180 likes | 318 Views
Land As A Community Asset. For the Year Ending December 31, 2004 Presented by: Christine McPherson ACFS Division Director Asset Building: The Perspectives of People of Color Convened by the National Economic Development & Law Center Tuskegee, Alabama, October 2 – 4, 2005
E N D
Land As A Community Asset For the Year Ending December 31, 2004 Presented by: Christine McPherson ACFS Division Director Asset Building: The Perspectives of People of Color Convened by the National Economic Development & Law Center Tuskegee, Alabama, October 2 – 4, 2005 Funded by the Ford Foundation
Policy Statement It is the policy of the Sault Tribe to acquire and manage property or lands for purposes consistent with the Tribal Vision of self-sufficiency. Authorization for dealing with property matters is vested with the Tribal Board of Directors as declared within the Tribal Constitution, Article VII - Powers, Section 1(k) “As authorized by law, to manage, lease, sell, acquire, or otherwise deal with tribal lands, interest in lands and water, or other tribal assets.”
Purposes for Acquiring Property • Governmental Use - health & human services, education, fishing, etc. • Community Development - housing, community centers, etc. • Economic Development - casino and non-gaming related • Expansion of Land Base - increase land holdings for future use
Tribal Land Holdings by Use Member Services EDC Tribal School Housing & Residential Chi Mukwa Fisheries Vacant Casino & Adjacent
Housing Sites Summary(Government Programs) *Kinross acreage included with DeMawating. **St. Ignace and ***Hessel include health and community centers, and casinos.
Housing Sites Summary(Enterprise) SUMMARY: • 10 Housing Sites in 7 Counties with 477 Units on 696 Acres • 3 Enterprise Housing Sites in 2 Counties with 478 Units • Total of 13 Housing Sites and 955 Units on 820 Acres
Acquisition/Disposition Process • Acquisitions begin under one of the two following scenarios: • A need for land or facility for a specific purpose is identified and a search is conducted to fit the request. • A property proposal is received and reviewed for consistency with Tribal demands. • Due Diligence and Purchase: • Property Appraisal • Environmental Audit • Property Survey • Title Policy • Zoning/Permitted Use Verification • If Business, additional due diligence • Tribal Board Resolution authorizing purchase and financing, if applicable • Closing and Recording
Michigan Tribes Trust Land Holdings Source: BIA Michigan Field Office
Michigan Tribes Trust Land & Membership Ratios NOTE: There are 36,350,000+/- acres of land in the State of Michigan. Source: BIA Michigan Field Office - 02/17/04
Common Misperceptions About Tribal Land Ownership • All land that the Tribe owns is held in trust status. • FALSE.The Tribe acquires property in fee and submits an application for trust status to the Bureau of Indian Affairs through an administrative process. • A Tribe can put a casino on any property it owns, regardless of land status, where it’s located or when it’s purchased. • FALSE.With limited exceptions, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) effectively restricts gaming activities to lands held in trust prior to 1988.
Common Misperceptions About Tribal Land Ownership • When a Tribe owns property it does not have to comply with local zoning, regulations and other ordinances. • FALSE.All property the Tribe owns in fee is subject to the same regulations as any other property owner would be. In fact, local governments often apply a higher standard to tribally owned property than they do ordinary citizens. All property the Tribe has in trust is subject to Tribal Ordinances and all applicable federal regulations.
Common Misperceptions About Tribal Land Ownership • When the Tribe buys property, it does not have to pay any property taxes. • FALSE. The Tribe pays property taxes on all property owned in fee, and payments-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILT or PILOT) for most property it has in trust. In addition, the gaming compact with the State of Michigan requires that local impact funds (2% payments) not be less than the local body would receive if the property were subject to taxation.