Monday, May 14, 2018

Resolution 97-36 Tribal Constitution Pala Band

Check out the dates.


Resolution 97-36 Tribal Constitution Pala Band by kupa7 on Scribd

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm confused? Isn't this document saying that Pala wants sovereignty and not to be under the BIA's decision?

Tukumay said...

It's going to get more confusing before it gets clearer. Most of these documents have been posted over and over. We will continue to post more.

You have to go back to 1994 when the first vote to amend the Articles to the Constitution actually did not garner enough votes. I don't remember all the BIA rules but basically to Amend the Articles required 50% of the tribe to participate in the election with I think 2/3 required to vote in favor in order to pass. I could be wrong on that percentage, I don't recall off-hand.

In 1994 the vote actually failed to pass even though soon after Pala started using the word Constitution instead of Articles.

From 1995 to 1997 Pala worked with the BIA to draft a Constitution.

Somewhere along the line rather than have the people vote on it in a General Election they just called a meeting and passed it 27 to 0. But you have to check the dates.

I'll post more documents in the coming days. It is very confusing even to me and we have been looking at this stuff for years. A lot of it has been submitted as evidence in various courts as well as to the BIA.

Tukumay said...

Also, to quote a previous commenter:

"Robert Smith you are so busted. Your constitution is not approved and therefore Pala is still under the Articles of Association. The real truth is that the special meeting on November 19, 1997 was the budget meeting not a meeting called to approve the constitution. Special meetings have to be a single item agenda and the item for the 19th was the budget. "

Reinstatement_Restitution said...

Yes, 50% participation, 2/3 majority required as specified in the Articles of Association to pass an amendment. BIA responded that each amendment required a vote and Secretarial approval. BIA recommended a revised governing document. This is not what the GC voted for. A Constitution was drafted and submitted. BIA made recommendations in the technical review, retype the draft and incorporated the changes. This revised Constitution was never submitted to the GC for review. That is the document RS said was approved in 1994, and again in NOV 1997.

Anonymous said...

I'm telling you Robert Smith and his two partners, Theresa J Nieto and Amy Duschke are 3 of the rottenest apples in the barrel.
They just got caught with their hands in each others pants on this one concerning the fake CONSTITUTION of PBMI.
Three pies in the oven.
I wonder what the Department of Justice thinks of the Honorable
Robert Smith now after they received the latest evidence on the fake
Constitution that was sent to them certified mail and signed for
today at 1:37 pm.

Anonymous said...

The old EC stated that the Articles of Assoc. were not amended in any way then why does the fake Constitution have so many changes.
These is what I was talking about earlier about the EC getting the people at the meetings to approve their so called and never bringing the final wording back to the General Membership for a final vote.
They always add or delete shit because this is one way that they get away with screwing the people.

Anonymous said...

Sorry I meant their so called drafts. Above post.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for explanations. :)

Anonymous said...

If this so called Constitution was valid then why did Robert Smith and the EC sign the first Tribal compact for the Casino stating that the Tribe was Governed by the ARTICLES of ASOCIATION instead of TRIBAL CONSTITUTION ?

Anonymous said...

Letter sent by Robert Smith to Francis Muncy on July 18, 2000

We have received the fax from the Bureau, of the Pala Constitution that was passed in 1997. We received comments from the Area Office and now the Pacific Regional Office. We decided not to incorporate those comments; we voted and passed the Constitution, which was submitted to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Southern California Agency. We would like to have it approved immediately, since it bas been 2 years or more.

So if you are not confused yet let me help make it worse. All the 1997 Resolution did was reaffirm the approval of the constitution that was voted on in 1994.

Here is the language from the 1997 resolution:

WHEREAS, on November 22, 1994 the Pala General Council· in the General Election of the Tribe voted to revise the Pala Tribal Articles of Association into the Pala Tribal Constitution.

Now then what does this really mean. It means that the revised constitution that was approved by the BIA is not the 1994 constitution and also realize that Robert Smith, without tribal consultation, rejected the revisions and demanded that the 1994 constitution be approved.

So what is the 1994 constitution? If you take the language of the 1997 resolution the 1994 constitution is the Articles of Association with the name simply changed to read constitution. So the reality is we are still operating under the Articles of Association and Robert Smith and his cronies have nor had any authority to disenroll anyone. So, take it to the meeting, the BIA, Congress, the Secretary of the Interior and let the world know what is going on here. Remember again the BIA has already determined that Margarita Britten is full blood and the disnerollees should have not been disenrolled. The authority to approve the tribes membership role is back ind the hands of the BIA. The opportunity is now to get this mess straightened out. Don't blow it.

Anonymous said...

Does the BIA know about this? They should just automatically put the brittians back on the rolls.

Anonymous said...

The EC should just automatically put the brittians back on the rolls. It is ridiculous that they were taken off. Puta end to this. This constitution stuff is the icing on the cake. Put the 1/16th brittians back on the rolls

Reinstatement_Restitution said...

Are you not listening? The BIA said the diserollments are an internal tribal matter and that they won't intervene. The Court agreed that membership decisions are protected by Santa Clara Pueblo v Martinez and that the BIA was correct not to intervene. The Court also ruled that the statute of limitations expired on appeal to the approval of the Pala Constitution, and that the Court would not overturn the Constitution because it would mean interfering with internal trial affairs.

At this point it is very clear that the Pala Constitution was never approved by the General Council. The so-called General Council meeting of NOV 1997 where there was a vote to approve the Constitution by 27 to 0 was not valid. It requires a General Election with over 50% of the enrolled members voting and a 2/3 majority vote to approve amendments to the governing document.

The BIA retyped the draft of the Pala Constitution and incorporated their recommendations. The General Council never saw this document. We don't even know if the Nov 1997 meeting ever happened because there was no agenda and no minutes of the meeting. At this point it appears that Robert Smith submitted a resolution to the BIA that the General Council had no part in.

He has spent the last 20 years perpetrating lies and fraud so it is not some kind of false allegation to say that this resolution is fraudulent. The General Council has allowed itself to be stripped of power. They let RS control the agenda, ban members from meetings, holding office, or voting. He decides who gets enrolled. He makes all financial decisions. He disenrolled the Brittain descendants who clearly have the blood, and keeps Lugo and Lavato descendants on the roll when they do no meet the blood degree standard.

PBMI is Robert Smith's sock puppet. The Pala Resort and Casino is his piggy bank. The BIA is his bitch. The San Diego Sheriff's Department and the District Attorney's office are in his pocket. The local newspapers won't print the truth because RS threatens to pull advertisement if the say bad things about PBMI.

This is the current state of affairs. Look at the glorious pig you Pala members bow to.

Anonymous said...

You are the one not listening. If the Constitution is not valid then the original enrollment ordinance is still in effect as well as the Articles of Association. So yes the BIA can get involved because the Articles and the ordinance require BIA approval of the roles.

The big question is what triggered the necessity for the 1997 resolution to be amended and why. The why is simple. The only reason this action is necessary means that the BIA is not recognizing the approval of the constitution. If this is true and it is then the statute of limitations clock should begin to run again and a new case brought before the court but first all other remedies have to be satisfied. So even if smith gets the people to amend the resolution the BIA should be challenged and all the facts brought forth and if the BIA decides in the negative then the door should be wide open for the courts to get involved.

It really provides an opportunity to provide all of the facts and we do have the facts. There is a new BIA and they might listen this time. So it is time for you to start listening and climb out of the hole you have dug for yourself. Look out and see the sun for a change. This is a gift horse and I intend to ride it.

Reinstatement_Restitution said...

The statute of limitations is on the BIA approval of the Pala Constitution, not on PBMI approval. The BIA would have to revoke the approval of the Pala Constitution in order to revert to the Articles. If that were to happen there would be lots of actions taken by the EC under authority of the Constitution that would have to be reviewed. BIA is better at avoiding work than at helping tribes fix problems. A very unlikely turn of events in my estimation.

Anonymous said...

A faster way to fix things is for the General Membership to somehow get on the Agenda and fix the disenrollment issue and then vote to fix the Constitution issue. And do not let the EC bully anyone into believing that this is just a mistake in the dates on the so called
Constitution.
I believe that the EC has been aware of this issue for a long time and has never acted on a fix because the disenrollments would be null and void and they were trying to find a way to keep the disenrolled members from being able to vote on any of these issues because with these extra votes the out come would be different.
So instead of living in limbo just demand your rights as tribal members and move forward.

Anonymous said...

Remember when the tribes website which was downloaded by the Attorney stated that the Tribes was governed by the Articles of Association and then the EC discovered their mistake by not changing their web page suddenly took the website down until they could try to find a way to cover their fuckup.
This was after the disenrollments took place.
And also the EC along with Smith signed the new Gamming Compact stating that the Tribe was governed by the Articles of Association and there was no mention of a Constitution.

Anonymous said...

@ 10:28pm We are saddled and ready to ride along side of you anytime you are ready.

Anonymous said...

What a fucking "RETARD" Robert Smith is, who's real last name is actually Schmitt according to some of his Ancestors background.
Like his full blooded Grandfather Henry Smith as documented in the Sherman Indian School.
Even his Grandmother used the name Annie Smith while in Sherman instead of Morro.
Were his Grandparents actually brother and sister ????????????????????

Anonymous said...

His mother can't have the bloodline that he claims either because she didn't know who her father was. Which means his blood degree is not enough to be enrolled in Pala along with his kids.
I think that his mothers dad was Frank Lacusa aka as the Rubber Man.
Also aka Frankie Joe.
Ay least that's what I remembers as a young man growing up in Pala for nearly 75 years ago.Frank was from either Rincon or Mesa Grande.

Anonymous said...

It is unreal how much coverage this Royal Wedding shit gets.
How about the "ROYAL FUCKING" that we are getting from the Royal
ASSHOLES that are supposed to protect us from corruption and using us for their own greed.
No coverage at all, people just don't give a shit about these rouge so called leaders that kill off true Native American people for there own personal gain.
That is really sad, but who cares just cover all this Royal wedding bullshit and turn a blind eye to the real problems. I personally would like to stick a Royal Sword up their Royal Asses and see how they would like it.

Reinstatement_Restitution said...

Also wondering who said the BIA asked for an amendment to Resolution 97-36?Better check that source on the liar meter.