WINDOW ROCK, Ariz. – The Office of the President issued a press release on May 11 alleging Council Delegates Kee Allen Begay and Young Jeff Tom of discrediting Judge Carol Perry for her decision to extend a temporary restraining order (TRO) to raise doubt in the public’s mind about their own Navajo court system, which is definitely not the case as they executed their roles as lawmakers by upholding Diné culture and sovereignty by being responsive and accountable to their Navajo constituents.

In his role as chairman and a member of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Begay is simply exercising his responsibility in improving the Navajo judicial system, which is contrary to the assumptions the Office of the President (OPVP) claimed in a recent press release. Begay would know and recognize first hand the issues within the judicial branch and its court decisions.

According to 2 N.N.C. § 574 of the Navajo Nation Code, some of the powers of the Judiciary Committee include: 

• To serve as the oversight committee for all operations of the Judicial Branch
• To review and evaluate the performance of probationary and permanent justices and judge
• To initiate, recommend, support and sponsor legislation to improve the Navajo judicial system
• To review and/or propose legislation and make recommendations regarding any proposed or current laws, procedures, and regulations affecting or creating any impact on the Judicial Branch
• To review and approve plans of operation for all Judicial Branch divisions, departments and programs and to amend or rescind such plans of operation.

“As a delegate and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I am following what is in the law. The Judiciary Committee of the 21st Navajo Nation Council has oversight authority of the Judicial Branch,” Begay said. “My statement is not about asking the judge to make a decision. My comment was more about how the judges are relying on other court hearings and literally ignoring what is in the law. For the past seven years, there was no problem with the court system until recently.”

Unfortunately, Begay does not have a personal or political agenda as the Office of the President’s press release assumes. In fact, the OPVP press release is a political tactic in itself as Begay is merely acting according to his enumerated powers as chairman and member of the Judiciary Committee in accordance with the Navajo Nation Code.

“If the Office of the President has a concern with judicial matters, the committee can certainly enlighten the Office of the President of the committee’s authority,” Begay added. “We are inviting the Office of the President to come to the Judiciary Committee regular meeting on May 20. I am not asking the president to sit in for all of our meetings, but to provide feedback such as the processing of legislation and other judicial related matters.” 

“If the Office of the President is so in tune with following my words through a microscope, my activity and my movement, why aren’t they helping me out in addressing dilapidated court facilities on the Navajo Nation?” Begay added. “We have the Chief Justice evaluation coming up and District Judge evaluations coming up as well, this is our function according to the law. I am sure the Office of the President will be preparing a statement because I am voluntarily assigned to sit in on the evaluation of Judge Perry.” 

It is the intent of Begay and Tom to make aware of the courts flawed system, which the people need to know about. 

“It has been over one year that the President has not acted on the recommendations of the committee to appoint another judge,” Begay said. “If the Executive Branch is so concerned with the Judicial Branch, why don’t they tackle those problems for the Navajo Nation, instead judges are being reassigned.” 

“We have, and I have, advocated on behalf of our Navajo people that we should have quality justice for our people based on our Navajo laws, but this is being violated,” Begay added. “I believe our court system is being abused and our judges are being persuaded to be on one side – this is not justice for the Navajo people.”

PHOENIX – Samantha Barrera, 23, of Laveen, Ariz., was sentenced here to 14 months in prison by U.S. District Judge Mary H. Murguia.  Barrera had pleaded guilty in December 2009 to Misprision of Felony for her involvement with thwarting a homicide investigation.

 The facts showed that on or about August 2, 2008, on the Gila River Indian Reservation, Deanna Breckenridge and Anthony Trujillo, charged in a separate case, killed Dane Peters.  The victim was a neighbor of Breckenridge.  Breckenridge and Trujillo alleged that the victim showed up, uninvited, into the home of Breckenridge while Breckendrige was sleeping.  This startled Breckenridge and Trujillo who ultimately beat the victim to death.

 After the victim stopped moving, Breckenridge and Trujillo put the victim into a trash can and dragged the can into the desert and left it.  The victim’s dead body was found several weeks later.  Trujillo and Breckenridge pled guilty to Voluntary Manslaughter in a separate case and both were sentenced to 10 years in prison.

 The investigation regarding the homicide showed that defendant Samantha Barrera (then the girlfriend of Trujillo and cousin to Breckenridge) was present during the beating and homicide.  She admitted that she cleaned up a significant amount of the victim’s blood.  She also lied to the FBI about what she saw and knew of the homicide.

 During sentencing Judge Murguia remarked that “we will never know” if the victim would have lived if Barrera had timely reported the conduct of Breckenridge and Trujillo.  She also told Barrera that witnesses of violent crime “must cooperate with law enforcement… must be truthful… and must be discouraged from cleaning up a crime scene.”  Judge Murguia told Barrera that while Barrera did not commit the murder, “you literally have the blood on your hands from cleaning up what had occurred.”

 The investigation in this case was conducted by the Gila River Police Department and the FBI.  The prosecution was handled by Sharon Sexton, Assistant U.S. Attorney, District of Arizona, Phoenix.

CASE NUMBER:    CR-09-385-PHX-MHM

RELEASE NUMBER: 2010-100(Barrera)

WINDOW ROCK, Ariz. – Saying legislation to elevate the power of the Navajo Nation Council’s lawyer is “retaliatory in nature,” Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr., on Friday vetoed Resolution CAP-17-10, the Special Prosecutor Amendments Act.
 
“Using lawmaking authority in this way is self-serving and counter to the public interest,” the President said in his veto message to Navajo Nation Council Speaker Lawrence T. Morgan.

“The timing of this legislation unavoidably appears to be in reaction to the Attorney General’s decision to pursue and investigate possible wrongful conduct of financial discretionary spending by Council delegates,” he said.  “The Attorney General reached his decision to do so independently and without consultation with me. As such, I believe we should allow the process to run its course without interference and without the enactment of what will appear to the public to be retaliatory measures.”

The legislation, sponsored by Council Delegate Orlanda Smith-Hodge, was passed by the Council on April 21 by a vote of 61-17.
 
Ms. Smith-Hodge said the legislation’s intent was to ensure that both Office of Legislative Counsel and the Attorney General work together.
 
However, according to Section 2024 C. II., the legislation gives the Chief Legislative Counsel or the Navajo Nation Council the power to remove a Special Prosecutor and to stop an investigation for any reason they choose, “on the basis of any condition.”
 
“First and foremost, this resolution serves to diminish the independence of the Attorney General and the Courts, violates the separation of powers doctrine, creates obvious conflicts of interest, is designed to shield and insulate members of the Navajo Nation Council from investigation of alleged misconduct, and unavoidably appears to be retaliatory in nature,” the President said.

He said the legislation would also require preliminary information obtained by the Attorney General’s Office, the White Collar Crime Unit, the Prosecutor’s Office, or any other authorized entity concerning possible misconduct of a government official to be presented, reviewed and referred by the Navajo Nation Council before a preliminary investigation and appointment of a Special Prosecutor could be pursued.  

The legislation would allow the Council’s lawyer to seek investigations of Executive Branch officials, and to hire a special prosecutor.

Currently, that authority rests only with the Navajo Nation Attorney General.

“Obviously, under these amendments, the Council would have the authority to stop the pursuit of a preliminary investigation and the subsequent hiring of a Special Prosecutor when the subject of the investigation is a member of the Council,” the President said.

The President said the legislation would expand the authority the Council’s lawyer, who represents only the Council’s interests, drafts legislation and defends the Council’s political positions, unlike the Attorney General who represents all of the Navajo People’s interests.

“This expansion of authority clearly tilts the balance of power among the three branches of Navajo government to that of the Legislative Branch,” President Shirley said. “Doing so would create a single superior Branch of government, and dispense with the concept of separation of powers as envisioned by the Council in 1989.”

He said the separation of powers serves several goals; it prevents concentration of power in one branch – historically viewed as the root of tyranny – ensures governmental transparency, and provides each branch with means to defend against the encroachment and overreach of authority by the other two.

In 1989, the Council sought to prevent the concentration and centralization of power without real checks on its exercise with the adoption of CD-68-89, he said.

“Experience shows that this deficiency in the government structure allows for, invites and has resulted in the abuse of power,” the Council stated in its 1989 resolution. “The lack of definition of power and separation of legislative and executive functions have also allowed the legislative body to overly involve itself in the administration of programs thereby demonstrating a need to limit the legislative function to legislation and policy decision making and further limit the executive function to implementation of laws and representation of the Navajo Nation.”

The President said the Special Prosecutor Amendments legislation “brings us back to December 15, 1989, when the Council sought to prevent this distortion of government functions. The Council itself saw the need for a clear separation and equal distribution of powers among the three Branches in order to check ‘the abuse of power’ by one Branch, specifically naming the Legislative Branch.”

The President said the legislation would give license to the Council’s lawyer to strengthen the political interests of Council members though investigations and potential prosecutions of Executive Branch officials. At the same time, it would protect Council members from similar investigations and prosecutions for alleged ethical and criminal infractions.

The President noted that the legislation creates obvious conflicts of interest for the Council by empowering it to confirm judges of the Special Division of the Window Rock District Court, the body charged with appointing and contracting with the Special Prosecutor. It would also be the final decision-maker on whether good cause exists to remove an official or not.

That would make the Council privy to information prior to and during the course of any investigation, the President said.

“Regardless of whether the allegations are proven during the prosecution phase or not, being privy to such information would unfairly affect the Council’s decision to remove an official,” he said. With this legislation, he said, “the Navajo Nation Council is now the investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury.”

The President said the original role, intent and responsibility of the Chief Legislative Counsel was to provide legislative drafting services and legal advice to the Council and Legislative Branch entities.  

These amendments create an unnecessary duplication of services already provided for under the current law, he said.

“From a fiduciary and financial perspective, especially considering the Nation’s current multi-million dollar budget deficit, this resolution lacks any information about how much this duplication of services will cost,” he said.

“For us as leaders to expect our citizens to have respect for our governmental processes on their behalf, we cannot betray that trust with resolutions that appear to serve our interests rather than theirs as Resolution CAP-17-10 so clearly does,” the President said.

‘Arizona Doing the Job Our Federal Government Won’t Do’

PHOENIX – Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin today launched an effort aimed at educating the country on the federal government’s failure to secure our nation’s southern border and its failure to address the human tragedy that is occurring as a result.

They also asked Americans to stand up and support Arizona. Key to the ‘Secure the Border—Support Arizona’ effort is the launching of a new website devoted to these issues: www.SecuretheBorder.org.

“Our purpose today is to help the rest of the nation understand the crisis which confronts our state,” Brewer stated. ‘This new website will help educate the rest of America and perhaps our political leaders in Washington that this is not an immigration crisis, this is a border security crisis.”

Governor Palin concurred, “We will never resolve our immigration crisis until Governors like Jan Brewer and the citizens of Arizona are convinced we have shut the front door of illegal immigration and drug smuggling along our own southern border. It is time for Americans across this great country to stand up and say, ‘we’re all Arizonans now, and in clear unity say: Mr. President, do your job, secure our border’.”

Brewer also announced that her first appointment to the Joint Border Security Advisory Committee (JBSAC) will be Basilio Aja, Executive Vice President of the Arizona Cattlemen’s Association. This statutory committee will analyze the latest information about our border, including crossings and crime statistics, and make recommendations designed to increase border security.

The JBSAC was created as part of the legislative changes Brewer requested to SB 1070. The 12-member Joint Border Security Advisory Committee will include six Brewer appointees and six legislators.

Brewer went on to say, “While President Obama is making wisecracks and playing racial politics, some groups have suggested that Arizona be punished for enforcing laws that our federal government has failed to enforce. That is misguided at best. At worst, it’s continuing political manipulation where earnest problem solving and protection of national security ought to be.”

SecuretheBorder.org features videos, pictures, statistics and news stories on the effects of the federal government’s failure to secure the border. It also has a section where site visitors can read all the correspondence sent to the federal government by Governor Brewer and then-Governor Janet Napolitano.

“DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano is turning a blind eye to the same problem of which she herself once complained,” Brewer remarked. “She and the President are giving us the same answer that she once got. She has apparently had a change of position in more ways than one.”

The website also allows visitors to sign petitions to the federal government demanding that they secure the border. Visitors can also express their support for the State of Arizona.

Palin concluded by saying, “A final word to the boycott crowd and the majority of Americans who support Governor Brewer’s stand: If you want border security—if you want to halt the human rights abuses that have resulted from our failed border security policy—come visit Arizona. You could say that here they are doing the job our federal government won’t do.”

The Governors made their announcement prior to the Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation’s annual banquet at the J.W. Marriott Desert Ridge Resort.

Speaker’s press release says Kee Allen Begay, Young Jeff Tom’s intent was to smear District Court Judge Carol Perry for granting motion their attorney sought

WINDOW ROCK, Ariz. – Two Navajo Nation Council delegates have criticized a Navajo District Court judge for cancelling a hearing on a temporary restraining order that their own attorney asked for.
 
“I believe our court system is being abused and our judges are being persuaded to be on one side ­– this is not justice for the Navajo people,” Many Farms delegate and Judiciary Committee Chairman Kee Allen Begay said in a news release issued by the Speaker’s Office on Tuesday.
 
The criticism is the latest in a series of attacks on Navajo judges by Council delegates for decisions the Legislative Branch dislikes. This has led to proposed legislation to “reform” the Judicial Branch, and exposes a significant conflict of interest for the Judiciary Committee chairman.
 
The two delegates fault District Court Judge Carol Perry’s order to cancel a May 7 hearing on whether to dismiss or make permanent a temporary restraining order to prevent the Election Administration from issuing candidate election packets for a Council of 88 delegates.
 
Cancelling the hearing meant an April 13 TRO remains in effect.
 
However, apparently unbeknownst to the two delegates, it was their own lawyer, Office of Legislative Counsel attorney Ron Haven, who asked Judge Perry to stay the hearing. Judge Perry simply ruled affirmatively on his motion.

In the news release, both Mr. Begay and Council Delegate Young Jeff Tom question Judge Carol Perry’s judicial ability, accuse her of timidity and an inability to do her job, say she displayed doubt in her own decision-making, and “seriously question her ability to interpret what the law says.”
 
They allege that the Navajo people are not getting “quality justice” from the District Court only because the Election Administration is complying with a TRO to not issue election packets until the Navajo Nation Supreme Court rules on the question of whether there will be an election for a Council of 24 or 88 delegates, among other issues.
 
“The lower court should be ruling first and then it goes to the Supreme Court if appealed,” Delegate Tom said. “Why is Judge Perry waiting?… She is discriminating.”
 
The reason for the stay, according to Mr. Haven’s motion, which was agreed to by plaintiff’s lawyer James Fitting of Luebben, Johnson & Barnhouse of Albuquerque, is that the question before the District Court – whether the Election Administration should continue to issue Council delegate candidate packets for a Council of 88 members – would be answered by the Supreme Court in the case Nelson v. Initiative Petition Committee and Dr. Joe Shirley, and that the decision would soon be issued.
 
Mr. Haven is defending Navajo Election Administration Director Edison Wauneka in a lawsuit against him brought by Eddie Arthur, who is represented by Mr. Fitting.
Although Mr. Tom states that a lower court ruling should come before a higher court decision, the case before the Supreme Court had been appealed months before the suit brought by Mr. Arthur against the Election Administration was filed.
 
That case before the high court involves an appeal brought by Leupp resident Timothy Nelson of a decision by the Office of Hearing and Appeals in which he states he had been denied a hearing on the Dec. 15 election case.
 
Ironically, the Speaker’s news release alleges that the Navajo People are being denied their right to vote even though Mr. Nelson’s lawsuit ultimately seeks to void the Dec. 15, 2009, initiative special election ­– disenfranchising Navajo voters – in which voters overwhelmingly supported reducing the Council to 24 delegates.
 
Mr. Nelson’s lawsuit was funded by a $150,000 grant from the Speaker’s Office and supported by numerous Council delegates who face losing their seats in an election of 24 delegates.
 
Mr. Begay reveals an inherent conflict of interest when he states that as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which he notes has oversight of the Judicial Branch, he is bothered by the District Court’s order, that justice is “being violated,” that the court system “is being abused,” and that Navajo judges are not being impartial in their decisions.
 
Mr. Begay accuses Judge Perry of “not doing her job,” questions her ability to render a decision, and threatens her continuation on the bench – all for political reasons.
 
“Maybe the judge does not have the ability to make a ruling or interpret the law,” he said. “Maybe it is time we re-evaluate our judges.”
 
His statements raise the question of how, as Judiciary Committee chairman, Mr. Begay can carry out his oversight duties impartially when his prejudice against the Judicial Branch, the courts and judges, and his intention to discredit Judge Perry, has been so publicly stated.
 
It criticism forms the basis of reasons why Council delegates oppose recent court decisions – and the judges who issue them – that tend to go against their political and personal interests.
 
Further, Mr. Begay states in the news release that judges have authority to interpret the law even though in January the Council repealed the discretion of judges to take Diné Fundamental Law into consideration in their decisions as they have for the past 50 years.
 
“Each judge is given the authority to interpret the law as an individual judge and not base their judgment merely on what the Supreme Court is going to say,” Mr. Begay said. “It bothers me.”
 
Despite Mr. Begay’s misunderstanding of court procedure, in the two cases before the Supreme Court the Court asked attorneys to submit supplemental briefs on the legality and legitimacy of the Council’s legislation pertaining to Fundamental Law and the elevation of power of the Chief Legislative Counsel to equal that of the Navajo Nation Attorney General.
 
On April 15, Judge Perry certified and submitted four questions to the Supreme Court, stating that the Council resolution to elevate the Chief Legislative Counsel “creates the potential of two conflicting legal authorities for the Navajo Nation, as emphasized in the President’s veto message.”
 
She wrote that the validity of the Council’s resolution “is a matter of unsettled law which is essential to whether or not this District Court can issue a Preliminary Injunction in the this matter.”
 
The four certified questions before the Supreme Court ask whether the resolution to elevate the Legislative Counsel’s powers is invalid legislation because:
 
1. “…It creates (an) unworkable system of two potentially conflicting voices for the Navajo Nation?”
 
2. “…It is a violation of the separation of powers inherent in the three branch government?”
 
3. “…In this instance, it operates to deprive (Mr. Arthur) of fundamental rights which is he is provided under (Diné Fundamental Law)…and…the Navajo Nation Bill of Rights?”
 
4. “…Of the inherent conflict in this legislation with the governmental concept which is embedded in Diné Fundamental Law?”
 
Delegate Tom said that if Judge Perry cannot make a decision – although she did by granting OLC’s motion to stay the hearing – she should consider disqualifying herself from the case.
 
Inexplicably, the news release notes that it was Mr. Begay and Mr. Tom’s intent to discredit Judge Perry in the eyes of the Navajo public, “in hopes the Navajo people will question the judge and the judicial system.”

PHOENIX. — Phillip Gomez, 29, of the Gila River Indian Community, was found guilty yesterday of Assault Resulting in Serious Bodily Injury, Assault with a Dangerous Weapon and Kidnapping by a federal jury in Phoenix.

 “This was an unbelievably vicious attack on a woman who was bearing this man’s child,” said Dennis K. Burke. “Violence against native women is a top priority in my office, an intolerable reality that cannot stand in our native communities.  Victims must be encouraged to speak out and we must all work together as a community to stop this violence.  I also want to commend my prosecutors who worked tirelessly for justice in this case.”   

 The evidence at trial showed that Gomez beat, kicked and punched his girlfriend for a period of three to four hours.  He also hit the victim with a stereo speaker that he ripped from the other stereo components.  During the assault, he grabbed the victim by the hair and dragged her around the home. He also forced the victim to take a shower with her clothes on to wash off the blood.  Pictures from the scene showed blood on the floor, walls, bed and clothing as well as clumps of the victim’s hair.  

 The defendant’s mother came home during the assault and called the police.  Gomez fled from the scene as his mother was talking to the 911 operator.  The victim was taken via helicopter to the hospital.  She suffered over 40 bruises to her body, some of which were 6″ X 5″ wide.  She also suffered three severe lacerations to her face, resulting in permanent scars to her face.  When police responded, her face had been beaten so severely that both eyes were swollen shut.  During the 911 call, the defendant could be heard in the background yelling the words “she made me!”

  Testimony showed that during the assault, the defendant’s brother walked in but did nothing to stop the assault.  While the victim was still in the hospital recovering from her injuries, Gomez tried to call her.  From the time of her hospitalization until the days before trial, he called her several times from jail telling her not to come to court.  While the victim expressed some reluctance to appear in court, she ultimately elected to take the stand and provided powerful testimony.

 The case was tried before United States District Court Judge Susan Bolton on May 11, and May 12, 2010.  A conviction for Aggravated Assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years and a conviction for Kidnapping carries a maximum penalty of life in prison.  Sentencing is set before Judge Bolton on August 9, 2010 at 2:30 p.m.

 The investigation leading to the guilty verdict was conducted by the Gila River Police Department and the FBI. The prosecution is being handled by Leta Hollon and Sharon Sexton, Assistant United States Attorneys, District of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona.

WINDOW ROCK, Ariz. – Council Delegate Thomas Walker Jr.’s proposal to reform the Navajo Nation Judicial Branch has started discussion despite the plan’s infancy stage status.

In his report to the Judiciary Committee of the 21st Navajo Nation Council, Walker (Birdsprings/Leupp/Tolani Lake) reported on his referendum effort to change appointed judges into elected positions as part of comprehensive government reform, which the Office of the President has advocated for by attempting to reduce the Navajo Nation Council from 88 members to 24 members.

Walker believes his plan of reforming the Judicial Branch will bring transparency. He believes his proposal will compliment the Office of the President’s initiative to true government reform and is a step in the right direction to ensure that the interests and rights of the Navajo people are fairly protected.

“The time is now to elect judges because the Navajo people want government reform, accountability and transparency from all who hold public offices and public positions,” Walker said. “What has been in place for years in the judicial system has proven not to work in the best interest of the Navajo people, so if the judges are elected, it will bring positive change to the bench.”

Some of the positive changes include:

1. Elected judges taking greater interest and assuring family safety as they will work more closely with families through all available resources
2. Elected judges and court staff would be much more courteous and helpful
3. Candidates for judgeship would come before the people to introduce themselves familiarizing the people with their rulings
4. Elections would remove the judgeship from politicizing the judicial system; currently, the President recommends individuals for appointment as the Council confirms judgeship

In contrary to the press release issued by the Office the President, Mr. Walker nor the Navajo Nation Council is not retaliating against appointed judges but is simply exercising “the Navajo Nation’s governing authority by upholding public trust and committing to a responsive and accountable government that preserves, protects and enhances Diné culture and sovereignty.”

“It is an opportunity for the Navajo people to elect judges based on their interpretation of the law, and to ensure due deliberation and decision making rather than rulings based on personal viewpoints,” Walker added. “The Navajo people will ensure that established court rules are followed and that the laws are adhered to. Judges will be the people’s choice; thus, held to higher standards.”

Walker said the Navajo Nation government is considered to be a government “for the people” and now must be “by the people,” which makes the most sense to try to put the proposal in ballot form for the upcoming Navajo Nation General Election where thousands of Navajo voters are estimated to cast their votes.

“This effort is something that deserves support from all three branches because we are talking about government for the people,” Walker said. “President Joe Shirley issued a press release to discredit me for my efforts to introduce a legislation to place a referendum on a ballot to allow the Navajo people to decide if judges should be elected by the people. Across the nation, judges are elected and it does work, it strengthens democracy. Press releases from the Office of the President are deceiving and serve only to “muddy the waters.”"

“President Shirley’s motive is just another political tactic to mislead the Navajo people into believing that all Council Delegates are unworthy to hold a leadership position,” Walker said. “It is time for the Navajo people to stand up for local leadership and community interest and ask President Joe Shirley Jr. why he continues to manipulate words and actions to gain political support that have done nothing but lead the Navajo Nation further into turmoil.”

The referendum process would allow the Navajo electorate to vote “Yea” or “Nay” on a ballot question asking the Navajo public to vote on whether to make Navajo Nation judges elected positions. Through the referendum method, direct democracy would be exercised as a result of direct involvement of voters in local governmental affairs, which is commonly the political culture at the chapter level.

The referendum process is projected to involve more than 16,000 voters unlike the special election initiative in which less than 10 percent of total registered voters participated. This referendum would spark debate and direct involvement among the people in possibly reforming another aspect of their government.

“The people would become the selectors and evaluators, which would elevate highly qualified candidates to administer fair justice,” added Walker who also said judicial retention elections would be part of the process if his proposal becomes law.

In judicial retention elections, Navajo voters would vote “Yea” to extend a sitting judge’s term or vote “Nay” against the sitting judge’s term. To maintain incumbency, a Navajo Nation judge would need majority votes from the Navajo electorate to stay in office.

Walker also believes it is also the responsibility of the Judiciary Committee and Judicial Branch to make necessary amendments for the betterment of a “just” Navajo society. Walker’s proposal of electing Navajo Nation judges does that.

The Navajo Nation Council would provide the Navajo Elections Administration with funds for public education through the media, documents to disseminate and public hearings regarding the referendum.

Council Delegate Nelson Gorman Jr. (Chinle) agreed that reform is needed and said “past efforts of reform have failed.”

“I think there needs to be reform. I think that is where our courts fall short,” Gorman said. “What our government is supposed to be doing is providing service to our people. I do favor statutory reform. We need to meet justice for our Navajo people.”

Vincent Craig aka Mutton Man, passed away Saturday evening on May 15, 2010 from cancer. The family is requesting help with medical and related funeral bills. A Vincent Craig tribute will be held Wednesday, May 26, 2010 from 7pm to 10pm at the Phoenix Downtown Radisson, 3600 N. 2^nd Ave. The event is for all ages, admission is 410 for adults and $5 for children under 12 and seniors 65 and over.

Please come and support the man that made you laugh and cry with his comedy and songs. All funds raised will go to his family. You can also donate items to a raffle to help raise additional funds.

If you are unable to attend, an account has been set up for Vincent Craig at Wells Fargo Bank under his wife’s name Mariddle J. Craig. Account #6734185546.

If you company or organization wishes to make a donation, please contact Loren Tapahe at (602) 448-0260.

You can also make a donation at the following locations: Fry Bread House in Phoenix and Tempe, Sacred Hogan Fry Bread in Phoenix. Checks can be made out to Mariddle J. Craig. Your generosity will be greatly appreciated.

For more information, please call (602) 448-0260.

Over the months since last fall & actual visit of filming for the show, many have inquired about the show in anticipation of their favorite host Andrew Zimmern & his particular liking to the Navajo meal he participated & enjoyed with our Navajo family in beautiful Monument Valley, Utah.

He was very positive, respectful & very much enjoyed the Navajo Nation.

Hope you enjoy & please forward your comments to the NNFO.

Also forward the following to your contacts here in the area.

Navajo Nation Film Office regulates all matters concerning filming, photography within the Navajo Nation, its members, land, culture & use of Nation resources. Develop & implement schedules, permits & obtain approval to individuals & organizations engaged within the Nation in the filming & photography activities to be conducted. Navajo Nation Film Office is located in Window Rock, Arizona operated under the Office of Broadcast Services, Division of Human Resources.

FROM THE TRAVEL CHANNEL.

Andrew uncovers unique food traditions in the great state of Arizona, where the spirit of the Wild West still lives strong today. From native traditions of the Navajo to the New Agers’ approach to food, this state offers an abundance of bizarre foods.

http://www.travelchannel.com/TV_Shows/Bizarre_Foods/Episodes_Travel_Guides/Arizona?refcd=bf-fb