No money for Black Mesa water project

Copyright © 2008
Gallup Independent
By Kathy Helms
Diné Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — A supplemental appropriation request for nearly $5.2 million to construct a Black Mesa waterline extension failed to pass Budget and Finance Committee Wednesday.

Not because the committee doesn’t support water for Black Mesa residents or the Many Mules Project, but because: No. 1, there’s no money in the Undesignated Unreserved Fund Balance, and No. 2, the proposed alternative of taking the money out of the Permanent Trust Fund could precipitate a run on the fund when it comes before the Navajo Nation Council.

B&F’s Nelson Begaye said it also concerned him that Wednesday was the first day of the new fiscal year and already there are requests for supplemental appropriations.
Delegate Amos Johnson, sponsor of the bill, said the proposed legislation is designed to provide reliable, safe drinking water for residents within the vicinity of the Peabody Coal lease area.

“People within the lease area have been hauling water for cooking and bathing for many years, and continue to do so today. This doesn’t sit well with me and some other delegates — for elders and children to have to haul water while the rest of the United States has indoor plumbing,” he said.

Johnson said the same proposal has gone to the Capital Improvement Office but didn’t rank high enough because of the rugged terrain and cluster of homes. Nevertheless, Indian Health Service recommended the project be funded, and at one time, it was recommended that Peabody pay for the water project, but that fell through, he said.

B&F Chairman LoRenzo Bates asked Controller Mark Grant for the balance in the UUFB. Grant said the Undesignated Reserve balance stands at zero and the Minimum Fund Balance, which should be at around $16 million and had been at $12.7 million before being tapped during last month’s budget session, now stands at $8.1 million.

Begaye said he agreed that the project is needed but added that because Council dipped into the Minimum Fund Balance, any extra money would have to go there first.

B&F’s Lorenzo Curley suggested taking money out of the Permanent Trust Fund and asked Legislative Counsel Frank Seanez what kind of waivers would be needed to do that.

“The reason I think this project should be funded by the Navajo Nation is a lot of the funding that’s generated is by coal activity.

“I was at a meeting last year in Black Mesa, and residents filled the meeting saying that when you started drilling and mining, you promised us water, but that didn’t happen,” he said. “You give money to these outside corporations to finance businesses but you don’t give it to our own people.”

In order to dip into the permanent fund income there would have to be a five-year plan, and at present, there isn’t one, Seanez said, adding that an expenditure from the permanent fund income may be waived only by a 90 percent vote of all members of the Navajo Nation Council. Expenditure of the principle from the permanent fund is not provided for except by referendum vote and approval by two-thirds of those voting.

Jonathan Nez said residents of Black Mesa have been ignored for decades. “Last year the chapter went through some hardship because of the roads, as happened last winter. People lose their lives because of the roads out there. We just approved a solar project out there so people are finally getting a glimpse of what the rest of the world enjoys.”

Begaye said he was not against funding the project, but, “I think there’s a lot of things we need to stop and do first before we go on another shopping spree.”

B&F’s Ralph Bennett said, “My concern is what’s happening back East, on Wall Street and Main Street. That’s a global thing too. We have to protect that Minimum Fund Balance. It’s way low. Suppose what’s happening back East will affect us. Where do we get the money to keep our government in operation? “I think we need to have a moratorium on appropriations and allocations until the Minimum Fund Balance is restored to $16 million.”

Curley said he has read about what’s happening on Wall Street. “The situation is going to continue until somebody figures out what to do. Our money, we use it or we lose it.”
The plan failed 2-3 with Bates casting the tie-breaking vote, citing the lack of a five-year plan, no money in the UUFB, and saying that opening the door on the Permanent Trust Fund would be detrimental.