ND Univ. Chancellor on Sioux name Tues. 11:07 A.M.

[wsdSIOUXfalls]

Today (Tuesday) at 11:07 A.M., on WDAY radio [970 AM or WDAY.com] Scott Hennen will have Bill Goetz, Chancelleor of the ND University System, speaking "on the future of the Fighting Sioux name and logo at UND."

Scott's online 'teaser' for today's show reads, "Tuesday Hot Talk: Fighting Sioux name done?"

Don't know if they'll take callers, but if so - hopefully the voice of reason will prevail!!!

[Fetch]

Scott (or someone) needs to interview the leaders of the Tribes & find out about elections & how the People can be asked & if a positive permanent solution is possible ? Not just the feelings of the current tribal leadership

[wsdSIOUXfalls]

Scott needs to interview the leaders of the Tribes & find out about elections & how the People can be asked & if a positive permanent solution is possible ? Not just the feelings of the current tribal leadership

Throughout the interview, Bill Goetz talked repeatedly that it was his "charge" by the Board of Higher Education to set up a step-by-step process of negotiations between 'officials'. Only once, towards the end, did Goetz say [closely paraphrased], "If people of the tribe feel retirement of the logo should take place - then it should be done."

[dagies]

After today's viewpoint in the Herald, Hennen needs to get Archie Fool Bear on.

[PCM]

Here's a summary of the interview Scott Hennen did this morning on Hot Talk with Chancellor of Higher Education Bill Gotez. This is not a verbatim transcript. I simply took notes attempting to paraphrase the main points.

Hennen: You

Edited November 20, 2007 by PCM

[Fetch]

Is there any way to talk to the "People" ? I guess thru these meetings - If they are Public & covered by TV & Radio & any sources the People use to get their news ?

[ScottM]

Hennen: You said the governor and the attorney general will be involved. I also read in an article that the congressional delegation might be involved. Do you think they will be?

Goetz: There is some value to having their input.

Considering their "stands" on the issue to this point, bringing those dullards into the situation is as about as useless as bringing the French into a war.

[GeauxSioux]

Thanks for the summary PCM.

[Oxbow6]

Considering their "stands" on the issue to this point, bringing those dullards into the situation is as about as useless as bringing the French into a war.

I would take the over on the French in a war vs. "those dullards" and that in itself is pathetic

[wsdSIOUXfalls]

Thanks PCM.. Great summary [ matches my notes pretty closely ]

Scott summarized at the end, saying he didn't like the feeling he got that Goetz wanted to "move on" quickly... essentially "wave the white flag" if there isn't an initial sense that the tribes are ready to compromise. Scott feels using more of the 3 yr time frame would give a chance to "let cooler heads prevail" and come up with a "win/win" solution. [Neither of them knew if there might be Tribal elections within the 3 yr time frame]

Scott also reminded listeners that the Sioux name was originally bestowed to UND by Elders of the Sioux tribal government.

It would be nice if a win/win situation could be found, and hope Goetz & all involved haven't given up on that possibility before the official "process of negotiations" has even been set up! How Goetz organizes this "process of negotiations" could be crucial to the outcome! Hopefully they can find a way to learn how (in Goetz' words) "people of the tribe" feel.

[PCM]

Hopefully they can find a way to learn how (in Goetz' words) "people of the tribe" feel.

I could be wrong, but doing this sooner rather than later seems like good strategy to me. Remember, the tribal governments could do absolutely nothing over the next three years and force UND to retire the nickname by simply sitting on their hands. This way, our highest state officials make the tribes' highest officials fully accountable for the decision. They have to decide whether to abide by the wishes of the majority or do what they feel like doing. The sooner the tribal governments make their decision, the more time the voters have to express their concerns at the polls and other ways.

This assumes that there really is strong support for the Fighting Sioux nickname on the Standing Rock and Spirit Lake reservations. One way or the other, we will find out.

[wsdSIOUXfalls]

"I could be wrong, but doing this sooner rather than later seems like good strategy to me. Remember, the tribal governments could do absolutely nothing over the next three years and force UND to retire the nickname by simply sitting on their hands. This way, our highest state officials make the tribes' highest officials fully accountable for the decision. They have to decide whether to abide by the wishes of the majority or do what they feel like doing."

Sounds good to me! I'd hope negotiators could agree to consider how the "people of the tribe" feel when making their decision, ie: by having a well organized vote or inclusive polling of tribal members. Then those results could become part of the negotiations. If tribal leaders won't agree to this, then their people should be told that their opinion isn't important to their elected leaders!

"The sooner the tribal governments make their decision, the more time the voters have to express their concerns at the polls and other ways".

?? I get confused here... Wouldn't it be better if a vote of Sioux tribal members happens before a decision is made?? Or are you thinking tribal members who support the UND Sioux name might be able to reverse the decision within 3 yrs by voting out their current leaders after they've succeeded in getting UND to drop the name??

"This assumes that there really is strong support for the Fighting Sioux nickname on the Standing Rock and Spirit Lake reservations. One way or the other, we will find out."

My point exactly, but hopefully we can find out during the negotiations - not after a decision has been made!

Four Bear, a member of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, made the following statements in today's Herald that speak to tribal support better than I can:

"- A recent meeting on the topic at UND attracted 40 American Indians, four of which where Sioux. So, how many of us really are offended by it?

- Six of eight districts on our reservation voted for UND to keep the name, but our chairman chose to ignore this fact. So, what does this say about his opinion of his constituents?

- In 1969, our former chairman, Aljoe “A.J.” Agard, concurred with UND's decision to use the name. Agard, whom we now have a district building named after, gave the tribe's blessing.

- If the majority of people in Standing Rock are not offended by the logo, then we should stand by our former leader's wishes and let UND keep the name. It is not right for a few politicians to discard the people's wishes for their own personal beliefs."

Don't know the best way to do this, so put comments within PCM's text above

[The Sicatoka]

... make the tribes' highest officials fully accountable for the decision. They have to decide whether to abide by the wishes of the majority or do what they feel like doing. The sooner the tribal governments make their decision, the more time the voters have to express their concerns at the polls and other ways.

And this simple little phrase explains why Ron His Horse is Thunder was up in arms, dare I say outraged, about the decision (that he claimed he so very much wanted to have power over) being handed to him.

Goetz is asking tribal government to act now. That gives the remainder of the three years for tribal government officials to see and feel the impacts of their decision (primarily at the reservation polling booth). If there's a disconnect between tribal members and tribal leadership this will find it.

[PCM]

I get confused here... Wouldn't it be better if a vote of Sioux tribal members happens before a decision is made??

Yes, it would be better that way, but there's no way it happens unless the current tribal governments allow a vote on the issue. I don't see that as a realistic possibility. It's not the state's, the university system's or UND's place to make it happen. The initiative must come from within the reservations.

?? Or are you thinking tribal members who support the UND Sioux name might be able to reverse the decision within 3 yrs by voting out their current leaders after they've succeeded in getting UND to drop the name??

Goetz didn't rule out that possibility when he was on Hot Talk this morning. That's why I think there's some value in allowing people to experience the consequences of their leaders' decisions before it's too late to undo them.