<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>BDR LAW</title>
	<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com</link>
	<description>Bledsoe Downes &#38; Rosier, PC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 21:18:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	<!-- generator="WordPress/3.0.1" -->

	<item>
		<title>BDR TEDB Comment Post</title>
		<description><![CDATA[U.S. Department of Treasury Seeks Comments on Tribal Economic Development Bonds On July 12, 2010, the Department of the Treasury (“Department”) published in the Federal Register a notice and request (“Notice”) for comments regarding tribal economic development bonds (“TEDBs”).  The request was issued pursuant to a directive in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”) [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2010/08/23/bdr-tedb-comment-post/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>BDR NIGC Consultation Post</title>
		<description><![CDATA[NIGC Consultation At the end of June 2010, the National Indian Gaming Commission sent a letter to Tribal leaders seeking comments regarding: 1) how to improve the existing tribal consultation policy; 2) the NIGC’s draft NEPA manual; and 3) the NIGC records retention policy. The NIGC is conducting consultations in California on July 29 and [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2010/08/23/bdr-nigc-consultation-post/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Congress Passes Tribal Law and Order Act</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Congress passed the Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA) on July 21, 2010, and the President is expected to sign it into law. This legislation seeks to reform the justice system in Indian country by establishing accountability measures for federal agencies responsible for law enforcement in Indian country and by providing tribes with tools to [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2010/08/23/congress-passes-tribal-law-and-order-act/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>County of San Diego v. Barona TGA</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control did not proceed in a manner contrary to law or in excess of its jurisdiction when it directed an administrative law judge, who was not a judge with the Office of Administrative Hearings, to hear and decide protests against casino&#8217;s liquor license application because Business and Professions Code Sec. 24210 [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2010/05/07/county-of-san-diego-v-alcoholic-beverage-control-appeals-board/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Parchester Village Neighborhood Council v. City of Richmond</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Indian tribe’s casino development did not constitute a &#8220;project&#8221; of city—which entered into municipal services agreement with tribe—under the California Environmental Quality Act where the city had no legal authority over the property upon which the casino was to be situated, and agreement by city to support tribe’s efforts to acquire the land for the [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2010/03/01/parchester-village-neighborhood-council-v-city-of-richmond/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Salt River Tribe to add Courtyard Marriott</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The development arm of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community announced plans this week to build a 156-room Marriott hotel, the first ever for the company on U.S. tribal land. Salt River Devco is developing a hotel site southeast of Pima Road and McDonald Drive adjacent to the Chaparral Business Center. Marriott International will operate [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2010/02/28/salt-river-tribe-to-add-courtyard-marriott/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Disenrollment is not a detention under ICRA</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Disenrollment of plaintiffs from Indian tribe, which resulted in a loss of access to certain facilities, did not pose a severe restraint on plaintiffs’ liberty and therefore did not amount to a detention. Alleged potential threat of future eviction was also insufficient. As federal appellate court lacked jurisdiction to review direct appeals of tribal disenrollment [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2009/12/28/disenrollment-is-not-a-detention-under-icra/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Robinson v. US, No. 07-17052</title>
		<description><![CDATA[November 9, 2009: In an action against the U.S. for encroachment onto plaintiffs&#8217; easement, the dismissal of the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Quiet Title Act is vacated where the district court needed to determine whether plaintiffs could assert jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Claims Act. This case involves land held [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2009/12/02/robinson-v-us-no-07-17052-9th-cir-nov-2-2009/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Gov. Schwarzenegger Signs Compact with the Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Courtesy of CA Governors office: Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today announced the signing of a compact with the Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake, located in Lake County. The compact follows a similar blueprint of the compacts Governor Schwarzenegger has previously negotiated in that it provides important benefits to the state, protects both employees and patrons and [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2009/09/13/gov-schwarzenegger-signs-compact-with-the-habematolel-pomo-of-upper-lake/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Tribal Economic Development Bonds</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Tribal Economic Development Bonds – Section 1402 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”) provides for allocation of $2 billion for tribal economic development bonds.  Tribes are eligible to apply for the first allocation of $1 billion under the ARRA for projects not exceeding $30 million for a broad range of governmental projects to [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.bdrlaw.com/2009/06/24/tribal-economic-development-bonds/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>
