4
SEPTEMBER 22, 1978 PAGE 9
Budget 79 Municipal Branch
Stressing
Accountability
and Planning
by Sandy Rangila
In response to increasing
community needs and Tribal
Council concern, the Municipal
Branch has been involved in a
large scale coordinated effort to
provide better programs and im
proved community services for
the Tribes.
The intent, as reflected in the
1979 objectives, is to provide
better quality services through
more effective programs with an
emphasis upon accountability
and professionalism. More com
munity involvement and input is
another area the
Municipal
Branch is beginning to embark
upon.
Municipal Branch Manager
Rudy Clements observed that in
previous years, it was basically a
m atter of maintaining programs
on a year-to-year basis, present
ing the same thing to Council
with no real accountability or
method of measuring the effec
tiveness of those programs.
With more attention being
directed to human needs and the
maimer in which service pro
grams relate to the community,
the muncipal branch has been
undergoing some major changes
in philosophy as well as man
power. Three new programs and
18 positions have been added,
10.5 of these positions to the
police department.
In terms of requested dol
lars, the largest proposed in
Treaty, Cont'
crease is in the police depart
ment and juvenile services bud
get. The overall budget increase
requested by the
municipal
branch is 41 per cent.
(For focus on Police and
Juvenile, see next issue)
New Programs
New to the municipal branch
is the creation of a tribal prose
cutor’s office, the movement of
the two tribal court advocates
from the Tribal Court to the
Municipal Branch, and the addi
tion of the Culture and Heritage
program.
Prosecutor Brenda
Lee
works closely with the police
department as prosecutor, she
represents the
Confederated
Tribes in all criminal cases
heard in the Tribal court.
Until the 1979 budget is in
effect.her salary is being paid
primarily by funds from the
American Indian Lawyers Train
ing Program.
Advocates John Allen and
Daisy Ike were placed outside
the Tribal Court into the Muni
cipal Branch since they are offi
cers of the court but not person
nel of the court.
“For the benefit of individ
uals facing the court, there was a
need for a more strengthened
adversary role that advocates
have to fullfill,” said Clements.
He explained that since the
police department and the Tribal
seasons were left open — in the
name of preservation of the
that the treaty was “not a grant
anadromous fish runs.
of rights to the Indians, but a
U.S, v. Oregon was continu
grant of rights from them, a
ed and Judge Belloni still has
reservation of those not grant jurisdiction over the commercial
ed.” This is the context within
fishery in the Columbia River.
which treaty rights are viewed 1 There have ’ been
numerous
today.
amendments to his 1969 judg
Since that time the Columbia
ment in the form of injunctions
River has continued to be the site
and restraining orders, as fish
of conflicts between Indian and
ermen and officials were spend
non-Indian fishermen, and be ing more time in the courtroom
tween tribes and the states of
than on the river and in their
Oregon and Washington.
offices.
The m atter of regulating the
In 1974 Belloni further de
commercial fishery seemed to be
fined his term “fair share” by
resolved in 1969 with Federal
assigning a 50-50 formula to the
District Judge Robert Belloni’s
Indian and non-Indian catches.
opinion in U.S. v. Oregon. Belloni
This ruling echoed District Judge
stated, “The phrase ‘the right to ; George Boldt’s landmark U.S. v.
fish at all usual and accustomed Washington decision, where he
places’ may not be qualified by
asserted that Indians were en
the State. I interpret this to mean
titled to 50 per cent of the catch in
that the State cannot so manage
the State of Washington. This
the fishery that no fish remain in
very literal interpretation of;the
the upper regions of thè stream
treaties’ “in common with citi
-where the historic Indian places
zens” provisions has been an
are mostly located. ”
extremely unpopular decision
The means by which the In
among the non-Indian commer
dians fish cannot be regulated by
cial and sports fishermen who
the state except for conservation
greatly outnumber the Indians.
purposes, Belloni also ruled.
The need for more specific
Treaty Indians have
an
guidelines became increasingly
“absolute right” to a fishery and
evident in Oregon. Belloni had
they are entitled to a “ Fair share
ordered the state to come up with
of the fish produced by the
a set of regulations to administer
Columbia River system,” said
his 50-50 ruling, but nothing wàs
Belloni.
forthcoming. After the heated
It seemed clear that the state
courtroom battles of the summer
of Oregon was to deal with the
of 1976, the judge placed the
Indian fishery as distinct from
burden on the four treaty tribes
the fishing of others and to
to come up with a fishery plan.
ensure the opportunity of Indians
The result was a comprehen
to a fair and equitable share of
sive management plan for the
the fish.
Columbia River fishery draft
But the subsequent years ed by attorneys for the Warm
found the Indian fishery continu
Springs confederated Tribes.
ally subject to closures while This plan is a 60-40 formula for
other , sppxts^anjd . comm ercial. the allocation of spring and fall
Court work closely together, the
relationship of the advocates to
the Tribal Court had to be
changed for the sake of credi
bility and in the interest of the
clients.
The Culture and Heritage
program has been transferred to
the Municipal Branch, and Cle
ments revealed that, in addition,
the Council has approved the
concept of a Culture and Heri
tage Board. The responsibility of
the board, yet to be selected, will
be to review anything being
documented about the Tribes.
“It will act as a sanctioning or
validating board,” Clements ex
plained.
A New Look At Old Problems
Clements would like to see
an increased effort in more
family-oriented programs. “A
lot of programs tend to isolate
out some responsibilities that
ought to be family responsibili
ties,” he maintains.
“Programs have had a ten
dency to do things for, contri
buting to the weakening of the
family.” He wants to emphasize
through Municipal Branch pro
grams strong,
independent,
competent families, “We need a
more cooperative effort in work-
' ing with families as a total unit
more than we have.’ Clements
stresses the positive and pre
ventative approach so people
won’t have to utilize the services
of the Health Branch so much.
Clements feels there is an
element of conditioning which
has taken hold as a result of
programs delivered over the
years. ‘‘There is an expectation
to have things done for you.”
Instead, Clements advocates
support to help resolve family
problems so they don’t get out of
hand. “One must lèarn to cope
with those yoürsëlf in order to
strengthen self and family.”
chinook to non-Indian and Indian
fishermen, to be computed after
a fixed escapement for upriver
spawning.
U.S. v. Oregon is still a live
case, Belloni having exercised
his authority just this week in the
closure of the lower river gill-
netters season (see story page
1). But with participation of the
treaty tribes in planning and
management (through the Col
umbia River Inter-tribal Fish
Commission) it is hoped that
fewer court hearings will be
necessary.
TRIBAL NOT INDIVIDUAL
RIGHTS
Whether it be commercial,
subsistence or ceremonial fish
ing, hunting, gathering, or live
stock pasturing off the reserva
tion, the treaty right is a tribal
not an individual right. This is
also true for the exclusive rights
on the reservation.
Natural Resources Director
Gene Greene never tires of
making this point. P art of his
department's job is to see that
these tribal rights are exercised
in an orderly fashion, according
to tribal law.
Tribal Ordinance No. 38
which offers regulations for off-
reservation fishing, states that
there are no “vested rights by
individuals in fishing sites.”
However the ordinance, recog
nizes the tradition of members
fishing in the same location for a
number of years and asks that
these informal rights be respect
ed by other fishermen. Sites on
the Columbia River are register
ed with the Tribes. Site squab
bles have long been a sticky
enforcement problem for the
He relates that premise to a
Municipal Branch objective —
staff development. Each depart
ment will do an introspective
analysis of staff needs, identi
fying barriers to a sound, in
dependent program and indi
vidual development.
Once the barriers are identi
fied, ways to overcome the bar
riers Can be developed. Then, it
will be possible for the program
to develop a direction which
might best benefit the com
munity. “Hopefully, that spirit of
strength will be transferred in;
how it relates to the com
munity,” says Clements.
“High staff turnover forced
us to take a look at the problem
of staff development,” said Cle
ments. And he notes that there
are still areas to be improved in
that respect.
“People have been placed in
positions who need on-the-job
training. When attention is paid
to individual problems, morale is
better and there is a lot less
turnover, generally,” observes
Clements.
Long Term Problems
There is a great deal of
concern in the area of education
and the Municipal Branch would
like to see better results from
their education program s.
“We’re not happy with the
situation as it is, now. Atten
dance, grades, dropouts are
heavy problems. The results of a
community Needs Assessment
are forthcoming, and may help
shed some light, offering possible
solutions in this area.
In the area of Natural Re
sources, joint planning and a
coordinated effort is a very high
priority . “Right now there is no
real mechanism to do that,” says
Clements. “We have to come up
with a comprehensive natural
resources preservation and de-
Tribes, worsening as the river
becomes more crowded.
Despite the treaty’s provi
sion for “erecting
suitable
houses for curing,” Ordinance
No. 38 prohibits the building of
permanent structures at fishing
sites, except for scaffolds.
According to No. 38 and the
Wildlife Ordinance (No. 50),
every fisherman and hunter
must carry tribal identification
at all times, to be shown on
demand to any federal, state, or
tribal officer.
Seasons for hunting and
fishing are set by the Tribal Fish
and Wildlife Committee. In the
case of hunting and commercial
fishing off the reservation, the
Committee acts in accordance
with state law.
The Tribes and the state
cooperate on monitoring salmon
and steelhead catches for the
purpose of enforcing limits, esti
mating run size and gathering
biological data. For everything
but commercial fishing, records
are voluntarily turned over to the
Fish and Wildlife Committee.
The commercial catch is moni
tored by state officials right at
the buying stations along the
Columbia.
No ordinance exists for wild
food gathering off the reserva
tion but the treaty reserves the
rights on “unclaimed lands.”
Permission from property own
ers is required if tribal members
wish to have access to private
lands. BLM land is open to root
diggers and National Forests are
open to huckleberry pickers.
Although there exists the
right to graze livestock off the
reservation, to Gene Greene’s
knowledge this right is not exer
cised.
velopment plan on a coordinated
basis.” Forestry practices, the
McQuinn Strip, water and range
all have to be carefully evalu
ated.
In The Works
Planned for completion in
1980, the proposed Community
Learning Center willhouse Day
care, HeadStart, Adult Educa
tion, the Education Department,
Culture and Heritage, Library,
and perhaps a media center. The
site is now under consideration.
Such a facility would open up
the community center to more
activities for the whole com
munity, providing social enrich
ment and a less restricted actt-
vity area, according to Cle
ments.
|
|S |
Another proposed facility af
fecting the Municipal. Branch is
the New Comprehensive Crimi
nal Justice Center. If construc
tion begins in the spring of 1979
as planned, the probable comple
tion date would be in mid-1980.
This facility would help oring
the Tribes in compliance with the
Indian Civil Rights Act of »1968,
and provide a safer environment
for those being detained as well
as for the staff.
The public would also have a
separate entrance through which
they could come and go while
conducting other business.
In Summary . . .
The increased dollar amount
requested in the
Municipal
Branch budget represents some
new tribal priorities in the area
of community services, accord
ing to management.
Community and council con
cern for improved and expanded
services has required very care
ful planning and review with the
program heads, Branch Mana
ger, General Manager, and the
Tribal Council. “We had to do
only a minimum of rejecting
because of this effort,” said
Clements.
THE END OF ARTICLE 1
The rather confusing provi
sions that follow the fishing and
hunting section and bring the
long first article of the treaty to
an end, refers to payments for
the ceded land. If any bands of
Indians did not sign the treaty
then those who did would still
receive their portion of the pay-,
ments, which are outlined in the
next article.
The treaty also states that
any Indians having to abandon
improvements made, would be
compensated for their loss or
have equivalent»* improvements
made on the reservation.
It is not known whether such
compensation was ever made.
Said Wallula turn with a shrug, “I
doubt if they were made.”
NEXT: Dollars, Services,
and Goods Promised by Treaty-
Makers
REFERENCES, PART 4
American Friends Service Com-
mettee, Uncommon Controver
sy, 1970.
Minutes of the Treaty. Council
U.S. v. Oregon and Sohappy v.
Washington, prepared by at
torneys for intervenor Confed
erated Tribes of Warm Springs
William Veeder,
“ Columbia
River Basin Indian Winters’
Doctrine Rights to the Use of
W ater,” 1967.
Tribal Ordinances No. 38 and No.
50
Nelson Wallulatum, Wasco Chief
Harold Culpus, Fish and Wildlife
Committee Chairman
Gene Greene, Natural Resources
Director
Atty. Dennis Karnopp