California Attorney General Rob Bonta has submitted an amicus brief to the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, in support of the Koi Nation in the case of Koi Nation v. Clearlake. The legal dispute centers on a proposed hotel site that the Koi Nation claims contains significant tribal cultural resources. The tribe asserts that the City of Clearlake did not adequately consult with them or consider the project's impacts on these resources, thereby violating the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its tribal consultation requirements established by Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52). A trial court previously ruled against the Koi Nation, stating they had not properly requested consultation and that the City fulfilled its CEQA obligations.
Attorney General Bonta emphasized the significance of preserving tribal cultural resources in areas inhabited by Native American tribes. "Preserving tribal cultural resources is critically important in the Clearlake area where Native American tribes call home," he stated. "With today’s amicus brief, we urge the Court not to impose additional barriers to tribes seeking consultation that do not exist and are inconsistent with AB 52."
The Koi Nation Tribal Council expressed their commitment to protecting ancestral remains and funerary objects dating back 20,000 years within their region. "We feel AB 52 was created to assist in these endeavors and when the law isn’t being followed we must allow the voices of the ancestors to be heard," they said. "It’s with deep gratitude that our efforts are supported by Attorney General Bonta and the AG’s office on this historic case."
In October 2023, Attorney General Bonta filed a similar amicus brief at the trial court level supporting the Koi Nation's position. He argued that Clearlake did not conduct adequate consultations or consider potential impacts on tribal cultural resources when approving a proposed 75-room hotel development known as Airport Hotel and 18th Avenue Extension.
The latest amicus brief underscores several key points regarding AB 52:
1. Courts should avoid imposing additional barriers for tribes requesting consultations under AB 52.
2. CEQA mandates lead agencies to assess whether a resource is significant to tribes before classifying it as a “tribal cultural resource.”
3. Once identified as a tribal cultural resource, lead agencies must incorporate tribal expertise and input when evaluating project impacts.
Bonta contends that Clearlake relied solely on an archaeological study without sufficient input from tribal experts, thus failing to comply with CEQA.
A copy of the amicus brief can be accessed here.