Shaping Public Opinion
The slippery slide of the Boards greasy wheel just might be stopping in the referendum currently being circulated.
Most Members say they have gave enough and it's time for the Board to give-up something.
Some Board Members have put themselves and their families before the electorate. A few bad apples are rotting the whole bunch. They know who they are and they know what they have done.
In the email string below, longtime Member advocates Tony Grondin and Mike Doud put it in layman's terms. They obviously know who the fools are.
It is time to pound and ground the Board and show them who's boss!
Tony Grondin wrote:
Your right Mike, it is supposed to be a two way street. I believe the most important thing about the referendum is that we are able to have it. Had things been explained differently in the beginning I still believe we would have had it. However the results of the referendum may turn out to be different if the BOD was forthright.
It is and will remain my opinion that IRS 409a is simple if explained how it applies to our BOD. Much of the legal mumbo jumbo means little as it applies to many. In the instance of our BOD in the simplest of terms it determines whether or not our BOD that have more than five years and less than twenty are going to have to pay taxes on their retirement if the referendum is disapproved.
I don't believe for a minute it is a compliance issue as portrayed on the referendum. What the IRS is telling our BOD is that if they want their retirement to be considered tax exempt they have to do certain things.
If they don't do those certain things they have to pay taxes. Kind of like the Homestead Act. If you have real estate that is adjacent to your primary home property you can claim it under the Homestead Act. But, ONLY if you file the right application for the expemption. If you fail to apply for the exemption you pay the regular tax as apllied to real property.
What the BOD did was make a mistake and put it to a resolution and the members got wind of it. It's a game this administration is continuing to play like the past administrations. Take for instance the elders dividends,,,,,,,,,,,, Bernard Bouschor didn't want to give it to the elders in the first place but when pressured by the membership he gathered elders 60 years of age and older and asked at what age our members should be considered an elder. Guess what it was? Before that tribal elders 55 and older were attending elders dinners and meetings here
To add insult to injury our elders have to pay taxes on their dividend. So why not the BOD pay taxes on their retirement? From what I understand the retirement is 5 to 10 years it's $500 monthly, 10 to 19 years it's $750 and twenty or more it's $1000 monthly with the spouse receiving it after death of the Director.
Your also right about Bouschor's conflict of interest. It's a travesty that an alleged thief of Millions of tribal dollars is allowed to serve on our BOD. Also Bouschor has a lawsuit against Greektown for $3.4 million and is claiming "executive immunity". The lower court judge rules that Bouschor did not have the authority to grant severances to the 7. The lower court judge also ruled that the 7 were not fired but had quit their jobs and were therefore not entitled to anything. At the very least Bouschor's stipend should be put in escrow.
The BOD konws little or nothing about Bahweting and are not concerned about it. And as for Key Employees terminations,,,,,, it won't happen. CFO Victor Matson Jr. admitted he gave Construction Supervisor, Lenny Adams permission to take home tribal property (shrubs), tribal equipment (Pick-up, trailer, backhoe and loader), and employees on tribal time (3) to plant shrubs at Lenny's new home.
As late as a few days ago Victor Matson Jr. Lenny Adams and CEO Joe McCoy is allowing construction employee Joe Paquin to take home a tribal pick-up everyday.
SO WHAT!!!!!! so what is the BOD's attitude
DISAPPROVE REFERENDUM
TG
It's hard to shape public opinion to be Pro-Board when the Board operates like the last 2 Administrations. The referendum could have been avoided had someone explained the exact nature of the resolution. To a keen eye, the resolution seems to be two-fold and sneaky, but not according to their legal beagles.
Important things the Board is failing to do are, Deal with 2% distribution, deal with Bahweting, dealing with terminations of key employees" They hate having their friends fired", deal with Bouschor's conflict of interest "the fox guarding the hen-house", have the Chief of Police re-investigate complaints file 13ed by Fast Freddie, and the list goes on. Giving and taking is a two way street. The Board has too much junk in their trunk.
