EXHIBIT A U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, Juneau, Alaska, August 30, 1976. Mr. RAYMOND E. PADDOCK, Jr. DEAR RAY: This is in response to Juanita Corwin's recent requests of how the Juneau Area views the Tlingit and Haida Central Council as it relates to the definitions of P.L. 93-638. Specifically, she asked if we consider the Central Council of Tlingit-Haida Indians of Alaska as a "Tribe" or a "Tribal Organization." We acknowledge that the CCTHIA was authorized and established pursuant to Public Law 152 of the 74th Congress of June 19, 1935 and Public Law 89-130 of August 19, 1965. For the purposes of those Acts, the United States Government (through the Department of the Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairs) has officially recognized the CCTHIA as the Tribal Governing Body in all matters relating to the judgment funds which the United States holds in trust for the Tlingit and Haida Indians of Alaska. This recognition and trust relationship includes Secretarial (or his Designee's) approval of tribal budgets and attorney contracts. Based on this historic recognition and relationship, we recognize the Tlingit and Haida Central Council as the tribal governing body of the Tlingit and Haida Tribes of Alaska for the purposes of P.L. 93-638. 66 Also included in the definition of "Indian Tribe" in P.L. 93-638 is “. . ., including any Alaska Native Village (italics added) or regional or village corporation as defined in or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (85 Stat 688) which is Federally recognized as eligible by the United States Government through the Secretary for the special programs and services provided by the Secretary to Indians because of their status as Indians." We have difficulty in understanding the rationale and propriety of including regional profit making corporations and village profitmaking corporations in the definition of "Indian Tribe", however, that is not the major issue at this particular time. What is at issue, however, is the inclusion of “any Alaska Native Village" in the definition. We do feel the inclusion of "any Alaska Native Village" in the definition is appropriate. Similar to our recognition of the Central Council, the Bureau has also historically recognized villages as "tribes" eligible for many of the ". . . special programs and services provided by the Secretary to Indians because of their status as Indians." Villages have been eligible and received grants under the Bureau's Tribal Government Development Program, Federal Revenue Sharing program, Law Enforcement Assistance Act and other programs. More importantly, however, is the fact that villages have historically performed substantial governmental functions through their village councils. Inasmuch as "any Alaska Native Village" is included in the current definition of "Indian Tribe" and nothing in the Act qualifies or limits their status, our interpretation is that villages are also tribes equal in status to the tribal status of the Central Council. Based on this interpretation, we have concluded that, for the purposes of P.L. 93-638, if the Central Council wishes to contract to provide services to villages within Southeast Alaska, the provisions of Subpart 271.2 (q) applies, specifically the portion that reads ". . . provided, that a request for a contract must be made by the Tribe that will receive services under the contract; provided further, that in any case where a contract is let to an organization to perform services benefiting more than one Indian Tribe, the approval of each such tribe shall be a prerequisite to the letting of such contract." (221) 81-879 O 77 15 We recognize that under the current definition, individual Alaska Natives could conceivably be members of four or more tribes, for instance in Southeast Alaska. 1. Central Council of Tlingit and Haidas of Alaska. 2. Sealaska Corporation. 3. A village corporation organized pursuant to Section 8A of ANCSA (85 Stat. 68a). 4. An IRA organization created pursuant to Section 16 of Alaska Reorganization Act (49 Stat. 1250). We doubt seriously that the drafters of P.L. 93-638 contemplated this as a potential problem. Regardless, the definition is in the statute and regulations and therefore until the statute is amended (which we firmly believe should be) we do not feel we have administrative discretion to amend the definition by eliminating any entity currently defined and therefore must abide by it. We hope this letter clarifies how we view the CCTHIA as it relates to P.L. 93-638. Sincerely yours, EXHIBIT B CLARENCE ANTIOQUIA, Area Director. Hon. JOHN O. CROW, WEISSBRODT & WEISSBRODT, Washington, D.C., March 28, 1972. Deputy Commissioner, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CROW: This is to request reconsideration of your action approving the document entitled: "Briefing and Recommendations Regarding Tlingit and Haida Agreement," prepared by Mr. Calvin N. Brice, Contract Advisor, and submitted to you under date of January 14, 1972. A copy of this document, marked "Appendix A," is attached. The document contains two conclusions, critical to the ultimate recommendation, which are plainly erroneous. The first is that Congress has not recognized the Central Council as the governing body of the Tlingit and Haida Indians. The second is that the Alaska Native Brotherhood qualifies as "Indian" under the "Buy Indian Act," 25 U.S.C. 47, and, inferentially, as a "tribal authority" under the "Tribal Direction of Bureau Employees Act," 25 U.S.C. 48, and the regulations issued pursuant to these Acts, 20 BIAM 4 and 5. THE CENTRAL COUNCIL While it is true that the Act of August 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 543), which provided for the organization of the Central Council under rules of election approved by the Secretary of the Interior, stipulates that this body "shall be the official Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indians for purposes of this Act," it is not true that the authority of the Council was intended by either the Congress or the Department of the Interior to be limited, as Mr. Brice believes, to matters "related to [the Tlingit and Haida] claim against the United States." Nor is it true that the status of the Central Council as the general governing body of the Tlingit and Haida Tribes rests solely on the 1965 act, although, in light of its legislative history, that act would suffice to establish it as such. Two subsequent acts of Congress, together with their legislative histories, establish the status of the Central Council beyond any legitimate doubt. These are the Act of July 13, 1970 (84 Stat. 431), providing for the disposition of the Tlingit and Haida judgment funds, and the Act of December 18, 1971 (85 Stat. 688), providing for overall settlement of the Alaska Native claims. 1965 ACT Anyone who is familiar with the circumstances that necessitated the Act of August 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 543), which amended the Tlingit and Haida jurisdictional act of June 19, 1935 (49 Stat. 388), cannot be exposed to the present situation without experiencing a strong sensation of deja vu. The 1965 act was born of, and was intended to lay to rest, precisely the controversy that the Alaska Native Brotherhood is now attempting to renew. The document submitted to you by Mr. Brice observes that: "The Alaskan Native Brotherhood has vigorously complained that they should be given an equal opportunity [with the Central Council] to negotiate for Indian involvement contracts at the Southeast Alaska Agency." It also suggests that the status of the Central Council as the general governing body of the Tlingit and Haida Tribes might somehow be questionable because "several of the Tlingit and Haida Villages are organized under the Indian Reorganization Act with tribal governments authorized by section 16 thereof." Reporting, by letters of March 16 and March 10, 1965, to the Chairmen of the Senate and House Interior Committees, respectively, on the need for the 1965 legislation, the Undersecretary of the Interior said in part: Because the 1935 act emphasized the separateness of their native communities, the Tlingit and Haidas have found it exceedingly difficult within the provisions of the act to form an organization which can represent them in claims matters. Section 7 of the 1935 act provides for the establishment of a central council, but does not describe any procedures for setting up such an organization and restricts the authority of this body to the compilation of an overall roll. In the late 1930's the Alaska Native Brotherhood attempted to designate itself as the central council, but was restrained from doing so by the Department of the Interior because the membership of the brotherhood was not limited to Tlingit and Haida Indians. The present body calling itself the central council grew out of a meeting organized at Wrangell in 1941 for the purposes of selecting a claims attorney. It has never been certain of its authority, nor has this Department, and it has used several different names during its 23-year history. We feel that the substitution of the proposed new language for sections 1, 7 and 8 of the 1935 act will provide much greater administrative flexibility for this Department and for the Indians in programming a Tlingit and Haida award. Furthermore, it will create a representative tribal governing body with all the authority necessary to work with the Bureau of Indian Affairs and with the smaller organized groups of Tlingits and Haidas. The absence of any such body has greatly handicapped both the Bureau and the Indians during the past 30 years. (Emphasis supplied.)1 At the hearings before the House Subcommittee on Indian Affairs on the bill that eventuated in the 1955 act, Congressman Haley, chairman of the subcommittee, asked the following question of Interior's principal witness, Mr. Graham E. Holmes (then Assistant Commissioner for Legislation, BIA), and received the following answer: Mr. HALEY. I want to know, Mr. Holmes, the urgency of this matter. Is there some overriding urgency involved here? I want to know is this an organized tribe? Is there somebody we can deal with here? I understand there are about 15 different clans or whatever you have here and as far as I have been able to find out, there is no legal organization [with] which the Bureau of Indian Affairs may deal. I want to hear something along that line. Mr. HOLMES. That is one of the problems involved. Now, under the present law, in the 1935 act, there is a provision for a central committe but there is no provision in the act for arriving at or determining how the central committee is to be made up. There is an organization which we feel is representative of the Tlingit and Haida Indians generally but any time a group of these people band together they call themselves the central committee and they apparently can speak and have as good a claim to being the central committee as the group that we feel is more representative. This proposed bill cures this situation because it sets up a method of selecting a representative group which can be dealt with and can be recognized as representing the Tlingit and Haida people generally, whereas under the present law there is not any 1 Letters reprinted in Hearings on H.R. 874 Before the Subcomm, on Indian Affairs of the House Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., ser. 4, at 2 and 117 (to chmn. Aspinall) and 110 (to chm. Jackson) (1965). way to determine how the central committee is to be selected and there is really no official organization that is organized under any of the statutes of the United States with a recognizable organization. (Emphasis supplied.) 1 The Senate Report (S. Rept. No. 159, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965)), which accompanied the bill that eventuated in the 1965 act, describes the need for the legislation in part as follows: Because the 1935 law did not specify how the central council would be established and function, no recognized representative tribal governing body has existed, and this has been a severe handicap to the tribe and to the Bureau of Indian Affairs in arriving at a consensus of how the judgment should be used. (Emphasis supplied.) The House Report (H. Rept. No. 521, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965))3 notes that the 1965 legislation was intended to amend the 1935 act in three principal respects: 1. Tlingit or Haida Indians will be defined as persons of Tlingit or Haida blood who reside in communities in the United States or Canada. 2. The existing Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indians is recognized, provided its future members are elected pursuant to rules and regulations found by the Secretary of the Interior adequate to assure fair representation of the Tlingits and Haidas wherever they may live in the United States or Canada 3. The council is authorized to prepare plans for the use of the judgment money, including per capita distribution, and the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to prepare a roll of persons of Tlingit or Haida blood residing in various communities or areas of the United States or Canada on the date of the act. Actual use or distribution of the funds will, however, await a further act of Congress, except for those needed for organizational, administrative and litigation expenses, and the like. (Emphasis supplied) While it is undisputed that the principal focus of the Congress and the Department of the Interior in 1965 was on enhancing the organizational capacity of the Tlingit and Haida Indians to prosecute their claims against the Government and to administer the anticipated proceeds, it is equally clear that it was intended and contemplated that the Central Council provided for by the 1965 act, when organized in accordance with the requirements thereof, was to be the recognized governing body of the Tlingit and Haida Indians for general purposes, and not just for those related to their claims. No other conclusion can be squared with the history of the 1965 act. That history also demonstrates beyond cavil that the act was understood and intended 1) to superimpose the Central Council as a regional governing body over Tlingit and Haida villages and communities without regard to whether they had previously organized under the Indian Reorganization Act,1 and 2) to settle, once and for all, the issue of what organization would be recognized as representative of the Tlingit and Haida Tribes as a whole, which issue had long been held in contention by the Alaska Native Brotherhood. Following enactment of the 1965 act, the Central Council organized under rules of election approved by the Secretary of the Interior and a constitution. Copies of these documents, marked "Appendix B" and "Appendix C," respectively, are attached hereto. As can be seen from the rules of election, the Central Council is a democratically elected body, truly representative of all the Tlingit and Haida Indians. 1 Hearings, cited in preceding note, at 16. 2 Reprinted in Hearings, supra, at 108 et seq. 3 Reprinted in Hearings, supra, at 115 et seq. 1 Twelve of the 19 communities presently eligible to elect delegates to the Central Council were organized at one time or another under the Indian Reorganization Act. The IRA organizations in most, if not all. of these communities have been dormant for years, and most, if not all, of these communities, together with the other seven communities presently represented on the Central Council, are now organized under community constitutions structuring them as constituent parts of the Central Council. See Resolution No. 68-69 C.C.-2 of the Central Council, and model community constitution, reprinted in Hearings on S. 2628 and S. 2650 Before the Senate Subcomm. on Indian Affairs of the Comm. on Interior and Insular Affairs, 91st Cong., 2nd Sess., at 33 et seq. (1970). The functioning organs of community government in most, if not all, of the 19 communities presently represented on the Central Council are community councils established under constitutions similar to the model. |