112 STAT. 2932 PUBLIC LAW 105-308 —OCT. 30, 1998 Public Law 105-308 105th Congress An Act Oct. 30, 1998 To remove the restriction on the distribution of certain revenues from the Mineral [H R 700] Springs parcel to certain members of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 25 USC 951 note. SECTION 1. FINDINGS. Congress finds that— (1) among its purposes, the Act entitled "An Act to provide for the equalization of allotments on the Agua Caliente (Palm Springs) Reservation in California, and for other purposes", approved September 21, 1959, commonly known as the "Agua Caliente Equalization Act of 1959" (25 U.S.C. 951 et seq.) (referred to in this section as the "Act") was intended to provide for a reasonable degree of equalization of the value of allotments made to members of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians; (2) the Act was enacted in response to litigation in Federal courts in Segundo, et al. v. United States, 123 F. Supp. 554 (1954); (3) the case referred to in paragraph (2) was appealed under the case name United States v. Pierce, 235 F. 2d 885 (1956) and that case affirmed the entitlement of certain members of the Band to allotments of approximately equal value to lands allotted to other members of the Band; (4)(A) to achieve the equalization referred to in paragraph (3), section 3 of the Act (25 U.S.C. 953) provided for the allotment or sale of all remaining tribal lands, with the exception of several specifically designated parcels, including 2 parcels in the Mineral Springs area known as parcel A and parcel B; (B) section 3 of the Act restricted the distribution of any net rents, profits, or other revenues derived from parcel B to members of the Band and their heirs entitled to equalization of the value of the allotments of those members; (C) from 1959 through 1984, each annual budget of the Band, as approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, provided for expenditure of all revenues derived from both parcel A and parcel B solely for tribal governmental purposes; and (D) as a result of the annual budgets referred to in subparagraph (C), no net revenues from parcel B were available for distribution to tribal members entitled to equalization under section 3 of the Act referred to in paragraph (1); (5) by letter of December 6, 1961, the Director of the Sacramento Area Office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs
�
