Menu
Categories
Navajo Council: Deleting Legislation to appoint new speaker
January 29, 2014 Professional Journal

HERE AT NAVAJO COUNCIL WHERE COUNCIL RECEIVING LEGAL OPINION FROM NAVAJO DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REGARDING DELEGATES VOTING ON LEGISLATION WHEN DELEGATES HAVE CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

NDOJ DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL DANA BOBROFF
Best to understand is to read Shiprock Chapter resolution Whereas clause and question is whether Delegates facing charges should step down and that is the answer that is being answered.
DOJ structructured by restructuring questions: whether Delegates charged is automatically removed. Delegate charged and not convicted would not authormatically be removed. There are no laws that DOJ cud find. Council cud put delegates on administrative leave if seriously violated trust. Due process important. Cannot do in executive session. Delegate would have to understand, opportunity to respond, do whatever necessarily in court.
Registered voters have opportunity and right to recall Delegate. As you are all aware, the grounds for recall are solely within rights of voters and grounds for recall not subject to review. Any recall ever starts with recall petition signed by 60 percent of voters that voted in last election.
For delegates, it would have to be signed by 60 percent of voters that voted in last election. What pointing out is that Tuba City delegate has no say over Shiprock delegate. If recall not challenged then election.
Elected official to be recalled gets on recall election.
Last avenue mentioned is Council remove for just cause and there are stringent due process requirements have to remove. 11 NNC 4281, primarily on conviction.
However two provisions is breach of fiduciary trust and don’t require conviction.
Difficult to understand what chapters asking and will ask them again.

DELEGATE LEONARD TSOSIE
Delegate Russell Begaye asked about Delegate serving cuz of conflict but this memo doesn’t touch. Delegate Curley asked about voting when have conflict and related to two chapters asking if Delegate remain active. Not asking for removal but active which means whether have voting capacity.
But memo is out and most Delegates know about removal requirements. But other question is tougher question and I guess it will remain unanswered.

DELEGATE WITHERSPOON
Going to question of Delegate R.Begaye and I didn’t get opinion so want opinion.

NDOJ DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL BOBROFF
Council can remove legislation from agenda with 2/3 vote and call out of order when legislation missing something.

DELEGATE RUSSELL BEGAYE
163C I don’t see where item to be ruled out of order to remove from agenda. Once agenda adopted, amended only by 2/3 vote of Council.

NDOJ DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL BOBROFF
You can amend your agenda by calling legislation Out of Order.

DELEGATE KATHERINE BENALLY
I believe precedence is law and we set over and over when Council ruled legislation out of order. And yeah there were challenges and we respected challenges. There are precedences numerous times.

DELEGATE LEONARD TSOSIE
Ask Bobroff and based on interpretation, here we have one delegate changing agenda cuz he ruled out of order so is he out of order. Remember he can’t fire you. I interpret Delegate R. BEgaye’s interpretation as allowing one person to change agenda by calling legislation out of order to just delete legislation. And there is law that prohibits that. And law mandates that Council agenda only be changed with 2/3 vote. And now we have to challenge Speaker Pro Temp ruling that Legislation 0011-14 is out of order.

NDOJ DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL BOBROFF
Delegate Tsosie makes good arguement but I still believe that legislation ruled out of order cuz has specific defect does not amend agenda, it goes into default. And ability to challenge protects legislation. And another protection for legislation is you cud vote on it.

SPEAKER PRO TEMP EDMUND YAZZIE
Now go back to Delegate Tsosie’s challenge of my Ruling that Legislation 0011-14 is out of order. Simple majority vote.

Leave a Reply
*