Survey distributed to adult members regarding constitutional reform

Scott Csernyik

6/12/2002 12:00:00 AM

To help gather the membership's opinion on issues regarding possible changes to the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan Constitution, a community survey has been distributed to adult members representing all three districts.

The surveys were mailed to 2,175 adult members on June 3. In an open letter to the membership dated May 31, Chief Maynard Kahgegab Jr. urged members to complete the survey before a June 17 deadline.

Members who return the completed survey will be automatically entered in a drawing for a Harley-Davidson motorcycle.

"In an effort to receive feedback from the Tribal membership, our Saginaw Chippewa Tribal Council is providing a community survey regarding possible changes to our Tribal Constitution," stated Kahgegab. "The survey can also be found on our Tribal website www.sagchip.org."

U.S. District Judge David M. Lawson of the Eastern District of Michigan's Northern Division granted plaintiff Gloria King's motion for summary judgement on Aug. 29. King is a District 1 Tribal member and acting spokesperson for the proposed constitutional changes originally initiated about five years ago. The lawsuit named Gail Norton, secretary of the Interior and the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs as defendants.

In his opinion, Lawson chastised the Bureau of Indian Affairs for an "abuse of discretion" on how it calculated the requisite number of valid signatures initiating the petitioning process to amend the Tribal Constitution.

The ruling overturned a Sept. 22, 1999 decision by the BIA over the number of necessary signatures needed to initiate the possible constitutional reform. Under federal law, a vote on a Tribal Constitution can be held if petitioners collect the signatures of at least one-third of the Tribe's eligible voters.

Proponents of a new constitution say this reform is necessary to solve membership problems and create a balance of power. Opponents to the more comprehensive amendments originally proposed in the King v. Norton lawsuit claim the document is loaded with inherent legal problems and would dramatically change Tribal membership.

The nine-page survey, appears to reflect a compromise position which focuses on a smaller number of possible amendments. The survey also included an introduction about why the membership's opinions were being solicited.

"This spring the Tribal Council initiated a series of discussions with the King plaintiffs to explore whether they would be willing to submit a different set of proposed changes (and fewer changes) to the existing constitution," Kahgegab also stated. "While that process is not complete, these discussions have progressed to the point that the council can now seek the community's views on the primary changes which may be presented for your vote in the pending secretarial election, with BIA approval.

"The council's discussions with the King plaintiffs have been cooperative and productive. They were undertaken with the joint objective of exploring whether long-term improvements in the Tribal government and long-term solutions as regards (to) Tribal membership issues could be achieved through constitutional amendments."

Adult members were asked "yes" or "no" to 30 questions covering myriad topics from four-year staggered terms to adding a membership "bill of rights."

The survey also asked if members would support the following:

-Create an independent judiciary as a separate branch of the Tribal government;

-Strengthen the Tribe's civil jurisdiction over non-Indians and remove unnecessary references to federal law; and

-Increase the Tribal Council to 16 based on 10 representatives for District 1, two for District 2 (Saganing) and four positions for District 3 (At-Large).

Other questions concerned the enrollment process, enrollment review, membership and proof of blood quantum.

"We say �miigwetch' for your input as we continue working together for our future," concluded Kahgegab.