Lack of ruling has Hopi tribe in turmoil

By Kathy Helms
Staff writer

KYKOTSMOVI, Ariz. — A ruling by pro tem Judge Geoffrey Tager on whether the Election Board erred when it certified Hopi Tribal Chairman Benjamin Nuvamsa perhaps could end the uproar among Hopi Tribal members over the chairmanship, but that ruling could be dragged out indefinitely.

In the meantime, petitions are flying with no end in sight, and Monday’s session of the Hopi Tribal Council was disrupted by Nuvamsa supporters who called for the removal of all council members voting in favor of nullifying the election.

They also called for the termination of General Counsel Scott Canty and termination of the contract with Phoenix attorney Erin Byrnes who is representing council members that voted to nullify the election.

The supporters’ petition was presented after Council representatives Caleb Johnson and Phillip Quochytewa Sr. had Canty draft a resolution that would cancel and rescind “all prior and existing delegations of authority, duties, and responsibilities formerly delegated by the Council to the Office of the Chairman.”

The legislation has not yet been placed on the council agenda, but was printed in the Tutuveni, the tribal newspaper, which is believed to have prompted Monday’s disruption of the council session.

Last Thursday, Hopi Tribal Court granted a request by Byrnes to designate contempt citations against Hopi Vice Chairman Todd Honyaoma Sr. and Tribal Secretary Mary Felter as civil citations. The motion has been pending with the court since June.

“When they cited both of my clients for contempt, they didn’t designate it one way or the other, and I certainly don’t want either of my clients having any criminal record for following the directives of council,” Byrnes said.

Nuvamsa had the two arrested earlier this year on contempt citations for violating the temporary restraining order that restored him to office after council booted him out by approving Resolution H-036-2007 that nullified the election.

On Aug. 22, Tager ruled that council’s action was unconstitutional. However, a majority of the council members recently voted for Byrnes to appeal that decision.

Byrnes said Monday that she will be filing petitions to disqualify the three Appeals Court justices that heard the original petition on the extraordinary writ and temporary restraining order filed by Nuvamsa “because they have already heard substantive matters and issued orders, although temporary, on substantive matters.”

“We’ve been asked to file those motions by Friday, and I think the other side has 10 days to respond. I also asked the court that it hear and decide that request for disqualification before requiring us to file our appellate briefs.” She also will be filing a motion for an extension.