|
| Title: |
Date: |
| A Summary of the Activities of the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission (July 1, 2007-June 30, 2008) |
| This report covers fiscal year 2008, July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008.
Tribal-state relations, after experiencing a positive two-year trend of improvement, precipitously plummeted in April 2008. Though specific individuals and their actions caused a rupture in tribal-state relations in the early spring of 2008, these developments occurred in the context of a negative longer term trend of unilateralism. Both the State of Maine and the Tribes too often act unilaterally though the State does so from a position of political, legal, and economic advantage while the Tribes revert to unilateral action from exasperation that they cannot resolve their disputes with the State in what they believe to be a just manner.
One of the most important achievements of the Maine Indian Claims Settlement was the establishment of a government-to-government relationship between equals. Former Maine Attorney General Richard Cohen testified to the US Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs in the summer of 1980, “I cannot promise you that the adoption of this settlement will usher in a period of uninterrupted harmony between Indians and non-Indians in Maine. But I can tell you, however, that because we sat down at a conference table as equals and jointly determined our future relationship, in my view there exists between the State and the tribes a far greater mutual respect and understanding than has ever existed in the past in the State of Maine.” Tom Tureen, the lawyer who represented the Passamaquoddy Tribe and Penobscot Nation in the negotiations with the State, said at the same hearing, “I would agree with what Dick Cohen said earlier – that the negotiations in this case all around were characterized by a mutual respect and were carried on in a commendable atmosphere.”
Perhaps the greatest casualty in the decades-long deterioration in tribal-state relations is the withering of the deep-seated mutual respect between the parties that Richard Cohen and Tom Tureen describe at the conclusion of the Settlement Act negotiations. Tribal leaders view the current Wabanaki-State relationship as broken. Maine political leaders claim for the most part that they don’t truly understand why the events of the late winter/early spring of 2008 caused such an abrupt rupture in tribal-state relations.
In order to fix the broken relationship, the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission (MITSC) believes that the signatories must return to jointly determining their future. At the same Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs referenced earlier, Attorney General Cohen warned, “I can also tell you that if this matter is litigated over a period of years, the atmosphere in Maine certainly will be quite different.” Though he was referring to the land claim itself, Richard Cohen’s words accurately describe the current situation. The litigation that has ensued since the adoption of the agreement involving its interpretation and application has degraded the relationship into one of suspicion and distrust.
MITSC recommends four specific actions to restoring a sense of trust and mutual recognition for each signatory’s sovereignty. Our recommendations include:
1. Adopt a new budget process for determining the signatories’ financial support for MITSC. Maine originally agreed to fund 100% of MITSC operations. Maine escaped its legal obligation to fund MITSC operations when the parties agreed the amount specified in MIA, $3,000, was insufficient and the specific amount was dropped from the Act. An initial Tribal offer in 1984 to contribute toward MITSC operations has become a State expectation of Tribal cost sharing. Yet the Tribes, equals with the State under the Settlement Act, have had no real input into MITSC’s funding as the Maine Legislature has determined what MITSC will receive for State funding. The Tribes have picked up the shortfall of what the State has determined it is willing to give. The parties should adopt a process that determines the amount of funding MITSC will receive based on what the parties mutually agree MITSC should do in the coming years. Ideally, this would occur at the Annual Assembly of Governors and Chiefs. In order for this new process to work, the discussion of the MITSC work plan, its overall funding, and how much each signatory would pay needs to occur at a predictable date which respects the different budget processes for the respective governments.
2. Enact in the 1st session of the 124th Legislature (2009) the Tribal-State Work Group (TSWG) recommendations that reinforce consultation and joint problem solving. Three of the eight unanimously endorsed TSWG recommendations especially address decision making. The second recommendation suggests adding the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians to MITSC.
Twice, attempts to add the Maliseets to MITSC have failed though all the signatories have recognized the Maliseets as members of MITSC since September 2007. Governor Baldacci and legislative leaders must resolve concerns expressed by the Attorney General’s staff about the TSWG third recommendation to institute mandatory mediation before the State or the Tribes could initiate litigation against one another concerning disputes involving the Settlement Act. All the parties assembled at the 2006 Assembly of Governors and Chiefs bemoaned the many costs of litigation. MITSC sees no reason that legislative language acceptable to all of the parties can’t be drafted. Finally, passage of the fourth TSWG recommendation, to require mandatory meaningful consultation with the Tribes prior to any legislative, policy, or rule change, should occur. A model for such a policy is Executive Order 13175 adopted by President Clinton governing Federal Government actions. The idea is for Maine to do something similar.
3. Develop a permanent process for orienting new and returning legislators about the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act (MICSA), MIA, the Wabanaki, and tribal-state relations. A component of the envisioned legislator orientation should include visits to one or more Wabanaki communities.
4. Accelerate implementation of LD 291. Maine Public Law 2001, Chapter 403 (LD 291, An Act to Require Teaching of Maine Native American History and Culture in Maine’s Schools) requires teaching in Maine public schools grades K-12 about Maine Wabanaki governments; Maine Wabanaki cultural systems; Maine Wabanaki territories; and Maine Wabanaki economic systems. Though successful implementation of this law will not immediately impact the government-to-government policy discussions of the signatories, over time it can greatly enhance the non-Indian population’s knowledge and understanding of the Wabanaki. Implementation of LD 291 has suffered because of the lack of a specific point person within the Department of Education (DOE) to oversee the law’s implementation. Commissioner Gendron has assigned the DOE Social Studies Specialist with responsibility for LD 291 implementation. Maine State Government must avoid cutting that position as it considers budget reductions for this fiscal year and in the upcoming biennium.
|
| October 30, 2008 |
 |
|
| Final Report of the Tribal-State Work Group |
| This report represents the final product of the Tribal-State Work Group created by Resolve 2007, Chapter 142, 123rd Maine Legislature, Resolve, To Continue the Tribal-State Work Group |
| January 20, 2008 |
|
|
| A Summary of the Activities of the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission (July 1, 2006-June 30, 2007) |
| MITSC is an inter-governmental entity created by An Act to Implement the Maine Indian Claims Settlement (known hereafter as the Maine Implementing Act (30 MRSA §6201 - §6214)). The Maine Implementing Act (MIA) directs MITSC to “continually review the effectiveness of this Act and the social, economic and legal relationship between the Passamaquoddy Tribe and the Penobscot Nation and the State….”
Tribal-State relations continue to improve since the last MITSC annual report published in October 2006. Perhaps the single most important continuing factor contributing to this improved political atmosphere is Governor John Baldacci’s engagement in tribal-state issues, especially his willingness to discuss possible changes to the Maine Implementing Act. Another decisive factor helping to enhance tribal-state relations is the executive and legislative branches of State Government reclaiming primary roles as the developers of policy with respect to the Tribes. Legislative leaders’ enthusiastic support to include information about the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act (MICSA), MIA, MITSC, Wabanaki Tribes, and tribal-state relations in this year’s legislative orientation program for the 123rd Legislature offers more evidence of increasing State consciousness of tribal-state relations.
Tribal Leaders also deserve credit for their diplomatic and statesmanlike words taking a long-term view of their relationship with the State during political controversies. The Tribes’ consent to creating the Tribal-State Work Group (TSWG) and their continuing active involvement in the process reflects greater faith in MITSC to help the parties resolve difference and a hope that differences will be genuinely addressed. The Maliseets’ decision to join MITSC serves as another example of growing Tribal confidence in MITSC.
During much of its history, MITSC has made many well thought-out recommendations, some the product of many months or even years of deliberation and work, only to have them ignored by the signatories to the Settlement Act. Many individuals and signatories to the Settlement Act have cited this ineffectiveness at implementation as a fundamental MITSC weakness. MITSC has consciously focused during the last one and a half years on ensuring the implementation of its recommendations. MITSC Chair Paul Bisulca has repeatedly said MITSC had to regain its customers. Beyond making and supporting recommendations, MITSC had to demonstrate success in implementing them.
Successfully implementing MITSC and signatory recommendations required two fundamental things: increased contractor man-hours and MITSC’s direct assistance to state and tribal staff efforts.
MITSC fully achieved its goal for increased State funding with the Legislature and Governor eventually supporting its original budget request for a $38,000 increase in both FYs 2008 and 2009. We also averted a mid-year funding crisis by persuading Governor Baldacci to provide $25,000 in emergency funding to MITSC in January 2007 to apply to FY 07. MITSC is now funded at a level that more adequately supports MITSC’s increased workload and need for greater contractor man-hours to apply to its own initiatives, which are described in the annual report.
Because of increased funding MITSC is also better able to monitor and actively assist in the implementation of agreements reached by both the State and Tribes. The MITSC Chair views past staff failures on both sides as having contributed to a perception that “leadership on the other side” does not always live up to the terms of agreements. This perception interfered with MITSC’s goal to build trust among the parties with which it works. MITSC’s direct assistance to state and tribal staffs and the results that have been achieved have increased trust and a sense of accomplishment by the signatories.
FY 2007 was a year that saw growth in MITSC’s visibility and operational effectiveness. MITSC successfully achieved eight of its nine work plan objectives for FY 2007. Some of the more notable work plan achievements include its success at obtaining increased and/or new State, Federal, and private funding, resolving a difference regarding Federal Trust Responsibility that blocked renewal of the Atlantic Salmon Cooperative Agreement, and implementation of all phase one Tribal-State Work Group recommendations. Beyond the FY 2007 work plan, MITSC played a key role in the appointment of Wayne Newell to the University of Maine System Board of Trustees (and August 28 appointment of Denise Altvater to the Maine State Prison Board of Visitors), facilitating resolution of concerns raised by the Sipayik Criminal Justice Commission with the State, county, and local criminal justice system, and helping to nurture the strengthening relationship between the Wabanaki and Bates, Bowdoin, and Colby Colleges.
MITSC stands prepared to undertake perhaps its more important mission during its 27 year history, helping Tribal and State parties to the Maine Implementing Act resolve their differences about its intent, interpretation, and application. MITSC already considers the process a success by the fact that all signatories mutually agreed to create the Tribal-State Work Group and by them collectively designing the process for considering changes to MIA. However, the new MITSC will also continue to judge its effectiveness by the ultimate results of the Tribal-State Work Group process. MITSC also expects the Tribal-State Work Group to review MITSC’s powers and consider to what extent those powers should be changed or expanded to equip MITSC to better serve the signatories and tribal-state relations in the 21st century.
|
| August 31, 2007 |
|
|
| REPORT of the TRIBAL-STATE WORK GROUP TO STUDY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE MAINE IMPLEMENTING ACT |
| Governor Baldacci’s Executive Order 19 FY 06/07 directs the Tribal-State Work Group to “study differences in the interpretation and understanding of the Settlement Acts.” It tasks the Work Group with developing “recommendations for how the 123rd Legislature might reconcile the issues in a manner that benefits both the Tribes and the State.” The 13 members of the Tribal-State Work Group to Study Issues Associated with the Maine Implementing Act unanimously recommend continuation of the group. Accomplishments of the Tribal-State Work Group include acting as a catalyst for including in-house and external briefing sessions on the Wabanaki, the Maine Implementing Act, and tribal-state relations in the official legislative orientation for the 123rd Maine Legislature, forging a consensus to recommend including seats for the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians on the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission, and drafting legislation to add the Maliseets to MITSC (see appendix seven). |
| December 6, 2006 |
|
|
| A Summary of the Activities of the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission (4/19/03 – 6/30/06) |
| This report summarizes MITSC’s work from April 19, 2003 to June 30, 2006. |
| October 1, 2006 |
|
|
| Final Report - Wabanaki Studies Commission |
| This is the final report of the Wabanaki Studies Commission published October 2003. |
| October 1, 2003 |
|
|
| Preliminary Report of the Wabanaki Studies Commission |
| This is the preliminary report of the Wabanaki Studies Commission. Their final report is due September 2003. |
| June 1, 2002 |
|
|
| 2001: Year in Review |
| The 2001 Annual Report of the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission to the Governor of Maine and the Governors and Chiefs of the Tribes in Maine. |
| March 1, 2002 |
|
|
| Final Status of Bills Relating to Maine Tribes: 120th Legislature |
| A list of the status of bills relevant to Maine Tribes at the end of the 120th Legislature. |
| June 30, 2001 |
|
|
| Impact of Maine Civil Laws on the Wabanaki: 1997-2000 |
| A review, pursuant to a Legislative Resolve, of how the civil laws of Maine affect the ability of Indian Tribes to regulate their members, lands, schools, cultural institutions, and communities in ways that honor tribal traditions. |
| December 15, 2000 |
|
|
| 2000: Year in Review |
| This report reviews the activities, accomplishments, and disappointments of the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission (MITSC) during the year 2000. After introductory information in Section 1, the report’s next five sections describe what happened during the year 2000. Section 2 provides an overview of MITSC’s members, meetings, and process; Section 3 reviews key pieces of legislation; Section 4 describes MITSC’s education activities; Section 5 summarizes the major natural resources and environmental issues before MITSC; and Section 6 analyses the tribal-state relations process. Based on what has happened during the year 2000, Section 7 identifies proposed areas of focus for the year 2001. |
| November 22, 2000 |
|
|
| Proposal to Drop "Squaw" from Place Names in Maine |
| An analysis of the reasons for the introduction of LD 2418 to the 119th Maine Legislature, including reactions from Native Americans and others in Maine to the prohibition of "sq---" in place names. |
| January 1, 2000 |
|
|
| 1999: Year in Review |
| MITSC's Annual Report to the Governor of Maine and the Governors and Chiefs of the Tribes in Maine. |
| November 23, 1999 |
|
|
| Final Status of Bills Relating to Maine Tribes:119th Legislature |
| A list of the status of bills relating to Maine's Tribes at the conclusion of the 119th Legislature. |
| July 1, 1999 |
|
|
| At Loggerheads: The State of Maine and the Wabanaki |
| The final report of the Task Force, created by the 117th Legislature, to explore ways of improving tribal-state relationships and the effectiveness of the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission, as well as to determine the appropriate role of the Aroostook Band of Micmacs and the Houlton Band of Maliseets in the Maine Indian Tribal State Commission. The Task Force made recommendations on: round table discussions, annual assembly of Governors and Chiefs, creating an advisory committee, strengthening the Commission, protecting tribal fish and wildlife, tribal needs and concerns, workshops, legislative representation for Micmacs and Maliseets, the Commission's resources, and legislation. |
| January 15, 1997 |
|
|
| Maine Indian Claims Settlement: Concepts, Context, and Perspectives |
| To do. |
| February 5, 1995 |
|
|
|
|
