Page images
PDF
EPUB

POSITION STATEMENT ON PROPOSED REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC LAW 93-638

Pursuant to the legislative intent expressed in the language contained thể Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (Public Law 93-638'; 88 Stat. 2203), the Education Committee of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe strongly."! ports incorporation of the following recommendations regarding the regulations proposed for 25 CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter Y, Part 403.--Education Contracts

[ocr errors][merged small]

1. Sec. 403.2(n) states that a "previously private school" must be controlled, A sanctioned or chartered by the Tribal governing body. Further, where a former mission school is involved, the title to the school facility and the land on which it is situated must have been transferred to an Indian tribe for operation as a non-sectarian school.

a. OBJECTION: Regarding title transfer, the proposed regulations lack an
essential option which would facilitate the eligibility of previously, private,
schools to participate in Johnson O'Malley-funded services designed to en-
shance educational opportunities for their Indian children. Title retainers
may be reluctant to transfer title to a tribal governing body, and may desire
fnstead to transfer title to a tribal organization controlling the "previously
private school". Recognition, and protection of, the tribal governing body's
key role in decision-making is still provided for by the requirement that.
the school must be controlled, sanctioned or chartered by the tribal governing
body and by the provisions in Sec. 403.2(u) which require the tribal governing
body to request a contract for the school in order for that school to be
I eligible to receive Johnson O'Malley funding.

RECOMMENDATION: Give Indian people an option, eliminating unnecessary constraints which prevent some Indian children from receiving educational. benefits provided by the Act. Revise the regulations to read "Where a former mission school is involved, the title to the school facility and the land on which it is situated must have been transferred to an Indian tribe or tribal organization for operation as a non-sectarian school."

2.

Sec. 403.2(u) states "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 Indian tribe shall be prerequisite to the letting of such contract."

a. OBJECTION: In many cases, an organization attempting to provide
services to a target population comprised of recipients from numerous
Indian tribes wil! It finncially infeasible to do so if the wording
of the proposed reruline main unchanged. One example is an urban
school population of 600 students. If three of those students are Alaska

natives and fifteen are lavajo, the ormization would be required to
spend inordinate amounts of time and money securing tribal relutions
from Alaska and the Navajo (:1th mrh these sturients represent only 2%
of the student population) in order to provide services to the entire
student population.

b. RECOMENDATION: Revise the remulation to exempt an organization from
this clause in love eases where the Indium tribe(..) concerned represent
less than 10% (or some other ressonable percentage figure) of the recipients.

3. Sec. 403.11 (c,3) provita tent the Burenu will contract with a State, 'school district, or Indian corporation for supplemental programs or operational support if a tribal organization rat recedes a contract.

a. OBJECTION: Ne provision is made for tribal input as to which of the eligible entities (Pate, schod district, or Inding corporation) will contract with the Bureau in the case t retrocession by a tribal organization.

b.

RECOMMENDATION: Chure relation to provide Indian tribes with the power to decide which of the ei,it entities hall receive the contract retroceded by the tribal orar ist in Provided, that the decision is made within 30 days f the date of tification of the Bureau by the tribal organization of the intent to retrored.

4. Sec. 403.15 (a) provides that, when a loen! school board is composed of

a majority of Indians, that rehool board will serve in place of an Indian Education
Committee. If the school board is not composed of a majority of Indians, the
tribe is to specify as the Indian Education Committee one of the entities listed
in Sec. 403.15 (b).

a. OBJECTION: In order to be eligible for election to an Indian Education
Committee, one must br 9 parent for stand in loo parentis) of an Indian
child of 1/4 or m re fudin blood. in the majority of cases, the parent will
probably be of 1/4 or "N Indian bloed. Tore is no similar probability in
the case of an Indian-, rity seto 1 board, as f. 103.2(g) defines an
Indian as simply a member

an rdian tribe. Under the proposed regulations

a five-member school board, in which three members are each of 1/16 Indian blood and none c the mentors are parents of eligible Indian children, would be required by regulation to serve in place of an Indian Education Committee, & deplorable prospect which only servies to defeat the intent of the Act.

b.

RECOMENDATION: change the relations to include the definition of a school board composed of a majority of Indians as being a school board in which the majority of members are parents (or stand in loco parentis) of an Indian child of 1/4 or more Indian blood enrolled in the school(s) affected by the contract(s).

a1 OBJFSTION: Sec. 463.15(a) states unequivocally that, in the case or a school board composed of " majority of Indians, that school board will serve in place of an Indian Education Committee. Sec. 403.16(c) states that said chool board hall have the powers and duties of the Indian Education Committee. Inne fatal stroke, all existing Indien Johnson O'Malley representative bodies in that school district are beheuicd. There are Johnson O'Malley Indian Education Committees functioning in these district which will be rendered invalid regardless of demonstrated excellence and erodibility in representing parents of Intian children. May of these committees have mentership requirements which re idention to the proposed regulations regarding Indian Education Committee membership.

Morcover, state law provider that there can be orly one school board
for each district, which of course would restrict representation of
parent of Indian children to a single group serving as the Indian
Education Committee for all tehool in the district receiving Johnson
O'Malley funds. The proposed regulations are in fact antithetical
to See. 403.4 regarding the protesed policy of maximum Indian parti-
cipation by those affected. There are many, many instances in which
several Indian Education Curmittees are operative within a single dis-
trict with each committee entrusted with the representation of parents of
Indian children attending a particular school or group of schools. And
there are many parents who, if allowed the choice, wouldn't have it any
other way, as they realize diversified representation means opportunity
for greater and more meaningful grassroots Indian participation.

And finally, if the emphasis is on recognizing the tribal governing
body as able and representative decision makers, that body should have
the choice of relegating Idian Education Committee rights and respon-
sibilities to a school board or exercising the options in Sec. 403.15(b)
pertaining to the establishment of Indian Education Committees, whichever
representative avenue provides, in the opinion of the Indian people, the
maximum meaningful indian participation in educational processes.

b. RECO'S ENDATION: Give Indian people a choice. Modify Sec. 403.15 to provide that, in the case of a local school board composed of a majority

5.

of parent of eligible Indian children enrolled in the school(s)
affected by the cor tra t(s), that school board may serve in place
of the Indian Pucation Committee(); Provided, that approval for
the assumtion by the school beard of such rights and responsibilities.
is secure from the Indien trite affected. Hodify the wording of cl cr
regulatory provi, ion pertaining to Indian-majority school boards va de
consistent with the principle of tribal discretion.

Sec. 403.15 (b,1) states that an Indian Education Committee is to be clccted from among the parents of eligible Indian students enrolled in the school1⁄2

affected by the contract(s).

a.

OBJECTION: Ne rr vision te male reparling who is eligible to vote fee Indian Education Comittee mesters.

b. RECOMMENDATICI: Revize the regulations to state that an Trois Fuucrulon Committee is to be electe! by art from am or the parents of eligible in 1.1 students enrolled in the geloci(s) affected by the contract().

a. OBJECTION: There are now, and will continue to be, individuals to do
not meet, the pe roved qrtification; for membership on an Inaion FC.t-
ation Committee but wh, nevertheless demonstrate such dedication ce cha
principle of meaning d Indian i volvement in education that their orde
ibility as reprezentative. of parents of Indian children is so pretenced
as to inspire the whol or afest; import of the parents they serve.
parents of non-eligible cure Heat Indim etildren are in this category
Also included re teent of cli, it le Petian children no enrolled
in the school(s) affecterį. And tifa eatery certainly includes Boto
non-Indians as well. Muler the present proposed regulations, rows of
these individual: would be eligible to serve on the Indian Education
Committee regardless of the wishes of the Indian people.

b. RECOMMENDATION: Rodify the prorored regulation to provide that 25%
of the member hin of an Indinduer tion Committee may be composed c?
members wh do not meet the requirement: presently proposed in Sec.
403.15 (b,1); Provided, that such members are not school administrators
or officials; Provided farther that much members are clected by
parents of the eligible Irlian children enrolled in the school(s)
affected by the contract(s).

6. Section. 403.13 (h,1,TV) states that, in order for a public school district to be eligible to receive finds for operational support, there must is at least 75 percent eligible Indian enrollment within the school district or thin any particular school served. The Commissioner may waive the require...

at the request of the tribe(s) and Indian Education Committee(s) if there is at least 51% eligible Indian enrollment within the school district or within any particular school served.

a. OBJECTION: Previous regulations governing eligibility for operational support required 70% eligible Indian enrollment and no minimum eligible. Indian enrollment percentage figure for waiver eligibility. This Committee can conceive of no rational explanation for the proposed changes and is totally unfamiliar with the rationale leading to the proposed regulations, in question.

b.

RECOMMENDATION: Revise the regulations to include the original 70 percent eligible Indian enrollment for eligibility for operational support. Strike the 51 percent. minimum eligible Indian enrollment for waiver eligi-. bility, and allow the Commissioner to decide each request for waiver on the basis of individual merit.

« PreviousContinue »