Smoke signals., June 01, 2016, Page 21, Image 21

S moke S ignals
JUNE 1, 2016
21
Letters
Dear Smoke Signals:
The upcoming constitutional amendment has sure got everyone's at-
tention. We have those who are for it and those who are against it, and
in a way I’ve never seen before. I, myself, have watched the videos where
members are voicing their concerns, have read on Facebook where mem-
bers and non-members do the same and have talked directly to members
who are for it and who are not. For the most part many members are not
in support of changing our Constitution.
I have one thought: If this constitutional amendment passes what be-
comes of the programs that are currently offered and how will it affect
the current enrollment?
Let's face it, there's only so many grants we can apply for and currently
do. We stretch every one of those dollars to the best of our ability. The
Tribe funds some programs, but again there are only so many dollars to
assist with. Sure, we have the casino, but with competition of another one
being built on our back doorstep, do you really think we won't take a hit?
It's my opinion we probably will.
Let me ask this, do you enjoy your medical, education, housing, Social
Services programs, Elders beneit and per capita? Because if you do, and
this amendment passes, you may not be receiving them. Granted those
programs will still be intact, but it doesn't mean you’ll receive them. Don’t
get me wrong, you might receive a little, but not to the full extent we all
receive now. Instead your medical coverage will go down and chances of
receiving a scholarship will be affected. Keep in mind there only so many
dollars and many members want and need assistance toward their edu-
cational goals. There’s only so many houses/apartments in the Housing
Department. Social Services is only allotted so much; many programs are
irst-come, irst-served. Elder’s endowment can only support so many and
per capita payments will go down.
No instead, it could be someone else, someone who isn’t really a Grand
Ronde Tribal member, but now is because of this amendment. Sure we
have money in the bank, but we are not a rich Tribe when compared to
others. Compared to some Tribes, we’re still fairly new.
It’s my opinion, if you want to make someone a Tribal member then you
make my descendants one. At least they’ll have Grand Ronde blood. If
this amendment passes, some will be enrolled who have none while others
who do are left out. How fair is that? It's ridiculous.
As far as the referendum, no. All that will do is give power to a few. It’s
totally absurd. Leave it as it is. Anything else is dangerous to our Tribe.
The parent on the poll amendment I agree with, but because this has
been bundled I now have to vote “no.” Effectively my voice has been qui-
eted and that’s not fair. Parent on the roll probably would have passed on
its own merit, but there seems to be those who don’t think I’m intelligent
enough to vote on several amendments at one time. Instead, I have to
vote across the board, yes for all or no for all. Again, I vote “no.” What a
shame for our Tribe and what an insult to me.
I was raised in Grand Ronde and lived there from the 1960s through
the ’80s. Even before Restoration, we took pride in who we were. We were
Grand Ronde Indians! No other but Grand Ronde! I think of all those who
have walked on from that period, and feel at peace knowing they wouldn’t
agree with what is happening. Instead, I believe in my heart they’d be
crying out to stop it.
When I leave this world, when I am called home, I refuse to stand before
my ancestors and answer to them why I think this constitutional amend-
ment was right. Because it’s not.
Tammy C. Garrison
Roll #1669
Dear Smoke Signals:
I am writing today because I have grown very concerned about the di-
rection our current Tribal leaders are leading our Tribe. The majority of
Tribal Council appear to me to be more concerned about opening up our
enrollment for outside Native Americans to join the Tribe than they are
concerned about the overall well-being of our current Tribe. My concerns
are substantiated by the two proposed constitutional amendments and
the manner in which the registration and election are being administered.
First, let me begin with the election, which used to allow a total of 90 days
to register and vote. Tribal members are now given 21 days to register to
vote in the upcoming election and 25 days to cast their vote, almost cutting
the overall time for registering and casting votes in half. These timelines
include the amount of time it takes to receive your paperwork in the mail
and the amount of time it takes to return the paperwork in the mail.
Consequently, if a Tribal member is serving in the military overseas or
living outside of the continental United States, it will be very possible that
there is not enough time to either register or cast a vote. Our current ma-
jority on Tribal Council has chosen to cut the time for the election almost
in half against the recommendations of the BIA and the Enrollment Board.
Upholding a fair and unbiased election is always far more important than
any perceived urgency to propose constitutional changes.
Our election process is the only way that Tribal members can have a
fair say in the Tribe’s future. Why would the majority not desire to ensure
that all Tribal members who wish to cast a vote are given suficient time
to do so? If every Tribal member is not given ample time to cast a vote in
an election, it is plainly and simply a form of censorship.
Now let me write about the amendments we are voting on, beginning
with the proposed change to the deinition of Grand Ronde blood. The
new deinition will be changed to include all Indian blood derived from a
direct ancestor who appears on the oficial Tribal membership roll from
1984 to 1999 as opposed to the 1983 Restoration Roll. This means that any
descendant from an enrolled member may count the Indian blood of their
enrolled parent’s mother and father combined even though only one is a
Grand Ronde ancestor. Personally, I do not agree that our Tribe should
enroll people who do not have at least 1/16th Indian blood traced back to
an enrolled Tribal member only. At what point will our Tribe become com-
prised with a majority of members with minimal blood lineage to the ive
Tribes of Grand Ronde and recognized Northwest bands? Will these new
members care about the future of our Tribe or will they simply be here to
collect all that they can until the well runs dry?
Next, I would like to address the proposed change to the requirements
for initiatives, referendums and the calling of special General Council
meetings. Is it necessary to reduce this requirement from 30 percent to
15 percent? Is 650 people, as opposed to 1,300, enough members to justify
a proposal to create amendments to our Constitution, to recall previous-
ly approved changes by the majority of the membership, or to call for a
special General Council meeting? I ind this new number far too few to
be given such great power over the entire membership. The Tribe and its
leaders have far too many important tasks to perform to spend their time
addressing organized efforts that do not relect the overall mindset of the
Tribe in general. In other words, expect a lot more elections requiring us
to vote against changes to our Constitution that most of us feel are com-
pletely unnecessary.
Please join me by voting “no” on these proposed amendments in our
upcoming election. Make sure to meet the stringent timelines that have
been unfairly forced upon us. And while you’re at it, make sure to let the
Tribal Council, including the majority, know that you do not approve of
these unwanted elections and the efforts to open up our Tribe to outside
Indian blood.
Brenda Gray
Roll #339
Dear Smoke Signals:
I’m sure I won’t be the only one to make a recommendation on the
upcoming constitutional amendments. But unlike some of those people
telling you to vote “no,” I will provide my rationale based on fact, not wild
speculation, rumors, exaggeration or statements like “our Tribe will be
ruined.” Those couldn’t be further from the truth.
Please understand, I actually read the proposed amendments, attended
a Q&A session and ind both of these proposals long overdue and much
needed within our Tribe.
For those of you on Facebook, I am an administrator for Grand Ronde
Forum, a message board for our Tribal community. The attempts to mis-
inform, scare and attack those supporting these amendments absolutely
disgusts and saddens me. I hope for rational, fact-based debate on im-
portant Tribal issues, not childish arguments like presidential primaries.
Let me start with the low-hanging fruit: The amendments to lower the
petitioning requirements on our General Council powers of initiative,
referendum and the calling of special Council meetings. These are rights
and powers we already possess as Tribal members, but they currently have
such dificult requirements, needing 1,200-1,300 signatures, making them
near impossible to meet. We barely have that many members vote in our
Tribal Council elections!
As a Tribal member who wants to do more than just draw per cap checks
and vote in Tribal Council elections, I like the idea of being able to propose
our own Tribal laws and resolutions, or legally question those of Tribal
Council. What is wrong with giving Tribal members a tool to make their
own proposals and put them to a vote? Or to put a questionable law or res-
olution by Tribal Council to a vote? I am not comfortable with a system of
government that provides absolute power to ive members of Tribal Council,
who can do whatever they want without explanation. These proposals are
a step in the right direction. If you want more power as a Tribal member,
then vote “yes” on these amendments. Personally, I can’t believe anybody
even opposes giving the Tribal membership more power, but the split on
Tribal Council was 5-4.
On the enrollment amendment: I see this proposal as cleaning up the
unintended consequences of the 1999 amendment that have hurt many
Tribal families. This does not open the “loodgates,” as many opponents
have stated. Nor does it create split families. This was settled at the Port-
land Q&A session, when our Tribal attorneys, the ones who some Tribal
Council swear by, acknowledged that no new split families will be created.
The amendment will mean a modest boost in our Tribal population. But
they are people who should be Tribal members, who are descended from
Grand Ronde ancestors, but have been disqualiied by the technicalities
of the 1999 amendment. Those ridiculous situations where one child is
enrolled but the other is not, despite having the same biological parents,
will be resolved.
I will be the irst to admit the amendment doesn’t go as far as it should.
There are longer term problems, such as blood quantum, that will need to
be addressed in the coming decades. But everyone should recognize that
this is a positive step for our Tribe. Please join me in voting “yes.”
Bryan Mercier
Roll #1357