Administration’s letter was
swift and varied. The API reported Senator Dorgan said
immediately, “This is a significant admission,” indicating
that he takes the proposal as a concession of governmen-
tal liability. Associate Deputy Interior Secretary Jim Cason,
however, promptly stated that the proposal did not reflect
any admission of anything, but merely looked to putting the
past behind in an effort to focus on a new federal-Indian
trust relationship. According to the API, Cason indicated
that roughly one-half of the $7 billion would be used to set-
tle all individual and tribal claims, and the remainder to
other measures included in the Administration’s proposal.
Keith Harper, one of the Cobell attorneys, called the Ad-
ministration “an insult,” the API reported.
Many tribes throughout the country strongly opposed
the proposal to include settlement of all tribal claims in a
$7 billion package that is characterized as an investment
in the future. Some of them pointed out that Attorney Gen-
eral Gonzales had previously testified to an appropriations
subcommittee that the possible exposure of the govern-
ment to liability in tribal claims alone could be as much as
$200 billion. A Justice Department representative advised
that the Attorney General’s testimony referred not to the
Department’s own assessment, but to an estimate of the
cumulative amount of claims estimated by tribes them-
selves. (Continued on page 5)
NARF Executive Director John Echohawk addressing Tribal leadership.

INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
BUSH ADMINISTRATION GOES ON RECORD
FOR COBELL SETTLEMENT
(Continued from page 4)
Other tribes reacted more cautiously to the settlement
figure, pointing out that tribes have been criticizing the
Administration for two years for its failure to “put a num-
ber on the table,” and suggesting that $7 billion was just
the Administration’s opening gambit. Still other tribes
have expressed a skepticism that the $7 billion figure is
really an offer at all, since it is proposed to be spread over
a ten-year period and might be scored against other In-
dian programs in the budget process. Tribal representa-
tives at the ITMA Annual Conference had previously
adopted a resolution unanimously rejecting a proposal to
include all tribal claims in any legislation addressed to
settle the Cobell litigation.
Individual Indians’ reactions have been mixed as well.
Some individuals have expressed interest in expanding
their holdings through federal legislation that would re-
quire consolidation by cashing out their co-owners.
Other individual landowners have suggested that forced
sales of privately held real property will create social un-
rest within tribes throughout the nation, pitting family
members against each other.
In short, the proposal commits the Administration to
supporting legislation that would somehow quash all cur-
rent legal proceedings; extinguish any claims against the
United States that might have been brought prior to en-
actment by tribes or individual Indians; eliminate future
liability of the government for mismanaging Indian money
or other trust assets; convert all individually and tribally
owned Indian trust lands into “owner-managed trust
status” within ten years; and impose a clear statute of
limitations with an explicit bar on prejudgment interest.
ITMA has committed to both the Administration and to
the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs to remain closely
involved with future deliberations, especially when tribal
interests are implicated in any proposed legislation.
Page 5
ITMA TESTIFIES ON ADMINISTRATION
PROPOSAL, OFFERS RECOMMENDATIONS
TO SENATE PANEL
ITMA was requested by the Senate Committee on In-
dian Affairs to present its views in a March 29, 2007 hear-
ing on the letter proposal delivered earlier in the month by
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Interior Secretary
Dirk Kempthorne to settle all Indian trust-related history in
a single piece of legislation. Then councilman, and now
Tribal President Bill Martin of the Central Council of Tlingit
and Haida Tribes of Alaska presented ITMA’s testimony.
Mr. Martin is also the present vice-chairman of the Inter-
tribal Monitoring Association on Indian Trust Funds.
Mr. Martin advised the Committee that the proposal to
“invest up to $7 billion” as a black box number to settle all
individual and tribal claims was not consistent with Chair-
man Dorgan’s assurance that any settlement process
would be “transparent.” The Congress should not start
with a number and work back to allocate it among the
diverse purposes suggested by the Administration.
Rather, any number should be a result of deliberations,
not a starting point. Further, Mr. Martin advised the Com-
mittee that Congress should take these elements of the
Administration’s proposal in manageable pieces, and not
as an all-or-nothing proposition. Specifically, he advised
the Committee to deal with the Cobell litigation separately
if a Congressional resolution is attempted at all. And,
finally, he urged the Committee not to attempt to resolve
all tribal claims in the same legislation that attempts reso-
lution of Cobell and elimination of the fractionated land
titles in Indian country. All the Indian witnesses echoed
the advice not to include tribal settlements in an effort to
legislate “global peace,” as the government refers to its
plans for settlement legislation. (Continued on page 6)
ITMA Executive Director Mary Zuni--Chalan.
 INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds Page 6

ITMA TESTIFIES ON ADMINISTRATION PROPOSAL, OFFERS RECOMMENDATIONS TO SENATE PANEL

Mr. Martin reminded the Committee that “experts” in- ITMA continues to monitor legislative initiatives,
vited by the previous Congress to address the Cobell and expresses great appreciation to Chairman Dorgan for
litigation had, in fact, recommended that Congress his word that any legislative process for trust fund settle-
adopt a “black box” number since it was highly unlikely ment in this Congress will be a transparent one.
that the parties would ever agree on a number they
could recommend jointly. That starting point for Cobell ITMA AND DOI’S TRIBAL TRUST FUND
might be appropriate, but no tribe and no expert had
ever suggested including all the diverse tribal claims in
SETTLEMENT PROJECT
such an initiative. Seven ITMA tribes have worked over the last three years
With respect to land fractionation, Mr. Martin indi- in a cooperative effort with the Department of Interior to
cated that it is a problem for tribes as much as it is for develop a methodology by which they can reach a settle-
the federal government, and tribes are willing to work ment of trust fund-related claims without resorting to litiga-
with the government in addressing it. A proposal to tion. These tribes are the Yakama Nation, the Gros Ventre
separate individual Indians from their property involun- and Assiniboine Tribes of the Fort Belknap Reservation,
tarily, however, will face the same challenges as previ- Coeur d’Alene, Colville, Nez Perce, Picuris Pueblo, and the
ous efforts that have twice been declared unconstitu- Sac and Fox Tribe of Oklahoma.
tional. Successes in voluntary purchases and family The focus of the effort has been the time period of 1972-
consolidation should be expanded to fit the size of the 1992, the period of time covered by the Arthur Andersen
problem, not jettisoned because inadequate funding reports which were delivered to tribes in 1996. These tribes
has led to inadequate results. all executed non-disclosure agreements in order that collec-
Regarding the explosion of tribal litigation in the last tive discussions would be possible with the Department’s
month of December 2006, Mr. Martin reminded the Office of Historical Accounting regarding the way their ac-
Committee that Congress had declined to reset the counts were treated in the Arthur Andersen work. ITMA has
statutory date for tribal receipt of the infamous Arthur scheduled a national meeting for May 31, 2007 to provide
Andersen “reconciliation reports” of the 1990’s, and any interested tribes with an update on this project. See
urged the Committee to consider doing so even now. the meeting announcement in this newsletter.
Many, if not most, of the litigating tribes filed actions in (Continued on page 7)
December as a defensive measure because the gov-
ernment continues to assert that on December 31,
2006 the statute of limitations ran on claims arising
prior to receipt of those reports. While no court has
yet agreed with the government’s position in that mat-
ter, prudence required tribes who could afford to file to
do so before that date. Many of them might well vol-
untarily withdraw their suits if the threat that prompted
them were removed.
In addition, Mr. Martin advised the Committee that
the present unilateral authority of the Secretary to im-
pose fees on trust transactions should be lifted until
such time as trust reforms are accomplished and the
Congress has had an opportunity to consider whether
ITMA and DOI’s Tribal Trust Fund Settlement meeting.
to restore such authority and under what conditions.
 INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
ITMA AND DOI’S TRIBAL TRUST FUND SETTLEMENT PROJECT
ITMA has engaged an expert accountant and, from
time to time regional accounting firms who have exten-
sive experience in dealing with tribal accounts and finan-
cial statements to assist in the deliberations among the
tribes themselves and in negotiations with the govern-
ment. These negotiations have been arduous from the
beginning, including even the language of the Coopera-
tive Agreement itself which sets the framework for the
Tribal Trust Fund Settlement Project (TTFSP).
The government continues to favor a wholesale ap-
proach wherever possible through the use of statistical
sampling and the application of national “error rates” on
various aspects of the methodology. The participating
tribes, on the other hand, while indicating they might be
willing to forego a detailed historical accounting of every
transaction in each of their accounts, continue to
insist that any methodology will provide each tribe with
an opportunity for analytic review of its own accounts
and more detailed examination wherever indicated by
such investigations. All this, of course, is in pursuit sim-
ply of a methodology that will be sufficiently acceptable
to both tribes and the government that it can be applied
by tribes in their own individual negotiations with the
government.
Besides the inherent difficulties of the negotiations,
several external events have also significantly influenced
progress of the TTFSP over the last year. These events
include the dissemination of draft regulations by the De-
partment that appeared to accord finality by regulation to
the account balances posited more than ten years ago
by Arthur Andersen and other government contractors.
In addition, concern over the possible running of the stat-
ute of limitations on certain claims prompted six of the
seve participating tribes to file lawsuits in December.
The litigation itself “changed the landscape,” as a
Department official put it, and briefly brought the entire
TTFSP project into question, since three of the partici-
pating tribes had agreed to serve as named plaintiffs in a
proposed class action, and three others had filed their
own individual actions. While the government appeared
to be questioning the participating tribes’ commitment to
the settlement process, Congressional committee staff
Page 7
(Continued from page 6)
and many other tribes were expressing increasing interest
in the nature of the project and its possible applicability to
their own situations. And even as the government was
questioning the commitment of the seven participating
tribes to the project, both Interior and Justice Department
officials increasingly referred to TTFSP as an important
alternative to litigation.
ITMA and Interior Department representatives con-
ducted a briefing session for Congressional staff in
March. While some judges in the U.S. Court of Federal
Claims denied joint motions of tribes and the government
to stay their recently filed lawsuits while they pursued set-
tlement options, at least one judge granted such a stay by
referring to the tribes’ and the government’s joint partici-
pation in the ITMA Tribal Trust Fund Settlement Project.
ITMA expects both Interior and Justice Department
personnel to attend the May 31 Denver meeting at which
the participating tribes and ITMA representatives will ex-
plain the project at whatever length attendees request.
While the TTFSP is regarded as a possible alternative
to litigation, the methodology contemplated could just as
well be effective as a means to settle some matters in
litigation also. The methodology under consideration
does not contemplate the full accounting that ITMA insists
all tribes have a right as trust beneficiaries to demand of
the government.
Nor does it contemplate an unquestioning acceptance
of any financial statements received from the government
or its contractors. Rather, the methodology contemplates
a disciplined examination of reported account statements
and account balances with an eye to determining on a
tribe by tribe basis (Continued on page 8)
(from left to right) Heidi Gudgell, David Harrison, and

INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
ITMA AND DOI’S TRIBAL TRUST FUND
SETTLEMENT PROJECT (Continued from page 7)
whether tribes have meritorious claims for failures to
administer their accounts in accordance with the appro-
priate laws and standards for fiduciary conduct.
For instance, the methodology contemplates an ex-
amination whether Arthur Andersen and other contrac-
tors did what they said they did in their reviews of tribal
accounts; whether those reviews were sufficiently com-
plete to provide reliable indicators of revenues and dis-
bursements; whether amounts received were appropri-
ately and timely invested and reinvested; and whether
recorded disbursements can reliably be accepted.
A good many details remain to be ironed out, and
those negotiations promise to be as arduous as the ear-
lier ones have been. To date, however, both the partici-
pating tribes and the government express determination
to complete the methodology under development.
All tribes with an interest in trust fund settlement are
invited to the May 31 meeting in Denver, subject to the
requirement that litigating tribes be accompanied by their
litigation counsel or provide a non-objection letter from
litigation counsel.
ITMA-TTFSP Lead Consultant Sandra Johnigan with Jim Vogel of
Fort Belknap and Richard George from the Yakama Nation.
Page 8
TOHONO O’ODHAM NATION HOSTED ITMA
LISTENING CONFERENCE (Continued on page 9)
On January 24-25, 2007, the Tohono O’odham Nation
Legislative Council Chairman Verlon Jose welcomed the
participants to the Tribally sponsored forum arranged for
Tribal Council and Indian individuals to address concerns
regarding their tribal and individual trust funds accounts
and resource issues.
ITMA Executive Director Mary Zuni-Chalan opened the
session thanking the Tohono O’odham Nation for hosting
the 16th Listening Conference conducted by ITMA across
Indian Country. Councilman Gerald Fayuant was instru-
mental in organizing the event on behalf of the Nation.
As ITMA continues to monitor the trust related activities
of the Federal Government and Congress, these sessions
are conducted to provide, in most cases, a first-time oppor-
tunity for tribal governments and individual Indians to
speak directly to top level Government representatives
regarding tribal-specific trust management and resource
issues. Information from these sessions is utilized by
ITMA in the development of policy and positions. Ms.
Zuni-Chalan clarified that the on-going IIM account litiga-
tion is outside the scope of the Listening Conferences.
Chairwoman Vivian Juan-Saunders, addressing the
Legislative Council and audience, welcomed the meeting
participants and provided comments on the history of com-
munally owned land. The Nation, occupying its aboriginal
territory, has over 1200 individual landowners, many of
whom own land in the allotted San Xavier District near
Tucson. Original lands are significantly reduced with lands
in Mexico being part of the original land base.
Chairwoman Juan-Saunders spoke to a 1979 Depart-
ment of Interior Solicitor’s opinion that trust responsibility
imposes the most exacting fiduciary standards that federal
representatives and tribal councils have been attempting
to comply with.
The Chair called for the equitable and fair settlement for
the IIM accountholders with sufficient dollars to remain in
BIA to address law enforcement, public safety, road, social
services and other needs of the Nation. (Continued on page 9)
 INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
TOHONO O’ODHAM NATION SPONSORS ITMA LISTENING CONFERENCE (Continued from page 8)
Further, no Tribal Priority Allocation (TPA) funding should
be redirected to fund OST. The Nation experienced a
shortfall due as the result of a FY 2004 BIA directive stating
that if 10% or less of the TPA was to be utilized by BIA that
there was no need to consult with the Tribe. The Nation
strongly objected to DOI’s attempt to tap into federal appro-
priations for Tribes to pay for DOI’s legal fees. Chairwoman
Saunders suggested that rather than an increase in funds to
support work to insure equitable accounting and fairness for
IIM accountholders, there appears a shifting of funds from
one place to another impacting funds required for road im-
provements and for the Nation’s Realty Office to adequately
manage lands or deal with flooding of the Santa Cruz River
that for years has critically affected the Chui Chu and Sif
Oidak Districts.
Special Trustee Swimmer responded to the issues
agreeing with the fiduciary duties owed Tribes and individ-
ual Indians by the Federal Government as supported by
case law and statutory law. He stated the work of OST is in
furtherance of the fiduciary duty, particularly in the financial
arena of the trust. He referenced the ‘appearance’ that
monies are being shifted to OST, stating that OST’s appro-
priation is given back to BIA in the form of services, includ-
ing the support of work to address the probate backlog. He
reported that Congress did not appropriate funds for 2007
and current spending is at the FY 2006 levels.
Allen Anspach, BIA Western Regional Director, who was
accompanied by Papago Agency Acting Superintendent
Nina Siquieros, and Stan Webb, Western Regional Realty
Officer, stated funds are now back on the BIA books from
Federal Highways and an agreement between BIA and the
Nation will be developed to apply funds appropriately. He
stated the amount of funds on the initial contract for Realty
was not sufficient but agreement was reached for the Na-
tion to contract Reality for tribal lands with an understanding
the Nation would supplement the budget. He cited this as
the harsh reality of the current budget both for BIA and the
current PL. 93-638 contract with the Nation.
ITMA Board member Councilwoman Betty Cooper of the
Blackfeet Tribe of Montana reminded BIA and OST that
Tribes are not only looking for dollars to address trust mis-
management, but also to acquire lands. Ms. Cooper ad-
Page 9
vised the audience of a Homeland Security matter on-
going at the Blackfeet Tribe.
Majel Russell, ITMA’s legal counsel and liaison to
OST discussed the trust reform arena:
• Visits to OST headquarters and the Beneficiary Call
Center created to address beneficiary questions regard-
ing trust payments or other trust management ques-
tions. In May 2006 the Center received 114,000 calls
and reportedly approximately 89% were addressed in
the initial call.
• Lock Box System located in Prescott, AZ serves as
a commercial Lock Box for all trust land payments to
allow for payments. The system now allows for same
day deposits for trust payments.
• National Training Center, developed as a training
center for OST and BIA personnel on the new Trust
Asset Accounting Management System (TAAMS).
Ms. Russell concluded stating that effective reforms
have been accomplished in the arena of managing trust
funds, however, reforms in trust resources manage-
ment, including effective lease negotiation, lease com-
pliance, conservation efforts for trust lands and prose-
cutions for trespass still remain to be implemented.
Donna Erwin, Principal Deputy Special Trustee, con-
ducted a power point presentation on the difference
between BIA and OST responsibilities. Basically, OST
handles money, BIA takes care of resources and the
Office of Hearings and Appeals determines heirs
through a probate process. BIA and OST have sepa-
rate duties to address audit issues. BIA handles plan-
ning for resource usages, manages acquisition and dis-
posals, establishes leasing relationships, in addition to
working with BLM who does compliance and MMS who
collects royalties for oil and gas.
Philbert Bailey provided background on the San Xa-
vier District and a class action lawsuit filed in 1975 by
the Allottees Association. Mr. Bailey stated the Asso-
ciation would like to see leases no longer being one-
time payment leases and suggested 25-year leases
with five-year adjustments. He asked that the El Paso

INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds
TOHONO O’ODHAM NATION HOSTED ITMA
LISTENING CONFERENCE (Continued from page 9)
gas line lease, the Pima County and other leases be re-
viewed. Regarding the Asarco mining royalities, individu-
als receive statements quarterly and they would like to
see a breakdown of fees. Mr. Bailey asked for clarifica-
tion between individual mining leases that are paid
monthly and “business” leases that are paid annually.
He stated MMS was to provide an audit from the mine to
the allottees and they have yet to receive it.
Phyliss Pachora, Board member of the Allottees Asso-
ciation reiterated that MMS is not responsive to the indi-
viduals. Ms. Pachora stated there are allottees living in
Mexico that should be considered. She cited issues with
a Palm Springs developer who signed a lease with indi-
viduals that must be looked into. Ms. Pachora stated es-
cheatments have occurred with lack of proper notification.
The 1995 Asarco lease calls for royalties on a sliding
scale so payments can increase with cost of living, this
has not occurred.
Elenore Hunter asked for clarification on the ability to
name beneficiaries.
Mr. Swimmer stated Indian Affairs is attempting to get
escheatments reverted or revested back to the owners.
The Youpee case was brought to address this issue and
it is an ongoing issue in the BIA, OST and with OHA’s
probate process. Leases and rights-of-way can be nego-
tiated up to a point without changing the law. If you reach
an impasse on a lease you can stop there, however, with
a rights-of-way, the law does permit the company to come
in and condemn but in most instances, there have been
exceptions.
Mr. Swimmer stated he will work with BIA to see what
the status of MMS is on the audit. Doug Lords, Deputy
Special Trustee, regarding the Mexico issue, offered out-
reach if requested.
There was a great deal of discussion on recent
changes in the law regarding deeding of property to bene-
ficiaries and the new law and the definition of “Indian” for
these purposes.
Page 10
Edward Encinas, a landowner at San Xavier dis-
cussed inherited land that was leased and his opposi-
tion to the lease because of what it is doing to the land
and vegetation.
San Xavier Board Member Tony Encinas stated his
concerns lie with the probate portion of the Allotment
Act. He asked where the information obtained from this
session goes.
Anthony Rios stated he was unaware of the many
changes in the law regarding the single heir rule.
Tribal Councilwoman Gloria Ramirez asked the
status of the OST required Strategic Plan. Mr. Swim-
mer responded there were two plans, one in 1996 and
one in January 2003 referred to as the Comprehensive
Trust Management Plan that describes how the trust
would be operated between and with the BIA, OST,
MMS, BLM, the Secretary’s Office, the Solicitors Office
and the Office of Hearings and Appeals. OST is near-
ing completion of the implementation and completing
validation of information going into the software sys-
tems, the development of oil and gas recording software
system, and the graphical information system.
Councilwoman Darlene Andrew addressed the Santa
Cruz -Chui Chu flooding.
Councilman Flores asked for a description of the
purpose of ITMA.
Councilwoman Nunez addressed allotment fraction-
alization and the updating of records.
Councilwoman Antone addressed the Asarco lease
negotiations, reiterated the Nation’s position on roads
and environmental issues.
Austin Nunez, Chairman of San Xavier District cited
concerns on behalf of the District with regards to the 2%
Youpee interest, how the local agency is handling the
matter and when will the interest be transferred; they
understand there is a continual backlog of probates, and
they understand there are several unfilled positions in
the Southwest area which handle probates. With regard
to water issues, they are implementing the Southern
Arizona Waster Rights Settlement Act Amendments of
2004 and have internal matters to deal with.
 Page 11
INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds

TOHONO O’ODHAM NATION HOSTED ITMA

LISTENING CONFERENCE (Continued from page 10)
The District would like to see the portion of S1439 that
deals with accounting of the funds for individuals and valua-
tions of land become a reality.
Councilman Fayuant, as an outgoing ITMA Board mem-
ber, commented on the valuable work ITMA has done in
regards to trust issues and thanked the Organization for
bring a Listening Conference to Tohono O’odham for the
benefit of his people.

Pictures from the ITMA ’s TOHONO O’ODHAM NATION

Listening Conference, May 23 - 24, 2007
 INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds Page 12

ITMA TO HOST TRIBAL TRUST FUND SETTLEMENT MEETING

All Tribes with an interest in tribal trust fund issues, especially ITMA’s project consultants will explain the Project’s proposed
those with an interest in settling their trust accounting and trust fund methodological approach. Tribes who have been participating in the
mismanagement claims outside of litigation, are invited to attend and ITMA Tribal Trust Fund Settlement (TTFS) Project are planning to
participate in this meeting. The date of the meeting, which will be attend the meeting. In addition, the United States Department of the
in May 2007, will be announced immediately upon confirmation Interior and the United States Department of Justice are planning to
from agenda participants, and will be held at the Embassy Suites at attend the meeting and will be available to answer questions.
the Denver Airport. [Check ITMA’s website www.itmatrustfunds.org
The seven Tribes who are currently participating in the ITMA Tribal
for updated meeting information.]
Trust Fund Settlement Project are:
The purpose of the TTFS Project is to provide the Tribes and the
Government with the opportunity and the means to evaluate and • Coeur D’Alene Tribe of Idaho
address the Tribes’ trust fund accounting and trust fund-related • Confederate Tribes of Colville of Washington
claims, without the need for protracted and potentially expensive
litigation. It is ITMA’s understanding that many Tribes, including • Confederate Tribes of Yakama Nation of Washington
many of those that have filed suit against the Government recently, • Fort Belknap Tribes of Montana
have expressed an interest in and desire for an alternative honorable
resolution, based on a reliable and trustworthy technical methodol- • Nez Perce Tribe of Idaho
ogy, of their accounting and fund-related claims. Government offi-
• Picuris Pueblo of New Mexico
cials have advised ITMA that the Government shares this interest
and desire. Over two years before the filing of cases in November • Sac and Fox Tribe of Oklahoma
and December, 2006, ITMA and the U.S. Department of the Interior
embarked on the TTFS Project through a Cooperative Agreement to Because a predominant number of the Government representa-
achieve an alternative method of resolving fund-related claims. tives planning to attend the May 31 meeting are lawyers who are
involved, in some way, with some, if not most or all, of the pending
ITMA and seven Tribes from across Indian Country have been and Tribal trust accounting and trust mismanagement cases.
continue to be working with Interior, specifically Interior’s Office of
Historical Trust Accounting (OHTA), to develop a feasible process Those Government lawyers have to comply with certain profes-
based on a tested methodology that will enable and assist Tribes and sional rules and procedures. As a result, they will likely have to de-
the Government to reach settlement on the Tribes’ trust accounting cline attendance or participation in the meeting, unless the following
and trust fund-related claims, such as the accuracy of Tribal Trust condition is met by the litigating Tribes that are attending the meet-
Fund account balances, at least for significant time periods. ing. Therefore, meeting attendance pre-requisites are being consid-
ered by ITMA and the government and will be announced as the
Tribes who have been participating in the ITMA Tribal Trust Fund meeting date is announced.
Settlement (TTFS) Project are planning to attend the meeting. In
addition, the United States Department of the Interior and the United
States Department of Justice are planning to attend the meeting.
Presently, there are about 103 Tribal trust accounting and trust
mismanagement cases pending in the federal court system. Thirty-
seven of those cases are pending in the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia; nine are pending in various United States
District Courts in Oklahoma; and fifty-seven are pending in the United
States Court of Federal Claims. In recent months there has been
increasing awareness of the TTFS Project, and, as a result, many
Tribes in litigation have requested that ITMA provide a forum to learn
about the Project. In at least one of these cases, the Tribes and the
Government have made joint submissions to the Court, acknowledg-
ing a possible influence and impact of the TTFS Project on the dispo-
sition of the cases. TTFS Project meeting participants.
Page 13
 Page 14

ITMA TRIBAL MEMBERSHIP

PACIFIC REGION: Pueblo of Cochiti
California: Pueblo of Laguna
Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Pueblo of Picuris
Indians Pueblo of Sandia
Fort Bidwell Indian Community GREAT PLAINS:
Hoopa Valley Tribe North Dakota:
San Pasqual Tribe Three Affiliated Tribes
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
Yurok Tribe Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa
NORTHWEST REGION: South Dakota:
Idaho: Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
Coeur d’Alene Tribe Sisseton-Wahapton Oyate Tribes
Nez Perce Tribe Nebraska:
Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Winnebago Tribe
Oregon: SOUTHERN PLAINS:
Confederated Tribes of Umatilla Oklahoma:
Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Absentee Shawnee Tribe
Washington: Alabama Quassarte Tribe
Confederated Tribes of Chehalis Tribe Cherokee Nation
Confederated Tribes of Colville Iowa Tribe
Confederated Tribes of Quinault Kaw Nation
Confederated Tribes of Yakima Nation Kiowa Nation
WESTERN REGION: Muscogee Nation
Arizona: Osage Nation
Hopi Tribe Sac and Fox Tribes
Salt River Pima Maricopa Tribe Thlopthlocco Tribe
Tohono O’odham Nation Quapaw Tribe
Nevada: MIDWEST:
Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe Minnesota:
Walker River Paiute Tribe Grand Portage Tribe
ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION: Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe
Montana: Red Lake Band of Chippewa
Blackfeet Tribe Wisconsin:
Chippewa Cree Tribe of Rocky Boy Reservation Forrest County Potawatomi Tribe
Confederate Tribes of Salish & Kootenai Oneida Nation
Fort Belknap Tribes Michigan
Fort Peck Tribes Lac Vieux Desert Tribe
Northern Cheyenne Tribe Sault St. Marie Tribe of Chippewa
Wyoming: EASTERN REGION:
Eastern Shoshone Tribe Maine:
Northern Arapaho Tribe Passamaquoddy Tribe of Pleasant Point Reservation
SOUTHWEST REGION: Penobscot Nation
Colorado: ALASKA:
Southern Ute Tribe Central Council Tlingit & Haida Tribes
New Mexico: Kenaitze Tribe
Jicarilla Apache Tribe Metlakatla Tribe
Mescalero Apache Tribe
 Page 15

INTERTRIBAL MONITORING ASSOCIATION on Indian Trust Funds

ITMA Board of Directors—2007

ITMA Chairman, Councilman Mervin Packineau Councilman Samuel Penney

Three Affiliated Tribes Nez Perce Tribe

ITMA Vice-Chairman, 1st Vice President Bill Martin Chairman James Steel
Tlingit & Haida Tribes Salish & Kootenai Tribe

ITMA Secretary Melinda Danforth Chairman James Gray

Oneida Tribe Osage Nation

ITMA Treasurer Jody Calaca

Warm Springs Tribe Councilman Floyd Kirk
Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate

Councilman Scott Russell Councilman Michael Marchand

Crow Tribe Confederated Tribes of Colville

Representative Richard Sangrey

Councilwoman Betty Cooper
Blackfeet Tribe Chippewa Cree Tribe
 ITMA was organized in 1990 by Tribes
determined to actively monitor and have
We are on the web! a voice in the activities of the Federal
government to ensure fair compensa-
www.itmatrustfunds.org tion to tribes for the historical trust
funds mismanagement. Today, ITMA is
a national tribal consortium consisting
of 65 federally recognized tribes, whose
ITMA's mission is to focus on trust fund and asset purpose and objectives have increased
management initiatives as developed by tribal partici- as it follows the trust reform activities of
the Federal government and Congress.
pants:
• Monitor the Government's Reform Efforts
• Trust Policies and Regulations
• Legislative and Litigation Initiatives
• Provide a Forum for Tribal Consultation
• Provide Increased Education for Tribes and Individuals
• Enforcing the Federal Government to Adhere and Imple-
ment Trust Standards
• Empowering Tribes and Individuals to Control and Man-
age Their Own Trust Funds and Assets

ITMA
2800 San Mateo Blvd. NE Suite 105
Albuquerque, NM 87110