TAKE ACTION TODAY! Chief Red Eagle opposes the ‘Eagle Take’ permit from the wind developer and is urging Osage tribal members to speak out against wind farm. See the article at http://osagenews.org/article/chief-red-eagle-opposes-‘eagle-take’-permit-wind-developer "The Nation is urging tribal members to voice their concerns to Jerry Thompson, Chief of the USFWS Migratory Bird Permits Office, at jerry_e_thompson@fws.gov or by phone at (505) 248-6406."
View article, Osage Nation officials take cultural stand against eagle kill permit at: http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Osage_Nation_officials_take_cultural_stand_against/20130624_11_A1_Thegov591184
VERY Interesting comment posted at the Facebook page of the Bigheart Times at https://www.facebook.com/pages/Bigheart-Times/130472647019594 under Recent Posts by Others on Bigheart Times: by Fred Wightman--"Louise, I can't message you guys. Would your husband still be interested in the wind tower pole? I was able to find a mounting ring with studs from Ion Solar here in Tulsa that would allow you guys to set the ring in concrete with rebar to secure the tower to the base. The tower will need to be dropped and John Miggins here in Tulsa has the unit that allows people to lower towers and erect them. I have numbers and contact information for both of these. If you are going to set a wind turbine on this pole, you will need to have the exact configuration of the tower top and it is much easier to make adjustments needed while the pole is horizontal." Is Congressman Raymond Red Corn and his wife Louise going into the wind farm business too?
Big News for the Shareholders: view articles in the Tulsa World and The Oklahoman, Chaparral Energy to redevelop North Burbank oil field in Osage County at http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Chaparral_Energy_to_redevelop_North_Burbank_oil_field/20130625_49_E1_Iholni368172 and Back to the Future: Chaparral hopes to recover 77 million barrels of oil from one of Oklahoma's oldest oil fields at http://newsok.com/back-to-the-future-chaparral-hopes-to-recover-77-million-barrels-of-oil-from-one-of-oklahomas-oldest-oil-fields/article/3855899
Look at this article on the Pipeline at the Bigheart Times>> http://barnsdalltimes.com/http:/barnsdalltimes.com/news/osage-chief-releases-long-awaited-pipeline-consultant-contract
On the Shareholder's behalf, do the members of the ON Congress ever ask any questions in session of the people that they approve by resolution? Does anyone know what Vince Logan's view is, nominee for the Office of the Special Trustee's Special Trustee for American Indians, on the Mineral Estate Trust and the Osages running it by compacting or other shared means?
Don't forget to check for the Mineral Council Meetings on the Osage Nation Tribal Monthly Calendar at http://www.osagetribe.com/CalendarList.aspx?themonth=7/11/2013%2012:00:00%20AM#d11
As usual Ray McClain proves to be informative again with the latest news at the last M.C. meeting on the 13th. Why is Cynthia hot on the rally for those Oil gaugers? Does she know something about somethin and not coming forward and why does she not get the facts always straight? Though I appreciate all that she is and has done thus far. I am curious otherwise wouldn't you be? In addition why does she not follow protocol? And in addition what do you think about the BigHeart Statue? I agree one should be erected given that we all have benefitted from his behalf and should be recognized. And as a reminder to us all Long Live The 1906 Act and we shall continue to give voice in order to protect our Rights.
In addition to your questions, why doesn't Cynthia confine her efforts to the business of the MC? It is reported that in the MC meeting of June 19 2013, Cynthia approached the MC wanting them to sign off on a letter of support for a woman that had "supposedly" been banned form the Hominy dances. Cynthia had no incident report or documentation to support this claim and it is reported that several people did in fact see the woman at the hominy dances. She and Mel Gore had supposedly written the letter and it already had the chairman's name on it! Chairman Yates said he had not seen the letter much less signed it! He further stated that this was none of the MC business. Non the less a vote was taken. The count was 5 to 3 against the letter of support, with Yates, Red Eagle, Abbott, Crum and Curtis Bear voting NO and Cynthia, Gore and Whitehorn voting yes. My brief comment on this, is we elected people to the MC to take care of shareholders business and not use their position to bring personal matters or individual favors that have nothing to do with MC business to the floor. Kudos to the 5 MC members that understand this.
As far as I know the Mineral Council supports the Drum and has this line item in their yearly budget. They do have a stake in this matter so Cynthia is not off base here I don't think.
To Orbi-Osage 7-17 at 11.09. I am fully aware the MC supports the Drum as well as their yearly budget. What exactly does that have to do with Cynthia raising a question at the MC meeting when she had no documentation to prove the incident ever happened. I believe the Chairman and the other MC members that voted NO are aware of their "Stake" in the matter as well as what is MC business and what is not. While we're at it how did Cynthia have a letter to the subject with Yates signature on it and accordingly he had not seen the letter prior to the meeting?
As I understand it, she didn't "Attain" the letter....she and Mel Gore wrote it and signed Yates name to it before him even seeing the letter. It took a lot os gall and assumption ahead of time to assume Yates and the other would "Fall in line" with this little plan. Next time we vote I am going to hold our MC candidates to a higher standard than this! This ranks right up there with Cynthia's little tantrum about how much coffee cups and sweetener the office uses.
All I know is that if the MC is supporting the Drum then they have some say in how things are done and if that's not the case then perhaps Hominy won't be needing Shareholder money or perhaps they won't accept it from the MC in the future which would probably be the best policy going forward. Is this becoming a discrimination against women issue at the Hominy dances or what? I'm not sure I understand what is really going on here. Can someone explain this in a little more detail? Thx.
From what I understand Indians are the worst for discrimination or of racism as well. Lets hope this is not the case. However, I do believe action is necessary to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. for the sake of appearance of any impropriety, especially with what's going on with our Chief, everyone must be on pins and needle. Understanding this situation goes without saying. I do not understand her reasoning as of late and Cynthia needs to let us know that the truth is what we want. Just being candid here she's butting her head into things because? She's up to something and we just can't see it and will she lets up shareholders know lets hope so. I'm still banking she knows something about something and lets not be quick to judge or hang her. I find her spirit entertaining and I'm sure she's had that effect with her family as well.....Mrs. Gladys Kravitz. Lol with all do respect. And really this is small fry we should be more concerned with the M.C. matters. After all there is and this is just a feeling, theres something going on in little China, meaning, the acting Superintendent Loften is leaving, issues with our Producers etc......
In response to you wondering what Cynthia was up to with her "Letter of Support" There are rumors getting out, and I'll repeat rumors at this point, so I won't get into specifics on what they are until verified but the rumor is Cynthia was tying to help a person. How or why Mel Gore got involved in her plan is pure speculation at this point.
Yes I do understand that they are Rumors. Though still curious who and what and why she was in protection mode for? THANKS FOR THE UPDATE....Yeah sometimes I have keys that stick, you would think I would replace this keyboard of mine or use the latest technology but call me a little ole fashioned hard to throw away something that still works.
Since you've admitted it's you who posted on July 18, 2013 at 12:59 PM, I'm putting you on notice that I'm not interested in your rumors. Just the facts Jack. It was snarky little twinks posting crap just like this that got the OSA Blog taken down and some of us appreciate Osageblogger and the trouble that's been gone to so we have a place to go to share information about what is going on with our Minerals Estate. There are eight elected people paid on the Mineral Council most of whom draw a paycheck who are supposed to be keeping us up to date on what is happening with the ME and yet we have to rely on people like Osageblogger and Ray McClain to find out what is taking place in the here and now? Don't the MC have a website for posting up-to date information? Some of us are grateful and want to stay informed as events take place in real time and not a month or so later when shareholders find out one by one about things and the word eventually begins to get around. Get on board or start your own website where you can spread as many rumors as you like. Others have proven that they can go from Zero to Hero. What's standing in your way? You?
P.S....I've posted all over this place supporting this site as well as RAY RAY.....S site. Nah I'm about a lot things and I try not to be quick to Judge, though I am to reckon with I suppose because you will come up unarmed and it's hard to fight someone who is challenged for whatever reason. It wouldn't be a fair argument or fight. Just here to stay comprised. Careful before you assume I forgive you....
Ok. guys. Let's settle down bit here. As ndntoo's comment more than suggests, it's not a good idea to post rumor, innuendo and suggestions about the personal lives of others. That is not our mission here. It's best to refrain from going in that direction and if so, bottom line, everybody lives. Thank you.
Agreed....Rumors should not be posted....however to the subject of MC meetings, Ray has two reports on his site that all of us might find interesting. His site is ( raymcclain@ Osages-you-need-to-Know ) The post are dated MC meeting 6-18-2013 and MC meeting 7-17-2013
To Poster July 17th @ 11:18 pm, I don't think Indianz.com likes the Osages. The News is out there. And if anyone of you had a chance to read RAYRAYS REPORT AT Osages-you-need-to-know.com your uneasiness will be put to rest. Just wish we could post on his site as well.
Ps no offense Osageblogger still have love for this site more than you know. Thanks again for the extra eye's and my eyes are wide open to listen to your interpretation is much apprecaited from this Osage.
Hey, you're good. The more the merrier I say. And Ray McClain does get the job of reporting on Mineral matters done in a timely manner. Kudos to him in a big way!
O News finally has an article, since it was first reported by the Journal Record on the 16th of July, 2013 about what has happened with the two Hz well drilling companies that are pulling out of the Osage at http://osagenews.org/article/horizontal-wells-too-costly-two-companies-osage-county
See the article, Osage Nation, Enbridge partner up as need for pipeline workers doubles at http://barnsdalltimes.com/http:/barnsdalltimes.com/news/osage-nation-enbridge-partner-up-as-need-for-pipeline-workers-doubles
The Osage News is reporting on their Facebook page that the ON Education Department is no longer taking applications for the Enbridge Flanagan South Pipeline Project at https://www.facebook.com/OsageNews
BEWARE Shareholders--Ole' Jim Gray is still on about compacting the Mineral Estate services away from the BIA. Start small he says. Oh yeah! A year or two from then it will be a new ON Department, Office or what-have-you with 60 employees paid up to the hilt doing next to nothing but collecting a paycheck and trying to look important with a Director at a starting salary of $75K or more. He refers to "Geoff" in his comments. Who might that be, I wonder? Is he on board with this too? Find his recent comments at Osage Community for Responsible Citizenry https://www.facebook.com/groups/yanman/
It won't happen. To many of us would unite because of obvious reasons. To many of us have more than 1 headright and will do what it takes to do what is right and protect the 1906 act...A lot of the Shareholders are uniting on one subject matter and focus and the real issue is, does the M.C. have are best interest. And when you understand that subvertly the 1906 Act and I say subtly has been used for someone's agenda. And has been used politically for argument. Once you get to the crumb of the cookie then the crumbs begin to smell like a thief in the night...of course realizing that there are people who are going to be the ones who will try to stir the pot and that's putting it politely and we recognize the shenanigans. LOl. Jim Gray will do anything to detract from the Shareholders because he is a Greedy Man? Or is it because he thinks that the BIA is detrimental to the success of the Mineral Estate? Then you have to ask what is the M.C. doing to protect and preserve the 1906 Act and serve the best interest of the Shareholders? As a collective that we should be United the Shareholders and if you don't think on front that can't happen if the M.C. doesn't begin to see the forest for the trees we might just have to do a national petition across the U.S.A for all shareholders to unite for a new Council. This could happen as well. Would take some of the cronyism away. But, bottom line we did not start this but we can end it with solutions by acting and speaking out and end the corruption of the 1906 Act. Live by it and stop cherry picking and subverting the true meaning of the text that it was written and signed by it's true intent.
Update on the Pawhuska 5-Man Board allegations-- Read it and weep! The outcome is that the Feds have decided to pass on any prosecution so that leaves the ON AG to move forward with a substantial array of penalties that may include: 1 year in jail, a fine of $1,000 and restitution of the $814,000 if he can even get it. Does the word SKATE mean anything to anyone out there? There is still the possibility that the IRS may come after JDM for taxes on the all or a portion of that amount. ("That's how they got Al Capone.")
This just in everyone go to Ray Mclain's sight. At www.osages-you-need-to-know.com Patricis Sperrier Bright filed an heated e-mail to inform all that a few select people named went on behalf of the producers to Washington to lobby for them and not in executive session or was approved or on the behalf of the shareholders. This is just insane and to be honest with you I'm getting tired of Cynthia and her excuses. I for one if these members are to be removed I for one am first in line to fill any vacancy. And I am for one to support this motion. Thank you Ray for the update. Read. So telling
Wasn't there an Osage Mineral Council vote of 5 to 3 to NOT advance the Negotiated Rulemaking Draft to Washington DC? Did the members of the OMC adhere to that Will of the Council and vote NO as the MAJORITY of the Council agreed to do? NO THEY DID NOT! If OS want to hold someone accountable for the Will of the Shareholders why did you not call them to task for NOT voting as the MAJORITY wanted? Do you really want to see YOUR Partners continue the Great Exodus out of the Osage? Are there any new companies beating a path to your door to take over the TWO Concessions that you have already lost, with the probability of the THIRD one being within the next couple of months? There were 12 and now there are 10, with the Osage County Sales Tax going down, the pump shops sales down more than 25%, Drilling Permits from about 100 every two weeks to one a week for the past few weeks, Devon has about 17 rigs drilling right now, there are NONE of their rigs drilling in the Osage. Has the OMC told you any of these FACTS? No, the spin is that it was not profitable, go find out how much royalty that was paid on those Mississippi Wells and how much of OS SHAREHOLDER Royalty walked out that door.
Four Minerals Council members went to Washington D.C. to stand up for the oil producers with regard to the new proposed regulations and to request that the BIA/Secretary of the Interior protect the interests of the Osage MIneral Estate as is their fiduciary obligation to do so as the Trustee of the OME. Feature this; the old regulations were put forward on a 19 page brochure. The new proposed rules and regulations (CFRs) as to oil production in Osage County are 388 pages (8.5" X 11"). If these are adopted and go into effect, not only will the big oil companies leave, the Mom and Pop producers will follow out of the Osage right behind them because IT WILL BE TOO EXPENSIVE FOR THEM TO DO BUSINESS IN OSAGE COUNTY. I think Councilpersons Core, Whitehorn, Bear and Boone deserve some thanks for going to Washington D.C. to intercede on behalf of the Shareholders and their income headright interest. The Nymex rate might look a whole lot better than the highest posted price but how much will a headright share be worth if there is no income coming in and placed in the Osage Mineral Estate Trust account in the U.S. Treasury because ALL of the oil producers have fled the oil patch in Osage County?
RED ALERT! Important Article on the BIA Osage Agency operations audited at http://roundhousetalk.com/2013/08/bia-osage-agency-operations-audited/ NOTE: "The Department of Interior has been reviewing the rules and once published, there will be a comment period." Every Osage Headright Shareholder and every Headright owner, non-Osage, and Entity, MUST send in comments during this upcoming Comment Period to stop these new regulations (CFRs) from killing the oil business in Osage County! This comment period should be announced in the Federal Register. It's your income and your individual responsibility to protect it from being diminished by rules and regulations that will severely inhibit the oil production and the income generated from it. See also the article at http://osagenews.org/article/change-coming-oil-and-gas-production-osage and the article, OMC unhappy with proposed changes to Code of Federal Regulations at http://osagenews.org/article/omc-unhappy-proposed-changes-code-federal-regulations Though many thought this could never happen, the production of oil in the OME could dry up overnight and VERY SOON if this warning is not heeded. STAY INFORMED! Plan to attend the next MC Meeting on August 16, 2013 at 10 A.M. (CDT) in the Chambers or listen live on the internet to find out more about this extremely important developing situation. The MC meeting on the 21st of August will also be important for all shareholders to attend.
Uh-oh! Looks like a ton of Osages had better quit complaining, get up off their duffs and get something done about this-you know what-caught in the ringer.
A little over two years ago the Osage Minerals Council began entering into exclusive exploration and leasing agreements with oil companies with the primary goal of enticing them to experiment in developing a horizontal drilling play into the Mississippi formation under Osage County. This was an untried technique into this formation and a very expensive undertaking considering the cost of horizontal drilling and the added infrastructure needed. Ultimately, agreements were entered into with seven different companies that committed about 400,000 acres for their use in this project. The agreements required aggressive yearly drilling commitments and were to last for only 3-4 years with any unused land released back to the Osage for re-marketing. As with any experiment, mixed results could be expected. Some of the companies are doing better than others in consistently finding the big paying wells in their area, but overall the horizontal play has been very successful for the Osage. We have collected tens of millions of dollars in exploration / lease bonuses and added a couple of thousand barrels a day in new oil production (about $40,000 per day royalty at current prices), as well as significant increases in gas production. Two of these seven companies, Encanna and Chaparral have recently indicated that they were not going to meet the 2013 horizontal well drilling commitments needed to hold on to their large exclusive exploration areas. Encanna asked the Council’s permission to find a partner for, or to market their position in the Osage to another company. Chaparral indicated that they were retuning to a veridical well drilling program only. Neither company even mentioned the proposed CFR rule changes as a reason for their decision. Instead, both indicated to the Council that they were not hitting the big paying wells consistently enough to generate the return on investment ratio needed to justify continued horizontal drilling in their areas. Chaparral even negotiated for 10 new 160 acre leases at $12,000 bonus per lease for the purpose of expanding their vertical drilling program in the Osage. They also have just completed a $100 million CO2 pipeline project for a new enhanced oil recovery method in the Burbank unit. They think this will quickly double oil production from this unit and generate $1.2 Billion in royalty for the Osages over the next 30 yrs. This hardly seems the behavior of a Company that is dissatisfied with doing business with the Osages.
Galen, thank you for posting. It's good to have another aspect of the situation to mull over and another point of view to consider. There are troubling aspects of this situation however. Clearly The Journal Record article is reporting, "Oil and gas producers, fearing these strict rules will go into effect, are cautious about committing more assets in Osage County. Companies like Encana and Chaparral are two examples of companies backing away from Osage County because of the uncertainty." Obviously this representation wouldn't have been made if there weren't some truth to it. Secondly, what are the legal ramifications? These oil lease holders came in under one set of CFRs and are now looking at a whole new set of rules that may likely be less favorable to them from a profit and loss standpoint. You can't change the rules in the middle of the game and that's understandable from their point of view. Will the leases they currently have be grandfathered in under the old CFRs or not?
Thank you for the clarification of the real issues Osageblogger. You are exactly right. How can a $4 Billion Business expect an International Company like EnCana acquire a Concession with a set of CFR rules and then in the middle of the term, change everything including the net royalty rate of NYMEX? EnCana was already on record at the Negotiated Rulemaking Meetings stating if the new CFR's went forward that they would be out of the Osage. They watched a Resolution passed by a 5 - 3 vote that the CFR's needed more time and then the 3 voted them in anyway? Did the Council think that it was a bluff? If EnCana can't get NYMEX for their oil, how can any other Producer? The Producers are the Shareholders Partners, THEY make MONEY the Shareholders all make money too, they lose money and they leave and no one takes their place. Our royalty checks go to nothing. It is a matter of Profit and Loss economics and the biggest losers will be US, again!
Thanks Osage blogger, now I have some questions. What specific proposed CFR changes would you suggest people complain about? Would it be the one that forces the BIA to be more accountable to producer and surface owner complaints and requests by requiring timely written responses? Or maybe it’s the one that asks the producers to notify the BIA when they have a full tank of oil that is ready for the purchaser to pick up? That simple phone call or e-mail will allow the BIA field men/gaugers a much better shot at getting an accurate gauge on more of our oil instead of having to rely 99% of the time on what the purchaser says they picked up from the tank. Or perhaps it’s the one that gives the Osage Tribal police the right to stop oil tanker trucks and check their purchase orders and paper work? Or maybe they should complain about the numerous new areas that the BIA is required to consult with the Minerals Council, such as when they terminate a lease for cause etc.? Perhaps they should attempt to block the changes that will require that our natural gas be measured, for the first time ever, by industry standard methods, royalty be paid at top of the area prices, and that we are paid for all the gas that leaves the lease instead of just a fraction? The change getting the most attention however is the one changing our oil royalty pricing from Highest Posted Price (HPP) to the average monthly Cushing NYMEX price. So let’s talk about that one. The Federal Government just paid the Osages $380 million largely because they had failed in their basic Trust responsibility of seeing that the producers paid the Osages royalty based on top of the area market prices. So naturally the Feds are very interested in fixing that problem and I would think most Osage Headright holders should be also. Despite its name, HPP is not the highest anything. It is consistently more than $2.00 per barrel less than the average oil prices paid in the Osage and more than $3.50 less than highest prices paid, which are pegged at or near the Cushing NYMEX price. HPP is actually at or near the bottom of the price scale paid for Osage oil. This situation makes the Osages the only tribe required by regulation to accept oil royalty pricing at the bottom of the area market. Everywhere else the Feds are required to ensure just the opposite occurs. So just how much of an effect will changing to Cushing NYMEX pricing have on the producers? First one must remember that only the royalty pricing point would be changed. We currently collect royalty at rates between twelve and one half percent and 20%, depending on what era the lease was granted, with the current average being about 16%. If a comparison is made between the actual oil prices paid for Osage oil, HPP price and Cushing NYMEX average prices for the years 2008 through 2012 this is what is found. The average increase would be twenty five cents per barrel and the maximum increase would be about seventy five cents per barrel. So if a producer is currently selling oil at Cushing NYMEX type prices he would pay the Osages no additionally money, if he is selling at HPP prices, the maximum increase would be seventy five cents per barrel. Even this maximum increase of $.75 is less than a 1% increase at current oil prices, hardly a devastating increase by anyone’s standards.
Excellent discussion going here and it appears that it has been needed for some time. Galen, in response to your questions, if the BIA is struggling to handle the regulations that it has now with the "current model", how can it be expected to layer on 388 pages of them? May I politely suggest that the members of the Minerals Council have got to be first and foremost, diplomats with a situation that appears to be turning down with tempers flaring on all sides. The Osages should not use the Negotiated Rule Making Committee to upend the situation in the field for the oil producers, airing and attempting to address in the new CFRs every possible wrong that the Osage team can come up with that needs to be righted. It's sort of like people who hate sales people but the bottom line is that the bills don't get paid until the sales person pays them by seeing to it that the product is sold, whatever that might be. The guys that do the work in the field have to be accommodated in order for the income to flow. They are people who do business in the real world and they actually understand about profit and loss and what can happen when the numbers get out of alignment. They came into the Osage with a set of numbers that they thought would work. If the landscape associated with those projections change because of outside forces beyond their control, the entire plan goes haywire for them and they begin to lose money and that can be disastrous. Risk factors are through the roof as it is in the oil business and having an entire new set of variables layered on in terms of profit and loss only increase that risk to unacceptable levels. In as much as possible you have to have a stable environment in order to do business no matter what business it is and most particularly where the oil producers are concerned in the Osage. Guys in a business like this are not kidding. They need a STABLE PARTNER that is in their corner and the Minerals Council has got to be exactly that or it will frighten the producers away and well it should. I'm sorry to have to put it this way but the "downtrodden" thing needs to happen somewhere else rather than here because you are working for the Shareholders in a professional capacity and "team players" don't fall out with this sort of thing in the real world. In answer to your question, more regulations that the BIA will be unable to implement as it is are questionable. Higher drilling costs to do business going in and throughout that are unanticipated thereby changing the rules as a result of the new CFRs on what the oil producers, (large, medium or small) can expect to be taking in and how it will effect the bottom line is not good in terms of their risk model. Seeing certain members of the Minerals Council change from becoming advocates to adversaries is so bad from a professional standpoint, it's entirely unacceptable. Those companies that have current leases with the old set of rules should be protected so that their business environment stays the same as to what was anticipated. Any new business can come under the new rules if you can find any to do business that way and remember, the new CFRs will be in stone from the time they are accepted with no going back. As a member of the Minerals Council, I should think that you would want to initiate a comment period of your own or hearings in the Osage with the oil producers themselves before you make such a final commitment that may be exceedingly deleterious to the future income of the Osage Mineral Estate. Remember, you didn't have a single oil producer at the table of the Negotiated Rule Making Committee to find out whether or not these new regulations would be acceptable to their business model. Did you?
To Osage Blogger. I think I know where you got the silly idea that the Osage CFR’s are going to be 388 pages long, and it is all part of same batch of lies and misinformation that person has been spreading forever. (more and more people are catching on to this persons deceitful ways, I predict you will also someday) I believe the proposed Regs. will be about 78 pages more or less but I can’t say for certain until they are through being reformatted and published. And you still never answered my question about which specific proposed CFR’s you are advising the readers here to object to. Could you please tell us which ones you don’t like and why? I don’t know where you get the idea that anyone on the Minerals Council is hostile to the producers. I fully understand why they are fighting this and hold them no ill will; in their position I might do the same. We all want the producers to be successful, and make every reasonable effort work with all of them. However, if the Minerals Council role is to blindly agree with everything the producers ask for, there is no need for the Council to exist. We could just let the producers decide how much they wish to pay and how our minerals are to be measured and valued. And if we don’t want the BIA to have the CFR’s necessary to protect us, we might as well do away with them also. Just let the Producers pay us what ever they think is right. But three of us are refusing to put Producer interests ahead of those of the Osage Headright holders. Two Osage Tribal Councils and two Minerals Councils spent millions of dollars fighting in court to prove that the Osages deserved to be paid full value for their oil and gas. We won that long contested fight with the BIA/DOI and were paid $380 million in damages and also got a promise from the BIA that we would not be treated like that again. Now we have five members of the current Council turning their backs on what those other leaders fought so many years to achieve. They are trying to tell the BIA that yes, we wanted you pay us damages on all that money you failed to collect from the producers on our behalf, but we were only kidding when we said we wanted you to fix the CFR problems that are still causing it to happen. Well the BIA isn’t going do that no matter what we say. We sued them for these and other deficiencies and the clock has been ticking for nearly two years now while they remain vulnerable to claims of further damages on many of the very same issues that have already been litigated. So saying “let’s just leave things the way they are” is silly. They can’t do it. And I don’t want them to.
Thank you for your reply and for putting forward your point of view. Some but not all of the concerns are located at http://osagenews.org/article/proposed-cfr-changes-spur-discussion-village-laws and a further laundry list of some, but not all, are at http://osagenews.org/article/change-coming-oil-and-gas-production-osage beginning with the phrase, "Some of the proposed changes to the 35-page CFRs include:" Also, it is being reported that part of the proposed CFRs include three or more BLM (Bureau of Land Management) regulations. How will these impact oil production and leasing with additional regulations? In addition, I did voice ONE of my largest concerns and that has to do with a woefully deficient Osage Agency according to recent reports. If they can't manage to handle a 19 page brochure of rules and regulations, how are they going to manage 35, 78, 388 pages or whatever the actual number once the dust finally settles? Oh and by the way, the U.S. Congress has mandated the new government via P.L. 108-431, but I know of no Congressional Act that allows the BIA or the Executive Branch of the United States to arbitrarily change the CRFs without legislative approval and permission as per the 1906 Allotment Act as amended. They (members of the U.S. Congress) have not weighed in but for three members of the Oklahoma Delegation and they do not seem ONE BIT PLEASED with the new CFRs judging from the letter that they sent to BIA Assistant Secretary Kevin Washburn.
SHAREHOLDER ALERT: A copy of the letter from three members of the Oklahoma Delegation who oppose the new changes to the Code of Federal Regulations and why with regard to the management of the Osage Mineral Estate by the BIA is available by e-mailing a request for it to osage_election_news@comcast.net Review 25 C.F.R. part 226 at http://www.osagetribe.com/minerals/news_story.aspx?news_id=3100 If you wish to share your concerns, contact Senator Tom Coburn, Representative Frank Lucas and Senator James Imhofe:
If you live outside of the State of Oklahoma, you will have to phone their offices directly in order to get your message through to these members of the U.S. Congress.
Please share this Osage Blog post with all of the Osage Shareholders on your e-mail list.
The BLM regulations you are referring to are two and only two. They will have little or no effect on oil production, though one will however make a significant difference on how much natural gas we will be getting paid for. They are actually called on shore orders and are the BLM’s way of codify highly technical standards that are necessary for making sure operations are done up to the latest industry standards. Keeping them separate allows for them to be kept current as industry standards evolve. One of the orders we proposed to adopt by reference was the one dealing with how H2S is handled when it shows up as an unwanted by product. H2S is very toxic even at very low levels and requires some very sophisticated equipment and policies to ensure that it is dealt with properly. BLM already had developed this on shore order that meets the best of industry standards so we saw no reason to reinvent the wheel. I say it will probably have no effect on oil production because I’m proud to say our producers were already meeting most of these same standards even though the BIA nor the state of Oklahoma currently have any regulations to guide them. Adopting these regulations should also take all the teeth out of the surface owner’s complaints that they are being placed in undue danger by this dangerous gas. The other onshore order to be adopted by reference is the one detailing how natural gas should be measured and tested for quality. Measuring oil is really a pretty straight forward process but gas is very complicated, and all phases are very critical to getting an accurate measurement. For instance the pipe diameter and orifices used must accurate to a thousandth of an inch, and even the material used in the testing tube to extract gas for BTU testing can make a difference of up to 20% in the accuracy of the result. We currently have no standards in place to regulate how our gas is measured. Again the BLM already has industry standard regulations in an onshore order on the measuring of gas, so we proposed adopting that onshore order by reference. When either one of these orders is updated as the technology and industry standards evolve, the Superintendent can also adopt the changes if we wish so our regulations will include the updates.
Please see my reply to a tread below on how we are dealing with the needed changes to the BIA Osage Agency.
The Journal Record has been very negative to the Osage efforts in the Neg/Reg process from the beginning. They have printed every negative comment they can illicit without making any attempt to sort out fact from fiction. Naturally the producers don’t want to pay us any more money, and the best tactic they have is to create fear and uncertainty about the effect the changes may have, even when they fully intend to live with them. The question about legal aspects of the changes is easy. The CFR’s are very specific about what things can’t be changed in existing leases. For instance you can’t change the royalty rate, but you can change the method of determining the price point that the royalty percentage is based on. The producers managed to get this done in 1994 to when the pricing point method was changed from “highest price paid or offered in the Osage” to the current Highest Posted Price method. They liked the ability change the rules in the middle of the game just fine when they were sticking it to the Osages.
IT APPEARS THAT THE JOURNAL RECORD AND THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL ARE DEAD ON FOR WHERE THE REAL PROBLEM IN THE OSAGE IS...BIA OPERATIONS MISMANAGEMENT, NOT PRODUCERS PAYING NYMEX, WHICH BTW IS A COMMODITIES PRICE NOT A PRICING LEVEL. SINCE THE OSAGE HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN PAID THE HIGHEST PRICE IN OK, WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR DATA INFORMATION BECAUSE YOUR "EXPERT" ALSO IS QUOTED AS SAYING THAT YOU ONLY HAVE TO TRUCK THE OIL 15 MILES TO CUSHING SO HIS MAP IS SKEWED AND SO ARE HIS NUMBERS FOR NYMEX. INQUIRING OSAGES SHOULD HAVE THE FACTS! SORRY FOR THE CAPS, WANTED TO MAKE SURE NO ONE THOUGHT THIS WAS THE ARTICLE. WHAT DID YOU DO TO CORRECT THE BIA OPERATIONS MISMANAGMENT, THE REAL PROBLEM? AFTER ALMOST TWO MORE YEARS OF MORE MISMANAGEMENT THE OIG HAS STEPPED UP TO DO WHAT WAS NOT DONE!
My data about the effect of Cushing NYMEX pricing is not flawed and is public record. Here is a chart and an explanation of the math used. The chart got compressed in the transfer to this format so I’ll try to clarify it a little. The first column is the average price actually paid in the Osage for that year. The second is the HPP price for that year and the third is the Cushing NYMEX price for the same year. Oil Prices
Cushing information comes from EIA, which is the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Highest Posted Price and Osage average prices paid are from our Tribal Auditor and BIA records. As you can see the current Osage royalty pricing point (HPP) is consistently lower than the average price purchasers actually paid, $2.18 average per barrel in this five year period. The average Cushing NYMEX price for the same period is $1.59 per barrel higher than the Osage average paid price. Osage current average royalty rate is about 16%. So adopting the Cushing NYMEX royalty price point would raise the average amount paid to the Osage by about twenty five cents per barrel. ($1.59 x 16% = $.25) The highest royalty rate we collect is 20% and that is only on leases taken in the last 4yrs. The lowest oil royalty price point we accept is HPP. The average difference between the proposed Cushing NYMEX price and HPP for these years is $3.77. This makes the maximum average increase per barrel possible about $.75. ($3.77 x 20% = $.75) This maximum scenario is very rare since nearly all our producers that have taken new leases in the last 4yrs. are much too business savvy to accept a bottom of the market HPP sales point. If the Cushing NYMEX royalty price point is adopted, producers currently selling oil at Cushing prices will pay the Osage no additional money. Even the maximum increase indicated above of $.75 per barrel is only about eight tenths of one percent of a current $90 barrel of oil. But, adopting Cushing royalty pricing will meet the governments basic trust responsibility of ensuring the Osage are paid top of the area market royalty price for their oil.
OK, but if the producers can't get the NNMEX price for their oil as reported in the comment higher up on this page, what happens to their profit margin if they have to pay us more than they have in the past? This hardly addresses the other problems with the added regulations and fines that the BIA won't be able to keep up with as they are reported to be backlogged as it is now. What's the story about the BIA trying to find a new permanent Osage Superintendent?
NYMEX is NOT a Pricing Schedule...it is a COMMODITY Price. If we want to trade in commodities then take the barrels IN KIND (AS the CFR allows) and hire a broker. Also hire a trucking company to truck it to Cushing because it is a PERFECT BBL DELIVERED to Cushing OK, and has to be in increments of 1,000 BBLS! NOT attainable by the average operator or even the BIG ones. BIA could NOT ENFORCE the previous 19 page brochure of CFR's, do you think that they can a 388 page BOOK of them? They can't accurately measure our oil and gas now and have no idea when there is a theft with only gauging an average of less than 10 - 15 tank batteries per month. BIA Supt. books are closed for new applications and it is rumored that there were over 70 applicants. Until we solve the chronic understaffing and not having a Royalty Compliance Department (we have an Oil Accounting person and a Gas Accounting person and a Supervisor now)there will be business as usual for the $4 Billion Minerals Estate which I have heard is being devalued right now by all the uncertainty and our PARTNERS pulling out. Before long, we may not have to worry about the understaffing because it will be such a SMALL ESTATE that the current staff could easily handle it.
Let's also not forget the Oklahoma Delegation's letter to Kevin Washburn, Assistant Secretary of the BIA, having to do with the BIA not having a strong enough fiduciary trust relationship established in the new CFRs where the Bureau's accountability is concerned. What ever came of the requested U.S. Congressional formal briefing? The letter was dated on May 29, 2013.
BIA Osage Agency operations audited By D. Ray Tuttle, The Journal Record see article at http://roundhousetalk.com/2013/08/bia-osage-agency-operations-audited/
The statements made above that none of producers can get Cushing NYMEX average monthly prices is false. Last fall, using BIA sales records, we did a study of sixteen Osage Producers picked at random, except that we tried to pick some from every part of the spectrum from small to large in sales volume. We tracked them over several months and at no time were there any less than two of the sixteen selling at greater prices than the proposed Cushing NYMEX average for that month. One month in particular five of the sixteen sold their oil at significantly higher prices than the Cushing price. We made this information known to the producers at one of our three public meetings (these meetings were held in addition to the official NEG/REG meetings) to solicit their input on regulation proposals. And all of the Minerals Council has had access to this study, so anyone of those folks that are still saying Osage producers can’t get the Cushing price, are ignoring the facts. Again, the statements being made that the proposed new 25 CFR 226 will be 388 pages long are just a blatant lie, 78 pages are more like it. Yes, the BIA needs more and better trained staff as well as fully functioning computer systems for all phases of their operation. We are working on this with Director Black in our twice yearly BIA improvement meetings that were also mandated in the settlement agreement. Many of the CFR changes were structured by the Osage delegation with the express intent of moving these needed changes from the “optional category” in regard to funding and implementation, to “mandatory status”, meaning that they must make the improvements or risk being found negligently out of compliance with regulations.
To Osageblogger: The Oklahoma delegation had their questions asked and answered, apparently satisfactorily, months ago.
Apparently? Are you kidding? If you don't know what happened for certain, you shouldn't speculate. Also, isn't your study a bit arbitrary? Of how many oil producers currently active in Osage County? One hundred? Five hundred? A thousand? What was the overall percentage of all of them tested? At greater prices? What about the number of the sixteen selling below Cushing NYMEX? What were the figures for all of the sixteen for every month single month you conducted the study? Don't take us for stupid and don't for a split second take the oil producers for stupid either. You may insult our intelligence but if you insult the oil producers, it will have very negative consequences.
I treated no one as being stupid. The ascertain has been made here several times that none of the producers are able to get Cushing NYMEX monthly average prices for the oil they sell. I merely pointed out factual evidence of that being an inaccurate statement. To do otherwise would allow readers to continue to be misled about the true facts. And of course not everyone in the sample was getting that price or I would have stated that as being the case. The point was that it is an attainable price, so statements to the contrary are misleading. The standard that the BIA must achieve in order to live up to their trust responsibility is to see that we get a royalty price that is at or very near the top of the area market. Being at the top of the market means by definition that it will be above what some others are getting. Using Cushing NYMEX average price paid for the same month that the Osage oil is sold meets that standard and is an easy to utilize, published price that everyone in the business knows how to find and track. On a personal note, maybe you should channel some of that hostility you are throwing at me toward the people that have been misleading you all these months. I’m just trying to set the record straight with some actual facts.
This is a great opportunity for us to be able to see and hear what is available for us to properly MONITOR the Oil and Gas production and SALES. There are excellent speakers and will be booths for us to talk to the people who do this all across the US,everywhere but the Osage for the most part we still use a tin can and a string. Actually it is a fob on the end of a string that you run down into the tank to MEASURE the oil. Not only are we still in the last century in regards to the BIA MISMANAGEMENT, but we still use archaic ways to gauge the oil. Gas is worse, some of them still use charts that blow off the meter and the cows chew on them, all the while that gas is whirling through the meters and not being METERED or ROYALTY paid on it! What do the NEW CFR's do to improve THOSE PROBLEMS? Nothing! You get an average of 10 - 15 gaugers per month using the same outdated methods to gauge a tank, IF THEY can find one ready to be picked up! Granted, there is a call in required to the Supt. office in the NEW CFR but guess what, YOU could set that up NOW relatively easily because the Operators COULD voluntarily call in the OIL if the Council had not alienated so many of them with THEIR attitude that the PROBLEM was the OPERATORS successfully switching the blame from the BIA MISMANAGEMENT to the Operators! Nice bait and switch game for Mike Black to pull it off, the US COURT determined where the problem was yet THAT is still business as usual at the BIA. The BIA Model has to be changed to correct the problems because the BIA Operations was the real problem NOT the CFR, which they refused to enforce properly all these years. WAKE UP!
SHAREHOLDER REMINDER: The next MC Meeting is on this coming Friday, August 16, 2013 at 10 A.M. (CDT) in the Chambers or listen live on the internet at www.osagetribe.com/ The MC meeting on Wednesday, the 21st of August will also be important for all shareholders to attend.
The Chief looks to have lost total control of what the Mineral Council has been up to with the new CFRs which have the oil producers up in arms and leaving Osage County. What happened to the Chief's Office Minerals liaison guy to the Minerals? Does anyone up top know what is going on in the Executive side of this new government? After all isn't JRE responsible for the mess his branch of government makes of things? Just saying.
I would propose ...That it is we, the shareholders that have lost control of the MC! It appears that four on the MC now work for the producers. I have often wondered why so many things have to be discussed in "Executive" session. Now that the producers have paid for four of our MC members to go to Washington Cynthia's old speech of "I work for you" is a sham and I for one don't want to hear it any more. Executive sessions with the producers, no transparency, sneaking off in secret to Washington, who do you think she and Bear, Core, Whitehorn and Myron work for? All four of them need to be replaced with people that really work for the shareholders. If we can't vote to have them removed, then come election time if we can get just two of them out and replaced with two that are loyal to the shareholders, then that will change the balance of power in the MC. LET THE CAMPAIGN BEGIN! AND we need to vote on there being NO MORE executive sessions especially with the producers! That needs to be done at the coming MC meeting or ASAP. There may be a need for one every now for other business but this has gotten out of hand. The MC members were elected by the shareholders and as such we should have shareholders in attendance in every executive session if there are going to be any!
The Minerals Council meeting agenda for today lists a Washington DC trip discussion but I was not able to open the live broadcast. Hope someone reports an unbiased,factual letter about the meeting.
I notice that all of "experts" denouncing these revisions post anonymously. Why do you hide? Are you not proud of what you are saying? Who should we credit all this wisdom to? I can understand shareholders being reluctant to identify themselves for fear of retaliation against them or their relatives. But, you "EXPERTS" with all this advise do not have that privilege. STEP UP OR SHUT UP
Ray McClain just posted on his site that there is a lot of hyperbole going on here and I agree. But where there is politics you have rhetoric which can be good and bad. Ray post here so people can have a dialogue with you. Much of what you say I tend to believe though I do have my opinions.
Ray McClain would be an excellent person to have on the MC. I think we should do all we can to convince him to run. He is far more knowledgeable of the oil business than some we have on there now. Electing family friends and relatives to the MC has not served us well to date.
Osage Shareholders Association Meeting is August 18 at 1:00pm At Dave Landrum in Pawhuska Bring a pot luck dish, Chicken will be furnished...Much to be discussed....Here is your chance to ask questions ....We need each other!!!! Together we stand....
There was a lengthy discussion about the BIA and the New CFR's and what the implications to the future production and operations will be. It was discussed that the Settlement was paid because the HPP was not paid versus the mismanagement of the BIA with their chronic understaffing,operational issues, not depositing money in a timely manner, etc. along with their NON ENFORCEMENT of the current CFR. A debate as to whether compacting the functions of the BIA would be preferable to Modernizing the BIA was also discussed. The consensus seemed to be that the proposed new CFR's had not been properly submitted with not enough time and not enough people on the Committee to develop a plan to address what was in reality the problem. The Operational Issues of the BIA will never be addressed in the New CFR and until the problems are resolved with unqualified, under qualified, and certainly understaffing (currently short 3 Field Men according to the Acting Supt. and no hope of having them replaced in the near future)which equates to about 10 - 15 Oil Tank Inspections/Month of the estimated 2,300 TANK BATTERIES. The Gas Issues were not touched on although the Minerals Council hired a gas expert in the First Minerals Council Term who opened 15 of the "best" gas meters and found water, coal dust, etc. that was inhibiting the proper measurement of the gas. The Expert wanted the OMC to build a meter run trailer that could be hauled to the sites and test the meters properly all across the Osage. He told them that his estimate was 10-15% loss of revenue PER MONTH which at that time was about $100,000 to $150,000 per month and amounting to about FIVE MILLION DOLLARS LOST by now with NOTHING ever being done by the Osage Minerals Council to implement those suggested changes. He also suggested a review of EVERY Gas Contract to check for inequitable language, which was never done, either. If Our Minerals Council wants to force these new CFR's down the Operators throats to get more money for the Minerals Estate and the Shareholders, then why are they not doing their own job in rectifying what they have been made aware of that is wrong? IF NYMEX will only make $.75 difference in price, (which is the "story") why are THEY continually DEMANDING that yet not addressing $5 MILLION in losses? Why Commission a Study and then NEVER ACT ON IT? Why would they not hire Teddy Pledger who did the Gas Analysis when he offered to come in and help? Why did they not follow through on their attorney and another expert who was to review the Gas Contracts? Why would they refuse to hire someone who they respected enough to allow to come in and help them understand the Gas issues with their own self serving "Expert", who proved that HIS method of calculating the gas was FLAWED? GAS is the NEW OIL. Why would you think that the Operators would not want the gas measured properly if THEIR GAS is also paid on those same flawed meter runs as our royalty is also paid upon but at a rate of AT LEAST FOUR TIMES the Royalty Rate? Not all these issues were discussed at today's meeting but it needs addressing and if anyone wants to say that someone else is not doing their job they might need to remember what happens when you point your finger at the other guy, there are still THREE POINTING squarely back at yourself. Stop all this petty nitpicking and get on with the BUSINESS of this $4 BILLION MINERAL ESTATE and start running it like a business and not as one expert told them "a one pump filling station..." Realize that all the issues that were brought up in the Original Settlement are still the problem... MISMANAGEMENT and Operational Issues in the BIA and no one is minding the store or heeding the cries of the customers who are taking their business elsewhere for whatever reason you care to call it, the end result is THEY ARE LEAVING!
I could spend a lot of space here showing why you are wrong about oil companies pulling out of the Osage, but I think I’ll save that for another time. Instead, since you seem very interested in making improvements to our gas measurement and pricing, and obviously have not read the proposed new CFR’s as they relate to gas, I think I can give you some information that should make you very happy. When these proposed CFR’s are approved, we will for the first time ever, have specific regulations saying that our gas will be measured by industry standard methods. This will correct the measurement and meter maintenance flaws uncovered by the study you refer to. As you point out, proper measurement also benefits the Producer. Also, for the first time we will have control of the prices we will accept and also stop the practice of only paying us for a portion of the gas produced and removed from the lease. As you point out, many of the sales agreements in place now, that had no Osage participation in their approval, set prices that are below market and force us and the producers to give away much of the gas with no payment at all. In the new regulations our gas will be priced by an area zone price index method. The United States Office of Natural Resources Revenue has divided the state of Oklahoma into zones, and gas sales data is collected each month from each zone and a top of the market price is determined and published on their website. (We are in Oklahoma Zone 1) This will become our royalty sales point. Also with the adoption of the new regs, our gas will in the future be measured and tested for mmBTU content by industry standard methods, at or near the well head. We then will be paid on the total volume that leaves the lease according to the Zone price index for that quality of gas. No longer will we be forced to accept less than top of the area market prices and give away much of the gas produced on the lease. In some of these sales contracts we are now giving away more that half the produced gas.
You 3 on the OMC were called out as being anti- oil company so it is only conjecture on your part to make a statement as to why they are leaving the Osage. I wouldn't expect you to have access to any privileged information given your antagonistic attitude towards the oil companies. To properly represent OUR SHAREHOLDER INTEREST it is incumbent upon you to determine, if oil is over $100/BBL, and Chairman Yates stated that the production is NOT down, why are our payments DOWN from the previous quarter? Asked but never answered at the meeting. Move forward to your gas measurement and pricing discourse: According to the CURRENT CFR 226.39 MEASUREMENT OF GAS, "All gas, required to be measured, shall be measured by meter(preferably of the orifice meter type) unless otherwise agreed to by the Superintendent. All gas meters must be approved by the Superintendent and installed at the expense of the Lessee..." the fact that gas was not being properly metered or measured falls squarely at the door of the BIA once again. MISMANAGEMENT, OPERATIONAL ISSUES, UNDERSTAFFING, UNDERQUALIFIED, just as stated in the Settlement Lawsuit. When we only have ONE GAS Accounting person managing about $3,000,000.00 in gas revenue per month there's lots of room for error. Metering not being done properly, according to the study and the fact that the Contracts are not equitable in most instances, equals a diagnosis for the illness of BIAism. YOU are the one who stated that the sales agreements "had no Osage participation in their approval." In reality, the Contracts are ALL sent to the BIA where they are scrutinized, then they are signed by the Supt., who is our Agent, is she not? In the past, it was then sent to the Council for approval. Another right that we lost with the new form of government, or like the Storage Building, the previous Gas Study, previous instructions to the Attorney to review the Gas Contracts, just fell by the wayside with NO FOLLOW THROUGH by the MC? Either way, the BIA DID NOT DO THEIR JOB with the gas just as they DID NOT DO THEIR JOB WITH THE OIL. Only difference is that someone, in their infinite illogical wisdom decided NOT to pursue the GAS issues in the settlement lawsuit, only the oil and about 15 years at that? I believe it has been on YOUR watch that there was estimated by the BIA that over $500,000 in gas royalty by one operator was not properly accounted for and the BIA has declined to pursue that, too? Isn't that what has triggered the current Forensic Audit by the Inspector General's office that has been ongoing for several months? The MC has been given ample proof through that Study to have acted upon the evidence of gas measurement issues, ample time since about 2008, and ample funding since there is purported to be about $500,000 remaining in the $1,000,000.00 budget. I would rather have my Gas Royalty go up by properly spending the remaining money to retain experts in gas measuring and gas contracts because it is obvious that the BIA through their operational mismanagement can't properly evaluate where the measurement problems exist. Don't have time to wait on the NEW CFR to be approved since the OLD CFR to address the problem was ignored just as all the other regulation violations in the past. Would you rather have about $200 more in quarterly payment by the $500,000 unused budget amt. returned to the Shareholders, or hire a couple of experts to assist in determining where we are hemorrhaging our gas and get the losses stopped SOONER rather than LATER? I can't believe that the inaction of the Minerals Council in IMMEDIATELY investigating the loss of over $100,000/month has been allowed to continue for almost FIVE YEARS given the status of the report by an International Gas Expert? The Minerals Council cannot sit back on their dubious laurels of being the Council that signed the Settlement, because I believe that these NEW CFR's that caused the next great Exodus Out of the Osage will be your real Legacy.
I just read what Anonymous posted on Aug. 20th 2013. Thats right Yates tell us why our checks are lower this month compared to the last. Why are the Payments down Yates? Why are we having a problem with the Producers not wanting to follow with the requirements? This makes no sense. I would like to see an expert come in here and diagnose the real issue...and you know what they are going to say which is so elemental to the M/E is data input and follow through and don't wait for someone else to do what you can do today....TODAY. It's not that hard to see the forest for the trees. And this is what I have been sharing with other Osages getting out the truth of the crutch. If we were to hire an expert and verify exactly where and what the problem is of which we already know to be the truth which seems redundant to spend the money to only confirm what we know. Add the numbers either way a million a year or five million a year we are losing the revenue and it's going into someone else's pockets. And this has been occurring for a Century and you want more of the same by not doing something about it? It would take one or two tanks by an expert to figure out the percentage or estimated over all loss. A expert can give you a Chart or spreadsheet one or the other and show you exactly by the numbers what the true loss is and at this point to delay in another dollar unaccounted for and this should not be happening period......We are 2 years into this HPP Settlement and still at square 1. I just see incompetence all over the place Yates and this isn't an excuse that is going to fly with the Shareholders. Of which are somewhere to be 5000 who gets a check. Take a few or more. But yes if all of them knew and can fly to those meetings or afford to would be there if they could I can assure you of that. So when our brother and sister Osages back home, fellow Shareholders, members of the Osage Tribe, want answers, it's not different for the rest who do not live in the Three Districts or surrounding Osage County. All we are is asking common sense question to common sense answers and one plus one is not equalling to two. Why is that? Here lies the problem at a Administration level is the big sore. Because now remember When Melissa Curry was the super and if I have it correct she said she had been requesting for help for some time and now we have the sequestration? For one thing I can be sure of, there is always going to be an excuse coming from this Agency, the BIA, then it is up to us to solve and pick up where need be and this is just not happening. I would rather spend a 100,000. a year for someones salary or thereof and earn for that year a 12000000. or 6000000. in our pockets......And this just needs to happen. Remember you are our Governing Body and Speaker we are holding you accountable and you are accountable to the Shareholders.
August 23 Anonymous, you are right on target. From the report to the MC on Wed. though the carryover is considerably less than the $500,000 since we spent $361,000 in legal fees to stop the Wind Farm. Funny we can refuse money from the Osage Nation to pay part of those fees yet we still keep bleeding out at the BIA and can't even hire another Osage Shareholder expert to find where the problems lie in the Gas Contracts, gas payments, etc. It is time to step up and take care of business in this $4 BILLION Mineral Estate because it will be devalued by operators leaving, more Government Regulations and the new CFR. The first question asked when anyone is looking at prospects is "How much government is involved?" Why do you think that Wind River and other BLM/BIA areas are NOT BEING DEVELOPED? Environmental issues like H2S and waste on the land is one thing, FINES (that the local BIA Office doesn't even get to keep) and NYMEX which is a COMMODITIES PRICE that is unattainable is far different. The National Indian OIL Valuation Negotiated Rulemaking Committee that determines standards for every other Federal Tribal Land in the US consisted of SEVEN Industry Members, and TEN Tribal members, what happened in the Osage? We were not even allowed to have ALL duly ELECTED Osage Mineral Council Members! We didn't even have the TWO HIGHEST Vote getting elected members on our committee! If you can't see how this was orchestrated by the BIA and Mike Black then you haven't been paying attention. OH, but the BIA is our Fiduciary Caretaker so they are always there to protect OUR Best Interests? Do we feel SOLD OUT yet? BTW the OIL Valuation Team is NOT using NYMEX to value their oil determination because it was unattainable, judging by their website. Maybe the BIA forced it to drive the operators out of the Osage along with refusing to allow them a voice in the Process?
Hence the concerns of the Oklahoma Delegation as expressed by their letter to Kevin Washburn of the BIA. However, on the other hand, you have the lovely choice of the ON running the OME with a new Trust of some kind and a Business Board at arms length that undoubtedly will make your Headright check money go away faster than a magician in a disappearing act in Las Vegas, JUST like the reports coming in about the Osage Gaming Board as we write. And the CAPPER: A whole new set of shareholders with the BIA entirely out of the picture that will undoubtedly end the currently held Mineral Estate Trust because you won't be able to transfer the current trust with the current set of shareholders/headright owners to another party to administer and run including the Osage Nation because no such Federal Indian trust that I am aware of is run outside of the auspices of the BIA to date. As far as I know the U.S. Congress, which has "plenary" power over Indian affairs still has to come to the table to officially and formally end the Trust relationship with the Osages with regard to the Osage Mineral Estate with an official vote of the Shareholders to end it NO MATTER how the BIA may choose to machinate or manipulate the situation along with or as per ANY of the rulings or decisions of the Courts of the United States. So, put that in your pipes and smoke it...
One thing's for sure and Osagebogger and I agree, the 1906 ACT as written, is set in stone. It would take an act of THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS to authorize any change.....The BIA, has not overstepped their boundaries in so much as, why the Fed. Gov't. lost the HPP case. Because, the BIA failed to Regulate and Manage as we failed to follow through. So, when you look at the overall perspective in the Market Principals and Competition vs. The Public Sector and Private Sector, most gov't agencies monopolize in so much at a level of inefficiencies and the lack of to update with the current 21st century of the art equipment, coupled with less manpower. Understanding how this could be seen as manipulative. What we require is the MINERAL COUNCIL to stop getting paid to argue and start managing the 4 billion Mineral Estate. We are the Private Sector, We are the Owners of the M.E. the Identifier, The 1906 ACT. We are a separate entity, the Identifier, The 1906 ACT. It is incumbent of the Shareholder that we require efficiency at the highest level and no less from our M.C. In my opinion, attainable efficiency would be economically sound for the future of our M.E and to do nothing, we choose to lose millions for the sake of argument makes for poor economical structure and sense and is counter productive to the M.E. So what is the argument that is going to cost the Shareholders millions this time? Is there always going to be an excuse to use not to do what is inherently right by the 1906 Act? What is the intended consequence? Follow the Actions in parallel to the BIA? Failure to act is not an excuse.....There is no true Politics Governing the THE 1906 ACT in Perpetual. Is there Conjecture sure there is injected, but the true principle supported by the 1906 ACT there is no conjecture there, supported turly and honest facts. There in nothing lost in translation about the Principal meaning behind the 1906 ACT, when all else fails square one is staring at you in your face. Politics can be abstract and a detractor. I do not see Politics in the 1906 ACT and nor shall we allow it to be used, such as only by the true text it was intended. When you take away the Politics for argument sake, you are left with a 4 Billion Estate being poorly managed in a grotesque way by and by. There is no simple way to put it. Stop your grinnin and start winnin. Trying to look at this is so sobering, as to reality just leaves you thinking.
Actually, it no longer takes an Act of Congress for the Feds to step away from the administration of the Mineral Estate Trust. The 1978 Act to Amend the 1938 Act that amended the 1906 Allotment Act now stipulates that, "...the Act of June 24, 1938 (52 Stat. 1034, 1035), as amended, is amended by striking the phrase "unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress" and inserting, in lieu thereof, the phrase "and thereafter until otherwise provided by Congress"." whatever that means. No definition of the phrase, "...until otherwise provided by Congress," has ever been forthcoming from the U.S. Congress on an official basis and that's why it becomes of such concern how we fight with one another and can't seem to settle down where these issues are concerned. Not that there isn't reason for concern, it's just the fractious form it usually takes on a day to day basis. If our situation becomes such a headache to and for the U.S. Congress as reported to them by the BIA, they are authorized to take a walk and toss the whole thing right in the waste basket by the 1906 Act as amended and there isn't a thing we can do about it. This little known fact (apparently) should give every headright owner pause for thought and the members of the Minerals Council as well.
Right thank you Osageblogger. Wow! And you are exactly right. Thanks for your insight to another perspective of facts facing us Shareholders.....Less should we forget. Right then the fight begins bring on Rocky Balboa all over again 1.2.and 3. if we have to go back to the Courts again so shall it be....but we can avoid this as well and so shall we instruct.....Push it to limt the comes to mind.
I know that it appears to be an unfavorable alternative but it was mentioned at the OSA meeting. Why not allow the OK Corporation Commission (which regulates every other area of OK in the Oil/Gas Industry) do the ENFORCING of the requirements of maintaining the production and permitting and the BIA do what Congress intended in the 1906 Act, be the fiduciary of the Osage Mineral Estate? The BIA has failed miserably in all areas and with the New CFR will succeed in shutting down most of the operations in the Osage just as has happened having FEDERAL oversight on all the other FEDERAL LANDS in the US. Make no mistake about it, BIA controlled land IS Federal Lands. Read the article about the decline in the post below from an independent oversight perspective. The first question anyone asks when they are looking at a prospect is "How much govt. is there?" You can't take over 300 days to get a permit when you can go anywhere else in OK and walk in, pay for a permit and have it emailed to you that afternoon, can you? Producers are already familiar with the OCC and they do protect the environment so that will placate the unhappy landowners, they move in faster on a problem than the BIA historically ever did, and they get the job done. When can the BIA ever say that? Then we would have the BIA to make sure that the royalties are paid properly and at the CORRECT price and we would finally have the Fiduciary Trust taken care of as Congress and the 1906 Act meant for it to have been done. Trust remains intact and everyone wins and the ON doesn't take over our $4 Billion Mineral Estate.
NOT! I see a ton of things wrong with this idea. You don't want to come under the rules and regulations of the State of OK in any way or under any circumstances especially since they can't enforce without a whole new set of rules and regulations imposed on the OME. For a one day permit, you will also come under their taxing authority. Think about that because with any State government nothing comes free. In addition, the only way you can do a thing like this is if the U.S. Congress walks away from the Federally held MET. That means the reset button gets pushed on the current set of shareholders and that will mean war in the Osage till kingdom come and it will come sooner or later for anyone involved it a scheme like this one. People are, to one degree or another, dependent on their headright checks and make no mistake, getting too creative could come with a lot of unpleasant circumstances for those who are making these decisions and agree to them officially.
I agree with SMH, less State less tax. Go to Ray McClains sight and study exactly what is exactly what is posted on his sight through and through then you may come back with a different question. For Poster on at 7:52. Rays sight is www.osages-you-need-to-know.com The Facts as they are.
From the desk of Councilwoman Boone: I presented the following resolutions: (1) No.2-164: to request a legal opinion on the qualifications to run for office. Those who voted "no" were Councilmen Abbott, Crum and Yates. I went to the office the day after our regular meeting of July 17, to get copies of the signed resolutions from that day. I was informed that Chairman Yates did not sign everything. Maybe the fact that he had to fulfill his duties as an Osage Nation employee by attending a Water Task Force meeting that afternoon at 3:30 was the reason he didn't have the time to finish our business. His supervisor was at the meeting also. This is one of the reasons I believe we need to change our qualifications to run for office. I believe the shareholders deserve an elected official who can devote their time to shareholder business and not make their Osage Nation job their priority. I can't even begin to think what a headache it must be for his supervisor to keep up with his leave when he gets phone calls on his job regarding minerals business or when he has to leave his job and come to the office to take care of shareholder business. After all, the oil business doesn't just happen on Friday and Wednesday. (2) No.166: Are we in favor of changes made in the Negotiated Rule Making? Those who voted "no" were: Councilman Bear, Whitehorn, Core, Redeagle and me. I voted no because I felt the proposed changes would decrease oil production. (3) No.2-167: to have our attorney review the proposed CFR changes and give us some advice on how to appeal. Those who voted "no" were Councilmen Abbott, Crum and Yates. We fired our attorney and expert in March and finished the negotiated rule making without legal representation. I think it was a disservice no to have had our attorney in this total process. On July 16, 2013, an article in the Journal Record titled "Two companies quit drilling programs in Osage County" states that Chaparral Energy LLC and Encana Corp. decided to quit the horizontal programs. Reference was made to the rules changes completed in April and the negative impact they would have on the oil industry. Those are the facts. Our payment check is down this quarter. Will it continue to decline because of the proposed changes? Remember that Abbott, Crum and Yates voted for change.
At our Osage Minerals Council meeting, May 15, 2013, we elected a new chairman, Andrew Yates. Councilman Abbott persuaded Councilmen Core and Redeagle to trade their votes. If both of them would vote for Yates for chairman, he would vote for their resolution to place a person at the BIA and have the shareholders pay that person's salary. I believe the BIA should pay employee salaries, not the shareholders. Councilmen Core and Redeagle's swapping of votes left them holding the bag. Their resolution did not pass. Those who voted for Core and Redeagle's resolution were: Core, Redeagle and Abbott. This was also the meeting where Andrew Yates called the Osage Nation Police. Our policy says if someone gets out of line, you need to tell that person. There was no physical altercation. I placed several issues from Friday's meeting on the agenda Tuesday before the July 17, Wednesday meeting. It is routine that when we discuss issues on Friday, we vote on them the following Wednesday. Chairman Yates informed me that in the future I was to adhere to the Osage Nation Meeting laws and have my items on the agenda 48 hours in advance. We have not adopted the Osage Nation meeting laws. He did allow another councilman to discuss a brand new subject that was never on any agenda. He likes to pick and choose the Osage Nation's rules to go by. The Osage Minerals Council has it's own policies and procedures. His actions do support his campaign mission statement, "Protect the shareholder's interests by following the objectives of the 1906 Allotment Act as set forth in the new constitution." When the local Osage Shareholders Association interviewed candidates for Minerals council, Yates said the minerals belonged to the Osage Nation. One of the Osage Nation laws says tribal officials shall not engage in other employment or economic activity which involves inherent substantial conflict with their responsibilities and duties as tribal officials...So if your job required you to conduct field inspections, witness well plugging, inspect facilities, report compliance, witness integrity tests in the oil fields and then you voted on that oil company's lease for approval, wouldn't that be a conflict? Is that ethical? Maybe we ought to have an investigation into this. It doesn't matter how many times our attorney says we don't have to comply with the nation's laws, Yates keeps steering us in that direction. The Osage Nation Police will be at our meeting this Friday. I'll let you know what that's all about next week if they don't throw me in jail for an ethics violation. The views described herein are not representative of any other Osage Minerals Council or Osage Nation Congress member. They are our own views.
Pat the oil producers on the back to come in and do business at the Oil Summit and then change the regulations and pull the rug right out from under them no matter what size they are? GOOD FOR YOU CYNTHIA. Keep those no goods at bay and the the oil flowing in Osage County for us SHAREHOLDERS.
Was there ever! You will be able to listen to this meeting online on demand when it is posted to the Audio/Video Archive at http://www.osagetribe.com/main_view_video.aspx
L. Evans reported that she had attended the Small Oil Producer's meeting at the Elks Lodge, "...and they are so upset about that huge bunch of paperwork they have to go through...and the new CFRs were pushed down "our throats and the small oil producers throats and obviously there are two different agendas here...I feel like the people who went to Washington have the shareholders interests at heart...these producers are scared to death. THEY ARE READY TO PULL OUT! This bunch of regulations is going to cut out all the Mom and Pops...you all are strangling them with your new rules! Obviously you guys (Abbot, Crum and Yates) didn't get invited because you're the ones who are trying to cut their necks." (Referring to the new CFRs) "If this gets passed, we're (small oil producers) going to have to go out of business."
Isn't it interesting that underneath Cynthia's post there is no "Reply" tab? Non the less I find it the height of hypocrisy that she of all people should talk about ethics. As far as Cynthia quoting policy that if someone gets out of line they need to be spoken to...I have this to say about that. It was Cynthia's supporters that caused the most disruption in the MC meeting today. She didn't mention that did she? Her people can't sit there and wait their turn to speak. Instead they interrupt others as they are speaking and caused as much ill mannered disruptions as possible.
Cynthia's post? Cynthia didn't post the Boone's Bulletin. I did. I'm glad she's taking matters in hand with the others who went off to Washington D.C. and that she's getting the word out about what is going on with these new CFRs and the effect it's having on the oil producers. If the Abbott team had so many supporters in the room why did it explode with thunderous applause after she finished her report at the MC meeting on Friday, the 16th of August?
That's real interesting that you would take it upon yourself to post as if you were Cynthia. The post was written as if she wrote it stating numerous times as "I" did this that and the other. I think it's called "First Tense" I guess since Cynthia takes it upon herself to sign other peoples names to MC documents, with out them knowing about it, I guess it is OK to make post on this forum and make it look like someone else is writing it. And yet there is talk of "ethics" on this forum.?? You....whoever you are, really take the cake. You post under "Anonymous" as well as "Cynthia's Bulletin" and no telling how many other post you post under different names. I can think of one or two people that would pose as Cynthia, but it will all come out at election time and maybe before then? As far as your claim of thunderous applause, it came from a small group of her load mouth supporters. Hardly a referendum of approval of her actions.
I'm replying and just in my opinion but the OSAGE MINERAL COUNCIL IS OWNED BY THE SHAREHOLDERS AND I WISH TO KEEP THE NATION AWAY Yate's. Whats going to happen if the Nation goes belly up and the Feds come in here for whatever reason and strips them of all their Grant's (Hyperthetical) I am in support of YATES, CRUM, and ABBOTT for saying no to the qualifications. The MOM AND POP SHOPS WANT THEIR CAKE AND ICE CREAM AT THE SAME TIME. They now will be held to compliance and if that scares them then they've had sometin to hide all this time. Nah, if they leave good ridence. They did there job, let them go drill somewhere else but it's not going to be any different except they won't be able hide by not following the policies. Hireing a employee on shareholders money will not fly period whoever suggested this is just idiotic. Yates the Mineral Council is not paid by the De facto Govt. there fore it is seperate from the Nation. Per the 1906 ACT each and everyone of the M.C. members can be held to that document. So lets not go down that road. You will have a fight for life on your hands. We are in a new era and the times have changed and should have a long time ago. If the BIA CANNOT HANDLE THE DEMANDS THEN IT IS INCUMBANT OF THEM TO HIRE AND THEY SHOULD SO THE LEASES FOR APPROVAL CAN BE EXPIDITED IN A FAIR AND TIMELY MATTER. The changes to the CFR'S will not do the workload that has been lacking for quite some time and the loss if it continues can result in another suit if need be....The crippling factors are the lack of geological professionals, the back logs have to stop and I suspect more factors into this but building the infrastructure from with in and building out is what needs to be done. Education is paramount and I suggested that a long time ago. It has taken some time but now I see the bigger pic. is coming into focus, just took some time. Lets not be our own worst enemy and over regulate. The CFR'S are the result of the HPP cynthia and now you want to cry me a river. This does not solve the issues and we start by all of getting along and valueing what the other say and see the path to longevity for the future of our children. Remember, The best politcal operators in buisness are able to read the organizational culture and to find ways to communicate within the culture in order to make their messages most effective. One thing is for sure we all live eat and sleep well some of us does lets get a long and stop the cat fighting and stop the he did she did with the exception of hiding your agenda for your personal self interest and not the benifit to the Shareholder and secret meetings with producers or going to Washington is counter productive and makes you look deceptive, could be a violation. I suggest not doing that again........We must stay vigilant and be sure that the current BIA is meeting it's fudiciary duties and that they get a Royalty Compliance Dept. Remember the 1906 Act requires this Agency as instructed. The Times may have changed and so should the agency grow as well and it is up to us to follow through. Clearly we need to branch and we need to Grow and we water what takes care of us..... The M.C. has been charged by the 1906 ACT.
As far as the producers go, large and small,they have been " Cutting a fat Calf " for a long time and the shareholders have paid the price for it. I can see why they don't want to abide by the new CFR's because they will have to conduct their business and follow regulations that are in effect across most of the USA. Read Ray's blog and see what the producers are complaining about. We have been losing money left and right due to improper operating procedures, antiquated metering equipment that isn't correct ( to their favor) and many other things. Why Cynthia feels we should not update our regulations and procedures and want to allow the producers to continue as is, is beyond me! This is another reason we need to get educated people on the MC that are knowledgeable of the oil business! I think Yates, Galen and a couple of others are trying to get the Osage oil business modernized but some others on the MC are just sitting in a chair and causing trouble.
Buddy, you actually made me laugh till I cried. I posted Cynthia's newsletter, The Boone's Bulletin, that she sends out by e-mail. I copied and pasted her comments, added them in the reply box and hit the button to publish them. You must not know that she sends out her bulletin periodically about what is going on from her point of view as a member of the Minerals Council.
The August 16, 2013 MC meeting in three segments is now posted to the Audio/Video Archive page for on demand listening via the internet at http://www.osagetribe.com/main_view_video.aspx
Just amazing just because she bought the material from a storage does not mean the material belongs to her and her excuse is so out of line. And if we wanted to we could go after them. We could claim they were stolen and we just don't know how they ended up there. I have more information probably that is more telling than what she has in that box she bought. It's almost as if she can't wait to find something wrong as if she is always on a witch hunt.....Doesn't this women have a happy life. LOL. She's lost credibility a while back, and now after she started to side with the producers and it's not because everyone hates her. But she needs to gom along with everyone else that went with her. She is a trouble maker. We want people who can work with eachother to solve the issues for the future of the Mineral Estate....Plain and simple. I stated in a earlier post that I agree that we should give anyone and everyone who is a shareholder a chance and opportunity to learn about the OIL BUISNESS and for her to suggest at this point requirements to sit on the council is ludacris, where in the 1906 act requires that or for that matter before you start you have to have a plan, a strategy, a core, with ppp's in place and it's kind of like putting the cart before the horse. Funny but I can't help it I can't wait to see what she's going to cry wolf about in the future. So far our estate will do well but we will be sure to be vigilant with our M.C. and The BIA. Do the job that is expected and you have nothing to worry about. Nah we need to get these mom and pop shops off on their own or just except the change and follow compliance. My bet we will see a change in the royalty checks soon to come. Bottom line is now we will with compliance see the true measure of what we have'nt seen. The future is for us to see it through. Pretty much what I said in my earlie post on AUG 17TH AT 5:47 RAY pretty much solitified what I had said with Numbers and I HAVE always said numbers do not lie.
Why are you making it seem like Cynthia is all at fault? Isn't she one of 5 other members of the Minerals Council who have taken this stance? If she bought the stuff at public auction because the Osage Nation is so pathetically incompetent as to not pay for a storage unit for two years and have the Mineral Council owned property sold at auction then she has every right to step up and thank God she did and not someone else who could have used whatever they found against us. Quit picking on her. After a while, it gets boring. As the post above stated, The Journal Record reported, "Oil and gas producers, fearing these strict rules will go into effect, are cautious about committing more assets in Osage County. Companies like Encana and Chaparral are two examples of companies backing away from Osage County because of the uncertainty." Obviously this representation wouldn't have been made if there weren't some truth to it."" There are a lot of people with Headrights who like the Mom and Pops and remember from before 1990 when they were run off and had to be painstakingly brought back in over the years, so don't think that your opinion is in the majority here because it isn't. They have helped to keep us alive over the years and that's no joke. I'm grateful to them so be cavalier with your own check that under your plan will be controlled by the big producers and then we will be their mercy. Then this change you anticipate could be down, way down, and not up.
Cynthia is happy when she can stir the pot from everything to how many packets of sugar the office uses ( remember that one) to forging the chairman's name to MC documents, to trying to get the MC involved in someone's personal business (that didn't fly) to complaining about not being chosen for committees ( happened several times) and now going to Washington to support the producers. Cynthia is a trouble maker and she enjoys it! Everyone should read Ray McClain's latest post on his web site ( Osages-You-Need-To-Know) it is the most compressive report yet and will give you a excellent idea of what is going on and why the producers don't like the proposed CFR's. Knowing Ray's background, he has more knowledge of the oil business than probably anyone on the MC. Read the report and you will come away asking why Cynthia and the other 3 are now against them the new CFR's. I believe she voted for the new CFR's ...we took the Govt money and agreed to the updated CFR's with better regulations and accountability and now maliciously she is against them! AGAIN...read Ray's report, it cuts through all the smoke and mirrors that is being thrown around. He also explains very factually what is going on with Encana and Chaparral.
Hold on. I am going to have to jump in here. We may have taken the money but the only thing most people knew was that there was going to be a negotiated rule making committee and no one really knew what that was or what it meant. There were a few questions asked but no one ever gave much of an answer from the Osage Nation government side or the BIA at all. If it had been listed in the final settlement agreement, that was finally published long after the Shareholders voted to accept the settlement, as a negotiated regulations changing committee then everyone would have known what was going on and would probably NOT have voted for the settlement or to have the Minerals Council act as their representatives. As far as I know, the entire MIneral Council and the BIA snuck up on the Osage Shareholders, holding out and waiving the settlement money in the right hand with a butcher knife full of treachery in the left hand hidden behind their backs. This is exactly as I remember it and there were people on that OSA Discussion web site that tried to warn us time and time again about accepting the settlement by that phony BIA vote before we saw the final agreement and fully understood what it meant.
You are exactly correct! All people were worried about at the time was the money we were going to get. And we voted not knowing what the new CFR's were to be. Having said that I think the new regulations are way over due.
Hey truthful Shareholder no disputes what you are saying. Or the Fact that the JUDGE in the HPP case recognized the rightful owners of the estate. Yates has it wrong. Now my eyes are on him. Cynthia will go and if Yates continues on this page he is on, we will ask him to step down and we can do that. And I'm going to tell you why and I do not think I have it wrong as advised. First it does not say that as a shareholder of the estate that we cannot recall anyone of you sitting as a M.C. member. It does say in the 1906 ACT eight members. Second we are the owners of the estate aired to us not the Nation or anyone else, as a shareholder in the first we are not party as to a second shareholder and we will never be a a second shareholder, per the 1906 Act. In a sense if you pick at the 1906 Act it is clear we must have a Chief but why do we have to have a Chief who in a sense we pay to be on both sides of the fence kinda a conflict but it is so no one person can have full authority and our four fathers saw to this. And this is why we have to answer to the S.O.I AND D.O.I AND D.O.J AND THE FED. GOV'T BUT MOST OF ALL THE U.S. CONGRESS. This makes us unequivocally the true owner. We haveing to adhere to the Nation is B.S. We are a separate Business Entity. And I'll bring this up again this office needs to get organized and set a set of rules or PPP'S in place. The Nations not going to do it for us. Everyone lives by rules why should this Entity behave any differently. When Cynthia suggested that we make it a requirement for new council members to be educated and realizing she probably has good intentions but where did she get her education? Ah in this Field, on the job, so, you have to ask isn't it hypocrytical in a sense that most of her experience is on the job training and now what gives her the authority to ask, just pointing out another fact and do we want to close the door on another shareholder who might want the same opportunity, education about his or her estate, I think not. It's kinda like putting the horse before the cart. If there are going to be PPP'S then you must have a standard by which it comes from a core value. A lot needs to be done and yet our members on the council understand poor record keeping in a day an age where this should not be happening and we have members who sit on the council who other wise can't seem to understand that they as well should be doing the same as the BIA and following through with the data but for the liabiity to the trust estate and to the Shareholders as well. What are we paying them for the air that they breath around them? Or for that matter we must remember we don't want another dictator or we don't want the hypocrasy to get any deeper. Let the Truthful Shareholder remind you, and remember what we stand for, United WW OSAGE SHAREHOLDERS, THE OSAGE TRIBE. Long live the 1906 ACT. The Nation would not be here if it was not for us in the first regardless whether we like it or not. So when I say that their are solutions lets get to them and not sit around for the next drama. Theirs always going to be something but another day we slip from our fingers what we should be doing is another dollar missed and unaccounted for. Our Success is in our hands it's time to plant the seed. We need a working office and I say make our M.C. members aspire all that they can be. After all they are the seed and we are the sun shine. STAY POSITIVE SHAREHOLDERS.
One thing I do agree with, is educating with ongoing required training and continuing education about the Trust and the CFRs for the elected members of the Minerals Council in future. I became acutely aware of the need and necessity for this education when Melvin Core wanted to change the vote from a fraction/multiple shares to one man one vote no matter what your share, shares, or fractionated share might be. This is set by law and cannot be changed arbitrarily at the whim of one of the members of the Minerals Council. It appeared as if Mr. Core didn't realize this, exposing his ignorance in the matter. We need people working for the Shareholders who actually know what's what in the law associated with the Osage Minerals Estate Trust. The BIA needs to have educational sessions to bring these people up to speed where the laws and the applicable rules/regulations are concerned. This should not be optional.
Just read Ray McClains report on the last Mineral Council meet. Funny isn't it, how he neglected to mention how Cynthia reported that the upcoming Osage Oil Summit is paid for by the oil producers. She even detailed the number of hotel rooms and suites, the meals, the liquor, the conference rooms and the fact that it's being held at the Hard Rock Hotel in Tulsa and that's BIG BUCKS folks. It seems that some of the members of the Osage Nation government have blinders on and they should stop lying to themselves and others as well. The trip to Washington D.C., was taken because the oil producers don't like the new proposed CRFs because they negotiated in good faith to do business in the Osage under the old CFRs and don't like having the ON government and the Feds at the BIA jerk the rug out from under them. Now if it's unethical for the members of the MC who were invited to take that trip, then the OOS that is paid for by the oil producers is just as unethical too. Fair is fair.
I read the entire post wondering if Ray and I had been at the same meeting? If we are going to rely on someone to report to the Shareholders then you find out that they are cherry picking it is rather disappointing. Why can't there just be the reporting of the facts and then make your own conclusions?
The Summit has been scheduled to be held at the Cherokee Hard Rock since shortly after last year's Summit. It was discussed and voted on at a OMC meeting and they offered the best deal with the most perks, or so it was presented to the Council. There was discussion about Skiatook too as I recall but couldn't be assured that it would be completed on time and there are not 60 rooms as has been reserved according to the discussion. As of Wed. it sounds like that there is a glitch to have the Lease Sale at the same time, PLUS the fact that there were only TWO LEASES nominated to date! Really appears that there is NOTHING wrong in the Osage, doesn't it?
Is it a glitch or is it keeping the redundancies down? At a administration level their is a huge problem at the BIA and with our Gov. body the M.C . When you see that lack of or there of organization coupled with the fact that there is no follow through, with evidence of material being left behind in storage units....and we are in the 20th century incompetence is a part of why we are here on everyones part. To do nothing an squable like children is a waste of time and another day that goes by we are no better off than we were before the HPP settled. And now you have another suit to start with the Feds.....
If the man who witnessed the storage bldg debacle is correct, and the material is related to the 30th council activities and as memory serves that was Charles Tilman and Dudley Whitehorn's council. Now Cynthia Boone has the documents. Oh my*what could go wrong there???
To Speaker Yates. It is incumbent of the Shareholder and Stakeholder as we are one to inherently protect the interest of the Four Billion Mineral Estate. You are charged as the Governing Body and by and by the 1906 ACT. I am unfortunately asking you to remove Cynthia Boone , Melvin Core, Dudley Whitehorn, and Curtis Bear to relieve them of their seat. This decision is based on nothing but pure Business Ethics and not on Emotion. Their Actions was counter productive to the Estate and quite the opposite of who we want representing the Shareholders. Bottom line their actions has caused great harm. And we have yet to see the damage or thereof in the future. Lets be clear on this matter Yates. Forever the stakeholder and shareholder that we are, forever enshrined by the 1906 Act. The Act of impropriety has occurred blatantly in front of our faces and now we have a rouge four that clearly do not see the consequence of their actions to the detriment of the estate no longer can be valued or trusted to do what is right for the Shareholder and no longer recognized. No Kidding Sir......The Law is the 1906 ACT of which they were charged and sworn to uphold and they crossed the line. End of Story. We or I as a shareholder find them as a threat and so should the rest of the Shareholders, in the real world they would be gone A.S.A.P I suggest you get with the Chief and start the process and we do not need LAWYERS OR SCOI'S Action today and not tomorrow. The evidence speaks for itself. If the Chief cannot get away with unethical behavior so should the rouge for be charged.
Speak for yourself there ANON. What do you plan to do? String the rest of them up by the short hairs when they attend the Osage Oil Summit that is bought and paid for by the Oil Producers. Lobbying the BIA is wholly allowable and acceptable under the 1906 Act. Nearly every Council for the last ONE HUNDRED YEARS has been to Washington, D.C. for one reason or another to present their requests (lobbying) to the BIA. They are in the majority with five voting to not accept and to have more time to review the new CFRs. You are on the side of the minority in this matter for certain.
The Truth of the crutch hurts sorry. I'm not here for Childs Play. This is serious. And I am Justified. You on the other had do not understand the common denominator. Someone turned off your turn signal a long time ago of which you do not understand logic. I do. As I said in a earlier post they have the right to do as they feel and as I said to the contrary just because they can does not justify the means. This is nothing personal. This is real Business and if you cannot see the forest for the trees then you are in that minority. Anybody can justify their Actions. Like everyone has one. They pandered to the Producers and sorry a Century of no action to continue after just 2yrs into the Settlement and yet we want an extention hell no....I'm for the update of the CFR'S and For the BIA to step up to the agreement of the settlement and enforce the New CFR'S. We need to Grow and no way shape or form will this hurt the Producers....We need to clean house. I do not want to compact this agency. So we solve the problem ourselves. The Answers are so clear what has to happen and couldn't be more in your face....You live on a Naive Plain. I just want truth, integrity , strength for the O.M.C...When you look at the overall perspective, you look at the principal and business activities then you see the big Pic. The M.C would not be here if it was not for us. They work for us and I want my dollar to go to the Interest of the M.E. not to self interest.
You are one among many who take this situation as seriously as you do. Make no mistake. We respect your opinion but don't care to be steamrolled by it. At times it's better to agree to disagree. Cynthia has a very numerous, staunch and loyal following and it would be a mistake to try and nail her to the cross. The same can be said of some of the others who also went to Washington, D.C. The thing to keep in mind is that all of the members of the Minerals Council know that the CFRs are going to change. They also know that once they are in stone, as they have been for many many years, most of them want to take a longer time to consider the unintended consequences that might come about as a result of layering on even more regulations that the BIA cannot hope to cope with at this point in time and for some time in the future.
Thank you Osageblogger I do see the unintended consequences, we live it and see it every day it's what we do that makes all the difference. What they cannot see is for us to see in the future, the unintended consequence has played a huge role and if you look at it from a Psychological view as well we all Human and Fear is wicked as to happenchance can be fortuitous. I would rather not walk in fear to living the truth and walking the talk.....and as you have said education and building the infrastructure from within is a great start. We have Eight Members that can step up to the plate and start the data processing and you can map and input duplicate leases and network with the agency so everyone is in compliance......But to delay is another dollar not accounted for and I am not in the habit of losing money or complaining and nor should you..... Two years and we are still at square one. Everyone had time to read the new CFR'S. And I do realize after everything said and done not everyone is on the same educational level and or just don't know, I get that. And I am not being mean when I say that. Yes I see the unintended actions, can go in a different direction as well. See both sides of the pendulum...If what I am saying is shell shocking it should be. Get up and stand up fight for your rights.
ALARM! Mineral Meeting Discussion today, what's all this about the Jeff Jones letter, Attorney General of the Osage Nation, that indicates that the Headright Shares will now be on the basis of one man one vote no matter how many full shares or a fractionated share that the Headright owner may have and how it relates to the current validity or lack of validity to change 25 CFR Part 90, without a full hearing process similar to what has recently been done with 25 CFR Part 226? In addition, that Congressman Standing Bear is right now making a major move to compact the Mineral Estate away from the BIA under the auspices of the Osage Nation and right out from under provisions of the Federally held Mineral Estate Trust? WTH is going on HERE? I thought the Osage Nation was supposed to STAY OUT OF MINERALS BUSINESS AND LEAVE THE MINERALS COUNCIL ALONE! We need to keep an eye on this Standing Bear when he makes his bid for elected office whether it's for Chief or as a member of Congress in 2014.
Now you understand, we are not going to accept the Nation compacting in any way shape or form, will have a huge fight on them. Compacting is not the way to go but if nothing is done to preserve what is in stone, the 1906 Act. Will take an act of Congress the U.S. Congress to approve such a Grandious move of this nature. Let them try and it will get knocked down. Standing Bear and Yates....both of them are peas in a pod. United We Stand.
These mineral meetings are getting more and more out of hand. They need to start running them more professionally. This is an oil business/shareholder meeting and they are letting it be run like a damn free for all. Chairman needs meeting training. This is going out to the public and the oil producers can listen in too from anywhere. Councilman verbally threatening other members of Council? It gets more and more appalling every one they have.
Unfortunately there is great rhetoric going on. Take the emotion away then what do you have, a Business that clearly needs to be ran from that standpoint of professionalism. And you do this by not giving the appearance of impropriety, once that line has been crossed all integrity you once had is lost....Now we correct this in of which matter is not easy to come to because everybody knows everybody mentality atmosphere needs to leave the Stadium and the best interest put for for the Shareholders. Bottom line where there is supply there will be demand that's the law of nature....I appreciate the MOM AND POP Producers for all that they have done but now it is our wish that you update in sync with compliance to the 21st century the CFR'S. In the long run that will protect the assets of Osage Shareholder and the Producer. This is our money. We decide. Now once again this is my opinion of what needs to happen and let this be an example of what not to do in the future. We pay you to represent us not the producers. To delay the CFR'S would cause more harm than good. Not that, this is going to happen. Even the Federal Government agrees we need to be updated. Lets get current with the rest of the U.S. and move forward. Change does not mean it will necessarily be wrong either...or right but Yate's being the speaker needs to address both ends of the spectrum and restore civility by standing up and being leader and address these issues professionally. It is not always easy to do what is right but at least you can walk the truth knowing you did right with your head up...
Ray has a new letter out of his opinion about the New Found Treasure Cyntia found. And as I've stated as well her actions are beligerent and contrary to the Oath she took. The Material she has she may have paid for the documents and she is a Member of the M.C. and the Material she is charged with is to protect and turn it in to the M.C. We pay you to keep these documents safe for the Benefit of the Shareholders and could be considered the property of the Shareholders. I would hate to take this women to the Courts and morally by the Oath she took this property belongs to us. This will not be used as a bartering tool to keep her on the council, in no way shape or form can she be trusted. I understand what she is doing and really she needs to remove her emotions and maybe she might just get some respect. I'm for progress and everywhich way we turn she trumps up something else. I find her hostile to the detriment of the 4 BILLION M.E. MRS. GLADYS KRITZ ITS TIME TO LEAVE AND BOW OUT GRACEFULLY http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?_adv_prop=image&fr=mcafee&va=mrs+kravitz
Ok nuff said, What we have is a failure to communicate and you can bet where this starts and where we need to do something today and about the find of the 30TH Council Records and I can assure this will reflect negatively on the M.C. or Positively. First and foremost I have been a victim from time to time with reality in the Past and I can assure you in the Past I would rectify or remedy the situation. This is Human Error but the blame reflects on all of us. If you don't know you just don't know and of no fault but if you know and do nothing you are complicit.....I take some of the blame as well for I am a Shareholder and a Constituent and Osage. I for the love of our Tribe throughout the years worked to survive as I was taught not ever not for once has my love for our Tribe has swayed. Guilty by not paying attention cuz I was too busy raising 5 kids and might I say beautiful kids...I take accountability. So when I say to do nothing about this situation is like putting a bandaid and not solving the problem for the future. Put an IT in your office and start following through and start doing the J.O.B. of a M.C. and Governing Body. You are a separate entity from this Gov. You create Rev. for the Shareholders for the Producers and the Fed.Gov. etc...So when I say this would not happen if you were in the real world means exactly that. What are all of you getting paid for, to argue? And RAY McClain your last letter I just want you to know that I am a Osage Shareholder first and in the second a Constituent. I would prefer that when you right to us Please address us as voting Shareholders or shareholders as recognized by the FEDERAL GOV. and THE U.S. CONGRESS. We live in an age of data storage. Programs that almost do the work for you. Mapping with the technology of today is the state of the art these days, There is no excuse when you take away the excuse then you begin to understand how to execute what needs to be done first....This is a layout for a strong Governing Body to build out from within. But you have to have a Core and a Standard and let it be the 1906 Act. Incompetence is not an Excuse....
Do you guys have any idea how embarrassingly immature you all can seem at times over the way you behave over Cynthia? You know? Get over it. Get over her and quit giving her the buainess every time you turn around over one thing or another. Are you that shot with envy through and through?
Cynthia has sent us her statements that she read into the record during the last two Minerals Council meetings. Included are the AG letter and the OSA endorsement letter of the trip to Washington, D.C. To download these documents, go to http://edigital.iserver.net/osages/Cynthia_AG_OSA.pdf
Thank you Osagebloger for the information though I was unable to find edigital.iserver on the post of august 23 2013 at 1:43 am. Searched with Google still could not find that address you posted. Thanks
Concerning the letter of support that osageblogger Aug 23 2013 refereed to from the OSA, it is important to understand how these letters come about. Someone in the OSA meeting will make a motion, in this case the letter of support and it will be voted on by the members present, which could be only a hand full. Additionally it is important to point out that after the last election the OSA and the board is controlled by Cynthia and her friends with her husband as chairman. No big surprise there! Keep in mind that these people are officers of OSA by default! No one else ran for the positions. So...you now have Cynthia's supporters making up the majority of members in attendance at the OSA meetings and they can make a motion and get it passed with out a problem. SO...it should come as no surprise that she has a letter of support from the OSA. The OSA is now going to be a big propaganda machine and you can bet she will use it well. Her motto of "I work for you" is a joke. " I work for me and I'll do what I want" should be the motto!
It is a figment of their fantasy of which they live a lie. And which they should answer to. They are both officers and it is a true Conflict. If we are choosing to file ethical charges against the Chief so shall we make a removal a necessary in the interest of the Shareholder. This is a conflict and I motion for Cynthia to be removed it will be one or the other......I find her hostile. We can and will and I'm sure there is somebody who is willing to take her seat. It would be easier. This would be the first constructive move charged by our Governing Body the M.C. Who is the OSA? We are the Shareholders and what is it they exactly do? Outside of make decisions that should be Governed by and by the MINERAL COUNCIL. Where does it say we charge the OSA, LOL and a LETTER OF SUPPORT MEANS DIDDLY. LOL.....The letter is a detraction as well from what has to be done. Get rid of the disease and you cure the ailment. The disease of inaction....
The Facebook web page of the Osage Community for Responsible Citizenry at https://www.facebook.com/groups/yanman/ has a post by Curtis Bear about holding three Town Hall meetings this coming Sunday in Grayhorse, Pawhuska and Hominy.
To bad Curtis didn't think it was important enough to have Town Hall meetings before he and others went to Washington to support the producers. A trip that was paid for by the producers, by the way. And just think...we are paying him to represent us on the MC! Think about that each time they go into "Executive Session" with the producers!! They slipped out "In the middle of the night" on the producers dime and all he wants to do now is explain what he did. I don't care, his actions speak more than his words. He seems to be a nice guy but I no longer trust him or the others that went, to represent me on the MC.
Response to Mr. Pipestem’s Facebook statement: “ Producers would not provide this information “ ….regarding negative effects of NYMEX on producers. Fact was that until September, 2012 meeting the Osage Producers Association was not even aware of the Osage NegReg meetings (Who in Oklahoma reads the Federal Registry?) and remember zero operators named on NegReg committee as required. Then by the next NegReg meeting in Oct. 2012, the “ NYMEX Solution” had been totally bought by most as a simple wonderful cure-all answer for all the $380,000,000 settled law suit's many BIA mismanagement causes. And Osage MC & BIA leaders' minds were closed shut to any contrary financial facts from operator’s knowledge learned from years of marketing crude oil. Myself and operators tried and tried to explain why the “ NYMEX Solution '’ will kill the goose that lays the Osage Mineral Estate's golden egg ....but your legal representative and others who never sold or bought a barrel of crude oil or invested in a drilling deal, would not listen! We along with ranchers were agenda-ed away, and treated like skunks at a Sunday picnic. Get real....If BIA's Mike Black and lawyers inside Wash DC are so right - how come Osage Mineral Estate's only free market customer - the oil & gas operators are steaming mad with many leaving? Add in ranchers & other landowners with years of grievances as not happy campers. In my opinion, the Osage NegReg project was a failed experiment in democracy, so lets have a civil debate and have jurors find & follow the facts. Therefore I issue a honorable challenge: Mr. Wilson Pipestem and Mr. Galen Crum come to Tulsa and debate the “ NYMEX Solution “ and your other cure-all issues with me before a jury of private sector economists, oil & gas attorneys and major bank trustee officers, all experienced in the petroleum industry's capital & financial investment risks and rewards.
I believe that if this Debate would take place it would certainly show why these New CFR's are such a BAD idea. Not just for the Operators but for all of us because anything that causes delays in getting the oil out of the ground is NOT to our benefit. Just saw this on Facebook too:
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/286245-report-us-oil-and-gas-production-up-despite-drop-on-federal-lands INDEPENDENT nonpartisan Congressional Research Service quotes decline in oil development of SEVEN percentage points DESPITE output rose about 1.1 Million BBLS/DAY... looks like the BIA got out of the Indian Business in a BIG WAY, unfortunately the Osage are going to have to put the pieces back together if this new CFR is NOT STOPPED.
Aren't you confusing apples and oranges here? The article says nothing about Indian land controlled by the BIA. These are lands controlled by State and Federal rules and regulations. It's a bit disingenuous to muddle the issue in this way.
Not that I don't think your point is well taken, it's just not the same situation with Federal lands and Indian Land. I think your idea is a great one and a debate in a conference room should be added to the agenda to air these issues pro and con with the BIA and the Oklahoma Delegation invited to attend during the forthcoming Osage Oil Summit at the Hard Rock in Catoosa. GO for it.
307 days to get a drilling permit on federal lands? Is this what they are proposing in the new CFRs? Will the new regs take that much time or close to it if these new CFRs go into effect?
I agree with SMH. Lets not muddle it's bad enough. If the BIA is out of compliance by not following due process then it is up to the M/C to take action. Isn't there a law that if Leasing Permits do not meet the necessary constraint times allowable for processing at a administration level within said timelines set forth by law, the BIA is required to pay a fine to the Shareholders? And in the same breath the leases then become approved automatically?
Mr. Jackman, I would absolutely love to debate you, or anyone else, about the proposed CFR changes. After months of listening to your unending dialogs twice a day at every negotiated rule making meeting I yearn for the chance to point out all the errors and misinformation contained in your rhetoric. Even the producers came to me several times requesting you be barred from further speaking because they felt that the misinformation you were spreading was clouding the real issues that they were trying to bring forward. They thought that since you do not own or operate any leases in Osage County that perhaps you might be barred on that basis. I had to inform them that the Committee was tasked with listening politely to anyone who signed up to comment,(even someone without your small interest in a single gas field) and I also assured them that your comments were being given the full weight and consideration they deserved. To the commenter asking about the time frame permit approvals sometimes takes on other federal lands. We in the Osage have a completely different system and much less red tape than required other places. The Neg/Reg committee was very careful not to add unnecessary changes to our regulations that would bring about delays in any segment of our operation. Indeed several changes were aimed at making our already much faster system more efficient. The one I’m most excited about is the one that will force the Osage Agency to convert from a paper based system to a digital one. Currently much time and labor is wasted in processing and sending paper applications back and forth for corrections, clarifications and approvals. These delays are also true for things like production reports and all other aspects of normal business. When the digital system is installed, small problems like a left out piece of information on a form can be pointed out and corrected in seconds instead of a week of mailing forms back and forth. Also when the production data is reported in digital form, we will have a searchable production data base that will open the doors to infinitely better ways for the BIA, Minerals Council and producers to manage our mineral estate.
Galen thank you so much....I get it. Not much kudos goes out to you and everyone. You responding makes the world of difference and maybe we should have a higher standard. But lets work the kinks. I'm a Titan when running a business but anybody will tell you I will give the back of my shirt to anyone.
Reprint from Robert Jackman on Conversation August 2013 Thread today: Robert Jackman responding to Galen Crum: First are corrections to his recent blog minimizing my interests in producing property’s value to Osage Shareholder, as a “small gas field.” Fact of record; R. Jackman owns interests in 18 good producing oil and gas wells in Osage County which since 2002 have paid millions in royalty to Shareholders. And without being required in leases or drilling program agreements originated by Jackman, the Operator in early 2000 donated at my suggestion, thousands to Osage Museum and Pawhuska Dance Arbor’s needed repairs and maintenance. Next, I wonder if Mr. Crum and I attended the same Osage NegReg meetings? His questioned description of reactions to my public remarks and suggestions to NegReg Committee members and general public, are in complete opposite to comments and reactions I received; A standing ovation at one meeting, and often many operators, Mineral Council Members, Shareholders and ranchers thanking me in person for my stand-up remarks made at the various meetings. To summarize my NegReg meetings remark’s message: “ It is BIA’s Continuing Willful Mismanagement –Stupid.” And where Mr. Crum and BIA Officials and I respectfully disagree; They totally support BIA’s top management in Muskogee and Wash DC in their blame–shifting of all the $380 million in damages from the BIA’s past mistakes and negligent - to the Operators. Therefore by his incorrect statements Mr. Crum is obviously guilty of the denier’s classic act; “ Ignore the Message and Shoot the Messenger - Jackman.”
The Osage News is reporting the LAND BY BACK PROCESS BY THE US. DEPT. OF INTERRIOR. Has any Shareholder recieced any information in regards to this matter?
Ok, Just read Ray McClains posting uh all I have to say is HIT RESTART AND HAVE A OSAGE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Wow the Conflicts of interest exists and now I see why such the turmoil.....ONE WORD, STUPIDITY, is not an excuse....Ah I see why the BIA takes the stance of not gettin involved in O.N voting procedures but with this seperate agency and Buisness Entity THE M/E has dropped the ball. I see the ball being dropped all over the place...If you connect the dots OMGeebies.....and now this is where we are at. SOBERING AS IT IS, does not mean we cannot take Authority to correct the injustice and move forward. until we know how the Tilman Case will turn out and if I suspect right we just might have to do a about turn as in u turn. Hit restart because this Gov is operating on a Lie by not following there Constitution by not recognizing this Agency is not apart of the Osage Nation but must follow the laws of the Nation and the FED. Govt. The answer is simple in nature and we start by everyone adhereing to the rules and live by them, the M/E has Authotity to Administrate and develope the M/E and should act by doing so for the future of the M/E. End the conflict and remove CYNTHIA and the Others who did not follow by the Nations Laws as written. They are now hostile to the overall goven body of the M/E....We cannot have 2 members of one family in positions of authority MYRON REDEAGLE will have to go. Sorry....voting The Chief and the Asst. Chief are tie breakers we pay them from our Royalty yet they still can vote in M/E matters, no there is no conflict there. That needs to end. And then again our rights have been abrogated all along is my understanding what I have read to be true from the articles presented and not represented by the BIA for the Shareholders obligated as set forth by the 1906 ACT. We take the proper steps to right the wrong today. Lets clean house...
And as of my last post at 2:15 As I am understanding title and land into trust if you read and as I have stated before and others as well like Jenny,from the office of S.O.I. SECTION 4;307 AND 308 title and deposition of income say's, during the pendency of the probate and up to the date of transfer of title to the U.S. in trust for tribe in accordance with section 4;307 all income received or accrued from the land interest purchased by the tribe shall be credited to the ESTATE. So let me see, how many of the Casinos income went to the Estate before we were a Government? and or why is it not happening to this day? Our Success in in our ability to move forward and we do this by being accountable.
Fascinating "OME Mineral Council Election" Letter sent to Attorney Grimm from the BIA and it's not a "Fairy Tale": Go to http://www.osages-you-need-to-know.com/ and click on the text 3. 2013-8-26 BIA letter to B. Grimm-Tilman suit.pdf (PDF — 584 KB). This letter asserts that it is only property rights that are important and that they have not been diminished by the existence of the new Osage Nation constitutional government. If I understand this correctly, the political rights that have been lost to the shareholder are of no importance whatsoever to the BIA including, I presume, the loss of membership, after the new ON Constitution was ratified when the membership bill was passed by the ON Congress in the Fall of 2006, as well as the right to run for elected Minerals Council office DESPITE the fact that the 2004 Reaffirmation Act states only and very clearly AND WITHOUT QUALIFICATION AS TO WHAT THAT BUNDLE OF RIGHTS ACTUALLY ARE, "provided that the "rights" of any person to the Osage mineral estate shares are not diminished." (Emphasis added) The property right to receive the income and to inherit are only two of that bundle that used to include the right to be a member and the right to run for office. This is so strange to me because the U.S. Government was FORMED BECAUSE THE POLITICAL RIGHTS WERE DIMINISHED (no taxation without representation) and for the most part, did not exist for those who lived in the new world under the reign of Britain's King George III. That's WHY we had an American Revolution! See the U.S. Declaration of Independence. It appears to me that the U.S. through it's system of government and various Branches is now turning around and doing the same thing to the former members of the Osage Tribe because the U.S. Congress did not fully clarify what that bundle of rights associated with a headright share actually included at the time that its members passed P.L. 108-431. Is this weird or what?
It's also important to note that the Osage Tribal Council's OGRC did not give the members of the Osage Tribe the right to choose their form of government in the Referendum Election in the Fall of 2005 because the questions that were included never asked whether those who voted wanted to keep the current resolution style form of government that was in existence at the time. The questions in that election were only about a constitutional form of government. See http://www.osagemineralstrustprotection.com/PDF/ReformQuestionsResults.pdf and http://www.osagemineralstrustprotection.com/
I'm not surprised. My vote did not get counted in 2005. And thats my argument as well. Proper notification was not sent and the executive said it was in the OSAGE NEWSPAPER HOW YOU WERE NOTIFIED. I said what? I didn't subscribe to the Newspaper and this could not be the only way we were notified and if that was the case Where was the BIA. notifying the Shareholders as well as the SOI and Congress etc... The ball was dropped and maybe this Gov. SHOULD BE DROPPED AS WELL. Shut IT DOWN. Where is the letter of intent to the Shareholders? Ah the excuse was we notified by the NEWS. Not. If I had known I would have been in tow with a lawyer to fight this before we became a Gov. Still trying to digest this all but now that we examined the issue at hand....we can move forward. Now you see why we are all over the place....We are a united front for the truth for the Osage Tribe.
The only way we became and this is my opinion with facts to support what I am saying is everything you just pointed out, sum's it all in a nutshell OSAGEBLOGGER. Talk about the wool being pulled over your eyes. And if you again look at the voting numbers back then to date isn't coincidental the votes are low at 1400 to 1500 and we have 15000 Osages. We should be taking this to U.S Congress and make them aware what is happening. The Bia is not going to act so we must, a court can't decide for us, it will be Congress. Even the ruling Judge in the HPP case got it right. She made sure that the proper authority to receive this payout recognized the proper authority and got it right. Just more facts to support.
Heres a copy of public law 108-431. Shareholders we urge you to voice your opinion in this matter. Go to Rays site if you have questions just come back to this Blog. Ask. Don't be shy. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-108publ431/pdf/PLAW-108publ431.pdf
HEADS UP! RED ALERT--THE COMMENT PERIOD ON THE NEW CFRs for 25 CFR Part 226 HAS BEGUN! Comments on this proposed rule must be received by October 28, 2013: "Comments on the information collections contained in this proposed regulation are separate from those on the substance of the rule. Comments on the information collection burden should be received by September 27, 2013 to ensure consideration, but must be received no later than October 28, 2013. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: —Federal rulemaking portal: The rule is listed under the agency name ‘‘Bureau of Indian Affairs’’ and has been assigned Docket ID ‘‘BIA–2013–0003’’ at http://www.regulations.gov. —Email: osageregneg@bia.gov. Include the number 1076–AF17 in the subject line of the message. —Mail or hand-delivery: Mr. Eddie Streater, Designated Federal Officer, Bureau of Indian Affairs, P.O. Box 8002, Muscogee, OK 74402. Include the number 1076–AF17 on the outer envelope. We cannot ensure that comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES) will be included in the docket for this rulemaking and considered. SEE THE FULL NOTIFICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-08-28/pdf/2013-20764.pdf
The following notification came in the Minerals Council Newsletter e-mailed August 30th, 2013:
Attention Shareholders: The proposed changes to the CFRs have been published in the Federal Register. The changes are not beneficial to the Osage oil producers and will hinder their attempts to further their activity to increase oil production. If you have any concerns you can write the Secretary of the Department of the Interior and or the Oklahoma state representatives. You can also write the Designated Federal Officer of the BIA:
Senator James Inhofe 1924 S. Utica Ave. Suite 530 Tulsa, Ok 74104 (405) 350-7744
Congressman Frank Lucas P.O. Box 1726 Oklahoma City, Ok 73101 (918) 748-5111
Senator Tom Coburn 1800 S. Baltimore Suite 800 Tulsa, Ok 74119 (918) 581-7651
Congressman Markwayne Mullin 104 S. Muskogee Ave. Claremore, Ok 74017 (918) 341-9336
Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell 1849 C Street N.W. Washington, DC 20240 (202) 208-3100
Mr. Eddie Streater Designated Federal Officer BIA P.O. Box 8002 Muscogee, OK 74402 Include the number 1076—AF17 on the outer envelope. Comments on this proposed rule must be received by October 28, 2013.
SHAREHOLDERS, BE CERTAIN TO SEND IN YOUR COMMENTS TODAY!
Can someone please detail in short what it is exactly they perceive to be a threat with respect to the changes of the CFR'S. It is my belief that at one level you can update all you want and a judge can sign off but isn't it Congress that needs to approve signed by the President once said and done? After all it took the President to sign and sanction the HPP SETTLEMENT. In addition, you can make all the Changes you want to the CFR'S until at the administration hires more staff to insure and inforce these rule changes nothing is going to happen. Unless there is accountability and consequences or there of how is this going to work? In the end it's the M/E that will suffer.....
I don't believe that the President signed off on the HPP lawsuit. That was the Cobell settlement that he signed off on. The HPP lawsuit was adjudicated in the Court of Federal Claims and they have the ability to settle claims with the money they have available. The President signs off on Congressional legislation. I don't think that he signs off on the updating of the CFRs but I may be wrong.
I notice that the bulletin denouncing the new rules in the Sept. OMC news letter is not signed. I think at least 2 and maybe 3 of the half-wit councilmen who took that trip to Washington are on the committee that edits this newsletter. It looks like Mr. Core at least signs what he writes. Boone, Bear, and Whitehorn don’t seem too proud of what they are doing. Like on the blog, they post as anonymous in the newsletter too.
Note that Kevin Washburn of the BIA can issue extensions: Washburn Extends Comment Period on Federal Recognition Regulations. Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/08/15/washburn-extends-comment-period-federal-recognition-regulations-150865
For periodic reports from Osage Shareholder, Ray Mcclain at http: www.Osages-You-Need-To-Know.com
ReplyDeleteIs the domain down for Osageshareholders.org? Ray keep up the talented work you are doing.
DeleteA new BIA Operations Report as of July 5, 2013 is up on Ray McClain's web site.
DeleteThank you.
DeleteFor Cobell information, see http://www.indiantrust.com/
ReplyDeleteSee article, Changes approved in Cobell payments to heirs at http://nativetimes.com/news/federal/9000-changes-approved-in-cobell-payments-to-heirs
DeleteTAKE ACTION TODAY! Chief Red Eagle opposes the ‘Eagle Take’ permit from the wind developer and is urging Osage tribal members to speak out against wind farm. See the article at http://osagenews.org/article/chief-red-eagle-opposes-‘eagle-take’-permit-wind-developer "The Nation is urging tribal members to voice their concerns to Jerry Thompson, Chief of the USFWS Migratory Bird Permits Office, at jerry_e_thompson@fws.gov or by phone at (505) 248-6406."
ReplyDeleteView article, Osage Nation officials take cultural stand against eagle kill permit at:
Deletehttp://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Osage_Nation_officials_take_cultural_stand_against/20130624_11_A1_Thegov591184
VERY Interesting comment posted at the Facebook page of the Bigheart Times at https://www.facebook.com/pages/Bigheart-Times/130472647019594 under Recent Posts by Others on Bigheart Times: by Fred Wightman--"Louise, I can't message you guys. Would your husband still be interested in the wind tower pole? I was able to find a mounting ring with studs from Ion Solar here in Tulsa that would allow you guys to set the ring in concrete with rebar to secure the tower to the base. The tower will need to be dropped and John Miggins here in Tulsa has the unit that allows people to lower towers and erect them. I have numbers and contact information for both of these. If you are going to set a wind turbine on this pole, you will need to have the exact configuration of the tower top and it is much easier to make adjustments needed while the pole is horizontal." Is Congressman Raymond Red Corn and his wife Louise going into the wind farm business too?
DeleteNew article>> http://osagenews.org/article/osage-nation-wants-countys-help-opposing-eagle-kill-permits
DeleteBig News for the Shareholders: view articles in the Tulsa World and The Oklahoman, Chaparral Energy to redevelop North Burbank oil field in Osage County at http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Chaparral_Energy_to_redevelop_North_Burbank_oil_field/20130625_49_E1_Iholni368172 and Back to the Future: Chaparral hopes to recover 77 million barrels of oil from one of Oklahoma's oldest oil fields at http://newsok.com/back-to-the-future-chaparral-hopes-to-recover-77-million-barrels-of-oil-from-one-of-oklahomas-oldest-oil-fields/article/3855899
ReplyDeleteView article, Chief Red Eagle and Pipeline Changing Lives at http://www.osagetribe.com/executive/news_story.aspx?news_id=3134
ReplyDeleteLook at this article on the Pipeline at the Bigheart Times>> http://barnsdalltimes.com/http:/barnsdalltimes.com/news/osage-chief-releases-long-awaited-pipeline-consultant-contract
DeleteOn the Shareholder's behalf, do the members of the ON Congress ever ask any questions in session of the people that they approve by resolution? Does anyone know what Vince Logan's view is, nominee for the Office of the Special Trustee's Special Trustee for American Indians, on the Mineral Estate Trust and the Osages running it by compacting or other shared means?
ReplyDeleteDon't forget to check for the Mineral Council Meetings on the Osage Nation Tribal Monthly Calendar at http://www.osagetribe.com/CalendarList.aspx?themonth=7/11/2013%2012:00:00%20AM#d11
ReplyDeleteAs usual Ray McClain proves to be informative again with the latest news at the last M.C. meeting on the 13th. Why is Cynthia hot on the rally for those Oil gaugers? Does she know something about somethin and not coming forward and why does she not get the facts always straight? Though I appreciate all that she is and has done thus far. I am curious otherwise wouldn't you be? In addition why does she not follow protocol? And in addition what do you think about the BigHeart Statue? I agree one should be erected given that we all have benefitted from his behalf and should be recognized. And as a reminder to us all Long Live The 1906 Act and we shall continue to give voice in order to protect our Rights.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to your questions, why doesn't Cynthia confine her efforts to the business of the MC? It is reported that in the MC meeting of June 19 2013, Cynthia approached the MC wanting them to sign off on a letter of support for a woman that had "supposedly" been banned form the Hominy dances. Cynthia had no incident report or documentation to support this claim and it is reported that several people did in fact see the woman at the hominy dances. She and Mel Gore had supposedly written the letter and it already had the chairman's name on it! Chairman Yates said he had not seen the letter much less signed it! He further stated that this was none of the MC business. Non the less a vote was taken. The count was 5 to 3 against the letter of support, with Yates, Red Eagle, Abbott, Crum and Curtis Bear voting NO and Cynthia, Gore and Whitehorn voting yes. My brief comment on this, is we elected people to the MC to take care of shareholders business and not use their position to bring personal matters or individual favors that have nothing to do with MC business to the floor. Kudos to the 5 MC members that understand this.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I know the Mineral Council supports the Drum and has this line item in their yearly budget. They do have a stake in this matter so Cynthia is not off base here I don't think.
DeleteTo Orbi-Osage 7-17 at 11.09. I am fully aware the MC supports the Drum as well as their yearly budget. What exactly does that have to do with Cynthia raising a question at the MC meeting when she had no documentation to prove the incident ever happened. I believe the Chairman and the other MC members that voted NO are aware of their "Stake" in the matter as well as what is MC business and what is not. While we're at it how did Cynthia have a letter to the subject with Yates signature on it and accordingly he had not seen the letter prior to the meeting?
DeleteYes I to want to know how she attained the letter as well.
DeleteAs I understand it, she didn't "Attain" the letter....she and Mel Gore wrote it and signed Yates name to it before him even seeing the letter. It took a lot os gall and assumption ahead of time to assume Yates and the other would "Fall in line" with this little plan. Next time we vote I am going to hold our MC candidates to a higher standard than this! This ranks right up there with Cynthia's little tantrum about how much coffee cups and sweetener the office uses.
DeleteAll I know is that if the MC is supporting the Drum then they have some say in how things are done and if that's not the case then perhaps Hominy won't be needing Shareholder money or perhaps they won't accept it from the MC in the future which would probably be the best policy going forward. Is this becoming a discrimination against women issue at the Hominy dances or what? I'm not sure I understand what is really going on here. Can someone explain this in a little more detail? Thx.
DeleteFrom what I understand Indians are the worst for discrimination or of racism as well. Lets hope this is not the case. However, I do believe action is necessary to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. for the sake of appearance of any impropriety, especially with what's going on with our Chief, everyone must be on pins and needle. Understanding this situation goes without saying. I do not understand her reasoning as of late and Cynthia needs to let us know that the truth is what we want. Just being candid here she's butting her head into things because? She's up to something and we just can't see it and will she lets up shareholders know lets hope so. I'm still banking she knows something about something and lets not be quick to judge or hang her. I find her spirit entertaining and I'm sure she's had that effect with her family as well.....Mrs. Gladys Kravitz. Lol with all do respect. And really this is small fry we should be more concerned with the M.C. matters. After all there is and this is just a feeling, theres something going on in little China, meaning, the acting Superintendent Loften is leaving, issues with our Producers etc......
DeleteIn response to you wondering what Cynthia was up to with her "Letter of Support" There are rumors getting out, and I'll repeat rumors at this point, so I won't get into specifics on what they are until verified but the rumor is Cynthia was tying to help a person. How or why Mel Gore got involved in her plan is pure speculation at this point.
DeleteI believe the last name is spelled Core with a C.
DeleteYes I do understand that they are Rumors. Though still curious who and what and why she was in protection mode for? THANKS FOR THE UPDATE....Yeah sometimes I have keys that stick, you would think I would replace this keyboard of mine or use the latest technology but call me a little ole fashioned hard to throw away something that still works.
DeleteSince you've admitted it's you who posted on July 18, 2013 at 12:59 PM, I'm putting you on notice that I'm not interested in your rumors. Just the facts Jack. It was snarky little twinks posting crap just like this that got the OSA Blog taken down and some of us appreciate Osageblogger and the trouble that's been gone to so we have a place to go to share information about what is going on with our Minerals Estate. There are eight elected people paid on the Mineral Council most of whom draw a paycheck who are supposed to be keeping us up to date on what is happening with the ME and yet we have to rely on people like Osageblogger and Ray McClain to find out what is taking place in the here and now? Don't the MC have a website for posting up-to date information? Some of us are grateful and want to stay informed as events take place in real time and not a month or so later when shareholders find out one by one about things and the word eventually begins to get around. Get on board or start your own website where you can spread as many rumors as you like. Others have proven that they can go from Zero to Hero. What's standing in your way? You?
DeleteSorry, wrong person, you should not assume Jack, just stating a truth. Wish I could be more helpful. Have a great weekend.
DeleteP.S....I've posted all over this place supporting this site as well as RAY RAY.....S site. Nah I'm about a lot things and I try not to be quick to Judge, though I am to reckon with I suppose because you will come up unarmed and it's hard to fight someone who is challenged for whatever reason. It wouldn't be a fair argument or fight. Just here to stay comprised. Careful before you assume I forgive you....
DeleteOk. guys. Let's settle down bit here. As ndntoo's comment more than suggests, it's not a good idea to post rumor, innuendo and suggestions about the personal lives of others. That is not our mission here. It's best to refrain from going in that direction and if so, bottom line, everybody lives. Thank you.
DeleteAgreed....Rumors should not be posted....however to the subject of MC meetings, Ray has two reports on his site that all of us might find interesting. His site is ( raymcclain@ Osages-you-need-to-Know ) The post are dated
DeleteMC meeting 6-18-2013 and MC meeting 7-17-2013
To Poster July 17th @ 11:18 pm, I don't think Indianz.com likes the Osages. The News is out there. And if anyone of you had a chance to read RAYRAYS REPORT AT Osages-you-need-to-know.com your uneasiness will be put to rest. Just wish we could post on his site as well.
ReplyDeletePs no offense Osageblogger still have love for this site more than you know. Thanks again for the extra eye's and my eyes are wide open to listen to your interpretation is much apprecaited from this Osage.
ReplyDeleteHey, you're good. The more the merrier I say. And Ray McClain does get the job of reporting on Mineral matters done in a timely manner. Kudos to him in a big way!
DeleteKudos and thumbs up to RayRay......lol
DeleteNew article on MC Chairman Yates>> http://osagenews.org/article/osage-minerals-council-elects-andrew-yates-chairman
ReplyDeleteYeah, wasn't much news though. We already were aware. Is it just me, did the Osage News just report late on this Subject?
ReplyDeleteProbably. They were out of town in Phoenix for the 2013 NAJA NPM National Native Media Conference.
DeleteBonjour and best wishes for a happy visit to the French group, OK-OC, from Montauban that is in the Osage this week!
ReplyDeleteClick on the link, Citation of Congratulations from the Osage Nation Congress to the Occitan People of France. at http://www.osagetribe.com/congress/
DeleteWhat good are they to OK?>> http://newsok.com/oklahoma-wind-farms-to-provide-power-to-arkansas-nebraska/article/3864823
ReplyDeleteO News finally has an article, since it was first reported by the Journal Record on the 16th of July, 2013 about what has happened with the two Hz well drilling companies that are pulling out of the Osage at http://osagenews.org/article/horizontal-wells-too-costly-two-companies-osage-county
ReplyDeleteSee the article, Osage Nation, Enbridge partner up as need for pipeline workers doubles at http://barnsdalltimes.com/http:/barnsdalltimes.com/news/osage-nation-enbridge-partner-up-as-need-for-pipeline-workers-doubles
ReplyDeleteThe Osage News is reporting on their Facebook page that the ON Education Department is no longer taking applications for the Enbridge Flanagan South Pipeline Project at https://www.facebook.com/OsageNews
DeleteNew article>> http://www.osagetribe.com/executive/news_story.aspx?news_id=3191
DeleteBEWARE Shareholders--Ole' Jim Gray is still on about compacting the Mineral Estate services away from the BIA. Start small he says. Oh yeah! A year or two from then it will be a new ON Department, Office or what-have-you with 60 employees paid up to the hilt doing next to nothing but collecting a paycheck and trying to look important with a Director at a starting salary of $75K or more. He refers to "Geoff" in his comments. Who might that be, I wonder? Is he on board with this too? Find his recent comments at Osage Community for Responsible Citizenry https://www.facebook.com/groups/yanman/
ReplyDeleteAdd RJ Walker to that number too. See his post at https://www.facebook.com/groups/yanman/
DeleteIt won't happen. To many of us would unite because of obvious reasons. To many of us have more than 1 headright and will do what it takes to do what is right and protect the 1906 act...A lot of the Shareholders are uniting on one subject matter and focus and the real issue is, does the M.C. have are best interest. And when you understand that subvertly the 1906 Act and I say subtly has been used for someone's agenda. And has been used politically for argument. Once you get to the crumb of the cookie then the crumbs begin to smell like a thief in the night...of course realizing that there are people who are going to be the ones who will try to stir the pot and that's putting it politely and we recognize the shenanigans. LOl. Jim Gray will do anything to detract from the Shareholders because he is a Greedy Man? Or is it because he thinks that the BIA is detrimental to the success of the Mineral Estate? Then you have to ask what is the M.C. doing to protect and preserve the 1906 Act and serve the best interest of the Shareholders? As a collective that we should be United the Shareholders and if you don't think on front that can't happen if the M.C. doesn't begin to see the forest for the trees we might just have to do a national petition across the U.S.A for all shareholders to unite for a new Council. This could happen as well. Would take some of the cronyism away. But, bottom line we did not start this but we can end it with solutions by acting and speaking out and end the corruption of the 1906 Act. Live by it and stop cherry picking and subverting the true meaning of the text that it was written and signed by it's true intent.
ReplyDeleteUpdate on the Pawhuska 5-Man Board allegations-- Read it and weep! The outcome is that the Feds have decided to pass on any prosecution so that leaves the ON AG to move forward with a substantial array of penalties that may include: 1 year in jail, a fine of $1,000 and restitution of the $814,000 if he can even get it. Does the word SKATE mean anything to anyone out there? There is still the possibility that the IRS may come after JDM for taxes on the all or a portion of that amount. ("That's how they got Al Capone.")
ReplyDeleteThis just in everyone go to Ray Mclain's sight. At www.osages-you-need-to-know.com Patricis Sperrier Bright filed an heated e-mail to inform all that a few select people named went on behalf of the producers to Washington to lobby for them and not in executive session or was approved or on the behalf of the shareholders. This is just insane and to be honest with you I'm getting tired of Cynthia and her excuses. I for one if these members are to be removed I for one am first in line to fill any vacancy. And I am for one to support this motion. Thank you Ray for the update. Read. So telling
ReplyDeleteIsn't PSB hopping big time for Sonny Abbot these days? Didn't she used to support Cynthia? Theres a story here. I'm sure of it.
DeleteI think the story is "Maybe Abbott has been right all along"
DeleteWasn't there an Osage Mineral Council vote of 5 to 3 to NOT advance the Negotiated Rulemaking Draft to Washington DC? Did the members of the OMC adhere to that Will of the Council and vote NO as the MAJORITY of the Council agreed to do? NO THEY DID NOT! If OS want to hold someone accountable for the Will of the Shareholders why did you not call them to task for NOT voting as the MAJORITY wanted? Do you really want to see YOUR Partners continue the Great Exodus out of the Osage? Are there any new companies beating a path to your door to take over the TWO Concessions that you have already lost, with the probability of the THIRD one being within the next couple of months? There were 12 and now there are 10, with the Osage County Sales Tax going down, the pump shops sales down more than 25%, Drilling Permits from about 100 every two weeks to one a week for the past few weeks, Devon has about 17 rigs drilling right now, there are NONE of their rigs drilling in the Osage. Has the OMC told you any of these FACTS? No, the spin is that it was not profitable, go find out how much royalty that was paid on those Mississippi Wells and how much of OS SHAREHOLDER Royalty walked out that door.
DeleteMr./Mrs. Anonymous, are you even a shareholder? Were you on this trip? Did you write any of their scripts for them?
DeleteFour Minerals Council members went to Washington D.C. to stand up for the oil producers with regard to the new proposed regulations and to request that the BIA/Secretary of the Interior protect the interests of the Osage MIneral Estate as is their fiduciary obligation to do so as the Trustee of the OME. Feature this; the old regulations were put forward on a 19 page brochure. The new proposed rules and regulations (CFRs) as to oil production in Osage County are 388 pages (8.5" X 11"). If these are adopted and go into effect, not only will the big oil companies leave, the Mom and Pop producers will follow out of the Osage right behind them because IT WILL BE TOO EXPENSIVE FOR THEM TO DO BUSINESS IN OSAGE COUNTY. I think Councilpersons Core, Whitehorn, Bear and Boone deserve some thanks for going to Washington D.C. to intercede on behalf of the Shareholders and their income headright interest. The Nymex rate might look a whole lot better than the highest posted price but how much will a headright share be worth if there is no income coming in and placed in the Osage Mineral Estate Trust account in the U.S. Treasury because ALL of the oil producers have fled the oil patch in Osage County?
DeleteRED ALERT! Important Article on the BIA Osage Agency operations audited at http://roundhousetalk.com/2013/08/bia-osage-agency-operations-audited/ NOTE: "The Department of Interior has been reviewing the rules and once published, there will be a comment period." Every Osage Headright Shareholder and every Headright owner, non-Osage, and Entity, MUST send in comments during this upcoming Comment Period to stop these new regulations (CFRs) from killing the oil business in Osage County! This comment period should be announced in the Federal Register. It's your income and your individual responsibility to protect it from being diminished by rules and regulations that will severely inhibit the oil production and the income generated from it. See also the article at http://osagenews.org/article/change-coming-oil-and-gas-production-osage and the article, OMC unhappy with proposed changes to Code of Federal Regulations at http://osagenews.org/article/omc-unhappy-proposed-changes-code-federal-regulations Though many thought this could never happen, the production of oil in the OME could dry up overnight and VERY SOON if this warning is not heeded. STAY INFORMED! Plan to attend the next MC Meeting on August 16, 2013 at 10 A.M. (CDT) in the Chambers or listen live on the internet to find out more about this extremely important developing situation. The MC meeting on the 21st of August will also be important for all shareholders to attend.
DeleteUh-oh! Looks like a ton of Osages had better quit complaining, get up off their duffs and get something done about this-you know what-caught in the ringer.
DeleteA little over two years ago the Osage Minerals Council began entering into exclusive exploration and leasing agreements with oil companies with the primary goal of enticing them to experiment in developing a horizontal drilling play into the Mississippi formation under Osage County. This was an untried technique into this formation and a very expensive undertaking considering the cost of horizontal drilling and the added infrastructure needed.
DeleteUltimately, agreements were entered into with seven different companies that committed about 400,000 acres for their use in this project. The agreements required aggressive yearly drilling commitments and were to last for only 3-4 years with any unused land released back to the Osage for re-marketing.
As with any experiment, mixed results could be expected. Some of the companies are doing better than others in consistently finding the big paying wells in their area, but overall the horizontal play has been very successful for the Osage. We have collected tens of millions of dollars in exploration / lease bonuses and added a couple of thousand barrels a day in new oil production (about $40,000 per day royalty at current prices), as well as significant increases in gas production.
Two of these seven companies, Encanna and Chaparral have recently indicated that they were not going to meet the 2013 horizontal well drilling commitments needed to hold on to their large exclusive exploration areas. Encanna asked the Council’s permission to find a partner for, or to market their position in the Osage to another company. Chaparral indicated that they were retuning to a veridical well drilling program only. Neither company even mentioned the proposed CFR rule changes as a reason for their decision. Instead, both indicated to the Council that they were not hitting the big paying wells consistently enough to generate the return on investment ratio needed to justify continued horizontal drilling in their areas.
Chaparral even negotiated for 10 new 160 acre leases at $12,000 bonus per lease for the purpose of expanding their vertical drilling program in the Osage. They also have just completed a $100 million CO2 pipeline project for a new enhanced oil recovery method in the Burbank unit. They think this will quickly double oil production from this unit and generate $1.2 Billion in royalty for the Osages over the next 30 yrs. This hardly seems the behavior of a Company that is dissatisfied with doing business with the Osages.
Galen, thank you for posting. It's good to have another aspect of the situation to mull over and another point of view to consider. There are troubling aspects of this situation however. Clearly The Journal Record article is reporting, "Oil and gas producers, fearing these strict rules will go into effect, are cautious about committing more assets in Osage County. Companies like Encana and Chaparral are two examples of companies backing away from Osage County because of the uncertainty." Obviously this representation wouldn't have been made if there weren't some truth to it. Secondly, what are the legal ramifications? These oil lease holders came in under one set of CFRs and are now looking at a whole new set of rules that may likely be less favorable to them from a profit and loss standpoint. You can't change the rules in the middle of the game and that's understandable from their point of view. Will the leases they currently have be grandfathered in under the old CFRs or not?
DeleteThank you for the clarification of the real issues Osageblogger. You are exactly right. How can a $4 Billion Business expect an International Company like EnCana acquire a Concession with a set of CFR rules and then in the middle of the term, change everything including the net royalty rate of NYMEX? EnCana was already on record at the Negotiated Rulemaking Meetings stating if the new CFR's went forward that they would be out of the Osage. They watched a Resolution passed by a 5 - 3 vote that the CFR's needed more time and then the 3 voted them in anyway? Did the Council think that it was a bluff? If EnCana can't get NYMEX for their oil, how can any other Producer? The Producers are the Shareholders Partners, THEY make MONEY the Shareholders all make money too, they lose money and they leave and no one takes their place. Our royalty checks go to nothing. It is a matter of Profit and Loss economics and the biggest losers will be US, again!
DeleteThanks Osage blogger, now I have some questions. What specific proposed CFR changes would you suggest people complain about? Would it be the one that forces the BIA to be more accountable to producer and surface owner complaints and requests by requiring timely written responses? Or maybe it’s the one that asks the producers to notify the BIA when they have a full tank of oil that is ready for the purchaser to pick up? That simple phone call or e-mail will allow the BIA field men/gaugers a much better shot at getting an accurate gauge on more of our oil instead of having to rely 99% of the time on what the purchaser says they picked up from the tank. Or perhaps it’s the one that gives the Osage Tribal police the right to stop oil tanker trucks and check their purchase orders and paper work? Or maybe they should complain about the numerous new areas that the BIA is required to consult with the Minerals Council, such as when they terminate a lease for cause etc.? Perhaps they should attempt to block the changes that will require that our natural gas be measured, for the first time ever, by industry standard methods, royalty be paid at top of the area prices, and that we are paid for all the gas that leaves the lease instead of just a fraction?
DeleteThe change getting the most attention however is the one changing our oil royalty pricing from Highest Posted Price (HPP) to the average monthly Cushing NYMEX price. So let’s talk about that one. The Federal Government just paid the Osages $380 million largely because they had failed in their basic Trust responsibility of seeing that the producers paid the Osages royalty based on top of the area market prices. So naturally the Feds are very interested in fixing that problem and I would think most Osage Headright holders should be also. Despite its name, HPP is not the highest anything. It is consistently more than $2.00 per barrel less than the average oil prices paid in the Osage and more than $3.50 less than highest prices paid, which are pegged at or near the Cushing NYMEX price. HPP is actually at or near the bottom of the price scale paid for Osage oil. This situation makes the Osages the only tribe required by regulation to accept oil royalty pricing at the bottom of the area market. Everywhere else the Feds are required to ensure just the opposite occurs.
So just how much of an effect will changing to Cushing NYMEX pricing have on the producers? First one must remember that only the royalty pricing point would be changed. We currently collect royalty at rates between twelve and one half percent and 20%, depending on what era the lease was granted, with the current average being about 16%. If a comparison is made between the actual oil prices paid for Osage oil, HPP price and Cushing NYMEX average prices for the years 2008 through 2012 this is what is found. The average increase would be twenty five cents per barrel and the maximum increase would be about seventy five cents per barrel. So if a producer is currently selling oil at Cushing NYMEX type prices he would pay the Osages no additionally money, if he is selling at HPP prices, the maximum increase would be seventy five cents per barrel. Even this maximum increase of $.75 is less than a 1% increase at current oil prices, hardly a devastating increase by anyone’s standards.
Excellent discussion going here and it appears that it has been needed for some time. Galen, in response to your questions, if the BIA is struggling to handle the regulations that it has now with the "current model", how can it be expected to layer on 388 pages of them? May I politely suggest that the members of the Minerals Council have got to be first and foremost, diplomats with a situation that appears to be turning down with tempers flaring on all sides. The Osages should not use the Negotiated Rule Making Committee to upend the situation in the field for the oil producers, airing and attempting to address in the new CFRs every possible wrong that the Osage team can come up with that needs to be righted. It's sort of like people who hate sales people but the bottom line is that the bills don't get paid until the sales person pays them by seeing to it that the product is sold, whatever that might be. The guys that do the work in the field have to be accommodated in order for the income to flow. They are people who do business in the real world and they actually understand about profit and loss and what can happen when the numbers get out of alignment. They came into the Osage with a set of numbers that they thought would work. If the landscape associated with those projections change because of outside forces beyond their control, the entire plan goes haywire for them and they begin to lose money and that can be disastrous. Risk factors are through the roof as it is in the oil business and having an entire new set of variables layered on in terms of profit and loss only increase that risk to unacceptable levels. In as much as possible you have to have a stable environment in order to do business no matter what business it is and most particularly where the oil producers are concerned in the Osage. Guys in a business like this are not kidding. They need a STABLE PARTNER that is in their corner and the Minerals Council has got to be exactly that or it will frighten the producers away and well it should. I'm sorry to have to put it this way but the "downtrodden" thing needs to happen somewhere else rather than here because you are working for the Shareholders in a professional capacity and "team players" don't fall out with this sort of thing in the real world. In answer to your question, more regulations that the BIA will be unable to implement as it is are questionable. Higher drilling costs to do business going in and throughout that are unanticipated thereby changing the rules as a result of the new CFRs on what the oil producers, (large, medium or small) can expect to be taking in and how it will effect the bottom line is not good in terms of their risk model. Seeing certain members of the Minerals Council change from becoming advocates to adversaries is so bad from a professional standpoint, it's entirely unacceptable. Those companies that have current leases with the old set of rules should be protected so that their business environment stays the same as to what was anticipated. Any new business can come under the new rules if you can find any to do business that way and remember, the new CFRs will be in stone from the time they are accepted with no going back. As a member of the Minerals Council, I should think that you would want to initiate a comment period of your own or hearings in the Osage with the oil producers themselves before you make such a final commitment that may be exceedingly deleterious to the future income of the Osage Mineral Estate. Remember, you didn't have a single oil producer at the table of the Negotiated Rule Making Committee to find out whether or not these new regulations would be acceptable to their business model. Did you?
DeleteTo Osage Blogger. I think I know where you got the silly idea that the Osage CFR’s are going to be 388 pages long, and it is all part of same batch of lies and misinformation that person has been spreading forever. (more and more people are catching on to this persons deceitful ways, I predict you will also someday) I believe the proposed Regs. will be about 78 pages more or less but I can’t say for certain until they are through being reformatted and published. And you still never answered my question about which specific proposed CFR’s you are advising the readers here to object to. Could you please tell us which ones you don’t like and why?
DeleteI don’t know where you get the idea that anyone on the Minerals Council is hostile to the producers. I fully understand why they are fighting this and hold them no ill will; in their position I might do the same. We all want the producers to be successful, and make every reasonable effort work with all of them. However, if the Minerals Council role is to blindly agree with everything the producers ask for, there is no need for the Council to exist. We could just let the producers decide how much they wish to pay and how our minerals are to be measured and valued. And if we don’t want the BIA to have the CFR’s necessary to protect us, we might as well do away with them also. Just let the Producers pay us what ever they think is right.
But three of us are refusing to put Producer interests ahead of those of the Osage Headright holders. Two Osage Tribal Councils and two Minerals Councils spent millions of dollars fighting in court to prove that the Osages deserved to be paid full value for their oil and gas. We won that long contested fight with the BIA/DOI and were paid $380 million in damages and also got a promise from the BIA that we would not be treated like that again. Now we have five members of the current Council turning their backs on what those other leaders fought so many years to achieve. They are trying to tell the BIA that yes, we wanted you pay us damages on all that money you failed to collect from the producers on our behalf, but we were only kidding when we said we wanted you to fix the CFR problems that are still causing it to happen.
Well the BIA isn’t going do that no matter what we say. We sued them for these and other deficiencies and the clock has been ticking for nearly two years now while they remain vulnerable to claims of further damages on many of the very same issues that have already been litigated. So saying “let’s just leave things the way they are” is silly. They can’t do it. And I don’t want them to.
Thank you for your reply and for putting forward your point of view. Some but not all of the concerns are located at http://osagenews.org/article/proposed-cfr-changes-spur-discussion-village-laws and a further laundry list of some, but not all, are at http://osagenews.org/article/change-coming-oil-and-gas-production-osage beginning with the phrase, "Some of the proposed changes to the 35-page CFRs include:" Also, it is being reported that part of the proposed CFRs include three or more BLM (Bureau of Land Management) regulations. How will these impact oil production and leasing with additional regulations? In addition, I did voice ONE of my largest concerns and that has to do with a woefully deficient Osage Agency according to recent reports. If they can't manage to handle a 19 page brochure of rules and regulations, how are they going to manage 35, 78, 388 pages or whatever the actual number once the dust finally settles? Oh and by the way, the U.S. Congress has mandated the new government via P.L. 108-431, but I know of no Congressional Act that allows the BIA or the Executive Branch of the United States to arbitrarily change the CRFs without legislative approval and permission as per the 1906 Allotment Act as amended. They (members of the U.S. Congress) have not weighed in but for three members of the Oklahoma Delegation and they do not seem ONE BIT PLEASED with the new CFRs judging from the letter that they sent to BIA Assistant Secretary Kevin Washburn.
DeleteSHAREHOLDER ALERT: A copy of the letter from three members of the Oklahoma Delegation who oppose the new changes to the Code of Federal Regulations and why with regard to the management of the Osage Mineral Estate by the BIA is available by e-mailing a request for it to osage_election_news@comcast.net Review 25 C.F.R. part 226 at http://www.osagetribe.com/minerals/news_story.aspx?news_id=3100 If you wish to share your concerns, contact Senator Tom Coburn, Representative Frank Lucas and Senator James Imhofe:
Deletehttp://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=ContactForm
https://lucas.house.gov/contact-me/email-me
http://www.inhofe.senate.gov/contact
If you live outside of the State of Oklahoma, you will have to phone their offices directly in order to get your message through to these members of the U.S. Congress.
Please share this Osage Blog post with all of the Osage Shareholders on your e-mail list.
The BLM regulations you are referring to are two and only two. They will have little or no effect on oil production, though one will however make a significant difference on how much natural gas we will be getting paid for. They are actually called on shore orders and are the BLM’s way of codify highly technical standards that are necessary for making sure operations are done up to the latest industry standards. Keeping them separate allows for them to be kept current as industry standards evolve. One of the orders we proposed to adopt by reference was the one dealing with how H2S is handled when it shows up as an unwanted by product. H2S is very toxic even at very low levels and requires some very sophisticated equipment and policies to ensure that it is dealt with properly. BLM already had developed this on shore order that meets the best of industry standards so we saw no reason to reinvent the wheel. I say it will probably have no effect on oil production because I’m proud to say our producers were already meeting most of these same standards even though the BIA nor the state of Oklahoma currently have any regulations to guide them. Adopting these regulations should also take all the teeth out of the surface owner’s complaints that they are being placed in undue danger by this dangerous gas.
DeleteThe other onshore order to be adopted by reference is the one detailing how natural gas should be measured and tested for quality. Measuring oil is really a pretty straight forward process but gas is very complicated, and all phases are very critical to getting an accurate measurement. For instance the pipe diameter and orifices used must accurate to a thousandth of an inch, and even the material used in the testing tube to extract gas for BTU testing can make a difference of up to 20% in the accuracy of the result. We currently have no standards in place to regulate how our gas is measured. Again the BLM already has industry standard regulations in an onshore order on the measuring of gas, so we proposed adopting that onshore order by reference.
When either one of these orders is updated as the technology and industry standards evolve, the Superintendent can also adopt the changes if we wish so our regulations will include the updates.
Please see my reply to a tread below on how we are dealing with the needed changes to the BIA Osage Agency.
FYI: Interesting information available about Online Database Mapping at http://www.osagetribe.com/naturalresources/news_story.aspx?news_id=2752
ReplyDeleteThe September 2013 Payment is reported to be $9035.00.
ReplyDeleteThe Journal Record has been very negative to the Osage efforts in the Neg/Reg process from the beginning. They have printed every negative comment they can illicit without making any attempt to sort out fact from fiction.
ReplyDeleteNaturally the producers don’t want to pay us any more money, and the best tactic they have is to create fear and uncertainty about the effect the changes may have, even when they fully intend to live with them.
The question about legal aspects of the changes is easy. The CFR’s are very specific about what things can’t be changed in existing leases. For instance you can’t change the royalty rate, but you can change the method of determining the price point that the royalty percentage is based on. The producers managed to get this done in 1994 to when the pricing point method was changed from “highest price paid or offered in the Osage” to the current Highest Posted Price method. They liked the ability change the rules in the middle of the game just fine when they were sticking it to the Osages.
IT APPEARS THAT THE JOURNAL RECORD AND THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL ARE DEAD ON FOR WHERE THE REAL PROBLEM IN THE OSAGE IS...BIA OPERATIONS MISMANAGEMENT, NOT PRODUCERS PAYING NYMEX, WHICH BTW IS A COMMODITIES PRICE NOT A PRICING LEVEL. SINCE THE OSAGE HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN PAID THE HIGHEST PRICE IN OK, WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR DATA INFORMATION BECAUSE YOUR "EXPERT" ALSO IS QUOTED AS SAYING THAT YOU ONLY HAVE TO TRUCK THE OIL 15 MILES TO CUSHING SO HIS MAP IS SKEWED AND SO ARE HIS NUMBERS FOR NYMEX. INQUIRING OSAGES SHOULD HAVE THE FACTS! SORRY FOR THE CAPS, WANTED TO MAKE SURE NO ONE THOUGHT THIS WAS THE ARTICLE. WHAT DID YOU DO TO CORRECT THE BIA OPERATIONS MISMANAGMENT, THE REAL PROBLEM? AFTER ALMOST TWO MORE YEARS OF MORE MISMANAGEMENT THE OIG HAS STEPPED UP TO DO WHAT WAS NOT DONE!
DeleteMy data about the effect of Cushing NYMEX pricing is not flawed and is public record. Here is a chart and an explanation of the math used. The chart got compressed in the transfer to this format so I’ll try to clarify it a little. The first column is the average price actually paid in the Osage for that year. The second is the HPP price for that year and the third is the Cushing NYMEX price for the same year.
DeleteOil Prices
Calendar Osage HPP Cushing NYMEX
avg.$/bbl avg.$/bbl avg./bbl
2008 $98.85 $96.29 $99.75
2009 $59.88 $58.31 $62.09
2010 $77.75 $74.98 $79.61
2011 $93.46 $91.57 $95.11
2012 $92.83 $90.71 $94.15
Cushing information comes from EIA, which is the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Highest Posted Price and Osage average prices paid are from our Tribal Auditor and BIA records.
As you can see the current Osage royalty pricing point (HPP) is consistently lower than the average price purchasers actually paid, $2.18 average per barrel in this five year period. The average Cushing NYMEX price for the same period is $1.59 per barrel higher than the Osage average paid price. Osage current average royalty rate is about 16%. So adopting the Cushing NYMEX royalty price point would raise the average amount paid to the Osage by about twenty five cents per barrel. ($1.59 x 16% = $.25)
The highest royalty rate we collect is 20% and that is only on leases taken in the last 4yrs. The lowest oil royalty price point we accept is HPP. The average difference between the proposed Cushing NYMEX price and HPP for these years is $3.77. This makes the maximum average increase per barrel possible about $.75. ($3.77 x 20% = $.75) This maximum scenario is very rare since nearly all our producers that have taken new leases in the last 4yrs. are much too business savvy to accept a bottom of the market HPP sales point.
If the Cushing NYMEX royalty price point is adopted, producers currently selling oil at Cushing prices will pay the Osage no additional money. Even the maximum increase indicated above of $.75 per barrel is only about eight tenths of one percent of a current $90 barrel of oil. But, adopting Cushing royalty pricing will meet the governments basic trust responsibility of ensuring the Osage are paid top of the area market royalty price for their oil.
OK, but if the producers can't get the NNMEX price for their oil as reported in the comment higher up on this page, what happens to their profit margin if they have to pay us more than they have in the past? This hardly addresses the other problems with the added regulations and fines that the BIA won't be able to keep up with as they are reported to be backlogged as it is now. What's the story about the BIA trying to find a new permanent Osage Superintendent?
DeleteNYMEX is NOT a Pricing Schedule...it is a COMMODITY Price. If we want to trade in commodities then take the barrels IN KIND (AS the CFR allows) and hire a broker. Also hire a trucking company to truck it to Cushing because it is a PERFECT BBL DELIVERED to Cushing OK, and has to be in increments of 1,000 BBLS! NOT attainable by the average operator or even the BIG ones. BIA could NOT ENFORCE the previous 19 page brochure of CFR's, do you think that they can a 388 page BOOK of them? They can't accurately measure our oil and gas now and have no idea when there is a theft with only gauging an average of less than 10 - 15 tank batteries per month. BIA Supt. books are closed for new applications and it is rumored that there were over 70 applicants. Until we solve the chronic understaffing and not having a Royalty Compliance Department (we have an Oil Accounting person and a Gas Accounting person and a Supervisor now)there will be business as usual for the $4 Billion Minerals Estate which I have heard is being devalued right now by all the uncertainty and our PARTNERS pulling out. Before long, we may not have to worry about the understaffing because it will be such a SMALL ESTATE that the current staff could easily handle it.
DeleteLet's also not forget the Oklahoma Delegation's letter to Kevin Washburn, Assistant Secretary of the BIA, having to do with the BIA not having a strong enough fiduciary trust relationship established in the new CFRs where the Bureau's accountability is concerned. What ever came of the requested U.S. Congressional formal briefing? The letter was dated on May 29, 2013.
DeleteBIA Osage Agency operations audited By D. Ray Tuttle, The Journal Record see article at http://roundhousetalk.com/2013/08/bia-osage-agency-operations-audited/
DeleteThe statements made above that none of producers can get Cushing NYMEX average monthly prices is false. Last fall, using BIA sales records, we did a study of sixteen Osage Producers picked at random, except that we tried to pick some from every part of the spectrum from small to large in sales volume. We tracked them over several months and at no time were there any less than two of the sixteen selling at greater prices than the proposed Cushing NYMEX average for that month. One month in particular five of the sixteen sold their oil at significantly higher prices than the Cushing price. We made this information known to the producers at one of our three public meetings (these meetings were held in addition to the official NEG/REG meetings) to solicit their input on regulation proposals. And all of the Minerals Council has had access to this study, so anyone of those folks that are still saying Osage producers can’t get the Cushing price, are ignoring the facts.
DeleteAgain, the statements being made that the proposed new 25 CFR 226 will be 388 pages long are just a blatant lie, 78 pages are more like it.
Yes, the BIA needs more and better trained staff as well as fully functioning computer systems for all phases of their operation. We are working on this with Director Black in our twice yearly BIA improvement meetings that were also mandated in the settlement agreement. Many of the CFR changes were structured by the Osage delegation with the express intent of moving these needed changes from the “optional category” in regard to funding and implementation, to “mandatory status”, meaning that they must make the improvements or risk being found negligently out of compliance with regulations.
To Osageblogger: The Oklahoma delegation had their questions asked and answered, apparently satisfactorily, months ago.
Apparently? Are you kidding? If you don't know what happened for certain, you shouldn't speculate. Also, isn't your study a bit arbitrary? Of how many oil producers currently active in Osage County? One hundred? Five hundred? A thousand? What was the overall percentage of all of them tested? At greater prices? What about the number of the sixteen selling below Cushing NYMEX? What were the figures for all of the sixteen for every month single month you conducted the study? Don't take us for stupid and don't for a split second take the oil producers for stupid either. You may insult our intelligence but if you insult the oil producers, it will have very negative consequences.
DeleteI treated no one as being stupid. The ascertain has been made here several times that none of the producers are able to get Cushing NYMEX monthly average prices for the oil they sell. I merely pointed out factual evidence of that being an inaccurate statement. To do otherwise would allow readers to continue to be misled about the true facts. And of course not everyone in the sample was getting that price or I would have stated that as being the case. The point was that it is an attainable price, so statements to the contrary are misleading.
DeleteThe standard that the BIA must achieve in order to live up to their trust responsibility is to see that we get a royalty price that is at or very near the top of the area market. Being at the top of the market means by definition that it will be above what some others are getting. Using Cushing NYMEX average price paid for the same month that the Osage oil is sold meets that standard and is an easy to utilize, published price that everyone in the business knows how to find and track.
On a personal note, maybe you should channel some of that hostility you are throwing at me toward the people that have been misleading you all these months. I’m just trying to set the record straight with some actual facts.
Mid-Continent Digital Oilfield Conference information is located at http://digitaloilconference.com/
ReplyDeleteThis is a great opportunity for us to be able to see and hear what is available for us to properly MONITOR the Oil and Gas production and SALES. There are excellent speakers and will be booths for us to talk to the people who do this all across the US,everywhere but the Osage for the most part we still use a tin can and a string. Actually it is a fob on the end of a string that you run down into the tank to MEASURE the oil. Not only are we still in the last century in regards to the BIA MISMANAGEMENT, but we still use archaic ways to gauge the oil. Gas is worse, some of them still use charts that blow off the meter and the cows chew on them, all the while that gas is whirling through the meters and not being METERED or ROYALTY paid on it! What do the NEW CFR's do to improve THOSE PROBLEMS? Nothing! You get an average of 10 - 15 gaugers per month using the same outdated methods to gauge a tank, IF THEY can find one ready to be picked up! Granted, there is a call in required to the Supt. office in the NEW CFR but guess what, YOU could set that up NOW relatively easily because the Operators COULD voluntarily call in the OIL if the Council had not alienated so many of them with THEIR attitude that the PROBLEM was the OPERATORS successfully switching the blame from the BIA MISMANAGEMENT to the Operators! Nice bait and switch game for Mike Black to pull it off, the US COURT determined where the problem was yet THAT is still business as usual at the BIA. The BIA Model has to be changed to correct the problems because the BIA Operations was the real problem NOT the CFR, which they refused to enforce properly all these years. WAKE UP!
DeleteSHAREHOLDER REMINDER: The next MC Meeting is on this coming Friday, August 16, 2013 at 10 A.M. (CDT) in the Chambers or listen live on the internet at www.osagetribe.com/ The MC meeting on Wednesday, the 21st of August will also be important for all shareholders to attend.
ReplyDeleteThe Chief looks to have lost total control of what the Mineral Council has been up to with the new CFRs which have the oil producers up in arms and leaving Osage County. What happened to the Chief's Office Minerals liaison guy to the Minerals? Does anyone up top know what is going on in the Executive side of this new government? After all isn't JRE responsible for the mess his branch of government makes of things? Just saying.
ReplyDeleteI would propose ...That it is we, the shareholders that have lost control of the MC! It appears that four on the MC now work for the producers. I have often wondered why so many things have to be discussed in "Executive" session. Now that the producers have paid for four of our MC members to go to Washington Cynthia's old speech of "I work for you" is a sham and I for one don't want to hear it any more. Executive sessions with the producers, no transparency, sneaking off in secret to Washington, who do you think she and Bear, Core, Whitehorn and Myron work for? All four of them need to be replaced with people that really work for the shareholders. If we can't vote to have them removed, then come election time if we can get just two of them out and replaced with two that are loyal to the shareholders, then that will change the balance of power in the MC. LET THE CAMPAIGN BEGIN! AND we need to vote on there being NO MORE executive sessions especially with the producers! That needs to be done at the coming MC meeting or ASAP. There may be a need for one every now for other business but this has gotten out of hand. The MC members were elected by the shareholders and as such we should have shareholders in attendance in every executive session if there are going to be any!
DeleteAgree about executive sessions. Disagree about Cynthia and the four who went to Washington.
DeleteThe Minerals Council meeting agenda for today lists a Washington DC trip discussion but I was not able to open the live broadcast. Hope someone reports an unbiased,factual letter about the meeting.
DeleteI notice that all of "experts" denouncing these revisions post anonymously. Why do you hide? Are you not proud of what you are saying? Who should we credit all this wisdom to? I can understand shareholders being reluctant to identify themselves for fear of retaliation against them or their relatives. But, you "EXPERTS" with all this advise do not have that privilege. STEP UP OR SHUT UP
ReplyDeleteAre you so unobservant that you haven't noticed that this IS the Osage Blog section for the SHAREHOLDERS and it's us who are making the comments here?
DeleteRay McClain just posted on his site that there is a lot of hyperbole going on here and I agree. But where there is politics you have rhetoric which can be good and bad. Ray post here so people can have a dialogue with you. Much of what you say I tend to believe though I do have my opinions.
ReplyDeleteAgree Come on Ray. Get in the fray. Your opinion is good as anybody elses.
DeleteRay McClain would be an excellent person to have on the MC. I think we should do all we can to convince him to run. He is far more knowledgeable of the oil business than some we have on there now. Electing family friends and relatives to the MC has not served us well to date.
DeleteOsage Shareholders Association Meeting is August 18 at 1:00pm At Dave Landrum in Pawhuska
ReplyDeleteBring a pot luck dish, Chicken will be furnished...Much to be discussed....Here is your chance
to ask questions ....We need each other!!!! Together we stand....
Thank you.
DeleteAnyone care to report on today's OSA Meeting?
DeleteThere was a lengthy discussion about the BIA and the New CFR's and what the implications to the future production and operations will be. It was discussed that the Settlement was paid because the HPP was not paid versus the mismanagement of the BIA with their chronic understaffing,operational issues, not depositing money in a timely manner, etc. along with their NON ENFORCEMENT of the current CFR. A debate as to whether compacting the functions of the BIA would be preferable to Modernizing the BIA was also discussed. The consensus seemed to be that the proposed new CFR's had not been properly submitted with not enough time and not enough people on the Committee to develop a plan to address what was in reality the problem. The Operational Issues of the BIA will never be addressed in the New CFR and until the problems are resolved with unqualified, under qualified, and certainly understaffing (currently short 3 Field Men according to the Acting Supt. and no hope of having them replaced in the near future)which equates to about 10 - 15 Oil Tank Inspections/Month of the estimated 2,300 TANK BATTERIES. The Gas Issues were not touched on although the Minerals Council hired a gas expert in the First Minerals Council Term who opened 15 of the "best" gas meters and found water, coal dust, etc. that was inhibiting the proper measurement of the gas. The Expert wanted the OMC to build a meter run trailer that could be hauled to the sites and test the meters properly all across the Osage. He told them that his estimate was 10-15% loss of revenue PER MONTH which at that time was about $100,000 to $150,000 per month and amounting to about FIVE MILLION DOLLARS LOST by now with NOTHING ever being done by the Osage Minerals Council to implement those suggested changes. He also suggested a review of EVERY Gas Contract to check for inequitable language, which was never done, either. If Our Minerals Council wants to force these new CFR's down the Operators throats to get more money for the Minerals Estate and the Shareholders, then why are they not doing their own job in rectifying what they have been made aware of that is wrong? IF NYMEX will only make $.75 difference in price, (which is the "story") why are THEY continually DEMANDING that yet not addressing $5 MILLION in losses? Why Commission a Study and then NEVER ACT ON IT? Why would they not hire Teddy Pledger who did the Gas Analysis when he offered to come in and help? Why did they not follow through on their attorney and another expert who was to review the Gas Contracts? Why would they refuse to hire someone who they respected enough to allow to come in and help them understand the Gas issues with their own self serving "Expert", who proved that HIS method of calculating the gas was FLAWED? GAS is the NEW OIL. Why would you think that the Operators would not want the gas measured properly if THEIR GAS is also paid on those same flawed meter runs as our royalty is also paid upon but at a rate of AT LEAST FOUR TIMES the Royalty Rate? Not all these issues were discussed at today's meeting but it needs addressing and if anyone wants to say that someone else is not doing their job they might need to remember what happens when you point your finger at the other guy, there are still THREE POINTING squarely back at yourself. Stop all this petty nitpicking and get on with the BUSINESS of this $4 BILLION MINERAL ESTATE and start running it like a business and not as one expert told them "a one pump filling station..." Realize that all the issues that were brought up in the Original Settlement are still the problem... MISMANAGEMENT and Operational Issues in the BIA and no one is minding the store or heeding the cries of the customers who are taking their business elsewhere for whatever reason you care to call it, the end result is THEY ARE LEAVING!
DeleteI could spend a lot of space here showing why you are wrong about oil companies pulling out of the Osage, but I think I’ll save that for another time.
DeleteInstead, since you seem very interested in making improvements to our gas measurement and pricing, and obviously have not read the proposed new CFR’s as they relate to gas, I think I can give you some information that should make you very happy.
When these proposed CFR’s are approved, we will for the first time ever, have specific regulations saying that our gas will be measured by industry standard methods. This will correct the measurement and meter maintenance flaws uncovered by the study you refer to. As you point out, proper measurement also benefits the Producer. Also, for the first time we will have control of the prices we will accept and also stop the practice of only paying us for a portion of the gas produced and removed from the lease. As you point out, many of the sales agreements in place now, that had no Osage participation in their approval, set prices that are below market and force us and the producers to give away much of the gas with no payment at all.
In the new regulations our gas will be priced by an area zone price index method. The United States Office of Natural Resources Revenue has divided the state of Oklahoma into zones, and gas sales data is collected each month from each zone and a top of the market price is determined and published on their website. (We are in Oklahoma Zone 1) This will become our royalty sales point.
Also with the adoption of the new regs, our gas will in the future be measured and tested for mmBTU content by industry standard methods, at or near the well head. We then will be paid on the total volume that leaves the lease according to the Zone price index for that quality of gas. No longer will we be forced to accept less than top of the area market prices and give away much of the gas produced on the lease. In some of these sales contracts we are now giving away more that half the produced gas.
You 3 on the OMC were called out as being anti- oil company so it is only conjecture on your part to make a statement as to why they are leaving the Osage. I wouldn't expect you to have access to any privileged information given your antagonistic attitude towards the oil companies. To properly represent OUR SHAREHOLDER INTEREST it is incumbent upon you to determine, if oil is over $100/BBL, and Chairman Yates stated that the production is NOT down, why are our payments DOWN from the previous quarter? Asked but never answered at the meeting.
DeleteMove forward to your gas measurement and pricing discourse: According to the CURRENT CFR 226.39 MEASUREMENT OF GAS, "All gas, required to be measured, shall be measured by meter(preferably of the orifice meter type) unless otherwise agreed to by the Superintendent. All gas meters must be approved by the Superintendent and installed at the expense of the Lessee..." the fact that gas was not being properly metered or measured falls squarely at the door of the BIA once again. MISMANAGEMENT, OPERATIONAL ISSUES, UNDERSTAFFING, UNDERQUALIFIED, just as stated in the Settlement Lawsuit. When we only have ONE GAS Accounting person managing about $3,000,000.00 in gas revenue per month there's lots of room for error. Metering not being done properly, according to the study and the fact that the Contracts are not equitable in most instances, equals a diagnosis for the illness of BIAism. YOU are the one who stated that the sales agreements "had no Osage participation in their approval." In reality, the Contracts are ALL sent to the BIA where they are scrutinized, then they are signed by the Supt., who is our Agent, is she not? In the past, it was then sent to the Council for approval. Another right that we lost with the new form of government, or like the Storage Building, the previous Gas Study, previous instructions to the Attorney to review the Gas Contracts, just fell by the wayside with NO FOLLOW THROUGH by the MC? Either way, the BIA DID NOT DO THEIR JOB with the gas just as they DID NOT DO THEIR JOB WITH THE OIL. Only difference is that someone, in their infinite illogical wisdom decided NOT to pursue the GAS issues in the settlement lawsuit, only the oil and about 15 years at that? I believe it has been on YOUR watch that there was estimated by the BIA that over $500,000 in gas royalty by one operator was not properly accounted for and the BIA has declined to pursue that, too? Isn't that what has triggered the current Forensic Audit by the Inspector General's office that has been ongoing for several months? The MC has been given ample proof through that Study to have acted upon the evidence of gas measurement issues, ample time since about 2008, and ample funding since there is purported to be about $500,000 remaining in the $1,000,000.00 budget. I would rather have my Gas Royalty go up by properly spending the remaining money to retain experts in gas measuring and gas contracts because it is obvious that the BIA through their operational mismanagement can't properly evaluate where the measurement problems exist. Don't have time to wait on the NEW CFR to be approved since the OLD CFR to address the problem was ignored just as all the other regulation violations in the past.
Would you rather have about $200 more in quarterly payment by the $500,000 unused budget amt. returned to the Shareholders, or hire a couple of experts to assist in determining where we are hemorrhaging our gas and get the losses stopped SOONER rather than LATER? I can't believe that the inaction of the Minerals Council in IMMEDIATELY investigating the loss of over $100,000/month has been allowed to continue for almost FIVE YEARS given the status of the report by an International Gas Expert? The Minerals Council cannot sit back on their dubious laurels of being the Council that signed the Settlement, because I believe that these NEW CFR's that caused the next great Exodus Out of the Osage will be your real Legacy.
Right. Superb comment that I hope doesn't fall on blind eyes.
DeleteI just read what Anonymous posted on Aug. 20th 2013. Thats right Yates tell us why our checks are lower this month compared to the last. Why are the Payments down Yates? Why are we having a problem with the Producers not wanting to follow with the requirements? This makes no sense. I would like to see an expert come in here and diagnose the real issue...and you know what they are going to say which is so elemental to the M/E is data input and follow through and don't wait for someone else to do what you can do today....TODAY. It's not that hard to see the forest for the trees. And this is what I have been sharing with other Osages getting out the truth of the crutch. If we were to hire an expert and verify exactly where and what the problem is of which we already know to be the truth which seems redundant to spend the money to only confirm what we know. Add the numbers either way a million a year or five million a year we are losing the revenue and it's going into someone else's pockets. And this has been occurring for a Century and you want more of the same by not doing something about it? It would take one or two tanks by an expert to figure out the percentage or estimated over all loss. A expert can give you a Chart or spreadsheet one or the other and show you exactly by the numbers what the true loss is and at this point to delay in another dollar unaccounted for and this should not be happening period......We are 2 years into this HPP Settlement and still at square 1. I just see incompetence all over the place Yates and this isn't an excuse that is going to fly with the Shareholders. Of which are somewhere to be 5000 who gets a check. Take a few or more. But yes if all of them knew and can fly to those meetings or afford to would be there if they could I can assure you of that. So when our brother and sister Osages back home, fellow Shareholders, members of the Osage Tribe, want answers, it's not different for the rest who do not live in the Three Districts or surrounding Osage County. All we are is asking common sense question to common sense answers and one plus one is not equalling to two. Why is that? Here lies the problem at a Administration level is the big sore. Because now remember When Melissa Curry was the super and if I have it correct she said she had been requesting for help for some time and now we have the sequestration? For one thing I can be sure of, there is always going to be an excuse coming from this Agency, the BIA, then it is up to us to solve and pick up where need be and this is just not happening. I would rather spend a 100,000. a year for someones salary or thereof and earn for that year a 12000000. or 6000000. in our pockets......And this just needs to happen. Remember you are our Governing Body and Speaker we are holding you accountable and you are accountable to the Shareholders.
DeleteAugust 23 Anonymous, you are right on target. From the report to the MC on Wed. though the carryover is considerably less than the $500,000 since we spent $361,000 in legal fees to stop the Wind Farm. Funny we can refuse money from the Osage Nation to pay part of those fees yet we still keep bleeding out at the BIA and can't even hire another Osage Shareholder expert to find where the problems lie in the Gas Contracts, gas payments, etc. It is time to step up and take care of business in this $4 BILLION Mineral Estate because it will be devalued by operators leaving, more Government Regulations and the new CFR. The first question asked when anyone is looking at prospects is "How much government is involved?" Why do you think that Wind River and other BLM/BIA areas are NOT BEING DEVELOPED? Environmental issues like H2S and waste on the land is one thing, FINES (that the local BIA Office doesn't even get to keep) and NYMEX which is a COMMODITIES PRICE that is unattainable is far different. The National Indian OIL Valuation Negotiated Rulemaking Committee that determines standards for every other Federal Tribal Land in the US consisted of SEVEN Industry Members, and TEN Tribal members, what happened in the Osage? We were not even allowed to have ALL duly ELECTED Osage Mineral Council Members! We didn't even have the TWO HIGHEST Vote getting elected members on our committee! If you can't see how this was orchestrated by the BIA and Mike Black then you haven't been paying attention. OH, but the BIA is our Fiduciary Caretaker so they are always there to protect OUR Best Interests? Do we feel SOLD OUT yet? BTW the OIL Valuation Team is NOT using NYMEX to value their oil determination because it was unattainable, judging by their website. Maybe the BIA forced it to drive the operators out of the Osage along with refusing to allow them a voice in the Process?
DeleteHence the concerns of the Oklahoma Delegation as expressed by their letter to Kevin Washburn of the BIA. However, on the other hand, you have the lovely choice of the ON running the OME with a new Trust of some kind and a Business Board at arms length that undoubtedly will make your Headright check money go away faster than a magician in a disappearing act in Las Vegas, JUST like the reports coming in about the Osage Gaming Board as we write. And the CAPPER: A whole new set of shareholders with the BIA entirely out of the picture that will undoubtedly end the currently held Mineral Estate Trust because you won't be able to transfer the current trust with the current set of shareholders/headright owners to another party to administer and run including the Osage Nation because no such Federal Indian trust that I am aware of is run outside of the auspices of the BIA to date. As far as I know the U.S. Congress, which has "plenary" power over Indian affairs still has to come to the table to officially and formally end the Trust relationship with the Osages with regard to the Osage Mineral Estate with an official vote of the Shareholders to end it NO MATTER how the BIA may choose to machinate or manipulate the situation along with or as per ANY of the rulings or decisions of the Courts of the United States. So, put that in your pipes and smoke it...
DeleteOne thing's for sure and Osagebogger and I agree, the 1906 ACT as written, is set in stone. It would take an act of THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS to authorize any change.....The BIA, has not overstepped their boundaries in so much as, why the Fed. Gov't. lost the HPP case. Because, the BIA failed to Regulate and Manage as we failed to follow through. So, when you look at the overall perspective in the Market Principals and Competition vs. The Public Sector and Private Sector, most gov't agencies monopolize in so much at a level of inefficiencies and the lack of to update with the current 21st century of the art equipment, coupled with less manpower. Understanding how this could be seen as manipulative. What we require is the MINERAL COUNCIL to stop getting paid to argue and start managing the 4 billion Mineral Estate. We are the Private Sector, We are the Owners of the M.E. the Identifier, The 1906 ACT. We are a separate entity, the Identifier, The 1906 ACT. It is incumbent of the Shareholder that we require efficiency at the highest level and no less from our M.C. In my opinion, attainable efficiency would be economically sound for the future of our M.E and to do nothing, we choose to lose millions for the sake of argument makes for poor economical structure and sense and is counter productive to the M.E. So what is the argument that is going to cost the Shareholders millions this time? Is there always going to be an excuse to use not to do what is inherently right by the 1906 Act? What is the intended consequence? Follow the Actions in parallel to the BIA? Failure to act is not an excuse.....There is no true Politics Governing the THE 1906 ACT in Perpetual. Is there Conjecture sure there is injected, but the true principle supported by the 1906 ACT there is no conjecture there, supported turly and honest facts. There in nothing lost in translation about the Principal meaning behind the 1906 ACT, when all else fails square one is staring at you in your face. Politics can be abstract and a detractor. I do not see Politics in the 1906 ACT and nor shall we allow it to be used, such as only by the true text it was intended. When you take away the Politics for argument sake, you are left with a 4 Billion Estate being poorly managed in a grotesque way by and by. There is no simple way to put it. Stop your grinnin and start winnin. Trying to look at this is so sobering, as to reality just leaves you thinking.
DeleteActually, it no longer takes an Act of Congress for the Feds to step away from the administration of the Mineral Estate Trust. The 1978 Act to Amend the 1938 Act that amended the 1906 Allotment Act now stipulates that, "...the Act of June 24, 1938 (52 Stat. 1034, 1035), as amended, is amended by striking the phrase "unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress" and inserting, in lieu thereof, the phrase "and thereafter until otherwise provided by Congress"." whatever that means. No definition of the phrase, "...until otherwise provided by Congress," has ever been forthcoming from the U.S. Congress on an official basis and that's why it becomes of such concern how we fight with one another and can't seem to settle down where these issues are concerned. Not that there isn't reason for concern, it's just the fractious form it usually takes on a day to day basis. If our situation becomes such a headache to and for the U.S. Congress as reported to them by the BIA, they are authorized to take a walk and toss the whole thing right in the waste basket by the 1906 Act as amended and there isn't a thing we can do about it. This little known fact (apparently) should give every headright owner pause for thought and the members of the Minerals Council as well.
DeleteRight thank you Osageblogger. Wow! And you are exactly right. Thanks for your insight to another perspective of facts facing us Shareholders.....Less should we forget. Right then the fight begins bring on Rocky Balboa all over again 1.2.and 3. if we have to go back to the Courts again so shall it be....but we can avoid this as well and so shall we instruct.....Push it to limt the comes to mind.
DeleteI know that it appears to be an unfavorable alternative but it was mentioned at the OSA meeting. Why not allow the OK Corporation Commission (which regulates every other area of OK in the Oil/Gas Industry) do the ENFORCING of the requirements of maintaining the production and permitting and the BIA do what Congress intended in the 1906 Act, be the fiduciary of the Osage Mineral Estate? The BIA has failed miserably in all areas and with the New CFR will succeed in shutting down most of the operations in the Osage just as has happened having FEDERAL oversight on all the other FEDERAL LANDS in the US. Make no mistake about it, BIA controlled land IS Federal Lands. Read the article about the decline in the post below from an independent oversight perspective. The first question anyone asks when they are looking at a prospect is "How much govt. is there?" You can't take over 300 days to get a permit when you can go anywhere else in OK and walk in, pay for a permit and have it emailed to you that afternoon, can you? Producers are already familiar with the OCC and they do protect the environment so that will placate the unhappy landowners, they move in faster on a problem than the BIA historically ever did, and they get the job done. When can the BIA ever say that? Then we would have the BIA to make sure that the royalties are paid properly and at the CORRECT price and we would finally have the Fiduciary Trust taken care of as Congress and the 1906 Act meant for it to have been done. Trust remains intact and everyone wins and the ON doesn't take over our $4 Billion Mineral Estate.
DeleteNOT! I see a ton of things wrong with this idea. You don't want to come under the rules and regulations of the State of OK in any way or under any circumstances especially since they can't enforce without a whole new set of rules and regulations imposed on the OME. For a one day permit, you will also come under their taxing authority. Think about that because with any State government nothing comes free. In addition, the only way you can do a thing like this is if the U.S. Congress walks away from the Federally held MET. That means the reset button gets pushed on the current set of shareholders and that will mean war in the Osage till kingdom come and it will come sooner or later for anyone involved it a scheme like this one. People are, to one degree or another, dependent on their headright checks and make no mistake, getting too creative could come with a lot of unpleasant circumstances for those who are making these decisions and agree to them officially.
DeleteI agree with SMH, less State less tax. Go to Ray McClains sight and study exactly what is exactly what is posted on his sight through and through then you may come back with a different question. For Poster on at 7:52. Rays sight is www.osages-you-need-to-know.com The Facts as they are.
DeleteI could not open and listen to the live broadcast of this mornings Mineral Council meeting. Anyone know why or what the instructions are?
ReplyDeleteI am listening right now via the internet and it's coming through loud and clear.
DeleteGo to www.osagetribe.com and click on the link "Listen Live to Minerals Council Meeting" on the right side of the web page under Quick Links.
DeleteGive 'em Hell, Cynthia! Keep working to keep those oil producers working in the field!!!
DeleteFrom the desk of Councilwoman Boone:
DeleteI presented the following resolutions: (1) No.2-164: to request a legal opinion on the qualifications to run for office. Those who voted "no" were Councilmen Abbott, Crum and Yates. I went to the office the day after our regular meeting of July 17, to get copies of the signed resolutions from that day. I was informed that Chairman Yates did not sign everything. Maybe the fact that he had to fulfill his duties as an Osage Nation employee by attending a Water Task Force meeting that afternoon at 3:30 was the reason he didn't have the time to finish our business. His supervisor was at the meeting also. This is one of the reasons I believe we need to change our qualifications to run for office. I believe the shareholders deserve an elected
official who can devote their time to shareholder business and not make their Osage Nation job their priority. I can't even begin to think what a headache it must be for his supervisor to keep up with his leave when he gets phone calls on his job regarding minerals business or when he has
to leave his job and come to the office to take care of shareholder business. After all, the oil business doesn't just happen on Friday and Wednesday. (2) No.166: Are we in favor of changes made in the Negotiated Rule Making? Those who voted "no" were: Councilman Bear, Whitehorn, Core, Redeagle and me. I voted no because I felt the proposed changes would decrease oil production. (3) No.2-167: to have our attorney review the proposed CFR changes and give us some advice on how to appeal. Those who voted "no" were Councilmen Abbott, Crum and Yates. We fired our attorney and expert in March and finished the negotiated rule making without legal representation. I think it was a disservice no to have had our attorney in this total process. On July 16, 2013, an article in the Journal Record titled "Two companies quit drilling programs in Osage County" states that Chaparral Energy LLC and Encana Corp. decided to quit the horizontal programs. Reference was made to the rules changes completed in April and the negative impact they would have on the oil industry. Those are the facts. Our payment check is down this quarter. Will it continue to decline because of the proposed changes? Remember that Abbott, Crum and Yates voted for change.
At our Osage Minerals Council meeting, May 15, 2013, we elected a new chairman, Andrew Yates. Councilman Abbott persuaded Councilmen Core and Redeagle to trade their votes. If both of them would vote for Yates for chairman, he would vote for their resolution to place a person at the BIA and have the shareholders pay that person's salary. I believe the BIA should pay employee salaries, not the shareholders. Councilmen Core and Redeagle's swapping of votes left them holding the bag. Their resolution did not pass. Those who voted for Core and Redeagle's resolution were: Core, Redeagle and Abbott. This was also the meeting where Andrew Yates called the Osage Nation Police. Our policy says if someone gets out of line, you need to tell that person. There was no physical altercation.
DeleteI placed several issues from Friday's meeting on the agenda Tuesday before the July 17, Wednesday meeting. It is routine that when we discuss issues on Friday, we vote on them the following Wednesday.
Chairman Yates informed me that in the future I was to adhere to the Osage Nation Meeting laws and have my items on the agenda 48 hours in advance. We have not adopted the Osage Nation meeting laws. He did allow another councilman to discuss a brand new subject that was never on any agenda. He likes to pick and choose the Osage Nation's rules to go by. The Osage Minerals Council has it's own policies and procedures. His actions do support his campaign mission statement, "Protect the shareholder's interests by following the objectives of the 1906 Allotment Act as set forth in the new constitution." When the local Osage Shareholders Association interviewed candidates for Minerals council, Yates said the minerals belonged to the Osage Nation.
One of the Osage Nation laws says tribal officials shall not engage in other employment or economic activity which involves inherent substantial conflict with their responsibilities and duties as tribal officials...So if your job required you to conduct field inspections, witness well plugging, inspect facilities, report compliance, witness integrity tests in the oil fields and then you voted on that oil company's lease for approval, wouldn't that be a conflict? Is that ethical? Maybe we ought to have an investigation into this.
It doesn't matter how many times our attorney says we don't have to comply with the nation's laws, Yates keeps steering us in that direction.
The Osage Nation Police will be at our meeting this Friday. I'll let you know what that's all about next week if they don't throw me in jail for an ethics violation.
The views described herein are not representative of any other Osage Minerals Council or Osage Nation Congress member. They are our own views.
Pat the oil producers on the back to come in and do business at the Oil Summit and then change the regulations and pull the rug right out from under them no matter what size they are? GOOD FOR YOU CYNTHIA. Keep those no goods at bay and the the oil flowing in Osage County for us SHAREHOLDERS.
DeleteThank you Cynthia for your report. Was there a discussion about the Washington DC trip?
DeleteWas there ever! You will be able to listen to this meeting online on demand when it is posted to the Audio/Video Archive at http://www.osagetribe.com/main_view_video.aspx
DeleteL. Evans reported that she had attended the Small Oil Producer's meeting at the Elks Lodge, "...and they are so upset about that huge bunch of paperwork they have to go through...and the new CFRs were pushed down "our throats and the small oil producers throats and obviously there are two different agendas here...I feel like the people who went to Washington have the shareholders interests at heart...these producers are scared to death. THEY ARE READY TO PULL OUT! This bunch of regulations is going to cut out all the Mom and Pops...you all are strangling them with your new rules! Obviously you guys (Abbot, Crum and Yates) didn't get invited because you're the ones who are trying to cut their necks." (Referring to the new CFRs) "If this gets passed, we're (small oil producers) going to have to go out of business."
DeleteIsn't it interesting that underneath Cynthia's post there is no "Reply" tab? Non the less I find it the height of hypocrisy that she of all people should talk about ethics. As far as Cynthia quoting policy that if someone gets out of line they need to be spoken to...I have this to say about that. It was Cynthia's supporters that caused the most disruption in the MC meeting today. She didn't mention that did she? Her people can't sit there and wait their turn to speak. Instead they interrupt others as they are speaking and caused as much ill mannered disruptions as possible.
DeletePlease post a copy of the Boone statement, very succinct. So many Shareholders were unable to hear the Live Broadcast according to the posts.
DeleteWhen the MC meeting is uploaded and posted, you will be able to hear it on demand via the internet from http://www.osagetribe.com/main_view_video.aspx
DeleteThe Agenda for the MC Meeting to follow along when it has been posted is located at http://www.osagetribe.com/minerals/event_detail.aspx?news_id=3206
DeleteCynthia's post? Cynthia didn't post the Boone's Bulletin. I did. I'm glad she's taking matters in hand with the others who went off to Washington D.C. and that she's getting the word out about what is going on with these new CFRs and the effect it's having on the oil producers. If the Abbott team had so many supporters in the room why did it explode with thunderous applause after she finished her report at the MC meeting on Friday, the 16th of August?
DeleteThat's real interesting that you would take it upon yourself to post as if you were Cynthia. The post was written as if she wrote it stating numerous times as "I" did this that and the other. I think it's called "First Tense" I guess since Cynthia takes it upon herself to sign other peoples names to MC documents, with out them knowing about it, I guess it is OK to make post on this forum and make it look like someone else is writing it. And yet there is talk of "ethics" on this forum.?? You....whoever you are, really take the cake. You post under "Anonymous" as well as "Cynthia's Bulletin" and no telling how many other post you post under different names. I can think of one or two people that would pose as Cynthia, but it will all come out at election time and maybe before then?
DeleteAs far as your claim of thunderous applause, it came from a small group of her load mouth supporters. Hardly a referendum of approval of her actions.
I'm replying and just in my opinion but the OSAGE MINERAL COUNCIL IS OWNED BY THE SHAREHOLDERS AND I WISH TO KEEP THE NATION AWAY Yate's. Whats going to happen if the Nation goes belly up and the Feds come in here for whatever reason and strips them of all their Grant's (Hyperthetical) I am in support of YATES, CRUM, and ABBOTT for saying no to the qualifications. The MOM AND POP SHOPS WANT THEIR CAKE AND ICE CREAM AT THE SAME TIME. They now will be held to compliance and if that scares them then they've had sometin to hide all this time. Nah, if they leave good ridence. They did there job, let them go drill somewhere else but it's not going to be any different except they won't be able hide by not following the policies. Hireing a employee on shareholders money will not fly period whoever suggested this is just idiotic. Yates the Mineral Council is not paid by the De facto Govt. there fore it is seperate from the Nation. Per the 1906 ACT each and everyone of the M.C. members can be held to that document. So lets not go down that road. You will have a fight for life on your hands. We are in a new era and the times have changed and should have a long time ago. If the BIA CANNOT HANDLE THE DEMANDS THEN IT IS INCUMBANT OF THEM TO HIRE AND THEY SHOULD SO THE LEASES FOR APPROVAL CAN BE EXPIDITED IN A FAIR AND TIMELY MATTER. The changes to the CFR'S will not do the workload that has been lacking for quite some time and the loss if it continues can result in another suit if need be....The crippling factors are the lack of geological professionals, the back logs have to stop and I suspect more factors into this but building the infrastructure from with in and building out is what needs to be done. Education is paramount and I suggested that a long time ago. It has taken some time but now I see the bigger pic. is coming into focus, just took some time. Lets not be our own worst enemy and over regulate. The CFR'S are the result of the HPP cynthia and now you want to cry me a river. This does not solve the issues and we start by all of getting along and valueing what the other say and see the path to longevity for the future of our children. Remember, The best politcal operators in buisness are able to read the organizational culture and to find ways to communicate within the culture in order to make their messages most effective. One thing is for sure we all live eat and sleep well some of us does lets get a long and stop the cat fighting and stop the he did she did with the exception of hiding your agenda for your personal self interest and not the benifit to the Shareholder and secret meetings with producers or going to Washington is counter productive and makes you look deceptive, could be a violation. I suggest not doing that again........We must stay vigilant and be sure that the current BIA is meeting it's fudiciary duties and that they get a Royalty Compliance Dept. Remember the 1906 Act requires this Agency as instructed. The Times may have changed and so should the agency grow as well and it is up to us to follow through. Clearly we need to branch and we need to Grow and we water what takes care of us..... The M.C. has been charged by the 1906 ACT.
DeleteWELL SAID !!
DeleteAs far as the producers go, large and small,they have been " Cutting a fat Calf " for a long time and the shareholders have paid the price for it. I can see why they don't want to abide by the new CFR's because they will have to conduct their business and follow regulations that are in effect across most of the USA. Read Ray's blog and see what the producers are complaining about. We have been losing money left and right due to improper operating procedures, antiquated metering equipment that isn't correct ( to their favor) and many other things. Why Cynthia feels we should not update our regulations and procedures and want to allow the producers to continue as is, is beyond me! This is another reason we need to get educated people on the MC that are knowledgeable of the oil business! I think Yates, Galen and a couple of others are trying to get the Osage oil business modernized but some others on the MC are just sitting in a chair and causing trouble.
DeleteBuddy, you actually made me laugh till I cried. I posted Cynthia's newsletter, The Boone's Bulletin, that she sends out by e-mail. I copied and pasted her comments, added them in the reply box and hit the button to publish them. You must not know that she sends out her bulletin periodically about what is going on from her point of view as a member of the Minerals Council.
DeleteThe August 16, 2013 MC meeting in three segments is now posted to the Audio/Video Archive page for on demand listening via the internet at http://www.osagetribe.com/main_view_video.aspx
DeleteThere is no "Reply" tab on any of these posts, they ARE a reply to the first post...
ReplyDeleteRay McClain has 3 new posts on osages you need to know. Very Interesting
ReplyDeleteJust amazing just because she bought the material from a storage does not mean the material belongs to her and her excuse is so out of line. And if we wanted to we could go after them. We could claim they were stolen and we just don't know how they ended up there. I have more information probably that is more telling than what she has in that box she bought. It's almost as if she can't wait to find something wrong as if she is always on a witch hunt.....Doesn't this women have a happy life. LOL. She's lost credibility a while back, and now after she started to side with the producers and it's not because everyone hates her. But she needs to gom along with everyone else that went with her. She is a trouble maker. We want people who can work with eachother to solve the issues for the future of the Mineral Estate....Plain and simple. I stated in a earlier post that I agree that we should give anyone and everyone who is a shareholder a chance and opportunity to learn about the OIL BUISNESS and for her to suggest at this point requirements to sit on the council is ludacris, where in the 1906 act requires that or for that matter before you start you have to have a plan, a strategy, a core, with ppp's in place and it's kind of like putting the cart before the horse. Funny but I can't help it I can't wait to see what she's going to cry wolf about in the future. So far our estate will do well but we will be sure to be vigilant with our M.C. and The BIA. Do the job that is expected and you have nothing to worry about. Nah we need to get these mom and pop shops off on their own or just except the change and follow compliance. My bet we will see a change in the royalty checks soon to come. Bottom line is now we will with compliance see the true measure of what we have'nt seen. The future is for us to see it through. Pretty much what I said in my earlie post on AUG 17TH AT 5:47 RAY pretty much solitified what I had said with Numbers and I HAVE always said numbers do not lie.
DeleteWhy are you making it seem like Cynthia is all at fault? Isn't she one of 5 other members of the Minerals Council who have taken this stance? If she bought the stuff at public auction because the Osage Nation is so pathetically incompetent as to not pay for a storage unit for two years and have the Mineral Council owned property sold at auction then she has every right to step up and thank God she did and not someone else who could have used whatever they found against us. Quit picking on her. After a while, it gets boring. As the post above stated, The Journal Record reported, "Oil and gas producers, fearing these strict rules will go into effect, are cautious about committing more assets in Osage County. Companies like Encana and Chaparral are two examples of companies backing away from Osage County because of the uncertainty." Obviously this representation wouldn't have been made if there weren't some truth to it."" There are a lot of people with Headrights who like the Mom and Pops and remember from before 1990 when they were run off and had to be painstakingly brought back in over the years, so don't think that your opinion is in the majority here because it isn't. They have helped to keep us alive over the years and that's no joke. I'm grateful to them so be cavalier with your own check that under your plan will be controlled by the big producers and then we will be their mercy. Then this change you anticipate could be down, way down, and not up.
DeleteReply to 8.18.13 at 6:04 P.M. **Trust me, you will not be bored.**
DeleteCynthia is happy when she can stir the pot from everything to how many packets of sugar the office uses ( remember that one) to forging the chairman's name to MC documents, to trying to get the MC involved in someone's personal business (that didn't fly) to complaining about not being chosen for committees ( happened several times) and now going to Washington to support the producers. Cynthia is a trouble maker and she enjoys it! Everyone should read Ray McClain's latest post on his web site ( Osages-You-Need-To-Know) it is the most compressive report yet and will give you a excellent idea of what is going on and why the producers don't like the proposed CFR's. Knowing Ray's background, he has more knowledge of the oil business than probably anyone on the MC. Read the report and you will come away asking why Cynthia and the other 3 are now against them the new CFR's. I believe she voted for the new CFR's ...we took the Govt money and agreed to the updated CFR's with better regulations and accountability and now maliciously she is against them! AGAIN...read Ray's report, it cuts through all the smoke and mirrors that is being thrown around. He also explains very factually what is going on with Encana and Chaparral.
DeleteHold on. I am going to have to jump in here. We may have taken the money but the only thing most people knew was that there was going to be a negotiated rule making committee and no one really knew what that was or what it meant. There were a few questions asked but no one ever gave much of an answer from the Osage Nation government side or the BIA at all. If it had been listed in the final settlement agreement, that was finally published long after the Shareholders voted to accept the settlement, as a negotiated regulations changing committee then everyone would have known what was going on and would probably NOT have voted for the settlement or to have the Minerals Council act as their representatives. As far as I know, the entire MIneral Council and the BIA snuck up on the Osage Shareholders, holding out and waiving the settlement money in the right hand with a butcher knife full of treachery in the left hand hidden behind their backs. This is exactly as I remember it and there were people on that OSA Discussion web site that tried to warn us time and time again about accepting the settlement by that phony BIA vote before we saw the final agreement and fully understood what it meant.
DeleteYou are exactly correct! All people were worried about at the time was the money we were going to get. And we voted not knowing what the new CFR's were to be. Having said that I think the new regulations are way over due.
DeleteHey truthful Shareholder no disputes what you are saying. Or the Fact that the JUDGE in the HPP case recognized the rightful owners of the estate. Yates has it wrong. Now my eyes are on him. Cynthia will go and if Yates continues on this page he is on, we will ask him to step down and we can do that. And I'm going to tell you why and I do not think I have it wrong as advised. First it does not say that as a shareholder of the estate that we cannot recall anyone of you sitting as a M.C. member. It does say in the 1906 ACT eight members. Second we are the owners of the estate aired to us not the Nation or anyone else, as a shareholder in the first we are not party as to a second shareholder and we will never be a a second shareholder, per the 1906 Act. In a sense if you pick at the 1906 Act it is clear we must have a Chief but why do we have to have a Chief who in a sense we pay to be on both sides of the fence kinda a conflict but it is so no one person can have full authority and our four fathers saw to this. And this is why we have to answer to the S.O.I AND D.O.I AND D.O.J AND THE FED. GOV'T BUT MOST OF ALL THE U.S. CONGRESS. This makes us unequivocally the true owner. We haveing to adhere to the Nation is B.S. We are a separate Business Entity. And I'll bring this up again this office needs to get organized and set a set of rules or PPP'S in place. The Nations not going to do it for us. Everyone lives by rules why should this Entity behave any differently. When Cynthia suggested that we make it a requirement for new council members to be educated and realizing she probably has good intentions but where did she get her education? Ah in this Field, on the job, so, you have to ask isn't it hypocrytical in a sense that most of her experience is on the job training and now what gives her the authority to ask, just pointing out another fact and do we want to close the door on another shareholder who might want the same opportunity, education about his or her estate, I think not. It's kinda like putting the horse before the cart. If there are going to be PPP'S then you must have a standard by which it comes from a core value. A lot needs to be done and yet our members on the council understand poor record keeping in a day an age where this should not be happening and we have members who sit on the council who other wise can't seem to understand that they as well should be doing the same as the BIA and following through with the data but for the liabiity to the trust estate and to the Shareholders as well. What are we paying them for the air that they breath around them? Or for that matter we must remember we don't want another dictator or we don't want the hypocrasy to get any deeper. Let the Truthful Shareholder remind you, and remember what we stand for, United WW OSAGE SHAREHOLDERS, THE OSAGE TRIBE. Long live the 1906 ACT. The Nation would not be here if it was not for us in the first regardless whether we like it or not. So when I say that their are solutions lets get to them and not sit around for the next drama. Theirs always going to be something but another day we slip from our fingers what we should be doing is another dollar missed and unaccounted for. Our Success is in our hands it's time to plant the seed. We need a working office and I say make our M.C. members aspire all that they can be. After all they are the seed and we are the sun shine. STAY POSITIVE SHAREHOLDERS.
DeleteOne thing I do agree with, is educating with ongoing required training and continuing education about the Trust and the CFRs for the elected members of the Minerals Council in future. I became acutely aware of the need and necessity for this education when Melvin Core wanted to change the vote from a fraction/multiple shares to one man one vote no matter what your share, shares, or fractionated share might be. This is set by law and cannot be changed arbitrarily at the whim of one of the members of the Minerals Council. It appeared as if Mr. Core didn't realize this, exposing his ignorance in the matter. We need people working for the Shareholders who actually know what's what in the law associated with the Osage Minerals Estate Trust. The BIA needs to have educational sessions to bring these people up to speed where the laws and the applicable rules/regulations are concerned. This should not be optional.
DeleteJust read Ray McClains report on the last Mineral Council meet. Funny isn't it, how he neglected to mention how Cynthia reported that the upcoming Osage Oil Summit is paid for by the oil producers. She even detailed the number of hotel rooms and suites, the meals, the liquor, the conference rooms and the fact that it's being held at the Hard Rock Hotel in Tulsa and that's BIG BUCKS folks. It seems that some of the members of the Osage Nation government have blinders on and they should stop lying to themselves and others as well. The trip to Washington D.C., was taken because the oil producers don't like the new proposed CRFs because they negotiated in good faith to do business in the Osage under the old CFRs and don't like having the ON government and the Feds at the BIA jerk the rug out from under them. Now if it's unethical for the members of the MC who were invited to take that trip, then the OOS that is paid for by the oil producers is just as unethical too. Fair is fair.
DeleteI read the entire post wondering if Ray and I had been at the same meeting? If we are going to rely on someone to report to the Shareholders then you find out that they are cherry picking it is rather disappointing. Why can't there just be the reporting of the facts and then make your own conclusions?
DeleteExcellent! Point made. Point taken.
DeleteAs of the last MC meeting, the Osage Oil Summit is going to be held at the Cherokee Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Catoosa, OK, not Tulsa.
DeleteThe Summit has been scheduled to be held at the Cherokee Hard Rock since shortly after last year's Summit. It was discussed and voted on at a OMC meeting and they offered the best deal with the most perks, or so it was presented to the Council. There was discussion about Skiatook too as I recall but couldn't be assured that it would be completed on time and there are not 60 rooms as has been reserved according to the discussion. As of Wed. it sounds like that there is a glitch to have the Lease Sale at the same time, PLUS the fact that there were only TWO LEASES nominated to date! Really appears that there is NOTHING wrong in the Osage, doesn't it?
DeleteIs it a glitch or is it keeping the redundancies down? At a administration level their is a huge problem at the BIA and with our Gov. body the M.C . When you see that lack of or there of organization coupled with the fact that there is no follow through, with evidence of material being left behind in storage units....and we are in the 20th century incompetence is a part of why we are here on everyones part. To do nothing an squable like children is a waste of time and another day that goes by we are no better off than we were before the HPP settled. And now you have another suit to start with the Feds.....
DeleteNew articlel>> http://www.nativetimes.com/news/tribal/9165-proposed-oil-gas-regulations-divide-osage-minerals-council
DeleteThank you Orbi-Osage.
DeleteIf the man who witnessed the storage bldg debacle is correct, and the material is related to the 30th council activities and as memory serves that was Charles Tilman and Dudley Whitehorn's council.
ReplyDeleteNow Cynthia Boone has the documents.
Oh my*what could go wrong there???
EDWARD SNOWDEN IN TWO WORDS. LOL....
DeleteCorrect me if I am wrong but I didn't think that Dudley Whitehorn was elected until the 31st Council. That was the first Gray administration. Yes?
DeleteI believe you have it right.
DeleteThank you. That's what I thought.
DeleteTo Speaker Yates. It is incumbent of the Shareholder and Stakeholder as we are one to inherently protect the interest of the Four Billion Mineral Estate. You are charged as the Governing Body and by and by the 1906 ACT. I am unfortunately asking you to remove Cynthia Boone , Melvin Core, Dudley Whitehorn, and Curtis Bear to relieve them of their seat. This decision is based on nothing but pure Business Ethics and not on Emotion. Their Actions was counter productive to the Estate and quite the opposite of who we want representing the Shareholders. Bottom line their actions has caused great harm. And we have yet to see the damage or thereof in the future. Lets be clear on this matter Yates. Forever the stakeholder and shareholder that we are, forever enshrined by the 1906 Act. The Act of impropriety has occurred blatantly in front of our faces and now we have a rouge four that clearly do not see the consequence of their actions to the detriment of the estate no longer can be valued or trusted to do what is right for the Shareholder and no longer recognized. No Kidding Sir......The Law is the 1906 ACT of which they were charged and sworn to uphold and they crossed the line. End of Story. We or I as a shareholder find them as a threat and so should the rest of the Shareholders, in the real world they would be gone A.S.A.P I suggest you get with the Chief and start the process and we do not need LAWYERS OR SCOI'S Action today and not tomorrow. The evidence speaks for itself. If the Chief cannot get away with unethical behavior so should the rouge for be charged.
ReplyDeleteSpeak for yourself there ANON. What do you plan to do? String the rest of them up by the short hairs when they attend the Osage Oil Summit that is bought and paid for by the Oil Producers. Lobbying the BIA is wholly allowable and acceptable under the 1906 Act. Nearly every Council for the last ONE HUNDRED YEARS has been to Washington, D.C. for one reason or another to present their requests (lobbying) to the BIA. They are in the majority with five voting to not accept and to have more time to review the new CFRs. You are on the side of the minority in this matter for certain.
DeleteThe Truth of the crutch hurts sorry. I'm not here for Childs Play. This is serious. And I am Justified. You on the other had do not understand the common denominator. Someone turned off your turn signal a long time ago of which you do not understand logic. I do. As I said in a earlier post they have the right to do as they feel and as I said to the contrary just because they can does not justify the means. This is nothing personal. This is real Business and if you cannot see the forest for the trees then you are in that minority. Anybody can justify their Actions. Like everyone has one. They pandered to the Producers and sorry a Century of no action to continue after just 2yrs into the Settlement and yet we want an extention hell no....I'm for the update of the CFR'S and For the BIA to step up to the agreement of the settlement and enforce the New CFR'S. We need to Grow and no way shape or form will this hurt the Producers....We need to clean house. I do not want to compact this agency. So we solve the problem ourselves. The Answers are so clear what has to happen and couldn't be more in your face....You live on a Naive Plain. I just want truth, integrity , strength for the O.M.C...When you look at the overall perspective, you look at the principal and business activities then you see the big Pic. The M.C would not be here if it was not for us. They work for us and I want my dollar to go to the Interest of the M.E. not to self interest.
DeleteYou are one among many who take this situation as seriously as you do. Make no mistake. We respect your opinion but don't care to be steamrolled by it. At times it's better to agree to disagree. Cynthia has a very numerous, staunch and loyal following and it would be a mistake to try and nail her to the cross. The same can be said of some of the others who also went to Washington, D.C. The thing to keep in mind is that all of the members of the Minerals Council know that the CFRs are going to change. They also know that once they are in stone, as they have been for many many years, most of them want to take a longer time to consider the unintended consequences that might come about as a result of layering on even more regulations that the BIA cannot hope to cope with at this point in time and for some time in the future.
DeleteThank you Osageblogger I do see the unintended consequences, we live it and see it every day it's what we do that makes all the difference. What they cannot see is for us to see in the future, the unintended consequence has played a huge role and if you look at it from a Psychological view as well we all Human and Fear is wicked as to happenchance can be fortuitous. I would rather not walk in fear to living the truth and walking the talk.....and as you have said education and building the infrastructure from within is a great start. We have Eight Members that can step up to the plate and start the data processing and you can map and input duplicate leases and network with the agency so everyone is in compliance......But to delay is another dollar not accounted for and I am not in the habit of losing money or complaining and nor should you..... Two years and we are still at square one. Everyone had time to read the new CFR'S. And I do realize after everything said and done not everyone is on the same educational level and or just don't know, I get that. And I am not being mean when I say that. Yes I see the unintended actions, can go in a different direction as well. See both sides of the pendulum...If what I am saying is shell shocking it should be. Get up and stand up fight for your rights.
DeleteSee Osage Minerals Council Agenda for August 21, 2013 at http://www.osagetribe.com/minerals/event_detail.aspx?news_id=3212
ReplyDeleteALARM! Mineral Meeting Discussion today, what's all this about the Jeff Jones letter, Attorney General of the Osage Nation, that indicates that the Headright Shares will now be on the basis of one man one vote no matter how many full shares or a fractionated share that the Headright owner may have and how it relates to the current validity or lack of validity to change 25 CFR Part 90, without a full hearing process similar to what has recently been done with 25 CFR Part 226? In addition, that Congressman Standing Bear is right now making a major move to compact the Mineral Estate away from the BIA under the auspices of the Osage Nation and right out from under provisions of the Federally held Mineral Estate Trust? WTH is going on HERE? I thought the Osage Nation was supposed to STAY OUT OF MINERALS BUSINESS AND LEAVE THE MINERALS COUNCIL ALONE! We need to keep an eye on this Standing Bear when he makes his bid for elected office whether it's for Chief or as a member of Congress in 2014.
ReplyDeleteNow you understand, we are not going to accept the Nation compacting in any way shape or form, will have a huge fight on them. Compacting is not the way to go but if nothing is done to preserve what is in stone, the 1906 Act. Will take an act of Congress the U.S. Congress to approve such a Grandious move of this nature. Let them try and it will get knocked down. Standing Bear and Yates....both of them are peas in a pod. United We Stand.
DeleteThese mineral meetings are getting more and more out of hand. They need to start running them more professionally. This is an oil business/shareholder meeting and they are letting it be run like a damn free for all. Chairman needs meeting training. This is going out to the public and the oil producers can listen in too from anywhere. Councilman verbally threatening other members of Council? It gets more and more appalling every one they have.
DeleteUnfortunately there is great rhetoric going on. Take the emotion away then what do you have, a Business that clearly needs to be ran from that standpoint of professionalism. And you do this by not giving the appearance of impropriety, once that line has been crossed all integrity you once had is lost....Now we correct this in of which matter is not easy to come to because everybody knows everybody mentality atmosphere needs to leave the Stadium and the best interest put for for the Shareholders. Bottom line where there is supply there will be demand that's the law of nature....I appreciate the MOM AND POP Producers for all that they have done but now it is our wish that you update in sync with compliance to the 21st century the CFR'S. In the long run that will protect the assets of Osage Shareholder and the Producer. This is our money. We decide. Now once again this is my opinion of what needs to happen and let this be an example of what not to do in the future. We pay you to represent us not the producers. To delay the CFR'S would cause more harm than good. Not that, this is going to happen. Even the Federal Government agrees we need to be updated. Lets get current with the rest of the U.S. and move forward. Change does not mean it will necessarily be wrong either...or right but Yate's being the speaker needs to address both ends of the spectrum and restore civility by standing up and being leader and address these issues professionally. It is not always easy to do what is right but at least you can walk the truth knowing you did right with your head up...
DeleteRay has a new letter out of his opinion about the New Found Treasure Cyntia found. And as I've stated as well her actions are beligerent and contrary to the Oath she took. The Material she has she may have paid for the documents and she is a Member of the M.C. and the Material she is charged with is to protect and turn it in to the M.C. We pay you to keep these documents safe for the Benefit of the Shareholders and could be considered the property of the Shareholders. I would hate to take this women to the Courts and morally by the Oath she took this property belongs to us. This will not be used as a bartering tool to keep her on the council, in no way shape or form can she be trusted. I understand what she is doing and really she needs to remove her emotions and maybe she might just get some respect. I'm for progress and everywhich way we turn she trumps up something else. I find her hostile to the detriment of the 4 BILLION M.E. MRS. GLADYS KRITZ ITS TIME TO LEAVE AND BOW OUT GRACEFULLY http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?_adv_prop=image&fr=mcafee&va=mrs+kravitz
DeleteOk nuff said, What we have is a failure to communicate and you can bet where this starts and where we need to do something today and about the find of the 30TH Council Records and I can assure this will reflect negatively on the M.C. or Positively. First and foremost I have been a victim from time to time with reality in the Past and I can assure you in the Past I would rectify or remedy the situation. This is Human Error but the blame reflects on all of us. If you don't know you just don't know and of no fault but if you know and do nothing you are complicit.....I take some of the blame as well for I am a Shareholder and a Constituent and Osage. I for the love of our Tribe throughout the years worked to survive as I was taught not ever not for once has my love for our Tribe has swayed. Guilty by not paying attention cuz I was too busy raising 5 kids and might I say beautiful kids...I take accountability. So when I say to do nothing about this situation is like putting a bandaid and not solving the problem for the future. Put an IT in your office and start following through and start doing the J.O.B. of a M.C. and Governing Body. You are a separate entity from this Gov. You create Rev. for the Shareholders for the Producers and the Fed.Gov. etc...So when I say this would not happen if you were in the real world means exactly that. What are all of you getting paid for, to argue? And RAY McClain your last letter I just want you to know that I am a Osage Shareholder first and in the second a Constituent. I would prefer that when you right to us Please address us as voting Shareholders or shareholders as recognized by the FEDERAL GOV. and THE U.S. CONGRESS. We live in an age of data storage. Programs that almost do the work for you. Mapping with the technology of today is the state of the art these days, There is no excuse when you take away the excuse then you begin to understand how to execute what needs to be done first....This is a layout for a strong Governing Body to build out from within. But you have to have a Core and a Standard and let it be the 1906 Act. Incompetence is not an Excuse....
DeleteDo you guys have any idea how embarrassingly immature you all can seem at times over the way you behave over Cynthia? You know? Get over it. Get over her and quit giving her the buainess every time you turn around over one thing or another. Are you that shot with envy through and through?
DeleteCynthia has sent us her statements that she read into the record during the last two Minerals Council meetings. Included are the AG letter and the OSA endorsement letter of the trip to Washington, D.C. To download these documents, go to http://edigital.iserver.net/osages/Cynthia_AG_OSA.pdf
DeleteThe MC Meeting for August 21, 2013 is now posted for on demand listening via the internet at http://www.osagetribe.com/main_view_video.aspx
DeleteThank you Osagebloger for the information though I was unable to find edigital.iserver on the post of august 23 2013 at 1:43 am. Searched with Google still could not find that address you posted. Thanks
DeleteCopy and paste the entire URL into your browser and hit the enter/return key. It should come up for you.
DeleteThank you it worked.
DeleteConcerning the letter of support that osageblogger Aug 23 2013 refereed to from the OSA, it is important to understand how these letters come about. Someone in the OSA meeting will make a motion, in this case the letter of support and it will be voted on by the members present, which could be only a hand full. Additionally it is important to point out that after the last election the OSA and the board is controlled by Cynthia and her friends with her husband as chairman. No big surprise there! Keep in mind that these people are officers of OSA by default! No one else ran for the positions. So...you now have Cynthia's supporters making up the majority of members in attendance at the OSA meetings and they can make a motion and get it passed with out a problem. SO...it should come as no surprise that she has a letter of support from the OSA. The OSA is now going to be a big propaganda machine and you can bet she will use it well. Her motto of "I work for you" is a joke. " I work for me and I'll do what I want" should be the motto!
DeleteIt is a figment of their fantasy of which they live a lie. And which they should answer to. They are both officers and it is a true Conflict. If we are choosing to file ethical charges against the Chief so shall we make a removal a necessary in the interest of the Shareholder. This is a conflict and I motion for Cynthia to be removed it will be one or the other......I find her hostile. We can and will and I'm sure there is somebody who is willing to take her seat. It would be easier. This would be the first constructive move charged by our Governing Body the M.C. Who is the OSA? We are the Shareholders and what is it they exactly do? Outside of make decisions that should be Governed by and by the MINERAL COUNCIL. Where does it say we charge the OSA, LOL and a LETTER OF SUPPORT MEANS DIDDLY. LOL.....The letter is a detraction as well from what has to be done. Get rid of the disease and you cure the ailment. The disease of inaction....
DeleteWind Farm going forward? New article>> http://barnsdalltimes.com/http:/barnsdalltimes.com/news/going-up-prairie-wind-turbines
ReplyDeleteThe Facebook web page of the Osage Community for Responsible Citizenry at https://www.facebook.com/groups/yanman/ has a post by Curtis Bear about holding three Town Hall meetings this coming Sunday in Grayhorse, Pawhuska and Hominy.
ReplyDeleteTo bad Curtis didn't think it was important enough to have Town Hall meetings before he and others went to Washington to support the producers. A trip that was paid for by the producers, by the way. And just think...we are paying him to represent us on the MC! Think about that each time they go into "Executive Session" with the producers!! They slipped out "In the middle of the night" on the producers dime and all he wants to do now is explain what he did. I don't care, his actions speak more than his words. He seems to be a nice guy but I no longer trust him or the others that went, to represent me on the MC.
DeleteGood resource>> IA-Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development Facebook page is https://www.facebook.com/IA.IEED
ReplyDeleteResponse to Mr. Pipestem’s Facebook statement: “ Producers would not provide this information “ ….regarding negative effects of NYMEX on producers.
ReplyDeleteFact was that until September, 2012 meeting the Osage Producers Association was not even aware of the Osage NegReg meetings (Who in Oklahoma reads the Federal Registry?) and remember zero operators named on NegReg committee as required. Then by the next NegReg meeting in Oct. 2012, the “ NYMEX Solution” had been totally bought by most as a simple wonderful cure-all answer for all the $380,000,000 settled law suit's many BIA mismanagement causes. And Osage MC & BIA leaders' minds were closed shut to any contrary financial facts from operator’s knowledge learned from years of marketing crude oil.
Myself and operators tried and tried to explain why the “ NYMEX Solution '’ will kill the goose that lays the Osage Mineral Estate's golden egg ....but your legal representative and others who never sold or bought a barrel of crude oil or invested in a drilling deal, would not listen! We along with ranchers were agenda-ed away, and treated like skunks at a Sunday picnic. Get real....If BIA's Mike Black and lawyers inside Wash DC are so right - how come Osage Mineral Estate's only free market customer - the oil & gas operators are steaming mad with many leaving? Add in ranchers & other landowners with years of grievances as not happy campers.
In my opinion, the Osage NegReg project was a failed experiment in democracy, so lets have a civil debate and have jurors find & follow the facts. Therefore I issue a honorable challenge: Mr. Wilson Pipestem and Mr. Galen Crum come to Tulsa and debate the “ NYMEX Solution “ and your other cure-all issues with me before a jury of private sector economists, oil & gas attorneys and major bank trustee officers, all experienced in the petroleum industry's capital & financial investment risks and rewards.
Bob Jackman
Now you're talkin'.
DeleteI believe that if this Debate would take place it would certainly show why these New CFR's are such a BAD idea. Not just for the Operators but for all of us because anything that causes delays in getting the oil out of the ground is NOT to our benefit. Just saw this on Facebook too:
Deletehttp://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/286245-report-us-oil-and-gas-production-up-despite-drop-on-federal-lands
INDEPENDENT nonpartisan Congressional Research Service quotes decline in oil development of SEVEN percentage points DESPITE output rose about 1.1 Million BBLS/DAY... looks like the BIA got out of the Indian Business in a BIG WAY, unfortunately the Osage are going to have to put the pieces back together if this new CFR is NOT STOPPED.
Aren't you confusing apples and oranges here? The article says nothing about Indian land controlled by the BIA. These are lands controlled by State and Federal rules and regulations. It's a bit disingenuous to muddle the issue in this way.
DeleteNot that I don't think your point is well taken, it's just not the same situation with Federal lands and Indian Land. I think your idea is a great one and a debate in a conference room should be added to the agenda to air these issues pro and con with the BIA and the Oklahoma Delegation invited to attend during the forthcoming Osage Oil Summit at the Hard Rock in Catoosa. GO for it.
Delete307 days to get a drilling permit on federal lands? Is this what they are proposing in the new CFRs? Will the new regs take that much time or close to it if these new CFRs go into effect?
DeleteI agree with SMH. Lets not muddle it's bad enough. If the BIA is out of compliance by not following due process then it is up to the M/C to take action. Isn't there a law that if Leasing Permits do not meet the necessary constraint times allowable for processing at a administration level within said timelines set forth by law, the BIA is required to pay a fine to the Shareholders? And in the same breath the leases then become approved automatically?
DeleteMr. Jackman, I would absolutely love to debate you, or anyone else, about the proposed CFR changes. After months of listening to your unending dialogs twice a day at every negotiated rule making meeting I yearn for the chance to point out all the errors and misinformation contained in your rhetoric. Even the producers came to me several times requesting you be barred from further speaking because they felt that the misinformation you were spreading was clouding the real issues that they were trying to bring forward. They thought that since you do not own or operate any leases in Osage County that perhaps you might be barred on that basis. I had to inform them that the Committee was tasked with listening politely to anyone who signed up to comment,(even someone without your small interest in a single gas field) and I also assured them that your comments were being given the full weight and consideration they deserved.
DeleteTo the commenter asking about the time frame permit approvals sometimes takes on other federal lands. We in the Osage have a completely different system and much less red tape than required other places. The Neg/Reg committee was very careful not to add unnecessary changes to our regulations that would bring about delays in any segment of our operation.
Indeed several changes were aimed at making our already much faster system more efficient. The one I’m most excited about is the one that will force the Osage Agency to convert from a paper based system to a digital one. Currently much time and labor is wasted in processing and sending paper applications back and forth for corrections, clarifications and approvals. These delays are also true for things like production reports and all other aspects of normal business. When the digital system is installed, small problems like a left out piece of information on a form can be pointed out and corrected in seconds instead of a week of mailing forms back and forth. Also when the production data is reported in digital form, we will have a searchable production data base that will open the doors to infinitely better ways for the BIA, Minerals Council and producers to manage our mineral estate.
Galen thank you so much....I get it. Not much kudos goes out to you and everyone. You responding makes the world of difference and maybe we should have a higher standard. But lets work the kinks. I'm a Titan when running a business but anybody will tell you I will give the back of my shirt to anyone.
DeleteReprint from Robert Jackman on Conversation August 2013 Thread today: Robert Jackman responding to Galen Crum: First are corrections to his recent blog minimizing my interests in producing property’s value to Osage Shareholder, as a “small gas field.” Fact of record; R. Jackman owns interests in 18 good producing oil and gas wells in Osage County which since 2002 have paid millions in royalty to Shareholders. And without being required in leases or drilling program agreements originated by Jackman, the Operator in early 2000 donated at my suggestion, thousands to Osage Museum and Pawhuska Dance Arbor’s needed repairs and maintenance.
DeleteNext, I wonder if Mr. Crum and I attended the same Osage NegReg meetings? His questioned description of reactions to my public remarks and suggestions to NegReg Committee members and general public, are in complete opposite to comments and reactions I received; A standing ovation at one meeting, and often many operators, Mineral Council Members, Shareholders and ranchers thanking me in person for my stand-up remarks made at the various meetings. To summarize my NegReg meetings remark’s message: “ It is BIA’s Continuing Willful Mismanagement –Stupid.” And where Mr. Crum and BIA Officials and I respectfully disagree; They totally support BIA’s top management in Muskogee and Wash DC in their blame–shifting of all the $380 million in damages from the BIA’s past mistakes and negligent - to the Operators. Therefore by his incorrect statements Mr. Crum is obviously guilty of the denier’s classic act; “ Ignore the Message and Shoot the Messenger - Jackman.”
The Osage News is reporting the LAND BY BACK PROCESS BY THE US. DEPT. OF INTERRIOR. Has any Shareholder recieced any information in regards to this matter?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.doi.gov/buybackprogram/index.cfm
DeleteThank you again. Still contemplating the findings in there Data and etc....
DeleteOk, Just read Ray McClains posting uh all I have to say is HIT RESTART AND HAVE A OSAGE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. Wow the Conflicts of interest exists and now I see why such the turmoil.....ONE WORD, STUPIDITY, is not an excuse....Ah I see why the BIA takes the stance of not gettin involved in O.N voting procedures but with this seperate agency and Buisness Entity THE M/E has dropped the ball. I see the ball being dropped all over the place...If you connect the dots OMGeebies.....and now this is where we are at. SOBERING AS IT IS, does not mean we cannot take Authority to correct the injustice and move forward. until we know how the Tilman Case will turn out and if I suspect right we just might have to do a about turn as in u turn. Hit restart because this Gov is operating on a Lie by not following there Constitution by not recognizing this Agency is not apart of the Osage Nation but must follow the laws of the Nation and the FED. Govt. The answer is simple in nature and we start by everyone adhereing to the rules and live by them, the M/E has Authotity to Administrate and develope the M/E and should act by doing so for the future of the M/E. End the conflict and remove CYNTHIA and the Others who did not follow by the Nations Laws as written. They are now hostile to the overall goven body of the M/E....We cannot have 2 members of one family in positions of authority MYRON REDEAGLE will have to go. Sorry....voting The Chief and the Asst. Chief are tie breakers we pay them from our Royalty yet they still can vote in M/E matters, no there is no conflict there. That needs to end. And then again our rights have been abrogated all along is my understanding what I have read to be true from the articles presented and not represented by the BIA for the Shareholders obligated as set forth by the 1906 ACT. We take the proper steps to right the wrong today. Lets clean house...
ReplyDeleteAnd as of my last post at 2:15 As I am understanding title and land into trust if you read and as I have stated before and others as well like Jenny,from the office of S.O.I. SECTION 4;307 AND 308 title and deposition of income say's, during the pendency of the probate and up to the date of transfer of title to the U.S. in trust for tribe in accordance with section 4;307 all income received or accrued from the land interest purchased by the tribe shall be credited to the ESTATE. So let me see, how many of the Casinos income went to the Estate before we were a Government? and or why is it not happening to this day? Our Success in in our ability to move forward and we do this by being accountable.
DeleteFascinating "OME Mineral Council Election" Letter sent to Attorney Grimm from the BIA and it's not a "Fairy Tale": Go to http://www.osages-you-need-to-know.com/ and click on the text 3. 2013-8-26 BIA letter to B. Grimm-Tilman suit.pdf (PDF — 584 KB). This letter asserts that it is only property rights that are important and that they have not been diminished by the existence of the new Osage Nation constitutional government. If I understand this correctly, the political rights that have been lost to the shareholder are of no importance whatsoever to the BIA including, I presume, the loss of membership, after the new ON Constitution was ratified when the membership bill was passed by the ON Congress in the Fall of 2006, as well as the right to run for elected Minerals Council office DESPITE the fact that the 2004 Reaffirmation Act states only and very clearly AND WITHOUT QUALIFICATION AS TO WHAT THAT BUNDLE OF RIGHTS ACTUALLY ARE, "provided that the "rights" of any person to the Osage mineral estate shares are not diminished." (Emphasis added) The property right to receive the income and to inherit are only two of that bundle that used to include the right to be a member and the right to run for office. This is so strange to me because the U.S. Government was FORMED BECAUSE THE POLITICAL RIGHTS WERE DIMINISHED (no taxation without representation) and for the most part, did not exist for those who lived in the new world under the reign of Britain's King George III. That's WHY we had an American Revolution! See the U.S. Declaration of Independence. It appears to me that the U.S. through it's system of government and various Branches is now turning around and doing the same thing to the former members of the Osage Tribe because the U.S. Congress did not fully clarify what that bundle of rights associated with a headright share actually included at the time that its members passed P.L. 108-431. Is this weird or what?
ReplyDeleteIt's also important to note that the Osage Tribal Council's OGRC did not give the members of the Osage Tribe the right to choose their form of government in the Referendum Election in the Fall of 2005 because the questions that were included never asked whether those who voted wanted to keep the current resolution style form of government that was in existence at the time. The questions in that election were only about a constitutional form of government. See http://www.osagemineralstrustprotection.com/PDF/ReformQuestionsResults.pdf and http://www.osagemineralstrustprotection.com/
DeleteI'm not surprised. My vote did not get counted in 2005. And thats my argument as well. Proper notification was not sent and the executive said it was in the OSAGE NEWSPAPER HOW YOU WERE NOTIFIED. I said what? I didn't subscribe to the Newspaper and this could not be the only way we were notified and if that was the case Where was the BIA. notifying the Shareholders as well as the SOI and Congress etc... The ball was dropped and maybe this Gov. SHOULD BE DROPPED AS WELL. Shut IT DOWN. Where is the letter of intent to the Shareholders? Ah the excuse was we notified by the NEWS. Not. If I had known I would have been in tow with a lawyer to fight this before we became a Gov. Still trying to digest this all but now that we examined the issue at hand....we can move forward. Now you see why we are all over the place....We are a united front for the truth for the Osage Tribe.
DeleteThe only way we became and this is my opinion with facts to support what I am saying is everything you just pointed out, sum's it all in a nutshell OSAGEBLOGGER. Talk about the wool being pulled over your eyes. And if you again look at the voting numbers back then to date isn't coincidental the votes are low at 1400 to 1500 and we have 15000 Osages. We should be taking this to U.S Congress and make them aware what is happening. The Bia is not going to act so we must, a court can't decide for us, it will be Congress. Even the ruling Judge in the HPP case got it right. She made sure that the proper authority to receive this payout recognized the proper authority and got it right. Just more facts to support.
DeleteHeres a copy of public law 108-431. Shareholders we urge you to voice your opinion in this matter. Go to Rays site if you have questions just come back to this Blog. Ask. Don't be shy. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-108publ431/pdf/PLAW-108publ431.pdf
DeleteHEADS UP! RED ALERT--THE COMMENT PERIOD ON THE NEW CFRs for 25 CFR Part 226 HAS BEGUN! Comments on this proposed rule must be received by October 28, 2013: "Comments on the information collections contained in this proposed regulation are separate from those on the substance of the rule. Comments on the information collection burden should be received by September 27, 2013 to ensure consideration, but must be received no later than October 28, 2013. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: —Federal rulemaking portal: The rule is listed under the agency name ‘‘Bureau of Indian Affairs’’ and has been assigned Docket ID ‘‘BIA–2013–0003’’ at http://www.regulations.gov. —Email: osageregneg@bia.gov. Include the number 1076–AF17 in the subject line of the message. —Mail or hand-delivery: Mr. Eddie Streater, Designated Federal Officer, Bureau of Indian Affairs, P.O. Box 8002, Muscogee, OK 74402. Include the number 1076–AF17 on the outer envelope. We cannot ensure that comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES) will be included in the docket for this rulemaking and considered. SEE THE FULL NOTIFICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-08-28/pdf/2013-20764.pdf
ReplyDeleteThe following notification came in the Minerals Council Newsletter e-mailed August 30th, 2013:
Attention Shareholders: The proposed changes to the CFRs have been published in the Federal Register. The changes are not beneficial to the Osage oil producers and will hinder their attempts to further their activity to increase oil production. If you have any concerns you can write the Secretary of the Department of the Interior and or the Oklahoma state representatives. You can also write the Designated Federal Officer of the BIA:
Senator James Inhofe
1924 S. Utica Ave.
Suite 530
Tulsa, Ok 74104
(405) 350-7744
Congressman Frank Lucas
P.O. Box 1726
Oklahoma City, Ok 73101
(918) 748-5111
Senator Tom Coburn
1800 S. Baltimore
Suite 800
Tulsa, Ok 74119
(918) 581-7651
Congressman Markwayne Mullin
104 S. Muskogee Ave.
Claremore, Ok 74017
(918) 341-9336
Secretary of the Interior
Sally Jewell
1849 C Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20240
(202) 208-3100
Mr. Eddie Streater
Designated Federal Officer BIA
P.O. Box 8002
Muscogee, OK 74402
Include the number 1076—AF17 on the outer envelope. Comments on this proposed rule must be received by October 28, 2013.
SHAREHOLDERS, BE CERTAIN TO SEND IN YOUR COMMENTS TODAY!
OF SPECIAL NOTE: Comments on the information collection burden should be received by September 27, 2013 to ensure consideration.
DeleteCan someone please detail in short what it is exactly they perceive to be a threat with respect to the changes of the CFR'S. It is my belief that at one level you can update all you want and a judge can sign off but isn't it Congress that needs to approve signed by the President once said and done? After all it took the President to sign and sanction the HPP SETTLEMENT. In addition, you can make all the Changes you want to the CFR'S until at the administration hires more staff to insure and inforce these rule changes nothing is going to happen. Unless there is accountability and consequences or there of how is this going to work? In the end it's the M/E that will suffer.....
DeleteI don't believe that the President signed off on the HPP lawsuit. That was the Cobell settlement that he signed off on. The HPP lawsuit was adjudicated in the Court of Federal Claims and they have the ability to settle claims with the money they have available. The President signs off on Congressional legislation. I don't think that he signs off on the updating of the CFRs but I may be wrong.
DeleteI notice that the bulletin denouncing the new rules in the Sept. OMC news letter is not signed. I think at least 2 and maybe 3 of the half-wit councilmen who took that trip to Washington are on the committee that edits this newsletter. It looks like Mr. Core at least signs what he writes. Boone, Bear, and Whitehorn don’t seem too proud of what they are doing. Like on the blog, they post as anonymous in the newsletter too.
DeleteNote that Kevin Washburn of the BIA can issue extensions: Washburn Extends Comment Period on Federal Recognition Regulations. Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/08/15/washburn-extends-comment-period-federal-recognition-regulations-150865
Delete