009-0-0-Syvia-Quast-DOJ 0 0 0 0 0 California Valley Miwok Tribe, California (formerly the Sheep Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California) Sheep Ranch Rd. (Sheep Ranch) Mountain Ranch, California 9 09-- {www.californiavalleymiwok.com} April 0, 009 Sylvia Quast, Esq. Assistant U.S. Attorney 0 "I" Street, Suite 0-00 Sacramento, California 9 Tel: (9) -0; E-mail <Sylvia.quest@usdoj.gov> Ms. Quast: Regarding the suit: California Valley Miwok, Tribe v. Dick Kempthorne, et al. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - Case 09- Chadd Everone, Deputy 0 Shattuck Ave. 0 Berkeley, California 90 0-- I represent what can be called the Yakima Dixie group or Putative Member Class of this Tribe. As you may know, there has been a prolongued dispute between this group and Ms. Silvia Burley regarding who is to be the Federally recognized authority for the Tribe. This dispute culminated in what we call the Olsen Mandate of February, 00. See: http://www.californiavalleymiwok.com/00-0---determination.pdf Therein, Michael Olsen (Principal Deputy, Acting Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs) determined that was no Federally recognized authority for the Tribe, that the issue of authority would have to be resolved by tribal re-organization under the umbrella of the, and that the would not recognize any intra-tribal remedy regarding issues of tribal membership. This was a final agency action and not subject to appeal. Since that Determination, Ms. Burley has made every possible effort to obstruct tribal re-organization, asserting that because, at one time the address her as Chairperson, ipso facto, she had to be the Federally recognized authority, cloaking herself, personally, in the mantel of sovereignty. Her efforts have included suits against the Federal government, appeals, and suits against the State of California. Our group has "stalked" these proceeding as either Intervenor, Amicus Curiae, or Interested Party and as Plaintiff in one instance against the State of California. All of Burley's efforts have failed with the exception of the three pending actions as identified by the color green in the schematic of litigations, which is appended. Those actions are: A) Burley v. the ( appeal 0-00-A); Burley v. California Gambling Control Commission in the California Court of Appeals - th district (case D09); and c) your action.
009-0-0-Syvia-Quast-DOJ 0 0 0 The case 0-0-A is the linch-pin and once that is adjudicated the others, I would assume, would collapse. I last spoke to the clerk of the on April, 009; and the case is 9 in the docket, which I calculate would mean about months away. From the Orders on your case, it appears that Ms. Burley must file her opening brief by tomorrow, April, and you must file your response by May. In discussion with Superintendent Troy Burdick on April, 009, he made the side comment that even if the were to make its Determination, your action, if still out-standing, might delay tribal organization until your action is resolved - i.e., another year. Consequently, we would request that you do everything possible to expedite your proceedings. Burley's tactic is clearly to obstruct and delay, and several of the tribal elders have died during this delay. Also, people are getting mightily peeved at the for allowing this procedural obstruction to supersede the substance of this matter. It seems that Silvia Burley has been given every consideration for years since the Olsen Determination, while the legitimate members are given short shrift. Also, an expedited proceeding in your case would prevent us from having to file for Amicus status... If there is any information which might help you, either I or our attorney, Tim Vollmann who presented our amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals in this matter, might be able to be of some use. Sincerely, Chadd Everone 90 9 9 9 9 00 0 0 0 0
009-0-9-Litigations Here is a charting of the various litigations in which we have been engaged, directly or indirectly as an interested party, Intervenor, or amicus curiae. Chadd Legend: CSCA Intra-tribal CGCC Bureau of Indian Affairs Interior Board of Indian Appeals Superior Court of California, San Diego Superior Court of California, Sacramento California United States District Court - Eastern District (Sacramento) United States Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit United States District Court - District of Columbia United States Court of Appeals - District of Columbia Administrative Hearing with the Tribe California Gambling Control Commission Completed Pending Case and litigants 00 00 00 9 0 9 0 9 0 00-0- 0-9 Dixie vs. Burley a 00-0-9 0-09 Burley vs. USA b 00-0-0 0-09 Intevenor Burley vs. USA
009-0-9-Litigations Case and litigants 00 00 00 9 0 9 0 9 0 00-0-0 Appeal Case and litigants 00 00 00 9 0 9 0 9 0 a 00-0-9 0-09 Burley vs. USA (cont.) b 00-0-0 0-09 Dixie Intervenor c 00-0- 0-9 re USDC 0-09 Affirmed District Court's Dismissal 00-0-0 Appeal Olsen Mandate to reorganize 00-0- Intra-tribal AH-00-00 Burley v. Dixie Invalidated by 00-0-9 0AS00 Dixie vs. CGCC a 00-0- 0-cv-009 Burley v USA re. b 00-0- 0-cv-009 Dixie intervenor Made moot c 00-0- 0-0 Appeal of 0-cv-009 d 00-0- 0-0 AmicusCuriae.pdf 00--0 0AS0 CGCC vs.dixie/burley 00-0-9 0-0-A Dixie v PL 9 00--0 0-00-A Burley v.
009-0-9-Litigations Case and litigants 00 00 009 9 0 9 0 9 0 c 00-0- 0-0 Appeal of 0-cv-009 District Court a Affirmed d 00-0- 0-0 AmicusCuriae.pdf Argued by Vollmann 00-0-9 0-0-A Dixie v PL Withdrawn & 9 00--0 0-00-A Burley v. 0a 00-0-0-00-000 Burley v.cgcc Removed 0b 00-0- :0-cv-009 Burley v CGCC Remanded 0c 00-0-0 :0-cv-009 Dixie Intervention Obvi ated 0d 00-0- -00-000 Burley v.cgcc 0 009-0- CCA-th D09 Burley v. CGCC 00-0- 0--A Burley v. PL- 00-0-9 09--A Burley v. PL a 00--9 :0-cv-0 Burley v. PL Dismi ssed b 009-0- Case 09- appealing a Pend ing ->