Letters | Dust to duty - Navajo Times

Posted by Navajo Times | Oct 9, 2025 | Letters |

Dust to duty

Editor,

This past weekend, although it was very windy, I took a chance to take the Low Mountain Road to shorten driving time to the Shiprock fair. All summer long, I would come from the west into First Mesa and see the dust covering the entire valley from Low Mountain. This dust is caused by vehicles transporting people to work and school. I was not surprised to encounter the number of vehicles that day also on the 13-mile stretch of dirt road.

I complement the Hopi Transportation for its attempts to maintain the road with its limited budget. However, I could see the areas repaired were already damaged by the recent rainstorms and the blowing sand. Of course, I was driving my pickup chitty and was able to maneuver the condition of the dirt road. Evidence of broken vehicle parts are shrewd along the road possibly due to the rough road condition.

My immediate thoughts were of our people having no choice but to use the road for a direct route to our destination and saving gasoline expenses. For an all-weather road system, one would have to drive almost to Chinle, south toward Ganado, and east to Keams Canyon. This is the route at times Hopi High School would travel to transport students from the area. This dirt road remains the best to serve response for emergency services for police, fire, and EMS ambulance.

The permission to construct an all-weather road was granted by the leaders of First Mesa almost 50 years ago. The project became a victim of the Navajo-Hopi land dispute and allowed to be stalled for years. President Zah and I, during our cooperative talks, identified this an important route for our people and the result was a BIA agreement for maintenance. Our inquiry did produce a right-of-way and design documents. This allowed the tribes to work on a cooperative long-term federal legislation for special congressional funding. We both left our position as tribal leaders with hopes that our successors would continue the project.

Having no progress, the local people created a grassroots group to continue the struggle for congressional and tribal support. The surrounding Navajo chapter officials, First Mesa Consolidated Villages leaders, former Navajo Council Delegate Kee Allen Begay, Arizona Department of Transportation Board member Jesse Thompson, and Arizona state legislators conveyed to discuss a plan. What resulted was the Arizona state legislator appropriated $2 million to assist the project. Both tribes held meetings to continue the support of the Navajo state legislators and ADOT until the Hopi chairman told the Navajo legislators this was not a priority of the Hopi Tribe.

Some of us remain strong of the need for better roads to serve our tribes and particular this road, which will serve the entire Four Corners areas.

I still feel the deep sorrow for the loss of my brother and friend, Mr. Peterson Zah. During my drive this past weekend, I reminisced our talks and what positive results it created, including the support of the federal government, especially Congress. I sometimes urge to forget the project but must continue to respect the need of our grassroots people.

I recently traveled to Window Rock to visit the Navajo Tribal Council speaker without an appointment. She was not in her office, so I left a message for her to call me, however, knowing I was not a constituent.

My promise to Chairman Zah, I will dedicate myself to continue the reality of this project with all the spiritual help.

Our traditional and religious leaders still own the land but without financial resources to construct the road.

I’m now retired but must devote my time to continue work for the betterment of our people, especially our children.

Ivan Sidney
Kykotsmovi, Ariz.

Line-item monster

Editor,
The origin of the line-item veto power given to the Navajo Nation president in 2009 can be described as a manifestation of the malevolent “Big Monster” (Yé’iitsoh), part of a group of naayéé’ (monsters) that posed a threat to our people before the hero twins, as detailed in Navajo folklore and history.

The line-item veto has been used by every Navajo Nation president since 2009. This includes Joe Shirley Jr., the late Ben Shelly, Russell Begaye, Jonathan Nez and Buu Nygren. The incremental and methodical abuse of the line-item veto authority has now created a chaotic and appalling governmental practice, used as a form of political retribution.

In 2009, then-President Joe Shirley, Jr., and his co-conspirators, Patrick Sandavol and Arbin Mitchell, first proposed the line-item veto, purportedly to stop the overspending of discretionary funds, which at the time had depleted the Unreserved Undesignated Fund Balance.

We cannot forget that a time of great division between the Council and president marked another turning point in our Navajo government during Shirley’s second term and the 19th Navajo Nation Council. The core of their “clash” (Shirley v. Morgan) was the debate about government reform, shrinking the Council from 88 to 24, and granting line-item veto power to the president. It was during Shirley’s State of the Nation address on April 21, 2009, that he announced the formation of a “Presidential Task Force on Government Reform.”

After the 2006 election, the Council and president both strong-armed the Commission on Navajo Government Development (“Commission”), “a special entity created by the Navajo Nation Council with quasi-independent authority, responsible for developing and advancing a comprehensive government reform proposal for the Navajo Nation,” as noted in Resolution CD-68-89.

The Navajo Government Development Act of 2007 was introduced by then-Speaker Lawrence Morgan and Delegate Charles Damon II. Consequently, they passed Resolution CO-37-07 on October 16, 2007, and it abolished the 12-member commission. A deceptive justification for abolishing the commission was that it had not generated any government reform models; however, the truth is that the Council and the president each had plans to present their own proposals for reforming the Navajo government.

Ten days before October 26, 2007, the Navajo Nation Council voted (48-22) to put President Joe Shirley Jr. on leave while they investigated his involvement in the OnSat and BCDS business dealings, which led to the Nation losing millions.
On December 15, 2009, in the absence of the commission (despite its original authority under Resolution CD-68-89), the Overreaching and Cunning Shirley Administration hastily and with dubious maneuvering and funding, put before the Navajo People an initiative petition to reduce the Council, and the line-item veto authority. Hence, the concept of checks and balances and the separation of powers, foundational principles of a three-branch government, have since shifted.

Dana Bobroff, the former chief Legislative counsel, called the president’s line-item authority “an ultimate power check.” In my years of thorough analysis of Navajo government reform, I could not agree more with Ms. Bobroff; the ultimate power check is what the Navajo people witnessed on September 15, 2025, in Resolution CS-44-25 – the Navajo Nation’s Comprehensive Budget for Fiscal Year 2026. Overstriking $22.8 million, forcing the dismissal of employees, and slashing programs.

My team and I previously studied the dubious line-item vetoes of past Navajo presidents, observing a trend of modifying laws and, in some cases, inserting their own language and unjustified funding amounts. The line-item veto is currently being abused and used for retaliation. For instance, in Resolution CS-44-25, Nygren’s line-item veto targets the Legislative Branch, its committees, and abolishes the LDA program, eliminating over $8.8 million from the Legislative Branch. It is an egregious overreach, with the executive branch making laws, which is entirely against a representative democracy.

Here is what’s perplexing: in 2010, the 19th NNC under Speaker Morgan, the Navajo Nation Supreme Court ruled that the Council’s action was illegal, citing a section of the Navajo Nation code that said all amendments to Title Two, especially the commission and its office, must come from the people and the commission and then be approved by a vote of the people.

The Navajo Nation Supreme Court ordered the Council to immediately reinstate the commission, return its administrative staff, and fund it (Shirley v. Morgan, No. SC-CV-02-10 [Nav. Sup. Ct. May 28, 2010]). As a result, the Council’s move to disband the commission was disputed in the highest Navajo Nation Court and was later ruled, “to restore the Commission.”

Aside from the May 2010, the Navajo Nation Supreme Court’s order to the Board of Election Supervisors to certify the initiative petition results after a challenge by the Council expired, there have since been no legal challenges to the courts. The Council made numerous unsuccessful attempts to modify the wording of the line-item veto over time. The line-item veto hasn’t faced a unified effort to be overturned via a referendum measure, although the authors of the initiative petition in 2009 inserted what they view as a safeguard language of “If approved, this initiative may be repealed or amended by the initiative process only.”

My analysis boils down to this: the 2009 petition process, under Title 11 of the Navajo Nation Code, Section 404(A), was led by the Navajo Nation government and its agents or staff, not the “People.” The referendum process, as cited at Title 11, Section 403(A) – Referendum measures referred by the Navajo Nation Council, is yet another path to put a ballot measure before the Navajo People.

I distinctly remember that two former chief Legislative counsels from the 23rd and 24th NNCs agreed that the initiative and referendum process produces the same outcomes. Both the initiative process and the referendum process are two automobiles, if you will – a Ford and a Chevy, a vehicle that goes from point A to point B. It achieves the same end; the outcome is a ballot question for voters to decide.

The core of Title 11, Section 409(C)(1)(2) states: “Legislation from a referendum/initiative can only be amended or repealed: 1. By the outcome of a vote on a subsequent referendum or initiative election concerning the same subject matter as that of the referendum/initiative which originally adopted the legislation; and 2. For a Navajo Nation-wide referendum or initiative election, by three-fourths vote of the full membership of the Navajo Nation Council at a regular session of the Navajo Nation
Council.”

I reiterate, the Navajo Nation Courts have yet to address the 2009 line-item veto regarding this initiative petition or referendum. It’s long overdue for a deeper legal analysis involving the line-item veto by systematically identifying issues, gathering and examining facts, researching and applying relevant codes and case law.

A strong public protest is needed regarding the misuse of the line-item veto. The Navajo chapter governments have every right to get involved by passing supporting resolutions to have the Navajo people reconsider this lopsided line-item veto authority.

This is precisely what the blind-leading-the-blind director at the Office of Navajo Government

Development and the rotating commissioners should be focusing on, instead of peddling the director’s personal constitution document. Multiple attempts to establish a Navajo constitution have failed since the 1930s. The 107-page constitution, authored by one man but falsely proclaimed it’s the “Collective Will of the Navajo People,” will never solve the problem the Navajo Nation faces today.

This line-item veto is a new critical issue for the Navajo Nation. We are truly witnessing the Nygren’s culture of corruption, an unprecedented disregard for ethical responsibilities that comes with being a public official, while degrading the office of the president. The Nygren Administration is a powder keg of corruption scandals, categorical abuse of the line-item veto power, allegations of profiteering from contracts, narcissistic tendencies, personnel infighting, and the phenomenon of staff exodus like saloon doors, swinging freely between his loyalists and new stooges, while ballooning his budget by 68 percent since taking office, as reported.

The self-absorbed president is now signing official papers with a Sharpie, covering much of the page with his scrawls. Where have we witnessed this, or emulating whom? Thus, an inclination toward narcissism. Because he’s as bold as he thinks he is, to show dominance toward the Council and to us ordinary masses. Really?

The Yé’iitsoh of our time is the line-item veto power, and it must be destroyed. It is known that political courage is a scarce commodity, and courage is surely one of the most admirable of human virtues, but at this inflection point, the Nation’s people are looking to a delegate or two to exercise their conscientious judgment to introduce legislation to repeal the 2009 Line-Item Veto Power. A dangerous power, a weaponization tool, that is now openly used against the lawmaking body.

Who from the Navajo Nation Council will embody the modern-day Hero Twins? The Naayéé Neizghání (Monster Slayer) and the Tóbájíshchíní (Born for Water), to deliver decisive blows against the modern-day Yé’iitsoh – the vile line-item veto power.

Edward Dee
Red Mesa, Ariz.

Get instant access to this story by purchasing one of our many e-edition subscriptions HERE at our Navajo Times Store.