Page Nav

HIDE

Grid

GRID_STYLE

intro

Breaking News

latest

convincing the state of retrocession

  Convincing the State: Funding Shortfalls Five of the 13 interviewees who spoke about the factors that persuaded the state to agree said th...


 


Convincing the State: Funding Shortfalls Five of the 13 interviewees who spoke about the factors that persuaded the state to agree said that the funds that retrocession would free up for country law enforcement were a major factor. Because state law enforcement received no additional money to fund increased policing responsibilities and because reservations are not subject to many state taxes, county sheriff’s departments took on extra responsibilities without extra resources. Often, it was tribal representatives who focused on this point to get the backing of county law enforcement. (Interviewer) Did the money factor work in your favor with the county and the state? Were they agreeable because it was going to save them money? (


Respondent) We kind of pitched a little bit of that. Saying we’ll help you reduce [costs]. 451 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. One tribe used timing to its advantage — countywide budget shortfalls made retrocession seem like an attractive option for the state to save money it would have otherwise spent on reservation-based criminal justice issues: What I heard was the county didn’t have enough officers, and, at that time, they were cutting down on personnel because they didn’t have funds.



 There was hardly any coverage, even in their area. If we could get our own, the sheriffs were happy to have us take care of this area. Convincing the State: Good Relationship Another reason cited by several individuals was the relationship that the tribe had with the state. One respondent said that developing this relationship was part of the strategy for securing state acceptance of retrocession, and 2 others cited a relationship that was fostered from a previous court decision mandating that the tribe and state work together on hunting and fishing issues. Because I think, the first year, it was kind of the strategy, developing the relationship with the [state government], and actually that really helped us with our relationship with the [state government] because we were aligned with people, eventually, who were already to the point of having it adopted by resolution, going to the various committees. Several other reasons for state acceptance cited by individual interviewees included: non-Indian community support; state confidence in the ability of the tribe to police itself; state knowledge of retrocession from previous successful attempts by other tribes; high quality of people involved in lobbying effort; and the fact that tribal people themselves were doing the lobbying proved to help win over state support. Success Generally While it was not a formal question in the interview schedule, 5 respondents commented more generally on what factors they think led to their petition for retrocession being successful, while other tribes failed. These 5 respondents, who were heavily involved in the retrocession itself, offered detailed responses involving a variety of answers some of them overlapping with the reasons given for state acceptance. The responses included the following: · Great leadership cited from the Chairperson and tribal police chief; · Friends in high places, such as the BIA and U.S. Attorney General’s Office; 452 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. · Support from non-Indian community;


 · Experienced and competent tribal police; · State funding savings that would result from retrocession; · Stories of the sheriff’s mistreatment; · Testimony from other tribes that had successfully retroceded; · Public relations effort that included mass mailings to the surrounding non-Indian community. Success Generally: Leadership Good leadership by a visionary tribal chair and an experienced tribal police chief were the top reasons offered. The whole process of what we did, really is a credit to [the Chairman] and what he did. The managing of it, the bringing of the insight of what we’re doing to the council and to the community. ... He managed, and he orchestrated the majority of what happened and brought in the resources and the people who were committed to doing this. ... I think because he was a well-rounded individual — spiritually, mentally, physically ... he had a real diverse kind of a background in the area of Indian communities, knowing the issues that faced us. And I think, in knowing that, he was also on the traditional part.

No comments

Ads