Officials advocate new negotiations
Sept. 27, 2000

By R. PATRICK CORBETT
Observer-Dispatch

As the fallout settles from Monday’s court ruling letting landowners off the hook in the Oneida Indian land claim, some players in the case are hoping the decision will reopen the door to a negotiated settlement.

Senior U.S. District Court Judge Neal P. McCurn ruled Monday that the Oneidas cannot sue landowners in the 250,000-acre land claim territory in Madison and Oneida counties.

“I would hope it would make a difference and that (the Oneidas) would come back to the bargaining table,” Madison County Board of Supervisors Chairman Rocco DiVeronica said Tuesday.

“But,” he added, “I don’t see anything on the horizon right now.”

Oneida County Executive Ralph Eannace Jr. said Monday, “We will remain open to try to negotiate while waiting for a trial. This (ruling by McCurn) does not resolve all the landowners’ concerns.”

Oneida Indian Nation of New York spokesman Mark Emery said negotiations are always a possibility, but, “We’re headed for court right now.”

He said out-of-court talks might be more likely “as it gets closer to litigation” in court.

Arlinda Locklear, lawyer for the Oneidas of Wisconsin, said Monday her clients will have to reconsider their approach toward the landowners, but she would not say if that might include renewing negotiations.

U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said Tuesday he would weigh in on the side of negotiation.

He has asked the U.S. Justice Department’s lawyers to act as mediators, rather than as the strict advocates of the Indian position they have been so far.

In a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno Tuesday, the senator said, “I would also urge you to forgo any appeals of Judge McCurn’s ruling. An appeal would only serve to needlessly prolong the anxiety of landowners.”

Property owners, meanwhile, have reacted in varying ways to McCurn’s ruling. Some were only cautiously optimistic, saying the large issue of the land claim remains to be resolved.

Leon Koziol, a Utica attorney who has represented different citizens’ groups, said Tuesday he’s seen a lot of positive reaction.

“The landowners are very happy,” he said. Their protests the past two years drew the attention of local, state and federal officials and helped influence the outcome, Koziol said.

“Really, the credit goes to the landowners,” Koziol said.

The Oneidas want reparations for 250,000 acres in the two counties that they claim the state acquired wrongfully in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

The Oneidas claim they only asked to add landowners to the suit in 1998 after the state dragged its feet on negotiations for years.

There have been no formal negotiations between the counties and the Oneidas since April, when the two sides could not agree on sales tax and property acquisition questions. The Oneidas left a $500 million settlement offer from the state and federal governments sitting on the table.

DiVeronica said while the counties hope for renewed negotiations, they continue to prepare for trial.

If the case goes to trial, he said, “we’re going to be more aggressive going after the litigation than we were at negotiations.”

He would not discuss specific strategy.

“Our lawyers are meeting Friday and Monday to discuss strategy,” he said. Next week, the lawyers may brief the county board’s Native American Affairs Committee on the status of their preparations, he added.

Those briefings could go on for a long time.

McCurn cautioned in his 66-page decision Monday that, “A trial date easily could be years away.”

Lawyers have said they expect the land claim will be appealed through the federal courts and probably end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, a process that would take many more years.