PAGE 8 WARM SPRINGS, OREGON AUGUST 6, 1976
is
New Facilities, New Goals
Chemawa
Part I
Indian people. Interms of
-éelf-d^twimnâÎion' we view
such a facility as essential.
With this program functioning
we foresee a large student
dependent population. The
Board remains unchanged in
it’s view that the Indian Health
Service should plan now for a
facility that will serve approx
imately 2,500 Indian people and
provide for the changes in
population we foresee.”
The same year, the Chem
awa Advisory Board adopted
Resolution No. 1975-1, which
ended:
. . the undersigned
agree with the programs des
cribed in the Chemawa Health
Facility Planning Document
dated November 1973, as re
vised September 6, 1974, for
the . design and construction of
a replacement health facility in
Conjunction with that of the
new school complex.. . .”
Five Year Plan
By Olney Patt, Jr.
The original Chemawa In
dian School was established in
Forest Groye, .Oregon in 1880
with a féderâï" grant of $5,000.
When fire destroyed a sizeable
portion bf: the school; in 1884, it
was relocated to it’s present
site 5 miles north of Salem,
along the tracks of the South
ern Pacific Railroad. Since
then, it has become the oldest
continously operated Indian
school in America, and at least
partly responsible for the edu
cation of some 37,000 Indian
students.
Through the years, Chem
awa’s buildings have been re
juvenated and remodeled to
comply with state health and
safety standards, but, by 1975,
old age had gotten the upper
hand and many of the build
ings were vacated arid con
demned. Safety inspectors
noted many cases of structural
weakness - the combined work
of dry rot, water seepage due
to timeworn plumbing, and the
constant vibration of daily
train traffic through the middle
of thé school grounds.
In 1975, Martell, the arch
itectural firm was contracted
to do a building evaluation
study. Their findings: “The
primary concern at Chemawa
is non-compliance with mini
mum life "safety and health
requirements; they cannot be
waived. Another serious con
cern is the indications of struc
tural failure in critical areas in
some buildings and the ques
tion of structural adequacy of
all of the buildings. Most of the
subject buildings are 50 years
old or more, some are more
than 70 years old. The build
ings are obsolete, dilapidated,
drab and, except for two or
three, they provide a depres
sing atmosphere. The buildings
were poorly designed and built
with an almost total disregard
of life safety requirements.
These buildings have stood for
50 to 70 years, but as they
have deteriorated, the margin
of safety in the structures has
become less and less. Most of
the roof structures were im
properly designed to begin
with. They do not comply with
standard engineering practice
and code requirements. If the
Chemawa Indian School must
continue in these buildings for
another 5 or 6 years, then it
must be recognized that cor
rective work costing from
$1,000,000 to $2,000,000 should
be made immediately.”
In conclusion: “In general,
except for the new roofs, cor
rection of the deficiencies
listed in this report will not
improve the deteriorated con
dition of the buildings nor will
it relieve the accelerating
maintenance problems. ’ ’
But the study was merely
a formal verification of what
Chemawa officials had recog
nized as early as 1969: the
existing facilities would have
to be replaced if Chemawa
Indian School was to continue
operating.
Justifications and
Specifications
By 1971, plans and specifi
cations submitted by Chemawa
administration and Advisory
Board members - (students are
also represented on the ad
visory board) as well as stu
dent need and population esti
mates from agencies within the
Northwest area - were being
considered by officials of the
Division of Planning, Design,
and Construction (P.D.C.) at
the head office in Washington,
D.C., the regional office in
Albuquerque, N.M, and the
Portland Area Office.
In a memorandum to John
F. Carmody, head of P.D.C. in
Washington, D.C., (dated 9-28-
72) then-superintendent of
Chemawa Al Ouchi outlined the
specific needs of the Northwest
tribes as requested by the
advisory board and tribal lead
ers. It became clear that it
was not the wish of Northwest
tribal leaders to construct a
replica of the old school; the
desired capacity of the new
school grew to 1,000 students:
600 high school and 400 post-
high school. (Ouchi also poin
ted out that, should House Bill
Number 15902 be passed, a
large number of Klamath In
dians would become eligible to
attend Chemawa. These stu
dents had not been included in
the population estimates.)
In testimony given before
the House Appropriations Com
mittee on April 8, 1976, Chair
person Virginia Brown of the
Chemawa Advisory Board
made four points in justifying
the rebuilding program: 1)
Chemawa was built for the
Northwest Indian students and
has for many years been util
ized by Navajo and Alaskans
to the detriment of the North
west Indians. 2) While1 other
schools ïrt'theTîUreau^
being ‘conStrhctéd and rebuilt,
Chertià^a* was, !aliowed Iwnde-
HêiioFâiëJ W4t^} preserit 'condi-
' tiorr 3P Thé public schools are
unable to meet the needs of all
Indian children. There is still a
critical need for residential
facilities such as Chemawa for
Northwest Indian students and
that need has not diminished.
4) That sending Indian stu
dents out of the Northwest
where parents have not input
into the school system is not
the answer.
Health Facilities
Also taxed for space and
facilities was the Student
Health Center. They were not,
however, forgotten, as this let
ter from Virginia Brown, to
John R. Heinz, Director of
Chemawa Health Services, in
dicates:
“Dear Mr. Heinz: It re
mains the position of the
Chemawa Advisory School
Board that ultimately the new
Chemawa School will require a
capacity for 1000 students. At
this point in time planning and
construction are geared to a
600 student high school. With
the accomplishment of this
phase it is our intention to
begin planning for a post-high
school, vocation-technical, jun
ior college phase. This will be
in addition to the high school
and will accommodate approx
imately 400 students with de
pendents. Eventually, the
Board sees Chemawa as a
regional training center for
John R. Heinz, member of
the' Chemawa'Task^ Force on
Career Education reported that
“Prelininary surveys of stu
dents, parents, and alumuni
have revealed considerable in
terest in a career education
approach. Older alumuni recall
when Chemawa’s school day
was one-half academic and
one-half direct experience. Cur
rent students would like to see
• opportunities for application of
the accademic curriculum.
Parents express dissatisfaction
with the school as a spin-off of
the frustrations of their child
ren. These frustrations go be
yond the academic program
but are nonetheless part of the
entire school environment.” He
further stated that, “To best
plan for the future this school
must become more consumer
oriented and realign itself to
meet current and projected
needs of the people it serves.”
During the 1975-76 school
year, Chemawa was in the pro
cess of updatirig it’s curriculum
to meet the needs of the stu
dents; it took the first-and light
est step in a 5 year plan, as
proposed by the task force.
During the course of those five
years, Chemawa will gradually
shift it’s emphasis from that of
a conventional high school to
that of a career training center
for Indians. When that shift is
completed, the curriculum will
contain 30 main course offer
ings some of which are:
Health Occupations prepara
tion, business education, col
lege preparation, technical
trades preparation (construc
tion trades, metal, wood,
mechanics, graphics, electri
city), forest products indus
tries, alcohol- and drug abuse
advisor training, food service
occupations, fire fighting, law
enforcement services, small
business administration, range
management, wildlife manage
ment studies, child care ser
vices, agricultural enterprises,
cosmetology, recreation, build
ing maintenance and repair,
fine arts, tribal political stu
dies (or leadership training-
Indian/rights and responsibil
ities), data processing, reser
vation economic development,
reservation human resource
development, and fisheries
management (aquaculture,
hatchery operation, conserva
tion, and stocking programs).
Interim Facilities
While this planning was
going on, one nagging question
presented itself at the end of
the 75-76 school year: how to
. (Continued on Page 12)