Were other enforcement mechanisms put in place?


Leo Cardenas


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

But in the agreement itself, there were resources with which to do things that hadn't been there before. CRS always works a dispute so that whatever enforcement mechanisms are there, they're self-enforced, by the parties themselves. You know, we've never seen ourselves as having the capability of doing follow-up.

Question:
Were there certain things that you did to insure that?

Answer:
Well, in this case, the money and the commitment, and on both sides, like I said. It's easy to point to money, but it's the commitment and it's also the relationships that were established. And in this particular case, it not only established relationships here, because it eventually became a national agreement, but as a result of that, McGraw Hill then went into the four other cities and worked those programs almost voluntarily as a result of the agreement.




Leo Cardenas


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

How do you or how do they enforce that agreement?

Answer:
We have self-enforcement mechanisms. And let's use as an example, again, a bilingual program that's simply not working, and let's say that part of what we have, while we were there, was that the program was not explained to the community. Once the community group gets a greater understanding of it, then the next step is that program itself has a certain amount of resources to be spend in a school year and that those resources will include the minority community -- minority parents as an example, and so the resolution lies in the fact that now the minority parents have to fulfill their part of the agreement. They will attend parent-teacher meetings, and they will see that the children do certain things so they are committed to the resolution. It's not just the fault of the program, it's not just the fault of the school. There is a role to be filled by the community. And of course they themselves now have a greater role and a greater voice, which is really what they wanted.




Bob Ensley


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

Question:
So what would be the enforcement mechanism so that they don't go back on this?

Answer:
Federal court. Get a temporary restraining order to keep them from making these discriminatory decisions.




Julian Klugman


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

Answer:
Yeah, that was one of the mandates at that time. There had to be a monitoring mechanism.

Question:
CRS mechanism?

Answer:
No, but we wanted to build it into every agreement if we possibly could. In the case of Klammath Falls, I got the League of Women Voters to monitor.

Question:
Aside from monitoring, do you build in any mechanism so that if something is found to be wrong, there's some way to fix it?

Answer:
Yeah.

Question:
Give me an example.

Answer:
Remember now, you build an ongoing group that's going to continue into the agreement. That's number one. Number two you have the monitoring group. Things are not going right or the time table is not being met. In essence they say to the groups, "You said within three months there would be a report, there's no report, let's go." They're monitoring it.

Question:
Is there any sort of enforcement that says, "Ok, you really have to go because if you don't, then..."

Answer:
If the monitoring group says the agreement is violated, then I would come back.

Question:
You, as the mediator, would come back.

Answer:
Yeah.

Question:
Is that the typical way of dealing with this sort of thing?

Answer:
You can, in court cases usually they have monitors. We would love to have monitors, but we just don't have the staff, but courts will pay monitors. They have court hired monitors that the parties paid for.




Will Reed


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

I always build in a monitoring mechanism for any of these things that get written up in the mediation agreements. Who's going to test this thing? Who's going to enforce it? Who's going to be sincere enough to see that the garbage trucks are rolling over to Blue Sky? Who's going to be looking at recruiting Indian teachers for the school district? Who's going to be the one to try to recruit Indian policemen and jailers? Are you going to find some? How do you identify those? Then, underneath all of that, in monitoring mechanisms, in order to have a full-fledged working, sincere, and functional mediation agreement, you're going to make sure that you have tentacles coming out of that agreement that will address work issues. What I mean by that is you put together a committee. Let's say you are looking at recruiting Indian teachers. You address all this stuff in the agreement. Subsections, headings and so forth. So when you got the agreement finished, you have all of the other mechanisms put together to address and speak to each issue or concern.



Dick Salem


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

Question:
Was there any implicit threat that the larger Justice Department might do something if the agreement wasn't adhered to?

Answer:
No, but we often felt it necessary to be sure that members of the community were aware of their rights and knew who in the federal government to call if they wanted to move in that direction. This was especially in smaller communities where people were at tremendous disadvantages for legal and other resources. But, that does not mean we were not perceived as having some clout. We might call a U.S. Attorney's office, and say we've had a complaint and we think somebody from the F.B.I. ought to go in and investigate it. Or we might encourage somebody in the community to call the U. S. Attorney. That was appropriate. We were never supposed to share confidential information.




Nancy Ferrell


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

Question:
Were there any provisions in the document that addressed what would happen if any of the provisions werenít followed, any enforcement mechanism?

Answer:
Generally, I would say yes. I canít remember specifically on that document. We always had the "what ifís," and our agency was a recourse as far as calling us to come in and help interpret and redefine or help the parties begin to implement. The things we did, like the task force, became recognized groups under the president, and reported directly to the president. So they had their own legitimacy and recourse. Any violation fell in under existing policies and procedures. So it wasnít outside the system. It was just creating this place where people were focused on ethnic relations and discrimination and helping these people who were pretty much isolated get redress. The remedy was available there; it just wasnít being exercised, because people were afraid to seek remedy.






Bob Hughes


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

Do you remember the points of the agreement?

Answer:
One. We recognized the Indian treaty and their usual custom fishing areas, and their right to access waters by passing through other waters for fishing. Some such verbiage. They have a right to pass through and use private property in order to exercise that right. A major, major concession was the recognition of those rights. But that was worked out in a joint committee. The tribal attorney in this case, who's a non-Indian, young man, was probably crucial in the working and persuading. He probably said something like "If you will give this recognition, I think in exchange, we can get to these other concerns that you have addressed."

Question:
What was given in exchange?

Answer:
All of this. There was a listing of procedures. All nets shall be lit at all times, they shall be placed so as to provide clear navigation channels in and out of the bay. There will be no loud playing of radios or excessive noise while fisherman are involved in fishing. There were a number of things like that, which addressed these specific concerns that had been raised. The Tribal Fisheries Patrol was a key part. They had one large boat with a sergeant in charge of it, who was a highly respected man, a Chippewa. He was from another part of the country, and he was highly respected, had a lot of law enforcement experience, and outside of tribal enforcement. During fishing, operations are taking place, during the fishing season, the Fishers Enforcement Patrol will regularly visit these areas and will ensure that all fishermen have copies of this agreement and that they will have authority to lift nets that are improperly placed and so on. So there was an enforcement procedure. And I believe that was it. These agreements are permanent. They'll last forever. It doesn't terminate at a certain point. The last item in the agreement would be that the mediator will arrange for a meeting three months from now for the purpose of reviewing implementation of the agreements. Secondly, for the purpose of addressing new issues related to this general area that may have arisen, that are not addressed specifically in the terms of the agreement. Thirdly, and this is by far the most important, I could renew working relationships. Now, I don't recall if I said all of that on the first case, because that was a growing awareness. But from that point on, every mediation agreement, I would try to persuade them to agree to that. This may have been where I first used that. What came out of this was, the time of the next meeting was after the fishing season had been completed. In the meantime, there was a procedure for a complaint channel, a number at the Fisheries Patrol Office, and this is the name of the person who's in charge of it. Call, and he will respond to calls from property owners. That was a commitment that he had made. He must have been invited into the meeting to be introduced and so on, a very attractive person and a lot of this was successful because of him. He could be depended on to come, and he did. The provision for the follow-up meeting was at the conclusion of the fishing season, which would be over in October or something like that. There's various runs of salmon, I had to learn all this. "When the last run has run then the mediator will reconvene the parties and we'll review the implementation of the agreement." And at that point, we arranged for, prior to the beginning of the next season, which would be about August or September, we'll meet again and be sure that we have the right phone numbers and any changes that have taken up. All these things that the Indians have little knowledge of, but that was provided for. That went on for several years, that kind of meeting.

Question:
With you involved?

Answer:
I was for the first year or so, but we would meet at the sheriff's Marine Patrol Office, the precinct where they operated out of. And I'd work out of the role of mediator and turn it over to the sergeant in charge of the Marine Patrol. He'd have the responsibility for contacting the parties to be convened, and maybe I would attend, maybe I wouldn't. But I was trying to get out of their dependence on me. There were various problems that came up later, but that was the process and dynamics that went into that case. That was my first fishing rights case. But it wasn't the last.




Julian Klugman


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

Then we set up a group to monitor the agreement. I had noticed two older white women who were coming to the sessions and they were from the League of Women Voters. Klammath Falls, Oregon is a little town, but it turned out all the professional women, all the wives of professionals, belonged to the League of Women Voters. I found out talking to these women that Indians was one of their study topics. So I had a meeting at 11:30 at night after one of my sessions, in my hotel room, all these 10 white ladies, sitting on my bed. Everything had to be voted on, and I said, "Come on, we have to move and they had an emergency board meeting with me." I just laid it out. "You're going to be on the cover of the such-and-such magazine," and I really sold it to them. They voted right then and there to be the monitoring group. They were the status women's group in town.

Question:
That was acceptable to the Native Americans?

Answer:
Yeah, they had a relationship with the woman, the matriarch.




Manuel Salinas


 [Full Interview] [Topic Top]

Question:
Did you put into place any sort of monitoring mechanism or enforcement mechanism? So that if things didn't go as everybody agreed, once the assessment was done and the chief agreed to follow it, would there have been any recourse that you or the committee could've taken?

Answer:
Within the assessment there was a paragraph in there that CRS would continue to monitor. We did very little of that, because as I said it was going very smoothly. But within that assessment that was stated in there. I don't know whether it was the closing paragraph or something like that. But it was in there so that the city would know that we're still around, we can still be helpful, and we can still ask questions and see where you're at. That was in there. But that was to the extent of it. I didn't promise to come back or check back on any particular schedule.







Copyright © 2000-2007
by Conflict Management Initiatives and the Conflict Information Consortium at the University of Colorado