From Breakthrough to Protest

Native recognition amendment faces criticism from Abenaki groups, state commission

By Jedd Kettler
MONTPELIER: Spilling out of the crowded Senate Economic Development Committee meet-ing room in the Statehouse on Thursday, March 13, the mood among members of three Vermont tribal bands of Abenaki was upbeat and hopeful. Some said the amendment offered a historic breakthrough.

By the following week, though, after seeing the proposed bill that eventually came out of Sen. Vince Illuzzi's committee, that feeling had shifted drastically for some.

The new bill, S.369, would conditionally recognize three Abenaki bands, the St. Francis/Sokoki, Koasek and Nulhegan groups, for arts labeling purposes. These same groups, however, would also be required to seek reconfirmation of that recognition through a process involving both the Vermont Attorney General and the Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs.
These requirements have raised alarm bells among several high-profile groups in Vermont's Abenaki community.

Later today, members of four different bands – the St. Francis/Sokoki Band of Missisquoi Abenaki, the Koasek Traditional Band, the Nulhegan Band of the Coosuk Abenaki, and the Elnu Abenaki Tribe - will protest these changes. They have planned a press conference at 1 p.m. at the Ndakinna Cultural Center in East Montpelier.

In a Tuesday press release, the groups said they have "no confidence in the process of recognition as outlined ... due to misgivings concerning the role of the Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs and the Vermont Attorney General's Office."
The bill "has completely failed to meet the needs of those Vermont Abenaki bands that would be affected," according to the groups.

The statement continues, "The organized Abenaki Bands do not feel as though they can receive a fair hearing on the highly political issue of Tribal recognition. The fact that the amendment links a despised Attorney General's Office with a detested Commission is doubly disturbing."

One of the chief concerns being raised is the role given to the AG's office in reconfirming State recognition for the groups. The AG's office spent years rebutting the St. Francis/Sokoki band's bid for federal recognition and opposed the original state recognition law, S.117, until shortly before it was passed.

"This organization abused genealogical and cultural information and even revealed personal eugenics survey information for its campaign to discredit Vermont Abenaki ethnic identity," the bands' press release reads.

The groups also object to "the unreasonably short timeframe" for the three groups to seek recognition under the amendment.
After their initial recognition under the bill, the St. Francis/Sokoki, Koasek, and Nulhegan bands would be required to submit applications by Aug. 1, 2008. The AG's office would then be given a chance to support or oppose them, followed by responses from the applicants. By January 2008, the Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs would be required to rule on the applications.

Other groups could apply for state recognition through the VCNAA alone and no timeframe is laid out, though criteria would be the same for all.

Though the Native groups' press release is also pointedly critical of the Commission, VCNAA Chairman Mark Mitchell agrees with several of the issues they've raised, including the "forced timeframe."

Mitchell said this timeframe is not required of other applicants and would also pose an administrative problem for the Commission.

"I certainly find it very unreasonable to ask from a non-budgeted, volunteer Commission to put it under a timeline," he said. "The Commission would have to deal with three applicants in a five-month period ... I see the timeframe as totally unreasonable."

Mitchell pointed out that the Commission is legally only required to meet three times a year, and depending on new VCNAA leadership in the coming year, the Commission could conceivably not even meet until after the proposed timeframe expires.
Mitchell said it is also unclear just what the AG's role in the recognition process is under the proposed legislation.

The VCNAA crafted its own proposal for fixing the recognition law at the beginning of the legislative session, and a number of changes, including those at issue, have been made since.

"The Commission submitted an amendment ... and has not been a participant in any of the language since," he said. "I can certainly say that within 28 days, things have changed pretty quickly."

The four tribal groups also leveled criticism at the VCNAA, in part saying that the Commission "has done little to benefit" these Abenaki communities.

Mitchell took the criticism in stride, saying the strong cooperation now being seen between these four tribal bands is itself a welcome change.

"To see the Native community coming together more than they have is positive ... I guess if they dislike me, yet more communities get along together, I can live with that success," Mitchell said.

On the question of how much the Commission has accomplished since it was formed in August, 2006, Mitchell said the need to address flaws in the original state recognition bill have taken over far more of their time than they would have liked.
"This bill has paralyzed the Commission," Mitchell said.

Shortly after being appointed, Mitchell and other VCNAA Commissioners began working on criteria to recognize specific tribes and bands, but the AG's office said they did not have the authority to recognize groups.

The Indian Arts and Crafts Board also said the original law, S.117 fails to meet federal requirements to protect Native artists and craftspeople in Vermont.

In their attempts to draft an amendment to address these issues, the VCNAA has worked to be open to all of Vermont's Abenaki community, Mitchell said, seeking out input for months and taking testimony in Montpelier.

"The Commission has had an open door," he said.

Attempts to contact Chief April St. Francis-Merrill of the St. Francis/Sokoki band and Sen. Vince Illuzzi were unsuccessful as of press deadline.