STATEMENT OF ED REINA, JR., CHIEF, LAW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM, SALT RIVER INDIAN COMMUNITY, PHOENIX, AZ

Mr. REINA. Thank you, Chairman Inouye, Senator McCain, members of the committee. I am Ed Reina, Jr. I am Chief of Police and a member of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian community. I appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning. I represent my community and also the 19 Indian communities of the Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona. I wish to submit written comments directly from the Inter-Tribal Council.

The Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian community has contracted for law enforcement services with the Bureau of Indian Affairs since 1967, over 20 years, and since the early 1980s has assumed criminal investigation functions normally delegated to the FBI or the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The result is that we have strengthened our department, we have enhanced relationships with our neighbors and non-Indian counterparts, which has ultimately benefited all the people we serve, Indian and non-Indian.

We support the act in part and feel it is necessary, but there are concerns with the section which states that the criminal investigation function "shall not be subject to contracting under the Indian Self-Determination Act."

Not only is this in direct conflict with the Indian Self-Determination Act, but it also closes the door on any tribe that may want to develop its own criminal investigation function.

Indian country is plagued by alcoholism, high unemployment, and endless varieties of social and economic problems. There needs to be control returned to our communities to instill hope that these problems can be overcome, not a taking away of control.

It is apparent that the section on noncontractibility is directed toward removing another area of control from tribal governments. Whether the loss is real or not, there remains the perception that there will be no control over serious crimes in the community. In a very real sense, this adds another stone to the mountain of dominance exerted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and results in a weakening of the esteem of the tribal communities.

Options should be left to the tribes. Although I speak for several tribes, each tribe is unique, as unique as its language. I urge the committee to recognize this and to leave the door open for a tribe that may want to develop a criminal investigation function, while also providing the alternative for a tribe to use the services of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I also suggest that the Bureau of Indian Affairs provide technical assistance to a tribe that may be developing a criminal investigation function.

There have been numerous studies and reports generated on law enforcement in Indian country over the years that we have talked about today, and continue to talk about, such as the American Indian Court Judges Association report in 1974, the Department of Justice Task Force on Indian Matters report in 1975, the American Indian Policy Review Commission report in 1976, and the report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights in 1981. Throughout these years little has been done to address the problems that each of these reports have consistently identified and corroborated.

I commend Chairman Inouye, Senator McCain, and the committee for your efforts. I am encouraged by the action that you have taken and the interest you have in resolving the problems of law enforcement in Indian country.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Reina appears in appendix:]

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

All of the witnesses are from Arizona, so if I may, I would like to yield to the Senator from Arizona for initial questioning.

Senator MCCAIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your usual courtesy and consideration.

I have to go in a few minutes because I will be returning to Arizona, I guess before you will. I appreciate your being here. Mr. Yazzie and Major John, I am sorry that you are here under these very tragic circumstances surrounding the events of yesterday. I know that you will be returning as soon as possible.

I also know that we have received assurances from the BIA that any available law enforcement agents from Albuquerque and other places will be sent at your request, if needed.

Mr. Yazzie, do you feel comfortable that you are receiving enough assistance at this time?

Mr. YAZZIE. Yes. The requests have been made through Major John's office, and we would be comfortable with the assurance that was relayed this morning.

Senator MCCAIN. Major John, do you feel that you will be receiving sufficient assistance? Or is it too early to tell?

Major JOHN. It's too early to tell because in the past, when we did ask for Federal assistance, we were kind of blocked by the U.S. Attorney's Office here in Washington, where apparently the Bureau of Indian Affairs would not respond to our request until the Department of Justice people gave their approval based on some agreement that was made between those agencies. But if the people who were speaking on behalf of the Department of Justice are-they have made a statement that they are willing to provide assistance to us, then I feel confident that they will.

Senator MCCAIN. Well, we would appreciate it very much if you are not receiving the assistance that you feel is necessary to maintain peace on your reservation, if you would inform the Chairman and me and I'm sure Senator DeConcini as well-I'm sure that we would be more than eager to provide whatever assistance we could.

I believe, from talking with Mr. Eddie Brown this morning, that he is very well aware of the situation and intends to provide whatever assistance you need.

Chief Reina, before I go, maybe for the record and for the benefit of the Chairman-who, by the way, has visited our State on several occasions to visit the Indian reservations in Arizona, for which we're very grateful-please describe the unique situation of the Salt River reservation where there exists this hazardous waste dumping and other crimes by non-Indians are far more pronounced than perhaps any other reservation in American, in my view. Mr. REINA. Thank you, Senator McCain.

Mr. Chairman, the situation-the problem as it has been described was not so much a problem until the recent Flint case came

out of Arizona. We were able to prosecute non-Indians because of our State certification and our training.

We have had various problems in our community that still went unresolved when, on occasion, a Justice of the Peace would not accept a certain violation, saying that it should have been handled in a tribal court-things such as dumping. On one case, we would handle it civilly in our court, and also criminally in the State court. When we tried that; it was partially successful. Now, with the recent Flint case, our jurisdiction over non-Indians for prosecution over misdemeanor offenses is again limited. The State will not accept cases where an Indian is the victim.

We have convenience stores on the reservation; one is a Circle K and another is a market run by an Indian. If a non-Indian shoplifts in that Circle K, we can prosecute him. If the same person shoplifts in the convenience market run by the Indian, there's nothing we can do about it.

Senator MCCAIN. How many non-Indians pass through your reservation in a day?

Mr. REINA. Our traffic is estimated to be 60,000 vehicles per day. These are just people going through. We have a recreation area, two rivers, a six-screen theater, a community college. Also, we have recently opened a shopping mall which is probably one of the largest in the valley.

Our problems are increasing. We are handling them the best way we can, but we would appreciate any assistance we can get from this committee.

Senator MCCAIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you very much for being here. We appreciate your testimony and we will do everything we can to help. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Chief Reina, you just indicated that if I shoplifted-I am a non-Indian-in a store owned by an Indian, you have no authority over me?

Mr. REINA. The only authority we would have would be to remove you from the reservation. Otherwise, there is no forum for prosecution. We may try to take it through the U.S. Attorney's Office, but there again we are limited. There are only certain crimes that can be prosecuted under Federal law, and shoplifting is not one of them, and other misdemeanor violations may not be prosecuted under Federal law.

We do have other situations where an Indian woman is married to a non-Indian. If we have a simple assault, under tribal law it is charged as domestic violence and there is a prosecution; under State law it is also domestic violence and there is prosecution; but under no law, now, can we prosecute that non-Indian for a misdemeanor assault on his Indian spouse.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, this bill before us doesn't change that picture, does it?

Mr. REINA. No, it doesn't.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you people gotten together to suggest legislation that might bring about a change, where you can exercise greater sovereignty?

Mr. REINA. Mr. Chairman, as Mr. McNamee has mentioned, we have met with the Inter-Tribal Council and his office and discussed this problem. Legislation is probably the most reasonable answer to

that, in the form of two things: either concurrent jurisdiction with the State where we would be able to prosecute that which is done in the State, or a more logical answer, which is the return of prosecution of non-Indians to the tribal courts.

The CHAIRMAN. If I went into your reservation and I dumped toxic material on reservation land, what can you do?

Mr. REINA. Depending on the extent of damage, we could prosecute in the State system

The CHAIRMAN. PCBs?

Mr. REINA. There are Federal laws that do cover toxic waste. But our problem is more of a person who brings out a truckload of garbage from his back yard and dumps it, that type of situation.

The CHAIRMAN. I can, with complete disregard, go into your reservation and dump rubbish?

Mr. REINA. Just about, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. So your reservation has become a dumping ground for all non-Indians in your area?

Mr. REINA. Mr. Chairman, although it is a common problem within the State everywhere, including Indian country, it's just that we cannot prosecute them as easily as we can if someone is across the road in the city of Mesa or Tempe or Scottsdale. So in effect yes, it is a dumping ground.

The CHAIRMAN. And is that the situation in your area, in the Navajo Nation?

Mr. YAZZIE. There are problems with the lack of Federal laws regarding tribal prosecution of misdemeanors and certain Federal crimes, and there is also definitely the lack of Federal personnel to investigate and prosecute those crimes. But as the representative from Arizona just stated, the logical answer is to deal on a government-to-government relationship between the Federal Government and the tribal government to improve the enforcement of laws, and not to treat one government as either the dumping ground for waste or its criminals, but to see how we can jointly prosecute those people.

The CHAIRMAN. All three members of the first panel mentioned line of authority. Judge Manuel expressed grave reservations about the line of authority provisions in this bill.

What about you, Chief, and Attorney General?

Mr. YAZZIE. The line of authority question-in the first instance, I believe it creates another level of bureaucracy which may not be needed. The last thing that we need in this government-to-government relationship that we're trying to establish and maintain is having to answer to someone back in D.C. as to how to react to some local incident. That's the fear we have.

If the local government-which is the Navajo Nation government, or whatever tribal government—were able to respond quickly, which in most cases they can, and coordinate this effort with Federal authorities with the tribal government being regarded as the supervising authority, I see no problem, if that relationship can be established. The best response is almost always by the local government.

The CHAIRMAN. Chief Reina.

Mr. REINA. Mr. Chairman, the concept of line authority from a law enforcement perspective is very necessary. Again, each tribe

has to be looked at as being a unique entity. Each tribe may have a different opinion. At Salt River, we don't have a problem at all with that because we have operated our police department for over 20 years, and the tribe itself has assumed a lot of the responsibilities that BIA has had over the past years. In fact, we have our own tribal government.

But there are problems with the present system. Our neighbors have a Bureau of Indian Affairs police force. I have had questions where I have called the Phoenix Area Office, thinking that this person had control over that agency, and I have been dissatisfied because he could do nothing about it. I had to go back to the superintendent, and after trying to explain my situation, he really didn't understand because he was not a law enforcement person.

So I can see where it's necessary. Again, you have to look at each tribe as being unique in the way they perceive that system. The CHAIRMAN. Major John.

Major JOHN. I think in response to line of authority, we did have a similar problem with the present conflict that is occurring. When we initially asked for Federal assistance, at the beginning of this political turmoil, the request was made to the area director; but the number of people we have received in terms of Federal assistance-we only received 18 Federal officers to assist our department. Part of that problem was because under the Federal system, the Federal officers who are stationed on the various Indian reservations are subject to the supervision of the agency superintendent. It was up to the agency superintendent to determine how many Federal officers were going to be dispatched to the Navajo Nation to assist us. So the provisions and terms of the line of authority within H.R. 498, from the law enforcement perspective as far as Chief Reina had alluded to, we don't see that as a problem. As a matter of fact, it would kind of make our job a lot easier from the tribal law enforcement perspective in terms of who we go to that has authority to assist us in any type of law enforcement situation. Also, in response to your question concerning the problem with non-Indians, we do have a problem. One of the problems that fueled the situation that occurred yesterday dealt with a nonIndian. The Navajo Tribal Council two years ago, the Navajo Tribal Government under Peter MacDonald, appointed a non-Indian police chief. This former police chief was the one that created the problems as far as law enforcement was concerned during the onset of the political turmoil. We have attempted to seek some type of charges against him through the State system, but the State system did not want to deal with this individual because not only was he a non-Indian, but the victim was the Navajo Tribal Government.

We then turned to the United States Government to assist us in seeking some kind of prosecution against that individual. Because of the offense that this individual committed being less serious, they were reluctant to pursue it through the Federal court system. So as you mentioned, I think that Federal legislation would be needed in order to change the authority that Indian tribes have over non-Indians, but that's in the form of separate legislation.

The CHAIRMAN. If this bill passes in the form presented to you today, will it diminish or erode the sovereignty of your nations?