ALASKA NATIVES COMMISSION
JOINT FEDERAL-STATE COMMISSION
ON
POLICIES AND PROGRAMS AFFECTING
ALASKA NATIVES
4000 Old Seward Highway, Suite 100
Anchorage,
Alaska 99503
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Witness List | PDF
Version
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Okay, is Noah Andrew in here yet?
(Pause.)
COMMISSIONER ELLIOTT: No, I saw him, but he's gone.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: You saw him? Okay, we'll go on to Willie Kasayulie. (Pause.)
MR. KASAYULIE: Good afternoon. My name is Willie Kasayulie, and I'm the chairman for Akiachak, Native Community, which is a federally-organized IRA government. It was organized in 1948, and I think that that number shows that our community organized under federal law 11 years prior to statehood. I guess, prior to 1948, the community basically governed themselves under a traditional-law format; but in 1948, the residents opted to utilize the federal legislation and organize as an IRA government. During 1948 to 1974, the community, as I stated, governed itself under the tribal governments. In 1974, the community incorporated as a municipal government; and, in the mid-1980s, we took the initiative to begin educating the community on the functions of tribal government versus the municipal government; and, in that light, the community, through a referendum, proceeding with the dissolution of the municipal government.
And I think we set a precedence in that area; and whatever work this Governance Committee is doing will have some impact on our ability to utilize our tribal government to provide the needed services on the local level. I think every one of us here agree that, because of our society, and because of our -- where we come from, the tribes and tribal governments have always been in existence in one form or another.
One of the things that I see as a problem in the Native communities is that we have a lo -- a whole lot of municipalities existing; and, in many cases, these municipalities basically assume the responsibilities of the tribal governments. Something needs to be done to reeducate, restrengthen the tribal government's ability to provide services to the members and residents. We know than there are some funds that the tribal governments have access to, whether from the state, or the federal government, or whatever grants may be available out there. Majority of the funds that are currently available to the tribes are through the BIA program systems.
I serve on the BIA Reorganization Task Force, as one of the three representatives from Alaska. Whe -- the problem that we see on the Bureau level is the funds that are allocated through Congress on a nationwide basis. I understand BIA is broken down into 12 areas, and we're one of the 12. In terms of population, if I'm not mistaken, the Alaska Natives are number three, behind, I believe, the Cherokees or the Navahos. But in terms of funding, we're down like number 10 or 11. That goes to show that the sys -- the BIA appropriation system is flawed. But that's something the Task Force has begun to address, in terms of providing equity funding to the areas and tribes that are eligible for these programs.
There was a question earlier by Mr. Boyko to the first presenter about which forms of government the communities may opt to utilize to run their communities. And I think it's the choice of the community, whether it's tribal, municipal, or otherwise. In the case of Akiachak, it was tribal; and the support is very important if the community wishes to utilize that route. Up at the AFN Convention, there's been some discussion on the request for solicitors' opinion. I think it's something that's needed; however, I think that Congress -- committees of Congress needs to come to Alaska and listen to the concerns of the tribes; because, ultimately, whatever opinion may come out, it would have a severe impact on our ability to govern ourselves on the local level.
And one area that we attempted to include in the 1991 provisions was transfer of land from the corporations to the tribes. I think that's still feasible; but we need to make sure the BIA or whoever is responsible make applicable to the lands that are transferred to the tribal governments. We know that reservation has been discussed. I don't think the villages in the regions would want to establish themselves under a reservation-type government, but something that the communities and the regions develop by themselves.
One of the things that we're pushing for in our area is the establishment of the -- a regional tribal government under a confederacy type, meaning the authority would lie with the Native governments on the local level; but giving the regional tribal government some authority. That's something I feel the regions need to look at, in terms of strengthening the authority and involve the local people on a regional and village level.
We know that, under the tribal-government format, we have the capabilities to establish tribal courts. And tribal courts, in many cases, in smaller villages, handle civil cases.
As Charlie mentioned earlier, many of the communities' traditional laws were applicable, but I think times are changing; and there are series of federal law that have an impact on the ability of the tribal courts and tribal governments, to name a couple: Indian Civil Rights Act and Public Law 280.
Public Law 280 allows the state to handle criminal law and jurisdiction in the communities; but I feel that law needs to be reevaluated for Alaska; and one of the things that I would like to see, as far as Alaska is concerned, is to look at how the other states in Lower 48 deal with their tribes, and maybe that's something that is needed to -- because tribal governments are not going to go away. We'll still be here, despite the efforts to establish state-charter governments. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Do you have -- Paul, do you have a question?
MR. TONY: Yeah, I've got a question about -- he made a mention of Public Law 280; and I was at the Indian -- the Federal Bar Association's Indian Law Conference in Albuquerque, where a lawyer gave a presentation about a state in the Midwest that had given the Public Law 280 jurisdiction, back to the tribe.
Is -- what's your position on that type of an occurrence?
MR. KASAYULIE: If I'm not mistaken, there's -- has also been discussion by several Indian nations and tribes about the possibility of repealing Public Law 280, where this law is applicable in those states. If the state of Alaska is willing to provide some authority to the tribal governments and maintain the federal law, I think that's something that we as tribes need to look at. One of the things that we heard upstairs is -- on subsistence is co-management; but, in this case, since the tribal court is existing in the community, the tribal court should have that authority.
I failed to mention earlier, we do have State Troopers enforcing some law in our villages; and, in many cases, it takes anywhere from two to three days for them to show up in the village; and, by the time they show up, the dispute may be resolved in the tribal court or tribal-government setting. But the state, not recognizing the authority of the tribes, they usually take the individual out of the community and, basically, retry them in their state courts.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Ella, do you have any questions?
MS. ANAGIK: I -- not at this time.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Bart?
MR. GARBER: Yes. Willie, you pointed at the problem with the allocation of 638 and federal funding on a nationwide level, I know that there's been an issue -- perhaps not in your area, but may -- perhaps you could comment on it and see -- and tell me if the Commission should be concerned about the allocation of funds on a village-by-village level. Even in any particular village or community, I know that there's a problem with priorities. It hasn't cropped up that often, but have you had the experience of a village corporation competing for funds alongside a village? And perhaps the whole system of getting resolutions to provide support to tribal organizations, is there -- what can the government do to help with the priority system and the contracting system as it stands?
MR. KASAYULIE: Not so much under the 638 Contracting System; but there are funds available through the Bureau for economic development. The tribes and the corporations are both eligible for these funds; but, in many cases, because of the structure of the village corporations, they're more likely to be eligible than the tribal governments in their access for -- into these types of funding. You know, equity funding-needs to be discussed, not just on the national level, but here in the state of Alaska as well. The Bureau provides -- or has five agencies in this state; and, basically, the funds that are funneled through the Juneau office are distributed to the five areas. That distribution formula also needs to be evaluated, if we're going to be providing some type of equity funding to the tribes and villages that are eligible for them.
And there needs to be expanse in the funds also. I'm aware that in Lower 48, under the Bureau program, the tribes in Lower 48 are eligible for law enforcement. It's not -- nonexistent up here; but we're eligible -- I feel we're eligible for those kinds of funding, because, in the first place, we're having to deal and hire our own village police officers to enforce local ordinances. And the state, although they have some resources, they don' t always show up when you need them.
MR. TONY: If I understand you correctly, what you're -- what I hear you saying is that the tribal governments at the village level are not getting the adequate funding to do the work that's there for them to do; and what I'm wondering is if the tribal governments are adequately funded, if they're provided with enough money to do the job, is there an incentive, both on the federal and the state level, to provide that funding? In other words, will it decrease -- in your opinion, will it decrease -- will it give the federal government and the state government cost savings in other areas, such as in social programs, and court costs, and things of that nature?
MR. KASAYULIE: I think so. If the village tribal governments in the community have dedicated people, there's a lot of money out there that's available.
I can use my community as an example. As I mentioned earlier, under the state law, we're considered an unincorporated community -- another fancy word for tribal governments under state law, I guess. But as far as state funding, municipal revenue sharing, we're only eligible for about $11,000 for a year; whereas, if we were a municipality, we may have been eligible for seventy-five to eighty thousand dollars.
And from the Bureau's level, they do have
some funds available, but it’s minimal. I'm guessing the average
funds that the Bureau dishes out to the communities is about
$3,000 per village.
If self-determination is to work, you need to have people that are dedicated on the village level. In our case, for the last three to four years, functioning as a tribal government, our annual budget has run about four hundred fifty to half a million dollars a year, some of it generated locally by the authority of the tribes to initiate sales tax; we own some properties; and others -- and most of the funding that we get are special grants for specific purposes.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Okay, Bart. Go ahead
MR. GARBER: Yeah, I just wanted it -- to get it clear on the record. Well, Willie, do you think then that it's -- maybe I'm not -- maybe you don't have the problem out in your area; but this priority system, would you -- right now, it's just a policy in BIA that if a tribe comes in and wants money and a village corporation in the same location wants it, they've got an unofficial policy that says the tribe gets it.
MR. KASAYULIE: Yes.
MR. GARBER: Would you like to see that policy made official; or do think that each community should deal with it on their own?
MR. KASAYULIE: Personally, I would like to see that policy changed; because, under the new amendments to the 638, for some strange odd reason in Alaska, they identified organizations that are eligible to receive and contract Bureau services. Of course, we have the two tribal governments that have the priority; and if the tribal governments are not existing or not functioning in the village, then the village corporations are eligible for these types of programs under BIA 638 regs. I've voiced my opposition to that specific language. In fact, last year, we tried to introduce a resolution here on the Convention; but we all know the majority of the members are of these corporations, and that kind of put it aside. But it -- basically, it's up to the tribes to whom -- if they -- they can authorize whomever they want to provide that service if they don't have the infrastructure on that -- on the village level. Competition for funds are there.
MR. GARBER: Just a short follow-up. You mentioned tribal taxation in your village. Let me be devil's advocate, okay? What would happen if the federal government said that potentially, some of our federal budget would be gone; but, in exchange, we would have recognition of our authority to generate our own revenues through taxation, or whatever means. Even if it wasn't so extreme, would that be a price to pay for having local authority to generate revenues, --
MR. KASAYULIE: I'm not sure if --
MR. GARBER: -- or would it be difficult?
MR. KASAYULIE: -- if I understand.
MR. GARBER: Well, what happens if we have some of our federal funds reduced; but, in lieu of that, we have federal acknowledgment of the authority to tax and generate our own revenues? What would be the result of that kind of policy? Would you support that kind of policy?
MR. KASAYULIE: I would not support that kind of policy. I think I would advocate that the federal government has a crux responsibility to Alaska Natives and American Indians, but recognizing the tribes to have the authority to develop, for example, sales tax ordinances.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: I'm experiencing, as I'm listening to the testimony of these witnesses, a growing concern, which I would appreciate have somebody addressing. Have we created -- are we in the process of creating a crazy quilt and patchwork of overlapping, competing, different entities, partially governmental, partially corporate, partially tribal, which will result in -- might result in diluting the availability of resources, interfering with simple administration, and recognition of local needs? Do you see this happening?
I mean, we've got ANCSA corporations; we've got municipalities; we've got tribal governments; we've got the sovereign villages; we've got maybe some reservations, or that we could have; what -- where are we going with this? I mean, are we vulcanizing Alaska?
MR. KASAYULIE: I think we are; because, on the village level, we have the three main organizations: the tribes, the municipalities, and the corporations, each with their own board of directors, and each with their bylaws, and whatever. They, basically, represent the same constituents. If there is some feud between individuals, then that creates a problem in that community. We have, in some of our communities, a cooperative effort of the three organizations trying to work together. But that's the choice of the communities to take. The danger, as far as the three organizations, is the individuals that may sit on those boards or councils, I think something that needs to be understood by the people is that they should understand they represent the same people, and --
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: Well, don't you wind up with competing budgets; and personnel, and staff, and --
MR. KASAYULIE: Personnel. Competition is there.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: So -- but that’s really wasteful, isn’t
it?
MR. KASAYULIE: Uh-huh (affirmative). That's why we'd like to see one government
-- tribal governments; do away with the municipalities and the corporations.
The tribes have the authority to establish businesses that's existing in
Lower 48, and it's something that Alaska should look into, I think.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: Should we have a five-minute stretch, Mr. Chairman?
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Wait.
COMMISSIONER ELLIOTT: Oh, I just have --
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: Oh, oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER ELLIOTT: - - one question. I heard you speak upstairs; and I -- if I am correct, you did urge the tribal government on village level, and you have stated that one of the things that would happen under such tribal government would be a court system, local, such as in Minto, Sitka, and somewhat at the North Slope. But I'm interested -- and perhaps others are, too -- what other areas of control or government do you see the tribal government assuming? What would be the areas that the tribe would then regain either from state, federal, or whatever you will, some authority?
MR. KASAYULIE: Civil, criminal, and resource management jurisdiction.
COMMISSIONER ELLIOTT: Pardon?
MR. KASAYULIE: Civil, criminal, and resource management. Resource meaning subsistence that, our people depended on wa -- on land and water. We do have Na -- traditional laws towards these resources we depend upon; but these laws are not recognized by the state; and, I think, under the authority of the tribal governments and tribal courts, those can come back, and the laws can be developed to suit the regional needs.
COMMISSIONER ELLIOTT: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Willie, I have a couple. Maybe you could clarify some issues for me-We talk about the tribal -- village tribal governments, corporate structures, and the municipalities -- the city governments, three entities; and then we have the non-profit corporations, such as Kana -- Tanana Chiefs, etcetera, etcetera. How do those corporations which I understand deliver many of the social services to people in the village, are they contracted on behalf of those tribal entities in the village? Or --
MR. KASAYULIE: Yes, they are.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: -- are they another entity separate?
MR. KASAYULIE: In the case of our region, AVCP contracts on behalf of the villages, by authorizing resolutions for 638 Programs. In many of 12 regional non-profits, these organizations are not governmental entities per se. They basically receive funds to provide services to their members, and not necessarily establish laws tor them, or tribal courts for them. That authority lies with the-tribal governments on the village level. And I think that authority can be expanded on a regional level, if the regions should organize a regional tribal government.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: One more. How then - - who does the non-profits show accountability to? The government who gives them the con -- the monies, or are they accountable in any way to the tribal entities in the village as to deliver to the service and the amount of dollars spent, whether it's an administration warranted?
MR. KASAYULIE: I think, as far as fish go, accountability, the region non-profits are accountable to the federal government; but in the cou -- in this same line, they are also accountable to the villages, because that's who they provide service to.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Okay, -- that last question then in a regional profit corporation, the non-profit, and the tribal entities, how can best we get together to work together to the end result of a better quality of life for the Native people?
MR. KASAYULIE: I think, as far as the regional profits and the non-profits, you need to get your people together and identify responsibilities. We've attempted several times in our region to get major organizations -- Native organizations that provide service to us, and give them specific responsibilities to improve the economic stability of our villages. Again, there on that level, it usually depends on the attitudes of the individuals that serve or are in the leadership position. I think all of them needs to understand that if they are to provide quality life, they need to work together and provide that service to their constituents.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: What about the -- you said resource control. What about the lands and sub-surface resources that are now being held by the regional corporations? Is this a system you want to see continued, and how would the tribal governments fit into that?
MR. KASAYULIE: I don't think I can answer the sub-surface part, because that ties in with the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, and it involves the other -- all of the 12 regions -- or the 13th --
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: It does, indeed, but --
MR. KASAYULIE: -- is also involved.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: -- my question is directly addressed to that, because how are you going to have control of your resources if somebody else owns it?
MR. KASAYULIE: Well, again, there I think if we do a scenario of establishing a regional tribal government, it would be incumbent upon the regional government to sit down with the corporations to arrive at some agreements in that area.
I need to say one thing. I know that there has been some discussions in some communities of the possibility of disbanding the corporate structure and transferring the land over to the tribes, I think, if that's the desire of the communities, that's their choice. But transferring property, especially land, to the corp -- the tribes, doesn't mean that the corporation would go out of existence. I think it can still be utilized as a tool to provide some type of economic stability to the people that they represent.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Another one. In your testimony, you mentioned that there was money, either to the tribal entity or the corporate structure, for economic development. Now, where does that money come from, and who does it go through? What organization does it go through? The non-profits or who?
MR. KASAYULIE: Well, sitting on the BIA Reorganization Task Force, the Department of Interior recommended that a separate department be established within the Bureau structure. Their main emphasis there is to strengthen the tribes' economic strength in reservations, or wherever. So, in that light, the funds are generally funnelled through the BIA system; and the tribes, I believe, under some type of competition or a grant process, are eligible for those funds.
MR. GARBER: There -- well, speaking as a resource person, they also come from some other agencies through loan programs, some Small Business Administration, some EDA on loan packages. But BIA has, I think, the largest direct funding packages --
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: Well. --
MR. GARBER: -- both directly through them and ENA.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: Let me ask you this, Bart. Are there any local communities now that do generate their own revenues for governmental purposes?
MR. GARBER: Willie's does through a tax that's essentially the old municipal tax. And there are a number of other -- I don't know how many more in your area.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: Are they doing this by virtue of state law, municipal corporation status, or. . .
MR. GARBER: No.
MS. ANAGIK: Inherent.
MR. GARBER: Tribal.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: Tribal authority.
MR. GARBER: Tribal tax.
MS. ANAGIK: Inherent (indiscernible -- speaking simultaneously).
MR. GARBER: Willie's had his for -- what? -- half a dozen years?
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: I like the idea, but I'm kind of apprehensive of some people in the villages winding up with three or four or five layers of government bearing down on them. Whi -- I realize that some of that stuff flows down to them; but knowing the nature of governments and hierarchial organizations to create little empires for themselves, I think that's a very frightening picture; and it seems to me that we need to address the concept of streamlining this crazy quilt that we've created in this state, and continue to create.
Every time we reg -- we see a problem, we'll create some other governmental structure, or some other organization with competing powers and, I think, it's a mess. But I could be wrong.
MR. KASAYULIE: I think there's already a simple solution that's evident, and that's to, basically, utlilize the tribal format, because it has been in existence for a long time. Do away with the municipal and the corporation, and utilize the tribal government on the village level.
COMMISSIONER BOYKO: My question to you then is why didn't we do that in the first place, when we created all these other monsters?
MR. KASAYULIE: I think there were some attempts -- and maybe Frank can shed some light to it -- during the Land Claim process. I think that was debated (laughing), to utilize government format -- tribal government format to be the custodian of the lands. Instead, they created the corporations.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Well, I guess that's a real grey area, and as to what really the legalities of doing something like that and how it would keep ail shareholders in, and have the eligibility for the benefits from the profit corporation, I think there's a lot of grey there; and I think, to me, these things have to be answered.
MR. KASAYULIE: Well, just one example also, the mo -- nominees -- I don't know
if everyone's aware of it; but initially the Land Claims for the nominee
tribes was through the corporation types of entities; but, eventually, because
of loss of lands, the tribal governments were reinstituted to the nominee
tribes.
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: That -- Willie, I really appreciate your testimony. I think it was very good; and we've got a lot to talk about, and I -- we thank you.
MR. KASAYULIE: Thank you.
MR. GARBER: Do you want to take a five-minute break right here?
COMMISSIONER PAGANO: Let’s take a five-minute
break.
(Off record.)
This document was ocr scanned. We have made every
attempt to keep the online document the same as the original,
including the recorder's original misspellings or typos.
