Official defends casino vote; JP Morgan criticized

By Kathy Helms
Diné Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — Legislation passed by the Navajo Nation Council authorizing the administration to pursue a $100 million line of credit to finance gaming has a lot of people nervous, including past and present Navajo leaders.
But the agreement has not been signed, Budget and Finance Chairman LoRenzo Bates said Wednesday. “And one of the reasons the agreement has not been signed is because JP Morgan is demanding things beyond what the Council agreed to.

“Negotiations are still ongoing,” Bates said. “The only reason we’re still involved is we have a fiduciary responsibility to the Nation — the money.”

George Hardeen, speaking for the Office of the President and Vice President, said it is the duty of the Navajo Nation Council to enact law, “and that’s what it did. The courts have ruled on cases like this before and have thrown them out, because it’s not illegal for the Council to pass laws.”

“The line of credit passed by a 2-to-1 margin, it had 11 sponsors, and Council wanted to proceed, and that’s exactly what it did,” he said. The group’s allegation that the Nation’s assets are in jeopardy is “an opinion, and they can express this opinion. If they don’t like how Council acted, they can seek elected office and change how the Council acted.”

Milton Bluehouse, former Navajo Nation president, said the legislation grants broad authority to the president, controller and attorney general to engage in financial activities that pose a dangerous risk to the Navajo people’s sovereignty and assets.

Though the Navajo Council held a work session to familiarize itself with the legislation before passage, some questions went unanswered and Council voted to send it back to the Budget and Finance Committee for 30 days for review, said Leonard Tsosie, a Council delegate and former New Mexico state senator.

“The questions were on the open-endedness, the commitment fees that were included, and whether lands were being put in jeopardy — the trust lands and fee land — the repayment, and whether the Navajo Nation will pay for the loan even when it’s not using it,” Tsosie said.

There also are concerns that the action may impact the permanent trust fund. Though the attorney general and the president believe it will not, Tsosie said, “Some of us believe it does because of the open-endedness of ‘legally available assets,’ that language.

“We could have easily protected the permanent trust fund by saying ‘legally available assets except for the permanent trust fund and other reserved funds,’ ” he said, but added that the legislation doesn’t say that. “That’s where, I think, we say that this fund has been put at risk.”

The group Ha’a’da’a Sidi, “The Vigilant Ones,” which filed notice of intent to sue Controller Mark Grant, and the Navajo Nation for declaratory judgment only, is asking Council to reconsider the legislation and make sure the Nation’s sovereignty and its property are adequately protected, Tsosie said during a press conference Tuesday.
Bluehouse said the group wants to make sure that Navajo laws are complied with. During a recent session, though Council kicked the legislation back to B&F for a 30-day review, “Lo and behold, it was only five days later it was back on the table in the Navajo Nation Council,” he said.

Bluehouse said that off reservation when such matters are considered, the people generally are given the opportunity to decide the issue through referendum. “Don’t be surprised if we head down that way if things don’t work right.”

The Navajo people turned down gaming twice through referendum before Council took it upon itself to approve it. “I have my doubts now whether they would want to make a $100 million loan,” Bluehouse said.