New land-claim mediator to be appointed by judge
May 4, 2002

By R. PATRICK CORBETT
Observer-Dispatch

SYRACUSE — The Oneida land claim is headed back to the bargaining table under a new court-appointed mediator.

U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Kahn’s mediation order Friday surprised many of the land-claim lawyers. They had come to Kahn’s courtroom to hear arguments on another case, the Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin lawsuits against 60 landowners in Oneida and Madison counties.

Kahn said he hopes to make a decision on the latest lawsuits “in a reasonable amount of time.”

Regardless of that ruling, he said, “I’m going to appoint a mediator to try to see if there’s a way to find the missing pieces of this puzzle.” He set an Aug. 30 deadline on the mediated talks.

An earlier attempt to negotiate the land claim ended with all sides blaming each other for the collapse of nearly a year and a half of talks under mediator Ronald Riccio.

Albany lawyer John W. Tabner, whom Kahn described as a “senior member of the bar” experienced in mediation, will oversee the next round of confidential negotiations.

Acknowledging the earlier failure, Kahn said, “If we can try in the Middle East, we can certainly try in Central New York.”

The Oneida tribes of New York, Wisconsin and Canada claim that the state illegally took 250,000 acres in Oneida and Madison counties from the original tribe in the late 1700s and early 1800s.

The Wisconsin tribe started suing individual landowners in February, after New York state and the Oneida Indian Nation of New York came out with a plan to settle the larger land claim. The plan included money, but no land for the Wisconsin or Canadian tribes.

The New York Oneidas oppose the Wisconsin tribe’s lawsuits.

The arguments Friday revolved around whether an earlier court ruling prohibits suits against landowners, and whether the New York Oneidas have to support the Wisconsins’ suit.

The lawyer for the Wisconsin Oneidas, Arlinda Locklear, said the earlier ruling by Senior U.S. District Court Judge Neal P. McCurn only addressed a suit against all landowners in the claim area. It did not conclusively prohibit all suits against landowners, she said.

Also, Locklear said, the Oneida Indian Nation of New York waived its interest in the land in question when its leaders stated publicly that they would not pursue a claim against individual owners.

Dwight A. Healy, hired by the state to represent landowners sued by the Wisconsin Oneidas, said the suits create a “fundamental conflict.” He said if the court sides with Locklear, the property would be turned over solely to the Wisconsin tribe even though it lies within the boundaries of the claim filed by all three tribes.

John Benjamin Carroll, lawyer for Roy and Winifred Bish of Oneida, said the Wisconsin Oneida suit is “highly disruptive” to the community and his clients and runs counter to state laws protecting people who buy land in good faith based on historical ownership.

Winifred Bish said the land is not vacant, as Locklear claimed, but has a seasonal residence that she and her husband had planned to renovate for their retirement home.

“They’re messing up our retirement plans,” she said.

Roy Bish said the suit also cost him and his son Shawn two days’ pay to attend Friday’s hearing.

John O’Mara, a lawyer who helped assemble Gov. George Pataki’s plan to settle the larger land claim, said he was unprepared for the mediation ruling.

He said Kahn had scheduled arguments on that issue for May 17.

Lawyers for the New York Oneidas echoed Oneida County Executive Ralph J. Eannace Jr., who said, “We’re perfectly willing to meet with the mediator. We hope it works out quickly.”

But Eannace said that talks also would continue among the state, the counties and the Oneida Nation on the New York state proposal. He said those discussions are “very intense,” but he declined to be more specific.

Locklear, who had asked for a mediator, said, “It’s the only way to get a comprehensive settlement.”

Marilyn Ford, the Connecticut lawyer representing the Brothertown Nation of New York, a tribe added to the larger land claim last year, said the proposed New York settlement ignored her clients, so she is “pleased to see the case continued” in mediation.

She said the New York settlement plan was simply a scheme “by the Oneidas of New York to get a quick casino” in the Catskill Mountains, as authorized last fall by the state legislature.