TO TRUST, OR NOT TO TRUST
BACKGROUND
Blue Sky Indigenous Nation’s Community Trust was established in June 1994. Chief and Council signed four subsequent agreements. One of the agreements paved the way for a new four-lane highway through the reserve; however, once the highway corridor lands changed from federal to provincial jurisdiction, the Indigenous Nation was
compensated by the province. Each band member (man, woman, and child, including those entitled to be registered as band members on- and off-reserve) received a per capita distribution of $1,000 in late 1994.The remaining monies of $4.9 million were deposited in the community trust (capital account) in the fall of 1997.
The Trust is designed to be held as a long-term asset of the band and endure twenty years after the death of the last surviving descendant of those band members who were alive at the time the trust agreement was made. The trust agreement, similar to a treaty, was designed to preserve and protect the trust property, the capital of $4.9 million and revenue monies for future generations. The trust agreement is the first of its kind in Blue Sky Indigenous Nation’s history. Trustees must execute a high degree of care and diligence in administering the trust property on behalf of the beneficiaries.
The Community Trust was formed through a tripartite agreement between the beneficiaries of the Trust (band members) as represented by Chief and Council, the band members who are appointed as trustees to manage and administer the Trust property, and the corporate trustee. This agreement preserves and protects the capital.
The trust agreement lays out the terms and conditions for the operation of the Trust. Basically, trustees invest the capital monies annually to generate interest. Interest is used to pay for the office administration and projects that the band members approveby way of community vote organized by the Trust. To minimize tax implications, only the Indigenous Nation, a band corporation, or a joint venture can apply to the Trust for funding.
For a community vote to be considered valid or successful, 35%+1 of the eligible voters must participate by casting a ballot. For projects to be considered valid or successful to receive trust revenue funding, they must receive 50%+1 of the vote, once the minimum participation threshold has been met.
CONTEXT
Since 1997, the Blue Sky Indigenous Nation Community Trust has conducted eleven votes. Only four have been valid. Thus, thirty-three projects have been approved by the band membership in the aggregate amount of $2.1million. Thirty-two projects have received disbursements from the Community Trust in the amount of approximately $1.7 million, with two projects valued at $18,000 outstanding. The thirty-third project did not return the required documentation to initiate the Community Trust’s funding reimbursement process. Thus, though initially approved by the band members, this project has been officially removed from the Trust books.
Another project was cancelled by the trustees, as the project applicant did not start the project in a reasonable amount of time (within three years after the trustees had disbursed 10% or $40,000 of the project value to the Indigenous Nation’s department). Another project did not provide proper financial supporting documentation. The Trust requested such information on three separate occasions, but did not receive it.
The last valid vote was in 2009. According to the trust agreement, any unused revenue monies not used for projects as the end of the fiscal (calendar) year becomes payable on December 31 to the Indigenous Nation. Since 2010, the Community Trust has had to distribute trust revenue monies to the Indigenous Nation, as no projects were
approved by band members. Two recent audits have noted that approximately $100,000 was disbursed to the Indigenous Nation, with a third audit amount yet to be determined.
SITUATION
Participation by beneficiaries of the Blue Sky Indigenous Nation Community Trust – Blue Sky Indigenous Nation band members – in trust votes is crucial to the success of the Trust. Beneficiaries have a vested interest in the trust property being held as a long- term asset. Despite this, only four of the eleven community votes held have been valid.
That is, the majority of scheduled votes have failed to attract the minimum participation threshold of 35%+1 of eligible voters.
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
1. How could the Community Trust increase awareness and educate band members of their roles as beneficiaries of the Trust?
2. How can the Community Trust ensure band members living off-reserve feel included and become involved in decision-making?
3. What marketing strategies could be implemented to ensure future votes are valid?
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|
