United States Department of the Interior

I:'\ REPLY REFER TO:

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS P<:!.cific Regional Office

2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, California 95825 ·

Tribal Operations

Robert A .. Rosette, A~orney Rosette, LLP for Lewis Faction

565 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 212 Chandler, Arizona 85225 CERT1FIEQ MAIL NO.: 7013 0600 00011876 6925 RETURN RECEJ~T REQUESTED .·

John Peebles, Attorney Fredericks Peebles & Morgan LLP For Reid Faction

2020LStreet, Suite 250 Sacramento, California 95825 CE.RTlflEOMAILN0.:70130600000118766932 'RETURN ~ECEtPT REQUESTED

Lester J. Marston, Attorney Law Offices of Rapport and Marston for Ayala Faction

405 W. Perkins Street· Ukiah, California .95482 CERTIFIEt>MAllNO.: 7013060000011876 6949 RETU~N RECEIPT REQUESTED

Dear Mr. Rosette, Mr. Peebles, amfMr. Marsto~·; ·

FEB ll ZB14

The purposlil ofthiseorresp~~~enc~tsto informv()Y:of:mydecisH~rireaatdl~gtbe•Notices of Appeal . dated June 14,· 201$, October a, ~3;Stand Oct'om,;r9, !01l,filed?lnac®rdance With ~SCFtt. Part 2.9 .. by the Reid Factip:~~the Lewts Fa~ion,Jmdthe AyaJa:Ffciftrni.rt9'1Pect~~1'ly:th~sj:-ppeaf,s relate te the

· actions of the.Superi1ntendeAt; Central CaHforni a Af,~~i:q,: r~tu.rcttiin1.tht ta·ctit-~$:,t() '¢antract with. tbe ·Bureau ofl ndHan Affalrs {&l~l "'r!lier the lndia.n SeJf-~t.$,rmtnatlQ·n,ant"<'.fi~h1c.titin ~S,tS:tlr'l·~ Act · (ISDEAA,),' PuhlUc Law 9~638; 's4'Dmitted by.eaeh tadfoit. .. , . . · ·· ·. ·. · . . . ·. · .. ,

I

The Reid Facth:m, con.sisti ng Of Me>rris Reid, Janice Devine, Dix:ie. Jackson, Harold Hammond, ~md Frank Fernandez, timely filed a Notice of Appeal, dated June 14, 20131 of the Superlntende'nt's May 1~, 2013, decision. The Reid Faction cites two decisions in the Superintendent'sMay 16, 20U,.correspondence as the subject of the appeal. First, the Superintendent's decision to recognize tl!le council elected as a . result of the December 1, 2012, election consisting of: Nancy Ayala, Chalrpersan; Reggie Lewis, Vice-Chairperson; Tract Brechbuel, Secretary; Karen Wynn, Treasurer; (:hance.Alberta1

Member-at-Large; CharlesSargosa, Member-at-Large; and Carl Buzz Bushman, Member-at·targe. Second, the Superintendent's decision to return the Reid Faction1srequf;lstto contract under Public Law 93-638with the BIA.

The Lewis Faction, consisting of Reggie Lewis, Chairman; Carl "Buzz" Bushman, Vtce ChaJtman; Irene Waltz, Secretary; Chance Alberta, Treasurer;Melvin Espe, Member ... at:-Large; David Castillo, Member-at-Large; and Lynn Chenot, Member-at-Large, timely filed a Notice ofAppeaJ, elated October 3, 2013, of th~ Superintendent's S~pternber 4, 2013; deci~ion. The Lewis Factio,n.ceites three appeaJable issues'°f the Superintenden:rs decision to return the Lewis Faction's neguest without action due tohls lack of Jurisdiction because of theReid Faction's appeal pending be.fore the Reg~onal Director. First,the Lewis Facti.on asserts the Superintendent" ... failed to cite.any de.Olinatlon criteria, legal basis, or lawful reason for refusing to act upon the Tribe's 638 Contract Proposal;" Seco.nd, the Lewis Faction .asserts" ... the IBIA Orders and the applicable law all dearly direct the Superintendent to perform his duty.and his responsl1bilttyto.det~m1'.line which indMduals are authorized Tribal offieials empoweredte>apply for and executea638comtrac:tforFY 2013.'l Third~" ... the BIA has not lived up to its duties under its trust relationship to mak.e dear that the current governing boc:J.v [is} occupying the Chukchansi Gold Resort & Casino.''

The Ayala Faction, consisting of the Tribal Council led by Nancey Ayala, timely filed a No~ite of Appeal, dated October 9, 2013, of the Superintendent's September 4, 2013, decision1• The Ayala faction Cites the Superintendent's decision to return without action, the Ayala Faction's P.L. 93 .. 638al!>'plicationfor · a new three-year contract, .Fiscal Years 20:13~201i5;·because the Superintendent was .precluded from actlngupon·the Ayala Faction's tequest·due tothe·at.>,peaJ peoc:Hng before the lnteriorJ~oard of Indian .· Appeals (IBIA), citing BIA's reliance uponPicayu.ne Rand}etia oftheChu~chansi Indians; Morris Reid; Dora Jones, Dixie Jackson, and Harold Hammond v. Pacific Regional Director; Bureau of lndiem Affairs; Docket No IBIA 13-045, Order dated April 2, 2013, as the appeal able issue.

In the Orderof A:prlt 2; 2013,i.nPkayune Rancheriaoftl'trt~hu1<¢hr:ini/Jfl~lf{rJSi MotrJiReil/,:OortJJon11s,. Dixie Jackson,.·andt'!/arold H:ommondv. Pacific.Rt1.giml.t11Jf1inn;tar,.su~quoftndk',mAHairs1,~~uf)ra, HUA (Board) states "without det&rmtnlngwhethert~f! l)itn,denevof this a~~.a,I, tllrt:der the fa~sof this

, '"' ,

1 On No'ABmber 13. 2013vthe Pacitc::~l~:>nal:Ofllce·~i~th•Relld FltoUon'$ ~Otion·~o Ol$miss the "untimely"· Notice ofAppeif.fHed by the Ayata,Facti¢rr. Jrt aAettef;~at~ Oeoem~er 2. 20.13,;c;l~e!'lled the motion citing 25 QJ;R P~nt 4, 15, compotatlon oftim,e, which states 1'cor;npwta)i0n a.hall in~e the. tast day of the period, unless·· iti.s ~ Saturday •. a Sun~, 9r a t~al .bQlida~ .• Jn wf'lh::h4t~S!tt.tb~ peric,id runs· unttltheead of the next day which is. not il.<:Satur.day, a Sunday, ·Qr a 1•1~~Jiday." aoetc~tl'1e ~13·GoV$m~ent shu~owni from October 1,: 201a,ctc:>'Q~ob>er 17, ~013, the '~la F•e;tlrari w11s.11ot·affQrdeli! th' opP4)r;t.tinlty to submit their Notice of .an Appeal until· ©eto~er ,1;j·. 20.13, otthe e~d of:ttil&1iftE»d ctay toltowino:0cito~r .~; 20'13; when the. BIAwas reo~ened. · · · ·

I

l I

case, divests BIA of jurisdiction to consider a request on behalf oft.he Tribe for a newcof'ltract for FY 2013, the Board grants BIA jurisdiction to consider such a request{ or t"equests)." Further, in the Juty 10, 2013, Order C~ncei:nil)g BIA Jurisdiction Over FY 2013 Contract Proposals and Over FY 2012 Contract Matters, and OrderDirecting.andAllowing Responses to Api)eHant's Supplemental Submission, the IBtA states: "Arly issues regarding the jurisdiction ofthe Superintendentto address proposals or requests while Appellants' appeal is pending before. the RegionaLDirectorshouh:I be resolved by the Regional Director." Thus t~e Board's Order provides me the authority to hear these· appeals, as they are all related to the ISDEAA contract proposals of the Picayun~ Rancheriadf Chukchansi Indians for Fiscal Years 2013-2015.

All the appealspertaintoa request fora new ISOEAA contract fort.he PicayuneRancheriaof Chukchansi Indians for FY 2013•2015. On. December 10, 2013, due to the related subject matter of the appe.a1s,.and in accordanc.ewith Title 25,.Code of Federal Regulations, Part 2.18, GonsoUd:.ati.on of

, . ' . ' .. , '

Appeals, I exercised my discretionary authority to combine the related appeals and issue one decision to resolve them. In addition, each party was given the opportutllty to submit any final a.rgument$ to this office before a decision is issued2•

The leaders:hip of the Picayune Rancheria of Chukctiansl lndlan!ttas be~n embroiled indtsputes'S1111ce the December 3, 2011, election. The hold-over officers (lndividu1als.notup forelectiortarid wttose ,

i . - .,_. ' • . . - . "

terms had not ex:pired) that remained on the Tribal Council were Nancy Ayala, Jennif'ef'StanJey and Nokomis Hernandez3• It appears the 2011election was conducted in accordance with.the Tribe's Constitution adopted on October 22, 1988, and the Election Ordinance adopted on Octot>er21, 2010. Under the 1988Constitution, the Tribal Council has staggered terms and the regulaftrlbal Ellection held on December 3, 2011, was.for the foL1rTribal Council seats whose terms hac:l~>tpired. Tne .201a . . . . ' . ' ' ~. .' .,

· election results reflec;t that Morris.Reid, Dora Jones, Dixie Jackson and Harold Hammond, sr. 1 received the highest number of votes in, the electlon4• · Ho.wever, multl'pfe can'd~'dates runni;l'l.i in the .efec.tton. appealed to the Etection Comml.ttee challenging eHgibillty efHarold Hammond,Sr., to be seated ~s a. member of the Tribal Council, claiming that Mr. Hammond should have never been qu'$tlfie'dto run for office as he did not meet the eligibility requtrements5• The appe·als of Mr.Hamrpond;s eligibility to run for office led toa disagreement overwhetberthe,R'eld Facti,onwasd;ulv installed o'n to the council in accordance with the Constitution. The R•idf~Ction claimed to b~ d11l~·seated at theOecember.26, · 2011, Trl1bakCountilme;~lng, ln'aecordanee withtri;bal •. faw. TheLe:WiSoFactloh cU.sput~dwhetherthe e I ected Tri bat Courtdl was,p,rf)petty sea~e~ and rernafr'l:fl4 in offiteJ:n aocordan·pe wfth trjf:)·al )la.w. The record does notJeflect i·f the questJon whetlller tbe·e'leat~d F\eid ~a~i~nwas'pl:'Q,p~.rty seated in accordance with Tribal law was finally resolved and this issue ~su'ltS'dl~oMgoh•1gtntemal leadership disputes with both: factions claiming to be the autllorfied:c·gaverntl'li body. The recEi>rd shows the

2 The December 10, '2013, le~ter pro'Vided a deadlirie of .:lanu.~ 7', ,20·14, to ~brt:J,IUht\l arguments; howewr, on January 6, 2014 •. the svperint$1'.'lcfentrorwardedarequest'.fmllltheAyalaFa~tion tQ,extend t.~ deadline .to January .10, 2014. ·.tn·accQrdance with 25 CFR § 2.16,· QnJen~aiY·.7ri014,,f~('IJ'ntftdtfle:;re.Q.'4es·tto extend the deadline to January 10, 2014. Afl arguments were tUbmiltedQrJ>()strnarktid'b~·J~t:Juaty10,,2014. 3 Therecord reflects that .. Nokomis HEm;tandez was .. appQJnt•~·by thE1"ftibalCQµn~ltore~lac:e eatrick Hammond, Ill. . · .•.. • · · · ·· · · 4 See February 1, 2013; AdmJnietrati..e Record, Tab F, $$1 5 See February 1, 2013, Ad,minis~r:atiwReooflQ,·Tab F, 59,~0.64,'63, ~nd65.

Lewi:s F.action held a General Council meeting on March 10, 20126; in arrattempt to.settl,e tile: dispute, but the vaU dity of the meeting and the actions adopted at t.hat meeting are con~ested by the Reid Faction. The Reid Faction did not participate in this meeUng and challenges they~Hdity oHhe meeting, claiming it was not called and conducted by the legitimate Tribal Council. ··

It appears the Tribe was still embroiled in an intra~tribal dispute:between the Reid Fletion and the Lewis Faction when a December 1,.2012, electi,on was held by the Lewis Faction; The re~o.rd reflects the December i, 2012, electli:m was conductedin accordance with thetribe!sConstitutld:nad(>ptect ,on October 22; 1988, and th.e Elect1on Ordinance amended on September 20, 2012. TheTr:lbaJCouncil has staggered terms and a regular tribal election was conducted on December, i,.201z..forthe three Tribal Council seats whose terms had expired. As indicated by th~ ~cembe.r :J;,2012, election report signed by Dominque Carrillo on January 3, 2013, the hold.-over.officers that remained om the Tribal Council were Reggie Lewis, Chance Alberta, Tracey Brechbuel and Karen Wynn and th;atNancy Ayala, Carl Bushman and Charles Sargosa received the highest numberof votes in.the election. ·the Refd · Faction did l'lot partieipate In this electiornnd co.ntends it was not a valid tribal election ~~cal;Jse it was not held by th~ legitimate tri.bal government orElecti.on Committee (dµeto the Reid Factlon suspending Dominique Carrillo, Dana Hall and Orianna Walker from 'their.positions on the Election Committee'). Further, they challenge the inclusion of Reggie Lewis, Chance Alberta, Karen Wynn and Tracey Brechbuel, on the Tribal Council, as those four seats are the same seats the .Reid1Faction claimed to occupy. The record does not reflect that the Decemberl, 20121 election resolved the pending leadership dispute regardf~g the interpret~tion of the installation of newly elected officers from the past e.lection.

The Ayala/lewis FactiontemporarNysuspendedTribal Coundl rner11bers·Kareh WYn:n:$flcf~racey Brech bu.el on January 24, 2013, due to allegations concerning misuse of tri~al funds. In correspondence dated January 31, 2013, the Ayala/Lewis Faction provided notice of the te'l'l'l:p()rary suspensions to Karen Wynn and Tracey Brechbuehl pending the outcomeofan investigatiqn (.the Ayala Faction later disp1.1ted the validityofthese ~spensions).

·~ • v

The re~ord refl:ects thatt;nothaf"intr~:trfbal dis.put.: arosespUttitiftheAyala/LewJs Factionla:pparently resulting from a•Jons taker1btthe Ay<tlafactlon cm February 21t;2013; wherein they r~'moved the entireTribalcouncil, with the ex:eeptton of Ay~la, and replaced them with anotherTribafCouncil. A series of suspensions and removals occurred 1n b .. ot. h factions, bu.tJtJs uncl.ear ileither h1d.;aqu:orum . . ..

of the Tribal Counci.I,

In a.purported attem;pt to resolv,ethe dtspute, the LEt\Yis·t;aci:i~n attertigt~at'~1Jtlltz~thireferend;liJm procedure, and on Jt.me 19, 2013,the Indian Dispute Resolutior;i'~'f'YicE!S·~rtJf~a1~:the re.suJts;of·the referendum and held a eeneral 'ouncil m'etlng~n Sec~t,ltlberl4,~013. At 50me ~~ii1t1 .foHowlng the Gerieral CounclfMeeti n&1 the lewis and Reid Fa~';(};;l't·re:cof'leiled tbl~I rdlfferente:s and' began workf.ng toge.tfl@r. ln a letter qatedJanuary 2, 2014,·the'Reid·af'ld•.~ewis.FattfC;ms su,,rti:Jtted·a.Joint

~ Se.e Febru~ry.1, .2013, Admini$tratl~•Reoord;·Tab F, 6• 7 See February 1, 201·3, ~drrj;lnistratiw Re¢ord; Tab·F1 35.

response to this Office's DecemberlO, 2013, letter. The Lewis/Reid Faction state" ..• the two separate P.L. 93-638 contract applications for FY 2013-2015, are renewed, by way of th~s correspondence, as a single contract application for yo.ur consideratioli.''8

This Office received two reports of a TribaLElection held Oecerj'.lber 7, 2()13, submitted by the . Lewis/Reid Faction and the Ayala Faction. According to memorandums ftom the Centrlll Caltfornia Agency Superintendent dated January 15, 2014, and January 22, 2014, the combined Lewts/Reid Faction reported its election was conducted pursuant to the Tribe's Constitution adopted on October 22, 1988, and an Election Ordinance amended on October 17, 2013, while the Ayala Faction December 7, 2013, tribal election was conducted in accordancewiththe Tribe's Constitution adopted on October 22, 1988, and the Election Ordinance amended on September23, 20130'Followingthe

. December 7, 2013, elections,attornevs for.bothfactions submitted correspondence arguingthe merits oftheir elections, Y·rgiflg BIA recognition of respective elections, an~ discussing the invalidity of the other faction's etection.9 Despite efforts by the· various factions, the two tribal electio!'l:s .heJd on December7, 20b,did not resolve the intra-tribal dispute over the Interpretation regarding the installation of newly elected officers and the controversy carried overto·t'he subsequent elections.

In Cayuga Indian Nation of New York, Clint Ha/ftown, Tim Twogun~, and Gary Wheeler v Eastern Regional Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs,, Docket No. IBJA.12 .. QOS, Orde.·.r Vacating O.ecision, theJBIA

,· ' • ' <

states," ... at leas.t since 1996, the Board has recognized that BIA has the authorityto make a determination on tribal leadership (when the situation [has] deteriorated tothe pointthat recognition ohome government wasessentialforFederalpurpose.s.' Wadena v. ActingMlrmeapo/is Area Director, 301BIA 130, 145 (1996) (emphasis added). A corollary is that Bl"A has '.bothJhe authority and responsibility to interpret tribal law when necessary to carry out the government.::to-government relationship with the tribe.' United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee lndlems v. Muskogee Area tpirecttJr, 22 IB.IA 75, 80(1992) (emphasis added); see also Ransom v. Babbitt,.69 F.Su.pp. 2d 141, is1-s2(0~0 .. c. 1999) (Department has authority to review tribal procedures 'When it is forced to recognize! tr~bal leadership) •. AndJt is wetl,established that irrexecuti·ng responsibilities for carrying on government r:elationswith a tribe and providing necessary day-to-day services, BIA may not effectively create a hiatus in tribal government by simultaneously recognizing two tribal governments or declining to reco.gni;ze any trib111I government. Goad/ace v. Grassrope, 108 F.2d 3'35, .338~39(8th Cir, 1,983:)."

' ' ' ' , '~, ' '

·. .

In Steven .R Smith·. vActing Pgclfit ~~gionatDlrector, Bul'•u ottnt11an Afl<iirsi Pocket ~ •. ·:42 IBtA ~24! Order DismJssingAppeal, the HUA staies; ''. •• it isw1;r~l~ettl•tl"that a v111·lld etectionHeld durrogthe pendency of an a.p,pe~l moot~ ~ny questionscon<:fr~ln.g priorJrtbil lea~~Bhlp;(Seee;g~tWlllit;tms v. Alaska Regional Oite€:tor, 391BIA 140, 142(2ooa); Kost%Jjfli/.•V. soutf¥em P·'tains R~glonf;JU;>irectM, 35 IBIA 205(2000); Roso/es .v. SacramentoArta Director, 3418£l12S, 125(1999); Hamlltonv.A~ting Sacramento Area Director, 29 lBIA 12i;, 123 (1996);. l/i#f;Qas.v. Sacramento. Arel'l Direddr, 24JBIA 150,

. .

. 8 No'formal request mee(inQ the req1,1lrtments sefftlrth irJ i!~OFR § $90:, •si;it:>,part c, ·has· been submitted for eonsideratton bytt\e!Lewl$'1Reid Faction. . .. •.. .. .• • .. · . •. . .· .·. •.

,Q Altho~h the.• L.ewi$ and.Reltt faetlQl:'ls ha\eapparently ·~~r:mi.fec:f and ar• n()!N ~rldnt tQ~er,the. Reid Facticm has two appeal~· l<).eriQtng •befq)re the tBl.4dil11imtfl9 td·te ·the legitlma-e ~rrying ·Q~ of the Picayune Rancheria, IBl.A Docket Nos. 13-04$ .and•13-081. · ·

151-52 (1993). '[T)he determination.of tribal leadership is quintessentially an lntra:-tribal matten:aising issues of tribal sovereignty, and therefore the. Department should defer to tribal resoh.,ition of the matter through an appropriate tribal.forum, including the normahlectoraJprocess.' Hamilton, 29 IBIA at 123."

While this Office defers to tribal interpretations of tribal laWSi it has not been possible to ascertain which factions actions are consistent with Tribal Law. There is no dispute thatthe Constitution of the Picayune Reservation, adopted by the Tribe October 22, 1988, istheTr.ibe's supreme governing document. However, the record reflects numerous instances where the Electi.on Ordin·anc:e was amenped by the various compositions of the opposing factions, 10 purportedly in accord.a.nee with the Tribe's Constitution. The record also shows that multiple Tribal Courts were formed by the opposing factions, in attempts to resolve these issues. There is no provision in the Tribe's Constitution or federal law that provides the BIA with the authority to determine which of the opposing factions interpretation ofthe Tribe's law is correct, disputes regarding leadership of Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians are controlled by tribal law, and fa.fl within the excl us Ive jurisdiction o.f the tribe, and BIA does not have the authority to cl~ter:mine the Tribe's permanent leadership. The record does notreflect whether recent tribal.eJectioris were conducted In accordance with tribal governing documents. As such, la/lirm the Superintendent's derision to retum the ISDEAA contract requests of all three factions, and vacate the Superintendent's decision to recognize the results of the December l, 2012, election.

The situation at the Picay.une Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians has deteriorated to a point that recognition of ag<:>vernment is essential forthe purpose .of contracting,under the ISDEAA, and to prevent any furtherhiatus ofthis govemment·to-government relationship wtth the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians. Therefore, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Pacific Region, will conduct business, on an iMterim basis, with th'e last uncontested Tribal Co.uncil11 electe:diDecember2010, consisting of: Dora Jones, Chance Alberta, Jennifer Stanley, Nancy Ayala, Morris Reid, Reggie Lewis, and Nokomis Hernandez, until such time as th.e issue is resolved in accordance with the Tribe's laws. ,

Thelevel of<:onflfctto which thlsdi,sputeordisp1Jtes.have risensJnce the December 2011, election is extremely concerning ttHhis Offi~e, ,In February 20l2it was reP{ortedthat an attemptto take over theTribalOflice by one of thefactipnslecfto vidlence resultihg';in a ~tabblrigofone Individual, and requiring the Ma;deracountl/ She.riff's E>eP'artment t~ .intervene. In Februar:y 2013 it was reported that a f actton occupied the Tribal. Officerthreate n ing viGh~i!l~e wtth respectto anyone who attempted to remove the factton, agalnleadlrig tq interventionbythe'Sheriff's Departmentu. ·In addition to

--------------· ., 10 While this Ofllc~ hat ~et>eived ,a copy ()f two Cif the ve~ions·of the amended EtectiQn Oidtl'laru~e. ·the other \ersions !:lave been addre1sed.·~ the factions in various co•poridence •. (See'S&r>t&nlQfW 10, 2013, letter from Sominique Cemlf(}to the General Membership; January 16, 2P14, memQmndum from Superintendent to . Regional Director; Jan1;1ary,.22,. 2014 · memo~ndum. from· Superint.;nttent to Regional, Of rector; December .16, ·2013, letter from Lewis/Reid Faction to ~egion.~1 Director; Exhibit C)·.. · 11 See Acting Governor Lest~ Warane4•latjo, Cf/eyl!fn,,_ an,f Aia{>aho Trib.~. v, Southem PJ~insRegiorial Director, 5alBIA 121, 124 (2011} . · .· · .. · . . . . · . · . . .. ··· .. 12 As indicated by the february.27, 2013, Sierra Star article titled "Tribal Leadership.Splitttt.Ploayune Rancheria. · · ·

these reports, the dispute over the Tribe's leadership has led to multiple financial hardships includi.ng

reported defaults on loans connected with the Tribe's gaming facility. In addition, many .Fede rat

agencies have been unable to determine with whom to conduct business amidstthe dispute, causing

essential Tribal programs that are funded by the Federal government to cease operation1a, including

the loss of NAHASDA funds. Due to these increasing issues there appears to be several grou.nds for

finding it would be in the public interest to put this decision into immediate effect. As such, I will be

filing a motionwith the IBIA t<? place my decision into immediate effect.

This decision may be appealed to the Interior Board of Indian Appeals, 801 North Quincy Street,

Arlington, Virginia 22203, in accordance with regulations at 43 CFR § 4.310and 4.349. VourNotke of Appeal to the Board must be signed by you or your attorney and must be mailed within 3(}days of the

date you receive this decision. It should clearly identify the decision being appealed. tf possible,

attach a copy of the decision. You must send copies of your Notice o.f Appeal to (1) The Assistant

Secretary- Indian Affairs, 4160 MIB, U.S. Department of the interior, 1849 C Street, N.W .. Washington,

D.C. 20240, (2) each interested party known to you, and (3) this office. Your Notice of .6,ppeal sent to

. the Board of Indian Appeals must certify that you have sent copies to these parties. ff you file a

Notice of Appeal, the Board of Indian Appeals will notify you of further appeal procec;lures. If no

appeal is timely filed, this decision will become final for the Department of the Interior atthe

expiration of the appeal period. No extensions of time may be granted for filing a N~otice of Appeal.

Sincerely,

cc: See AttachedJ;>istribution List

13 See Picayune Rancheria o~Chuk~hansl /ndlan1, ttt al,1. v: $~ B Henriquez, et al, No. CV-13-01917-P.H~CGC, Order, OecembE&r3o, 2013,·atf?egeSl.ine 5 ~

Michael Black, Director Bureau of Indian Affairs

1849 C Street, N.W. MS - 4606 - MIB Washington, DC 20240

Troy Burdick, Superintendent Bureau of Indian Affairs Central California Agency 650 Capital Mall, Suite 8-500 Sacramento, CA 95814

Congressman Jeff Denham United States Congress 1730 Longworth HOB Washington, DC 20515

Congressman Tom Mcclintock United States Congress 434 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515

Carolyn O'Neil, Administrator U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Southwest Office of Native American Programs 1 North Central Avenue, Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85004

John Anderson, Sheriff Madera County Sheriffs Office 14143 Road 28 Madera, CA 93638

Paula Hart, Director Office of Indian Gaming, Indian Affairs MS - 3657..,. MIB 1849 C Street, NW Washington, DC20240

Interior Board of Indian Appeals United States Department of the Interior 801 North Quincy Street, MS 300 QC Arlington, VA 22203

Office of the Solicitor Pacific Southwest Region United States Department of Interior 2800 Cottage Way, Room E-1712 Sacramento, CA 95825

Senator Dianne Feinstein United States Senate 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510

Office of the Governor Edmund G. ·Brown, Jr. ATIN: JacobAppelsrnith, Senior Advisor to the Governor c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173 Sacramento, CA 95814

Denise Zvanovec, Grants Management Officer Management & Technical Services Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 75 Hawthorne Street, M/S ORC•2 San Francisco, CA 94105

Board of Supervisors County of Madera Madera County Government Center 200 West FourthStreet Madera, CA 93637

National Indian Gaming Commission ATIN: Maria Geoff, Senior Attorney 1441. L Street NW; Suite 9100 Washington, DC: 20005