March 27, 2006

Mr. James Cason

Associate Deputy Secretary

United States Department of the Interior

Washington, D.C.

VIA FAX

Dear Secretary Cason:

          We write to inform you of our strong opposition to Chief Jim Gray’s proposal to seek a waiver of the protections afforded to our Tribe and to individual Osage annuitants (shareholders in the Osage Mineral Trust) under the 1906 Act of Congress, as amended, and the implementing regulations found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 

          The 1906 Act of Congress establishes an Osage Minerals Council (composed of a Chief, Assistant Chief, and eight (8) members at large) with oversight authority over the Osage Mineral Trust.  In 2004, the United States Congress reaffirmed the inherent sovereignty of the Osage Nation and authorized government reform.  However, the 2004 Act, H.R. 2912, expressly prohibited any interference with the rights of Osage annuitants, as well as any alteration of the provisions set forth in Section 9 of the 1906 Act.  Section 9 outlines the basic structure of the Minerals Council (including the positions of Chief and Assistant Chief) and the procedure for electing these officers.   

          The Osage Constitution was recently enacted by a majority of a small percentage of eligible Osage voters and in spite of significant opposition.  Those who opposed the Constitution did so in part because of its poorly drafted and overly general provisions regarding the Osage Mineral Trust.  In fact, the Osage Mineral Trust is not addressed until Article 15 of the Constitution.  Even there, it is buried amid other powers that are assigned to the Osage National Congress.  The Osage Nation Constitution does not address how many persons will serve on the Osage Minerals Council, whether its fundamental composition includes a Chief and Assistant Chief, and whether the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) retains its statutory authority to administer the election of these officers.  Instead, the Osage Nation Constitution clearly provides that the Minerals Trust and the Minerals Council will be governed in accordance with applicable federal law. 

          At this juncture, the Osage Principal Chief seeks to compensate for the deficiencies in the Constitution he endorsed by asking you and your agency to waive governing federal laws and regulations.  In essence, he asks the BIA to “edit” the Osage Nation Constitution to include the things he “meant to address, but didn’t.”

          We believe that the Osage Nation Constitution, which was ratified by many non-shareholders, does not and should not override governing federal law to the detriment of the Osage Mineral Trust and its shareholders.  We further believe that any changes to the fundamental structure of the Osage Minerals Council and to the procedures governing election of these officers must occur through formal rulemaking, with prior notice and an opportunity to comment for all concerned.  We do not believe such changes should be authorized through “waivers” or closed door meetings.  Because the Constitution does not require the Chief or Assistant Chief of the Osage Nation to be shareholders, we believe that that the positions of Chief and Assistant Chief of the Minerals Council were meant to be preserved and protected under the 2004 Act of Congress.     

In conclusion, we respectfully request that the B.I.A. exercise its statutory authority to administer elections pertaining to the Osage Mineral Trust, to preserve and protect the fundamental structure of the Osage Minerals Council in accordance with federal law, and to deny any proposal to waive such protections.  Thank you for your attention and consideration regarding these matters

 Very Truly Yours,

"Composer requests anonymity"

Cc:    Ms. Melissa Curry, Superintendent, BIA, Osage Agency

Ms. Jeanette Hannah, Regional Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs   

               .