Image provided by: University of California, Berkeley, Ethnic Studies Library; Berkeley, CA
About Siletz news / (Siletz, OR) 199?-current | View Entire Issue (March 1, 1998)
S ile tz News Chairman’s Report Page2 at the point at which they would normally count the ballots ón March 23, 1998, shall instead proceed by shredding thè ballots individually one at a time without counting them and without inspecting their contents until all ballots are transformed into shredded paper."/ The decision in this matter (TC 98-02) is on appeal, as well as the other related cases (TC 98-01 and TC 98-03). I feel very strongly that my actions were solely motivated by my commitment to assuring Tribal that tiie Constitution is upheld and that all tribal There have been many events that haves/ members are treated fairly. The Tribal Council is occurred since I was elected Chairman. My first currently reviewing the Election Ordinance , to statement as your Chairman was that I will incorporate detailed procedures for recall continue to be fair in all my decisions. When I elections. In the near future, you will be sent the took my oath of office, I vowed to uphold the draft ordinance for comments. If you would like Constitution and to protect the rights of all tribal further information regarding the court cases, members. For the past year, as my voting record please call me. will show, I have always supported what I feel is Siletz's new legal counsel deals only with in the best interest of our Tribe and our Indian tribes, has nationwide experience membership. ¿ lU m irm cm s R e p o r t S H PAT DUNCAN Important ruling in Tribal Court affects recall petitions and constitutional ordinances. Many of you have wondered why you have not received this newsletter until now. I had asked Michelle Batten to wait until there were decisions in Tribal Court on the recall election so that you could get complete information on the issue. This is the first time in nineteen years that the Siletz Tribe has been faced with holding a recall election. A recall election is, by its very nature, a very politically divisive process. The Tribal Council felt that it was extremely important that these recall elections be held in strict adherence to the Siletz Tribe's Constitution. Against the Tribal Council's efforts to enact procedures within a recall ordinance, which is mandated by the Constitution (Article VII, Section 5) but has never been enacted, the Election Board sent out ballots and called for a recall election. Article VII, Section 3 clearly delegates the authority to call a recall election to the Tribal Council. As a neutral party and as your Chairman charged with protecting the rights of all tribal members, I requested to view tire petitions to ascertain whether any of the Election Board members signed the petitions and to determine if the Election Board had indeed verified the signatures of the petitions. Since the Election Board denied m y request, I petitioned the Tribal Court. During the hearing held on March 16, it was determined that at least two of the Election Board members signed thè petitions, which I feel was a definite conflict of interest and unfair to the subjects of the recall petitions and those who had signed the petitions. During the hearing, if was also determined that the Election Board did not verify the minimum number of signatures required for a recall election to be held. On March 23, 1998 Judge Andrew Viles ruled that the Respondent (Siletz Election Board) "conduct the election scheduled for March 23, 1998, to the point of counting the ballots," and'"that Respondent, once they arrive with native issues. On March 8,1998 a resolution was passed to terminate the tribal attorney contract with Craig Dorsay. I voted in favor of this for several reasons. Our Tribe has so many diverse issues that require legal advice that it is impossible for one attorney to have the expertise in all areas or the time to devote in assuring that all areas are reviewed in a timely manner. Another major reason, I felt, was that past contracts did not fully protect oùr Tribe's best interests. The most damaging * cóntract was the Comstock' consulting agreement which resulted in our Tribe agreeing to a settlement fee of $3,750,000 With an interest accrual of $372,009 as of February 22, 1998; this obligation could have been avoided if the contract had the appropriate legal provisions in place. For these reasons, I feel very strongly that we need the diverse expertise available in a large firm. I fully support retaining Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker, a well-established law firm specializing in federal Indian law. We now have the legal representation to meet the needs of our Tribe in all areas. And to allay any concerns, the new legal counsel is paid out of the same approved budget as was Craig Dorsay. Established in 1982, Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker provides a full range of legal services to Indian tribes and Indian or Alaska Native organizations throughout the United States, including lobbying, litigation, administrative agency representation and general counsel services. The firm has 17 attorneys and three legislative specialists in three offices Portland, Oregon; Washington, D.C., and Norman, Oklahoma. Taking the lead in representing the Tribe are the attorneys based in Portland: Geoffrey Strommer, who became a partner in 1997, joined the Portland office in 1992, and is nowrits resident partner. He represents Indian clients on a wide range of issues, specializing in the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. His Work under that Act includes negotiating contracts, compacts, and annual funding agreements with the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service, and bringing administrative appeals. In addition to Self-Determination issues, Mr. Strommer assists tribes on a variety of legal matters, including drafting and revising constitutions, bylaws and ordinances, and negotiating contracts with private parties. Mr. Strommer received his J.D. degree from the Georgetown University Law Center in 1990, and his B.A. degree from the University of California, Berkeley (with distinction) .in 1986. He is a member of the Arizona and Ofegon bars, the Federal Bar Association and the Executive Committee of the Oregon State Bar Indian Law Section. He is also an adjunct professor of law at Northwestern School of Law where he co teaches a course on federal Indian law. Robert Miller, an enrolled member of the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, joined the firm in 1995 following a clerkship with Judge O'Scannlain of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and three years practicing commercial law. He represents clients in federal court litigation and before federal administrative agencies. Mr. Miller is an adjunct professor and has taught Indian law courses at Northwestern School of Law and at various Oregon colleges sincè 1993. He is ón the Board of the National Indian Child Welfare Association and is the current Chair of the Oregon State Bar In d ian L aw S ection. He h as published num erous articles on Indian law issues in journals, bar journals and continuing legal educational materials. Mr. Miller graduated in 1991 magna cum laude from Northwestern School of Law, Lewis & Clark College. He received his B.S. degree from Eastern Oregon State College in 1988. He is a member of the Oregon bar. Tohn Lowndes joined the firm in 1994. Since passage of the Tribal Self-Governance Act in 1994, he has been involved in drafting and negotiating proposed regulations for the imple mentation of the Self-Governance program. He is a member of the technical subcommittee for the Joint Tribal/BIA Tribal Shares Process Workgroup to establish an equitable process for determining the availability, of programs and funds under thè ISDEAA. He is the author of the article, "W hen History Outweighs Law: Extinguishment of Abenaki Aboriginal Title," Buffalo Law Review, voi. 42. no. 1 (1994). Mr. Lowndes received his J.D. (magna cum laude) from the Washington College of Law, American University, in 1994. He received his B.A. from Florida State University in 1988, and his M.A. from the University of Rorida in 1991. He is a member o fth e District of Columbia, Oregon and Florida bars.
