Home VCNAA Commission Commission News Another attempt for Vested Authority by the VCNAA?

Another attempt for Vested Authority by the VCNAA?

Written by Administrator

Tuesday, 27 October 2009

Another attempt for Vested Authority by the VCNAA? RE: “Vested Authority” for the Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs (VCNAA) TO: Sen. Hinda Miller, Sen. Diane Snelling, Rep. Kesha Ram FROM: Commissioner Charles Delaney-Megeso DATE: Sunday, September 14, 2009 Since accepting the VCNAA’s charge to work for our Commission’s “vested authority,” the term has become synonymous with the power to grant Indian recognition. Although receiving this right was in fact part of the proposed amendment to Sec. 1.  1 V.S.A. chapter 23: ABENAKI PEOPLE § 852, that was by no means the only purpose of the request for vested authority. The rest of the proposal read: “The State of Vermont Legislative Assembly confers given full vested authority to the commission to … conduct other duties appointed to it including the creation of State policy toward and programs for Native peoples, and the oversight of all other affairs affecting Native American peoples in the State. To accomplish these duties, the commission shall establish appropriate rules, regulations, policies, and programs.” Perhaps the phrase “vested authority” shouldn’t be used, but I strongly believe that the Commission should be fully charged and empowered to conduct its work to that same level, especially when we have to deal with other governmental bodies. As I noted in my commentary to the VCNAA at the time, we were created (emphasis added): “In order to recognize the historic and cultural contributions of Native Americans to Vermont, to protect and strengthen their heritage and to address their needs in State policy, programs and actions … .” I see this as endowing the Native Affairs Commission with the right and responsibility to be the watchdog for and caretaker of the well-being of all Native concerns in the State of Vermont. However, an important case-in-point arose during the Commission’s first term regarding Act 250 proceedings relating to Burlington’s Intervale, a known Abenaki site of interest. It was reported at the January 2009 VCNAA meeting that Assistant Attorney General Mike McShane “said that he could not tell the Commission how to conduct their work, but that they could not be given, as a Commission, formal party status for any Act 250 proceedings.” I am left asking the question: If the Native Affairs Commission does not have standing in such proceedings, what state body charged with protecting Native interests does have this authority? Further, I am concerned that, as with the regulations regarding the Indian Arts and Crafts law, the VCNAA could run into similar problems, such as when dealing with Title VII Indian Education Act needs for our people. I respectfully ask: Shouldn’t the VCNAA have full authority to be a custodian and champion of Indian rights and well-being in all dealings with governmental bodies and other parties related to our work? Oliwni, (thank you), for your time and consideration on these and all matters to benefit Vermont's people.  --------------------------------- Charles Delaney-Megeso

 

< Prev		Next >