MRS.TINA BOLTON
P.O. Box 11
Gitwinksihlkw, B.C.
V0J 3T0
(250) 633-2311
January 6, 2005
Nisga?a Administrative Decisions Review Board
P.O. Box 221
New Aiyansh, B.C., V0J 1A0
Dear Members:
I believe the 2004 Nisga?a Regular election was not carried out properly and in substantial manner in the spirit of the Act that it so deserves.
I?m writing in response to my application to declare the 2004 Gitwinksihlkw election\referendum invalid under section 60 of the Nisga?a Elections Act.
This is a written submission to declare the 2004 Nisga?a Regular Election invalid, even if this written submission is after the fact. Here are some of my reasons.
Submission after submission has fallen on your desk. Some submissions were rejected because of early submission, done before the November 10, 2004 date. Our elections held on October 27, 2004 ? November 2 our elections officer declared the results. Approximately 6 days had passed before our results were made public. In my opinion these applications were relevant to the issues -- given the enormity of the issues that lie with the outcome of the process in which the 2004 Nisga?a elections was carried out. After compiling these complaints, concerns, submissions etc. I only hope you come to the right decision at days end. Which to date does not look favorable because of the time lapse given for your board to come to a conclusion with regards to the submissions put forth after conclusion of the day?s process.
Here are some of my questions and concerns with the outcome of your decisions with regard to my submission. Residency was one of the reasons of my submission but so was the fact that the candidate was not a registered village member and that she is registered under the Laxgalts?ap Village Government. So in essence she is sitting at our table representing us and her PER CAPITA DOLLARS are flowing through Laxgalts?ap. Village governments thrive on per capita dollars and the constituents of Gitwinksihlkw are all aware of our struggle with this issue ? one with which I hope will be addressed by our village government.
.
On the voters list dated October 8, 2004 and in accordance with section 10(2), 15(1)(2), and 94(c) of the Nisga?a Elections Act - voters list GITWINKSIHLKW ? it states ? IF YOUR ADDRESS ONLY LISTS YOUR POST OFFICE BOX, YOU MUST REGISTER YOUR STREET ADDRESS TO BE ELIGIBLE AS AN ORDINARY RESIDENT. What sort of paper submission was put forth by the candidate that satisfied the residency clause issue? Does she have a street address in our community? Does she have a registered P.O. Box # in our post office? You only need to browse through our voters list to answer some of these questions ? because she is not on there. Why, was it technical error or human error? Where these taken into consideration or addressed and I guess the paper work was in order why you were satisfied that no part of the election act was broken or seriously overlooked when determination of residency arose. If you have proof of ordinary residence then all this would not be applicable. If you have this kind of proof then forward that pertinent information to myself to satisfy my thoughts of question.
In my opinion, it was premature of our government to go ahead with the bi-election (so it is called) for the village of Gingolx while this review was on-going. This in itself should have raised the red flags for someone and the bi-election for Gingolx should have been put to a halt until these issues where dealt with. And further why was it that there was a declaration to have a bi-election for Gingolx when George Moore Sr. was declared winner for the Chief Council position for that particular village, as stated in the declaration of the voting results of the 2004 Nisga?a Regular Elections put out by our Elections Officer, Ms. Bright. To make matters worst Ms. Bright was allowed to conduct the bi-election for Gingolx even though her conduct throughout the 2004 election was questionable.
I would like to make this clear that yes I am an unsuccessful candidate for the Gitwinksihlkw 2004 election and further this was not the reason for my submission. My submission was done on the basis that the election process was not carried out in the spirit of the act ? given not only my submission but all the written submissions and facts put forth by the public of our Nation to date. Too many mishaps had taken place within the process otherwise all these submissions would not be sitting on your desk and yes, they are vital to the issues and concerns that have come forth in regards to our elections and the manner in which it was carried out. That is the outcome of this issue ? WAS THE ELECTION CARRIED OUT TO ITS FULLEST EXTENT, BECAUSE IT DESERVES SO, THE FOLLOWING OF THE NISGA?A ELECTIONS ACT AND PROCEDURES? In this case I have come to the conclusion NO ? my opinion stands final.
Again I hope by the end of the day you will come to an honorable decision with regards to the many concern that have come to light in regards to our 2004 Nisga?a Regular Elections that have come through your doors.
Without Prejudice.
Sincerely,
Tina M. Bolton