August 8, 2026,
SAULT STE. MARIE, Mich. — Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Members are preparing for a federally administered Secretarial Election that tribal officials have repeatedly described as a vote on establishing three separate and equal branches of government.
But a review of the proposed amended Constitution shows the ballot would decide considerably more than whether the Tribe should have legislative, executive and judicial branches. However, Tribal Members will not be allowed to vote on each change separately.
The proposal rewrites or substantially restructures nearly the entire constitutional framework governing the Tribe, including provisions involving member rights, elections, recalls, referendums, constitutional amendments, access to records, sovereign immunity, qualifications for office, judicial authority and the powers of tribal government.
The Tribe's official description says members will vote “yes” or “no” on proposed constitutional amendments establishing “three separate and equal branches of government.” The Board of Directors unanimously approved submitting the proposal to the Bureau of Indian Affairs in May.
The proposed document itself, however, demonstrates that separation of powers is only one component of a much broader rewrite.
How Many Parts of the Constitution Are Actually Changing?
The existing Constitution contains 11 constitutional articles, followed by bylaws. The proposed Constitution contains 14 constitutional articles.
Comparing the article structure in the redlined document shows that 13 of the proposed Constitution's 14 articles contain new, renamed, relocated or materially rewritten subject matter compared with the present Constitution. All three articles of the Bylaws also contain changes.
That means at least 16 major article-level areas — 13 constitutional articles plus all three Bylaw articles — are affected, although that number should not be confused with the number of individual textual amendments. At the section and subsection level, the proposal contains dozens of separate additions, deletions and changes.
The only major constitutional subject that remains comparatively close to its existing form is Article II governing territory and jurisdiction.
The proposal adds an entirely new sovereignty article declaring tribal citizens the source of governing authority and reserving undelegated powers to the citizenship. It changes “Membership” to “Citizenship,” creates a substantially expanded Bill of Rights, establishes separation of powers, constitutionalizes two levels of tribal courts, establishes a legislative branch and executive branch, rewrites removal and recall procedures, changes election provisions, adds an express sovereign-immunity article, changes referendum requirements, rewrites the constitutional amendment process and changes the adoption provisions.
That is significantly broader than simply inserting three branches into the existing Constitution.
Board Says Three Branches Are the Central Issue.
The Tribe has framed the proposal around separation of powers.
In announcing the Board's May action, the Tribe said the resolution moved the government toward “three co-equal branches” and noted that a constitutional survey conducted in fall 2025 found a majority of respondents supported a more defined system of checks and balances.
The proposed Constitution does exactly that in Article V, establishing legislative, executive and judicial branches and prohibiting one branch from exercising powers assigned to another except where the Constitution permits it.
But voters are not being presented with a stand-alone separation-of-powers amendment.
They will be asked to approve or reject the amended Constitution as submitted.
Equal Rights: Current and Proposed Language Are Different,
One of the most important questions for voters is what happens to the rights members already possess.
The existing Bill of Rights begins with an unequivocal statement:
“All members of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians shall be accorded equal protection of the law under this constitution.”
It further says no member may be denied rights and guarantees enjoyed by citizens under the U.S. Constitution and incorporates protections of the Indian Civil Rights Act.
The proposed Article IV takes a different approach.
It contains a much longer list of individual protections, including speech, religion, press, assembly, privacy, due process, criminal-procedure protections, equal protection, property rights and protection for employees who disclose official misconduct.
That expansion is significant and should not be overlooked.
At the same time, the proposal no longer begins with the existing Constitution's direct declaration that all tribal members shall be accorded equal protection under the Constitution. Instead, Article IV prohibits the Tribe from denying “any person within its jurisdiction” equal protection, application or opportunity under the law.
Whether that formulation ultimately provides stronger, equivalent or weaker protection would depend partly on interpretation and enforcement by the tribal courts. It therefore would be inaccurate to say the proposed Constitution contains no equal-protection provision. It does.
But equal protection under law also does not mean every citizen receives identical political opportunities under the rest of the document.
Geography Creates Different Opportunities to Hold Office.
The proposed Constitution places geographic restrictions on who can seek some of the Tribe's most powerful offices.
A Tribal Council candidate must physically reside in the voting unit the person seeks to represent for at least one year before the election.
The Ogemaa faces a broader residency requirement. A candidate must have physically resided within the Tribe's jurisdictional territory for at least one year before the election and, after election, must live within 50 miles of Baaweting within 90 days and remain there throughout the term.
The elected Chief Judge must likewise relocate within 50 miles of Baaweting within 90 days and remain there while serving.
Consequently, tribal citizenship alone does not provide every citizen the same practical opportunity to hold every constitutional office.
That distinction could be especially important for Sault Tribe Members living outside the Tribe's five voting units or outside Michigan.
Some Supreme Court Seats Would Not Be Reserved for Sault Tribe Citizens.
The proposed judicial branch creates another distinction.
The Chief Judge, Associate Trial Court Judge and Chief Justice are generally required to be tribal citizens and licensed attorneys. But the proposed Constitution says only one of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court must be a Citizen of the Sault Tribe.
All Associate Justices must be Native American, and at least one must be an attorney, but the language allows individuals who are not Sault Tribe Citizens to occupy some seats on the Tribe's highest court. Associate Justices are appointed by the Ogemaa and confirmed by the Tribal Council rather than elected directly by the membership.
That means the proposed Constitution simultaneously gives the Supreme Court substantial constitutional authority while allowing some of its members to be neither elected by Sault Tribe Citizens nor Citizens of the Sault Tribe.
Supreme Court Could Decline an Appeal.
The proposed Constitution says a party in a civil case or a criminal defendant dissatisfied with a Trial Court decision has the right to file an appeal.
The next sentence, however, says the Supreme Court “shall have the right to accept or deny any appeal from a Trial Court.”
The distinction is important: the Constitution guarantees the right to file an appeal but does not state that every appeal must receive appellate review.
The Supreme Court also receives original and exclusive jurisdiction over final Election Commission determinations.
Referendum Rights Would Change.
The election rules that allow members to force a referendum on an enacted or proposed ordinance resolution or to ask for a recall election against a board member changes.
The proposed Constitution replaces the number with a petition signed by 5 percent of the total votes cast in the previous Ogemaa general election.
Whether that makes a referendum easier or harder in a particular election cycle depends on turnout in the preceding Ogemaa election.
For example, if 5,000 votes were cast, 250 verified signatures would be necessary. If 10,000 were cast, 500 would be required. The actual threshold therefore needs to be calculated from the official vote total rather than assumed.
The validity requirement also changes. Instead of the existing 30-percent participation language, the proposal ties referendum validity to the return rate of the previous Ogemaa general election.
Those are substantive changes to citizens' direct-democracy powers, separate from establishing three branches.
Recall and Removal Would Be Rewritten.
The proposed Constitution replaces the current system with a recall mechanism applying to Council members, the Ogemaa and elected judges and justices.
A recall petition generally requires verified signatures equal to 10 percent of the votes cast in the relevant preceding election. A successful recall bars the official from running for another elected office until the original term would have expired.
Removal “for cause” would separately be limited to specified grounds including gross misconduct or malfeasance and certain criminal convictions, with proceedings occurring in Tribal Court.
Again, those provisions are not merely technical changes required to create three branches. They redefine how citizens and the government can remove elected officials.
Access to Tribal Records Would Also Change.
The current Bylaws provide that tribal books, records and financial accounts, including the tribal roll, “shall be open to inspection” by members upon reasonable request.
The proposed provision retains a right of inspection but adds that the Tribal Council must enact laws governing “reasonable disclosure of information” and sunset provisions involving proprietary business information.
How restrictive or expansive those future disclosure laws would be cannot be determined from the Constitution itself because they have not yet been enacted.
That makes the implementation of legislation important: members would be voting on constitutional authority whose practical boundaries would later be defined by the Council.
Sovereign Immunity Becomes an Express Constitutional Article.
The proposal also adds a dedicated sovereign-immunity article.
It declares that the Tribe possesses sovereign immunity and provides that immunity is not waived unless specifically stated, with the Tribal Council authorized to approve limited waivers.
This matters in connection with the Bill of Rights because constitutional rights and the ability to obtain a remedy for an alleged violation are separate legal questions.
The proposal gives the tribal courts jurisdiction over constitutional disputes and authorizes judicial review of tribal laws and executive actions, which provides an enforcement mechanism.
Members should therefore examine both the rights being promised and the procedures available to enforce those rights.
Government Powers Expand and Become More Detailed.
The new legislative article contains a lengthy list of powers that goes substantially beyond simply renaming the current Board of Directors as a Tribal Council.
Among other things, the Council could create regulatory commissions and legally separate authorities, establish executive departments, approve budgets, levy duties, fees, taxes and assessments within tribal jurisdiction, investigate and issue subpoenas, and conduct certain internal and administrative business without formal adoption of a tribal law, ordinance or resolution.
The Ogemaa would receive constitutional executive powers including administration of tribal government, appointments, negotiations, budget preparation and a veto over Council legislation and budgets. The Council could override a veto with a two-thirds vote.
These are fundamental allocations of governmental power.
Constitution Becomes Harder — and in Another Way Easier — for Citizens to Amend.
The proposed Article XIII creates an entirely new internal amendment procedure.
Citizens could initiate a constitutional amendment election by obtaining signatures from 5 percent of eligible voters. The Election Commission would then verify the petition and conduct a special election.
Passage would require a majority of those voting, a ballot return rate of at least 20 percent based on eligible voters in the previous Ogemaa election, and approval by a majority of the Tribe's voting units.
That last requirement means a proposal receiving a Tribe-wide majority could nevertheless fail if it did not win a majority of voting units.
On the other hand, the provision expressly creates a citizen-initiated amendment procedure, potentially giving citizens a constitutional mechanism for proposing future changes without first obtaining Board approval.
The consequences therefore run in both directions.
This Is a Vote on an Entire Governing Framework.
The central issue facing members is not whether separation of powers appears in the proposal. It plainly does.
The larger issue is the scope of what accompanies it.
The redlined document restructures the Constitution from its opening sovereignty provisions through its Bill of Rights, courts, legislature, executive, recalls, elections, immunity, referendums, amendment process and bylaws.
The proposal even requires the Tribal Council, after ratification, to amend existing laws or enact new laws to bring tribal law into conformity with the new Constitution within 18 months, with Article IX implementation required within six months.
That provision itself illustrates the scale of the change.
Secretarial Election Timeline.
The Tribe initially announced that the Secretarial Election would be held on or before Sept. 26, 2026, while noting that the official date and timeline would be established through the Secretarial Election process. However because of a BIA Review it has been delayed.
Members must separately register for the Secretarial Election, the process is administered through the Bureau of Indian Affairs rather than as an ordinary tribal election.
Members should rely on the Secretarial Election Board and BIA for the final registration, ballot and election deadlines once those dates are officially established.
What is already clear from the proposed Constitution is that the ballot involves much more than adding three branches.
It asks Sault Tribe citizens to decide whether to replace much of the governmental structure under which they currently exercise political rights with a new constitutional system — one that adds substantial individual protections in some areas, changes or conditions member powers in others, creates new qualifications for holding office, establishes a powerful judiciary and executive, changes direct-democracy procedures and leaves significant details to laws that would be enacted after ratification.
For voters, the distinction matters.
The question is not simply whether the Sault Tribe should have three branches of government. The question before the membership is whether this entire package of constitutional changes should become the Tribe's governing law.
Audit of Proposed Sault Tribe Constitution.
169 Substantive Changes and New Provisions Identified in the 27-Page Redlined Proposal.
Methodology.
This audit compares the existing constitutional language appearing in the redlined document with Proposed Amendment “A.”
A provision is counted when it adds, removes or materially changes a governmental power, citizen right, qualification, procedure, responsibility, restriction, election requirement, judicial authority or accountability mechanism.
This audit does not count ordinary formatting, article renumbering, grammatical corrections, capitalization, or routine substitutions such as “Board of Directors” becoming “Tribal Council” and “member” becoming “citizen,” unless the change carries an independent substantive consequence.
Under that methodology, the document contains 169 separately identifiable substantive changes or new provisions.
This is an analytical count, not an official number issued by the Tribe or Bureau of Indian Affairs. Reasonable reviewers could combine closely related clauses and arrive at a somewhat smaller number or count individual sub-clauses separately and arrive at a larger one. What the redline establishes beyond dispute is that the proposal changes far more than simply adding three branches of government.
The document itself expands the constitutional structure from the existing 11 constitutional articles to 14, followed by substantially revised Bylaws.
PREAMBLE.
Changes 1–4.
1. Adds preservation of the Anishinaabe Bimaadziwin as an express constitutional purpose.
2. Adds preservation of inherent tribal sovereignty as an express constitutional purpose.
3. Adds the teachings of the Seven Grandfathers to the constitutional foundation.
4. Recasts the purposes of the Constitution around perpetuation of the Tribe's way of life, welfare, prosperity, self-government, property, resources and sovereignty.
The proposed Preamble contains these concepts expressly.
ARTICLE I — SOVEREIGNTY.
Changes 5–8.
5. Replaces the existing “Name” article with an entire constitutional article on sovereignty.
6. Declares tribal citizens to be the source of all governing authority and power.
7. Establishes the Constitution as supreme law over tribal government and citizenship and requires tribal laws, treaties, compacts and governmental actions to be consistent with it.
8. Establishes delegated and reserved powers: government may exercise only authority granted by the citizenship, while powers not granted to government remain reserved to the citizens.
These provisions fundamentally redefine the constitutional source and limits of governmental authority.
ARTICLE II — TERRITORY AND JURISDICTION.
The substance of the existing territory and jurisdiction provisions is largely retained, so this audit does not inflate the count by treating formatting and renumbering in Article II as substantive changes.
ARTICLE III — CITIZENSHIP.
Changes 9–10.
9. Changes the constitutional terminology and concept from “Membership” to “Citizenship.”
10. Changes the historical-band language from six to seven bands and expressly lists Grand Island, Point Iroquois, Sault Ste. Marie, Garden River, Sugar Island, Mackinac and Drummond Island.
The underlying authority to enact laws governing citizenship, loss of citizenship and adoption remains with the legislative body.
ARTICLE IV — BILL OF RIGHTS.
This is one of the most consequential rewrites.
The existing Constitution says:
“All members of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians shall be accorded equal protection of the law under this constitution.”
It also incorporates rights and guarantees enjoyed under the U.S. Constitution and protections under the Indian Civil Rights Act.
The proposed Constitution replaces that short provision with an extensive enumerated Bill of Rights.
Changes 11–24.
11. Replaces the existing general Bill of Rights formulation with a detailed enumerated Bill of Rights.
12. Adds explicit protection of religious and cultural beliefs and prohibits establishment of religion.
13. Expressly protects speech, expression and freedom of the press.
14. Expressly protects association, assembly and petitioning government for redress.
15. Creates an express constitutional right for otherwise eligible citizens to seek and hold tribal elective office.
16. Creates detailed privacy protections covering persons, houses, papers, electronic information, telecommunications information, vehicles and effects.
17. Establishes constitutional probable-cause requirements for warrants and arrests and reasonable-suspicion requirements for detention.
18. Establishes custodial-interrogation protections, including notice of the right to remain silent and access to an attorney.
19. Establishes constitutional protection against double jeopardy and compelled self-incrimination.
20. Establishes speedy/public-trial, confrontation, compulsory-process and criminal-defense-counsel protections.
21. Prohibits excessive bail, excessive fines and cruel and unusual interrogation or punishment.
22. Recasts equal protection as protection against denying “any person within its jurisdiction” equal protection, application or opportunity under law, while expressly allowing employment-preference laws.
23. Adds protections against legislation directing criminal proceedings against specific individuals/groups and against retroactive criminalization.
24. Adds jury, presumption-of-innocence, arms, whistleblower/employment-due-process and private-property/just-compensation protections.
These protections appear throughout proposed Article IV.
ARTICLE V — SEPARATION OF POWERS.
Changes 25–27.
25. Constitutionally establishes three separate branches: legislative, executive and judicial.
26. Constitutionally requires separation of powers and checks and balances.
27. Prohibits one branch or its officials from exercising powers constitutionally granted or properly delegated to another branch except where expressly permitted.
This is the portion most directly corresponding to the Tribe's description of establishing three branches.
But it represents only a small portion of the substantive provisions identified in this audit.
ARTICLE VI — JUDICIAL BRANCH.
Changes 28–61.
28. Constitutionally creates a judicial branch.
29. Creates a constitutional Trial Court called the Court of Gweyakwaadziwin.
30. Creates a constitutional Supreme Court called the Court of Nbwaakawin.
31. Authorizes creation of additional courts of special jurisdiction.
32. Establishes a Chief Judge and Associate Judge structure for Trial Court.
33. Authorizes additional Associate and Substitute Judges.
34. Gives the Chief Judge administrative authority over Trial Court.
35. Establishes a three-Justice Supreme Court.
36. Establishes a Chief Justice and two Associate Justices.
37. Authorizes additional/substitute Justices.
38. Gives the Chief Justice administrative authority over Supreme Court.
39. Requires election by citizens of the Chief Judge, Associate Trial Judge and Chief Justice, subject to exceptions.
40. Allows Ogemaa appointment and Council confirmation when no qualified tribal citizen seeks a judicial office.
41. Makes Associate Supreme Court Justices appointed by the Ogemaa and confirmed by Council rather than elected by citizens.
42. Gives the Chief Judge authority to select substitute judges following recusals, subject to law/court rules.
43. Creates an appointment procedure when no candidate declares for a judicial position.
44. Establishes staggered six-year judicial terms.
45. Allows judges and justices to remain seated until successors take their oaths.
46. Requires elected Chief Judge, Associate Trial Judge and Chief Justice candidates to be voting-age tribal citizens and licensed attorneys.
47. Allows a noncitizen attorney to be appointed when no qualified tribal citizen seeks the office.
48. Does not require every Associate Supreme Court Justice to be a Sault Tribe citizen; only at least one Associate Justice must be a tribal citizen.
49. Requires Associate Justices to be Native American.
50. Requires at least one Associate Justice to be an attorney.
51. Requires the Chief Judge to relocate within 50 miles of Baaweting within 90 days and remain there throughout the term.
52. Permanently disqualifies a person convicted of a felony in any jurisdiction from serving as Judge or Justice.
53. Prohibits judges/justices from serving in executive or legislative branches.
54. Restricts judges/justices from elected or appointed positions with other tribes, states or the United States, subject to the stated committee exception.
55. Prohibits judicial positions or appointments creating conflicts of interest.
56. Grants Trial Court original jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases and controversies arising under tribal Constitution, treaties, laws and customs.
57. Requires covered tribal cases to be filed and exhausted in the tribal judicial branch before another jurisdiction.
58. Gives Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction and exclusive original jurisdiction over final Election Commission disputes.
59. Gives Trial Court constitutional-review authority, including authority to declare ordinances, resolutions and executive actions void when inconsistent with the Constitution.
60. Gives Supreme Court constitutional interpretation/review authority and authority over court procedures and rules.
61. Creates a right to file an appeal while simultaneously giving the Supreme Court authority to accept or deny an appeal; also gives the legislative branch authority over judicial compensation with protection against reducing an individual judge's compensation during the term.
Judicial restructuring occupies several pages of the proposal.
ARTICLE VII — LEGISLATIVE BRANCH.
Changes 62–92.
62. Constitutionally establishes the Tribal Council as the legislative branch.
63. Fixes Council membership at 12 members representing five voting units.
64. Establishes staggered four-year Council terms.
65. Requires Council members to be elected within their voting units.
66. Requires Council members to be tribal citizens and qualified voters at least 18 years old.
67. Requires one year of physical residency in the voting unit before seeking Council office.
68. Prohibits Council members from simultaneously serving in executive or judicial branches.
69. Restricts Council members from holding elected/appointed positions with other governments, subject to the committee exception.
70. Adds a constitutional conflict-of-interest restriction on outside positions and appointments.
71. Gives Council authority to establish its compensation through the annual budget while prohibiting reduction during the term.
72. Transfers authority previously assigned to the Board by law, contract, charter or judicial order to the legislative branch.
73. Expressly grants Council lawmaking authority through ordinances and resolutions.
74. Requires approved laws to be submitted to the Ogemaa within five days for possible veto.
75. Creates a new process governing lawsuits in the Tribe's name, including a two-thirds Council route without Ogemaa concurrence.
76. Gives Council authority to approve agreements/contracts negotiated by the Ogemaa with governments, Indian nations and private parties.
77. Gives Council constitutional authority over acquisition of land, property and other assets.
78. Gives Council approval/disapproval authority over sales, dispositions, leases and encumbrances involving tribal property/assets.
79. Gives Council authority to establish executive departments and their governing policies.
80. Gives Council regulatory authority over specified activities by non-tribal persons within tribal jurisdiction.
81. Gives Council authority to create regulatory commissions and subordinate entities and regulate their meetings/procedures.
82. Gives Council authority to create legally separate business, gaming and enterprise authorities.
83. Gives Council authority to enact court procedures submitted by the Supreme Court.
84. Gives Council authority to conduct internal/administrative business without formally adopting a law, ordinance or resolution.
85. Exempts those internal/administrative actions from Ogemaa veto.
86. Gives Council authority to employ legal counsel and staff and confirm specified Ogemaa appointments.
87. Requires Council to create a public legislative process governing resolutions, ordinances, laws and budgets.
88. Gives Council authority over annual budgets and modifications and establishes continuation of prior funding levels if a new budget is not approved.
89. Gives Council authority to manage and appropriate funds under exclusive tribal control.
90. Gives Council authority to levy duties, fees, taxes and assessments on persons or corporations residing or doing business within tribal territorial jurisdiction.
91. Gives Council authority involving its officers, full faith and credit, sovereign-immunity waivers and necessary-and-proper legislative action.
92. Gives Council constitutional investigative and subpoena authority and establishes a Speaker with enumerated duties, including temporarily performing Ogemaa duties when necessary.
The proposed legislative powers span dozens of separately stated authorities.
ARTICLE VIII — EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
Changes 93–114.
93. Constitutionally creates a separate executive branch.
94. Vests executive power and control of the branch in the Tribal Ogemaa.
95. Establishes a four-year Ogemaa term.
96. Requires election of the Ogemaa by eligible tribal voters.
97. Requires the Ogemaa to be a tribal citizen, at least 18 and a qualified voter.
98. Requires an Ogemaa candidate to have physically resided within tribal jurisdictional territory for at least one year before the election.
99. Requires the elected Ogemaa to relocate within 50 miles of Baaweting within 90 days and remain there for the entire term.
100. Prohibits simultaneous Ogemaa service in legislative or judicial branches.
101. Restricts the Ogemaa from elected/appointed positions with another tribe, state or the United States, subject to the committee exception.
102. Prohibits Ogemaa appointments/positions creating conflicts of interest.
103. Gives Ogemaa constitutional authority to enforce Council laws.
104. Gives Ogemaa constitutional authority over administration and management of tribal government.
105. Gives Ogemaa authority to consult, negotiate and execute agreements/contracts subject to Council approval.
106. Gives Ogemaa specified judicial appointment authority.
107. Gives Ogemaa authority to hire direct support staff whose positions end with the Ogemaa's term.
108. Gives Ogemaa authority to appoint authority members and key executive officials, subject to Council confirmation.
109. Makes Ogemaa the Tribe's official representative.
110. Gives Ogemaa constitutional veto power over resolutions, ordinances, laws and budgets.
111. Requires Council actions to be presented to Ogemaa and establishes a ten-day decision period and two-thirds Council veto override.
112. Requires Ogemaa to prepare the annual budget and provide monthly financial reports to Council and quarterly reports to citizens.
113. Gives Ogemaa authority to collect Council-enacted taxes, exclude unauthorized persons/entities from tribal lands and deliver an annual State of the Tribe address.
114. Gives Council authority over Ogemaa compensation while prohibiting reduction during the term and tying initial compensation to the existing Tribal Chair level.
These provisions establish an executive office considerably different from the existing Chairperson structure.
ARTICLE IX — RESIGNATION, RECALL, REMOVAL AND VACANCIES.
Changes 115–129.
115. Establishes a constitutional resignation procedure for appointed and elected officials.
116. Creates a constitutional citizen recall right covering elected officials.
117. Replaces the existing 100-signature removal mechanism with a separate recall system based on percentages of prior election turnout.
118. Requires Council recall petitions to contain signatures equal to 10% of votes cast in the previous election for that unit.
119. Requires Ogemaa recall petitions to contain signatures equal to 10% of votes cast in the previous Ogemaa election.
120. Creates a recall process for elected Judges and Justices using a 10% threshold based on the previous relevant judicial election.
121. Gives the Election Commission authority to review recall petitions and signatures.
122. Requires approved recall elections to occur between 30 and 90 days after receipt of a valid petition.
123. Temporarily disqualifies successfully recalled officials from running for elected office until their original term expires.
124. Creates a separate “removal for cause” procedure for appointed and elected officials.
125. Defines gross misconduct or malfeasance as grounds for removal.
126. Establishes specified criminal convictions as grounds for removal.
127. Moves removal proceedings into Tribal Court under enacted tribal law rather than the existing Board-created hearing-board procedure.
128. Requires most elected-office vacancies to be filled by special election between 30 and 90 days after the vacancy, unless six months or less remain in the term.
129. Establishes temporary succession procedures for Ogemaa, Chief Judge/Justice and Speaker vacancies.
The current Constitution instead contains the 100-signature removal petition and Board-created hearing-board process visible in the redline.
ARTICLE X — NOMINATIONS AND ELECTIONS.
Changes 130–138.
130. Constitutionally continues the five existing voting units and current boundaries rather than requiring their initial creation.
131. Retains periodic census/voter-registration requirements under the Tribal Council structure.
132. Creates a first election encompassing Council, Ogemaa and judicial offices under the new Constitution.
133. Allows current Ogemaa and Council members to remain in office until their current terms expire.
134. Allows existing judges/justices to remain until the first judicial election.
135. Creates special initial staggered judicial terms.
136. Establishes six-year initial terms for Chief Judge and Chief Justice, a four-year initial Associate Trial Judge term, and staggered appointed Associate Justice terms.
137. Expressly establishes all tribal citizens age 18 or older as eligible voters.
138. Retains the unit-based voting system, including the ability of citizens residing outside a unit to register at least three months before an election and select a unit in which to vote, while assigning election-ordinance authority to Council.
The transition and first-election provisions are detailed in Article X.
ARTICLE XI — SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.
Changes 139–142.
139. Creates an express constitutional sovereign-immunity article.
140. Declares that nothing in the Constitution waives tribal sovereign immunity unless specifically stated.
141. Gives Tribal Council authority to waive sovereign immunity by law for a specific scope and duration.
142. Extends immunity language to elected officials, executive officials and employees acting within the scope of official authority and separately provides judicial immunity for Judges and Justices acting officially.
The proposal's immunity provisions appear as an entirely new constitutional subject.
ARTICLE XII — RIGHT OF REFERENDUM.
Changes 143–145.
143. The existing Constitution allows Tribal Members to force a referendum on an enacted or proposed ordinance or resolution with signatures from 100 eligible voters. However the current Election Code Chapter 16 Removal from Office Code requires the greater of 100 signatures or 10% of the votes cast in the applicable election. If approved the constitution changes the citizen petition requirement to 5% of votes cast in the previous Ogemaa general election from the previous requirements.
144. Retains a 60-day deadline for holding a validly petitioned referendum but places the process within the new Council structure.
145. Replaces the existing voters participation requirement with a validity requirement tied to the ballot-return rate of the previous Ogemaa general election as opposed to 100 signatures in the original constitution.
This is a direct substantive change in the power citizens use to challenge or decide Council legislation.
ARTICLE XIII — AMENDMENTS.
Changes 146–152.
146. Rewrites the constitutional amendment process.
147. Allows Tribal Council to initiate a constitutional special election only with a three-fourths vote of the whole Council.
148. Creates an express citizen-initiated constitutional amendment process using signatures from 5% of eligible voters.
149. Requires the Election Commission to verify those petition signatures within 15 days.
150. Requires a valid citizen-initiated amendment special election to occur within 90 days after verification.
151. Establishes a 20% ballot-return requirement for constitutional amendments based on eligible voters from the previous Ogemaa general election.
152. Adds a new requirement that an amendment must win not only a majority of votes cast but also approval from a majority of the Tribe's voting units.
Therefore, a proposed constitutional amendment potentially could receive a Tribe-wide majority yet fail because it did not carry enough voting units.
ARTICLE XIV — ADOPTION.
Changes 153–155.
153. Establishes the ratification mechanism for the amended Constitution through the Secretarial Election.
154. Changes the effective-date language so the amended Constitution takes effect upon ratification under the proposed language reflected in the redline.
155. Requires Council to bring existing tribal law into conformity with the new Constitution within 18 months, while requiring Article IX implementation within six months.
The implementation requirement means adoption would trigger another substantial round of tribal legislation after the constitutional vote.
BYLAWS — ARTICLE I.
Meetings of the Tribal Council.
Changes 156–161.
156. Reconstitutes the existing Board meeting rules as Tribal Council meeting rules.
157. Increases written notice to Council members for special meetings from five days to ten days.
158. Creates an express constitutional/bylaw procedure for emergency Council meetings.
159. Allows emergency meetings upon action of the Speaker or two-thirds Council agreement and establishes a minimum 24-hour notice requirement to the greatest extent feasible.
160. Restricts emergency meetings to the urgent subject matter necessitating the meeting and expressly requires regular, special and emergency meetings to remain open to citizens.
161. Adds express notice rules for emergency meetings while retaining quorum, conflict-of-interest, committee-reporting, monthly unit-report and public-record requirements under the new Council structure.
These meeting provisions appear in the proposed Bylaws.
BYLAWS — ARTICLE II.
Duties of Tribal Council Officers.
Changes 162–166.
162. Replaces the Chairperson-centered Council structure with a Speaker-centered legislative structure.
163. Gives the Speaker authority to preside over Council meetings and exercise authority delegated by Council.
164. Replaces the existing Chairperson/Vice-Chairperson succession language with provisions governing absence of the Speaker and other Council officers.
165. Substantially reduces and rewrites the Treasurer's constitutionally specified duties: the detailed existing requirements governing custody of funds, bonding, deposits, financial records, six-month reviews, annual independent audits, real-estate transactions and countersigned disbursements are replaced with a shorter requirement that the Treasurer or designee monitor fiscal affairs and perform duties assigned by Council or tribal law.
166. Rewrites the Secretary's duties and removes from the constitutional/bylaw text the existing detailed requirement to promptly submit Board minutes, ordinances and resolutions to the appropriate BIA office, replacing it with duties designated by Council or tribal law.
The contrast is particularly substantial in the Treasurer provisions: the existing Bylaws enumerate numerous mandatory financial controls, while the proposed provision states that the Treasurer or designee will “monitor” fiscal affairs and perform duties established elsewhere.
BYLAWS — ARTICLE III.
Tribal Records
Changes 167–169
167. Retains citizen inspection rights for tribal books, records, financial accounts and the tribal roll but expressly places “reasonable disclosure” under laws to be enacted by Tribal Council.
168. Requires Council within six months to enact laws governing disclosure and “appropriate sunset laws” concerning proprietary business information.
169. Adds an express constitutional/bylaw duty requiring current and former tribal officials and employees to safeguard tribal records as tribal property.
The records provisions are contained in the final article of the proposed Bylaws.
AUDIT RESULT.
A Sault Tribe Guardian clause-by-clause review identified 169 separately identifiable substantive changes or new provisions.
Under this audit methodology:
Proposed Article V — Separation of Powers itself accounts for only Changes 25–27: three core provisions establishing the three branches and separation/checks-and-balances framework.
The remaining proposal creates or materially changes scores of provisions involving:
Citizen rights; equal protection language; eligibility for office; residency requirements; judicial appointments; non-Sault citizens serving in certain judicial positions; Supreme Court appellate discretion; legislative powers; executive powers; veto authority; taxation authority; subpoena authority; sovereign immunity; recalls; removal of elected officials; vacancies; elections; referendums; constitutional amendments; public records; financial oversight; and Council meeting procedures.
The redline therefore supports a much more precise statement than saying the Tribe is simply voting on “three-branch government.”
The most significant member-rights questions.
For purposes of reporting on how the proposal affects citizens, several changes deserve particular scrutiny.
The current Constitution expressly declares that all members shall receive equal protection under the Constitution. The proposed Bill of Rights instead prohibits government from denying “any person within its jurisdiction” equal protection, application or opportunity under law. It simultaneously adds numerous specific civil-rights protections. The proposal therefore should be described as rewriting, rather than eliminating, constitutional equal protection.
Political opportunity is not identical for all citizens.
Council candidates must satisfy unit-residency requirements; Ogemaa candidates face jurisdictional residency and eventual 50-mile Baaweting residency requirements; and the Chief Judge must relocate within 50 miles of Baaweting.
Some members of the Tribe's highest court do not have to be Sault Tribe citizens. Only at least one Associate Supreme Court Justice is expressly required to be a citizen of the Tribe, while Associate Justices are appointed by the Ogemaa and confirmed by Council.
Citizens' referendum threshold changes from the constitution's original 100 signatures to 5% of the votes cast in the previous Ogemaa election, while referendum validity becomes tied to the previous Ogemaa election's return rate.
The constitutional-amendment process also changes dramatically. Citizens gain an express 5%-petition route to initiate amendments, but passage requires a Tribe-wide majority, a 20% return rate and approval by a majority of voting units.
And the existing Treasurer provisions contain detailed financial-control duties—including custody and safeguarding of funds, bonding, financial records, periodic review, an annual independent audit and controls over disbursements—that are replaced by much shorter language directing the Treasurer or designee to “monitor” fiscal affairs and perform duties established by Council or tribal law.
Those issues are independent of whether three branches of government are desirable. They are separate constitutional policy choices bundled into the same proposed governing document.
Bottom line: The 27-page proposal is not simply a three-branch amendment. Under this clause-by-clause methodology, it contains 169 separately identifiable substantive changes or new provisions affecting the structure of government and the relationship between that government and Sault Tribe Members.
Editors Note - and disclaimer. A clause-by-clause review by the Sault Tribe Guardian of the Tribe's 27-page redlined constitutional proposal identified 169 separately identifiable substantive changes or new provisions when formatting, renumbering and terminology-only edits were excluded. While the exact number depends on how related provisions are grouped, the document demonstrates that the Secretarial Election involves far more than the addition of legislative, executive and judicial branches. The proposal rewrites major provisions governing member rights, elections, recalls, referendums, constitutional amendments, judicial authority, sovereign immunity, qualifications for office, public records and the powers of tribal government. The analysis was conducted by a third party and may be subject to correction. If you find any needed corrections or wish to comment you can write a letter to the editor, Verified Tribal Member emails will be published in the editorial section. We will not open any PDF Files because of malware risks. All letters and proposed changes of this analysis must be placed in the body of the email.
