PDF(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)Tip?
104th Congress Rept. 104-439
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session Part 1
_______________________________________________________________________
SADDLEBACK MOUNTAIN-ARIZONA SETTLEMENT ACT OF 1995
_______
December 21, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1341]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the Act
(S. 1341) to provide for the transfer of certain lands to the
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community and the city of
Scottsdale, Arizona, and for other purposes, having considered
the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and
recommend that the Act do pass.
purpose of the bill
The purpose of S. 1341 is to provide for the transfer of
certain lands to the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community
and the city of Scottsdale, Arizona.
background and need for legislation
S. 1341, the proposed Saddleback Mountain-Arizona
Settlement Act of 1995, ratifies a land settlement agreement
between the Resolution Trust Corporation, the City of
Scottsdale, and the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community.
The land in question, 701 acres currently held by the
Resolution Trust Corporation, would be disposed of as follows:
One 27-acre tract and one 98-acre tract would be
purchased by the City of Scottsdale; and
One 211-acre tract and one 365-acre tract would be
purchased by the Tribe;
Pending litigation between the parties would be dismissed
and each of the four tracts would be administered according to
a detailed ownership, development, and use agreement.
Finally, S. 1341 provides that the land purchased by the
Tribe will be taken into trust and become part of the Salt
River Reservation.
committee action
S. 1341 was introduced on October 19, 1995, by Senator John
McCain. The bill was passed by the Senate on November 29, 1995.
In the House of Representatives, the bill was referred to the
Committee on Resources and the Committee on Banking and
Financial Services. With the Committee on Resources, the bill
was referred to the Subcommittee on Native American and Insular
Affairs.
On November 14, 1995 the Subcommittee on Native American
and Insular Affairs held a hearing on a similar bill, H.R.
2490, introduced by Congressman J.D. Hayworth on October 17,
1995.
On December 13, 1995, the Full Resources Committee met to
consider S. 1341. The bill was discharged by unanimous consent
from Subcommittee. No amendments were offered. S. 1341 was
ordered favorably reported by voice vote to the House of
Representatives.
section-by-section analysis
Section 1. Short title
This section states that this Act may be cited as the
``Saddleback Mountain-Arizona Settlement Act of 1995''.
Section 2. Congressional findings and purposes
Subsection (a) sets forth findings for the bill. Subsection
(b) sets forth the purposes of the bill.
Section 3. Definitions
This section provides definitions for 12 terms used in the
bill.
Section 4. Approval of agreement
This section states that the Settlement Agreement is
approved and ratified and shall be fully enforceable in
accordance with the terms and the provisions of this Act.
Section 5. Transfer of properties
Subsection (a) provides that the Resolution Trust
Corporation shall transfer: (1) to the Secretary of the
Interior the Mountain Property and the Development Property
purchased by the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community; and
(2) to the City of Scottsdale, the Preservation Property and
the Dedication Property purchased by the City, upon
satisfaction of all conditions of closing set forth in the
Settlement Agreement.
Subsection (b) provides that the Mountain Property and the
Development Property transferred to the Salt River Pima-
Maricopa Indian Community shall, subject to sections 6 and 7,
be held in trust by the United States for the Community and
become part of the Community's Reservation.
Subsection (c) provides that, upon satisfaction of all
conditions of closing set forth in the Settlement Agreement,
the Secretary shall file surveys depicting the various
properties with the office of the Maricopa County Recorder and
the Titles and Records Center of the Bureau of Indian Affairs
in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Section 6. Limitations on use and development
This section provides that upon the satisfaction of all of
the conditions of closing set forth in the Settlement
Agreement, the properties to be transferred to the City and the
Community pursuant to section 5 shall be subject to the
following limitations:
(1) the Preservation Property shall be forever
preserved in its natural state for use only as a public
park or recreation area that shall be used, maintained,
and subject to section 4(C) of the Settlement
Agreement, except that, at the sole discretion of the
City, a portion of the Preservation Property (the
Dedication Property) may be used to widen, reconfigure,
repair or reengineer Shea Boulevard in accordance with
section 4(D) of the Settlement Agreement;
(2) the Dedication Property shall be used to widen,
reconfigure, repair or reengineer Shea Boulevard and
136th Street, in accordance with sections 4(D) and 7 of
the Settlement Agreement;
(3) the Mountain Property shall be forever preserved
in its natural state for use only as a public park or
recreation area that shall be used, maintained, and
subject to the restrictions set forth in section 5(C)
of the Settlement Agreement; and
(4) the Development Property shall be used and
developed for the economic benefit of the Community in
accordance with the provisions of the Settlement
Agreement and the Development Agreement.
Section 7. Amendments to the settlement agreement
This section provides that no amendment made to the
Settlement Agreement (including any deviation from an approved
plan described in section 9(B) of the Settlement Agreement)
shall become effective unless the amendment is made in
accordance with the applicable requirements under sections 9(B)
and 34 of the Settlement Agreement and is consistent with the
provisions of this Act.
committee oversight findings and recommendations
With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of rule
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the Committee on Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
inflationary impact statement
Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee estimates that the
enactment of S. 1341 will have no significant inflationary
impact on prices and costs in the operation of the national
economy.
cost of the legislation
Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out
S. 1341. However, clause 7(d) of that rule provides that this
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
compliance with house rule xi
1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, S. 1341
does not contain any new budget authority, spending authority,
credit authority, or an increase or decrease in tax
expenditures. S. 1341 will result in an increase in revenues to
the Federal Government in Fiscal Year 1996, but this increase
would be offset by a similar revenue loss in the future.
2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and
Oversight on the subject of S. 1341.
3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
Committee has received the following cost estimate for S. 1341
from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
congressional budget office cost estimate
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, December 18, 1995.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
reviewed S. 1341, the Saddleback Mountain-Arizona Settlement
Act of 1995, as ordered reported by the House Committee on
Resources on December 13, 1995. S. 1341 would ratify a
settlement agreement that would transfer 701 acres from the
Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) to the Salt River Pima-
Maricopa Indian Community (to be held in trust by the
Department of the Interior) and the city of Scottsdale,
Arizona. Under the settlement agreement, the Salt River
Community and the city of Scottsdale have agreed to pay the RTC
a total of $6.5 million, which would be offsetting collections
to the federal government. We estimate that enacting S. 1341
would increase federal collections to the federal government.
We estimate that enacting S. 1341 would increase federal
collections by $6.5 million in fiscal year 1996, but that such
collections would be offset by a loss of a similar amount some
time over the next several years.
Based on information from the RTC, CBO expects that the
land would not be sold in the near term in the absence of the
act. We cannot predict the timing or price of such a sale under
current law, but we expect that the land would be sold
eventually even without this legislation. Hence, CBO estimates
that enacting S. 1341 would increase offsetting collections to
the RTC by $6.5 million in fiscal year 1996, thus reducing RTC
outlays by that amount, but over time, there would be no
significant net budgetary impact.
The receipts obtained in 1996 would constitute proceeds
from a non-routine asset sale. As a result, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply to the legislation. Under the 1996
budget resolution, proceeds from asset sales are counted in the
budget totals for purposes of Congressional scoring. Under the
Balanced Budget Act, however, proceeds from asset sales are not
counted in determining compliance with pay-as-you-go
requirements.
In addition to authorizing the transfer of land, S. 1341
also would clarify limitations on the use of the lands. For
example, the city of Scottsdale would be permitted to extend
and repair certain streets on its land, and part of the
property transferred to the Salt River Community would be held
forever as park or recreation lands. Other than the payments
from the Salt River Community and the city of Scottsdale to the
RTC, S. 1341 would not significantly affect the budgets of
state or local governments.
On November 16, 1995, CBO prepared a cost estimate for S.
1341, the Saddleback Mountain-Arizona Settlement Act of 1995,
as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
on November 7, 1995. The two estimates are identical.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Rachel
Robertson.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill, Director.
changes in existing law
If enacted, S. 1341 would make no changes in existing law.
departmental reports
The Committee has received no departmental reports on S.
1341.
A P P E N D I X
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Banking and Financial Services,
Washington, DC, December 14, 1995.
Hon. Newt Gingrich,
Speaker, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: I am writing concerning S. 1341, the
Saddleback Mountain-Arizona Settlement Act of 1995, which was
ordered to be reported by the Committee on Resources on
December 13, 1995. This legislation has been sequentially
referred to the Committee on Banking and Financial Services.
In 1989 the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) acquired the
Saddleback Property as receiver. After the Saddleback Property
was noticed for sale by the RTC, a dispute between the Pima-
Maricopa Indian Community and the City of Scottsdale, Arizona
arose concerning the future ownership, use, and development of
the Saddleback Property. The Community and the City each filed
litigation with respect to the dispute, but after months of
negotiation an agreement was reached. The agreement, signed on
September 11, 1995, includes a provision that it must be
ratified by Congress within 180 days or it is no longer
binding. S. 1341 would approve and ratify that agreement.
Based on the need for timely consideration of this
legislation, the Committee on Banking and Financial Services
waives consideration of S. 1341 and requests to be discharged
without prejudice from further consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
James A. Leach, Chairman.
