Assistant Principal Chief candidate Amanda Proctor answers a question during the Osage News Political Debates on June 23. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
By Shannon Shaw
Osage News
Scott BigHorse and Amanda Proctor faced off at the Osage News Political Debates for the Office of the Assistant Principal Chief. Both candidates will be judged by the Osage people on Election Day July 19 for the runoff candidates in the principal chief and assistant chief races.
The candidates were asked eight questions and were given three minutes to answer with one minute for rebuttal. The questions were formed by a seven person question committee made up of Osage News staff and four Osage tribal members; Jason Bussey, Bruce Cass, Marie Rumsey and Jennifer Tiger.
The debate was held on June 23 at the WahZhaZhi Cultural Center in Pawhuska with more than 100 people in attendance. The event was filmed and broadcast live on osagetribe.com and the link to the video is also at the end of this story.
Who would you like to work with as your Principal Chief and why?
“Both have good qualities, both have expertise in the health field,” BigHorse said of principal chief candidates John Red Eagle and Tim Tall Chief. “As assistant chief I could bring in other avenues of expertise. I have experience in law enforcement, in children – abused or neglected.
“They’re both very, very qualified. I’ve been under the arbor with both gentlemen and the Native American Church with [John] Red Eagle,” BigHorse said.
Proctor had a very different answer. Since she is an attorney she pointed out that if the question were in a deposition or a legal proceeding she would have had the question striken from the record because the way a person votes is personal and not even a judge could force a person to disclose their vote. But she thought both men would serve admirably.
“I think for me to answer this question would be a tremendous disservice . . . we as Osages know that this kind of a rift, if created, could last a lifetime. But beyond it being a disservice to me personally it’s also a disservice to the nation and to you,” she said to the audience. “Because the chief and assistant chief have to work together, we have to function as a team and we have to function as a team right out of the gate.”
Administrative competence in tribal government can be a power asset. It must exist in order to deliver quality services and programs to its citizens, attract and retain good people. How will you help the Executive Branch develop the competence to effectively administer its programs and services?
“A good executive director or tribal operations officer . . . I think that person is the cornerstone of an effective tribal government and we have to have the best and the brightest that Indian Country can offer in that capacity,” Proctor said. Proctor is a former housing director for tribal programs and a former program clerk, where she said she got her “sea legs.”
“I’ve done everything as a housing director from writing grant applications, drafting environmental review records, drafting Indian housing plans,” she said. “I’ve rolled up my sleeves and done all of those things and I’m prepared to do all of those things [again] and get this ship sailing smoothly.”
BigHorse said that the cornerstone of the Executive Branch begins with the chief and assistant chief and that to attain administrative competence they need to lead by example. He also touched on that he would like to ensure that the employees receive quality training.
“I think that’s something we need to put in place so that our directors can enhance their abilities and have the additional tools that it takes to run their departments,” BigHorse said. “I would like to see some form of Bill of Rights for our employees, because of the ‘gag order’ . . . the Executive Branch should have an open-door policy.”
Proctor disagreed with BigHorse and said that it will not be her job as assistant chief to micromanage the employees.
“The chief and assistant chief need to be accessible to the employees and citizens but I disagree . . . the chief and assistant chief have some big fires to put out and some real important tasks that need to be handled on a government to government basis and some of these other entities we have issues with such as the state, the [National Indian Gaming Association] and the Secretary of the Interior,” Proctor said. “It’s going to be my job to take that ball down the court; it’s not going to be my responsibility to worry about whether an employee filled the gas tank in the GSA vehicle.”
BigHorse said that maybe Proctor misunderstood him and that in his experience as a state representative good leadership started at the top.
“I think maybe my comments were taken out of context. I’m not talking about micromanaging, I’m talking about setting up a leadership program so that our directors and our employees have proper training in order to deliver services for our people and that does begin with the Executive Branch and it filters down,” BigHorse said. “Every organization I’ve been in starts at the top and it works its way down.”
How will you inspire executive branch employees to higher levels of performance if a merit system is not passed by Congress?
“There are many, many facets of that and one of those is team building and facilitating meetings, learning how to facilitate a meeting and some of that training is something our people need to lift their spirits,” BigHorse said. “If we’re not going to have a merit based system then we need to enhance our employees to the fullest of their ability and that’s what they’ll receive through training. We have Osage people who are in this field, we wouldn’t have to go outside and hire a firm to bring in.”
Proctor said that without a merit system the Nation would first need to make sure all the employee’s salaries were compliant with federal budget parameters; currently the Nation is on a 2003 government pay scale.
“There have been a number of surveys conducted regarding employee satisfaction and most of those surveys have reported that money is not the number one consideration to feeling job satisfaction where other issues such as feeling empowered and feeling appreciated for your work that matter more for the employees,” Proctor said. “When we talk about this merit system we talk about as though it’s discretionary and to some extent it’s not. Because there’s a little document put out by the Office of Management and Budgets, Circular A-87, and it applies to all federally funded tribal programs and that document states that salaries for those federally assisted programs must be necessary and reasonable and how we determine they are necessary and reasonable, the only way to do it really is to compare.
“And you compare not only internally, tribal program to tribal program within one tribe, but you compare those programs to other programs and you compare those tribal programs to other government agencies to make sure that we are paying those people within our federal budget parameters. So we really need to have a way to salary grid and we need to implement that now before we are called on that in a federal program audit as has happened to several of the tribes that I work with,” Proctor said.
If a citizen personally called you to complain about a program or service they didn’t receive, how would you handle the situation?
“As I stated earlier I’ve been a housing clerk and I’ve been a housing director for two tribes and one of those two tribes I am presently a lawyer for in their housing services area and as a housing director I’ve dealt with a lot of complaints,” Proctor said. “One of the things that has served me well is to have a grievance policy and I’ve always had a grievance policy and I had real thorough procedures for how a person attained redress from their unsatisfied service delivery.”
The policy would begin with an informal process and ends with a grievance hearing if the matters not resolved formally and there is always a follow-up to make sure it was resolved.
“We don’t have a grievance policy here at the Osage Nation and I know that because I’ve been aggrieved myself a time or two. I had an issue with the Housing program personally and an issue with the child care program personally and both times I was told that there was no grievance policy,” she said. Proctor said that she wrote a letter by hand and sent it through the proper channels and the outcome was chaotic because there was no formal process. “So, certainly [a grievance process] is something I would implement and I would implement right away.”
BigHorse said he would speak directly to the directors of the programs that received the complaints and ask them to resolve the issue themselves.
“When I was a state legislator I received many calls like this and in my capacity as a state legislator the way that we handled it in both the house and senate side was to call that director in that was over that program and give him the information,” BigHorse said. “There are two sides to every street, just because someone has made a complaint doesn’t mean it’s a viable and legitimate complaint but you still want to hear that person out.
“So you call that director in and you talk to that director and you explain the situation as it has been explained to you and then you allow that director to go down the chain to the person that the person is grieving on and then you let them work that out, you follow up with that director, you call that director back in or you set a time for that director to come back in with a resolve,” he said.
Proctor disagreed.
“I would not defer accountability if it were a grievance that was brought to my attention as [assistant] principal chief. Referring that matter to the program director handle it or not in his or her discretion would not be satisfactory to me,” Proctor said. “I would want to personally follow up with that person and make sure the problem was resolved and if it wasn’t resolved let’s follow through.
“Sometimes we have to be creative and look outside of what the Osage Nation can offer, I’ve had housing clients come to me and they couldn’t be served through HUD [U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development] programs but maybe they can be served through the USDA or some other agency . . . and we explore all of those options to do everything that we can to help that person,” Proctor said.
BigHorse maintained that his chain of command method would be the best way to handle complaints.
“A part of the process, the end process is following up with that constituent,” BigHorse said. “So, that is part of the process, when you talk to that director and that director takes it on down the line in whatever capacity and they work their way through that process and they bring it back to you and you respond to that constituent that gave you that call.”
Do you believe in per cap payments, and please explain why or why not?
“I believe in our future that we do have the ability for per cap but however at this time right now . . . we have many issues that may be costly issues that we’re going to have to deal with,” BigHorse said. “So before we look at any per cap we need to take care of our in-house business and make sure that it is all taken care of and if we have a surplus of monies and we have a rainy day fund and we’ve got backup monies, then yes, I am for per cap.”
Proctor said it would be up to the Osage Nation Congress to make the call on whether or not the Nation would have a per cap payment because it would call for an amendment to the tribe’s revenue allocation plan. The amendment would be subject to the chief’s veto power but she said at this time it isn’t a good idea.
“I think we have a lot of budgetary issues . . . we’ve got to save jobs, we’ve got to save as much as we can for those three casinos that are not on trust restricted land that are in jeopardy and it’s not time to think of new pressures that we can put upon our revenues,” Proctor said. “It’s time to tighten our belt straps and really thinking about what’s important to this Nation.
She said once the casino debacle is taken care of, the Nation’s elders, children, all the housing issues addressed and the Nation’s income is up than she would be open to a per capita payment.
BigHorse disagreed with Proctor in that he said not all good ideas are born from the Congress and that good ideas do come from the Executive Branch.
“I disagree that all ideas must be born in Congress, the Executive Branch is there and they are going to be some of our brightest of the bright in order to sit in those seats and there are a lot of policies that come out of the Executive Branch that are passed down to congress,” BigHorse said.
Proctor said that the legislative branch controls the purse strings of the Nation’s government and it would be up to Congress to allocate the money for the per capita after they make an amendment to the tribe’s revenue allocation plan.
“I don’t disagree that the Executive Branch can generate good ideas and can bring those ideas to the attention of Congress, I’ve certainly got a lot of ideas myself, but an amendment to the tribe’s revenue allocation plan would fall within Congress’s purview,” Proctor said. “I’m certainly open to the possibility of per capita payments but that would depend on the revenue stream or liquidity and that is something that [only those Congress members] sitting in those chairs now knows.”
How do you plan to become an active figure in policy making as our new Assistant Chief?
“In my experience in the state legislature I plan on hitting the ground running, I do not have to go to any sort of school to learn how to develop policy, I’ve developed policy on the state level and I’ve also developed policy for Indian Country on the national level,” BigHorse said.
While in the state legislature he joined the National Conference of State Legislators, he was on the Native American Caucus that was made up of approximately 90 state legislators that addressed the needs of Indian Country throughout the United States.
“We would look at those problems and try to come up with a solution, and we would develop a policy, and then the attorneys from NCSL would take our policy request to Capitol Hill for consideration to be offered before Congress in a bill form,” he said.
Proctor said she already has policies in mind and as an attorney for a number of Indian tribes in Oklahoma she’s seen some of the best and worst practices. She said she crafts policy and makes policy recommendations on “pretty much a daily basis” and only wants to implement the best policy practices she’s seen.
“One of the policies that I think is absolutely critical and time sensitive is a land acquisition program because only persons of half Osage blood or more can hold land under restriction, those people, unfortunately, are becoming fewer and fewer and they’re not leaving what we call Qualified Indian Heirs,” she said. “Those are persons who would be qualified to hold land under restriction usually because of their degree of blood. So we’ve got to go out and find those lands, we’ve got to buy those lands, and we’ve got to lease those lands now before those lands pass out of restricted status.
“No one’s making any more land and certainly not making any more restricted land so that would be a number one policy goal that I would put into place as assistant chief,” she said.
Another policy she would to develop a detention facility that would serve prisoners from Indian tribal justice systems, those would be misdemeanor offenders, usually with alcohol driven offenses because tribal court jurisdiction is limited by federal law to one-year incarceration or a $1,000 fine, she said. There is not one facility of that kind in Indian Country or Oklahoma, not one that takes adult offenders.
“I think this could be not only be a great service to Indian people but it could be a source of economic development,” Proctor said. She also said she would expand housing to all areas of the reservation, not just Pawhuska.
BigHorse responded with a question to Proctor. He wanted to know where she planned to put a detention facility.
“This is the field I come out of, corrections, prisons, it’s a good idea. It is a money maker. Right now the state of Oklahoma has approximately 6,000 adult prisoners in private prisons in the state of Oklahoma and they’re paying $50 a day,” BigHorse said. “The state of Oklahoma houses the same inmate, a little bit tougher inmates, because the private prisons get to pick the cream of the crop.
“The state of Oklahoma houses inmates at $28 a day, my question is where are we going to place this, whose backyard is this going to be and are they going to be willing for us to put it in their backyard?” he said.
Proctor named off the small towns of Ralston, Fairfax, Hominy, Barnsdall, Shidler and Burbank as a few examples of places on the reservation where a detention facility could be built.
“My mother and uncle who are sitting here grew up in a little town called Elgin, Kans., about 20 miles north of here and it doesn’t really exist anymore and what I’d like to do is build this prison in a place where people need jobs and people need hope and people need opportunity because this kind of facility would provide jobs not only as correctional officers . . . but also in the therapeutic area because we would need to provide these people with services,” Proctor said. “Again, they’re misdemeanor inmates, alcohol driven offenses, they’re not felons, they’re not hard core, they’re Indian people who need help and I would like to put these facilities in places where our people need help in the form of jobs.”
If elected, what will your level of responsibility be in relation to the Minerals Council?
“Mine would be as a backup and cooperative role. I know that these past four years that crucial issues have come up and the Minerals Council was needing some of their own travel money and that money was not approved for their travel and in my opinion they’re the ones that should be managing that money . . . we are there to cooperate with the Minerals Council because they are a separate entity,” BigHorse said.
Proctor said she didn’t know of any direct responsibility she would have if any with the Minerals Council but she would like to have a working knowledge of the council’s activities.
“I’m the attorney of record in the case of Fletcher vs. United States . . . and I believe very strongly in the principles behind that case and I believe that non-Indians should not be sharing in those mineral royalties,” she said. “I will hope to monitor that case and will hope to convince the Minerals Council that they too should monitor that case in some way. At least one share was returned by a defendant in that case, a church, and there are more settlements in the pipeline and someone needs to create a fund to pull those shares as they come back in.”
The plaintiffs in Fletcher vs. United States, William Fletcher and Charles Pratt, are asking that all section four royalty payments to shareholders only be paid to Osage shareholders and that all non-Osage shareholders and non-Osage entities be required to give back their shares.
BigHorse said that he didn’t think the majority of Osage shareholders knew about the Fletcher case or what the case stood for. He also said that the attorneys in the case are asking for too much money.
“The only problems that I have with this case is right now the attorneys are asking for $2 million and I would like to hear where that $2 million is going to come from because personally as a shareholder I don’t think all shareholders are aware that this lawsuit is out there and I don’t think they’ve been asked if they want to be a part of that law suit,” BigHorse said. “That’s something that needs to be taken back to the Minerals Council and the Minerals Council should, I believe, do a possible survey if they have over 50 percent of the people that want to pursue that litigation then that’s fine and the money would come out of our shareholder’s money, but that’s the only place where I see that money could come from.”
Proctor disagreed.
“I’m not sure which lawsuit Mr. BigHorse is referring to, I know there are several lawsuits pending, the lawsuit I am the attorney of record on, the Fletcher vs. United States case, I am unaware of any demand for attorneys fees – in fact the attorneys have carried the freight on that case for the last eight years and the attorneys, with their own money, spent up to $50,000 to accomplish this service [when] almost 1,700 non-Indian individuals and entities are collecting those distributions,” she said. “I don’t disagree that the shareholders don’t know what’s going on and that’s because no one on the tribal side is monitoring that case.
“We have heard from the defendants in that case and they’ve tried to give their shares back and we’ve communicated with the various chiefs of this Nation about giving those shares back and they’ve either received no reply or told it was impossible. It’s not impossible and it needs to happen,” she said.
How will you handle disputes with the Congress?
“The key to avoiding disputes is communication,” Proctor said. “The assistant chief is in a very strategic position to build those relationships between the Congress and Executive Branch so I would feel it was incumbent upon myself . . . to explain the disadvantages and the advantages of those laws, to convey the beliefs or the objections or reservations of the principal chief, if that be the case, so those amendments can be made during the legislative process instead of on the back end.”
She said her tribal clients prefer her to be at their council meetings because she brings her mediation practices with her and their meetings always go smoother.
BigHorse said his idea is to bring the chief and the Speaker of the Congress together.
“My idea is to bring the chief and Speaker of the [Congress] together and set up a mediation process so when there are disputes [those] two sides can come together with an unbiased person and sit down and talk through their issues,” BigHorse said. “[They can] come to a common ground without having to file lawsuits and pay attorneys outlandish wages to settle something that is probably simple enough that you can sit down at a table and come to an agreement to.”
Proctor did not disagree with BigHorse and agreed that the lawsuits between the Executive Branch and the legislative branch needs to stop.
“I believe it’s a tremendous waste of resources to fight inter-branch and that’s certainly something that hurts those branches and hurts the Nation,” she said. “I think we’ve got to find that middle ground however we can find it and I think the key to that harmony is communication.”
BigHorse maintained that his mediation policy will work.
“The mediation policy is the key, it is the answer and I also hope that the lawsuits are cut down to nothing but as you all know and we have attorneys who are sitting in this room right now, any one of you out here can file a lawsuit on me tomorrow for wearing this shirt I’m wearing tonight, and that’s just a fact of life folks,” BigHorse said. “To me the mediation process, putting it in place in conjunction with the Executive Branch and the Speaker of Congress and its members is of the utmost importance.”
Click below to view the video of the Osage News Debate for the runoff candidates:
http://www.osagetribe.com/electioncandidates/welcome_sub_page.aspx?subpage_id=9
Click below to hear the story by Susan Shannon from Indian Times on KGOU-KROU:
http://www.kgou.org/content/mp3/2010_06_26-27_i_times_mixdown.mp3
Osage News Political Debates moderator Jim Hill and Susan Singh announce the debate rules during the Osage News Political Debates on June 23. Both are volunteers from the League of Woman Voters of Greater Tulsa. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
Assistant Principal Chief candidates Scott BigHorse and Amanda Proctor listen to the debate rules given by moderator Jim Hill during the Osage News Political Debates on June 23. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
About 100 people attended the Osage News Political Debates on June 23 featuring the four candidates for Principal Chief and Assistant Principal Chief. Those candidates will face a runoff election on July 19. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
Assistant Principal Chief candidate Amanda Proctor answers the first of eight questions given during the Osage News Political Debates on June 23. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
Assistant Principal Chief candidate Scott BigHorse answers the first of eight questions given to him and fellow candidate Amanda Proctor during the Osage News Political Debates on June 23. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
Assistant Principal Chief candidate Scott BigHorse answers a question during the Osage News Political Debates on June 23 in Pawhuska. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
Audience members listen to the Assistant Principal Chief candidates answer questions during the Osage News Political Debates on June 23 in Pawhuska. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
Osage Nation Assistant Principal Chief candidates Scott BigHorse and Amanda Proctor shake hands after participating in the Osage News Political Debates on June 23 in Pawhuska. Photo by Chalene Toehay/Osage News
