Election still at whim of warring sides

The Dec. 15 special election in which voters chose to reduce the Navajo Nation Council by more than two-thirds is still not resolved, more than a month later.

Although the Office of Hearings and Appeals on Jan. 15 dismissed the complaint filed by a Western Agency voter, Tim Nelson, his group, Diné for Fairness in Government plans to file an appeal this week.

"There are several issues we want addressed," said Nelson, who filed the complaint on Dec. 23. "This should be open for discussion and we should be provided a hearing at any time."

The results of the Dec. 15 election, in which about 60 percent of voters approved to reduce the council from 88 to 24 members, cannot be certified until the complaint is resolved. Voters also approved granting the president line-item veto authority.

Nelson said neither he nor the group had received the $150,000 allocated by the council's Intergovernmental Relations Committee in December. However, the group has moved forward and hired a lawyer, John Trebon from Flagstaff.

Nelson said he signed an agreement with Trebon who will represent the group immediately and will be compensated when the funding is in place.

"I had to sign my life away," Nelson said, half-jokingly. "I know we've got a lot of support from council delegates and the speaker's office."

Administrative hearing officer Karen Bernally dismissed Nelson's complaint on Jan. 15, agreeing with Shirley that the complaint did not list the appropriate parties, namely the Navajo Election Administration or the Navajo Board of Election Supervisors. Nelson listed in his complaint only President Joe Shirley Jr. and his initiative committee.

Nelson "has not joined the Navajo Board of Election Supervisors and the Navajo Election Administration in this case," Bernally's ruling states. "They are indispensable parties to this case."

Nelson's complaint cites a 1989 law designating the council at 88 members and states a supermajority of voters - approval from all precincts and a majority of all registered voters regardless of turnout - is required to change that law.

However, a 2009 opinion from Attorney General Louis Denetsosie stated that an initiative - launched by voter-endorsed petitions - did not fall under the supermajority rule. The Navajo Nation Supreme Court issued a similar decision, invalidating laws that make it impossible for voters to decide the shape of their government.

Nelson's other grievances include the lack of police officers at polling sites, voters rejected for not voting in the previous election, timelines stated in the signature petitions but not on the ballot, and the lack of an "adequate plan" for the impacts of the reduction.

In his motion to dismiss filed Jan. 11, Shirley argued that he and the initiative committee had no say in the election process, therefore the complaint was misdirected.

Shirley also stated that Nelson's concern over the initiative process should have been addressed in 2008 when his committee initially turned in the petitions asking to put the questions on the ballot. The process allowed for complaints to be fielded within 10 days after the petitions were turned in, Shirley stated.

However Nelson said considering Shirley has stated he is not a part of the election process, Nelson shouldn't be bound by the 10-day timeframe to file a complaint. However, he expected to meet with Trebon Wednesday afternoon to solidify the strategy of his appeal.

Meanwhile his group, Diné For Fairness in Government, has fallen under fire for its intent to accept public funds to pay for its cause.

Nelson said such complaints are valid, however, the group will go beyond this case.

"This is not a one-shot deal for us," Nelson said. "Ultimately, we'd like to see other issues come up. Primarily, this would become an advocacy group in government reform overall."

Back to top ^