The vote is Tuesday, June 23, 2026 — four days before Homecoming begins. Request your absentee ballot now →  ·  Deadline: Must be received in the PO Box by 5PM on May 22

The text below is drawn from Exhibit 1 — Proposed Amendment to Tribal Constitution, voted 17-2 by the Tribal Council on April 16, 2026. The amendment shows both what is being deleted from the current constitution and what new language would replace it. Every tribal member has the right to read it for themselves before they vote.

What the constitution says right now — today

You already have the right to vote on gaming.
The amendment takes it away.

Article VIII, Section 1(b) — Current Lumbee Tribal Constitution

"Any ordinance imposing a tax or authorizing gaming in Lumbee territory shall be deemed to affect fundamental rights or interests of the Tribe. No ordinance certified as requiring a referendum shall be effective unless and until such ordinance is approved by a majority of those voting in the referendum, such referendum to be conducted in accordance with Article V of the Constitution."

From the Lumbee Tribe's own website — lumbeetribe.com

"The Lumbee Constitution required that any ordinance passed by the Tribal Council authorizing gaming must be certified for referendum by the membership of the Lumbee Tribe."

Source: lumbeetribe.com/faqs-history — the Lumbee Tribe's own FAQ page, published on the official tribal website.

Gaming is a fundamental right

The current constitution explicitly classifies gaming as a "fundamental right or interest of the Tribe" — not a routine administrative decision.

Chairman is required to call a referendum

The Tribal Chairperson is constitutionally required to certify any gaming ordinance for a member referendum within 10 days of passage. It is a mandatory constitutional duty — not a choice. Gaming cannot take effect until members approve it.

Full election rules apply

The referendum must follow Article V — the same constitutional rules that govern tribal officer elections. A full, formal member referendum. Not a casual vote.

The proposed amendment deletes this protection entirely. Today the Tribal Chairperson is constitutionally required to certify any gaming ordinance for a member referendum within 10 days — it is a mandatory constitutional duty, not a choice. After the amendment, that requirement is gone. Gaming is no longer classified as a fundamental right. The Tribal Council — confirmed by a 17-2 chairman-aligned majority — can authorize gaming without the chairman ever being required to put it to a member vote. The June 23 vote on this amendment may be the last time this protection exists.

Source: Exhibit 1 — Proposed Amendment to Tribal Constitution · Voted 17-2 by the Lumbee Tribal Council · April 16, 2026. The current constitution language is drawn from the provisions being amended as stated in the amendment document itself.
Article I · Section 1
Tribal Territory — What lands belong to the Lumbee Tribe
NEW LANGUAGE ADDED
Current constitution says
"The territory of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina shall include Robeson, Hoke, Scotland and Cumberland Counties, North Carolina."
What this means today
The tribe's territorial boundaries are fixed to these four counties. Any expansion of tribal territory would require a separate constitutional process.
Amendment would change it to
"The territory of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina shall include Robeson, Hoke, Scotland and Cumberland Counties, North Carolina, and any additional lands acquired by the Tribe or by the United States on behalf or for the benefit of the Tribe."
What this would mean
Any land the tribe purchases — anywhere — would automatically become tribal territory.
Why this matters

Under the current constitution, tribal territory is limited to four named counties. Under the amendment, any land purchase would automatically become part of tribal territory with no member vote required.

Most concerning provision

Article VII · Section 1 — Who controls gaming

This is the amendment's most alarming provision. It gives the Tribal Chairperson the power to negotiate all gaming contracts AND nominate every member of every gaming board and oversight board — confirmed by a Tribal Council that just voted 17-2 in his favor. One person controls contracts, appointments and oversight. That is not separation of powers. That is concentration of power.

Article VII · Section 1
Tribal Council Powers — Who controls gaming
NEW POWER ADDED
Current constitution says
The Tribal Council has general legislative powers. The constitution does not currently include specific gaming authority language.
What this means today
The constitution currently has no specific gaming provision. Any gaming authority would need to be established through ordinance subject to existing constitutional protections — including the member referendum requirement in Article VIII.
Amendment would add
New subsection (d): "the authority to approve any gaming compact negotiated by the Tribal Chairperson, to confirm the Tribal Chairperson's nomination of all members to the board of any Tribal gaming regulatory body and any Tribal gaming enterprise, and to enact tribal ordinances that permit, license, regulate or otherwise govern gaming activities."
What this would mean
The Chairperson negotiates all gaming contracts. The Chairperson nominates every member of every gaming regulatory and oversight board. The Tribal Council — which voted 17-2 in the chairman's favor — confirms those nominations. There is no independent check on the chairman's power over gaming.
Why this matters

One person negotiates the billion-dollar gaming contracts. That same person nominates every person who oversees those contracts. A 17-2 aligned council confirms. The same chairman who has not answered questions about the $3.6M profit land flip deal would control all of this.

Article VIII · Section 1 · Subsection (b)
Member Referendum Rights — Who gets to vote on gaming
EXISTING PROTECTION REMOVED
Current constitution says
"affects fundamental rights or interests of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina. Any ordinance imposing a tax or authorizing gaming in Lumbee territory shall be deemed to affect fundamental rights or interests of the Tribe. No ordinance certified as requiring a referendum shall be effective unless and until such ordinance is approved by a majority of those voting in the referendum, such referendum to be conducted in accordance with Article V of the Constitution."
What this means today
Under the current constitution, gaming requires your approval. Any ordinance authorizing gaming in Lumbee territory is deemed to affect "fundamental rights" and cannot take effect unless a majority of tribal members vote YES in a referendum. The Tribal Chairperson is constitutionally required — not merely permitted — to put gaming to a member referendum. It is a mandatory duty under Article VIII. You have a constitutional right to vote on gaming.
Amendment would replace it with
"imposes a tax on Individual Tribal Members. Any such ordinance shall not take effect until the Tribal Elections Board conducts a referendum on it and a majority of those voting in the referendum approves it."
What this would mean
The amendment deletes the gaming referendum requirement and replaces it with a much narrower protection — only a direct tax on individual members still requires a member referendum. Gaming no longer requires your vote. The Tribal Council can authorize gaming without ever asking the 67,500 members again.
Why this matters

This is the most significant change in the entire amendment. Today you have a constitutional right to vote on gaming. If this amendment passes, you lose that right. The Tribal Council — confirmed by the chairman's 17-2 majority — can authorize a billion-dollar gaming enterprise without ever asking tribal members to approve it. The June 23 vote on this amendment is the last vote you will ever cast on gaming if it passes.

What the amendment does NOT change

Your right to vote on direct taxes remains protected. Under both the current constitution and the proposed amendment, any ordinance that directly imposes a tax on individual tribal members still requires a majority referendum. The amendment narrows the referendum right — it does not eliminate it entirely. But it does eliminate it specifically for gaming.

Summary — three changes at a glance

Article What changes Effect on members
Article I Territorial definition expanded to cover any land the tribe acquires Future land purchases become tribal territory automatically
Article VII Chairman negotiates all gaming contracts and nominates all oversight board members One person controls gaming contracts and picks who oversees them, confirmed by a 17-2 aligned council
Article VIII Gaming referendum requirement deleted — replaced with narrower tax-only protection You lose your constitutional right to vote on gaming. The council can authorize gaming without asking members.

What a fair gaming referendum or better amendment looks like

Voting NO on June 23 is not the end of the conversation — it is the beginning of a better one. When we say "Demand Better," we mean a specific, concrete better. Whether the path forward is a new amendment or a direct member referendum, here is what it must include.

Important background — not part of the amendment

The Lumbee people deserve a full public accounting of the concerning $3.6M profit land flip deal — who authorized it, where the money came from, and who owns Western Agricultural Holdings. This is not something we can require as part of an amendment, but every tribal member deserves this transparency. A billion-dollar gaming enterprise should be built on honest accounting. We are still asking. Read the full story →

1 A fair vote open to all eligible enrolled members

In 1994, when tribal leadership wanted the Lumbee people to truly decide on their constitution, they held the referendum during Homecoming — over several days — when thousands of members from across the country were already gathered in Pembroke. 8,233 members voted — more than 30% of eligible voters, the highest turnout in tribal constitutional history.

The current gaming amendment vote is scheduled for Tuesday, June 23 — four days before Homecoming begins. A better amendment vote must be held during Homecoming, over multiple days, with absentee voting available to all eligible enrolled members (18 years of age or older) regardless of where they live.

1994 — Done right

During Homecoming · Multiple days · 8,233 votes · 30%+ turnout

2026 — Current plan

June 23 — Tuesday, four days before Homecoming begins · Single day · Most members not yet arrived

2 An independent gaming oversight board elected by members

The current amendment gives the Tribal Chairperson the power to nominate every member of both the gaming regulatory board and the gaming oversight board — confirmed by a council that voted 17-2 in the chairman's favor. That is not independent oversight. That is one person overseeing himself.

A better amendment requires gaming oversight board members to be elected directly by tribal members — not nominated by the chairman. Board members should serve staggered terms so no single administration can replace everyone at once. At least a majority of board members must have no financial relationship with any gaming vendor, contractor or management company.

Current amendment

Chairman nominates all board members · Council confirms · No independence

What we need

Eligible enrolled members elect oversight board · Staggered terms · Conflict of interest protections

3 Gaming revenues directed to tribal services for members

The amendment must specify — in the constitution itself, not in a side ordinance that can be changed later — that gaming revenues must be directed first to:

  • Healthcare for Lumbee members across all four counties
  • Education — from early childhood through higher education
  • Housing assistance for families living in poverty
  • Infrastructure across Lumbee territories
  • Elder care and services
  • Economic development in Robeson, Hoke, Scotland and Cumberland Counties

All revenue distributions must be publicly reported annually and independently audited. No gaming revenue should flow to outside companies or consultants beyond capital investment returns and disclosed operating costs.

Why this matters

A side ordinance can be amended by a simple council majority at any time. Constitutional protection cannot. If gaming revenue obligations are not written into the constitution, there is no guarantee the money ever reaches the people who need it most.

4 Land acquisition oversight — no more secret deals

Any land purchase above a set dollar threshold — for example $500,000 — must require tribal council approval by supermajority and public notification to tribal members before the purchase closes. No more Wyoming shell companies. No more $3.6 million profits to mystery entities. Every significant land acquisition gets a public record, a council vote, and member notification — before the money changes hands.

Why this matters

The concerning $3.6M profit land flip deal — $3.2 million to $6.8 million in days — happened without any public tribal council authorization vote and without any tribal member being informed. A better amendment makes this structurally impossible.

5 Explicit conflict of interest protections

The amendment must include explicit constitutional language prohibiting the following people from having any financial interest in any gaming vendor, contractor, management company or land deal connected to tribal gaming:

  • The Tribal Chairperson
  • Any Tribal Council member
  • Any gaming board or oversight board member
  • Immediate family members of any of the above
  • Any lobbyist or attorney retained by or connected to tribal gaming

The people who oversee gaming must have no financial stake in its outcome.

6 The power to govern gaming must remain with the people

The power to govern gaming must always remain with the people — not permanently transferred to any individual, council or outside party. The Lumbee people must always have the constitutional right to revisit, reform or revoke any gaming arrangement that does not serve them.

A fair gaming referendum or better amendment answers four questions

Who decides?

All eligible enrolled members (18+) — through a fair vote held during Homecoming over multiple days, with absentee voting for members living outside the territory.

Who oversees?

An independent board elected by members — not appointed by the chairman or confirmed by his council.

Where does the money go?

To tribal services and infrastructure for our elders, our children, our families — publicly tracked, independently audited and constitutionally protected.

What it takes to win — and what it takes to reverse it later

Understanding the vote threshold on June 23 — and what happens if the amendment passes — is the most important strategic information any tribal member can have before June 27.

Defeating the amendment on June 23

The Tribal Elections Board is conducting the June 23 vote as a proper constitutional special election under Article XIII. That means the threshold is straightforward — a majority of qualified voters who show up and vote. There is no minimum turnout requirement in Article XIII. More NO votes than YES votes.

The bottom line: Voting NO on June 23 is the easiest path. It requires only a majority of those present. Everything that comes after — if the amendment passes — is harder.

If the amendment passes — what it takes to reverse it

The only way to reverse a passed amendment is through another constitutional amendment under Article XIII. There are two paths.

Path 1 — Council proposes it

14 of 21 council members must vote to propose a new amendment. The same council that just voted 17-2 in favor of this one would need to reverse course. Extremely unlikely unless political dynamics shift dramatically.

Path 2 — Members propose it ★ Most realistic path

A petition signed by 5% of eligible members 18 and older — approximately 2,000 signatures. The Elections Board then posts it and conducts a special election within 60 days. A majority of those voting adopts it. No 30% turnout threshold required. This is easier than an Article VI challenge in every single respect — half the signatures, no council veto step, no second round of signatures, and no minimum turnout to make it binding.

The crucial difference: A member-initiated replacement amendment only needs 2,000 signatures to trigger a special election — and passes by a simple majority of those who vote, with no minimum turnout. The 2021 tribal chairman election drew 3,412 total votes. A replacement amendment election could realistically pass with similar turnout.

But there is an important caveat: After a YES vote on June 23, tribal leadership can move immediately — negotiating gaming compacts, appointing board members, approving land. A replacement amendment campaign would take months to organize. By the time a better amendment passed, contracts may already be signed, board members appointed, and decisions made that are difficult or impossible to unwind. Getting the amendment right on June 23 is far cleaner than trying to fix it afterward. A YES vote is not permanent — but the damage done in the months before a replacement passes may be.

The one thing that cannot stop gaming — the Article VI referendum challenge

After the amendment passes, members could theoretically challenge a gaming ordinance through the Article VI referendum process. But the numbers make this structurally impossible.

~4,000

Signatures needed just to force the council to reconsider (10% of ~47,000 eligible voters)

~8,000

Signatures needed within 30 days after council refuses, to trigger the actual referendum election (20%)

~12,000

Voters who must participate in the referendum for the result to be binding (30% turnout)

The historical record makes this almost impossible in practice — and tribal leadership knows it.

Path What it requires Realistic?
Vote NO on June 23 Majority of those present vote NO — Elections Board certified Yes — most achievable path
Member-initiated replacement amendment after a YES vote 2,000 signatures → special election → majority of those voting. No 30% threshold. Easier than Article VI in every respect — but leadership moves fast in the meantime. Possible — but the damage done while organizing it may be hard to undo
Council-initiated replacement amendment 14 of 21 council members agree to propose a replacement Unlikely given 17-2 alignment
Article VI referendum challenge 4,000 signatures → council refuses → 8,000 more signatures in 30 days → 12,000 voters participate No — practically impossible

The vote is June 23 — four days before Homecoming begins

If they truly wanted the Lumbee people to decide

They would hold the vote during Homecoming — over several days — the way it was done in 1994 when over 30% of eligible members participated.

1994 — How it was done right

The constitutional referendum was held during Homecoming, over several days — June 27 through July 2, 1994. Thousands of Lumbee members were already gathered in Pembroke from across the country.

Result: 8,233 votes cast — more than 30% of eligible members. The highest voter participation in any Lumbee constitutional election in history.

The constitution passed overwhelmingly — 8,010 in favor and 223 against — 8,233 total. The community had spoken.

2026 — How this vote is scheduled

The gaming amendment vote is scheduled for June 23, 2026 — a single Tuesday, four days before Homecoming begins on June 27.

Lumbee members in Baltimore, Detroit, Raleigh, Charlotte and across the country typically travel to Pembroke during Homecoming week — not the Tuesday before it starts.

A vote held before most members arrive is not the Lumbee people deciding. It is leadership deciding for them.

What a fair vote would look like

A fair vote on a constitutional amendment that affects all 67,500 Lumbee members would be held during Homecoming, over several days — when thousands of members from across the country are already gathered in Pembroke. It would allow absentee voting with a reasonable deadline. And it would give members adequate time to read, understand and discuss what they are voting on. June 23 — a single Tuesday four days before Homecoming — is none of those things.

Lumbees United for Accountability is not an anti-gaming coalition. Our members hold a range of views on gaming. What unites us is this: the Lumbee people should decide — and if gaming eventually passes, revenues must be directed to tribal services for members — healthcare, education, housing, infrastructure and elder care — not to outsiders, insiders or Wyoming shell companies. One man should not negotiate the contracts, appoint the gaming board, and the oversight board, confirmed by a council that voted 17-2 in his favor. That is not oversight. That is concentration of power. Vote NO. Demand Better!! The Lumbee people deserve a referendum or better amendment.

Read the full amendment analysis → Contact tribal leadership →

Lumbees United for Accountability is not an anti-gaming coalition. Our members hold a range of views on gaming. What unites us is this:

01

The Lumbee people deserve a referendum or better amendment on gaming — with real oversight and real transparency and a real balance of power, not the currently proposed concentration of power.

02

Voting NO does not stop gaming. It forces a referendum or a better amendment — one with independent oversight, transparent revenue reporting, and a balance of power.

03

If gaming eventually passes, revenues must be directed to tribal services for members — healthcare, education, housing, infrastructure and elder care — not to outsiders, insiders or a Wyoming shell company.

Vote NO. Demand Better!!