Recall efforts at Sipayik create turmoil

The recall of newly elected tribal councillor Pam Francis, in an October 13 vote, and petition drives to recall Chief Marla Dana and Vice Chief Maggie Dana have once again thrown the Sipayik community into some political turmoil. Questions about the legality of the recall election are being raised, while others maintain that Francis had found a loophole to initially avoid going through the recall process by resigning from the council and then getting reelected. In addition, the lack of tribal council meetings is creating concern among some tribal members.
"It's an illegal overthrow," says Francis of the recall vote, maintaining that the process did not follow the constitution adopted by the Sipayik members of the tribe. She alleges that Chief Dana has "done this all on her own."
Official voting results could not be obtained from the tribal government, but Ambrose Bassett, who is Francis' son, says the vote was 100 to 75 to recall Francis. The recall election was based on a petition seeking Francis' removal from office that had been presented to the tribal council on August 11. The petition alleged failure to meet the needs of the community and conflict of interest on the part of Francis, according to Debbie Yarmal, who helped circulate the petition. When she had been director of the housing authority at Sipayik, Francis ended up being involved in a long legal struggle with the tribe that was resolved in a negotiated settlement.
The recall petition had 202 certified signatures, with 196 needed for the recall process to proceed, but, according to Francis, 33 people who signed the petition asked to have their names removed because they said they were misled when they signed the petition and some were promised money and Visa cards if they signed.
Francis wanted the recall effort to be put on hold until the question of the signatures was investigated by the police department. According to Francis, while some tribal councillors were supportive of an investigation, the police were not asked to do so by the tribal chief. Bassett, though, says he has asked the police to conduct an investigation.
Francis resigned the day of the August 11 council meeting at which the recall petition was presented and accepted by the council, thus putting a stop to the recall process. She says she didn't want to put the community through the turmoil of a recall election with only a few weeks being left in her term of office. She then was nominated at a caucus meeting later that day for a new council seat. Although she says she didn't campaign for office, she was voted in during the September 8 tribal election, receiving 93 votes.
Later, a public hearing was held on October 5 to consider the recall petition that had been submitted in August. Francis, though, says the recall petition was for her previous term on the council, not the new one she was elected to.
According to Bassett, there was not a quorum of councillors at the hearing and Chief Dana acted on her own to call for the recall election. "It's completely illegal what she's doing," he alleges.
However, Chief Dana says that tribal officials "went by the recall process." The constitution just states that the chief and council must have a public hearing held on the matters set forth in a recall petition and provide notice to those officials to be considered for recall.
Francis then filed a request for an injunction to stop the recall process with the tribal court in Indian Township on the day of the vote, October 13. That complaint also requested that the court order that Francis be sworn into office and be awarded $25,000 in damages. The tribal court has not acted on the injunction request.
New councillors are sworn in to take office by October 1, but Francis says she was not sworn in as a new councillor. She understands that the next highest vote-getter who was not elected in the September 8 election, Viola Francis, has been appointed to take her place. Chief Dana says she cannot comment on whether she has been appointed, since the process "is still ongoing."
As for whether the earlier petition should have been used to recall Francis now, Chief Dana says she doesn't want to discuss the issue, since it's "an internal tribal matter." She adds that because Francis "is threatening to sue the tribe," she fears any statement she makes could be used against her. Vice Chief Dana also declines to make a statement in case there is a lawsuit.

Recall allegations made
As for the effort to recall Chief Dana, Francis alleges that the chief "does whatever she wants without council approval." Since Francis was initially elected to the tribal council in a special election last March, only two tribal council meetings with a quorum of members have been held, she believes. Although councillors have made attempts to call for council meetings, the chief has not called one in response, she alleges. According to the constitution, special meetings may be called at the request of three or more councillors.
Francis also says that the tribal council has not approved a budget for the tribal government for the past few years. A number of councillors did sign a resolution in March, when the COVID-19 lockdown started, giving certain powers to the chief. The declaration of emergency that was adopted on March 16 empowers the chief and vice chief to coordinate with any agency for receiving resources and funding to combat the pandemic and to expend the funds, "as well as conduct whatever means they deem necessary to carry out any and all actions they deem needed to protect the safety and well-being" of tribal members at Sipayik. The declaration was signed by Chief Dana and four of the six councillors -- Holly Cleaves, Edward Nicholas, Janelle Sapiel and Denise Altvater.
Bassett maintains that the declaration "doesn't allow them to violate the constitution. The governing body is the council."
Bassett is among those circulating a petition seeking to recall Chief Dana from office. The petition alleges that Chief Dana: withdrew over $500,000 in tribal carbon credit funds without a meeting of the tribal council or joint tribal council; made thousands of dollars worth of purchases from Federal Emergency Management Agency and carbon credit monies without tribal council approval; refused to allow tribal council meetings to be held; failed to invoke a police investigation concerning whether recall petition signatures were fraudulently obtained; violated the tribal council's "spendthrift resolution" that limits the power of tribal officials to spend tribal government funds of more than $2,500 without council approval; failed to adopt tribal government budgets for 2019 and 2020, with no audit conducted for 2019. The petition also alleges that the resolution giving Chief Dana exclusive power to handle the community COVID-19 emergency, financial expenditures and emergency personnel appointments was not approved by the tribal council at a council meeting. The petition states that community members "grow increasingly desperate while tribal government is shut down for an undetermined time while tribal member complaints go unanswered, the needs of the people rise, services are inadequate, phone calls to tribal government go unanswered!"