Here are a couple of interesting stories about a fellow tribe up north. It would be interesting to know what the whole story is. I can use my imagination, though.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/northwest/story/745137.html
http://www.thenewstribune.com/opinion/story/746627.html
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Monday, May 25, 2009
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Original Intent
We had another one of those "meetings" today. There was an effort to delay it, which included me. At this point I think any decision that has the potential to go down to a single Council vote might as well have all nine of us there. Not sure that it would have made a difference today in the outcome.
Undoubtedly people will learn of what decision took place today, and while it may have symbolic significance, I must admit the Tribe will as always move on.
But I wonder now the relevance anymore of what is supposed to be a fundamental part of the Tribe's philosophy, one that most if not all tribes I've encountered share. That is putting control of tribes in the hand of the tribal members e.g. jobs, boards, committees, governing (like my position), publications, the gaming commission. Though not always a well-defined goal, it's still a worthwhile one. Today though was almost affirmation of my suspicions that while we may strive to one day have a Tribe, including its governance, business, and judicial functions all run by and for our Tribal membership, a reasonable goal as members are the stakeholders, I'm becoming convinced such a notion is the epitome of idealistic. Sounds good, but given human nature, more fantastic than realistic.
The former General Manager of our casino was a Tribal member, and at least concerning our bottom line, got the job done. But certain people didn't like him, and the basis for their dislike always seemed personal, and on occasions, political. The same could be said for Spirit Mountain Casino's first General Manager, also a Tribal member. I've lost count of all the complaints we've gotten over the years about how bad, supposedly, this Tribe is about hiring its own members, at the casino and the governance center. Often those complaints have come from people who didn't get the jobs or positions they wanted. But as I mentioned earlier, even when a Tribal member is given a key position or promoted, the issue invariably becomes who the member is, and that they are Tribal is quickly forgotten. You can't win.
During my Tribal Government training last year, we were taught about the Allotment Act, and how decades after that historic decision it was considered an epic failure. The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, now more than 20 years old, was also supposed to be a historic decision, and right not I can't deny it hasn't been. Grand Ronde has, for all my issues, benefited pretty well from IGRA. But there are cracks in the armor.
We too have had to deal with corruption, with strife, and the divisiveness an ongoing struggle for power and resources that enormous and almost sudden wealth brings. We've also had to deal with petty agendas, where whether one is good at their job or not, or whether one has made wise decisions, or whether one is even a shareholder in a key position i.e. a Tribal member, is irrelevant because for whatever reason somebody at the top doesn't like you. When I see this kind of stuff, it depresses me, because aren't we as tribes supposed to be different? Aren't we sitting on a world of opportunity, a chance to be a model organization, to be self-sufficient, the envy of all other governments, tribal or not?
I worry sometimes, that like Allotment, one day the Federal Government will conduct a review on tribes since IGRA. They will see the family feuds, the pettiness, the partisan politics, and that which I would probably get into trouble for writing about. And they, like me, will say "this is not what we intended".
Undoubtedly people will learn of what decision took place today, and while it may have symbolic significance, I must admit the Tribe will as always move on.
But I wonder now the relevance anymore of what is supposed to be a fundamental part of the Tribe's philosophy, one that most if not all tribes I've encountered share. That is putting control of tribes in the hand of the tribal members e.g. jobs, boards, committees, governing (like my position), publications, the gaming commission. Though not always a well-defined goal, it's still a worthwhile one. Today though was almost affirmation of my suspicions that while we may strive to one day have a Tribe, including its governance, business, and judicial functions all run by and for our Tribal membership, a reasonable goal as members are the stakeholders, I'm becoming convinced such a notion is the epitome of idealistic. Sounds good, but given human nature, more fantastic than realistic.
The former General Manager of our casino was a Tribal member, and at least concerning our bottom line, got the job done. But certain people didn't like him, and the basis for their dislike always seemed personal, and on occasions, political. The same could be said for Spirit Mountain Casino's first General Manager, also a Tribal member. I've lost count of all the complaints we've gotten over the years about how bad, supposedly, this Tribe is about hiring its own members, at the casino and the governance center. Often those complaints have come from people who didn't get the jobs or positions they wanted. But as I mentioned earlier, even when a Tribal member is given a key position or promoted, the issue invariably becomes who the member is, and that they are Tribal is quickly forgotten. You can't win.
During my Tribal Government training last year, we were taught about the Allotment Act, and how decades after that historic decision it was considered an epic failure. The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, now more than 20 years old, was also supposed to be a historic decision, and right not I can't deny it hasn't been. Grand Ronde has, for all my issues, benefited pretty well from IGRA. But there are cracks in the armor.
We too have had to deal with corruption, with strife, and the divisiveness an ongoing struggle for power and resources that enormous and almost sudden wealth brings. We've also had to deal with petty agendas, where whether one is good at their job or not, or whether one has made wise decisions, or whether one is even a shareholder in a key position i.e. a Tribal member, is irrelevant because for whatever reason somebody at the top doesn't like you. When I see this kind of stuff, it depresses me, because aren't we as tribes supposed to be different? Aren't we sitting on a world of opportunity, a chance to be a model organization, to be self-sufficient, the envy of all other governments, tribal or not?
I worry sometimes, that like Allotment, one day the Federal Government will conduct a review on tribes since IGRA. They will see the family feuds, the pettiness, the partisan politics, and that which I would probably get into trouble for writing about. And they, like me, will say "this is not what we intended".
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Other Business
I never truly know what to make of some comments during the Other Business portion of our Wednesday night or General Council meetings. Having only really been a regular attendee for the last eight years, I can't speak to how these meetings might have gone before. Some meeting veterans have informed me the sessions were much more heated, in fact at one point it appears a fistfight nearly broke out. While we haven't had a meeting that bad, though there have been some bad ones, I still find myself on edge somewhat before each meeting. I scan the crowd for certain faces, because sadly there are some individuals whose presence usually means trouble, accusations, rants, or just plain meanness. There have been times when I knew exactly what somebody was going to say. Were it legal to start a betting pool on who would speak, what they would say, or who would be attacked, I think more than a few people would ante up.
Several years ago, the then Vice-Chair made her own effort to try and bring a sense of relevance and efficiency to what is almost always a question mark going into each and every meeting. Her efforts did not go smoothly, though sitting right beside her I knew exactly what was trying to be accomplished. But it just wasn't, and still isn't meant to be. I am not trying to gripe with this post, but I recently had what in hindsight has been a very enlightening discussion with several staff members about this very topic, ones with whom I've not spoken about on this subject.
Staff see right through a lot of the theatrics. They see the disingenuousness of some of the odd questions being asked, questions not-so-coincidentally pertaining to a sensitive issue that only a Council member would know about. They see the allies of Council members leading attacks or defending their favorites, and they also see the adversaries doing the exact same thing. It should be interesting to see how our streamed meetings will be taken by the general membership. Will they feel as if they've just started watching a soap opera or drama midway through some Tolstoy-like plotline? Or will they care?
Following the elections of the ABC/PPP, Council meetings took on a whole new dimension. They became theatrical, even more scripted than before. Enemies and allies alike gave me heads up on what would be brought up during the next Council meeting. For what seemed like forever, we were lucky to finish in less than 90 minutes. There was always something, and rarely was it not ugly, not scripted. And rarely could I not assume that the invisible hands of my peers were not in some way at work.
The meetings have mellowed out somewhat, in subject if not in length. It has been over a year since somebody went after me personally. There was a cast of characters who, during the supposed "reign" of the ABC/PPP group, rarely missed a meeting, and always had something negative to say, some "gotcha!" comment or question to spring upon us. Now that only a handful of us remain, and we no longer reign, they disappeared, faded back to where they came. Once in a while they'll come back, and as always, when I see them walking in, what they have to say is hardly a surprise.
I am not sure if or when we'll see the same cast brought back. But what I do know is, like the seasons, staff are preparing for seasonal two-hour meetings. The season: election.
Several years ago, the then Vice-Chair made her own effort to try and bring a sense of relevance and efficiency to what is almost always a question mark going into each and every meeting. Her efforts did not go smoothly, though sitting right beside her I knew exactly what was trying to be accomplished. But it just wasn't, and still isn't meant to be. I am not trying to gripe with this post, but I recently had what in hindsight has been a very enlightening discussion with several staff members about this very topic, ones with whom I've not spoken about on this subject.
Staff see right through a lot of the theatrics. They see the disingenuousness of some of the odd questions being asked, questions not-so-coincidentally pertaining to a sensitive issue that only a Council member would know about. They see the allies of Council members leading attacks or defending their favorites, and they also see the adversaries doing the exact same thing. It should be interesting to see how our streamed meetings will be taken by the general membership. Will they feel as if they've just started watching a soap opera or drama midway through some Tolstoy-like plotline? Or will they care?
Following the elections of the ABC/PPP, Council meetings took on a whole new dimension. They became theatrical, even more scripted than before. Enemies and allies alike gave me heads up on what would be brought up during the next Council meeting. For what seemed like forever, we were lucky to finish in less than 90 minutes. There was always something, and rarely was it not ugly, not scripted. And rarely could I not assume that the invisible hands of my peers were not in some way at work.
The meetings have mellowed out somewhat, in subject if not in length. It has been over a year since somebody went after me personally. There was a cast of characters who, during the supposed "reign" of the ABC/PPP group, rarely missed a meeting, and always had something negative to say, some "gotcha!" comment or question to spring upon us. Now that only a handful of us remain, and we no longer reign, they disappeared, faded back to where they came. Once in a while they'll come back, and as always, when I see them walking in, what they have to say is hardly a surprise.
I am not sure if or when we'll see the same cast brought back. But what I do know is, like the seasons, staff are preparing for seasonal two-hour meetings. The season: election.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Around Yakima
I've finally gotten into the habit of carrying a camera on my trips, even work-related ones. I've also gotten into the habit of making sure to travel a different route home, even if that means more time. For the most part, I am glad to have maintained that practice while driving back from Yakima. I headed west on Highway 12, through Wenatchee National Forest, a new area of the Northwest for me. All I can really say is that times like these a person has to be proud of where they come from.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
