|
The turmoil in the Sipayik tribal government is continuing, with efforts to recall the vice chief and a tribal councillor, as well as allegations of bullying and intimidation by supporters of the chief. Reasons for the tribal council's decision last month to suspend Chief Fred Moore III from his administrative duties have now been outlined and include the allegation of using tribal government funds for personal gain. Moore denies the charges, though, and says the council is violating the Sipayik Constitution.
The recent petitions to recall Vice Chief Vera Francis, who is carrying out the duties of the chief following his suspension, and tribal councillor Madonna Soctomah appear to have failed for lack of a sufficient number of valid signatures, according to the tribal clerk's certification of the petitions. The petition to recall Francis was submitted by Dorothy Clement on November 2 with 221 signatures. However, many were determined to be ineligible for a number of reasons, and only 132 signatures were certified as valid. Based on the number of Sipayik voters in the last gubernatorial election, 193 signatures are needed for a recall petition to result in the calling of a special recall election.
Then on November 9 the petition to recall Soctomah was submitted by Brenda Moore-Mitchell with 203 signatures. Only 137 were determined to be valid, though, by the tribal clerk. A number of petition signers -- 25 on Soctomah's and 11 on Francis' -- asked that their names be removed from the petitions after they had signed them. Other reasons that signatures were determined to be ineligible included that the signer did not vote in the last gubernatorial election or lives outside the Pleasant Point service area.
However, Moore says that there will be a special election to recall both Francis and Soctomah "and if any other councillors continue to violate the constitution they will be recalled as well."
According to Moore, the tribal clerk does not have the authority to determine which signatures are valid. He says he is bringing a case in tribal court to overturn the action by the four councillors who voted to suspend him, since he says the action violates the constitution.
Neither petition listed a reason for recall, other than citing the section of the Sipayik Constitution that outlines the recall process. "What are the charges we are responsible for that we should be recalled under?" asks Soctomah. "That's laughable."
According to the constitution, a recall election must be held if a petition is presented that is signed by at least 50% of the number of persons voting at the last Pleasant Point gubernatorial election. A legal opinion from tribal government attorney Craig Francis that was sought last December when another petition to recall Francis was presented states that if an individual is not on the approved voters' list and did not vote in the last gubernatorial election, their signature should be declared ineligible.
Soctomah believes that the signature verification process has flaws, with some people not completing the petition form in the manner required and some signing by proxy. Among the people who signed the petitions are Chief Moore and councillor Darren Paul, and Soctomah believes that elected officials should not be signing petitions that are to be considered by the tribal council.
Reasons for suspension
On September 11 Chief Moore had indefinitely suspended Vice Chief Francis from her executive duties and responsibilities because she had been summonsed for three misdemeanor offenses that stemmed from a drunk driving charge against another tribal member. Then on September 22 four councillors -- Soctomah, Philip Farrell Jr., Marla Dana and John Dana -- issued a statement that the vice chief's suspension was executed without constitutional authority. They nullified the suspension and recognized the full administrative authority of Francis as vice chief. On October 5 the four councillors voted to indefinitely suspend Moore from his administrative duties and responsibilities.
Concerning the reasons for the chief's suspension, Soctomah says that there were expenditures of tribal government funds by Moore that benefited him and his friends and that were not authorized by the tribal council. Among those expenditures was $33,463 to Native Harvest LLC, which is Moore's company, for his writing of a tribal fisheries management plan. According to Soctomah, the council had not approved that payment. Moore also was paid $8,771 for his work on the tribal government's ethics policy and sold his truck to the tribal government for $7,500, even though there is a lien on the truck. The tribal government also made numerous payments to Moore for travel expenses that were not authorized by the tribal council, Soctomah alleges.
The Sipayik Constitution states, "No person exercising the authority of the office of Governor shall use, or allow another to use, that authority for personal gain, or for the personal benefit of any member of the Governor and Council."
Moore, though, says that he was asked by the Joint Tribal Council to write the fisheries plan, but he initially refused. The council then received several proposals and again asked Moore to write the plan. Since tribal members were waiting to go elver fishing, he agreed. He says that he billed the tribe for his work months before he was elected as chief. A memo from the tribal attorney that was written for the vice chief says that he is owed the money for writing the plan. He asks why he would accept an unauthorized expenditure, since all of the tribal government's expenses are audited.
Moore says that Soctomah's statements that the payments were not approved by the council are hard to accept, since she was not on the council when they were made and the tribal council asked him to write the fisheries plan. "This person has demonstrated a depraved indifference to the rights of tribal members," he says. "The outlandish allegations being made are only being done to serve her political interests."
Soctomah also says that the tribal government spent over $50,000 on this year's Indian Day celebration, which was not authorized by the council. The funds were used in part to pay for other chiefs to come to Sipayik.
In addition, she says that Moore hired about 25 people in the tribal government, including a tribal manager and finance director, without council approval. Moore agrees that the people were hired but there was council approval. Soctomah also maintains that Moore had not been providing information to the council, including on the tribal government's budget. However, Moore says a hearing was held on the proposed budget and it was presented to the tribal council, which voted not to approve it. However, he points out that the constitution states that the chief and council "shall each year authorize the expenditure of available funds by an annual budget." He argues, then, that the council is in violation of the constitution by not approving the budget.
Moore says that the four tribal councillors have committed numerous violations of the constitution and says that Soctomah does not speak for the tribal council. "Madonna's opinions are exactly that -- her opinions." Noting that there is "an annual financial meeting at which all transactions are made available," he says his administration has been transparent in its actions.
Soctomah also alleges that Moore "manipulated the relocation" of the tribal government's employees "for his own purposes," which disrupted the employees and the tribal government's work flow. The tribal government has been moving out of the current tribal office building to other locations so that the building can be demolished to provide space for a new school building.
Soctomah also states that minutes of tribal council meetings during the past year have not been completed until just recently and have not been available to the public.
After the council's vote to suspend Moore, the locks on the housing authority office building that had been used by the chief for his office were changed. According to Soctomah, the tribal government's finance office in that building was broken into recently by Moore and others. Also, she alleges that efforts are being made to intimidate and bully those working at that office building, which also houses the elderly meal site. She says some elderly are now afraid to go to the site for their meals.
Moore, though, says that 85 people attended an October 31 meeting that he called for the tribal council, although the four councillors opposing him did not attend, and the people "directed me to restore the tribal government by any and all means necessary and to occupy my office." He says that the councillors have not shown up for three meetings now. He also states that the October 5 council meeting at which he was suspended had been cancelled by him, since a tribal member had passed away and traditionally a four-day mourning period is observed.
Soctomah says that Moore "had a golden opportunity when the tribal members elected him to the position of chief to gather his people and move the tribe ahead by working with everybody involved. He chose not to do that." Concerning the current turmoil in tribal government, she says, "What is going on is where he chose to spend his efforts. He failed to bring his people together. That's where the crime is. He chose to manipulate resources for his self gain. That's where the shame is. That's where the hurt is. That's what brings us down to our knees and brings tears. He held the hope and faith of the people, and he let us all down."
Moore, though, states, "Only one side is fighting -- and they are violating every law on the books." |
