Politics

Lawmakers Seek to Wrap up Costly Tribal Relocation Program

Published

11 years ago

February 9, 2015

This Saturday, Jan. 24, 2015 photo provided by Ron Lee, Office of Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick shows Democratic U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona, right, speaks with tribal members on the Hopi reservation in northeastern Arizona. (AP Photo/Office of Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, Ron Lee)

Felicia Fonseca, ASSOCIATED PRESS

FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. (AP) — The rolling hills of northeastern Arizona where cornfields lined a watering hole and sheep grazed in the distance were home to Susie Robinson and her extended family. When she moved farther east into a new four-bedroom home, it wasn’t by choice but the result of a bitter land dispute between the Navajo and Hopi tribes that dates back centuries.

The federal government’s attempt to have these tribes share land failed miserably, leading to one of the largest single relocation efforts in U.S. history. Thousands of Navajos have been transplanted into new homes off Hopi land, while dozens of Hopis have been moved off Navajo land.

Federal officials are trying to figure out how best to wrap up the work of the relocation program that has exceeded its original $41 million price tag by more than $500 million and dragged on decades longer than planned. The effort threatens to get even costlier with many people still awaiting new housing.

“I want to move this forward,” said Republican U.S. Rep. Ken Calvert of California, who recently visited the reservations with other congressional delegates to hear from tribal leaders on the matter. “The relocation program was never intended to be carried on in perpetuity.”

The Office of Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation was established by Congress in the years after the neighboring tribes were assigned reservations. It underlines a history of animosity between the Navajo and Hopi that has included threats of violence over property and clashes over cultural, business and political views.

Land is the most contentious issue.

The Navajo and Hopi tribes have occupied the same territory for centuries, though Navajos tended to be more nomadic sheepherders and Hopis mostly resided on three mesas towering above the surrounding desert.

In 1882, President Chester Arthur designated 2.4 million acres in Arizona for the Hopi Tribe and other Indians. Hopis outnumbered Navajos six to one on the land, but the Navajo population grew over time.

The federal government later gave the tribes the OK to sue over the land, and the Hopis responded in 1958 by seeking sole control of it. Four years later, a federal court deemed 1.8 million acres a joint-use area.

But the tribes were not amenable to sharing the land and, ultimately, Congress divided it and ordered tribal members to leave each other’s reservations. The Navajo Nation — the country’s largest reservation at 27,000 square miles — now completely surrounds the 2,500-square-mile Hopi reservation.

When the federal government proposed relocation, some Navajos armed themselves and threatened bloodshed if anyone tried to move them.

About a handful of Navajos who refused to leave Hopi land still live there under Hopi jurisdiction. Tensions run high at times, particularly over livestock grazing. The Hopi Tribe seized sheep from Navajos last year to preserve the vegetation.

The two tribes also have clashed in other areas. Until recently, they refused to be in the same congressional district. The Hopi Tribe also has been fighting a proposal for the Navajo Nation to build an aerial tram into the Grand Canyon.

“The relocation basically was a very traumatic experience for Navajo families who were directly affected,” Navajo lawmaker Walter Phelps said. “But it was also a very traumatic experience politically that has a certain amount of impact on the relationship between the tribes and the federal government.”

Still, the relocation program mushroomed, with the number of people eligible for housing benefits almost four times higher than expected.

In all, more than 7,200 heads of household have sought relocation benefits, representing 16,386 people. The relocation office has approved more than half of those applications.

The program was slated to end in 1986, but Navajo opposition to relocation early on and a shortage of suitable land to build houses helped prolong it.

Today, about 120 Navajos still await homes, 300 administrative appeals are pending, and eligibility is being determined on 65 applications, according to a recent report from the Interior Department’s Office of Inspector General. The program’s cost could go up another $35 million to $82 million once those applications and appeals are settled.

Robinson moved into her new, stucco house on a 1-acre plot in 1985. It was much larger than the two-room house she shared with her mother growing up. But the windows, foundation and stucco started cracking within a year, and she doesn’t have the sheep, cornfields, watering holes or ceremonial hogan she had as a child.

For Robinson, the relocation house isn’t home.

“I still miss my old place,” said the 60-year-old teacher who works with special education students at a school on the Hopi reservation. “If I were to get that piece of land back, I would be there in a heartbeat.”

About a dozen Hopi families relocated to a community called Spider Mound on the Hopi reservation. They have decried the lack of paved roads, running water, electricity and fire suppression that the Hopi chairman’s office said they were promised.

The delegation from the U.S. House Appropriations subcommittee that Calvert chairs said it saw an obvious need to address areas of disrepair but wasn’t sure that would be covered by the relocation program.

The relocation effort could be completed faster with legislative changes that could include a cash payout instead of a new home, or an increase in annual appropriations, the Office of Inspector General report said.

Democratic Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, whose district includes the Navajo and Hopi reservations, said she would work with the subcommittee to ensure the federal government meets its obligation to the tribes.

“They heard from a lot of concerned people who are relocates who spoke very eloquently about their conditions of living and how desperate the situation is,” she said.
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

###

Reporter II

Posts by Reporter II

Related Topics:Arizona Indian Country Native Americans

Up Next

Community Members Question Coliseum City

Don't Miss

Lawmakers Seek to Wrap up Costly Tribal Relocation Program

Reporter II

Click to comment

Activism

Marin City Public Housing Residents Demand a Voice in County’s Renovation Plans

Representation has been a continuous struggle for the Residents Council, she said in an interview with the Post News Group. In 2014, the tenants took the county to federal court over this issue, and prevailed, resulting in an MOU that was in effect from 2014 to 2024, said McLemore. “Now, they are not responding to our rightful requests to participate. They are not giving us a legal justification for their position.”

Published

4 days ago

May 10, 2026

Oakland Post

The largest housing complex in Marin County, Golden Gate Village residents are for predominantly Black and low-income. Courtesy image.

Tenants say the County of Marin is ignoring federal law requiring resident council participation

By Ken Epstein

Marin City public housing residents say the County is illegally depriving them of their rights to participate in renovation decisions that affect the future of their housing, raising deep concerns over whether the county ultimately will find a way to displace them.

According to regulations established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Marin City public housing residents have the right to organize, elect resident councils, and hold public housing agencies accountable for involving them in management decisions.

Without resident participation, the Board of Housing Commissioners, made up of the five Marin County Board of Supervisors and two resident comissioners, has approved a $226 million project. The plan calls for renovation of the 296 units in Golden Gate Village (GGV) and focuses on interior improvements. The project is scheduled to start in July.

Residents’ concerns have a long history, said Royce McLemore, president of the Golden Gate Village Residents Council and a 50-year resident of Marin City,

With no current MOU mandating training and participation of residents, the legal basis for all the redevelopment decisions made by the county since 2024 is questionable, said Terrie Green, executive director of Marin City Climate Resilience. “We are experiencing voicelessness. If residents had a voice, we wouldn’t be where we are today,” she said.

County decisions include a plan, in line with federal regulations, to convert GGV from public housing to a public-private enterprise that allows for private investment. The Marin Housing Authority has created a limited partnership that includes Burbank Housing – which will renovate the units and manage the property – and Wells Fargo Bank, the investor.

This change in federal policy regarding public housing, which includes a shift to a Section-8 voucher system, has resulted in gentrification across the country, particularly affecting African Americans in cities such as San Francisco.

Shifts in criteria of what is considered affordable could also end up pricing residents out of their living units. At present, low income in Marin County is officially considered $156,000. But the median household income in Marin City is significantly lower at $68,846.

Damian Morgan, a community advocate with Marin City Climate Resilience, questioned why the county is renovating apartments without fixing toxic infrastructure that is impacting the lives of people in GGV.

Morgan said tenants have filed a class action lawsuit because of unsafe conditions at Golden Gate Village.

Residents are also concerned that the County still does not have an adequate family plan for temporary displacement while their apartments are being renovated. Although the County has suggested other community apartments as alternatives, nothing concrete has developed except vacant public housing units that have the same toxic conditions, such as mold and mildew.

Green said it doesn’t make sense. “…Why are we moving people around into temporary housing that’s uninhabitable, when you should be dealing first with the infrastructure, the foundational work, replacing old and rusted water pipes and new sewers.”

Morgan questions the County’s motivation for neglecting infrastructure repairs. “They’re remodeling the units but leaving the decayed infrastructure in place. I feel like they’re just setting this up for it to fail.”

“What slowed it down a little is that GGV is a historic preservation district, but I think what they’re striving for is demolition by neglect,” he said. “The neglect has always been on their part.”

Architect Ora Hatheway said her concern is about cutting corners. “You have to deal with the land issues. You have to deal with grading and drainage, and that’s being brushed under the rug.”

In an interview with KGO TV, Marin County Supervisor Stephanie Moulton-Peters responded to some of these concerns. She said residents are guaranteed the right to return to their homes.

“This is a concern that we take seriously,” she said. “Every resident will move back into their own unit, and we’ve given this to them in writing. Before they leave their unit, we will sign a document together that guarantees their right to return.”

In response to residents who feel left out of the planning process, she said community input has focused on those affected by the first phase of the project. “So other residents may not have heard quite as much or felt like they had as much contact. But if there are residents who have concerns, we’re happy to hear from them. You can contact my office or the housing authority directly,” she said.

While County leaders may be giving some updates to some tenants, they are not sitting at the table with the Residents Council nor giving residents a voice in decision-making, said McLemore.

Without a voice in decisions, tenants are worried that Black people may be forced out of public housing, resulting in gentrification, she said in an interview with ABC 7. It’s still paternalistic, she said. “It’s still that ‘We know what’s best for you.’’’

Several years ago, the Residents Council proposed a land trust plan that would give tenants homeownership rights. Though the plan had broad support throughout the county, it was rejected by the Board of Supervisors

In the final analysis, Green said, for Marin City tenants the fight is not just for decent housing but to maintain their community with dignity under conditions of mutual respect.

“We’re talking about people who came here to work in the shipyards during World War II to bring about peace and safety to this country,” she said. “Look at the discrimination we’ve faced down through the years. Look at the life-span issue of Marin City folks – almost 20 years less than the rest of the County.”

“We want educational equity so our children will have decent schools. We need a land trust, property ownership, so we can have wealth creation. Marin City needs the same quality of life as other communities in Marin County.”

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of May 6 – 12, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of may 6 – 12, 2026

Published

4 days ago

May 10, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

On the Frontlines of Hate: NAACP Links Victims to Critical Support

The NAACP CA/HI has a long and well-established record of supporting victims of discrimination and hate crimes — providing critical referrals and, when necessary, direct assistance through legal advocacy and other forms of support. Beyond responding to incidents, the organization continues to advocate on broader civil rights issues, including voting rights and legal protections. It has also worked to counter efforts at the state and federal levels that could weaken the voting power of communities of color.

Published

2 weeks ago

May 1, 2026

Oakland Post

NAACP members at a recent advocacy day in Sacramento urging lawmakers to protect voting rights. Photo courtesy of California Black Media.

By Joe Kocurek
California Black Media

The California/Hawaii State Conference of the NAACP (CA/HI NAACP) has expanded its efforts to respond to rising hate incidents and civil rights complaints across California, supported in part by funding from California’s Stop the Hate Program

Through that grant, NAACP CA/HI has strengthened its ability to connect individuals experiencing hate or discrimination with critical resources. This includes referring those who file complaints to the CA vs Hate hotline, a statewide, non-emergency hate crime and incident reporting hotline and online portal created to help counter a more than 50% increase in reported hate crimes in California between 2020 and 2024. The system helps ensure incidents are documented, and victims are guided toward appropriate support.

LaJuana Bivens says the work of NAACP is as urgent as ever. Photo by Regina Wilson, California Black Media.

LaJuana Bivens, who has served in a number of roles within the NAACP, said California has seen an increase in civil rights violations and hate-related incidents.

“We have 52 branches, and they are constantly receiving complaints,” she said. “So, without the Stop the Hate, we would not be able to refer those cases up to attorneys at the state level. A lot of the people would not have had an opportunity to be heard.”

Carmen-Nicole Cox helps survivors of hate with their legal options. Photo courtesy of Carmen-Nicole Cox.

Carmen-Nicole Cox, an attorney who works with NAACP CA/HI – as a part of California’s Stop the Hate Program – provides legal consultation to victims of hate incidents and discrimination through her legal practice, the Cox Firm for Law and Policy.

She said the complaints she receives span a wide range of issues.

“People are having home builders and landlords refusing to provide repairs, a student was denied promotion in an academic program, and targeted scrutiny at work,” she said. “It’s typically employment; it’s housing; it’s education.

“We’ll meet and they’ll share their experiences,” she said. “And then I make assessments about possible legal claims.”

According to the California Civil Rights Department (CRD), nearly 1,200 reports of hate against minority groups were submitted in 2024 through the CA vs Hate hotline and online portal for non-emergency incidents.

While the California/Hawaii State Conference of the NAACP, which has tens of thousands of members, does not directly investigate hate incidents or crimes, it plays a key role in connecting victims to the state’s reporting systems and support services.

Beyond responding to incidents, the organization continues to advocate on broader civil rights issues, including voting rights and legal protections. It has also worked to counter efforts at the state and federal levels that could weaken the voting power of communities of color.

Bivens recently traveled to Sacramento to speak with state lawmakers about voting rights during an advocacy day event hosted by the organization.

“It’s just so hard for communities of color to be up to date because of all of the confusing information coming from the federal level,” she said. “I love our great state of California because here it is possible to vote by mail and to vote early.

“And I’m seeing that trying to be eroded. So, I’m here to urge continued support for vote by mail and early voting.”

When Texas moved to redraw congressional districts in ways critics said would dilute minority voting strength, NAACP CA/HI supported the passage of Proposition 50 in California. The organization also intervened in United States v. Shirley Weber, where federal officials sought access to unredacted California voter records, including Social Security numbers, raising concerns about misuse and voter intimidation.

Cultivating the advocacy and leaderships of young people is central to NAACP’s mission to fight racism and dismantle inequality. Photo courtesy of California Black Media.

A federal district court dismissed that case in January 2026.

The organization’s current work builds on a long history of civil rights advocacy. Today, Bivens says, the organization’s mission remains as urgent as ever.

“We are the oldest, boldest, most feared Civil Rights organization,” Bivens said. “What we do every day is fight for better housing, education, economic development and political inclusion. We take it on because there are just so many people who need that support.

“You would be amazed that our phones ring every single day.”

Get Support After Hate:

California vs Hate is a non-emergency, multilingual hotline and online portal offering confidential support for hate crimes and incidents. Victims and witnesses can get help anonymously by calling 833-8-NO-HATE (833-866-4283), Monday to Friday, 9 a.m.–6 p.m. PT, or online at any time. Anonymous. Confidential. No Police. No ICE.

This story was produced in partnership with CA vs Hate. Join them for the first-ever CA Civil Rights Summit on May 11. More information at www.cavshate.org/summit.

https://youtu.be/_k7UVhI-sN8