January 2011 Referendums Recommendations

Ballots were sent out on January 7, I received mine on January 11th I live in Northern Michigan.

On the front of the ballots are the question, on the back a copy of the actual resolution.  Here is STG's recommendation on how to vote and why.

Romulus Casino Referendum

This referendum would repeal resolution 2010-249, Pursuit of Settlement of a Land Claim with Respect to Property in the Romulus, Michigan Metropolitan Area,” approved Nov. 9.  Voted by half of the board with a tie breaker by Chairman Joe McCoy..

This is a lazy board members resolution.  Basically their having non tribal members attempt to obtain approval through congress to settle the land claims and give us land in Romulus, build a casino and we get a portion of the profits.   While the board does  nothing, and if successful takes credit and us members do not get as much money as we should if we did this on our own or with an investor who does not want as much money.

This referendum is sneaky, its not actually a pursuit of land clam settlement.  It's in pursuit of a new casino with Ted Gazaros one of former Greektown partners.  If you think we got shammed on the Greektown deal, then why go back into business with one of the Greektown partners.  Essentially Ted is re investing the money he obtained from Sault Tribe (foolishly allowed by Bernard by his shady dealings) and wants to use us to make even more money!  Would you go into business with someone who screwed you over on a previous business deal?  Absolutely not.  Throw Bernard's name in on this deal and you know....stay away!  Why do we even have board members if they are not going to do their job?  Why aren't they working on congressional approval themselves.  Are they too incompetent?  Why do we have Lobbyists?

Do you approve or disapprove
STG recommendation: DISPROVE

Indian Energy LLC Referendum

One of the referenda would repeal resolution 2010-226 Equity Purchase of Energy Development Company Indian Energy LLC, approved Oct. 26.

I was originally for this.  After all I like green companies and with tribal members this is even better.   I don't think this is the right time for the Sault Tribe to make such an investment. 

Here are my reasons:

1.  Business in Mexico?  What assurances we have that we won't end up in a court battle if something bad happens.  And will we be allowed to sue?  What about all the drug wars they are having there?  I read somewhere that more than 30,000 people were killed since 2006 when the Mexican president announce war on drugs.  Not a good time to visit Mexico and certainly not a good time to invest there. And certainly not when certain board members want to defend they membership.

When you hear comments by board members like Cathy Abramson, who told the Soo Evening News recently she voted to give convicted felon and former Sault Tribe Chief of Police Fred Paquin $18,000 in back pay because of the Tribe’s recent losing streak in court...say what?  It makes me very concerned that we do not have a board who is willing to stick up and fight for our tribal  members when they are wronged.  So if we enter a business deal with another group, whose to say they won't defend our money and just give it away.  That is essentially Cathy's way of thinking.  Bad Bad Bad leadership Cathy.

2.  The amount we owe in interest on current loans. Will this return only be enough to pay our interest on our current loans?  We are essentially borrowing money to make an investment that will probably cost as much as the interest to make the loan in the first place.  Do board members watch Suze Orman show?  This is like taking money out of your 401K plan to pay off your credit cards.  You just don't do it.

3.  Half of the board who had previous political problems with some of the people representing Indian Energy I don't see this going anywhere positive.

4.  The elders seem to be overlooked.  Funerals are no longer paid for all tribal members, communications is poor.  We have some serious member service problems that need to be fixed.

5.  Indian Energy could have asked the members and perhaps for those members who have money give them an opportunity to invest.  Instead they began to talk to tribal members when they heard there was a referendum.

6.  Even though there was a referendum the board continued to send payments to Indian Energy.

Finally, if we had a board who could actually work together on something like this, we did not owe as much money, and there was  faster return on our investment, services and elder money was restored, then I would agree to this.  Also it would help if Bernard was not on the board.  As he is always try to find a loop hole and work against all of our tribal members best interest.

Do you approve or disapprove
STG recommendation: DISPROVE