Tribes and States Sue to Block Sale and Removal of National Archives in Seattle

Here is the complaint in State of Washington v. Vought (W.D. Wash.):

1 Complaint

15 Motion for Preliminary Injunction

30 Amended Complaint

32 Opposition

37 Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Proposed Form of Injunctive Relief

40 Reply

News coverage:

Washington AG press release:

Indian Country Today:

Seattle Times:

Spokesman Review:

Yakama Nation press release:

Press Release_YN_OMB_Seattle Archives Lawsuit (1.4.21) (002)

Part-time Associate Judge Position with Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua & Siuslaw Indians

UPDATE (1/27/17): All Submissions will be opened publicly on February 27, 2017 at 9:00 a.m. Final award of the Submission is expected to be made on March 1, 2017.

Download(PDF): Request for Qualifications

All Submissions must be submitted in a sealed envelope clearly marked “Tribal Court Comprehensive Planning Demonstration Program – Facilitator Proposal” on the outside of the envelope. Submissions must be RECEIVED by January 24, 2017 at 12:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, to:

Diane C. Whitson, Tribal Court Administrator
Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua & Siuslaw Indians
1245 Fulton Avenue
Coos Bay, OR 97420

Faxed Submissions will not be accepted. Any Submissions received after the date and time of opening will be rejected and returned unopened to the Submitter.

Oregon COA Affirms Governor’s Authority to Enter into Indian Gaming Compacts

Here are the materials in Dewberry v. Kitzhaber (Or. App.):

Oregon COA Opinion

Appellants Opening Brief

Respondents Joint Answer Brief

Tribal Amicus Brief

Appellants Reply Brief

An excerpt:

In summary, the Oregon legislature authorized the Governor to enter into agreements with tribes to ensure that the state does not infringe on tribal rights under federal laws, such as IGRA. The trial court correctly concluded that the Governor acted lawfully under ORS 190.110 in negotiating and entering into the tribal-state compact with the Tribes.

RFP for Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians


Facilitator and Strategic Plan Drafting Services Related to

Comprehensive Planning Demonstration Program Grant


Proposals due June 14, 2013

Request for Proposals

The Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians (“Tribes”) are requesting proposals (“Tribal Court RFP”) to secure the services of a qualified consultant to perform facilitation and strategic planning services related to a federal Comprehensive Planning Demonstration Program grant to guide the Confederated Tribes’ justice system development to promote community wellness and safety.

A copy of the RFP may be obtained by contacting Diane Whitson, Tribal Court Clerk at (541) 888-1306 or by email at  Signed proposals will be received by the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians until June 14, 2013, at 1245 Fulton Avenue, Coos Bay, Oregon 97420. Proposals received after June 14, 2013, will not be considered



Oregon Trial Court Rules in Favor of Tribes in Gaming Compact Challenge–UPDATED

Here is the circuit court opinion in State ex rel. Dewberry v. Kulongowski: Dewberry Oregon Circuit Ct Opinion.

The court held that over numerous challenges that a Class III gaming compact between the state and the Confederated Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians relating to the so-called “Hatch Tract” was valid.

Commentary on the case from Scott Crowell:

The well-reasoned opinion, attached, ruled in favor of the Coos Tribe and the State on the merits of the two critical questions before it. First, it held that the prohibition in the Oregon Constitution against casinos is a regulation on the manner in which games may be provided,  rather than a prohibition against any type of gaming, and therefore does not apply to Tribes under IGRA. This leaves in tact the state laws that limit the Lottery games such that gaming cannot be the primary business in taverns, racetracks etc. Second, the court held that the Governor has the authority under both the Oregon Constitution and Oregon statutory law to execute and bind the State to the compact agreements. This is a major victory in that it is the first court case among several brought against compacts in other states that did not opine that the State Legislature must ratify the compacts before they are binding. Tribes in other states have been extorted into paying large fees to state coffers in order to get through the politics of legislative ratification.