North Dakota University "Fighting Sioux" Referendum, Measure 4 (June 2012)
|North Dakota University "Fighting Sioux" Referendum|
|Topic:||Motto and symbols|
Measure 4 allows the University of North Dakota to discontinue use of the "Fighting Sioux" nickname and logo by approving Senate Bill 2370, a law that repealed an earlier mandate requiring the use of the nickname. SB 2370 went into effect on December 1, 2011, and the university began the process of retiring the the nickname and logo.
Measure 4 was proposed by members of the Spirit Lake Sioux tribe.
A “Yes” vote on the measure means a vote for the University of North Dakota to drop the nickname, while a “No” vote keeps the nickname.
The following are official election results:
426 of 426 precincts reporting
Results via the North Dakota Board of Elections.
Spirit Lake Sioux tribe members filed a federal lawsuit against the NCAA in an effort to invalidate the policy against member colleges using American Indian nicknames and logos for their sports teams.
According to reports, the University of North Dakota wants to get rid of its 81-year-old nickname after a dispute with the NCAA. The NCAA argues that the name, the "Fighting Sioux," and logo are offensive to Native Americans. The NCAA has allowed some schools to keep their nicknames by getting permission from tribes. In North Dakota, the Spirit Lake Sioux tribe has endorsed the nickname but the Standing Rock Sioux tribe has not.
Text of measure
The measure as it appeared on the ballot said:
This referendum measure concerns Senate Bill 2370 as passed by the Legislative Assembly in the November 2011 special session (Session Laws, Chapter 580). Senate Bill 2370 repealed section 15-10-46 of the North Dakota Century Code, which required the University of North Dakota to use the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo.
YES – means you approve Senate Bill 2370, the effect of which would allow the University of North Dakota to discontinue the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo.
NO – means you reject Senate Bill 2370, and would require the University of North Dakota to use the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo.
On December 1, 2011, the Spirit Lake Nation issued a statement announcing their intention to file petitions for the measure with the North Dakota Secretary of State on December 2, and to begin gathering the necessary signatures to place the North Dakota University Nickname Amendment on the 2012 ballot.
- Spirit Lake Nation
- According to a statement issued by the tribe, the petition and proposed measure were an attempt to "Repeal the Repeal" of a mandate passed in 2011 that requires the University of North Dakota to continue to use the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo, and are part of a "fight to save our name and likeness, and the proud honor and traditions of our People which they represent."
- The Spirit Lake Nation further contended that the referendum would give the Standing Rock Sioux tribe a say in the matter.
- According to the Spirit Lake Nation's statement, the "UND(University of North Dakota) and the SBHE(State Board of Higher Education) are not in compliance with the legislative intent behind Senate Bill 2370 passed in November 2011." The Spirit Lake tribe claims that there is a three year moratorium to allow for their lawsuit against the NCAA to play out, and that while the name cannot be used by teams during this time, the official retirement of the nickname and logo should not be taking place.
The following information was obtained from North Dakota Secretary of State website.
|Committee for Understanding and Respect||$7,563.73|
- University of North Dakota Alumni Association and Foundation
- North Dakota Board of Higher Education
- In a column featured in the West Fargo Pioneer, columnist and former North Dakota Lieutenant Governor Lloyd Omdahl said, "Under the circumstances, the best way out of this mess would be abandonment of the petition drive. We could urge people not to sign the petitions but that would be hopeless because most folks aren’t aware of the damage the petitions will do to UND sports. Even the petitioners don’t seem to realize that. If the petitions are filed and both measures go on the ballot, thousands of dollars will be wasted on the campaigns. Money will be spent on both sides of the issue. Valuable time will be diverted at the University for months to fight passage of these measures. It will be a costly affair."
|2012 measure lawsuits|
| Arizona • Arkansas • Colorado • Florida • Maryland |
Michigan • Massachusetts • Minnesota
Missouri • Montana • Nevada
North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma
Oregon • Rhode Island
|By lawsuit type|
|Ballot text |
Motivation of sponsors
- University of North Dakota men's hockey coach Dave Hakstol, a former supporter of the nickname, spoke out against it on February 16 saying that he thinks it is time to retire the nickname and move on. Hakstol argued that the NCAA will not will not back down on sanctions against the school and that it is possible UND will get dumped from the Big Sky Conference if the nickname is used. Hakstol summed up his feelings saying, "With all of these factors in mind, I don't see any way that the University of North Dakota can be a fully successful Division I entity across all sports if we continue to mandate by law the use of the Fighting Sioux."
- See also: Polls, 2012 ballot measures
- A May 3-8, 2012, poll by Forum Communications revealed that 56% would vote 'yes' on the referendum, which means retiring the nickname, while 44% would vote 'No.' A total of 500 likely primary voters were polled. The margin of error was +/-4.3%.
- An early-June 2012 poll by Mason-Dixon revealed that 59% would vote against the amendment, 36% would vote for it, and 5% were undecided. A total of 404 likely primary voters were polled. The margin of error was +/-5%.
|Date of Poll||Pollster||In favor||Opposed||Undecided||Number polled|
|May 3 - May 8||Forum Communications||56%||44%||0%||500|
- See also: List of ballot measure lawsuits in 2012
North Dakota State Board of Higher Education V. Jaeger
On Monday, February 14, 2012, North Dakota's Board of Higher Education voted to file a lawsuit aimed at keeping the referendum off the ballot. Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem said he believes the North Dakota Supreme Court will weigh in on the dispute quickly, and that the court has invoked it's original jurisdiction before to hear high profile cases before and will likely do so so this case.
The state Supreme Court has taken up the case and has set a March 2, 2012, deadline for responses to the lawsuit. The court has asked the referendum's sponsoring committee if it wants to respond as well. Secretary of State Al Jaeger has been named the defendant. Secretary Jaeger has hired attorneys Sarah Andrews Herman and Matthew Kipp of Fargo to represent his office in the suit.
Hearings for the case were held in an hour long session before the state Supreme Court on Thursday, March 15, 2012, with both sides receiving tough questioning. Justices questioned the board on the reasons for their tardiness in seeking court action, Justice Daniel Crothers asked, "That harm has been there since the statute was passed almost a year ago... Why now? Why in the face of a referral?" The court was also critical of the defense's claims that regulating the nickname and logo were within the legislature's constitutional rights. Chief Justice Gerald VandeWalle said the state's arguments were so broad that it "would consume the constitutional authority of the board, if the Legislature wanted to do it." The court said it would rule at a later date.
- The Supreme Court's ruling can be found here.
Path to the ballot
- See also: North Dakota signature requirements
The proposed measure was filed with the Secretary of State on Friday, December 2, 2011. If valid petitions for a referendum are submitted to the state, the implementation of SB 2370 will be suspended until the the measure is voted on in 2012.
In mid-December 2011 supporters announced that they plan to seek a court order to force Ralph Engelstad Arena to allow the circulation of initiative petitions at hockey games. On December 29, 2011 Grand Forks County District Judge Sonja Clapp denied the request, but noted that a hearing would be scheduled in early January to determine if petitioners can move inside the arena for future events.
The referendum's sponsoring committee delivered 17,000 signatures on 604 petitions on February 7, 2012, thereby qualifying for the June 12 primary elections ballot.
The following is a timeline of events surrounding the measure:
|Signature filing||Feb. 7, 2012||Signatures were submitted by supporters to the secretary of state.|
|Signature verification||Mar. 13, 2012||North Dakota Secretary of State Al Jaeger confirmed that supporters collected sufficient signatures.|
| By Eric Veram|
Ballot measure writer
|Email • Submit a link|
- "Fighting Sioux" referendum to appear on ballot in North Dakota
- North Dakota "Fighting Sioux" veto referendum petition deadline a week away
- University of North Dakota's nickname battle may be headed to the statewide ballot in 2012
- Grand Forks Herald,"SIOUX NICKNAME PETITIONS: Out in the not-so cold," January 14, 2012
- WDAZ-TV,"Former Lt. Gov. Omdahl: 'Fighting Sioux' Petition Drives Should Stop," December 27, 2011
- Associated Press,"Petitions to require Univ. of N. Dakota to use Fighting Sioux nickname ready for circulation," December 13, 2011
- The College Hockey Blog,"North Dakota to Discontinue Use of Fighting Sioux Nickname in 2012," December 1, 2011
- The Jamestown Sun "‘A state-made legal mess’ : American Indian students warn against delays of lawsuit," April 25, 2012
- ↑ Grand Forks Herald,"Group wants Sioux nickname in N.D. constitution," November 17, 2011
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Grand Fork Herald "Fighting Sioux nickname supporters file petitions with 17,000 signatures," February 7, 2012
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 InForum "Jaeger places Sioux nickname, logo referendum on June 12 ballot," March 13, 2012
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Grand Forks Herald "Nickname backers to file petition forms Friday," December 1, 2011
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Associated Press,"Tribal members look to put UND nickname on ballot in effort to keep Fighting Sioux moniker," November 17, 2011
- ↑ Associated Press,"Fighting Sioux ballot language changed after error," April 5, 2012
- ↑ Measure 4 text, retrieved from Secretary of State, April 25, 2012
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 ValleyNewsLive.com "Spirit Lake Statement on Repeal of Fighting Sioux Nickname Law," December 1, 2011
- ↑ INFORUM "UND Alumni Association, Foundation to announce campaign against Fighting Sioux nickname measure," April 30, 2012
- ↑ West Fargo Pioneer,"Sioux logo petitions threaten UND sports," December 28, 2011
- ↑ Crookston Times "Hakstol: Nickname law hurts UND," February 16, 2012
- ↑ Forum Communications Co. "Majority in Poll: Retire Fighting Sioux Nickname," May 16, 2012
- ↑ KFYR-TV "Primary Election Poll: Measures 2 and 4," June 11, 2012
- ↑ Associated Press "ND high court expected to take Fighting Sioux case," February 14, 2012
- ↑ Associated Press "North Dakota Higher Ed Board To Sue To Drop Fighting Sioux," February 14, 2012
- ↑ Associated Press "ND Supreme Court deadline on Fighting Sioux case," February 22, 2012
- ↑ Associated Press "ND Sec State gets lawyers in Fighting Sioux case," February 27, 2012
- ↑ Associated Press "'Fighting Sioux' Case Considered by North Dakota Supreme Court," March 16, 2012
- ↑ Minnesota Public Radio "Court won't block Fighting Sioux name vote," April 5, 2012
- ↑ WDAY,"Sioux nickname petitions ready to be signed," December 13, 2011
- ↑ The Republic,"UND Fighting Sioux nickname petitioners plan legal action to access Ralph Engelstad Arena," December 24, 2011
- ↑ Grand Forks Herald,"FIGHTING SIOUX NICKNAME: For now, out in the cold," December 29, 2011
State of North Dakota
List of North Dakota ballot measures | Local measures | School bond issues | Ballot measure laws | Initiative laws | History of I&R | History of direct democracy | Campaign Finance Requirements | Recall process |
|State executive officers||
Governor | Lieutenant Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Treasurer | State Auditor | Superintendent of Public Instruction | Commissioner of Insurance | Commissioner of Agriculture | Director of Game and Fish | Commissioner of Labor | Public Service Commission |
Open Records Statute | Transparency Checklist | Government corruption reports | Transparency Legislation | Open Records procedures | Transparency Advocates | Transparency blogs | State budget | Taxpayer-funded lobbying associations |
List of Counties |
List of Cities |
List of Towns |
List of School Districts |