Confusion in Replacing Joe McCoy as Chair at Sault Tribe

Here is the release from saulttribe.com:

There will not be an election to fill the seat left vacant by Sault Tribe Chairman Darwin “Joe” McCoy, who announced his immediate resignation as the elected leader Tribe on Tuesday, May 10.

“After further review of our election ordinance and upon advice from our legal team and Tribal Election Committee, it has been determined that an advisory election to fill the vacant chairperson seat is prohibited under our Tribal Law,” said Lana Causley, Vice Chairperson. “Chapter 10 of the Tribal Code is the Tribe’s Election Ordinance. The relevant provisions are sections 10.107 (Notice of Election) and 10.203 (Date of Election) that state: “The date of the (special) election shall not be earlier than ninety (90) days after the Election Announcement. No Special Advisory Election shall be held if the election date shall be later than six (6) months prior to the posting of the Election Announcement for the next general election.’”

Under this Election Ordinance, the Tribe cannot hold a Special Advisory Election because, assuming the Board posted the announcement for the Special Advisory Election May 24, 2011, the earliest the Special Advisory Election could be held under section 10.203 would be August 22, 2011 (August 22 is ninety days from May 24, 2011), which is less than six months from the posting of the Election Announcement for the next general election, which is July 27, 2011.  In order to hold a Special Advisory Election, the Election Announcement would have had to been posted 90 days prior to July 27, 2011, which has already passed.  According to section 10.107 “The Notice of Election shall be sent to all Adult Members (at least one notice per household) by means of letter, and shall also be publicized in the tribal newspaper, on the Tribe’s official website, and posted at all Tribal Offices on the last Friday in January in the year in which a general election occurs”, which is 2012 in this case.

The board did consider a resolution which would allow them to have a special advisory election by changing tribal law eliminating the 6 months prohibition, and the resolution failed on a vote of six to five. Therefore, under the Election Ordinance, the Board may not authorize a Special Advisory Election to assist it in appointing a replacement to fill the unexpired term of former Chairman McCoy. There will not be a Special non binding Advisory Election.

Causley said the entire board apologizes to tribal members and other audiences about any confusion caused by reports that an advisory election could be held to fill the position. It is the first time the Tribe has had a chairman resign near the end of his term.

“Our goal is to make sure we are following our Constitution and Tribal Laws, which clearly state that calling a special election in this instance would be prohibited,” said Causley. “On behalf of the entire Board, I apologize for any confusion caused surrounding this issue.” Causley also cautioned to be aware of any notices surrounding this and other Tribal issues to be certain they are coming from the Tribe and not an outside source.  Continue reading

GTB Appellate Court Issues Opinions in Election Dispute

The case is captioned Shomin v. Grand Traverse Band Election Board:

Shomin v. GTB Election Board

Shomin v. GTB Election Board — Intervention Motion

Sault Tribe Membership Votes Down Romulus Casino; Chairman McCoy Promises Future Proposals

Here is the tribe’s press release. An excerpt:

The other referendum sought to repeal Resolution 2010-249, “Pursuit of Settlement of a Land Claim with respect to property in the Romulus, Michigan Metropolitan Area.”

The resolution was approved November 9 by the Sault Tribe board of directors.

The voters decided, by a vote of 1,864 to 2,986, to not approve Resolution 2010-249, thereby overturning the board’s action.

And:

Continue reading

LVD Appellate Court Decision in Election Dispute

Here is the opinion in Pete v. Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians Tribal Council (Matha, J.):

Pete v. LVD Tribal Council

Muscogee Nation Council Challenge to Tribal Constitutional Amendment Thrown Out (without briefing)

A year ago, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Council, along with a tribal member co-plaintiff, sued the Muscogee Election Board to challenge the adoption of several amendments to the tribal constitution, suing in the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction. That Court held, over a dissent, that it was improper to bring suit under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction, and remanded the case to the district court. The district court judge recused, leaving a vacancy that was never filled by the Muscogee executive branch. The case languished, and now the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Supreme Court (3-2, with one Justice not participating) has dismissed the claims for lack of standing of the plaintiffs, apparently without notice to the parties or the benefit of briefing of either party on the questions of whether it could reassert jurisdiction or on the standing of the parties.

Here are the materials:

Muscogee Council & Robert Trepp Complaint // CV 09-211 Summons & Complaint signed

Supreme Court Order Remanding to DCT

District Court Judge Recusement

Supreme Court Order Dismissing Suit // Supreme Court Order Dismissing Suit complete opinion

Briefs in Cherokee Nation Redistricting Case

The opinion in Cowan-Watts v. Smith is here.

Here are the available briefs:

Cowan-Watts Opening Brief

Principal Chief Reply

Council Reply

Cherokee Nation Supreme Court Strikes Down Redistricting Plan

Here is the opinion in Cowan-Watts v. Smith: Cherokee Nation election case.

An excerpt:

The Court FINDS that the portion of the Legislative Act 22-10 purporting to create a district with a 22.8% deviation in representation is hereby determined to be unconstitutional. This Court further finds that the redistricting plan offered by Cowan-Watts is a constitutional alternative, but we do not adopt such measure because to do so would violate the Separation of Powers Doctrine. The final decision on redistricting is for the Cherokee Nation Tribal Council and they should act immediately to readdress the issue of redistricting by legislation.

LVD Sorta Back to Normal

From TV via Pechanga:

WATERSMEET — After nearly a week of courtrooms, protests, and imprisonment the Lac Vieux Desert Tribal Council plans to return to their reservation in Watersmeet.

According to their attorney, the nine-member council plans to return home and conduct business as usual until the tribal appellate court hears the case.

Monday dozens of council and tribal members protested outside of the Marquette Federal Courthouse saying they are political prisoners upholding the tribe’s constitution.

All nine members of the tribal council were jailed last week after refusing to swear in the new executive council due to alleged election problems.

GTB Election Challenge

Here: Mary Shomin v Election Board_Sep 2010.

LVD Appellate Decision(s) Ordering Release of LVD Council

Note the dates of the orders (Sept. 9 and Sept. 11), and the actual release of the council (Sept. 11): Order Granting Habeas Corpus.