Executive Summary

Since the court ruling of Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), Indian tribes have been explicitly recognized as sovereign dependent nations to the United States of America. The court ruling established a trust responsibility and defined the ward to guardian relationship between Indian tribes and the federal government of the United States. The trust responsibility guarantees Indian tribes federal support for services, program development, and financial assistance to operate as sovereign nations. Additionally, the trust also provides tribes legal protection from state and local police powers.

Despite the United States’ trust obligation to protect and assist Indian tribes’ best interest. The federal government continues to negate its duty to provide adequate funding and selfdetermination driven policy for Indian housing development programs. Historically federal Indian housing policies have not only been ineffective to provide adequate housing, but destructive to Indian culture and social structure as well. Federal Indian housing policies such as the Indian Appropriations Act, Dawes Allotment Act, and the Indian Relocation Act were complicit to the erasure of American Indians lives and the dispossession of millions of acres Indian land. While the United States no longer overtly pursues Indian housing policies to terminate American Indians. Paternalistic Indian housing programs and lack of adequate federal funding for Indian housing development heavily impacts the livelihoods of American Indians and leads to poor housing conditions. Poor housing conditions on tribal land, such as overcrowding, dilapidated houses, and lack of access to plumbing and electricity in units pose a public health safety concern.

The focus of this research is to holistically understand the challenges contemporary federal Indian housing policies present to Pueblo TDHEs’ ability to develop and provide housing to tribal members. I seek to understand how Pueblo TDHEs are adopting innovative solutions to address restrictive paternalistic clauses and funding challenges imposed by Indian housing policy and programs. In this research I will examine the weaknesses of contemporary federal Indian housing policies and programs. I will analyze the experiences of Pueblo TDHEs utilizing federal Indian housing programs and their efforts to cover project cost, complying with construction regulations, design standards, rent and mortgage limitations. Additionally, I will analyze Pueblo TDHEs’ experiences ensuring tribal members have access to mortgages and loans to acquire housing.

This research builds upon the analytic framework of scholars Charles F. Wilkinson and Eric R. Biggs. Wilkinson and Biggs have observed the historical pendulum shifts in Indian housing policy and its tendencies to fluctuate between assimilation and self-determination driven initiatives. Scholars Virginia Davis and Susan J. Ferrell have written extensively about the overall shortcomings of federal Indian housing policy. Presently there is a research gap exploring how the shortcomings of Indian housing is being experienced and addressed from the perspective of Pueblo TDHEs, in New Mexico, as they seek to develop tribal housing.

I utilize case studies of Pueblo TDHEs as a primary source of qualitative data to understand the challenges Indian housing policies pose to housing development and how TDHEs adjust

5

to challenges. I conduct interviews with Pueblo TDHEs’ Executive Housing Directors for my case studies. The case studies indicate that historic inactive federal Indian housing policies have significantly disrupted traditional Puebloan spatial arrangement of housing units on site and design of housing units. What was surprising to find was despite recent policies such as NAHASDA’s departure from overly paternalistic clauses. Pueblo TDHEs find it increasingly more difficult to leverage funds to cover project costs. For Pueblo TDHEs the primary Indians housing policy challenges encountered are leveraging very limited federal funds, complying to competitive housing programs and restrictions on intended tenants, and securing tribal members access to credit lines for mortgages.

My recommendations call for a set of initiatives geared towards HUD and Pueblo TDHEs respectfully, that seek to address the challenges of lack in funding and constricting policies. My recommendations to HUD include strengthening support to NAHASDA non-competitive block grant funding, eliminating max rent cap and restrictions on household AMI eligibility, making housing case studies more accessible, and waiving Davis-Bacon fees. Moreover, I recommend Pueblo TDHEs develop an in-house or multi-Pueblo tribal collaborative construction team, self-report rent payments to the Credit Bureau, utilize the HEARTH Act, establish strategic partnerships with institutions that can further supply additional skilled research and labor support, and lastly develop a multi-tribal Pueblo bank.

6