Letters: Where was ‘Buy Local’ on Black Friday?

Dear Mr. President,

Merry Christmas. Apparently in this holiday season your administration seems to play an active role in being the Grinch this year.

As many flocked off the Navajo Nation during the Black Friday shopping weekend, there was no attempt by your administration to attract Navajo shoppers to local on-reservation shops and vendors.

In fact, your social media feeds show nothing of your leadership to Buy Local and Buy Navajo.

On Saturday following Black Friday, Small Business Saturday, the rest of the United States went in droves to spend its holiday dollars at local shops and “Main Street” business, while your administration, namely the Navajo Nation Division of Economic Development leaders, sat idle and let Navajo shoppers flock to off-reservation shops and vendors.

In the same vein, your administration really did not make any effort to help those who are becoming displaced by the closing of coalmines and power plants.

Mr. President, your efforts proved empty as the administration and its leadership again sat idle when the jobs evaporated, and your cabinet did nothing.

Transparency is a word that all government officials like to float around, but I can guess that the amateurs you hired as a cabinet, spent time remodeling office space and hiring unqualified cronies who cannot come up with a plan to sustain the local economy here on reservation. If you are honest about transparency, show us where you and your cronies made a difference.

Speaking of social media, I would like to congratulate you and your administration for its advancement of ideas and projects from previous administrations. Projects like a local glove factory, solar farms and convenience stores, all initiated by prior Navajo presidents, who were voted out because they too did not have a plan for sustaining the Navajo economy on reservation.

When elected, you had promises, you had ideas, and you banked on your youth and the driving force of innovation. Today, we doubt those ideas, promises and see just immature and reckless leadership with no vision.

With Christmas only days away, Mr. President, I wish you a Merry Christmas and I hope you have a least one present under your Christmas tree which was bought on reservation.

And, please lay off the social media, we really don’t care that you are running races and sitting at conference tables with your laptop.
It doesn’t prove to us that you are working. It just vividly demonstrates that you are not paying attention.

Steven James
Sheepsprings, N.M.

NTEC left empty chair at the table

In a Naa’bik’iyati’ meeting the other day, it was encouraging to hear some delegates talk about coming together, to compromise and develop a strategy that would meet the needs of competing interests.

We were asking funds for the Northern Justice Center. Other communities also want funds out of the same pot of money for similar projects.

The concept of Naa’bik’iyati’, where the leadership talk about mutual concerns, deliberate on options and strive to reach consensus, is rooted in true Diné leadership. A decision reached by consensus is one that is best for all, even if we each get less than what we initially wanted. It is a process that protects the integrity and dignity of all concerned.

The exemplary leadership of Otto Tso and Kee Allen Begay was shown when they counseled we need to look at our options and develop one strategy that would meet the most need with our limited resources. I thought we would be better off if our tribal leadership took this approach in all of our political deliberations.

One deliberation I was thinking of is the recent messy history of Navajo Transitional Energy Company.

In the spirit of Naa’bik’iyati’, I reached out to NTEC two times to come to the table to talk and reason together because I believe there is value in talking and working to reach an understanding.

On my first attempt I received a momentary positive response, then they backed away from any talks and nothing came of it.

My second effort was probably laughed off and not taken seriously. They either think we are not important enough or that they are too important to talk to us. An empty chair remains at the table.

If we came to the table, NTEC would talk about mining coal and making money and we, earth protectors, would talk about the climate crisis and helping save the planet for our future generations. There must be common ground, but NTEC does not see the value of sitting down to talk facts.

The seven-year old NTEC has become a prototype of the capitalist American polluting corporation that doesn’t care about what lands and people they trample over.

If we don’t exercise Naa’bik’iyati’, NTEC may win a battle and we will keep on fighting. We can win the war together or we will all lose.

I say again, we all must look into our hearts and imagine what our future grandchild will say about us. Will they say “See what our cheis, nalis and masaanis did for us” when they are thankful we defended their future?

Or will they say “Look what our grandparents did to us” when they see that NTEC/Navajo Nation was party to the crime of burning up their environment with fossil fuels?

We are the original landlords. We have been here for millennia, this is our land.

Duane Chili Yazzie
Shiprock, N.M.

Editor’s note: The writer is president of Shiprock Chapter.

Coverage was biased, one-sided

It’s amazing how much hate and vitriol Arlyssa (Becenti) can pack into so much space (“Public safety files complaint against delegate,” Dec. 5, 2019).
All her energies poured into an article full of malice, inaccuracies, unfounded statements, and misguided blame.

“Uncle” Edmund Yazzie has attended 32 percent or six of 19 of his required meetings, Honorable Charlaine Tso was sacked from her vice chairmanship and had attended 14 of 19 meetings.

Other delegates: Elmer P. Begay attended 15 of 19 meetings, Amber Crotty has missed 7 of 19, Herman Daniels missed 7 of 19, Vince James missed 6 of 19, Daniel Tso missed 5 of 19, and Pernell Halona has missed 4 of 19.

The misogynistic culture of the Navajo Nation Council is blatant and is supported by the Navajo Times. Why is the Navajo Times editor allowing one-sided reporting? How can Arlyssa claim to have won Native American Journalists Association awards based on poor journalistic practices? Where is the interview with Council Delegate Eugenia Charles-Newton? A good reporter gets both sides to the story.

A letter from former Delegate David Tsosie stated that he and his wife had been at the last day of the fall Council session and had witnessed delegates Newton and Yazzie talking where they had not seen Delegate Newton yelling “inches from his (Yazzie’s) face.”

We know the value of having an honest, hard working Council delegate from Shiprock. Honorable Eugenia Charles-Newton isn’t afraid to ask hard questions. We appreciate all her dedication and promises she swore to uphold. She has law enforcement background having been a Navajo tribal prosecutor and having worked as a prosecutor in Kansas.

Sorry reporting is unacceptable and a waste of paper and ink. Arlyssa’s “uncle” has to stop hiding behind the paper and do his job!

“Afraid” is a subjective term, as is “believes.” Objectivity is the goal of journalism, not innuendo, rumor, or blatant lies.

The Navajo Times represents all of us, not just some crybaby snowflakes.

Barbara J. Morgan
Shiprock, N.M.

Editor’s note: The Navajo Times stands behind Arlyssa Becenti’s reporting.

Cultural education should concern all of us

The Planter (Pleiades – Dilyehii — Nizaadgo Dah Diikai; Wokaa Haaskai; Yaa Deeskai; Eekai).

Sean Callan writes on Delyehi, in “Navajo Astronomy — An Understanding of the Cosmos From Time of Creation to the High School Classroom,” that:

The seven stars, it has been said, are six children and a woman. They represent the early carefree period of childhood. Their mother follows them. The children in this constellation are like the children of the earth — brave, curious and learning how to entertain themselves when left alone.

It is said that adults must recognize this and support the young children of the earth by providing stories and attention, by playing with them while the children learn to communicate, laugh and talk amongst themselves.

Why the story on Pleiades? Cultivating and nurturing healthy relationships are important. While the observance of our National American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month in November has come and gone, there is a time for reflection on cultural education. To some, this national observance is a form of cultural renaissance, to others, cultural continuity and still to others, indications of further Native cultural postmodernity.

One of the most sacred traditional teachings in our culture is that we accord the highest respect to our thinking. Only then are we able to formulate questions and thoughts of depth and weight.

A traditional Navajo Blessing Way practitioner offers clarity on the freedom to think responsibly: “… It’s simple to misplace yourself, and difficult to find your way back when you start to look for yourself, after you find that you are way ahead of yourself.”

This means that where you choose to place your thoughts is where you exist, and absent respect for one’s thinking, great difficulty is assured. In this vein then, an important question arises on who is the real authority on cultural education? Who do we turn to for authentic Native cultural education? Or why even bother?

We too often hear today statements of misplacements as follows: “My teacher, our school Native language teachers, say go to your family, your parents for language and culture. We go to our parents, our family and they all speak English. Our parents send us to our grandparents at sheep camp and our Grandma and Grandpa end up speaking English to us.”

Native cultural education continues to take on such cultural misplacement. Cultural education is too important an agenda and responsibility to leave to a few, or to preserve for someone’s sole exclusive purview, ownership, and responsibility.

As educators, Native and non-Native peoples alike, we cannot then summarily dismiss indigenous peoples as just another language-minority group to be assimilated. As Native peoples, it is a monumental challenge to misplace oneself from who we are today, from where we have been and have come from, and most importantly, to completely sever from where we along with our children and grandchildren are going for generations to come.

Our shortcoming with our cultural education and our shortcoming with American education go hand-in-hand. The shortcomings with our indigenous cultural education and American education cannot be analyzed as separate discrete units, overanalyzed and fragmented into void and meaninglessness.

As we gather for cultural education, in sacred ceremonies or schools, this is a time in our deeply spiritual seasonal world to deepen and intensify our perspectives, to think and dialogue, to gather resources, implement and build, bless as a family to guide our life work. This is gaining critical cultural consciousness inherent in one of our Blessing Way songs.

Accountability in Native education in our homeland for one is then not just about state-mandated testing and scores, dropouts, or graduation rates. From Native perspectives it is about ways and means to reaffirm and maintain the unbroken communal tribalism as a source of attaining stronger selfhood, acquiring cultural teachings and lessons to cultivate deeper personal strength in mind, body, and spirit.

It is important that we do not misplace ourselves as we continue to work toward building and maintaining healthy cultural relationships, completeness, and academic preeminence not as an end of and in itself, but as a means to an end, to give back to our people.

Cultural education should be a time to come together with good thoughts and leave together with good thoughts.

So why the story on Pleiades? Cultivating and nurturing healthy relationships are important.

Harold G. Begay
To’ Nanees Dizi’, Ariz.

Avenues exist to contact HUD

Since returning to Shiprock two weeks before the Shiprock Fair in 2011, I was asked by a friend to provide information that would help the people getting services provided by the federal government. I will use the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development as an example since I was employed by HUD for more than 20 years. Please note the following:

• I noticed that federal regulations are mentioned as an excuse for things not being done or not allowed. Federal regulations may be waived on case-by-case basis provided it is not statutory (the law).

• Former employer Northern Plains Office of Native American Programs has Grants Evaluation and Grants Management departments. “Role of the Grants Evaluation Division is to evaluate and monitor HUD funded programs, review performance reports, and provide technical assistance and training as needed … The role of the Grants Management Division is to review Indian Housing Plans, rate grant applications and provide technical assistance and training on programs.”

• HUD also has Office of Inspector General, which is separate from the Office of Native American Programs, with the mission of  conducting and supervising audits, evaluations, and investigations relating to the department’s programs and operations and to prevent and detect fraud, abuse, and mismanagement.

• “The hotline is the primary means to submit allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, or mismanagement to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Inspector General. This website is designed to allow you to provide tip information to the HUD OIG to assist with its missions as set forth in the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended.

The HUD OIG accepts reports of fraud, serious waste, abuse or gross mismanagement in HUD or HUD-funded programs from HUD employees, contractors, and the public. For the following types of complaints about HUD or its programs, or for general questions … contact the HUD office nearest you.

OIG does not investigate routine or administrative complaints that should be reported to HUD program staff, local administrators or other agencies. We also do not provide program information or become involved in day-to-day program administration. If your complaint is related to one of the types of items listed below, please use the links or phone numbers to raise your concern with the appropriate party.”

I would caution people to make legit complaints. Also cite the law rather than the federal regulations, which may be waived, in your resolution.
Other federal agencies can be contacted. I suggest you Google the agencies for contact information. Remember that our tax dollars fund these federal programs.

Nancy D. Todea
Shiprock, N.M.

ETA is right choice for San Juan

Thanks so much to all of you who attended last Monday’s public hearing (on PNM’s plan to retire the San Juan Generating Station).

So many of you stood up for climate justice to transition from coal to clean energy and save electric customers money while still paying for worker and community transition.

Some of you may have listened to the testimony and cross-examination that took place last week at the PRC (that continue next week) and tried to make heads or tails of what is being said.

First, remember that this case is dealing exclusively with whether to allow PNM to leave the San Juan coal plant, refinancing the outstanding debt on the plant at low rates, forcing PNM to take a loss on its future approved profits, and funding $40 million for worker and community transition support. The issue of how the energy at San Juan will be replaced comes in a separate case that will be heard in January.

There were some key points to take home last week. Tribal activists noted the total lack of transition support in Arizona, where coal-fired Navajo Generating Station and Kayenta coal mine just shut down. In Arizona, workers are left adrift and community leaders are trying to identify some alternative. The Arizona Legislature and Public Utilities Commission have provided no transition support, and organizers are left trying to work directly with the utilities.

Here in New Mexico, the ETA gives us the chance to do better and provide support to workers and communities as we transition away from dirty coal to clean energy.

Also, though the PRC is not the agency that oversees environmental requirements at San Juan, PNM witnesses stated that Sierra Club lawsuits over the years have forced PNM to comply with environmental laws and address the pollution from the San Juan plant. Now, with your help, we are finishing the job by moving New Mexico away from coal and toward a renewable future.

Finally, testimony showed that in the first year after the plant closes, customers will save $80 million on the San Juan plant and shareholders will lose $18 million in profits. These customer savings and losses for shareholders will continue for years to come.

We are, however, concerned about a few serious points of misinformation we’ve heard, so the next part of this requires a closer read and we are happy to answer any questions you might have.

It’s important to understand that many agencies are involved in a coal plant closure and that’s always been the case. The New Mexico Environment Department and the federal Environmental Protection Agency are the agencies that determine what PNM must do to comply with environmental laws for plant decommissioning and mine reclamation.

The PRC is not, and never has been, the agency in charge of cleanup at the plant or mine. If these environmental agencies order PNM to deal with coal ash or any other aspect of the pollution from burning coal at San Juan, PNM must comply (as must the other owners of the plant). If they don’t, environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, are likely to sue to force cleanup, as we have many times in the past.

Again, the PRC doesn’t make decisions on these clean-up issues. The bottom line is that the PRC cannot limit PNM’s liability to clean up pollution from the San Juan plant and mine.

… The ETA caps the amount PNM can receive in a financing order for plant decommissioning and mine reclamation to $30 million. PNM might later return to the commission and say it had to spend more (because of the environmental agencies’ requirements) and can request to add those costs to rates, but the PRC can deny that request, and the company’s shareholders will have to pay for that remaining amount.

… Right now, we all pay PNM each month for our share of the San Juan plant. If the plant ran until 2053, as it’s currently scheduled to, we’d each pay around $13 a month on our bill for San Juan until the plant closed.

By refinancing the costs of San Juan, we save money each month on our bills even while financing around $40 million for worker and community transition.

… The ETA is the only option for paying for worker and community transition. The low-rate bonds available under the ETA will pay for $40 million of worker and community transition funding. And even with this transition funding, ratepayers will pay less for San Juan than they are now.

Yes, ratepayers will help pay for community transition. That’s part of our responsibility as the users of the energy from San Juan, but the idea that you can save money on rates and still help pay for transition is why we like this plan so much. Again, PNM shareholders take a loss on the profit they currently make on San Juan.

The ETA applies only to coal plants. The cost recovery and securitization provisions of the Energy Transition Act apply only to coal-fired power plants. The ETA does not allow PNM, or any other utility, to refinance its investments in gas or nuclear plants.

Why is the debate so heated? I’m honestly not totally sure. We’ve battled PNM and the San Juan Mine operators for years, suing over toxic coal ash (and winning $10 million in cleanup), mercury and other pollutants (requiring PNM to install millions of dollars worth of pollution controls that slashed mercury, nitrous-oxide and sulfur-dioxide emissions), and suing under the Clean Air Act, leading the first two stacks to shut down.

We understand wanting to punish PNM for investing in coal. And the ETA does force PNM to give up its profit on its investments in San Juan, thereby saving customers millions of dollars. That’s why PNM would receive roughly the same amount of money for San Juan under the ETA as under the approach preferred by the ETA’s opponents.

But the ETA is the only option that provides critically needed funds for workers and community transition, and the only law that has strong renewables requirements that mandate a transition to clean energy. No other option is on the table and opponents seem willing to walk away from the ETA with no clear plan to exit coal, reinvest in the community, or transition to clean energy. We are baffled.

With the ETA, we can combine a nation-leading renewable-energy standard, reduced rates and funds for an equitable transition. We call that a groundbreaking, nation-leading win.

Camilla Feibelman
Director, Sierra Club’s Rio Grande Chapter
Albuquerque, N.M.

NRC already vetted Tetra Tech

On Dec. 5, 2019, the Navajo Times published an article entitled “O’Halleran takes Tetra Tech issue to NRC.”

The article contains several inaccuracies and false claims regarding Tetra Tech EC Inc. and its work at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard nearly a decade ago.

We know you relied on the information presented in Congressman O’Halleran’s press release, but we want you to know the facts. We have also met with the congressman’s office to correct the inaccuracies in the press release on which your article was based.

The allegations contained in the press release are based on false and misleading information generated by self-interested activists.

As recently as February 2019, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission rejected a petition by an activist environmental group to revoke Tetra Tech EC’s NRC license for work it performed many years ago, because the NRC found the petition failed to present evidence to support its claims. Previously, the NRC conducted an extensive investigation and found no evidence of any involvement by Tetra Tech EC management.

Most importantly, following additional testing this year, the California Department of Public Health and San Francisco Department of Public Health have stated on multiple occasions that the entire shipyard is safe. I have attached links to the reports issued by these agencies.

Tetra Tech EC stands by its work at Hunters Point, and the facts fully support the NRC’s rejection of these false claims. The public should know that Tetra Tech EC operated professionally, and properly performed the work it conducted at the site under the close supervision and oversight of the U.S. Navy and state and federal regulators.

Much of the interest in this matter has been driven by media accounts based on inaccurate information and unfounded allegations by individuals who misrepresent Tetra Tech EC’s work at Hunters Point for their own financial gain.

Tetra Tech is fully committed to integrity and ethical business practices as we continue to earn our clients’ trust by delivering outstanding service and acting ethically in all that we do for more than 50 years.

Charlie MacPherson
Vice President, Corporate Media and Communications
Tetra Tech
Pasadena, Calif.

Editor’s note: MacPherson did not return phone calls from the Navajo Times prior to the publication of the article.

---