| 12/09/2004 |
| Blumenthal: Fatal Flaw Seen On Schaghticokes |
| By: Kathryn Boughton |
A report from the United States Department of the Interior's Office of Hearings and Appeals appears to have undermined the validity of some of the data that the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs relied upon last January in granting recognition to the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation (STN).
"We will take action before the Internal Board of Indian Appeals [IBIA] immediately seeking denial of the Schaghticoke recognition decision," Mr. Blumental said in a statement issued Wednesday. "Once confronted with the mistake, the only conclusion can be to deny the group's recognition petition." The data in question concerns marriage rates for tribal members. There are seven criteria that tribes are required to meet to obtain tribal recognition from the federal government. Among those are a continuous community and continuity of political influence in historic times. The STN used its information for intra-tribal marriages to prove both its continuing tribal existence and, by extension, its political influence. The most recent Department of Interior filing acknowledges, however, that the percentages of Schaghticoke-to-Schaghticoke marriages in the 19th century was overstated. For instance, if three Schaghticokes were married, two to each other and the third to a non-tribal member, it should be counted as two marriages-one that supported tribal continuity and one that did not. But in the STN recognition process, individuals were counted, so the intra-Indian marriage was tabulated as two marriages and the interracial marriage as one. Kent First Selectman Dolores Schiesel said it has been difficult for researchers to determine precedent established by the BIA for acceptable marriage rates, but that previous tribal recognitions seem to have established a benchmark of 50 percent. When the intra-marriage rate is calculated properly for the Schaghticokes, according to Mr. Blumnethal, the rate drops to below 20 percent. Furthermore, the calculation drops below the 50 percent mark whether the percentage is based on marriages or members, according to the interior department's own report. The report concludes that "[T]he Summary under the Criteria for the final determination [for the] STN is not consistent with prior precedent in calculating the rates of marriages ... and provides no explanation for the inconsistency ... The analysis ... in the Summary and in the carryover ... therefore, should not be affirmed on these grounds absent explanation or new evidence." "This dynamite concession means that recognition must be denied," Mr. Blumenthal said in his statement. "It is an apparently unprecedented, unique admission of error. The BIA used the marriage rate to satisfy an essential recognition requirement for almost the entire 19th century. Without the now discredited marriage information, the BIA has conceded that it had insufficient evidence to recognize the Schaghticoke group." Mrs. Schiesel said the report reinforces the town's assessment of the marriage data. She said Town Attorney Jeff Sienkiewicz recognized early the inconsistency in the data put forward by the tribe. "He just kept picking at it," she said. "He saw this stuff from the beginning and did a great deal of research on the marriage analysis. He felt the [BIA] had not followed precedent when it used the STN data to support acknowledgement." In a statement issued following an executive session meeting Tuesday night, the Kent Board of Selectmen said it was "pleased to see serious research being conducted within the Department of Interior in acknowledgement decisions. Matching the facts and law means a truthful outcome for Kent for truly deserving Indians." Both Kent and Connecticut are playing a high-stakes game in trying to overturn the much-criticized BIA decision recognizing the Schaghticoke tribe. The STN, led by Chief Richard Velky, is located in Derby, but claims tribal lands in Kent. If the recognition stands, the STN, backed by gambling interests, wants to build another casino in Connecticut. If it cannot obtain state approval for purchase of land elsewhere, and if the federal recognition stands, it is ensured of the right to build the facility on its reservation in Kent-unless the state could successfully argue that the repeal of the law allowing gambling events for charitable purposes means that Connecticut formally repudiates organized gaming. Tribes with recognition are allowed to open casinos in states that allow gambling, and Connecticut's former Las Vegas Nights statute was interpreted as a precedent showing the state's sanctioning of organized gaming. In addition to its gaming plan, the STN has filed lawsuits to recover more than 2,000 acres of former tribal land in Kent that it asserts were illegally sold in the 19th century.
|