NAVAJO COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSION CONVENED AND NOW COUNCIL DEBATING AGENDA.
DELEGATE ALTON SHEPHERD
ADD LEGISLATION 0101-14, AMENDING SEX OFFENDER NOTIFICATION ACT, PASSED BY NAABIK’IYATI COMMITTEE, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT ITEM D ON COUNCIL AGENDA.
Couple of weeks ago, Law & Order Committee discussed and this Legislation includes “absconding.”
I know that in previous sessions, Council is okay with voting on addition of legislation without legislation being bofore them but knowing that the legislation is on its way. And legislation is being copied and will be here.
CALL FOR VOTE TO ADD LEGISLATION 0101-14 AT 11:28 A.M.
11 IN FAVOR, 2 OPPOSED, AMENDMENT PASSES
DELEGATE MEL BEGAY
Amendment to agenda is to re-arrange item, item C be first agenda item and reason why Council having special session. these matter very important regarding Budget and Finance Committee and Council to stay on track with development of annual 2015 budget.
DELEGATE LEONARD TSOSIE
May i recommend on reshuffling agenda until all legislation added to agenda. So ask Delegate Begay to withdraw with his motion.
DELEGATE MEL BEGAY
decline request because audit very important and audit would not impact any other additions to agenda.
DELEGATE SHEPHERD
i remember signing petition for special session and Guardianship Act was number one and that is why I signed petition for special session.
SPEAKER PRO TEMP BATES
you are correct that Guardianship Act was #1 and Audit #2.
DELEGATE LEONARD TSOSIE
Ask Council to vote down Delegate Mel Begay’s amendment because Audit will take up a lot of time and keep Audit towards end of agenda. Audit is about performance and about money of Navajo people and not in best interest of Navajo people.
DELEGATE LORENZO CURLEY
I want to support Delegate Tsosie. when sat down with auditors, it took several hours and so i believe it will take longer with full council. so let’s take care of other legislation and also that is why i voted not to add Sex Offender Notification Act.
CALL FOR VOTE ON AMENDMENT TWO: MOVE AUDIT TO #1 POSITION ON COUNCIL AGENDA at 11:38 a.m.
8 in favor, 8 opposed
speaker pro temp breaks tie and votes Yes
9 in favor, 8 opposed
DELEGATE LEONARD TSOSIE
AMENDMENT TO ADD LEGISLATION 0131-14:
approve settlement agreement between Navajo and U.S.
DELEGATE MEL BEGAY
Does this LEGISLATION require five day comment period? I want legal attorneys to answer.
CHIEF LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL LEVON HENRY
EMERGENCY LEGISLATION, under Navajo law, says matters that directly threaten sovereignty and public need. I also point out Navajo Supreme Court addressed Shirley v Morgan, what is emergency legislation and Court said emergency proceedings exempt from emergency legislation. Court stated that Council made no record of threat to Navajo sovereignty so Council needs to make record. In this instance, Code allows for emergency legislation and puboic record establishing emergency. And so when legislation comes up then those answers can be answered.
NAVAJO DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL DANA BOBROFF
agree with chief legislative counsel.
DELEGATE MEL BEGAY
this is very important matter to navajo nation and to its future so we need to stand on principles and legal guidance of attorneys. so we shud allow legislation to properly come before council.
DELEGATE LORENZO CURLEY
headline of Navajo paper stated, “I will not waive sovereignty” and so i was wondering if that person knows wat talking about. Legislation 0131-14 touches on navajo sovereign immunity and so it is threat to navajo sovereignty to decide how navajo nation wud decide to use its natural resources.
DELEGATE DWIGHT WITHERSPOON
I don’t feel threat that other colleagues feel. I feel need to follow process of providing information to public about major agreement regarding US and resources.
APPARENTLY, LEGISLATION 0131-14 HAS NOT GONE THROUGH PUBLIC POSTING ON COUNCIL WEBSITE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS WHICH IS WHY I CANNOT FIND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF IT.
DELEGATE LEONARD TSOSIE
objection premature. agree with other delegates, put on agenda and if you feel not properly agenda, then vote no. Transparency mentioned and by shutting down, you are not being transparent. whole world watching so let’s let them know. and at time of presentation, information will come that if not act sooner then dollars lost and settlement being jeopardized. we have different versions of threats. i always feel threatened unlike my colleague here who is muscular. (joke) this is not illegal process. this is the use of emergency process so ask for council support. allow this and let’s discuss.
DELEGATE KATHERINE BENALLY
are we in council or committee? the urgency and emergency has not been clarified and justified to me or any of us. our sovereignty is not at stake. we don’t have a big flood or huge fire. but there’s not emergency. and yesterday, i posed question to the attorneys that are working on this and they said there’s no emergency so we need to follow our process which is drop in hopper, wait five days for people to comment. that is process we are concerned with. for me, if i brot legislation, i’m told to go have public hearings and i do. i have joint meetings with other committees too. i follow the process and everyone needs to follow the process. there is no emergency process. we shouldn’t add. and we are not saying to hide this from public.
CHIEF LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL HENRY
Delegate Witherspoon wants to know what is emergency legislation but based on Court decision, what is missing, is putting on agenda as doing now. wat have to abide by is what is that public record to insure that this legislation emergency. and if goes to court, we want to make sure that Council is protected. in listening to council debate, that is start of public record.
concern is that once gets on agenda is that colleagues feel they must vote so creating record must start now. our concern is provide opportunity for people to get informed. i support rights of indigenous peoples and free, prior and informed consent but our people not be informed even if on website. looking at email about news article and i don’t see so dk if went out and dk if any of my constituents informed. i value transparency. and i don’t feel threat that my colleagues do that if wait five days for public comment that all will be lost. i’m also concerned about having justice department on record and so i want that.
NDOJ DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL DANA BOBROFF
I can understand concern about whether this threat or emergency. right now there are not many places that attorneys can look to for established law regarding emergency legislation and so have “vacuum of law”. We agree that this is subjective decision. But question is “what is sovereignty?” there is no waiver of soveeighty immunity in this legislation. sovereignty, according to Black’s Law Book, is about how government governs its land. and there is no definition when say emergency, is it today or tomorrow. one of problems is that cuz settlement of litigation, there is lot of attorney client discussion that is needed. i’m not asking you to go into executive session but put some things out for you to consider. cuz litigation, and litigation from prior council for attorney general to sue US in federal court and they agreed to follow rules of court and that court put forth protective and confidentiality order. so it is not decision that i or legislative counsel can point to a page and say that there is the definition. i agree with Henry that to develop public record that council must begin.
