LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
To the editor:
The hot topic of the Aug. 5 General
Council meeting was the wrongful spending
by the Tribal Council from Chinook Winds
Casino revenue. The Tribal Council will not
admit any wrongdoing. Instead, Tribal
Council chooses to risk the closure of
the casino.
If they had simply admitted a mistake
and cooperated with the National Indian
Gaming Commission, the notice of violations
and huge fines would not have happened.
The individual charges against Tribal Council
members are for personal use of net
revenues of the casino.
As of Aug. 4, 2000, the Tribe is being
fined up to $25,000 per violation per day. For
tribal members who are concerned about the
harmful impact on the tribe’s reputation and
tribal members, the response of Delores
Pigsley during the General Council meeting
was “If you can enroll in another tribe, do
so.” So her contemptuous advice is if you
don’t like it, get out!
The Tribal Council has blamed former
Tribal Council Chairman Pat Duncan for
“turning” them in. This is a blatant, libelous
lie and a very foolish approach to a
threatening matter that affects all tribal
members and the future of the tribe.
Tribal Council is complaining that NIGC
is violating our tribal sovereignty. They are
the ones who violated our tribal sovereignty
when they signed the last gaming compact
to give the state of Oregon everything they
wanted! Not only that, but Bonnie Petersen
told of how they sought the IRS to “approve”
Tribal Council “fringe benefits.”
Remember thn' so-called “election” we
just had - to vote on Tribal Council “fringe
benefits”?
The
tribal
members
overwhelmingly voted no! The final tally was
128 for and 427 against. Bonnie Petersen is
not happy with this outcome; she said we’ll
have to vote again! I guess next time the
ballot box will have to be stuffed! When she
claims that the IRS has approved their 401 k
retirement fund, she violates the Tribal
Constitution, tribal sovereignty, and Tribal
Council code of ethics.
The Tribal Constitution requires a
General Council vote on the wages of Tribal
Council. If Tribal Council wants “fringe
benefits,” they need the vote of the General
Council, not the IRS. By involving the IRS
in tribal government to veto the General
Council elective decision, they have thrown
away that part of tribal sovereignty.
To the editor:
In May 1998, at Tribal Council direction, the Ad-Hoc Constitution Committee
recommended three constitutional amendments for a General Council vote. Those
proposed amendments were: 1) fill a vacancy on Tribal Council with the runner-up; 2)
General Council authority to vote on tribal budgets; and 3) move elections to May.
At the last General Council meeting, a question was asked, “What happened to those
Ad-Hoc Constitution Committee recommendations?” The answer was, “We referred the
amendments to the bureau” - thereby Delores Pigsley confused the amendments we’ll be
voting on.
In fact, Tribal Council ignored the recommendations of the Constitution Committee
and submitted amendments to strip the membership of their rights. Except to move elections
to May, the amendments proposed by Tribal Council take away constitutional rights of
tribal members, especially the right to elect Tribal Council along with rights to individual due
process and equal protection of the laws.
Since July 1999, the constitutional amendments drafted by Tribal Council have
received barely any mention in the numerous tribal publications or subsequent General
Council meetings. In November 1999, the amendments were forwarded to the secretary
of the Interior to conduct the constitutional election.
In March 2000, Craig Dorsay and Delores Pigsley published the proposed
amendments for the first time, along with misleading and untruthful explanations, such as
stating the Council chairman has “veto authority” and the quorum reduction was for the
business of “the tribe” to continue during crisis on Tribal Council. There is no “veto authority”
and the General Council is the proper branch of government to continue as “the tribe”
during crisis. Additionally, the Tribal Council as the head of Tribal Court strips the
constitutional separation of powers and that element of tribal sovereignty.
The Department of the Interior commented on the proposed amendments, pointing
out problems such as “seating” Tribal Council members would strip the General Council of
its electoral powers. Plus, the Tribal Court rules and procedures would no longer be required
to comply with Siletz constitution^f'and federal laws.
Craig Dorsay’s part in this is unmistakable, through his contempt for tribal members
as evidenced by his statement, “There is a need to clean up the court rules to include non
tribal members as associate judges” (Tribal Council meeting in September 1998). If these
amendments pass, the Siletz Tribe becomes an official dictatorship with no recourse
for individuals.
Tribal Council replied to the Department of the Interior, directed the election to proceed,
and have kept that reply secret from tribal members. By proposing these amendments,
Tribal Council has violated the constitutional tribal purpose to “protect” individual rights. Do
not give up your rights! Please vote “no” on the constitutional amendments!
Cynthia Viles
Sovereignty does not exist without
members. Without honest elections, there is
no membership. It is all fake and trickery.
By Tribal Council enriching itself against the
authority of the General Council, they have
violated the tribal code of ethics. By making
these statements, Bonnie Petersen has
revealed herself to be a self-serving,
dishonest Tribal Council member!
Lori A. Johnson
5