User login |
Brenda Bremner and Tina Retasket Conspired to Violate Election LawTina Retasket and Brenda Bremner As a consequence of my recent presentation at the General Council Meeting, there was a Special Tribal Council Meeting today to consider appointments to the Election Board. The Tribal Council voted to re-appoint Kurtis Barker and Tracey Worman to the Election Board, as well as Felicia Carmona. I gave the following presentation to the Tribal Council, just before they voted: I'm here today to address growing ethical problems with the Election Board. I intend to explain why our General Manager Brenda Bremner is ethically unfit to recommend appointments to the Election Board and why Kurtis Barker and Tracey Worman are unfit to serve. In late 2007 Brenda Bremner and Tina Retasket conspired to break our elections laws, apparently with the tacit approval of the Tribal Council. The Election ordinance states: “Election Board members shall each serve for one year from the date of appointment and may be removed only for cause.” And it says that no person shall be appointed who “plans to be a candidate or who has an immediate family member or resident of the household who plans to be candidate in any election during his or her term of service.” This was our law in 2007 and it remains our law today. The ordinance clearly states that no person shall be appointed who plans to be a candidate for tribal office in ANY election during their term, and it clearly defines that term as one year. But Brenda Bremner appointed Tina Retasket to the Election Board in October 2007, and Tina accepted that appointment, even though both knew very well that Tina planned to run for Tribal Council just two months later. I spoke with Brenda Bremner two days ago, on November 6th. She told me that Tina had only been appointed to the Election Board for the duration of the referendum election which was held on December 8th, 2007. Brenda told me that she gave Tribal Council a memo which explained that Tina would only serve on the Election Board through the referendum because Tina planned to run for Tribal Council. Our Constitution says that Election Board members must serve set terms of office and our Election Ordinance defines that term as one year. There is nothing in our laws that authorizes Brenda to redefine that term of office. So even though Brenda sought to create a term tailor-made to accommodate Tina's campaign for Tribal Council, Tina's term was legally one year, a year in which both Tina and Brenda knew perfectly well that Tina would run for Tribal Council. Again, the Election Ordinance clearly states that no person shall be appointed who plans to be a candidate in ANY election during their term of office. Brenda and Tina both knew the law. But they violated the law in order to get Tina on the Election Board and still accommodate Tina's campaign for Tribal Council. This is punishable by up to 6 months in prison or a fine of up to $5000, or both. Tina was sitting on the Election Board at a time when it was already engaged in it's duties supervising the 2008 General Election - the very election in which Tina planned to run. Our campaign for that election began on November 3rd, 2007, at the General Council Meeting. Robert Kentta, Lorraine Butler, Cynthia Farlow, Lisa Brown, Eva Clayton and I declared our candidacies that day. Tina Retasket did not declare her candidacy then because she was still on the Election Board. And Tina was still on the Election Board a month later - a full month into the campaign for Tribal Council. Obviously it is unethical for a candidate to sit on the Election Board during a campaign in which she intends to run. That's why we have laws against it. The result was that Tina won a seat on the Tribal Council, edging out Lisa Brown by only 29 votes. Of course, Lisa Brown did not have the advantage of sitting on the Election Board during the campaign. The ethical problems with Brenda's appointment of Tina run much deeper. Earlier that same year Tina had departed from the Election Board due to an ethical scandal. When we spoke two days ago, Brenda told me that she, herself, had asked Tina for her resignation at that time, and that Tina had agreed. I asked why Brenda had called for Tina's resignation. Brenda said: “There was the appearance of a conflict because she wrote a letter and sent it out “ Brenda also said that the letter had endorsed certain candidates. We know that those ”certain candidates”were in fact Tribal Chairman Dee Pigsley and Vice-Chairman Bud Lane. Brenda told me Tina wrote and sent out the letter. This the same thing Chairman Dee Pigsley told the General Council in February 2007, although Dee failed to name Tina and she failed to disclose that Tina had been campaigning for Dee Pigsley and Bud Lane in the letter. Brenda told me that she did not know if Tina had actually done anything unethical, but that Brenda had asked Tina to resign because of the appearance of unethical conduct. I hardly know what to say about someone who claims not to know if it is unethical for an Election Board member to be campaigning for the Tribal Chairman and Vice-Chairman during an election she is supposed to be supervising fairly. I can only say that such a demonstrated lack of an ethical compass should disqualify Brenda Bremner from any further involvement in our election process. Given all of this, the Tribal Council should never again consider her recommendations for Election Board appointments. Today Brenda is recommending that Kurtis Barker and Tracy Worman be re-appointed. I will now present further reasons why these two individuals are unfit to serve. I spoke with Tracey recently. I was astonished to hear her say that Brenda oversees the Election Board. She repeated this several times. She told me, for instance, that if the Election Board had an issue with a candidate's statement they would first contact the candidate to try to clear up any problems, then they would consult Brenda and then the Tribal Council if necessary. I asked another question about Election Board policy and Tracey told me she would have to ask Brenda, and that Brenda was away for a few days. The problem here is that Brenda has no legitimate authority whatsoever over Election Board policies and decisions. It is an egregious violation of fair election practices for Brenda to be running our Election Board. I asked Jessie Davis about this and she told me “it would not be kosher” for Brenda to be overseeing the Election Board on such matters. Lillie Butler told me much the same thing. But at the General Council meeting last week, right in front of the Tribal Council, Tracey confirmed that the Election Board would consult with Brenda first on matters of election policy. They don't see anything wrong with that. On page 4 of the November issue of Siletz News there is an article by Kurtis Barker which states: "The Election Board now will be responsible for accepting and approving all candidate's statements. We have chosen to adopt many of the rules that govern statements in Siletz News. Statements will be limited to 450 words and not contain any personal attacks. One photo (optional) can be accepted with statements. Candidate's statements cannot be posted on Tribal property." On the other hand, the Election Ordinance clearly says that the Election Board may propose rules regarding candidates statements, but the Tribal Council must review and approve such rules. Tribal Council members Lillie Butler and Jessie Davis have both confirmed to me that the Tribal Council has not reviewed or approved the rules that Kurtis has attempted to impose on candidates. This article was of course published in our tribal newspaper by Brenda . It is unlawful for the Election Board to impose rules that have not been reviewed and adopted by the Tribal Council. And it is utterly inappropriate for Brenda to be publishing such illegal pronouncements. But it's hardly surprising that an Election Board which thinks it is supervised by Brenda is trying to impose the rules of the newspaper which Brenda runs, rules which she has used to reject or heavily censor my letters when I've criticized the Tribal Council. Both Kurtis and Tracey confirmed to me that suppressing criticism of the Tribal Council was indeed a purpose of the new rules. Kurtis Barker put it most bluntly when he said: “We want articles that state why you want to be on Tribal Council, not like an attack mode where you candidates can blame the Tribal Council for what's going on. “ Brenda 's policy of political censorship of letters to the Siletz News is being extended into our election process with this power grab to control candidates' statements. Brenda is clearly orchestrating our newspaper and our Election Board in concert to muzzle political opponents of the Tribal Council. And Kurtis and Tracey have attempted to impose these rules unilaterally, without the approval of the Tribal Council, which our law requires. For these reasons, Kurtis Barker and Tracey Worman are unfit to serve on the Election Board. Tribal Council should not re-appoint them. If you do re-appoint these two to the Election Board, I want to be put on the agenda for the next Tribal Council meeting where I will present additional evidence of more violations of the election ordinance by Brenda Bremner, Tracey Worman, and Kurtis Barker. Also, expect to see me back in Siletz on election day explaining to the General Council why these two are unfit to serve on the Election Board and how Brenda Bremner is using them to corrupt our election process. Lynette Warren note:
Even though Brenda told me this just two days ago on the phone, Brenda now denies knowing that Tina planned to be a candidate at the time of Tina's nomination to the Election Board in October 2007. At this afternoon's Special Tribal Council Meeting, Tina also wouldn't admit that she planned to run for Tribal Council during the time she served on the Election Board for the pay raise referendum last year.
|