The Citizen
A U.S. Supreme Court case slated for next week could have implications across New York, including Cayuga County, on the issue of Indian nations paying taxes to local municipalities.
Oral arguments will be held before the high court Tuesday in the city of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation case.
The case originated in 1997 after the Oneidas chose not to pay a property tax bill Sherrill issued for land the nation owned within city limits, including a gas station, convenience store and textile factory.
The Oneidas argue that the property is sovereign Indian territory and free of state and local taxes.
The city of Sherrill located in Oneida County, counters that the land, classified as reservation in the 1700s but then sold by the tribe in the 1800s, is no longer sovereign and thus the tribe must pay taxes.
The city of Sherrill appealed the case to the Supreme Court after two lower courts ruled in favor of the Oneida Nation.
Leaders in Cayuga County are hoping the Supreme Court will decide in favor of the city of Sherrill. They also are watching the case closely because of its potential effect the cases between the Cayuga Nation and the village of Union Springs and the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma and the town of Aurelius.
Both Indian groups own land in those communities.
County legislature chairman Herb Marshall said the county is watching the case to see if the Supreme Court feels the tribe has a case or not.
If the court rules in favor of the Oneida Indian Nation, then the land they buy automatically enters reservation status, and "that I think is bad for us," Marshall said. "Then you have no control over what's going on (on Indian-owned land)."
"From a town supervisor's standpoint, obviously if they can just immediately buy land and take it off the tax rolls, especially with a significant income form some of these gambling enterprises, it won't be long before the tax base of the township is eaten up," said Aurelius town supervisor Ed Ide.
Ide said property taxes, sales taxes and excise taxes on cigarettes that help cover the costs of Medicaid would be negatively impacted by a ruling in the favor of the Oneida Nation.
"If you believe in absolute equality, you have to believe we all have the same tax laws liability," said George Fearon, the county legislator who represents the towns of Ledyard, Scipio and Springport.
"I'm confident the city of Sherrill is going to win," said Dick Tallcot, co-chair of the Seneca-Cayuga Upstate Citizens for Equality chapter.
Tallcot said he thought case information cited in amicus brief briefs filed on behalf of the city of Sherrill sets a precedent that will lead the Supreme Court to reverse the lower court rulings. An example of that case law, Tallcot said, is the argument that Congress' constitutional power to declare war cannot be used domestically, and that the 1790 Indian Non-Intercourse Act is a war powers act and thus does not apply in the Sherrill case.
Land claims by historically based New York tribes are based on the argument that the state negotiated treaties and other land agreements in violation of 1790 Indian Non-Intercourse Act requiring federal government approval of all sales and transfers of land from Indian tribes. New York tribes have argued that many of those agreements, in which they gave up their original ancestral lands, are invalid without the requisite federal approval.
Cayuga County filed an amicus brief in the case arguing in support of the city of Sherrill.
The county's attorney for land claim issues, William Dorr, will be attending the oral arguments, Marshall said.
Staff writer Amaris Elliott-Engel can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 282 or at amaris.elliot-engel@lee.net
Oral arguments will be held before the high court Tuesday in the city of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation case.
The case originated in 1997 after the Oneidas chose not to pay a property tax bill Sherrill issued for land the nation owned within city limits, including a gas station, convenience store and textile factory.
The Oneidas argue that the property is sovereign Indian territory and free of state and local taxes.
The city of Sherrill located in Oneida County, counters that the land, classified as reservation in the 1700s but then sold by the tribe in the 1800s, is no longer sovereign and thus the tribe must pay taxes.
The city of Sherrill appealed the case to the Supreme Court after two lower courts ruled in favor of the Oneida Nation.
Leaders in Cayuga County are hoping the Supreme Court will decide in favor of the city of Sherrill. They also are watching the case closely because of its potential effect the cases between the Cayuga Nation and the village of Union Springs and the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma and the town of Aurelius.
Both Indian groups own land in those communities.
County legislature chairman Herb Marshall said the county is watching the case to see if the Supreme Court feels the tribe has a case or not.
If the court rules in favor of the Oneida Indian Nation, then the land they buy automatically enters reservation status, and "that I think is bad for us," Marshall said. "Then you have no control over what's going on (on Indian-owned land)."
"From a town supervisor's standpoint, obviously if they can just immediately buy land and take it off the tax rolls, especially with a significant income form some of these gambling enterprises, it won't be long before the tax base of the township is eaten up," said Aurelius town supervisor Ed Ide.
Ide said property taxes, sales taxes and excise taxes on cigarettes that help cover the costs of Medicaid would be negatively impacted by a ruling in the favor of the Oneida Nation.
"If you believe in absolute equality, you have to believe we all have the same tax laws liability," said George Fearon, the county legislator who represents the towns of Ledyard, Scipio and Springport.
"I'm confident the city of Sherrill is going to win," said Dick Tallcot, co-chair of the Seneca-Cayuga Upstate Citizens for Equality chapter.
Tallcot said he thought case information cited in amicus brief briefs filed on behalf of the city of Sherrill sets a precedent that will lead the Supreme Court to reverse the lower court rulings. An example of that case law, Tallcot said, is the argument that Congress' constitutional power to declare war cannot be used domestically, and that the 1790 Indian Non-Intercourse Act is a war powers act and thus does not apply in the Sherrill case.
Land claims by historically based New York tribes are based on the argument that the state negotiated treaties and other land agreements in violation of 1790 Indian Non-Intercourse Act requiring federal government approval of all sales and transfers of land from Indian tribes. New York tribes have argued that many of those agreements, in which they gave up their original ancestral lands, are invalid without the requisite federal approval.
Cayuga County filed an amicus brief in the case arguing in support of the city of Sherrill.
The county's attorney for land claim issues, William Dorr, will be attending the oral arguments, Marshall said.
Staff writer Amaris Elliott-Engel can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 282 or at amaris.elliot-engel@lee.net
The Citizens' Say
There are No comments posted.