ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE

 

JOINT LEGISLATIVE STUDY COMMITTEE ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE STATE AND THE NAVAJO NATION

 

Minutes of the Meeting

November 21, 2002

10:00 a.m.  Senate Hearing Room 109

 

Members Present:

Senator Jack Jackson, Cochair                  Representative Sylvia Laughter, Cochair  

Senator Ken Bennett                                    Representative Tom O'Halleran                             

Senator Pete Rios                                        Mr. Raymond C. Etcitty

Mr. Ron Lee                                                   Mr. Derrick Watchman

 

Members Absent:

Senator John Verkamp                                Representative Jake Flake

Representative James Sedillo

                                                                       

Staff:

Nadine Sapien, Senate Research Analyst

Dallas Gold, Senate Assistant Research Analyst

 

Senator Jackson called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m. and attendance was noted. For additional attendees, see Sign-in Sheet (Attachment A).

 

OPENING REMARKS

 

Senator Jackson opined that a formal relationship between the State and the Navajo Nation, as well as with all of the tribes within the State is needed to create guidelines to deal with critical issues such as the decline of water and other natural resources. He stated that formalizing the relationship between the State and the Navajo Nation would be a benefit for both entities.

 

PRESENTATION ON CROSS DEPUTIZING LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENTS

 

Dorothy Fulton, Acting Executive Director, Department for the Division of Public Safety for the Navajo Nation and Chief of Police for the Navajo Nation, commented that during the last few years she has been advocating on behalf of Navajo Nation Law Enforcement and Navajo Nation Public Safety Programs with both New Mexico and Arizona.  She remarked that Division of Public Safety for the Navajo Nation is currently working on various issues with counties in New Mexico and Arizona.   She remarked that there has been more activity with the State of New Mexico although efforts have been made with the State of Arizona. 

 

Director Fulton stated that currently, Navajo Nation Law Enforcement and Navajo Nation Public Safety Programs service over eighty chapters with a total of 220 police officers.  She noted that 120 of those officers are assigned to Arizona.  She commented that out of the 250,000 calls for services on the Navajo Nation, 38,000 result in arrests.  With only 103 bed spaces available, she noted that it is increasingly difficult to place these people in the jail system.  She explained that approximately 1,000 of the 250,000 calls for services involve major crimes, such as homicides, child and sexual abuse and other serious crimes that are processed through the Federal Court System.  She noted that there are 39 criminal investigators that respond and provide technical assistance and investigation on major crimes.  Additionally, Navajo Nation Law Enforcement has a violent crimes task force agreement with the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the US Attorney's Office, which allows the Navajo Nation Law Enforcement investigators the ability to be cross deputized as US Marshals and therefore do not have to wait for FBI agents at the crime scene to act.

 

Director Fulton explained that one of the ways Navajo Nation Law Enforcement has explored the problem of the high volume of calls is with a mutual aid agreement with the counties in both New Mexico and Arizona.  As a result, in 1998 Navajo Nation Law Enforcement entered in its first cross deputization agreement with McKinley County, New Mexico.  This agreement has not improved the relationship between McKinley County and the Navajo Nation because Navajo Nation Law Enforcement officers still have limited jurisdiction, even though the officers meet all New Mexico State standards.  She noted that there is reluctance from the county law enforcement officers to use the Navajo Nation Law Enforcement forms, detention booking process or tribal courts.  There has been an increase in the number of concerns and complaints filed with the Department of Justice regarding liability issues from individuals that were arrested by county law enforcement.  These incidents are pending as potential law suits.

 

Director Fulton stated that there is a need for mutual aid agreements with counties in Arizona.   She stated that communication with Sheriff Richardson from Coconino County has begun regarding the Antelope Point area.  She stated that communication with Apache and Navajo Counties has been quiet.  She stated that there has been an increase of requests for the temporary commissioning of officers and to have them present at more activities that are occurring in and around the Navajo Nation, such as at fairs and other events.   She opined that there is no need for a cross commissioning agreement with Arizona because Navajo Nation Law Enforcement police officers are certified and commissioned by the State of Arizona and the Navajo Nation Law Enforcement Police Academy meets the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training (AZ POST) standards and have been certified by the State.

 

Director Fulton distributed a handout which included a copy of the Cross-Commission Agreement between the Navajo Nation and the McKinley County Sheriff's Office, New Mexico; a copy of the Navajo Nation Mutual Aid Agreement Draft, 2000 and a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Navajo Nation and the Counties in Arizona Draft, February 2002 (Attachment B).

 

Director Fulton explained that Coconino, Navajo and Apache Counties returned these forms with their proposals that are being reviewed by the Navajo Department of Justice.   She stated that the Department of Justice is concerned that the creation of these agreements may compromise the Navajo Nation's sovereignty.

 

Director Fulton stated that the relationship between the states and the Navajo Nation greatly effects law enforcement due to financial assistance from the States. She explained that New Mexico funds Navajo Nation Law Enforcement with $600/police officer that is certified under New Mexico standards.  This funding is used for a variety of law enforcement needs, such as equipment or training.  Arizona does not fund any Navajo Nation Law Enforcement needs.  She remarked Navajo Nation Law Enforcement would like to see similar support from Arizona, but realizes that this responsibility is being delegated to the counties.  She noted that requests have been placed to the counties for assistance with autopsies, support with equipment and other needs, which have not been fulfilled.  She stated that last year an initiative regarding death investigations was submitted to cover the costs of autopsies and external exams that are conducted on death cases that occur outside of hospitals in New Mexico.  New Mexico passed legislation last year to fund $50,000 per year for autopsies and external exams in Indian Country.  She stated Navajo Nation Law Enforcement sought parity for this situation, as outside of Indian Country, all law enforcement agencies in the State of New Mexico are provided funds for autopsies and external examinations.  

 

Director Fulton remarked that another area under review is the sharing of driving under the influence (DUI) information with Arizona.  She stated that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement will be coming to the State to request that it be allowed to share its DUI data with the State to have another mechanism in place to address repeat DUI offenders. Currently, with Navajo Nation law and the current lack of bed space, Navajo Nation Law Enforcement can not address DUI cases in a way that it would like to.  She opined that if Arizona were to enter into an agreement with Navajo Nation Law Enforcement to share this information, these offenders could be penalized in a different manner other than tribal jail time.  She stated that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement is reviewing using a current agreement that is going through the process, where fingerprint data would also be shared with the State of Arizona.   She stated that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement recently was awarded grant monies to establish the Arizona fingerprinting system within the Navajo Nation.

 

Director Fulton noted that still another area under review is to further the Navajo Nation's relationship and gain recognition of the police academy in Toyei the State of Arizona.   She stated that it is Navajo Nation Law Enforcement's hope that the academy would be recognized by the State as a northern Arizonan police academy rather than a Navajo Nation law enforcement academy, as it meets the State's standards and curriculum requirements. 

 

In response to Representative Laughter, Director Fulton reiterated that the Department of Justice is concerned that the creation of cross commissioning agreements may compromise the Navajo Nation's sovereignty.  She remarked that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement would like to see Arizona's recommendations for guidelines for the creation of government-to-government agreements with the Arizona counties.  She stated that protocols in these agreements need to be established to deal with controversial issues, such as the issuance of tickets to avoid problems.

 

Representative Laughter recommended that the Navajo Nation might submit its recommendations for the agreements based on agreements made with the New Mexico counties.  She stated that by doing so, the Navajo Nation would retain its sovereignty and help facilitate the agreements being created with the Arizonan counties.

 

Representative Laughter asked if the main focus for wanting to establish the agreements is for Arizona to assist with funding.  Director Fulton remarked that the agreements are not to obtain funding.  She stated that a mutual aid agreement is to recognize that a relationship exists between the Navajo Nation and the State of Arizona and specifies under what circumstances and where county law enforcement officers would be called upon for assistance on the reservation to enhance Navajo Nation Law Enforcement.  She stated that the funding received by New Mexico is a new issue and noted that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement has not requested any funding support from Arizona in the past.

 

Mr. Watchman opined that in the 1970s, out of necessity, it was recognized that there was a need for cross deputization in New Mexico.  He opined that now in Arizona, the issue facing Navajo Nation Law Enforcement is the lack of uniformity between how the New Mexico counties and Arizona county law enforcement officers enforce county, state and Navajo law on reservations.  He remarked the process itself is also an issue.  Director Fulton stated Mr. Watchman's comments were correct.

 

Mr. Lee commented that this issue might be addressed with educating county law enforcement officers at the northern Arizonan  police academy in Toyei. 

 

Representative Laughter remarked that this might be best addressed in legislation.  She asked if Senator Bennett would be in support of legislation to address this issue.  Senator Bennett remarked that he would be in support of trying to pass legislation that would implement good ideas.  He stated that one option is to make the Navajo Nation its own county, but noted that this may make other tribes want to become individual counties as well. 

 

Mr. Watchman remarked that there is ambiguity with how county and state laws are enforced by Navajo Nation Law Enforcement and by county law enforcement officers.

 

Senator Rios commented that it was his understanding that these important issues of mutual concern, such as law enforcement, homeland security, water issues and other issues that lack clear definition, were to be addressed by the Committee by trying to create a piece of legislation that would authorize the Arizona Indian Commission, or some other entity to review.  He remarked that entity would then report back to the Legislature to have legislation created to address these areas of concern.

 

Senator Bennett asked if Navajo Nation Law Enforcement officers are able to enforce Navajo Nation laws as well as State and county laws.  Director Fulton stated that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement officers are encouraged to enforce Navajo Nation laws, however if the situation arises and the need exists for the use of State or Federal law, Navajo Nation Law Enforcement officers enforce them.  She stated that it varies from incident to incident.  She commented that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement would expect any law enforcement personnel or agency to respect the laws of the Navajo Nation and enforce the laws of the Navajo Nation. 

 

Mr. Etcitty remarked that offenses committed on the reservation, the Navajo Nation, by its authority, is limited to dealing with misdemeanor offenses.  When offenses are felonies, because it occurred on a reservation, federal law would prevail.  He noted that in some instances, state governments might wish to be involved as well.  He stated that these jurisdictional overlaps create a problem with uniformity.   He stated that creating a protocol to address these situations is needed.  He stated that cross deputizing allows for a state officer to enforce Navajo Nation law and Navajo Nation officers to enforce state law, but it does not outline which law should be used. 

 

Representative Laughter commented that before a state and a tribe can reach an agreement, she opined that the tribe needs to create the perimeters of its preferences or recommendation.  She stated that this would assist in the creation of uniformity.  She opined that this topic needs further discussion and recommended that interested parties should meet outside of the Committee.

 

Director Fulton stated that this issue has become a sensitive issue for Navajo Nation Law Enforcement.  She noted that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement has reached an impasse with the creation of an agreement between the counties of Arizona and the Navajo Nation.  She stated that both sides have submitted their recommendations and there has been an expectation of negotiations since April 2002, when the Navajo Nation submitted their recommendations to the counties.  She stated that Navajo Nation Law Enforcement is now waiting for negotiations to begin.

 

Senator Bennett excused himself from the meeting at 12:00 p.m.  In response to Senator Jackson, he stated that he would support a recommendation to continue the Committee for several more years to continue studying this situation.

 

 PRESENTATION OF DRAFT MODEL RELATIONSHIP

 

Ron Lee, Arizona Commission on Indian Affairs (ACIA), distributed handouts entitled A Model for Building Tribal-State Relations, Arizona Indian Town hall Process and a copy of ARS §41-1108, House Engrossed Senate Bill 1113 and House Engrossed House Bill 2632 (Attachments C, D and E).  He remarked that the Navajo Nation has the most established relationship with the State of any of the tribes, but noted that many tribes do not care to have any type of formalized relationship with the State.  As a result, he opined that the Committee needs to be careful with creating a definition of  “a formal relationship” that would be different amongst the various tribes.  He stated that since his appointment in 1988 to the ACIA, he has learned that some tribes want to remain autonomous and do not want the State to be involved in their affairs.  The following are highlights from his slide presentation, A Model for Building Tribal-State Relations:

 

·        Brief history of Tribal-State relations prior to 1999, mission and scope.

 

·        Explanation of new vision, with the need to develop ongoing dialogue.

 

·        Outline of needed organizational development.

 

·        New Town Hall Forum outline

 

·        Explanation and outline of purpose and activities before, during and after the Town Hall Forum.

 

·        Explanation of Indian Nations and Tribes Legislative Day, purpose and activities.

 

·        Explanation of developing a cycle of ongoing activities and proposed legislative changes.

 

·        Indian Nations Day and The Arizona Indian Town Hall Process – Executive  Summary

 

Representative Laughter moved that the Committee make a recommendation to introduce legislation to move the date of the Indian Nations and Tribal Legislative Day to the Thursday of the second week of session, per Ron Lee’s recommendation.   The motion CARRIED by voice vote.

 

Representative Laughter moved that the Committee make a recommendation to introduce legislation to add ARS §41-1108 back into the statute for Indian Nations and Tribal Legislative Day.   The motion CARRIED by voice vote.

 

Representative Laughter moved that the Committee make a recommendation to introduce legislation to have an intern from each of the universities including an intern from any interested tribal organizations, college or university to report in the form of a thesis to the Legislature and to Indian Nations and Tribal Legislatven Day.

 

Representative O’Halleran remarked that in theory he did not have a problem with this recommendation, but he would be hesitant to move forward with the recommendation until the Committee has more information and discussion.

 

Mr. Lee commented that rather than having an intern from the universities, he would recommend having the Legislature hire an intern for the ACIA to perform research and track legislation. 

 

Senator Rios explained the interns that are hired by the Legislature receive college credit for their intern service and are paid from the House and Senate budgets. He noted that other state agencies hire interns in a similar manner and pay the interns salaries from the agency’s budgets.  He opined that if the ACIA wants an intern for research purposes, the salary for the intern would need to come from the agency’s budget, not from the Legislature’s.  He remarked that he would not be in support of Representative Laughter’s motion.

 

Representative Laughter withdrew her motion.

 

REVIEW OF DRAFT COMMITTEE REPORT

 

Nadine Sapien, Senate Research Analyst, distributed a handout entitled Draft, Joint Legislative Study Committee on the Relationship Between the State and the Navajo Nation, 2002, Final Report (Attachment F).  She commented the recommendations that were voted on today would be included in the Draft of the final report.

 

Representative O’Halleran, referring to the Draft, commented that in the Committee charge it is stated that the Committee shall: (1) review the history of the formation of the Navajo Nation, including the status of the Navajo Nation at the time of statehood; (2) review the legal implications of the citizenship status of Navajo Nation members in relation to their tribe, the United States and this State; (3) review the legal implications of the Navajo Nation's sovereignty, including the issue of taxation and problems that have arisen when there have been differences between the laws or policies of this State, or a county, and the laws or policies of the Navajo Nation; (4) compile a list of State programs that provide services to tribal residents, including those services provided by the Department of Education and the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System administration and study the manner in which those agencies coordinate with tribal governments in administering those programs; (5) determine which universities and community college districts provide courses on reservations and determine the manner in which tribal approval for those courses is obtained; and (6) evaluate the possible impact of making the Navajo Nation a separate county.  The Committee shall make recommendations on the following: (1) statutory and administrative procedure changes to improve coordination between State, county and tribal governments in providing services to reservation residents; (2) methods to increase partnership efforts between the State, counties and Navajo Nation; (3) other methods to improve relationships between State, county and tribal governments.  The Committee shall submit a written report on or before December 15, 2002, of its findings and recommendations to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President of the Senate and the Governor.  The Committee shall provide a copy of its report to the Secretary of State and the Director of the Arizona State Library, Archives, and Public Records.  He asked if the Committee has completed any of these tasks. 

 

Ms. Sapien stated that not many of the Committee charge items have been addressed by the Committee.

 

Representative O’Halleran opined that it is important that the Committee follow the charge that was set forth and to deal with these issues in some way so that the Navajo Nation members and members of other tribes have an idea of how they can deal with the State.   He stated that after reading the minutes of prior meetings, he did not feel that the Committee has fulfilled its charge. 

 

Senator Jackson stated that a number of items on the Committee Charge were good ideas, but were hard to accomplish as it was very difficult to get a quorum.  He stated that he attempted to obtain information from the Navajo people to ascertain if there was a need for a formal relationship.  He opined that this has been established by the testimony given at the Committee meetings.   He stated that he is satisfied with what the Committee has done so far.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE INTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATION TO CREATE A NEW STUDY COMMITTEE

 

Representative O’Halleran recommended that one of the Committee’s recommendations should be the continuance of the Committee to fulfill the Committee’s obligations.   He opined that it is important for the Legislative body to fully understand the programs that are provided to tribal residents so that it can know if the State is fulfilling its obligation to all of the citizens of the State.

 

Representative O’Halleran moved that the Committee include in the final report a recommendation to introduce legislation to establish a new Study Committee for two years starting with the next legislative session of the relationship between the State and all the Native American tribes within the State.   The motion CARRIED by voice vote.

 

ADOPT FINAL REPORT

 

Representative Laughter moved that the Committee ADOPT the final report and direct staff to include the Committee’s approved recommendations. The motion CARRIED by voice vote.

 

In response to Representative Laughter, Ms. Sapien explained that the Committee would be terminated as of December 31, 2002.  She stated that should legislation be passed to establish a new study committee, the general effect date would be somewhere around August 2003, unless there was an emergency clause. 

 

Senator Rios stated that an ad hoc committee could be formed to continue the Committee’s work until a new study committee is established.

 

Representative O’Halleran stated that it is his intention to work with Representative Laughter and others to make sure that this work continues uninterrupted.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF THE COMMITTEE'S FINAL REPORT TO THE NAVAJO NATION FOR REVIEW

 

Senator Jackson stated that he recently spoke with the newly elected Navajo President and they agreed that the draft model relationship would need to be approved by the Navajo Nation. Senator Jackson instructed staff to forward the final report to the Navajo Nation for review.

 

Without objection, the meeting was adjourned at 12:50 p.m.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

 

                                                                        Tracey Moulton

                                                                        Committee Secretary

                                                                       

 

(Tapes and attachments on file in the Secretary of the Senate’s Office/Resource Center, Room 115.)

 

 

---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------

Joint Legislative Study Committee on the Relationship between the State and the Navajo Nation

November 21, 2002

Page 1

 

---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------