Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 15
15 tal work and initiatives between tribes, state, federal, and local have resident tribes that are recognized as sovereign by the fed- governments on transportation projects affecting tribal com- eral government, and others with federally recognized tribes munities. One such initiative has been the establishment of have not yet recognized the government-to-government rela- intergovernmental networks among project stakeholders tionship between the state and resident tribes. In the state of within states like Minnesota, North Dakota, and Washington. Alaska, the federal government has recognized the sovereignty These networks allow for direct relationships among members of 225 tribes, but as a result of the ANCSA, state-chartered and the increased success of transportation planning and exe- regional corporations manage surface and subsurface tribal cution. In addition, other states, like Arizona, Oregon, and lands. Without a land base, sovereignty is limited to internal New Mexico, have initiated similar efforts that may result in matters such as civil and criminal jurisdictional issues as well as the establishment of formal intergovernmental networks tribal subsistence matters. As a result, intergovernmental work among federal, state, local, and tribal governments. In the fol- and collaboration can be difficult to achieve. lowing sections, some of these initiatives are described. The following sections will provide information on states that have taken initiative to recognize and codify government- to-government relationships between the state and consulting 3.4 Network Initiatives by State tribes. These states have also established intergovernmental Many states have taken the initiative in establishing and rec- networks that facilitate collaboration on transportation proj- ognizing a government-to-government relationship between ects. State legislation and the creation of intergovernmental the state and tribes that have an interest in the state. In several networks in Minnesota, North Dakota, and Washington will cases, the need for direct consultation has taken the form be discussed as examples of collaboration and intergovern- of formal agreements, which have been drafted and signed mental networks. Finally, efforts initiated in Arizona that may between the state and tribal governments residing in or with result in the establishment of a formal intergovernmental net- interest in the state. While this creates a direct relationship work are discussed. between the tribes and the state, the governing relationship remains between the tribes and the federal government. 3.4.1 Minnesota With the foundation laid for intergovernmental work on surface transportation projects, states have taken initiatives to On April 1, 2002, at a tribal/state transportation summit, formalize collaboration with tribes. Initiatives for the highest the state of Minnesota, the 11 tribes within the state, and the level of cooperation include those in which state, tribal, local, FHWA signed the Government-to-Government Transporta- and federal governments establish partnerships to explore tion Accord for improved cooperation as partners in trans- methods for collaboration on transportation projects. Such portation planning and programs (27). Each party agreed to intergovernmental networks have been employed in some show mutual respect to the government structure and culture states for addressing transportation needs and issues on tribal of each of the respective partners signing the Accord. This lands. They serve to establish collaborative relationships among Accord relies on the assumption that improving cooperation, project stakeholders and network members. While the gov- coordination, and understanding among parties would in turn ernment-to-government relationship remains between tribes improve transportation systems, which could lead to an and the federal government, and in some cases between states increase in jobs and project success. and tribes, informal, direct working relationships are estab- On April 9, 2003, Executive Order 03-05 was issued by lished among all parties. the governor of Minnesota, affirming the government-to- Several states have established and recognized government- government relationship between the state and tribes in the to-government relationships with tribes residing in or with an state (26). In the Executive Order, the 11 tribal nations within interest in the state. In addition, some of these relationships the state are recognized as sovereign governments retaining the have taken the form of advanced collaboration efforts through rights to self-governance and self-determination. In addition, the creation of networks among stakeholders. Examples of all state employees are called to recognize the government-to- these collaborative efforts can be found in the states of Min- government relationship with tribal governments. Finally, all nesota, North Dakota, and Washington. While network-based, state employees are directed to achieve the goals of the Execu- collaborative efforts are not limited to these states, they serve tive Order by working cooperatively with tribal governments as an example of states that have enacted policy to establish a and performing duties in accordance with the Order. government-to-government relationship between tribes and The Advocacy Council on Tribal Transportation is an states and have further worked to formalize relationships intergovernmental network that was established three years between all tribal transportation project stakeholders. ago in the state of Minnesota for facilitating discussions on It should also be recognized that these state initiatives are roadway issues in the state and working to alleviate issues on not standard across the United States, as some states do not roadways that are of concern to tribal communities (43).