LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Dear fellow tribal members:
For the past year my name has
been in many discussions before Tribal
Council at their regular monthly meet
ings regarding my paternity and eligi
bility to be an enrolled Siletz. Tribal
member. Many of you are wondering
why I don't just take the DNA test to
prove my paternity as requested not
only by the council but by the Mason
family. 1 hope this letter helps to explain.
Tribal Council has the authority
within the Enrollment Ordinance, Sec
tion 2.314 APPEAL PROCEDURE (d)
Reconsideration of Applications. At its
discretion the Tribal Council may re
open old applications when new and
substantial evidence is submitted to
support the applicant’s position and
when the Council determines that jus
tice requires such reconsideration.
When you read this, it clearly ap
plies to applications and not currently
enrolled members. Imagine for a mo
ment that it does apply to currently
enrolled members. It also clearly states
“new and substantial evidence.”
What is “new and substantial evi
dence”? Does it include letters signed
by family members challenging your
paternity, or hearsay statements from a
man deceased for over 20 years, or state
ments from strangers that they think they
might be your father? This was the type
of evidence provided to Tribal Council.
I am the son of Terrance Mason and
Trish Holt. In 1993, my enrollment ap
plication and supporting documentation
were provided, my name was posted
for the required 30-day posting period,
and Tribal Council approved my enroll
ment. I followed the enrollment process
the same as anyone else in this tribe.
I refused to take the DNA test be
cause the Tribal Council has no author
ity to require it nor were they provided
any “new or substantial evidence” to
support the challenges against me.
As the government body, they
should have been protecting me
against the challenge instead of join
ing the challenge. Tribal Council has
made others submit to a DNA test and
they were dis-enrolled. Just because it
was done before to others does not mean
it is lawful.
I will not submit to a DNA test at the
request of the council or the Mason
family. I hope the membership under
stands that I am doing this to protect
us all. Our tribal government and en
rollment process, especially a DNA test,
should not be manipulated and used to
settle family feuds, animosity, or battles
among families within our tribe.
The way the process stands today,
and I am living proof, anybody can
challenge any member’s right to be
enrolled with just a statement and an
accusation. And trust me, there are four
members on the Tribal Council who
believe this is substantial evidence to
act on and you could be next.
Respectfully,
Tristen John
Dear tribal members:
With deep concern I address the
general membership. For the past year
an injustice has been presented to our
elected Tribal Council. The accusations
and hearsay inflicted upon an enrolled
tribal member were unmerited. The
assumptions were based on selective
memory of a few and a birth record
from a hospital. Our Enrollment Ordi
nance accepts this document.
I attended the Dec. 21 hearing
where hearsay evidence was submitted:
a statement that a woman said a man
said “he thought he could be the fa
ther of this person”; a woman said her
brother told her that “that child was not
his; the child does not look like him.”
Tribal Council sent a birth record
- a confidential enrollment record - to
a handwriting expert. This birth record
was even projected on a large screen
for everyone in this meeting to witness.
The parentage was discussed openly
and the Tribal Council even called wit
nesses to testify as to the parentage of
the enrolled tribal member.
You might want to ask yourself just
how safe is your confidential informa
tion in your file? Who has the right to
open it and discuss it in an open Tribal
Council meeting? Should you have to
give permission to allow this? I think so.
This enrolled tribal member’s infor
mation was taken out of his file and
“blasted on a large screen” at an open
meeting without his consent. If the law
of the Enrollment Ordinance is followed,
your enrollment file documents should
be secure and confidential. Or is it?
At the Dec. 21 meeting, Robert Kentta
moved to dis-enroll this tribal member;
Alfred “Bud” Lane seconded. The vote
was 4-yes, 3-no, and 2-abstentions.
This was an illegal action. Our En
rollment Ordinance doesn't allow for any
enrollment actions from Dec. I up to the
date of the annual elections in February.
The Tribal Court agreed, finding they
had voted on this matter illegally.
At a March 5 special meeting at Chi
nook Winds, Robert Kentta moved to
dis-enroll and Alfred “Bud" Lane sec
onded. The vote was much different this
time - 4-yes, 5-no, and O-abstentions.
Now we’re asked to question the
ethics of two elected Tribal Council
members for voting no. We were not
asked to look at ethics when the Tribal
Enrollment Ordinance was violated.
Why not?
Who will be the “watch dog” of the
rights of tribal members? As our Con
stitution states: May we continue for
ever, with the help of God. our unique
identity as Indians and as the Confed
erated Tribes of Siletz Indians of
Oregon and to protect that identity from
forces that threaten to diminish it.
Thank you for your time.
Krisit Martin-Bayya
Dear tribal members:
The whole ordeal that Tristen John
had to go through over his enrollment
was a shameful time for our tribe.
I attended both meetings where the
Tribal Council acted on this. I felt terrible
for this young man and was shocked
when the first vote was to dis-enroll him.
It was unbelievable.
I have heard from other tribal el
ders who felt this was wrong. I was very
relieved and happy that the second vote
was to not dis-enroll him.
I don't personally know Tristen
John. All 1 know of him is that he is a
traditional man. He dances at the dance
house, he is respectful to elders, he
helps at the wood cutting for elders,
and he is always pleasant and cordial
to people.
This matter has been voted on
twice now and needs to be closed.
Sincerely,
Liz John
Tribal Elder
Dear tribal members:
Having read the letters about
council action over Tristen John’s
enrollment, I am compelled to voice
my views.
The Enrollment Ordinance allows
council to re-examine an enrollment
when presented with “substantial
evidence.” In this case, the evidence
was verbal hearsay submitted through
“confidential” presentations over the
course of nearly a year.
In December, after these presen
tations, the council held a hearing on
this matter. Immediately after the
hearing, the council convened a special
meeting at which 4 members voted to
dis-enroll Tristen (3 members voted no
and 2 members abstained).
This action was appealed in Tribal
Court and the chief judge ruled the
action invalid as the Enrollment
Ordinance specifically prohibits any
enrollment actions (including dis-
enrollment) between Dec. I and the
second Saturday of February each year.
In March, the council held a special
meeting with “Enrollment” on the
agenda and voted again on a motion
to dis-enroll Tristen. This time all 9
members voted and the action failed -
5 against and 4 for dis-enrollment.
Enrollment and dis-enrollment are
serious matters that should not be left
to the decision of a minority of the full
council. While I can understand that
the Mason family is unhappy that the
vote did not go the way they wanted it
to, the matter has been decided.
I hope that they can let the matter
go and not be antagonistic. We need
to follow our rules and laws and be fair
to everyone.
Sincerely,
Laurie Brown-Godfrey
To the editor:
This letter responds to the letters in
the last newsletter regarding Tristen John.
One letter makes claims against our
Tribal Council members, who were voted
in by the majority to represent all tribal
members. Now. because the Mason fam
ily did not get the results they wanted,
they are questioning the abilities of
those council members who voted
against dis-enrolling a tribal member.
This letter refers to an “overabun
dance of legal proof that someone has
been fraudulently enrolled in our tribe."
This overabundance of legal proof in
cluded hearsay of both verbal and writ
ten statements. All other evidence pre
sented at the hearing was acquired
through the enrollment record by Tribal
Council.
What type of a system is this? Tribal
Council should be protecting the mem
bership, not working against them. The
policies and procedures were followed
during this enrollment process over 10
years ago and it is very disturbing that
Tribal Council interprets their author
ity to question that process.
The letters in the tribal paper ac
cused council members of having per
sonal involvements with the person
they claim to be fraudulently enrolled
because their son works with him. or
because he has considered someone
like a grandfather, or he works in the
same department. These are not con
flicts of interest under any law.
We as tribal people understand the
importance of not only family, but of
community. We often help to raise chil
dren who lack parents with the ability
to provide cultural ties to our tribe and
that relationship is easily and openly
established among many.
The Tribal Council Rules and Pro
cedures Ordinance states that council
members must abstain from decisions
in which they receive a personal finan
cial gain or advantage. This would also
apply to a benefit received by an im
mediate family member of a council
member. There was no benefit gained
and no conflict of interest for any of
the nine members voting on this issue.
We also know and understand that
being a tribal member is not about the
status, benefits, or even per capita. It is
about our identity and relationship to our
culture and tribal community. In any
case, this matter has been resolved and
I hope we never see another like it again.
Sincerely,
Bonnie Petersen
May 2007
•
Siletz News
•
5