| Big money at stake over Indian ancestry Friday, July 27, 2001 ANDY GRIMM THE SAGINAW NEWS http://sa.mlive.com/news/index.ssf?/news/stories/20010727schippewas.frm For more than 60 years, disputes over who is and who is not a Saginaw Chippewa have fractured politics on the Mount Pleasant reservation. Big money hangs in the balance, and tribal leaders' most recent effort to resolve the membership dilemma has again divided the tribe with now-familiar accusations of favoritism and fraud. A panel made up of seven members appointed by Chief Phillip Peters Sr.'s Tribal Council has begun formal hearings intended to weed out members with no ancestral link to the group. Opponents of the move say the panel is targeting council critics and members who have aligned themselves with Peters' rivals - and they even claim the lineage of the chief and other high-ranking officials is suspect. If stripped of tribal status, each member stands to lose $52,000 a year in profit-sharing from the Soaring Eagle Casino and Resort, as well as eligibility for tribal housing and federal health and educational benefits. The panel will rule on individual cases "in a reasonable amount of time," said Frank J. Cloutier, a tribal spokesman. Members may appeal the panel's decision in tribal court. "We're not going to put these people out on the street and kick them to the curb," Cloutier said. "That's not how things are done in Indian Country. We're a very family-oriented people." Families feud Members of rival families that have long dominated Chippewa politics have privately sneered at the lineage of their opponents, said Ben Hinmon, a member of a tribal council ousted by Peters' group in 1999. However, formal challenges seldom occurred until after the tribe began paying members shares of the lucrative profits - now more than $300 million a year - from the Soaring Eagle Casino and Resort in 1993. Hinmon agrees weeding out members is necessary, but said that with the enrollment advisory committee - as well as tribal judges - appointed by the council, candidates for disenrollment have little hope of getting a fair hearing. "The checks and balances available to every other citizen in America are not available to Indian nations," said Hinmon, whose family was the first to face an enrollment hearing. Hinmon, a former tribal secretary, is now chairman of the Saginaw Ojibwe Heritage Fund, a group that plans to mount legal challenges over the disenrollment measures. Hinmon and a group led by Kevin Chamberlain rose to power in 1996, when members overwhelmingly voted to recall a Peters-led council shortly after Peters attempted to prevent 480 members from receiving casino profits until they proved their tribal descent. The Chamberlain council also began a membership review with the aid of genealogy consultants that resulted in a half-dozen people losing their membership, Hinmon said. Now, Hinmon and about 50 of his relatives stand to lose their member status, and he estimates the council may cut as many as 500 others from the rolls. Jackpot For the 2,700-member tribe, removing even a small number of members can boost per-capita payments, said Norman Fowler, a tribal member who faces an enrollment hearing later this month. "Until the casino was up and running and going pretty good, there was no push for disenrollment," he said. "The only reason this is being questioned is these 500 people are getting $1,000 a week." Tribal leaders in November mailed letters to Hinmon, Fowler and an undisclosed number of other members. The letters, many of them addressed to long-dead ancestors - Hinmon's letter was marked for a grandmother who died in 1997 - informed the recipients of problems tracing their roots to one of four base rolls. The lists were compiled, often sloppily, by the tribes and federal officials during the late 1880s, said genealogy expert James McClerken. "By disenrolling a dead person they are destroying lineal descent so they can disenroll their descendants," said McClerken, who has worked as a consultant for the tribe under both the Chamberlain and Peters administrations. "I've never seen anything like this." The letters, and subsequent hearing, have not explained what limbs are missing from the Hinmon family tree. "We've never received anything in writing" explaining why the family is under review, Hinmon said. "We asked (the Enrollment Advisory Committee), 'What evidence do we have to refute?' and they said they had none. "It puts us in an odd position because we don't know what they need." Hinmon said officials recorded the proceedings, but refused to allow his attorney and a stenographer to attend the hearing, which will make appeals difficult. Tracing roots Elderly and uneducated members have no idea how to perform the research necessary to support their membership in the hearings, said Joan Meyers. Meyers' grandparents moved to St. Charles in the 1920s, hoping to leave behind the grinding poverty on the Chippewa's Isabella County reservation. Members who moved off the reservation often dropped off official membership rolls maintained by the tribe. Another base roll created when the tribe adopted a constitutional government in 1937 further tangled matters. The federal government in the early 1980s required Chippewa leaders to extend membership to any person with one quarter Indian blood who could trace his or her roots to one of four Chippewa membership lists. Meyers was one of nearly 3,000 who applied for membership, and many of those who joined during the "open window" are now disputed by the tribe. Meyers' enrollment documentation was accepted by the tribe and even bears Peters' signature. She said leaders have targeted her because of her outspoken criticism of both regimes. Meyers moved to an apartment on the reservation and has spent much of her time researching her lineage and helping others to trace their roots. "They are not going to take our heritage away from us," she said. "We have elders who don't know what to do. They don't know how to trace their tree." Meyers said her research shows that members of Peters' family do not meet membership criteria, and that other tribal leaders falsified documents in order to maintain their member status. Cloutier refused to discuss individual cases, but said the tribal council created an Enrollment Department with trained staff to help members research their claims. Attorneys and other advocates are allowed to attend only if they represent minors or members judged infirm, a measure the council adopted to allow the hearings to proceed quickly, Cloutier said. The review process is more fair and deliberate than any previously undertaken by the tribe, Cloutier said, adding that the Chamberlain council used ongoing membership disputes to invalidate three unfavorable tribal elections. Members have demanded that leaders resolve the membership dilemma, and even launched yet another recall effort when the Peters council appeared to drag its feet, Cloutier said. A survey of tribal members showed a majority favored the membership review, Cloutier said. Hinmon and others dispute the survey, and maintain that members overwhelmingly voted to allow all present members to remain, but to reform the rules for adding new members. Tribal Council member Ronald Jackson, who represents most of the off-reservation members who will face review, said he has recommended such a plan "on several occasions" but was rebuffed. He refused to comment on the current enrollment review, but called it "the will of the people." "Most of the researchers have come up with the same names," Jackson said. "You hear the same names over and over again, and there has to be something to it." t Andy Grimm is a staff writer for The Saginaw News. You may reach him at 776-9688. Copyright 2001 Michigan Live Inc. Reprinted under the Fair Use http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
doctrine of international copyright law. Full copyright retained by the original
publication. "The true movement isn't a thing, or some collective entity of
people, or even any person. It has no form or structure and so can't be distributed,
or possessed, or detained. No one else can exclude you, as you must invite
yourself." - Rush (When We Were Iron) List info at: http://nativenewsonline.org/natnews.htm |
| Grand Traverse ancestral land in conflict by Cari Noga Today correspondent LELAND, Mich. - An American Indian tribe is frustrated over a proposed public-private land swap on a remote Lake Michigan island and their complaints are ignored. The state of Michigan owns about one-third of 3,400-acre South Fox Island with ecological features that include rare sand dunes and habitat for endangered plant and bird species. Private landowner David Johnson, a Detroit-area developer best known for building a billion-dollar luxury resort on reclaimed industrial property south of Petoskey, owns the remaining two-thirds. The controversial swap would consolidate the present patchwork ownership pattern, giving Johnson a central chunk of South Fox. To complicate the matter, the BIA in 1983 identified at least 250 acres as belonging to members of the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. Some of those claims are among the parcels that would be exchanged. However, despite a nearly year-long debate over the swap, for which a federal Environmental Impact Statement is being prepared, the claims issue has been ignored, say tribal members and staff. "It's as if everything we've been saying about the land claims is falling on deaf ears. There ought not to be any consideration by the federal agencies of this proposal," tribal attorney Bill Rastetter said. Johnson, who has owned property on South Fox for 12 years, said this is the first time the land-claim issue has arisen. He said he's asked that the claims be identified specifically, but that hasn't happened. "It's frustrating we can't get any factual basis," Johnson said, adding he feels "phenomenally frustrated" over the whole swap. "We have addressed and accommodated a variety of constituencies," including endangered species advocates, hunters, and preservationists, he said. "We feel every single thing has been addressed." Rastetter said the tribe hasn't had incentive to document the claims, since it is a BIA responsibility. He noted a conflict of interest in that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which accepted public comment on the swap through July 15, and the National Park Service, which also plays a decision-making role, are part of the Department of the Interior, as is the BIA. "It's really unconscionable for two other agencies to even consider a proposal that might impact these Indian claims," Rastetter said. "If the agencies made a decision to go forward, one wonders if it would be consistent with their trust obligation to the Indians." He also said he wondered if it would be fair to the public, which could be shorted in the swap if tribal claims are upheld. "Is it possible to analyze the fairness of the trade if there are claims?" he asked. The band estimates between 25 and 30 percent of its 3,600 members are descended from the island. An island history book reports its population of American Indians and whites peaked in the 1920s, when about 60 people made their living farming and lumbering there. Some 17 tribal members and staff renewed their resolve to be heard on the South Fox dispute late last month, when they co-sponsored a charter ferry and visited their ancestral home. More visited July 5. For many, it was their first trip to the island, about 25 miles off the coast of mainland Leelanau County, where the band's reservation is located. For all, it was deeply moving. "Ready to go home again," is how Jaime Barrientoz, tribal council vice chairman, described his feelings after seeing the island where his great-grandfather and other relatives lived. "This is our history and we just can't allow it to happen," he said of the swap. "I would like to see the federal government live up to their trust responsibilities." "This is astronomical. I've wanted this all my life," said Darrell Wright, a 71-year-old Grand Traverse member who first sought access to the island six years ago to visit the grave of his grandfather. He said Johnson denied him access to the tribal cemetery site. Johnson recalled requesting documentation to verify Wright's request, which was never provided. Among tribal members, opinions varied about what to do with the land if its claims are upheld and title returned. Some suggested building a communal facility, perhaps a lodge. Others favored simply leaving the island natural. What won't happen, they said, is development. "Whenever Indians raise the issue of land claims, they automatically think casino," Barrientoz said. "That's not the case. I would like to see it left natural." A common concern of all opponents has been development and the consequences it poses to pristine South Fox. Johnson has said he intends only to use the island as a personal retreat, but opponents say there's no guarantee that either he - or some future owner - won't change their minds. Leaving the patchwork ownership pattern makes development more difficult, they say. Johnson points out he already owns 2,200 contiguous acres, more than enough to develop if he wanted to. He and the state say trespassing is a problem, and that consolidating ownership simplifies property management. The night before the excursion, tribal member Helen Paul, whose father had a lumber business on the island as recently as the 1950s, was hostess for a feast at her home. They ate the food their ancestors likely ate - boiled potatoes, corn, fry bread, cornmeal. They saved some of each dish and burned it on the island. "We started a sacred fire to feed our ancestors that are on the island," Paul said. "We do that to let them know we still care." After walking around the public land on the island's southern tip, Paul and her brother smoked beneath a tree. "It's probably been a long time since someone smoked a sacred Pipe here, or offered tobacco to the spirits that are here," she said. As they finished the ritual, just before boarding the boat to leave the island, an eagle soared overhead. To Paul, that means her prayers that the island stay in its natural state will be carried to the Great Spirit. "That makes me real happy," she said. Eagle notwithstanding, the tribe will continue to oppose the swap. It is on record as an opponent, for the host of environmental and political reasons argued by others. Besides the threats to habitat, opponents contend the swap is a political payback to Johnson, a large donor to the Republican Party, which holds the Michigan governor's office and controls both legislative chambers. Johnson scoffs at that accusation. "Gov. (John) Engler and his people don't do political favors and neither do I," Johnson said, adding he makes more charitable than political contributions. Rastetter said he expects the tribe would file another objection before the public comment deadline. But he still contends that decision-makers are ignoring the primary issue. "We ought not to be looking at those land claims as one of many
factors," he said. "It really diminishes the importance of the land claims
and trivializes them." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Native-American-Advocate Native-American-Advocate-subscribe@yahoogroups.com |
| July 11, 2001
Lake group discusses tribal fishing rights GRANT TOWNSHIP - The Black Lake Association held an informative meeting Monday about attempts by five Native American tribes to secure what they believe is their right to fish, hunt, trap and gather along Inland Waterways in Michigan. Speaking at the meeting was Frank Krist, member of the Michigan Fisheries Resource Conservation Coalition. The Coalition is made up of sportsmen's groups throughout the area to give a voice to hunters and fishers. According to Krist, five Michigan tribes - the Grand Traverse Band, the Bay Mills Indian Community, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians and the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians - are involved in a lawsuit to reaffirm their rights to fish, hunt, trap and gather on inland water and land. "They are saying," Krist stated, "they have the right to fishing and hunting along public water and land throughout Northern Michigan and the eastern portion of the Upper Peninsula." A treaty signed in 1836 reserves the tribal right to hunt and fish on land ceded "until the land is required for settlement." The issue is how water can be considered settled. The five tribes do not believe so, said Krist. The Coalition believes otherwise. "What we (the Coalition) must do," he explained, "is prove that this water is settled and that the treaties took away inland fishing and hunting rights. "The tribes are saying that the hunting and fishing rights were never taken away, and that unless they are taken away, they still have them." The process of reaffirmation could be divided into two phases, stated Krist "Phase one will take place in the courts," he stated. "The court will decide to reaffirm the tribes rights to hunt and fish or not reaffirm their rights. If they do not reaffirm, it is over. If they do reaffirm, then we enter phase two, where we will negotiate to decide what can and can not take place." |
PLAQUE AT TRAIN/BUS STATION
COURTESY OF
THE DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
| Chicago Treaty 1821
Treaty 1838 Notta-Sepee
Given up in 1827 under Gov. Cass 3,000 Indians gathered on this spot and directly north, for nearly a week. Chiefly Pottawattomies and Ottawas. Councils were held by their cheiftains causing a weird, mournful, dramatic scene. They took up their long line of march for the then far west, beyond the "father of the waters." Their tents and household goods loaded on ponies, able bodied men women and children accompanied by dogs followed on foot. Sick and aged carried on litters between ponies, papooses on the backs of squaws. Great reluctance on leaving homes of their ancestors under Gen. Brady and Hon. Henry Rice (Indian land agent) they passed single file before judge Epaphroditus Ransom (later governor) with respect doffed their ornamental headgear, elevated their right hand to say goodbye. Lucinda Hinsdale Stone Chapter June 1926 Daughters of the American Revolution Some 'interesting'
historical info at the site below
KALAMAZOO, MI.COM
|
|
January 4, 2002 |
|
Indians try to change constitutions http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/1230change/1230change.htm Reformers say lack of separation of powers give tribal leaders too much authority Dale G. Young / The Detroit News Newly elected Tribal Chief Maynard Kahgegab has suggested he will look at reforms to the tribal constitution that will foster more democratic rule. By Mark Puls and Melvin Claxton / The Detroit News American Indians on reservations across the country are ruled by sovereign governments whose constitutions often pit tribal leaders against those they serve. Most of these constitutions are cookie-cutter documents co-authored by the federal government and far more closely resemble blueprints for corporate operations than models for democratic governments. These constitutions give control over key branches of government — courts, police and the legislature — to powerful chief executives. Since the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) has helped create hundreds of tribal constitutions. The BIA’s failure to ensure a separation of power that protects the rights of tribal members was no accident, some experts say. “The bureau didn’t think tribes were legitimate governments,” said attorney Robert Lyttle, who specializes in amendments to tribal constitutions.. “They considered them to be more like a corporation than a government. That’s why they get titles such as chairman instead of president or governor. That’s why no tribe has a separation of powers.” American Indians trying to change their constitutions often face uphill battles, as a group of reformers in the Saginaw Chippewa tribe discovered. The group has sparked a political and legal firestorm with tribal leaders and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Ben Hinmon is a member of the Saginaw Chippewa reform group that battled efforts initiated by former tribal leader Phil Peters to kick out more than 10 percent of the Chippewa’s 2,700 members. Many of those targeted for expulsion were political opponents of the leadership. Tribal leaders contended that the constitution gave them the power to withdraw membership from Indians who could prove their Chippewa ancestry. Hinmon said his organization is attempting to make the tribe’s constitution more closely mirror that of the United States, as well as correct flaws that excluded legitimate descendants of the tribe from membership. Newly elected Tribal Chief Maynard Kahgegab has indicated that he will look into the constitution issue. Kahgegab replaced Peters, who was swept from office in November along with several top members of his council. The constitutional changes proposed by the Hinmon group include: * Opening membership to all who could trace their heritage to early tribal members named in historical treaties. * Separating the powers of the chief, council and courts. * Making voting districts more equal in influence. Currently, less than 25 percent of the tribe elects 10 of the 12 council members. “Without a separation of powers, there is no democracy,” Hinmon said. “It’s the veil of sovereign immunity that keeps the abuses covered up.” Hinmon’s group traveled to Washington to air their troubles before the BIA and members of Congress, but said they received little help. The group then launched a petition drive in 1999 to allow a vote on changing the constitution. Collecting sufficient signatures wasn’t enough to bring the issue before tribal voters. Tribal leaders fought back by changing voting districts to cause the drive to fall short. The Bureau of Indian Affairs accepted the new voting districts and rejected the validity of the petition drive. Hinmon’s group sued the BIA in federal court and won. U.S. District Judge David Lawson ruled in August that the bureau wrongfully rejected the petition by allowing tribal leaders to change voting boundaries. The judge was highly critical of the bureau’s handling of the case. The BIA said it would appeal the judge’s decision, but didn’t. The federal government’s opposition to changes in the constitution doesn’t surprise attorney Lyttle. “The bureau will tell you they have a policy of self-determination for the Indians, but when the tribes try to amend a constitution, they do everything to stall and delay a constitutional vote,” Lyttle said. One constitution currently awaiting BIA approval is that of the Little Traverse Band of Odawa Indians. The tribe, which won federal recognition in 1994, has operated on an interim constitution and is now awaiting approval of a draft constitution that tribal leaders say closely resembles that of the United States. Judges can’t be fired by the tribal leader or the council, but are subject to judicial review for discipline. The chairman is elected separately from the board. And the powers of the tribal board, courts and chairman are separate. http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/ Electoral abuse common http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/1230abuse/1230abuse.htm Lack of public scrutiny, tribal law make it hard to challenge incumbents who make rules. Misquez Peters By Mark Puls and Melvin Claxton / The Detroit News Sarah Misquez, president of the Mescalero Apache tribe in New Mexico, lost her bid for re-election Nov. 6. She is still president. The council she heads simply threw out results of the election after another losing candidate complained that voting machines were used instead of paper ballots. “They totally circumvented the will of the voters,” said Rufina Laws, a longtime Apache activist who voted against the current chief. “Why didn’t they bring up this issue about voting machines before the election?” Apache tribal members have little recourse. American Indian governments run their own elections with little federal or state oversight. This lack of public scrutiny has led to abuses and made it difficult to challenge incumbents who not only make election rules, but can change them at will. Examples of electoral abuse abound. Sault Ste. Marie Chippewas leaders — including current Chairman Bernard Bouschor — passed restrictive election laws that use blood quantum and residency to block more than two-thirds of their members from holding office. The four members on the board at the time who didn’t meet the requirement received exemptions. Under a special provision, sitting board members didn’t have to meet the blood quantum requirement as long as they remained in office and didn’t lose an election. Former Saginaw Chippewa Chief Phil Peters and key members of his council fought for years to protect a voting law that allowed 24 percent of the tribe that included their strongest supporters to elect 10 of the 12 council members. These leaders altered rules governing petitions in an effort to kill a drive to change voting laws. In some tribes, votes are openly bought. On the Seneca Nation of Indians reservation in New York, candidates are allowed to pay voters. Typically, candidates hand voters going into the voting booth brown paper bags with anywhere from $10 to $200. Even in cases like the Seneca, the federal government has been reluctant to get involved. In 1976, the federal government charged former Seneca tribal president Robert Hoag with embezzling money to buy votes, but not with vote buying. Hoag admitted he bought votes. But he was acquitted after showing that he used his own money, not the tribe’s. In Mescalero, Apache tribal members collected 609 signatures last month asking that the November general election be reaffirmed. Four of seven council members, including president Misquez, voted down the petition. The council agreed to hold another general election Jan. 9. Misquez did not return phone calls about the election, but has maintained that she was only following the law. “The Misquez administration is prepared to use any means it can to remain in power,” said Mark Chino, the candidate who defeated Misquez, 590-523. “She hides behind the constitution like it’s a castle.” http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/ Tribes buy clout with casino cash Congress turns blind eye to power abuses By Melvin Claxton and Mark Puls / The Detroit News http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/1230lead/1230lead.htm American Indian tribal leaders have used casino revenues to forge political alliances that have allowed them to ward off their critics and maintain governments that curtail many of the basic rights and freedoms most Americans take for granted. To protect their sweeping powers, tribal leaders spent an estimated $40 million over the last five years lobbying Congress and helping finance the campaigns of federal, state and local politicians. More than half of that money went to high-priced Washington lobbyists. But last year alone, $2.9 million went to federal candidates -- a sharp increase from the $128,000 spent by tribes on federal elections at the beginning of the Indian casino boom in 1992. These political contributions and lobbyists have made tribal leaders staunch friends in Congress, which has the authority to address the abuses of Indian governments but has chosen not to. As a result, many Indians on reservations across the country live with flawed justice systems, little control over tribal finances, limited press freedoms, restrictive election laws and scant protection against age or disability discrimination. Even their membership in the tribe can be withdrawn on a whim by tribal leaders. “It is a fact of life, if you want to bring attention to the issues that are important to you, you have to spend money,” said former Saginaw Chippewa tribal chief Kevin Chamberlain, who contributed more than $302,000 of tribal funds in 1998 to federal candidates. “Tribal leaders control campaign contributions so politicians listen to them. But the average guy in the tribe is going to have a hard time getting heard.” The importance tribal leaders place on lobbying was underscored three weeks ago when the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe agreed to pay lobbyist Jack Abramoff $150,000 a month to represent their interests in Washington. Abramoff is also a lobbyist for the Choctaw tribe of Mississippi, which paid $1.4 million for his services last year. Big givers have clout While politicians repeatedly deny that campaign contributions buy political favors, there is a consensus that big donors have a far better chance of having their concerns addressed. Last year, the Clinton administration intervened in a dispute between the Seminole Tribe and the state of Florida to help the tribe win approval for electronic gaming machines. The state opposed the machines, and the federal action came after the Seminoles made $325,000 in political donations — more than 80 percent to Democrats. Tribal leaders have used their financial clout not only to reward friends, but to target politicians who attempt to rein in their power. A case in point was last year’s U.S. Senate race in the state of Washington. Several tribes in Washington set out to unseat senior Republican Sen. Slade Gorton who, as head of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, had sought for years to limit the power of tribal governments. The tribes created a $2-million campaign fund and were successful in helping Maria Cantwell defeat the three-term senator. Few tribal councils have the economic and political clout of the long-entrenched leaders of the 600-member Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, whose Foxwood Casino in Connecticut is the most lucrative gaming enterprise in the world. These leaders, who oversee the tribe’s spending of millions of dollars a year on lobbyists and political donations, have been accused of keeping members in the dark about the tribe’s finances, including their own salaries, which reportedly exceed $1 million a year. This issue hasn’t affected the tribe’s ability to get help from political friends. Eight years ago, the Interior Department OK’d a highly controversial 165-acre expansion of the tribe’s reservation over the objections of nearby communities. From 1992-94, Mashantucket leaders donated $437,000 to Democrats, who controlled the White House at the time the Interior decision was made. Sault Chippewas generous In Michigan, no tribe has given more to politicians than the Sault Ste. Marie Chippewa Indians, owners of Greektown and five other casinos. The 29,000-member tribe, the largest in the state, gave more than $367,000 in political donations in the past five years. Nearly 95 percent of Sault Chippewa contributions went to Democrats, and the tribe was named in a donors list kept by a top Clinton White House official. Since 1995, leaders of the tribe funneled donations to campaign committees and politicians in at least seven states. Those generous contributions have helped longtime Sault Chippewa chairman Bernard Bouschor, who maintains an iron grip over just about every aspect of tribal life, develop influential connections and deflect criticism of his leadership. Complaints of mismanagement and conflicts of interest in his tribal government have gone largely ignored by Congress and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the federal agency responsible for overseeing governments on reservations. But Bouschor’s pet projects have received special attention from Congress and the White House. A proposed bill currently in the U.S. House of Representatives would give Bouschor’s government a long sought-after casino in a prime off-reservation location. And a highly controversial BIA decision in the dying days of the Clinton administration benefited a tribe the Sault Chippewas had invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in. Questionable land In July, Congressman Bart Stupak, D-Mich., re-introduced a bill that would allow the Sault Ste. Marie Chippewa and Bay Mills Indian Community tribes to convert prime property off their reservation into Indian trust land on which they could build casinos. American Indians do not need state or federal approval to build casinos on property earmarked by Congress as part of a land settlement. Under the Stupak plan, the Bay Mills tribe would get land in Vanderbilt and the Sault Chippewas in Mackinaw City, near the heavily traveled Mackinac Bridge, the gateway to Michigan’s popular Upper Peninsula vacation spots. The two tribes selected the properties named in the Stupak bill. Stupak said the bill is aimed at correcting an old injustice. The land he wants to give the tribes, he insists, is a fair exchange for land wrongly taken from them more than a century ago. The Bay Mills tribe fought for a similar deal in two court cases and lost. The Sault tribe refused to join the Bay Mills lawsuits. A lower court and Michigan court of appeals both agreed that the tribes legally lost the land in an 1885 tax sale. Stupak, who first introduced the bill in the House five years ago, reintroduced it after the appeals court released its ruling in April. There is no record that Stupak received contributions from either tribe and he insists the Sault tribe’s contributions of hundreds of thousands of dollars to his party had nothing to do with his bill. He said it was the current owners of the property the tribes claim was wrongly taken from them who first asked him to intervene. “It was the landowners who were being threatened by the Bay Mills tribe with a lawsuit who came to me for help,” Stupak said. “I had my staff investigate the matter and determined that the tribes had a legitimate claim. This had nothing to do with political contributions.” White House connections The relationships between the Sault Chippewa’s contributions and political actions are hard to ignore. The Stupak bill isn’t the first time politicians or their staff intervened to the benefit of the Sault Chippewa leadership. Just hours before President Bill Clinton left office in January, BIA interim head Michael Anderson extended federal recognition — and ultimately the right to operate a casino — to the Nimpuc Indians of Massachusetts, a tribe heavily supported financially by the Sault Chippewas. Anderson and his former BIA boss Kevin Grover co-chaired the Native Americans for Clinton/Gore Committee. Hatch For years, Sault Chippewa leaders had quietly bankrolled the Nimpucs to the tune of up to $14,000 a month, according to Sault Chippewa spokesman John Hatch. Tribal leaders, who kept the arrangement hidden from members until recently, won’t say exactly how much they gave the Nimpucs. Anderson gave the tribe federal status over the objections of the BIA's historians and experts who determined that the current tribe couldn’t continually trace its ancestry to the early Nimpucs. The Bush administration froze action on the Nimpucs’ recognition within days of coming to office. In September, it revoked the tribe’s federally recognized status. The Nimpucs, who had lobbied heavily for the recognition, were poised to build a megacasino on the Massachusetts-Connecticut border. If the Nimpucs got a casino, the Sault Chippewas were to be repaid with interest, Hatch said.. Sault Chippewas leaders, who donated $265,000 in 1996 to the Democratic Party during Bill Clinton’s re-election campaign, had a lot riding on the Clinton administration’s decision on the Nimpucs. The Sault Chippewas were clearly on the Democrats’ radar screen at the highest level. A donors list kept by former White House Deputy Chief-of-Staff Harold Ickes shows that in May 1996 the Sault Chippewas gave a total of $150,000 to Democratic campaign committees in New York, Illinois, Maine, Missouri and Maryland. The tribe later sent an additional $115,000 to Democratic state committees in Tennessee and Oregon. Sault tribal leaders have declined to comment on whether their contributions were in any way linked to the Nimpuc deal. A controversial mix For Sault Chippewa leaders, money and politics have always been a controversial mix. In 1999, leaders of three Michigan Indian tribes testified in a federal civil suit that Bouschor tried to trade his influence with state legislators for a future share of their casino profits. The claims stem from a 1996 meeting between Bouschor and leaders of the Little Traverse Band of Odawa Indians, the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians and the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians. One leader testified that Bouschor told them that their requests to open casinos, pending before the state Legislature, had been blocked by his tribe. “Chairman Bouschor claimed that he controlled enough votes to permanently prevent adoption of the needed resolutions by the Michigan Legislature,” Frank Ettawageshick, then-tribal president of the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, swore in a court deposition. “Chairman Bouschor next stated that he could see to it that the resolutions were adopted by the end of 1996 in return for an equity interest in each of the tribes’ three proposed casinos. This equity interest, as he explained it, would amount to a payment from each of the three tribes to the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of approximately 10 percent of the net revenues from gaming operations in perpetuity or at least for the life of the (gaming operations).” Bouschor, Ettawageshick said, promised to have the Sault Chippewas’ Las Vegas attorneys draft written proposals because they were versed in such deals. The three tribes rejected Bouschor’s offer after he later presented it in writing. Bouschor has denied the allegations and characterized the episode as standard business negotiations. In a Nov. 2, 1996, letter to Ettawageshik, Bouschor offered to loan the Little Traverse band $100,000 a month and use his tribe’s influence to help the band get a casino license. In exchange, he wanted interest on the money loaned and a share of future profits. If his terms were met, Bouschor wrote, the Sault Tribe would “use its best efforts to assist in securing the Michigan Legislature’s....ratification or approval of the band’s....gaming license.” It took the three tribes two years to get their gaming agreements approved by the state Legislature. They maintain the delay was a direct result of Bouschor's intervention. You can reach Melvin Claxton at (313) 222-2154 or mclaxton@detnews.com. You can reach Mark Puls at (313) 222-2035 or mpuls@ detnews.com . Tribes use sovereignty to skirt legal judgments http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/1230skirt/1230skirt.htm U.S. courts have no jurisdiction over actions of Indian tribes Bob Eighmie / Associated Press Tribal law helped ousted Tampa Seminole Tribal Chairman James Billie avoid a sexual harassment trial. The case was thrown out of federal court. By Melvin Claxton and Mark Puls / The Detroit News To Tim Schwartz, it was a clear case of breach of contract. He had a $2.2 million deal to build 28 houses for Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. But two years after signing the agreement, with only 19 houses built, the tribe closed down the project and dissolved its housing authority, which had contracted with Schwartz. Schwartz, whose company Genesis Construction had collected only $1.5 million in payment, sued to recover $729,000 in losses. That’s when tribal leaders pulled their trump card — sovereign immunity.. As a sovereign nation, the tribe argued that it couldn’t be sued in federal or state court unless it agrees to such a suit or Congress authorizes it. So far, neither has happened. And even if the tribe is sued and loses in tribal court, it can’t be forced to pay the judgment. It is a common dilemma for businesses and individuals who try to sue tribes. Time and again, tribal leaders have used sovereign immunity to protect themselves from the consequences of their actions. The problem is not confined to Michigan. When the Oklahoma Kiowa Tribe acquired a small aircraft maintenance company in western Oklahoma last year, it entered into an agreement to pay the former owners $285,000. It never did. The non-Indian former owners sued. The Kiowas have argued that their sovereign immunity protects them from such lawsuits. The case is pending, but courts have traditionally ruled in favor of tribes when sovereign immunity is used as a defense. In many cases, federal and state courts have ruled they simply don’t have jurisdiction to hear cases brought against tribes or their leaders. That was the situation when Christine O’Donnell sued ousted Tampa Seminole Tribal Chairman James Billie in federal court for sexual harrassment. In May, the 39-year-old O’Donnell filed her suit charging that Billie got her pregnant and then forced her to have an abortion. She claims after the abortion he fired her, paying her off with $100,000 in tribal funds. The suit didn’t get far. In October, a federal judge kicked it out, claiming the court didn’t have jurisdiction over tribes in this matter. Billie, who has maintained his innocence, didn’t have to answer the charges in court. Tim Schwartz’s breach of contract lawsuit against the Grand Traverse tribe has survived in federal court longer than most. He has argued that because his contract was with the tribe-owned Grand Traverse Band Housing Authority, which at the time also operated under a similar name as a registered Michigan nonprofit corporation, the agreement is subject to state and federal rules. In addition, more than 80 percent of the money for the houses was being provided by the federal Housing and Urban Development agency, which Schwartz believes should afford him extra protection. The tribe’s lawyer, Bill Rastetter, says the tribe believes it is fully protected from the suit by its sovereignty, but is exploring a settlement with the contractor. Schwartz says that despite talk of a settlement, the tribe has insisted that no tribal money will be spent to pay him. “I think it is their position that if they get the money from HUD or someone else that I will get paid,” Schwartz said. “But I don’t see why I should have to wait for someone else to pay me when my contract is with the tribe. I was held to the contract and kept my end of the bargain. The tribe should do the same.” HUD officials have refused to comment on the case while it is under litigation. But Schwartz said HUD officials indicated their agency has no intention of getting involved in the dispute. For Schwartz, the situation has proven costly. He is being sued by one of his suppliers, who is asking for $170,000. And he already has more than $40,000 in attorney fees. “People tell me I am crazy to sue the tribe because I can’t win,” Schwartz said. “But I can’t accept the fact that they have the power not to honor a valid contract. Not in America.” Chippewas hire lobbyist, join trend http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/1230lobby/1230lobby.htm More tribal leaders turn to groups to gain access to, support from Washington, D.C. By Melvin Claxton and Mark Puls / The Detroit News The Washington lobbying firm of Preston and Gates has an impressive list of clients, including the software giant Microsoft, sugar refining behemoth Tate & Lyle North American Sugars and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, a 176-square-mile U.S territory in the Pacific. But in 1999, the firm’s top paying client was the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, an 8,300-member tribe that has built its fortune around light manufacturing and casinos. The Choctaws, who operate the Silver Star Resort & Casino in Neshoba County, Miss., paid the lobbying firm $3.1 million to represent their interests in the nation’s capital. That payment placed the tribe in an elite group of about 136 organizations and companies nationwide who spent more than $2 million a year on lobbyists.. It reflects a growing trend among Indian tribal leaders to use lobbyists to gain access to the halls of power in Washington. From 1997-99, about 90 American Indian tribes — including at least three in Michigan — paid lobbyists a total of more than $18.5 million. Many tribal leaders have already seen the benefits. Choctaw Chief Phillip Martin, who has held the position for 25 years, openly speaks of the connections lobbyists and contributions have helped him make. “I’ve made a lot of friends in Congress, and not just the Mississippi group, who are all 100 percent backers,” Phillips told the Associated Press in November. “Through lobbyists and other people, I’ve met a lot of congressmen and senators. A lot of them and their staffs have been down here to look us over. They’ve been very supportive. We don’t go up there and ask for every little thing we need. We go for the big ones.” Two months ago, the Choctaws were able to use their political and economic clout to head off attempts by the Mississippi state legislature to impose a 12 percent tax on their casino earnings. Mississippi’s 30 other non-Indian casinos pay this tax. Earlier this month, the Saginaw Chippewas hired the Choctaw’s chief lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, for $150,000 a month. Abramoff, who kept the Mississippi Choctaws as clients when he recently left Preston and Gates, is also being paid $440,000 to represent the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana. Abramoff, a close ally of House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, R-Texas, declined to comment on his work for the tribes other than to confirm the agreements with his Indian clients. His success in connecting the Choctaws to policymakers in Washington is something other tribes clearly willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to emulate. FACTS ABOUT TRIBES IN THE UNITED STATES {this page contains charts that give stats on lobbying expenditures, # of tribes, etc} http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/1230facts/1230facts.htm Board upholds election KBIC council results stand http://upgroup.com/gazette/loclnews.html By Steve Neavling Gazette Writer L’ANSE — The Keweenaw Bay Indian Community tribal council voted to uphold the results of a contested election Friday. Donald Chosa Jr., who placed fourth in the L’Anse District council election Dec. 15 and lost his bid for a seat, said the process to choose council candidates violated the tribal constitution. The council disagreed and said the election was lawful. Chosa, who is considering an appeal in tribal court, said the tribe violated the KBIC constitution by awarding seats to the top two vote-getters. The constitution, however, requires a majority of votes, he said. In this case, no candidate won a majority. Moreover, with six candidates running, it’s impossible for two candidates to win a majority. But that’s the way the tribe has always done it, said tribal chairman Bill Cardinal. “Popular ballot was used to to determine our council for 65 years,” he said. “All (the elections) abided by the constitution.” Cardinal points to two sections he says justify the election process. First, districts are entitled to make their own rules. Since both districts decided to give seats to the top two vote-getters, the process was lawful. It also stipulated that candidates are chosen by popular vote. And they were. But in another section a majority vote is required. “It’s a matter of interpretation,” said Cardinal, who admits the constitution isn’t perfect. Sault Chippewa tribal leadership stifles dissent Tribe's board curbs critics, closes forums, defends record in ads. By Melvin Claxton and Mark Puls / The Detroit News http://detnews.com/2001/metro/0112/12/a01-365039.htm SAULT STE. MARIE -- Sault Ste. Marie Chippewa tribal leaders, in response to a Nov. 11 Detroit News series of stories about their shortcomings, have begun a media campaign to defend their record and have taken steps to stifle dissent. The campaign -- which includes a series of meetings with constituents, media interviews and half-page newspaper display ads -- followed revelations in The News that the tribe's 12-member governing board and its chairman hid million-dollar deals from tribal members, gave themselves large retroactive salary increases and created high-paying second jobs in the tribe for fellow board members. Tribal chairman Bernard Bouschor has hosted meetings in each of the tribe's five voting districts. He has barred the media from these meetings and limited tribal members to three written questions. He has refused to take follow-up questions or allow any discussion, according to several tribal members. Sault member Patty Chambers said when she demanded that Bouschor answer her question about recent pay raises for himself and the tribe's governing board, the chairman threatened to have her arrested and removed from the meeting. She said a tribal police officer tried to escort her out of the building but backed down when several other members present said he would have to remove them, too. "My civil rights were clearly violated," Chambers said. "That building is on tribal land and Bouschor makes all the rules." Tribal spokesman John Hatch declined to comment on events at the closed meetings. The New's series showed how the power granted the 52-year-old Bouschor as the head of a tribal government far exceed that of most elected officials. With no independent court, police, auditors or justice department within the tribe to answer to, he has amassed substantial economic and political clout over all tribal operations, including the tribe's six casinos that generated $175 million in revenues last year. Bouschor has used this unfettered power to keep tribal members in the dark about his financial dealings, co-opted fellow board members and compensated himself well. Tribal leaders have cemented their hold on power by passing restrictive laws that prevent more than two-thirds of the tribe's membership from running for office. They also gave themselves a 33-percent annual raise in 2000 at the same time they were considering a cost-cutting package that included layoffs at the tribe's businesses. The raises were retroactive going back five years. Closed meetings Sault Chippewa leaders blocked the media and all but tribal members from attending their recent community forums. Scott Brand, a reporter for the Sault Ste. Marie Evening News, attempted to cover the meeting but wasn't allowed. He reported on the incident in the Evening News: "In an ironic twist, the Sault Tribe of Chippewa Indians Board of Directors unanimously chose to shut out the general public in a special open forum, billed as a "community gathering" Tuesday evening, as the body attempts to rebuild credibility in the wake of a Nov. 11 series of articles in The Detroit News," Brand wrote in a newspaper article. "The meeting, which had originally been billed as open to the public, was set to address these allegations. "In making his introductory comments, Chairman Bernard Bouschor said he would entertain a motion to exclude anyone in the audience who was not either a member of Unit I or a staff member with the Sault Tribe. Trustee Fred Paquin immediately made the motion which was promptly seconded by Trustee Martha Miller. The unanimous vote -- instituting the new exclusionary criteria -- effectively excluded a handful of people in attendance, including a reporter from The Evening News who had been assigned to cover the "community meeting." Newspaper ads Tribal leaders have responded to the articles by placing half-page ads in at least four Michigan newspapers, including The Detroit News. The ad campaign, with a tab of about $30,000 so far, isn't costing board members or Bouschor a penny of their own money. Sault Chippewa leaders are paying for the ads from the tribe's coffers, Hatch confirmed. That has angered tribal member Terry Barr, who criticized Bouschor for using tribal funds to pay for ads to defend his record. "It doesn't seem right," Barr said. "If he has caused problems for himself, he should pay for the ads. That's not what the tribal money is meant for. But this is typical of the way he handles the tribe's money." Sault Chippewa leaders say their intention is to get the truth out about their record and accomplishments. But some tribal members say the ads are a continuation of an effort by tribal leaders to mask problems with the way they run the tribe. "This is exactly what we have been telling people for years" said tribal member Tom Bruning. "Bouschor and board members use any means, including propaganda and misrepresentations, to stay in power. What The Detroit News wrote was the truth, but these guys can't handle it because they have always had control over the press." The ads and media campaign are not the first attempt by tribal leaders to blunt the impact of the newspaper's report. Even before the articles were published, Bouschor attempted to head off potential criticism of his leadership by using the tribe-owned newspaper to attack the then unpublished stories. You can reach Melvin Claxton at (313) 222-2154 or mclaxton@ detnews.com. You can reach Mark Puls at (313) 222-2035 or mpuls@detnews.com. {NOTE: The article referenced below may be found at: American Indian Rule: Sovereignty Abused http://detnews.com/specialreports/2001/chippewa/ The Editorial which appeared in the Detroit News in response to the above article, and referenced below is available here: [NativeNews] MI, Spokesman for Sault Tribe unhappy with negative press, Maureen, 12 Nov http://207.126.116.12/culture/native_news/m20253.html } Many thanks to Ron for the following: ----- Original Message ----- From "The Sault Tribe of Chippewa Indians" <patch@saulttribe.org To <ron_burling@softhome.net Sent Wednesday, November 21, 2001 428 PM Subject We are fighting back! An Open Letter to Sault Tribe Members From the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Dear Members, A three-page expose in the Nov. 11 edition of The Detroit News went to great lengths to discredit the elected leaders of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians. The News' attack started at the top of page one and continued on two full pages inside the first section of the paper. The four stories were generally misleading, incomplete, one-sided and in some instances, entirely false. Why? Because they relied primarily on allegations from people whom the News' own reporters admitted were unreliable. Several people portrayed as "credible sources" in the stories have been rejected by tribal members in three separate elections. Their charges have been investigated and dismissed as fiction and shams by state and federal authorities. The issues they raised, and the News reported, are not new. We have wrestled with these issues for years at council meetings and in other public forums. Some we've resolved; others remain topics of open debate. The people who continue to raise these issues and slander our government leaders have a clear ulterior motive to gain momentum for their planned 2002 election campaigns. Because the News based its reports on these people, the paper published highly sensationalized and fictional accounts that could only leave readers with negative impressions of our government. Earlier this week, the News published our response to the stories on the paper's editorial and opinion pages. While the stories covered nearly 100 inches of copy, our response was restricted to just 500 words. It is impossible for us to correct all errors in the stories in just 500 words. As a result, we must set the record straight now 1. The News erroneously charged that we routinely conceal financial information from members. To be fair and complete, the stories should have noted that our books are fully audited each year by two separate and independent accounting firms. These audits are provided to our members. Finally, the stories also should have reported that we publish and distribute to all members annual reports about our finances. 2. In stereotypical ignorance, the News deemed the Tribe's former chief judge and Vice-Chairman unqualified for his offices because he lacked a high school diploma. George Nolan escaped the poverty of his time by joining the military at a young age. Later he earned a diploma and graduated from a national tribal judicial college. He was appointed - by the U.S. Congress - to chair the National Commission on Native American Housing. He was recognized by Congress for his achievements. Mr. Nolan is a shining example of what our people can accomplish. Last year, he suffered a debilitating stroke. The News' attack on a man who can't defend himself was deplorable. 3. The News erroneously reported that Board members gave themselves a pay raise while "contemplating" employee layoffs. Board salaries were increased nine months before the current economic slowdown made layoffs a necessary consideration. To be fair and complete, the stories should have noted that Board salaries had not been adjusted in more than five years. 4. The News erroneously reported that Board members received $80,000 in back pay while considering employee layoffs. In fact, the average amount was about $22,000. And again, the compensation occurred nine full months before layoffs were even considered. To be fair and complete, the stories should have noted that Board members donated significant portions of their back pay to sponsor children's Christmas parties, endow scholarships, help establish a dialysis unit at a local hospital, and much more. 5. The News erroneously reported that members must have Medicare to obtain tribal healthcare services. In fact, all members can receive healthcare services at tribal clinics and health centers regardless of ability to pay. If members have health insurance, of course we will accept those payments because healthcare is our fastest growing expense. In 2000, our clinics recorded 47,000 patient visits. We know why the News excluded fair and complete information from the stories. Without it, the reports earned the most coveted spot on page one, normally reserved for the day's biggest scandal. We should have known we were in trouble when one of the News' reporters fell asleep while covering a publicly televised Board workshop. Most unfair, the News completely ignored the significant achievements of our government. We firmly believe that Native tribes must develop strong economies to regain their pride and independence. As a result, we aggressively pursue business opportunities. Not all projects succeed, but our winners exceed our failures. Today our assets exceed $300 million compared to about $1 million in 1985. They include tribal health clinics, community centers, businesses, lands and housing. Today we employ more than 5,000 people across Michigan, and Sault Tribe members make up 65 percent of the managers who run our businesses and government. The real story of the Sault Tribe is how it rose from poverty through its own initiative, created jobs for and expanded critical government services to our members. Nowhere did They report the fact that we have distributed more than $14 million from our businesses to our elders, college students and other members for medical expenses, funeral services and other needs. Though our government is different from what most Americans might expect, it is fair, it is honest, and it produces largely positive results. The News' expose properly belongs in the bad fiction section with the rest of the supermarket tabloids. For a broader view of how we feel about the stories, please visit our Web site at saulttribe.org. Chairman Bernard Bouschor and the Board of Directors Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians 
FORUM FOR POSTING NEWS ON ISSUES,
ACTION ALERTS, OPINIONS AND COMMENTS NO NAMES OR EMAIL ADDRESSES NEEDED TO POST
|
