NAVAJO-HOPI "LAND DISPUTE" UPDATE: FEBRUARY 6, 1995
Meeting with the Hopis
This is slightly old news by now, although it probably has
not been reported in the press. On Friday the 13th (January)
there was a meeting between the Dine' family representatives and
the Hopi tribe in Flagstaff, Lee Phillips presiding. The meeting
was pretty well wiped out by weather. Field staff called in to
ask if they should go, what with the snow, ice, wind and mud. We
told them to try to make it and pick up as many of the elders as
they could reach. Betty Tso and Mae Tso made it, along with
David Begay from the Dine' Bikeya Committee, also Alfred McCabe
and the unstoppable Louise Begay, accompanied by her husband,
Betoney Bahe.
The greater part of the Hopi Tribal administration was
there, including Chairman Secakuku and Eugene Kay (who is now on
Chairman's staff), also Clayton Honeyumptewa, Director of the
Office of Hopi Lands, and Robbie Honanie from Hopi Resources. It
was an all-star cast.
I got in a little late. The Hopis had gone to lunch and the
Dine' families were caucusing. The Hopi Chairman had presented a
letter he sent president Zah on Jan. 6. It reiterated the Hopi
Tribe's demand that the Navajo Nation begin paying 'interim rent"
for the HPL lands, and told the people that there would be no
relaxation of the housing construction freeze until the Navajo
Nation made a forward payment of $200,000 in anticipation of the
future implementation of the Agreement in Principle.
The Hopi Tribe sent us a letter in November informing us
that home repair and construction would require Hopi approval
under the terms of the 1988 and 1989 court orders in Masayesva v.
Zah, the so-called "illegal construction" case. This is a long,
involved process. It takes months, sometimes years to get
approval, and the Hopi Tribe requires statements from a certified
building inspector and a nurse or doctor regarding the need for
improvements. It is essentially the same process that was
imposed on the Dine' living under the "Bennett Freeze" from 1966
until 1992.
Eased rules on home repairs was one of the benefits that was
supposed to flow to the Dine' families under the Agreement in
Principle. It was supposed to take a maximum of seven days to
secure routine approval. This was supposed to have been put in
place as part of an "interim implementation" process while the
rest of the AIP was being worked out. The rules were never
relaxed, even before the August 5, 1993 rejection of the AIP by
the Dine'. The Hopi Tribe's November letter - actually it came
from Tim Atkeson, of Arnold and Porter - just made explicit what
had been obvious for almost two years, and put another nail in
the AIP's coffin.
The Hopi Tribe came back in after lunch. They announced
they had approved another 12 housing repairs under Masayesva v.
Zah. It was mainly Betty Tso and Lee Phillips who did the
paperwork on these. They said they were willing to meet with the
Dine' families to "discuss how we are going to implement the
AIP."
Chairman Secakuku also mentioned the Navajo Nation Council's
december resolution, asking the families to lobby their council
delegates to get it rescinded. This is pretty interesting. All
along, it has been the Dine' families who have been objecting to
the AIP and the lease, and who have been highly critical of the
Navajo Nation for giving away the store. Scores of Dine' from
the Hopi Partitioned Lands DID come to Window Rock to lobby
Council, and to speak on the record. They did NOT lobby for the
AIP and lease. I am left wondering if the Hopi Tribe just
misunderstands the situation, of if they are offering the Dine' a
face-saving way to back off from the position they have taken.
There really were not enough people at the meeting to decide
anything. Also, most of the communities had not been formally
notified about the Council's resolution on the land settlement
(see the last UPDATE). Every community sent representatives to
speak at Council, and most people know in a general way what
Council did. The way people think, that doesn't count. Window
Rock has to go before the People in a formal ("duly called", is
how it is written on resolutions) meeting. By Window Rock, they
mean senior people. Like the President. Things must be done in
the right way.
Accordingly, the Dine' that were there asked for time to
hold meetings where the Council resolution could be formally read
and explained. They also noted that there was a new Council - a
majority of the delegates are new. The new administration has
not had a chance to review its position, and there is no Land
Commission to recommend changes.
There was a general consensus among northern and southern
families that the families still don't know what the Hopis and
the U.S. mean by "implementation", but that in any case religious
needs should be addressed next. The Manybeads case was about
religious freedom, but it seems that land and money issues are
overshadowing religion. The families want to get things back on
track in that regard.
Meanwhile, Tensions are Building Again
Unfortunately, the BIA has been out raiding again. Mae Tso
had five beautiful horses impounded two weeks ago. Down in
Teesto, there is a place where the HPL-NPL boundary fence is
open. NPL livestock walk through there, then the BIA impounds.
Ross Nez, a prominent medicine man from Teesto, and Mr. Gishe
both had livestock impounded. The weather has been clear the
last few days, and as the roads dry out we can expect more
impoundments.
The Hopi Rangers are also stopping everyone driving through
the HPL with firewood. If you don't have proof of purchase or
origin, they seize the wood and any wood cutting tools. This has
caused a lot of friction. Most of the time we don't hear about
it until later, unless one of the HPL people is busted and calls
us for help.
A lot of people are getting frustrated by all this. Mae Tso
said in a meeting at Hardrock Chapter House that she was afraid
the Hopi Rangers or police would start a violent confrontation.
I have heard rumors that Hopi and BIA rangers/police are carrying
more heat lately, but have not been able to check them out.
As always, when things get tense, rumors circulate that
weapons are being moved into Big Mountain. I don't know who
spreads these rumors, but often they are followed by some kind of
federal action. For instance, when the BIA impounded all the
livestock on Chambers Ranch in 1988, somebody first circulated a
rumor, which got into the press, that "AIM was going to send in
some soldiers". So the BIA sent in a VERY heavy SWAT team,
roughed up a bunch of elders, killed or lost a few cows and
calves, etc. etc.
Here's One for the Attorneys
In the ACLU's 1992 book "The Rights of Indians and Tribes",
it has a chapter on the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968.
According to ACLU, this Act "protects the rights of all persons
who are subject to the jurisdiction of an Indian tribe." It also
provides an avenue of appeal to the U.S. Courts for people who
feel their rights have been violated.
The question is, if the Dine' families accept Hopi
jurisdiction under the AIP, does the ICRA protect their rights.
If so, which rights? Can the U.S. Civil Rights Commission be
brought in? Is unequal or discriminatory enforcement of tribal
law (a major fear the Dine' have regarding Hopi jurisdiction)
covered under ICRA? What does ICRA say about contracts such as
the proposed Hopi Lease Agreement?
I would really like to hear. Also, I'll bet Dine' Bikeya
Committee and Lee Phillips would appreciate your thoughts. The
background documents can be downloaded through jburrows at the
Fourth World Information Center. He's on the net.
More meetings
There was a very good north-south meeting at Teesto this
Sunday, which I will write up soon. I have to hit the road, as
Dine' Bikeya Committee is meeting today. More later.
jn