Lawyer: Oneidas must take notice
Feb. 18, 2000

From staff reports

Landowners and elected leaders are studying the nearly $37 million settlement in the Cayuga land claim to see what the implications might be for the ongoing Oneida land-claim fight.

Leon Koziol, the lawyer representing Upstate Citizens for Equality, said the Cayuga verdict is “a very positive sign” for landowners in the Oneida land claim negotiations and a warning to Oneida Indian Nation officials.

Koziol had estimated the jury would award anywhere from $50 million to $300 million to the Cayugas. The jury’s recommendation for $36.9 million “is far less” than the Cayugas were seeking, he said.

The Oneida Indians are seeking compensation from Oneida and Madison counties and the state and federal governments for some 250,000 acres of land in the two counties that was purchased from the Oneidas two centuries ago in violation of U.S. treaties.

The parties are trying to negotiate a settlement, but if they fail, the matter would end up in the same courtroom where the Cayuga decision was rendered Thursday.

No official details of what the Oneidas are seeking in their land-claim suit have been released, though unofficial figures of up to $800 million have been made public.

If the Cayuga settlement is any indication, Koziol said, Ray Halbritter, Nation representative, and the rest of the Oneidas could be in for a disappointment if their case goes to court.

“I think this shows up the need for Halbritter to become more realistic in his demands,” Koziol said. “This is also a clear indication that the tribes overextended themselves in going after the land settlements.

The Cayugas can appeal the decision.

Oneida County Executive Ralph Eannace would not comment on the possible implications of the Cayuga verdict on the Oneida land claim, other than to say, “We’ll be looking at (the Cayuga decision) very carefully.”

Alexia Conrad, spokeswoman for the Oneida Indian nation said, “The Oneida Nation does not comment on the affairs of other Indian nations.”

When asked for his gut reaction to the jury’s verdict, Upstate Citizens for Equality President Scott Peterman said: “They gave them too much. They didn’t deserve anything.”

But considering the jurors probably didn’t have much prior knowledge of federal Indian law, Peterman said he thinks their decision was appropriate.

“I’m happy they didn’t award them the $300 million,” he said. “I think the Indians are lucky to get their $36 million. If they’re smart, they’ll take it and run.”

Peterman said he thought from the start the Cayugas would be better off going to court, instead of taking the state’s $100 million-plus settlement offer. He thinks the Cayugas will appeal the decision.

Upstate Citizens for Equality member Ben Origlio of Oneida said the verdict in the Cayugas’ claim could affect what happens in the Oneidas’ claim.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if it does go to court,” he said. “In a way, I think it should. I don’t think (the negotiators) are getting anywhere.”

But Oneida County Legislator Neil Angell, R-Durhamville, chairman of the county Indian Affairs Committee, said an out-of-court settlement is the best course of action.

“It’s the only way we can reach a finality in this,” he said. “If we reach a settlement (out of court), 50 years from now it will be difficult to see any scars around here.”

Otherwise, every issue would have to be settled in court, and the land claim still might be front page news in 2050, he said.
Angell added he was interested to see if U.S. District Judge Neal McCurn would stand by the jury’s verdict.

The jury’s recommendation Thursday doesn’t end the Cayuga land-claim issue, Koziol said. McCurn has some “room to move” in setting the final award figure to the Cayugas, he said.

And there’s always the question of how the Cayugas will use the money — whether it will go for purchasing land in the claim area — and what will be done with any land purchased.

Koziol and Verona Town Supervisor David Reed said revenues from the Oneida Nation’s Turning Stone Casino Resort should be taken into account in any settlement in the local land claim.