New efforts have evolved among a small group of Sault Tribe members to push the enactment of the 'New' Constitution. The end process, originally under the control of the Sault Tribe Board of Directors, although some would likely tell you different, is now in the hands of the Sault Tribe members, as it should have been from the beginning.
A new Facebook account created by Nathan Wright, called the "Sault Tribe Guide", has gathered together some key players who have vowed to review both the old and new constitutions and push the project along, regardless of the displeasure of some of the Sault Tribe board members.
It's long overdue that the members have a say in the way the Sault Tribe operates. One of the biggest changes that could have made a difference and prevented some of the disasters that the tribe has faced over the years is the Separation of Powers. This change will distribute the hold the board has over the entire tribe into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial, which will effectively break up the control the current board has over the judicial system and will take them away from the operative side of tribal business. This does leave the board to handle legislative issues.
Other policy changes will be necessary to make it all work. Human Resources will no longer be under the thumb of the board and employees may be less inclined to be intimidated by the powers that be. The Board of Directors may cease to exist in the form it does now. New educational requirements may be in place for those who are selected to become part of the three branches of government.
At any rate, this group is seeking your input to review the new constitution since it should reflect the fundamental needs of the tribe as a whole. If you prefer not to become a part of the Facebook Sault Tribe Guide but would rather contribute anonymously, than you can do so here. I will be posting any meetings, news or changes we hope to implement.
Keep in mind that this isn't a weak effort but one that we are 100% confident that we, as a tribe, will successfully change directions.....join us in being part of the Winds of Change.
15 comments:
We have 3 board members on STG, one regularly contributes, and provides honest straight forward answers. Anyone can join, and members who are joined can automatically invite others. If someone does not want to use their name, they can ask someone on the STG to raise the question. I personally won't reveal someones name if they want me to pose a question. Of course, this is not a Q and A site. It's a site about ideas and providing feed back to many issues. From pow wows to the new constitution. I think there is a lot of humour on there as well. Musciian artist contribute songs, others contribute their articles they send out via their own personal e-mail list. We appreciate everyone. Miigwetch.
Booshino Family teaches tribe about constitution vulnerabilities.
There have been several items that were controlled by a small majority.
If you change the voting requirement from majority to "unanimous", it would reduce the Booshino Family's muscle.
The rules of referendum and replacement of a Board member or chairman also need to be addressed.
The Booshino syndicate has shown us that a handful of money suckin thugs can control the interest of 40,000
Let's learn from them.
Shore up the proposed constitution so that it won't give them continued opportunities
Question: If the Sualt Tribe gets a new Constitution would the Mackinac Band be allowed to go free? will they be given their millions in 1997 trust funds back?
Nathan,
Either you truly do not get it, or you just do not want to. Asking questions is not and has never been the issue. Being part of a group that is now going to launch a grass roots effort to enact the new constitution is. Are you really so naieve that you cannot understand that association with this group would threaten those on the board ? Can you truly not understand that Cathy A is little more than a snake in sheep's clothing and she is taking note of everyone on that site ? Get real Nathan. This is not some friendly little social club where we can all sit in a circle and hold hands, there are many in power in the Tribe who are absolute cutthroats.
I think that the person who is writing with all the warnings about Nathans' group is a board member or one of the ones who suck up to the board. Could be a threat against those on the STG. That's why we need the new constitution.
100% behind the group trying to enact the new constitution. it will be a great day when tribal members no longer have to sign anonymous to their letters. i personally do not have nor desire a face book account so do appreciate the attempt to keep people such as myself in the loop. thanks and good luck.
Not at all. It is not a Board member writing against Nathan's group. The PROBLEM with Nathan's group is that he wants everyone to expose themselves and that leaves many people vulnerable to Board retaliation. Nathan has some misguided idea that everyone can sit around in a circle and hold hands and be nicey nicey to each other. He is not operating in the real world. Further, he is not sophisticated enough in the real tactics of the board if he thinks he can openly discuss plans of the members to force the board to implement the new constitution. Nathan is running a social group that may serve some need, but it is not the medium for real change.
It does not make sense to move HR out from under the Board. No organization gives their HR Dept. such autonomy. The problem is the Board has no rules or procedures. They need to follow some procedures on how they operate that prohibits them from intruding and micromanaging any individuals or departments. And they need to not be in any appeals process. They should not be involved at all in the day to day operations of the tribe. For one thing, none of them are qualified.
And STG continues to grow and all our members continue to discuss a variety of issues. And anyone can still join and anyone can read and comment or just read. A lie is a sprint, the truth will run forever.
Nathan,
Just an observation here, but, I recall seeing several messages from you to Charles Forgrave where you were accusing him of trying to take over your site. Not only is Charles an elder and a long term writer who really deserved more respect than you gave him, but, you have been here on Lynne's site many times advertising and recruiting members for your facebook group. Now one could easily think that you are trying to take over her site.....rather hypocritical now wouldn't you say ? I will never join your facebook group , not after reading the rude and hostile way you treated Charles. Lynne if for some reason you decide not to post this would you please at least send it on to Nathan ? Thank you.
I like the idea of the pages linking....shared information. It's possible you missed some of the discussion on the STG because some felt Charles was disrespectful. Some may have thought I was disrespectful when I was offended by a title Charles used for an article.
I am friends with both and by no means are any of us perfect. I am not in competition with Nathan over who gets the most visits because we are also friends. I feel we are providing a service to the members by bringing them together and giving them space to share ideas and opinions.
I just want to say that I see things differently and that I find Nathan to be respectful of others, including Charles. Charles is free to disagree with Nathan and vice versa. Because someone has a disagreement, it does not and should not make them enemies. Marriages would cease to exist if disagreements were followed by naming the other an enemy.
Is there some way you can tell who writes some of the comments because it sure sounds like Forgraves is having a jealousy attack. Whats with the long time writer stuff? He acts like he owns the title and doesn't want to share it. I follow Lynne's blog all the time and have noticed the odd comments that insult Nathan and build up Forgraves and after awhile I can't help but think that Forgraves is the one complaining about Nathan and seems like he is trying to stir up some trouble between 2 other writers. Hey Charlie, I know you have a blog and I like you're writing most of the time but this does not say much for your character. I am on the STG too and Nathan and Lynne seem to be fine sharing the spotlight and information but you seem to have a problem with it.You are losing my respect if your'e the one doing all the Nathan complaining and I think it is you.
Point of information regarding taking HR out from under the boards control. If there were a separation of powers, I believe that HR would fall under the executive branch whereas the board would be under the legislative branch. The elected board should have zero to do with the election process or who serves on that committee since it is a clear conflict of interest. It should also have zero to do with HR because of the current fear employees already have because of past demonstrated retaliation.
Personally, I would like to see an Elder council would report info back and forth between the branches of government and the people of the tribe.
This is absolutley not Charles writing about Nathan's group. I reviewed a several email interchange between Charles and Nathan and Nathan was absolutely immature, disrespectful and rude. Yes perhaps at times Charles may offend with his writing, he has a unique style. But he has worked hard at keeping us informed for many years and at many times when no one else would dare come forward. Personally I think itis Nathan who got jealous because Charles and Lynne were the primary spokespeople out here. So, he opens us his little club and in his controlling way wants a captive audience. But hey, what the heck. I really do not care and I will not address the issue again.
Does anyone know why the new constitution has never been implemented ? I recall when Hoffman was on the board he kept saying there were some problems with it. Were the problems that the Board would lose some of it's iron clad control ? I think members should start picketing outside Admin and should get some petitions signed and submitted. I know the board does not have to act on a petition but they may realize that the members mean business.
Post a Comment