I agree with Darlene Phillip's letter of Dec. 20.
Sound off on the important issues at
Sealaska shareholders are faced with an important decision on the proposed resolution to allow the enrollment of shareholder descendants and to issue life estate shares to descendants of original shareholders. I share Darlene's views that Sealaska's shareholders do not have enough information or options to make an informed decision. I share her opinion that shareholder descendants should also have the right to vote; they are entitled to nothing less. Creating new shareholders, as the resolution proposes, is like telling a new American citizen, you are now an American, but we are taking away inherent rights to vote.
I see an opportunity for shareholders to send a clear message to Sealaska. I ask shareholders to do this:
Allow Sealaska to submit the resolution as it now stands with no change.
Use direct votes to reject Sealaska's proposed resolution. Vote no using directed votes; discretionary voting allows Sealaska to vote for you.
Vote no to force the resolution to fail, and shareholders can propose a new resolution that works in the best interests of the original shareholders and their descendants.
If the resolution for shareholders decedents is defeated, that's OK. There is still time to draft a shareholder resolution that works for everyone. We will send a clear message that shareholders are concerned about their corporation, by using the power of voting directly. Shareholders of Sealaska have the power to voice their opinion about the direction of Sealaska by casting directed votes, just as in the same way voting Americans sent a clear message about demanding change to America's leaders.
Directed only votes will take discretionary voting power away from Sealaska management, which is what we need. Never cast a discretionary vote. Directed votes will tell Sealaska management that shareholders have reached a pivotal point and are demanding change. We can use our voting power to control the election of board members. Talk to other voting shareholders, if four of 10 people voted directly, we could provoke change.
The shareholders need to use this controversial topic to their advantage. By voting no to the enrollment of shareholder descendants, we need to do it right and bring the descendants issue to the table again, only on the shareholder's terms.
Raymond E. Austin