Legislature(2021 - 2022)DAVIS 106
03/16/2021 08:00 AM House TRIBAL AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentations(s): Tribal Contracting, Compacting & Consultation | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON TRIBAL AFFAIRS
March 16, 2021
8:04 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Tiffany Zulkosky, Chair
Representative Dan Ortiz
Representative Zack Fields
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Mike Cronk
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATIONS(S): Tribal Contracting, Compacting & Consultation
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
NATASHA SINGH, General Counsel
Tanana Chiefs Conference
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a PowerPoint and answered
questions during the presentation on Tribal Contracting,
Compacting & Consultation.
NICOLE BORROMEO, Executive Vice President & General Counsel
Alaska Federation of Natives
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a PowerPoint and answered
questions during the presentation on Tribal Contracting,
Compacting & Consultation.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:04:29 AM
CHAIR TIFFANY ZULKOSKY called the House Special Committee on
Tribal Affairs meeting to order at 8:04 a.m. Representatives
Cronk, Ortiz and Zulkosky were present at the call to order.
Representatives Tarr and Fields arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
^PRESENTATIONS(S): Tribal Contracting, Compacting & Consultation
PRESENTATIONS(S): Tribal Contracting, Compacting & Consultation
8:05:08 AM
CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the only order of business would
be a presentation on tribal contracting, compacting, and
consultation.
8:05:30 AM
NATASHA SINGH, General Counsel, Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC),
shared TCC represented Interior tribes and were federal
government contractors, co-signers with Indian Health Service
(IHS) and providers of health care to Interior Alaska on behalf
of the federal government.
8:06:27 AM
NICOLE BORROMEO, Executive Vice President & General Counsel,
Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN), shared AFN had existed since
1966 and was originally instated to negotiate a fair and just
settlement of Alaska Native land claims, and subsequently to
deal with pressing issues facing the Alaska Native (AN)
community. As of 2020, AFN included nine for-profit
corporations, 164 village for-profit corporations, and 12 non-
profit consortia that contracted and compacted with the federal
government under the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act (ISDEAA), and 169 federally recognized tribes.
Ms. Borromeo shared personal credentials.
8:08:05 AM
MS. SINGH offered AN had 10K years of stewardship including
intact knowledge systems, especially "geographic intelligence"
of place. There were different ethnic and political groups, and
separate tribal governments. The three sovereigns were tribes,
federal government, and state governments. Tribes were
recognized in the federal relationship in the US constitution.
8:10:15 AM
MS. BORROMEO added when Alaska became a state in 1959 there was
a question regarding the land AN had lived on for millennia.
After years of negotiations, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act of 1971 (ANCSA) was embarked upon, the largest private land
claim settlement in US history, 44 million acres. In 1994, all
229 tribes were finally federally recognized in Alaska, which is
how AN got added to the "list act." Federal government was
silent on AN status from ANCSA until 1994, she reiterated.
8:13:16 AM
MS. SINGH pointed out different entities had different missions
and sometimes purposes got mixed up. The ANCSA for-profit
regional corporations were often the most successful businesses
in Alaska, she shared. There to make shareholders' dividends,
they did an amazing job doing that, she said. Sister
organizations, the tribal non-profits included TCC, she shared.
These shared the same traditional territories, but non-profits
assisted tribes in providing social services, she shared.
Tribes were the governing bodies of the people who protected
children, issued marriage and divorce certificates, dealt with
public safety, and implemented an intricate body of health care.
A goal of TCC was to expand what was able to be done through
agreements.
MS. SINGH shared slide 2 on compacts, or government-to-
government agreements. Child foster care, or Title IV-E
agreements, were an example of federal - state partnerships,
which tribes could join too; the Indian Health System (IHS) an
example of a federal - tribal partnership, which was between the
feds and the state; child custody issues fell under the realm of
state - state; state - tribe agreements would be addressed
during Ms. Borromeo's upcoming presentation on child welfare;
and tribe - tribe agreements involved fish commission, child
custody arrangements, and more.
8:17:02 AM
MS. BORROMEO added compacts were agreements between two
sovereign entities.
MS. SINGH shared slide 3 on the ISDEAA. In this law championed
by former President Richard Nixon, tribes and tribal
organizations could contract or compact with the federal
government to provide programs, functions, services, or
activities that the federal government would otherwise provide
for ANs and American Indians (AIs). Before the ISDEAA was
passed, the federal government did not have a successful AI
policy. Control over programs and peoples had been requested
from, and granted by, Nixon. It's a Republican-grown and -
supported policy with bipartisan support, Ms. Singh noted.
These agreements were not race-based, she continued: tribal
government was able to determine who they served, which was why
non-Native peoples were able to be served.
MS. BORROMEO reiterated the ISDEAA was a political status and
not race-based, adding a historical note dating back to the
Marshall trilogy.
8:22:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS asked if the Marshall Trilogy was from the
1830s.
MS. BORROMEO replied yes, the trilogy of cases regarded how the
federal government related to Native people. While tribes were
not recognized as full sovereigns like the US or Great Britain,
attributes of sovereignty were in place, characterizing them as
domestic-dependent nations. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831)
tweaked how states dealt with tribes, she shared.
MS. SINGH added tenets of Federal Indian Law were in place until
Congress explicitly took them away, which is why there were
still tribes in Alaska. Congress did not remove them.
MS. BORROMEO added Congress did not take lightly that the
Federal Government owed tribes Federal Trust Responsibility.
8:26:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS asked what the term "trust" meant in this
context.
MS. BORROMEO replied that the trust responsibility unique to
Indian Law referred to the Federal government's need to act in
the best interest of federally recognized tribes.
MS. SINGH added ISDEAA was the only successful policy because it
was the first time it was not dictated to tribes what they would
do; moreover, tribes were given power and authority to do so
themselves.
MS. SINGH shared slide 5, contracts v. compacts, the latter of
which gave tribes much more flexibility and local control. She
shared as an example Fairbanks' methamphetamine epidemic: under
a compact, it would be understood a tribe had the knowledge of
how to keep its people off drugs; instead of taking over
control, under the compact the tribe would be granted the power
to decide what was best for themselves.
8:34:14 AM
MS. SINGH shared IHS's agreement with the Department of Health
and Social Services (DHSS) and what it entailed: community
health; health services, including dental, behavioral health,
and optometry; research and data; technology; health training;
rural energy; sanitation and health facilities management and
construction; and wellness and prevention. On the Bureau of
Indian Affairs/Department of the Interior side were child/family
services, economic development, education, employment and
training, elder services, natural resources, public safety,
transportation, and tribal justice.
8:39:20 AM
CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked presenters to touch on the idea of
leveraging partnerships, particularly in terms of the savings
aspect and in terms of increasing program efficiency, vis a vis
compacting.
MS. SINGH replied there were different programs under the same
roof, and patients and tribal member clients may as well have
been dealing with separate entities as "internal silos" to
coordinate care and provide better service to clients at a
lesser cost. With the state of Alaska's non-adherence to
separate "silos," it would be the same fit-together, albeit on a
larger scale.
MS. BORROMEO added in addition to cost savings, programs would
become more efficient. It was especially important in terms of
Alaska's size, she added, to let tribes handle certain
components themselves. There is less a focus on intervention,
for example, as tribes work on preventing interventions.
8:46:13 AM
MS. SINGH presented slide 8 on state compacting opportunities
currently being explored: education, public safety,
transportation, and others. She noted the fact that some tribes
did not want to take on responsibility for their schools was an
example of tribal self-determination. Others, such as the
village of Beaver, were interested in implementing tribes' own
decisions in terms of education.
8:48:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ asked if there had been discussion as to
what compacting would look like in terms of education, compared
to how it looks now.
MS. BORROMEO replied that it all started with willing
participants, and Commissioner Michael Johnson, Alaska
Department of Education & Early Development (DEED), has been a
willing participant, but conversations were in beginning stages.
She added there needed to be buy-in from the entire district and
region.
8:51:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK asked if there was any possibility of a
Native boarding school or regional school in the Interior.
MS. SINGH replied TCC did not like to be involved with the like,
as boarding schools, while they could be successful, took away
from student count and thus education in the villages.
8:53:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS asked if education compacting could be
done in such a way that teachers were able to maintain
continuity of retirement and benefits.
MS. SINGH replied yes, it would be a barrier to recruitment to
have a different system in which the benefits didn't match.
8:54:06 AM
CHAIR ZULKOSKY added that Joel Isaak, Project Coordinator,
State-Tribal Education Compacting, DEED, has been having ongoing
conversations with stakeholders about the prospect of compacting
within education.
8:54:43 AM
MS. SINGH went over consultation, a formal process to
"communicate in a good way," on slide 9. In terms of IHS,
tribes were asked what they thought before changes were made so
input could be made before regulations were put into place.
Consultation spoke to respect and transparency, and these
elements were present whether they happened formally or
informally, she added.
8:57:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK asked what compacting would look like in
terms of education.
MS. SINGH replied that when villages were involved and education
was working for local people, things would stay the same.
Compacting would be presented as an option when the status quo
was no longer working, she explained. In a village where tribal
members were in the juvenile justice system, the tribe could
pull the village together by developing a case plan. Specific
visions for specific communities, whether specifically named
compacting in education or not, was the idea, she stated.
9:02:12 AM
CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked if there would be a spectrum in terms of
those interested in compacting and those not.
MS. SINGH replied yes, and pilot programs were key in
determining the level of interest. Tribes choosing not to
participate were expressing self-determination, she reiterated,
the goal always being local control and local voice.
9:06:28 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:06 a.m. to 9:07 a.m.
9:07:06 AM
MS. BORROMEO shared a PowerPoint on the Alaska Child Welfare
Compact ("compact"). Alaska Native children made up 15 percent
of the state's general population, she shared, but represented
60 percent of the kids in state custody. Disparities of this
nature generally indicated a system failure, and Alaska was no
exception, she said. In terms of retention difficulties, the
state had a difficult time recruiting and retaining a proficient
workforce, she shared. The Office of Children's Services (OCS)
typically operated at a 30-percent vacancy rate and required its
frontline workforce to carry caseloads more than three times the
national average, she put forth.
9:13:42 AM
MS. BORROMEO shared the compact was a product of a 25-year
partnership between state and tribal representative between
child welfare workers and invited stakeholders, with the shared
goals of strengthening Alaska's compliance with the Indian Child
Welfare Act (ICWA), passed in 1978 to keep AN children in AN
homes with the goal of not removing children who weren't in
crisis just because they "looked like" they were in crisis by a
social worker who may not have understood concepts such as
generational living.
MS. BORROMEO shared the compact was also a product of Tribal
Title IV-E Agreements, a special section of the Social Security
Act, which provided federal money to states and to tribes for
foster care, transitional independent living programs,
guardianship assistance, and adoption assistance. Tribes
received a higher reimbursement rate than states for covered
services, resulting in significant General Fund savings, she
noted. She mentioned Kristie Swanson, Program Coordinator, OCS,
was someone whose expertise could be sought in this field.
MS. BORROMEO shared the compact was an intergovernmental
agreement between the State of Alaska and 18 federally
recognized Alaska Native tribes and tribal organizations to
improve the life outcomes of Alaska's children and families by
transferring negotiated child welfare services and supports
along with their respective revenue streams from OCS to the
Tribal co-signers, with the goal of providing higher quality
services and supports at a lower cost. The compact was modeled
after the compacts the federal government routinely negotiated
with tribes and tribal organizations under the ISDEAA, was the
first ever government-to-government agreement negotiated and
executed at the state level and was proud to recognize the
inherent authority of federally recognized Alaska Native tribes
to provide child welfare services and supports to their members.
She said it was helpful to consider tribes as local governments
exercising local control and explicitly pointed out there was
nothing to be afraid of in the word "tribe."
9:18:36 AM
MS. BORROMEO shared a list of 18 tribal co-signers representing
161 tribes, willing to provide services throughout the state:
Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, Arctic Slope Native
Association, Association of Village Council Presidents, Bristol
Bay Native Association, Central Council Tlingit and Haida Indian
Tribes of Alaska, Cheesh'na Tribal Council, Chugachmiut, Cook
Inlet Tribal Council, Copper River Native Association, Native
Village of Eyak, Kawerak, Inc., Kenaitze Indian Tribe, Maniilaq
Association, Mentasta Traditional Council, Nome Eskimo
Community, Aleut Community of St. Paul Island, Sun'aq Tribe
of Kodiak, and Tanana Chiefs Conference.
MS. BORROMEO shared the compact was conceived under Governor
Bill Walker and has grown since April 2017. During fiscal year
2018 (FY 18), tribal co-signers developed/redesigned their
programs and built capacity and infrastructure. Also, the state
began sharing Protective Services Reports, and provided training
and technical support. In FY 19, tribal co-signers began
performing Initial Diligent Relative Searches (IDRSs).
Furthermore, the parties negotiated four new scopes of work for
Ongoing Relatives Searches (ORSs), Family Contact, Licensing
Assists, and Safety Evaluations. Still, the state declined to
sign due to the change in administration to Governor Dunleavy.
MS. BORROMEO shared in FY 20 parties worked out differences and
signed all five pre-negotiated scopes, including IDRSs, ORSs,
Family Contact, Licensing Assists, and Safety Evaluations.
Negotiations will happen in May 2021 for FY 21, she added.
9:28:19 AM
CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked regarding support of the compact, what it
looked like from a tribal co-signer's perspective if the state
made assertions of support, what it looked like in terms of
functionality.
MS. BORROMEO replied that impediments to state support would be
funding stopping even though tribes are taking on more;
underwriting will become more of a challenge. Furthermore,
folks will constantly need to be educated on what the compact is
and how it came about.
CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked if funding flowed through the
administration's budget from the Department of Health and Social
Services or the OCS, and what amount had been set aside.
MS. BORROMEO replied it came out of OCS's budget, was a line
item at $1.6 million, and has met implementation challenges.
The state would have to infuse money "without needing X, Y, and
Z," she said.
CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked if there was an idea of what the annual
investment would be to make [the compact] fully functional from
the tribe's perspective.
MS. BORROMEO replied that it would depend on the co-signers and
how many children a particular tribe had in custody, but a good
number may be $5 million.
9:36:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked about the May 2021 meeting and if
anything should be done in advance to prepare.
MS. BORROMEO replied thinking about direct appropriations to the
compact would be helpful as that would be a strong signal the
legislature supported the compact and what it was trying to
accomplish. Drafting legislation to cement the compact in
statue would also be very helpful, she said.
9:38:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS asked if any legislation had been drafted.
MS. BORROMEO answered no.
9:38:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked, if Alaska got federal funds for child
abuse prevention and family violence prevention, whether the
compact would be an allowable purpose in which to spend them.
MS. BORROMEO replied that the funds had not yet been looked at
closely but may be able to be steered toward the compact.
MS. BORROMEO said applying the federal compact model to child
welfare service has caught the attention of Casey Family
Programs, the largest foster care program in the US, which in
turn has donated money and hired consultants. Services needed
to be higher quality and rendered in a more cost-efficient
manner, and that was the goal of the compact, she restated. The
number of children in state custody also needed to go down, she
emphasized.
9:43:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS asked about the savings to the general
fund while taking care of children through a compact rather than
through the state.
MS. BORROMEO replied that the numbers changed on an annual
basis, but the state was reimbursed for foster care through the
federal government at a rate of 50 percent, and through the
tribe it was closer to 60 or 70 percent.
9:46:08 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Tribal Affairs meeting was adjourned at
9:46 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Compacts Tribal, State, & Federal Partnerships.pdf |
HTRB 3/16/2021 8:00:00 AM |
|
| AK Tribal Child Welfare Compact.pptx |
HTRB 3/16/2021 8:00:00 AM |