Reducing Navajo Council
seen as retaliation

By John Christian Hopkins
Diné Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — President Joe Shirley Jr.’s idea to reduce the Navajo council from 88 members to 24 is seen as retaliation by some.

“Initially, as I read the press release on the reduction, I thought it is just a retaliation against the council, the current sitting council, for overrides,” Speaker Lawrence T. Morgan said.

It is also odd that it took Shirley halfway through his second term to “find his platform and begin working on it, six years after coming into the office,” Morgan added.

In a release issued by his press officer, George Hardeen, Shirley said Navajo people expressed their desire to see the Council reduced to 24 members in a 2000 tribal referendum. The president believes the people still support it, and when he campaigned for re-election, he said he would “pursue it diligently” in his second term.

In a scathing open letter to the president, Judiciary Committee Chairman Kee Allen Begay questioned the initiative and whether it would benefit the Navajo Nation.

“YOU are severely misleading our Navajo people of your justifications and it is very obvious that it’s just another tactic of retaliation against the Legislative Branch!” Begay wrote. “As I always said about you and your staff, you put your oppression in full throttle ... when it comes to putting down the Navajo Nation Council.”

Reduction of Council will obviously create a situation where communication with local residents — at the local level, chapters — suffers, Morgan said.

A reduction in the number of council delegates “would greatly improve government efficiency and effectiveness, balance power between the legislative and executive branches of Navajo government, significantly reduce micro-management by Council oversight committees, return the legislative branch to its intended policy-making function and vastly cut the bloated cost of the Council’s operations and expenses,” Shirley’s release stated.

But Morgan thinks the president’s plan would increase costs, and it appears undemocratic.

“Decisions would be made omitting the ‘people’, that would not be a democracy, but rather a dictatorship operation,” Morgan said. “The hasty move is to save money, I suppose; but it would limit services to the people, put a limitation on everything to everyone.

“It defeats the intent of any government services. The government’s expectation is to deliver services to all members of the nation,” the speaker added.

Morgan also was concerned that Shirley’s “cost-cutting” only seemed to be cutting into the legislative branch.
“What are the executive and judicial branches contributing to this splendid idea?” Morgan wondered. “Trying to make changes in a single branch is not a ‘government reform’, but a ‘government deform’.”

Delegate LoRenzo Bates, chairman of the Budget & Finance Committee, said he was concerned with the president’s plan because no feasibility study was done, no estimate of what its impact would be.

Begay said the president should look at his own executive branch appointees, such as division directors, if he wants to find out why the needs of the Nation are not being met.
“Which of your corrupt programs or divisions do I need to point out to you, that you are NOT effectively addressing or making corrections in your own programs, but instead blaming the Navajo Nation Council (for) your unsettling issues?” Begay wrote.

Begay also took the president to task for his comments that the current 88 delegates waste the tribe’s money.

“Is it really a wasteful spending of our 401K savings and benefits? Have you ever put into consideration that the Navajo Nation Council use their own vehicles when conducting their duties; unlike your executive branch, which has a fleet of gas guzzling SUV’s. And you or your staff doesn’t pay a penny for the wear and tear of these vehicles or even pay for the gas! And not to mention insurances!

“Now tell me who is taking advantage of the free-loading, utilizing the Navajo people’s money? Now compare the Navajo Nation Council’s supposedly wasteful spending with your Executive Branch salaries? What’s the average salary of your top political appointees? I believe its $80,000 or more (including your press officer getting paid much higher just to jet out negative information),” Begay wrote. “And your staff assistants also average around $55,000 or more just to pick up checks at the cashiers or just drive around (Window Rock)!”

“I also believe they also have deferred compensation, 401K’s and other benefits. Now average out your staff salaries and the NNC stipends, tell me which drawing out more,” Begay added.

Shirley’s initiative also pointed out how the council routinely waives the law when making appropriations.

But the president does that when its convenient, Begay said. He said laws were waived for the casino efforts, Desert Rock and paying litigation costs, Begay pointed out.

Begay also questioned the president’s open door policy, and suggested he needed to follow the Navajo concept of K’e.

“Why is it that you pose questions or just spill your dirty laundry for the whole world to see? Why is it that your office is just smudging our Great Navajo Nation (People) and Our Navajo Nation sovereignty with endless negative issues and remarks?” Begay wrote. “I will be convinced to support your effort should you, Mr. President Shirley, justify your initiative decisively and accurately ... We can tackle these issues only if we could talk and deliberate on it in our own Navajo language and Navajo thinking.”

On Tuesday, Shirley’s office submitted ballot language to the Navajo Nation Election Administration on two initiative questions, reducing council’s size and giving the president a line-item veto.

Now, an estimated 16,000 petitions signatures must be gathered and certified for the initiative measures to be included on the 2008 general election ballot.

Shirley’s goal is to obtain as many as 25,000 signatures within 90 days to ensure that the measure makes on to the ballot. Under tribal law, he has six months to gather the needed signatures.

If voters approved Shirley’s initiative, it could take effect during the 2010 elections.

Delegates must introduce legislation on the council floor, so it remains to be seen where Shirley’s initiative will go.
“Just because the president makes a huge intimidating move, it doesn’t necessarily mean the legislators will accept,” Morgan said. “That’s democracy.”

John Christian Hopkins can be reached at Hopkins1960@hotmail.com