Smoke signals. (Grand Ronde, Or.) 19??-current, November 01, 2016, Image 20

Smoke signals., November 01, 2016, Page 20, Image 20

Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR

About Smoke signals. (Grand Ronde, Or.) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 1, 2016)

Prev Page of 20 Prev Issue Next Text PDF JP2 (1.1 MB) Clip/Print Image

Return to Top

Prev Page of 20 Prev Issue Next

Newspaper Page Text20 NOVEMBER 1, 2016 S moke S ignals Enrollment Board statement on recent decision The Enrollment Board believes it is important for the membership to understand the issues surrounding our re- cent dismissal of an earlier disenrollment determination of a particular family claiming descent from a Treaty signer. A lot of negative and false information has been published over the course of this family’s disenrollment process that the board has been unable to respond to. Now that the process is completed the board can finally make a statement in support of the Tribe, the Enrollment Department and the board. The board believes that it has the responsibility, as the Enrollment Board and Tribal Elders, to ensure the Tribe continues as a sovereign nation and to preserve Tribal identity and culture, of which membership is central. Hon- oring and recognizing Tribal membership’s exclusive right to establish and amend the Constitution to determine who can be a member assures the Tribe’s integrity as a sovereign nation. The board takes this responsibility very seriously. The board makes decisions based on the Tribe’s Constitution without political or personal agendas. The Tribal Court of Appeals remanded the board’s de- cision to disenroll this family, and the Tribal Court order upholding the board’s decision, based solely on non-Tribal equitable defenses called laches and equitable estoppel. The Court of Appeals essentially ruled that the Tribe waited too long to begin disenrolling this family. Neither the Tribe’s ENROLLMENT BOARD: Michael Mercier Robert Schmid Laura Gleason Terri Wood Sharon Hanson Sharon Freund Constitution nor the Enrollment Ordinance provide a time limit on correcting the Tribal roll when someone has been erroneously enrolled. However, the Court of Appeals still or- dered the Tribal Court to remand the case back to the board and ordered the board to dismiss the previous disenrollment decision. The board dismissed the previous disenrollment decision, but did so in protest. The board strongly disagrees with the Court of Appeals decision because it ignores the real issue which is whether an individual meets the Constitutional requirements for membership at the time they are enrolled. The Constitution clearly lays out the requirements for membership and you should not be a member of this Tribe if you do not meet the requirements. While the board cannot publicly address the specifics of its determination on disenrollment of this family, the board can state that the findings of the board and the Tribal Court as to this family’s eligibility for membership under the Con- stitution were not overturned. The board’s previous Con- stitutional determinations still stand and the board stands behind them. This has been a long and difficult process for everyone. Regardless of how people feel about this result, the board hopes that the Tribe and its members can move forward in a positive direction. Margaret Provost: I did not sign on to this statement because I support the Court of Appeals’ Decision.