One Feather Staff Report
Jean Dennison, a citizen of the Osage Nation and an associate professor of American Indian Studies spoke to the EBCI (Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians) Constitution Committee on Monday, Nov. 27. Dennison is also co-director of the Center for American Indian Studies at the University of Washington. She is the author of two books about tribal government building, “Colonial Entanglement; Constituting a Twenty-First-Century Osage Nation” and “Vital Relations: How the Osage Nation is Moving Indigenous Nationhood Into the Future” (scheduled for release in Spring 2024).
The meeting convened at the Cherokee Indian Hospital conference room with Lloyd Arneach Jr., Carmaleta Monteith, Sgadugi constitution delegates (Tribal Council appointed); Peggy Hill, Sgadugi constitution delegate-alternate (Tribal Council appointed); Melvin Crowe, constitution delegate (Cherokee Community Club Council appointed); Tari Arneach, Yellowhill Community Club officer; Virginia Johnson, Yellowhill Community Club officer; and Tammy Jackson, Community Development Coordinator in attendance.
Dennison joined the meeting via Zoom. In addition, the following also joined via Zoom: Brenda Pipestem and Sunshine Parker – both on the Cherokee Supreme Court and potential judicial constitution delegates; Hannah Smith from the EBCI Attorney General’s Office; Mary Crowe, Yellowhill Community member; Coby Taylor, Birdtown Community member; Avery Maples, Birdtown Community member; and Truman Pipestem, a Wolftown member residing in Oklahoma.
Other delegates to the Constitutional Convention are Shannon Swimmer (Cherokee Community Club appointed from Painttown Community Club) and Tommy Chekelelee – (alternate-Cherokee Community Club appointed from Snowbird Community Club). They were not present at this meeting. Delegate seats from the Tribal Council, Executive Office, Judicial “Branch”, and Young Adult Group have yet to be selected.
Dennison had been asked to share her thoughts on constitution building based on her experience with helping to establish a constitution for the Osage Nation in 2007.
The Constitution Committee offered the following comments on the meeting:
“The Osage Tribe used the Reform Commission which can be a longer process. Keep in mind the Sgadugi Constitution Committee has already completed about 80 percent of the recommendations the Osage team made while developing their constitution. The only two items they did not do were a survey/questionnaire to get direct feedback from tribal members on sections of the constitution or the constitution as a whole or get specialized individuals to review the constitution at each stage of development. We think most would be in favor of doing a Constitutional Convention which will not take as long. Dennison also recommended if possible, doing referendums on portions of the constitution. She said that the Osage government tried the route of voting in sections of the constitution via referendums, but the questions became too long and difficult for people to understand.
“One note Ms. Dennison made was that community feedback was very important to the Osage people. Just knowing they were asked and allowed to express their opinions or ideas helped get their constitution passed. They did have to make sure the questions were in a format that everyone could understand the point of each article. They also offered an incentive to each member that completed a survey. (Very similar to what our tribe just did to encourage members to complete the Tribal Census.)
“After the meeting, the Sgadugi committee members identified five items that are of importance to our tribal members and discussed how they might recommend getting feedback on each item. They were as follows: Staggered Terms; Executive Power (Should it be defined in the constitution, as in the Charter, the day-to-day operational powers of the executive office?); Rights of Descendants (this was an issue for the Osage too); Grand Council (Should community club council have the assigned role of calling and overseeing any Grand Councils?); Judicial Branch appointments (Should community club council representatives be a part of the board that recommends these appointments to the chief?).”
Dennison responded to a One Feather request with the following comments after the meeting, “Those in attendance talked about some of the differences between the Osage context and the EBCI and also asked about how to go about engaging the youth in particular. I talked about how the Osage Government Reform Commission (OGRC) worked with an Osage graphic designer (Buffalo Nickel Creative) to develop posters and held a rally with an Osage musician to generate excitement and increase involvement in the government reform process. Another question was about how the staff and events were paid for and whether the Commissioners were paid. I talked about how it was the existing government that paid for the two dedicated staff, events, legal fees, specialists, and elections. The Commissioners were not paid, but they were offered mileage compensation and fed during their meetings. There were also questions about who all was involved in the writing process, where I talked about how we had a law firm that worked with the staff to draft the core document based on the referendum vote and other feedback collected. The Commissioners then brought in some additional legal experts and other people to help them draft out and fine-tune the final draft.
“From the little bit I know about the EBCI context I would say that the situations and conditions are quite different. Our process was spurred by a US law that finally recognized our inherent authority to determine our own citizenship and government, so there was a clear motivation to enact such a process in that particular moment. I do think though that the Osage and other government reform efforts have a lot to offer the EBCI in terms of process. It is vitally important to build community understanding, engagement, and excitement around government reform if you are going to be successful in getting the new government passed.”
