La Conner Weekly News - Your independent hometown award-winning newspaper

Special to La Conner Weekly News

The United States Department of the Interior on Friday approved the constitutional amendments voted on and passed in May by members of the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community.

While the changes in the tribe’s constitution are mostly aimed to reduce the paternalistic federal oversight of the tribe’s day-to-day operations, the wording in one of the amendments – dealing with territory and jurisdiction – sparked an outcry from landowners and farmers as well as Anacortes and Skagit County government officials.

To clarify the issue and possibly assuage fears of the neighbors of Swinomish, a letter from the Department of the Interior granting approval to the changes clearly states that the federal government’s position is that the amendment does not change the boundaries of the Swinomish Reservation, nor does it grant the tribe jurisdiction over issues outside its reservation.

So why the ruckus? The territory portion of the tribal constitution amendments delete reference to the Swinomish Reservation’s northern boundary, set in 1873 by an executive order by President Ulysses S. Grant. Swinomish leadership has been claiming for years that the reservation as originally established includes March’s Point and part of the city of Anacortes per the 1855 Point Elliot Treaty.

Deleting the boundary reference frightened landowners of thousands of acres – which include two oil refineries on March’s Point, two car dealerships as well as businesses and private homes. It also drew the ire of the Samish Indian Nation, which owns land in the area on which it hopes to develop a casino, and it also worried local governments with the specter of the tribe claiming all the taxes generated in the area.

Over the past few months federal officials received a blizzard of letters from people, organizations and elected officials in Skagit County. Last week and the week before, separate delegations from the City of Anacortes and from Skagit County traveled to Washington DC to lobby Department of the Interior and its lawyers over the amendments.

On the jurisdiction portion of the tribe’s constitution, ambiguous wording allows an interpretation that the tribe will have authority over “all persons, subjects, property and activities” in an area that could span most of Skagit County. The jurisdiction issue struck fear in the farming community, which already deals with restrictions on irrigation water due to tribal influence concerning the Skagit River watershed. Skagitonians to Preserve Farmland voiced their concerns to the federal agency, and the advocacy group Skagit Family Farmers took out newspaper advertising highlighting their worries and sponsored a letter writing campaign.

Skagit County Commissioner Lisa Janicki, who was a member of the county delegation that visited federal officials in Washington, DC two weeks ago, said on Monday the county has no issue with the tribe’s desire to update its constitution or its right to govern itself as it sees fit.

Her worry, she said, was ambiguity in the language concerning the tribe’s territory and jurisdiction. The county’s job is to protect the interests of the residents. “Leaving potential gaps in language that would allow for territorial claims or jurisdictional claims is something the county’s residents can’t live with,” she said. Besides the land claims on March’s Point, there was big concern over whether the tribe would claim jurisdiction over non-tribal members outside the reservation.

“We were very happy to see the clarification in that letter,” she said.

According to the Department of the Interior documents, Swinomish had 247 tribal members registered to vote in the constitution election. The turnout was greater than 50 percent. On the territory and jurisdiction amendment that had the neighbors in an uproar, 113 members voted yes while 16 voted no.

A letter to Swinomish Chairman Brian Cladoosby from the United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs signed by Northwest Regional Director Stanley Speaks clearly spells out the government’s position on the Swinomish territory and jurisdiction.Speaks noted that concerns voiced by all the people protesting the amendment, “largely echoed those raised,” by the Bureau of Indian Affairs during its review of the tribe’s proposal last fall.

Speaks’ letter states that the tribe “disputed the validity of the BIA’s concerns,” but amended its proposal anyway.

The version approved includes the phrase, “consistent with applicable federal law,” and that satisfied the federal agency.

Thus, the letter states that the government clarifies its understanding of the territory and jurisdiction amendment and, “We do so in light of the BIA’s previous concerns with the proposed amendments and the substantial outside interest in preemptively resolving jurisdictional disputes of other misunderstandings between the Tribe and its neighbors.

First, and as you have agreed, nothing in this approval shall be construed as authorizing any action under the Swinomish Constitution that is contrary to federal law.”

Second, nothing in this approval shall be construed as altering the Tribe’s reservation boundaries…

Third, nothing in this approval shall be construed as expanding, diminishing, or otherwise altering the Tribe’s civil, criminal, regulatory, or any other jurisdiction outside of its reservation…”

In a written statement released Friday night, Swinomish Chairman Cladoosby said, “I am pleased that the DOI reinforced what we have been saying throughout this process that nothing related to our constitutional amendment process could change our reservation boundaries in any way.”

He also noted that the tribe can now conduct its day-to-day operations without seeking Bureau of Indian Affairs approval every time. Moving away from federal micro-managing is a step other tribes across the country have taken and one that the US government encourages.

For local government officials, the federal clarification in writing that the approved constitution amendments do not enlarge the reservation or expand tribal jurisdiction is important.

Janicki said, “We see this decision as a win-win for our community and our tribal partners. It addresses Skagit County’s concerns, while at the same time respecting tribal sovereignty and the right of the tribes to govern themselves as they see fit.”