Lack of money for special election may delay vote

On Oct. 22, the Navajo Board of Election Supervisors approved language for the special election Dec. 15 in which voters will decide if they want to reduce the Navajo Nation Council from 88 to 24 and establish line-item veto authority for the president.

But it's not looking good for the Dec. 15 special election, which may be pushed back - if it is held at all.

Today (Oct. 23) is the first deadline to find money for the election to pay for absentee ballots.

On Oct. 22, the election board expected President Joe Shirley Jr., who launched the two initiatives, to submit a budget for $289,912 showing the source of funds and a memorandum of agreement for the money.

The money is coming from Shirley's office and the executive branch and will be spent by the election office, which is in the legislative branch, for the election.

Navajo finance laws mandate that Shirley must identify all the accounts for the funds, which would insure that the proper accounts are being used.

The finance law also requires an MOA between the branches before one branch uses another branch's money.

On Oct. 8, Shirley's legal advisor, Michelle Dotson, presented a budget for the $289,912 to the election board that did not include budget account numbers.

Dotson said the lack of account numbers was because no one in the president's office knew how to use a computer program that would properly show the numbers.

On Oct. 22, election board chair Larry Biltah said that election office director Edison Wauneka reported to the board that Oct. 26 is the last day to purchase ballots for the election.

The election board voted for a special meeting on Oct. 26 to resolve the funding issue.

Meanwhile, the election office continues to say that it hasn't yet got a single dollar to hold the election.

"In the worst-case scenario, we just call off the election and then I'll be in contempt (of court)," said Wauneka. "Because if we don't have any money, we don't have any money."

Council rejects money bill

On Tuesday, Oct. 20, during the council's fall session, Delegate Leonard Tsosie (Pueblo Pintado/Torreon/Whitehorse Lake), offered a bill to transfer money from the executive branch to the legislative branch.

He sought to add the bill to the agenda as emergency legislation, but his fellow delegates rejected it, saying it was flawed and presented conflicting figures.

This leaves the election office in a quandary. In June, the Office of Hearings and Appeals gave it a Dec. 25 deadline to hold the election. The hearing officer's decision was upheld in a July 30 ruling by the Navajo Nation Supreme Court.

In September, the election board voted to schedule the election on Dec. 15. This decision led to several deadlines, the first of which is Oct. 23, the final date to order and pay for printing absentee ballots.

"It's the absolute last day that we can ask for printing of the ballots," Wauneka said.

His office could forego absentee ballots "but that could be seen as a violation of the people's right to vote," he said. "We have to give everyone the opportunity to exercise their right."

Absentee ballots must be sent out 30 days prior to the election date. This gives voters who live off the reservation, or those who may not be able to reach a polling site, the opportunity to vote. In this case, that means the ballots have to be ready by Nov. 16.

"The only way, if we go beyond the 23rd (without funding), is to not have absentee ballots," Wauneka said. "But I know we're going to get criticized for that."

Without funding, Wauneka said there is little that can be done.

Tsosie questioned that.

"I don't understand," he said. "The 2010 budget covers this."

The initiatives election is a normal expenditure that the election office should be responsible for, Tsosie said. Its budget includes funds to cover these types of special elections as they arise.

Even if the election office were to find its accounts drained toward the end of the year, there are methods to resolve that, Tsosie said.

Supplemental route?

"If (the election office) uses up its budget on this, then it can come in for supplemental appropriations," Tsosie said. "To say that they can't do this because there is no money in the 2010 budget is just excuses."

Wauneka agreed that funding the election is the responsibility of his office.

However, he said, the council funds the program based on expected events in the coming year. Under this system, the election office cannot use money set aside for specific election events outside of its intended use, he said.

Shirley's aides have questioned why, with three months of advance notice that a special election would likely be ordered, Wauneka's office did not request money for it in the budget.

Wauneka said election officials did not do so because they anticipated continued litigation in the case.

"We couldn't request for funding when something was being litigated," he said.

By the time the Supreme Court released its decision on July 30, the election office's budget forms were in process, Wauneka said.

The election office also thought the ballot initiatives might be nullified because the timelines they stipulated were outdated by a year, thanks to the many delays since Shirley unveiled his government reform campaign in April 2008.

With the election office maintaining that it has no money to pay for the special election, the president's office has offered to pay for it.

"They told us they had the funds available, so there was no need to continue looking for a sponsor," Wauneka said.

However, with the council's decision not to consider the enabling legislation during the current council session, the executive branch money is not available as of the deadline of Oct. 23.

"We are ready, we just don't have the resources to do it," Wauneka said. "We are not trying to hold anything up. The only thing we have been trying to do is ensure everything is in line with (tribal code)."

Back to top ^