Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tribal Consultation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
APS policy committee gives first read to tribal consultation language, plans legal review and consultation
Summary
The Albuquerque Public Schools Policy Committee held a first reading of proposed tribal consultation language, agreed to revise IH‑9 with updated wording, seek legal review with tribal-law expertise, and pursue tribal and PED input before a second reading in November.
Get email alerts on the Tribal Consultation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Albuquerque Public Schools Board of Education Policy Committee on Sept. 8 gave a first reading to proposed tribal consultation language and directed staff to revise the district's IH‑9 Indian Education policy, run the draft by legal counsel with tribal-law expertise and seek input from tribal leaders and the Public Education Department before a second reading in November.
The committee's high-level proposal would add language committing the board to "foster sovereign-to-sovereign nation relationships with tribal leaders and maintain tribal consultation with tribal governments, such as the Navajo Nation, the 19 Pueblos and the Apache Nations, or their designees." Chair Josefina Dominguez said procedures with the implementation details would be developed later with tribal input and PED guidance.
Committee members focused on why the change was needed, who should be consulted and whether board-level consultation would duplicate or conflict with existing Indian Policies and Procedures (IPP) and state law. Board member Courtney Jackson urged adherence to the current IPP process, which the committee discussed as an existing mechanism for tribal input. Board member Reynaldo Tom Morito and others emphasized the need to hear directly from tribal leaders before finalizing language.
Policy analyst Martinez explained the blue text in draft documents came from Chair Dominguez and that a red insertion—adding "tribal consultation before"—had been added to the working draft. Superintendent Dr. Blakey and committee members said they expected additional guidance from the New Mexico Public Education Department; administration noted PED had been collecting tribal feedback and was expected to issue further guidance in the coming weeks.
The committee agreed on next steps: revise IH‑9 to reflect the discussed edits; submit the draft for legal review with a specialist in tribal consultation/Indian law; present the draft for 30-day public comment; solicit input at the district's Indian Parent Committee meeting (Sept. 18) and the district's government-to-government/tribal consultation event (Oct. 6); and return the policy committee for a second read in November. No formal vote was taken on policy adoption during the Sept. 8 meeting.
Board members repeatedly framed the proposed language as high-level. Chair Dominguez said procedures'the "nuts and bolts"'would be developed in partnership with tribal designees and PED and that the policy itself was intended to prevent the board or district from bypassing tribal leaders on matters that affect sovereign communities. Several members asked administration and legal counsel to confirm the draft would not conflict with state law, including the New Mexico Indian Education Act.
The committee scheduled follow-up outreach and emphasized the district's obligation to coordinate with tribal leaders and urban indigenous stakeholders. The discussion closed with administration committing to a legal review and to coordinating opportunities for tribal input before the second read in November.

