These questions were sent from an OIB group and provided with the following answers
Questions:
1. Please email or fax your resume to this address or at 250-498-0419.
2. Please state where you completed your education and please send copies of certificates and inform us of your actual education.
3. Are you a full time student or employed?
4. Please inform us of your present employment, describe if it is full time or part time, etc. and previous employment.
5. What languages do you speak and write fluently?
6. What are your short term and long term economic plans for the Osoyoos Indian Band?
7. What are you going to do about the Housing problems, deficits, people not paying their rent, repairs to houses done because of irresponsible tenants?
Answers:
1. Here is an attached copy of my resume and CV.
2. Education Background:
UBC Vancouver 95-98 - Arts, Major (Double) Economics and Political Science
Langara College 99-00 - Arts, Major Aboriginal Studies
Concoria University College 00-01 - Business, Business Management
Institute of Indigenous Governance 01-02 - Arts, Indigenous Governance
Thompson River's University 02-05 - Business Admin, Major Finance
BBA Degree attained in 2005
UBC Okanagan 2006-07 - Masters of Arts, Traditional Syilx Governance
UBC Okanagan 2007-08 - Doctorate, Economics from a Syilx perspective
I received my BBA from TRU in 2005, do not have a copy with me and believe it is at my dad's in a drawer somewhere (anyone is welcome to view it). I never got to complete my Master's degree, finished all the requirements, courses and thesis on traditional governance but was unable to defend, decided to move right into my Doctorate last Sept. You can have a copy of that if you'd like.
3. I am a full-time Doctorate student, but will have my courses completed this term (this month of Dec). Then I move into the research component of my degree and writing of my dissertation. I am also employed part-time and hold two (three) positions. Both are at OC and the other (third) position I am a consultant for the ONA, and that position is on an as-needs basis, whenever there are contracts that I have time to help in. The last contract I did was on sustainable development and am currently working on a project based on the socio-economic, cultural impacts of the Mountain Pine Beetle.
4. My employment is outlined in my resume, if you need any further clarification feel free to ask.
5. I am a novice writer and speaker of Okanagan, I am an intermediate listener, as I can hear/ follow conversations but can't respond or converse myself.
6. I believe that in the short-term we really need some direction from our people, to ensure we are heading on the right path, we need to address our Band's very large debt and we need to allow for transparency and accountability. In the long-term, we have to ensure that developments benefit the whole community, that the whole community has input into what developments should and shouldn't occur, at the earliest stage possible, we are at a level of unemployment that will not lower and we need to know why, membership employment targets for businesses would help as some are poorly lacking. Development benefits should trickle down to everyone, there are still people who are "poor" and we should look into why.
7. I believe that the housing issue is one that is systematic and goes deeper than the problems that we are seeing today. Over the years, the selection of who gets houses has not been fair, and there are those that were politically motivated. We need to develop policies that are fair, equitable and known and agreed to by everyone, a system that is objective, ie based on a point system. The decision of who gets a house should be known beforehand, everyone should know the criteria, and then know where they sit on the list based on that criteria, there should be no surprises. Also, there should be a public summary of the justifications of who got a house and why. Last, there should always be an appeal process; a process that itself is objective and public.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Press Release on Devaluation of Lease Land on OIB (Oct 2007)
Devaluation of Lease Land within the Osoyoos Indian Band; A Growing Trend within Indigenous Communities
Press Release
October 22, 2007
On October 30, 2007 the Osoyoos Indian Band (OIB) membership will be heading to the polls. The referendum vote is based on two questions involving lease agreements. The first question is an open ended approval of a future land designation, with no finalized lease agreement. Therefore, the focus here will be on the second land question and the lease agreement attached to it.
The problem begins with the valuation of the land provided by real estate appraisers. Real estate appraisers have no mechanism to adequately value reserve lands. I say this because the $850,000 value, placed on the 15 unit 99 year lease development located on the OIB reserve land, is far too low. Granted, the valuation is limited to an analysis of the prepaid rent value on the 99 year lease and, after Musqueum Indian Band v. Glass in 2000, business developers and appraisers have no idea how to value reserve lands. This has been an ongoing issue and problem, not only in BC but for all of Canada. However, it appears a lot has changed in the market since 2000 and the value quoted for the OIB reserve land is not the true “market rent”.
Here, a quick description on the land is needed. The land in question is adjacent to the Nk’mip Canyon golf course and is located on the shores of Tuc-el-nuit Lake. So, in terms of land that is comparable, I would have to point to the real estate developments at Vintage Hills golf course, located on the Westbank First Nation (WFN), and Sun Rivers golf course, located on the Kamloops Indian Band (KIB). Today, at Vintage Hills 1 bedroom condos are selling for $195,000 and two bedroom condos are selling for $295,000 while at Sun Rivers 4 bedroom homes are selling for $585,000 and 3 bedroom homes are renting for $1,750. Also, on 25 September 2007 at a Business Opportunities conference hosted by the Okanagan Nation Alliance, Chief Robert Louie told participants the Vintage Hills development sold out in 2 hrs.
Some will say that I am comparing “apples to oranges” that market prices on the WFN and KIB developments are values based on developed land, while, in this instance, the OIB lease agreement pertains to virgin land. However, there are two main factors that I believe need to be considered. First, Okanagan Partnerships has estimated the current population in the Okanagan is over 300,000 and is projected to increase to nearly 500,000 by 2020. Also, reserve lands are often the only land that is not developed, the OIB land here is no different. If you were to get an aerial view of Tuc-el-nuit Lake, the only land untouched is located on the OIB reserve. This circumstance creates vast development potential, especially given the projections for population growth.
So, a further analysis is needed on the appraisal value. In terms of 15 units, if we were to calculate the monthly lease payments to OIB from each unit, it would work out to $377.96 per month or $4,535.56 per year. With approximately 440 band members belonging to OIB, the yearly calculation above works out to $10.30 per year for each band member, for the total area of land leased over 99 years.
Also, it is interesting that in 2001 this very land was appraised by the very same firm. That year, the OIB reserve land in question was valued at $134,334 and jumped to $850,000 this year (2007). Fundamentally, this meant an increase in value of 632.75% over 5 years. Given this trend, if we were to reapply that same increase in value, the land would be worth $5,378,377 in 2012. And, just for fun, we reapply the trend and come up with a value of $34,031,696 for 2017. I must further add that the 632.75% increase in value was on the same virgin land.
I believe the real “apples and oranges” here is the value that we give to our land and the value that businesses and consultants say we can sell our land. We are letting buyers dictate the price and not the market. Economically, if consumers are willing to pay top dollar to the lessee, or renters of our land, why does this income not carry over to us, the suppliers and actual owners of the land? It is very simple, people will pay a premium to live by a lake, near a golf course, and as demand increases with population growth, that premium can only rise, especially if our land is the only land untouched. The evidence is there, readily available through current real estate listings. Unfortunately, we are not seeing the big picture.
As Syilx, who have an inherent right to the land, we should not grossly devalue our land so easily. This applies to all Indigenous People. If business developers continue to make low ball offers, then it is our responsibility to our great-great-great-grand-children (99 years affects the next 3 generations from today) to decline, and wait, for an honest offer that truly reflects market valuations. Because, and we should all be reminded that, we only have untouched land because our ancestors didn’t rush in and take the first offer that came their way. Should we continuously accept low offers if we are positively certain the land value will increase in the future? If anything, why not wait 10 years and sell the same piece of land for over $34 Million, which is a conservative figure in itself as I have already alluded that the $850,000 valuation is too low. So, OIB should wait … not rush-in, seems like good business sense to me.
Ethan Baptiste
Press Release
October 22, 2007
On October 30, 2007 the Osoyoos Indian Band (OIB) membership will be heading to the polls. The referendum vote is based on two questions involving lease agreements. The first question is an open ended approval of a future land designation, with no finalized lease agreement. Therefore, the focus here will be on the second land question and the lease agreement attached to it.
The problem begins with the valuation of the land provided by real estate appraisers. Real estate appraisers have no mechanism to adequately value reserve lands. I say this because the $850,000 value, placed on the 15 unit 99 year lease development located on the OIB reserve land, is far too low. Granted, the valuation is limited to an analysis of the prepaid rent value on the 99 year lease and, after Musqueum Indian Band v. Glass in 2000, business developers and appraisers have no idea how to value reserve lands. This has been an ongoing issue and problem, not only in BC but for all of Canada. However, it appears a lot has changed in the market since 2000 and the value quoted for the OIB reserve land is not the true “market rent”.
Here, a quick description on the land is needed. The land in question is adjacent to the Nk’mip Canyon golf course and is located on the shores of Tuc-el-nuit Lake. So, in terms of land that is comparable, I would have to point to the real estate developments at Vintage Hills golf course, located on the Westbank First Nation (WFN), and Sun Rivers golf course, located on the Kamloops Indian Band (KIB). Today, at Vintage Hills 1 bedroom condos are selling for $195,000 and two bedroom condos are selling for $295,000 while at Sun Rivers 4 bedroom homes are selling for $585,000 and 3 bedroom homes are renting for $1,750. Also, on 25 September 2007 at a Business Opportunities conference hosted by the Okanagan Nation Alliance, Chief Robert Louie told participants the Vintage Hills development sold out in 2 hrs.
Some will say that I am comparing “apples to oranges” that market prices on the WFN and KIB developments are values based on developed land, while, in this instance, the OIB lease agreement pertains to virgin land. However, there are two main factors that I believe need to be considered. First, Okanagan Partnerships has estimated the current population in the Okanagan is over 300,000 and is projected to increase to nearly 500,000 by 2020. Also, reserve lands are often the only land that is not developed, the OIB land here is no different. If you were to get an aerial view of Tuc-el-nuit Lake, the only land untouched is located on the OIB reserve. This circumstance creates vast development potential, especially given the projections for population growth.
So, a further analysis is needed on the appraisal value. In terms of 15 units, if we were to calculate the monthly lease payments to OIB from each unit, it would work out to $377.96 per month or $4,535.56 per year. With approximately 440 band members belonging to OIB, the yearly calculation above works out to $10.30 per year for each band member, for the total area of land leased over 99 years.
Also, it is interesting that in 2001 this very land was appraised by the very same firm. That year, the OIB reserve land in question was valued at $134,334 and jumped to $850,000 this year (2007). Fundamentally, this meant an increase in value of 632.75% over 5 years. Given this trend, if we were to reapply that same increase in value, the land would be worth $5,378,377 in 2012. And, just for fun, we reapply the trend and come up with a value of $34,031,696 for 2017. I must further add that the 632.75% increase in value was on the same virgin land.
I believe the real “apples and oranges” here is the value that we give to our land and the value that businesses and consultants say we can sell our land. We are letting buyers dictate the price and not the market. Economically, if consumers are willing to pay top dollar to the lessee, or renters of our land, why does this income not carry over to us, the suppliers and actual owners of the land? It is very simple, people will pay a premium to live by a lake, near a golf course, and as demand increases with population growth, that premium can only rise, especially if our land is the only land untouched. The evidence is there, readily available through current real estate listings. Unfortunately, we are not seeing the big picture.
As Syilx, who have an inherent right to the land, we should not grossly devalue our land so easily. This applies to all Indigenous People. If business developers continue to make low ball offers, then it is our responsibility to our great-great-great-grand-children (99 years affects the next 3 generations from today) to decline, and wait, for an honest offer that truly reflects market valuations. Because, and we should all be reminded that, we only have untouched land because our ancestors didn’t rush in and take the first offer that came their way. Should we continuously accept low offers if we are positively certain the land value will increase in the future? If anything, why not wait 10 years and sell the same piece of land for over $34 Million, which is a conservative figure in itself as I have already alluded that the $850,000 valuation is too low. So, OIB should wait … not rush-in, seems like good business sense to me.
Ethan Baptiste
Book Review on "Dances with Dependency"
EXTENDED BOOK REVIEW:
HELIN, CALVIN, DANCES WITH DEPENDENCY: INDIGENOUS SUCCESS THROUGH SELF-RELIANCE.
http://www.indigenouspolicy.org/xviv-1/xviv-1-media.htm#review
Abstract
Calvin Helin attempts to contextualize the current problems facing Aboriginal people in Canada and then offers simple and practical solutions, which he believes could apply to all Aboriginal people. This book tries to uncover why Aboriginal people's lives are subject to inequalities and hardships and goes on to suggest several psychological theories, which he believes are the origins of those problems. The author believes there is a dire need to address the social problems plaguing the lives of Aboriginal people, in order to fend off a potentially crippling economic crisis, referred to as the Demographic Tsunami. The author provides some excellent interpretations of the historical injustice, critique on current situations and political constrains of Aboriginal governance structures and instills hope in the reader that there is an end, with valid solutions, to such unrelenting problems faced by all Aboriginal people. Tragically, Helin offers nothing innovative or practical and simply mirrors and concedes to the will of the Canadian corporations and government's wishes. It is tragic because this book is so widely promoted throughout mainstream media as the answer to the problems facing Aboriginal people and now, Indigenous leadership are beginning to acknowledge and endorse Helin's misguided solutions.
The author's interpretations are wrought with contradictions, on the one hand Helin exhibits pride in his culture and traditions then refuses to incorporate any Indigenous way of life or ideology. Instead, Helin opts to reiterate the agenda of the Canadian governments through his “blueprint” presented, which is a facilitated Aboriginal migration to urban centers, forgetting of the past and individual private ownership on reserves. Also, to the enjoyment of Canadian business and industry, Helin calls not for an implementation or realization of Aboriginal Title or real self-determination but for a shift in focus to economic gains and the bottom line. Given, all the resource extraction taking place on unceded traditional territory of Aboriginal Nations, Helin calls for accommodation agreements and creation of business partnerships.
HELIN, CALVIN, DANCES WITH DEPENDENCY: INDIGENOUS SUCCESS THROUGH SELF-RELIANCE.
http://www.indigenouspolicy.org/xviv-1/xviv-1-media.htm#review
Abstract
Calvin Helin attempts to contextualize the current problems facing Aboriginal people in Canada and then offers simple and practical solutions, which he believes could apply to all Aboriginal people. This book tries to uncover why Aboriginal people's lives are subject to inequalities and hardships and goes on to suggest several psychological theories, which he believes are the origins of those problems. The author believes there is a dire need to address the social problems plaguing the lives of Aboriginal people, in order to fend off a potentially crippling economic crisis, referred to as the Demographic Tsunami. The author provides some excellent interpretations of the historical injustice, critique on current situations and political constrains of Aboriginal governance structures and instills hope in the reader that there is an end, with valid solutions, to such unrelenting problems faced by all Aboriginal people. Tragically, Helin offers nothing innovative or practical and simply mirrors and concedes to the will of the Canadian corporations and government's wishes. It is tragic because this book is so widely promoted throughout mainstream media as the answer to the problems facing Aboriginal people and now, Indigenous leadership are beginning to acknowledge and endorse Helin's misguided solutions.
The author's interpretations are wrought with contradictions, on the one hand Helin exhibits pride in his culture and traditions then refuses to incorporate any Indigenous way of life or ideology. Instead, Helin opts to reiterate the agenda of the Canadian governments through his “blueprint” presented, which is a facilitated Aboriginal migration to urban centers, forgetting of the past and individual private ownership on reserves. Also, to the enjoyment of Canadian business and industry, Helin calls not for an implementation or realization of Aboriginal Title or real self-determination but for a shift in focus to economic gains and the bottom line. Given, all the resource extraction taking place on unceded traditional territory of Aboriginal Nations, Helin calls for accommodation agreements and creation of business partnerships.
Press Release on Land Code (June 2007)
Osoyoos Indian Band Rejects the Framework Agreement on
First Nations Land Management
On Thursday June 28, 2007, after a two day vote was held, the Osoyoos Indian Band membership voted against the Osoyoos Indian Band Land Code. Therefore, the Osoyoos Indian Band will not become a signatory to the Framework Agreement on First Nations Land Management. Currently, 19 First Nations have ratified and approved Land Codes with 19 other First Nations in the development phase, with the Tsleil Waututh being the most recent First Nation to approve.
As stated on the Land Management Board website, "the initiative enables First Nations to make timely business and administrative decisions and to accelerate progress in areas such as economic development, resource management, and land use planning. This government to government initiative provides participating First Nations with the opportunity to come out from under the land administration sections of the Indian Act and establish their own regimes to manage their lands and resources, providing for more decision making at the local level".
Although the Framework Agreement on First Nations Land Management would have facilitated more development by quickening the leasing process, allowing the Osoyoos Indian Band to increase economic development initiatives, the Osoyoos Indian Band members chose to reject the Indian and Northern Affairs supported "government to government agreement". There were many outstanding issues. The Osoyoos Indian Band Land Code was in development for over two years but failed to address several of the community's major concerns. These included areas of; protection of aboriginal rights and title, extended powers of Council, jurisdiction over reserve lands and traditional territory, lands committee selection, increased liability risk and management, expropriation of individual's lands and a valid dispute resolution mechanism.
However, the greatest concern was seen in the lack of community involvement. Membership participation was restricted to editing the Framework Agreement, which was created in 1999, and sections of the Indian Act relating to land management. The Osoyoos Indian Band community felt that if there was going to be any real and true involvement, that would require a document that was originally created by the membership, from the ground up, not an edited version of what outside interests believe land management should look like. Also, it was not understood until very late in the process that "if there is an inconsistency between this Land Code and the Framework Agreement, the Framework Agreement prevails to the extent of the inconsistency" (S. 3.5, OIB Land Code). Therefore, in reality, the community felt they were voting on the Framework Agreement and not a document worked on by their members.
The community urged the Osoyoos Indian Band leadership to abandon the process. However, the leadership was determined to hold a referendum vote, even though the community wanted their concerns addressed and, ultimately, felt the process was too restrictive and did not adequately reflect their vision of land management. Holding the referendum under these circumstances sparked an "Osoyoos Indian Band Day of Action" and peaceful protest from the community membership. The protest was set up across the Osoyoos Indian Band office, where the two day referendum vote was being held, and lasted the duration of the vote. In the end, the membership decided not to accept the Osoyoos Indian Band Land Code.
Ethan Baptiste
First Nations Land Management
On Thursday June 28, 2007, after a two day vote was held, the Osoyoos Indian Band membership voted against the Osoyoos Indian Band Land Code. Therefore, the Osoyoos Indian Band will not become a signatory to the Framework Agreement on First Nations Land Management. Currently, 19 First Nations have ratified and approved Land Codes with 19 other First Nations in the development phase, with the Tsleil Waututh being the most recent First Nation to approve.
As stated on the Land Management Board website, "the initiative enables First Nations to make timely business and administrative decisions and to accelerate progress in areas such as economic development, resource management, and land use planning. This government to government initiative provides participating First Nations with the opportunity to come out from under the land administration sections of the Indian Act and establish their own regimes to manage their lands and resources, providing for more decision making at the local level".
Although the Framework Agreement on First Nations Land Management would have facilitated more development by quickening the leasing process, allowing the Osoyoos Indian Band to increase economic development initiatives, the Osoyoos Indian Band members chose to reject the Indian and Northern Affairs supported "government to government agreement". There were many outstanding issues. The Osoyoos Indian Band Land Code was in development for over two years but failed to address several of the community's major concerns. These included areas of; protection of aboriginal rights and title, extended powers of Council, jurisdiction over reserve lands and traditional territory, lands committee selection, increased liability risk and management, expropriation of individual's lands and a valid dispute resolution mechanism.
However, the greatest concern was seen in the lack of community involvement. Membership participation was restricted to editing the Framework Agreement, which was created in 1999, and sections of the Indian Act relating to land management. The Osoyoos Indian Band community felt that if there was going to be any real and true involvement, that would require a document that was originally created by the membership, from the ground up, not an edited version of what outside interests believe land management should look like. Also, it was not understood until very late in the process that "if there is an inconsistency between this Land Code and the Framework Agreement, the Framework Agreement prevails to the extent of the inconsistency" (S. 3.5, OIB Land Code). Therefore, in reality, the community felt they were voting on the Framework Agreement and not a document worked on by their members.
The community urged the Osoyoos Indian Band leadership to abandon the process. However, the leadership was determined to hold a referendum vote, even though the community wanted their concerns addressed and, ultimately, felt the process was too restrictive and did not adequately reflect their vision of land management. Holding the referendum under these circumstances sparked an "Osoyoos Indian Band Day of Action" and peaceful protest from the community membership. The protest was set up across the Osoyoos Indian Band office, where the two day referendum vote was being held, and lasted the duration of the vote. In the end, the membership decided not to accept the Osoyoos Indian Band Land Code.
Ethan Baptiste
Paper on Traditional Leadership
Traditional Governance: A Case Study of the Osoyoos Indian Band and Application of Traditional Okanagan Leadership Principles
http://www.indigenouspolicy.org/xviv-1/xviv-1-articles.htm#baptiste
Powerpoint Presentation link
http://www.sharingindigenouswisdom.org/presentations/PowerPoints/EthanBaptiste.pdf
Abstract
There are traditional Okanagan governance and leadership principles and guidelines that have been informed through language terms and traditional stories. These have been interpreted and taught to us by our elders of the Okanagan Nation. Five principles of traditional Okanagan leadership will be discussed; will of the people, leadership training, protection of the land, leading by example and continuously validated authority. These are the principles that will be applied to the leadership of today. The focus of such analysis will be on the application of these traditional principles to current governance systems, including accountability, transparency, consultation, communication and decision making. The Osoyoos Indian Band (OIB) will be the case study used to contextualize this analysis. There are several Western leadership principles that have been accepted and adopted by our leadership, at OIB and other bands and Nations. These are the Western principles that need to be Indigenized so they will benefit our communities. However, I will not stop there, as it is easy to criticize without proposing any real changes. So, following each criticism I will add my own propositions or beginning proposals to change that is needed to re-vitalize our systems of governance in order to rightly incorporate traditional values.
http://www.indigenouspolicy.org/xviv-1/xviv-1-articles.htm#baptiste
Powerpoint Presentation link
http://www.sharingindigenouswisdom.org/presentations/PowerPoints/EthanBaptiste.pdf
Abstract
There are traditional Okanagan governance and leadership principles and guidelines that have been informed through language terms and traditional stories. These have been interpreted and taught to us by our elders of the Okanagan Nation. Five principles of traditional Okanagan leadership will be discussed; will of the people, leadership training, protection of the land, leading by example and continuously validated authority. These are the principles that will be applied to the leadership of today. The focus of such analysis will be on the application of these traditional principles to current governance systems, including accountability, transparency, consultation, communication and decision making. The Osoyoos Indian Band (OIB) will be the case study used to contextualize this analysis. There are several Western leadership principles that have been accepted and adopted by our leadership, at OIB and other bands and Nations. These are the Western principles that need to be Indigenized so they will benefit our communities. However, I will not stop there, as it is easy to criticize without proposing any real changes. So, following each criticism I will add my own propositions or beginning proposals to change that is needed to re-vitalize our systems of governance in order to rightly incorporate traditional values.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
