Confusion of Fort de Buade Agreement Must Be Cleared up

To the Editor:

At a recent St. Ignace City Council meeting, the council decided to await the results of a public hearing before acting on an offer by the Sault Tribe to fund the private business known as Fort de Buade. The delay suggests that there may be some fear in the minds of some members of the Council that the Sault Tribe 2-percent monies may be cut off before the end of the pending six-year agreement, thereby leaving the city "holding the bag" for a significant portion of the purchase price. If such a fear does exist, it would seem to be well founded. As you may be aware, there is a group of Sault Tribe members, including some highly respected Elders, who object to and are working to prevent the allocation of 2-percent monies for this particular purchase. Some of those objections, all of which were based on the belief that the allocation is improper, possibly illegal, and certainly ill considered, have been communicated in an earlier letter.

It was not known until after a vote of the board had occurred that the resolution authored by Sault Tribe board member Keith Massaway had not originated with the City of St. Ignace and, in fact, the city had not been consulted on the potential money windfall until some time after the resolution had been submitted. That information was not communicated to the Sault Tribe board of directors at the time the resolution was first offered and voted on, and was not willingly communicated to the Tribe membership at any time. It was also learned subsequently that the monies to be allocated were not really for the city, but for the owner of Fort de Buade, a private party, who had agreed to sell the property to the Michilimackinac Historical Society (MHS). According to the minutes of a St. Ignace City Council meeting, the city was to act merely as a conduit - "a pass-through entity" - for moving the money from the Tribe through the MHS to the individual owner.

Several more red flags have been raised as a result of the confusion that has resulted from the apparent composition of the property, its oftchanging price, and who, in the final analysis, will hold title to the property. For example, in mid-2006, the owner offered Fort de Buade, the building and its contents, to MHS for $500,000. This conflicts with a recent St. Ignace News article by Ryan Schlehuber, in which he wrote, "The collection and other contents would be donated by the family." In the same News article, Mr. Schlehuber seemed to contradict his own earlier statement by writing, "On the table is an offer from the tribe...to purchase the building and valuable museum collection." (The emphasis is mine). Does the Fort de Buade property consist of only the dilapidated building, or does it also include all of the contents, of which the authenticities and values of many are held to be contentious? Given the above statements, the answer to that question is impossible to know.

In mid-2006, the owner set the price for Fort de Buade at $500,000. An agreement for purchase of the property (building, contents, or both?) by the MHS apparently was made at that time, as Mr. Schlehuber recently has written: "Last year, the historical society reached an agreement...to purchase the building for $500,000." (Note: There is no mention of building contents in this statement). Most recently, the purchase price has been quoted as $708,000. This latest price is consistent with that requested by Keith Massaway in the resolution presented to the Sault Tribe board in early January 2007, although that figure is fully $210,000, or 42 percent, higher than the private owner's asking price.

Why has the price of Fort de Buade escalated by 42 percent?

Mr. Massaway asserted that the additional money was needed to cover legal fees, taxes, and other financing costs associated with the purchase. Mr. Schlehuber writes: "The tribe's offer of $700,000 would be enough to purchase the property and collections and leave enough left over to start up the business." (The emphasis is mine).

Tribal members have asked for an explicit accounting of the $210,388. One specific question among several reasonable ones: Are any proponents of the Fort de Buade purchase expecting to gain financially from the distribution of Tribal 2 percent monies and, if so, who and how? To date and to my knowledge, no member has received a response to any of the questions. It is difficult to attribute the non-responsiveness to our questions to anything but total disdain on the part of those involved in the proposed transaction for the right of Tribal members to know the purposes for which their monetary resources are being expended.

It is worthwhile to note that in early 2006, a member of the Sault Tribe board of directors publicly recommended an outright purchase of Fort de Buade and its contents, citing an unsubstantiated value for the contents in the millions of dollars. It is rather telling to note also that the recommendation received no significant support from the Tribal board.

The question of title to the property to be purchased is especially confusing. It appears that the city has entered into a number of verbal agreements with the MHS, one of which assigns responsibility for the operation of Fort de Buade and for the maintenance and care of the included artifacts, and appears to confer de facto ownership to the MHS. However, MHS member Cheryl Schlehuber has explained "...that a second agreement between the city and the historical society would have to be established to give the historical society legal responsibility for operating the museum and its staff."

Ownership question aside, it is incomprehensible that an agreement would be made through which a sum of money in excess of $700,000 exchanges hands without some written understanding of the use of the money, and the responsibility for its proper disposition and accountability. Further, it is even more incomprehensible that the Sault Tribe board of directors would authorize such an exchange of monies for which they have ultimate fiduciary responsibility.

In another agreement: "The city and historical society have verbally agreed that items from the collection will not be sold. Any item to be sold would have to be agreed on by all parties involved." These two sentences clearly are contradictory. It is unclear how two parties can agree on items to be sold after first agreeing that those items will not be sold. However, if even one item of the collection is sold, or otherwise disposed of, the purpose of this undertaking, i.e., "to keep the unique collection of area artifacts and guns in the area..." will have been defeated.

And finally, "Also under the verbal agreement at this time, if the historical society ever disbands, any collections would become property of the City of St. Ignace." This agreement is additional evidence of MHS ownership of Fort de Buade property. Further, the City has agreed, "the artifacts will be turned over to the tribe in the event the City is no longer willing or able to display them." The City-Tribe agreement has a rather hollow ring to it. It is possible to visualize a scenario in which the City and the MHS will agree to sell artifacts that they have agreed not to sell until, at some point, they will have sold them all and there are no artifacts left, authentic or not. When and if that happens, the Sault Tribe will then be the one left "holding the bag."

Clearly, the evolution of the Fort de Buade purchase process and the various activities that drive the process are confusing. It is difficult to know if the confusion is the result of careless execution of questionable practices, or the skillful execution of unacceptable ones, or perhaps something else altogether. An explanation by those responsible would go a long way toward helping to clear up the confusion.I know of a relatively large segment of the tribe whose recent efforts to overturn the resolution that authorized this questionable allocation might have succeeded except for procedural omissions in the authorizing petition.

It is essential to emphasize the fact that knowledgeable Native Americans within and without the Sault Tribe are aware that valuable and authentic Anishiinabe artifacts, some with strong cultural and spiritual significance, represent a small percentage of the Fort de Buade collection.

In the near future, we will begin to explore mechanisms whereby those artifacts can be identified and ultimately transferred to the Sault Tribe for perpetual enshrinement.

As this effort progresses, we will seek guidance from traditional Sault Tribe members who possess the knowledge, background, and experience essential to the success of this culturally sensitive endeavor.

Charles E. Adams Jr.

Laughlin, Nevada