EDITORIAL: Changes to Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe property boundaries minor, but a relieving conclusion
The relatively minor changes enacted by the lawsuit between the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe and several local authorities do not reflect the considerable amount of time it took to be settled.
The trial was filed in 2005, and had not been part of the public’s consciousness for years. This changed when the Mount Pleasant City Commission approved the agreements of the during a closed session at their Nov. 8 meeting. The court must receive concerned citizens’ comments in the mail before Nov. 19, a relatively small window of time.
All parties entered negotiations in 2009 and verbally agreed to the 12 agreements of understanding before the Mount Pleasant City and the Isabella County commissions approved the agreements on Nov. 8 and 9 respectively. Though he had a representative at the negotiation, Attorney General Mike Cox filed an objection Wednesday.
His objection may delay an important and already time-intensive decision, but Cox voices some equally important concerns.
First it was the lack of transparency, as he argues the constituents have not had enough time to look over the terms of the agreement and have not received enough information. He also states the details of the agreement will not be publicly available until after the state, city and county have adopted it.
After five years of pending litigation, starting with the tribe against the governor, attorney general and the treasurer of Michigan, adding the U.S. on the side of the tribe in 2006 and Isabella County and the city of Mount Pleasant on the side of the state in 2007, not much has changed.
The city will continue to have limited jurisdiction on tribal land, especially within the “tribal enclave” outlined in the agreement. However, the city and the tribe will collaborate more in terms of law enforcement, from sharing documents to applying zoning ordinances.
It is important they reached this agreement so both parties can move on. Though the borders of the tribe had stood uncontested for more than 150 years, leaving this dispute in a judicial moratorium makes court cases and other decisions more difficult for residents.
The confusion stems from the differences in the trial process for crimes that occur in “Indian country” and those that do not.
This does allow residents to hold their elected officials responsible since the public can only petition the court after these three parties have approved the agreement.
