The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
James Cote served as a state commissioner on the Maine Indian Tribal State Commission from 2019-2022.
The Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission at its most fundamental is intended to strengthen the relationship between the Tribes and the state and provide a forum to improve intergovernmental cooperation.
I believe recent actions by the MITSC executive director and the current chair of the commission have undermined the organization, its authority and its mission. The already-strained relationship between the state and Tribes has been made worse and the independence of the commission has been jeopardized.
Last week, Gov. Janet Mills withdrew the nominations to MITSC of Lloyd Cuttler of Carrabassett Valley and Richard Bronson Jr. of Bangor. The governor withdrew these qualified nominees after the MITSC Executive Director Jill Tompkins and commission Chair Newell Lewey sent a letter to the chairs of the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee opposing the appointments.
As a former state commissioner on MITSC, I believe that the letter was inappropriate, counterproductive and undermines the precise statutory purpose of the commission.
The commission, by design, is intended to be made up of six tribal commissioners, and six state commissioners, with a 13th member — a chairperson — who is selected by a majority vote of the commissioners.
The Tribes have the responsibility to appoint six representatives, and the governor, with the approval of the Legislature, has the responsibility to appoint the six state representatives. The professional staff of the commission and the chair have no role in the appointment process and should remain neutral on appointments.
MITSC’s statutory obligation is to continually review the effectiveness of the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act and the social, economic and legal relationships between the Tribes and the state.
Nothing in MITSC’s enabling legislation suggests that the governor’s appointees must have no countervailing views to Tribal policy positions as a prerequisite to their confirmation or good-faith participation as a commissioner.
I would suggest that MITSC is designed specifically to accommodate a range of perspectives and to encourage tough conversations among Tribal and state commissioners that can facilitate actual consensus and work to resolve the complex and longstanding issues in state-Tribal relations.
Serving on the commission is difficult work, and the policy matters, such as Tribal sovereignty, are significant.
The job of discussing social, economic and legal dynamics between Maine Tribes and the state in the context of a 40-year-old settlement provides no opportunity for immediate satisfaction.
I wish it was easier, but the legacy of racism, conflict and mistrust can only be confronted through good-faith participation by all parties.
Opposing the confirmations of otherwise qualified nominees who have real-life experience with the relationships between the Tribes and state because of differing views only prolongs and delays the meaningful discussions that should take place and exacerbates the political feuds that distract from them.
Unfortunately, the MITSC letter that was sent on behalf of the commission was representative of a pattern of unproductive administrative leadership that I experienced over my three-year term.
I began my term with an open mind and a willingness to have tough conversations. I ended my term with a deep sense of frustration that we spent more time dealing with routine administrative concerns than trying to tackle the real problems that were within our jurisdiction and that, over time, I believe the commission could have built consensus around.
I hope that the Legislature, Tribes, and MITSC itself will use this unfortunate event to reflect upon the mechanics and objectives of the organization and to refocus on productive work that improves Tribal-state relationships — no matter how difficult.
I firmly believe commissioners with differing views and diverse real-life experiences who are also willing to work together in good faith, listen to one another and consider different points of view is an asset to the relationship between the Tribes and the state, not a detriment.
