Niagara County IDA Challenges Indian Preference, Receives Letter from BIA

Deputy Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Kevin Bearquiver responded to an inquiry from the Niagara County Industrial Development Agency (IDA) that challenged Indian Hiring Preference on the Hickory Stick Golf Course in Lewiston, New York.

The hiring procedures of the golf course are of concern to the IDA because of a property tax break it granted to the course, which is not built on Seneca-owned land. Bearquiver informed the IDA that the Seneca Nation of Indians isn’t in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as the Act allows “any business or enterprise on or near an Indian Reservation” to practice Indian hiring preference.

Please click here to view Bearquiver’s letter to the IDA, via Turtle Talk.

Falmouth Training now Online -- This Month: Indian Preference

Falmouth Institute is launching an online training program this month with a seminar on Indian Preference.  The first seminar is scheduled for February 19, 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. EST. It will be repeated on February 24, 1 to 2 p.m. EST and Feburary 26, 3 to 4 p.m. EST. 

With all the federal stimulus money that is expected to be available for construction in Indian Country, an understanding of Indian preference is particularly important. There are several laws and regulations that give tribes preference in contracting. Even when the tribe is not the prime contractor, in some instances prime contrators must comply with federal and tribal preference laws. Make sure you know your rights as a tribal official, a tribal employers or a federal employer.

 

Help us plan our next online seminar! Please let us know what types of training you would take online and we'll do our best to offer it as soon as possible. 

Indian Preference Expanded

The U.S. Department of Interior must give preference to qualified Indians for all positions within the Department of Interior that relate to the provision of services to American Indians, not just the Bureau of Indian Affairs, according to a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Indian Educators Federation v. Kempthorne (Civil No. 04-01215). The Indian Educators Federation argued that Section 12 of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 mandates employment preference for American Indians employed in any position in the Department of Interior that directly and primarily relates to the provision of services to American Indians. In ruling for the organization, the court examined the Interior Department’s historical interpretation of Section 12 and the meaning of the term “Indian Office,” as used in the act. Though acknowledging that the term is ambiguous in the Act, the court determined that the ambiguity should be “construed liberally to favor the Indians.”