Why Worry About the Executive Retirement Plan

There are some who may ask why we should bother with the executive retirement plan. Another notion is that Council members knew what the intent was. While some will argue that the matter is trivial consider this, and Wolfetown Rep. Susan Toineeta even noted this in her proposal to rescind the plan passed in January, the tribe will be facing some seriously challenging times financially. The situation is worse than many currently in the tribe's leadership are willing to concede. The plan passed in January has the potential to break the tribe, already stretched to the limits on retirement benefits for employees.
The plan passed, as written, does pay Chief Hicks $70,000 per month upon his leaving office, assuming he's done in 2011. That may not have been the intent, and Michell Hicks may only take $70,000 yearly as may have been the intent of the legislation. There are serious problems with relying upon intent. One is no one really knows what that intent was with the exception of the one who authored the proposal. When the law has been on the books for 100 years, no one can ask the attorney general what the intent was, because in all likelihood she'll have died. The other major problem is that it may be the case that this chief would only take $70,000. But that doesn't mean that another chief with the same amount of time vested wouldn't take half the yearly salary per month, and guess what, the way the law is now currently worded, it would be legal.
The tribal Supreme Court ruled on the issue of absentee voting that the way the law was worded was problematic. It was worded to mean that tribal members had to meet every single criteria. Sure we knew what the intent was, but the wording had to match that intent.
Toineeta's proposal is a sensible one, and Tribal Council needs to pass it. This is an important issue. The economic future of the tribe depends upon it.