To speak or not to speak

Tuesday was another one of those days. What I mean by that is from 9 a.m. until nearly 5 p.m., nothing but meetings. As most people know, Tuesday mornings are the days in which we hold our Legislative Action Committee meetings, which basically feature decisions that will eventually become public decisions in our twice-a-month Wednesday night Tribal Council meetings. I wouldn’t say that we made any groundbreaking decisions today, but a point that has always been kind of a sensitive one was raised: how much time should we allow for non-Tribal members to speak at our Tribal Council, General Council, and Community meetings, if any time at all?
While the discussion raged on, I remained silent, not out of cowardice but really out of uncertainty as to what kind of arguments could be mustered. Having been raised by the non-Tribal half of my parentage, and being a big proponent of freedom of speech, and lastly just accepting that non-Tribal parents of Tribal children are really stakeholders, I just can’t bring myself to accept the mentality that we should limit anybody from speaking. Yet there are plenty of people, some maybe even on Council, who feel that the Tribe is for Tribal members, and that non-members have no right speaking at either our Tribal Council or General Council meetings, much less holding opinions on Grand Ronde issues.
I guess there really isn’t a right answer. Many like to compare stakeholders to shareholders, and in a lot of ways they kind of are the same thing. Realistically, a person who doesn’t own stock in a company would have almost no right to show up at the annual shareholder’s meeting and pop off, right? But then again, Tribes aren’t entirely about money. Tribes consist of communities, ones that are comprised of Tribal members and their non-Tribal spouses. Non-Tribal parents charged with protection of their Tribal children, including trust funds that will be worth who knows what come age 21. Come to think of it, when talking about Grand Ronde issues some of the most well-informed and passionate people I know are non-Tribal. And of course we have the people who are proven Grand Ronde descendants, with either thinned blood lines or bad timing (1999 Constitutional Amendment).
One Council member had the good sense to suggest that perhaps we should look at some sort of policy on this issue, instead of just putting the burden on the Tribal Chair (read: me) to make a judgment call during every meeting the issue arises. Maybe that is the proper way to handle the situation, through policy. I’m sure we’ll have a work session on the matter, and I’m equally sure that discussion will be very intense and heated. What I’m not sure is what the outcome will be. I understand why some people feel the need to create some sort of rule. But for some reason shutting down anybody when they take the microphone seems wrong, regardless of who, when, or why. Some rights are truly unalienable, and the right to speak should be one of them.