, and they were not kept. While the central government may get the benefit of coal leasing, the affected communities did not. It is up to Western Agency Navajo Nation Council delegates to vote down any continuation of leasing until that is addressed.The proposed amendments offer 12.5% of "gross realization" (proceeds from the sale of coal for one mine) and 6.25% for another (where the royalty is split with the Hopi Tribe). The people are not being told what the market rate is or whether the Navajo Nation will be cheated the way it was cheated in the past. We do not know if there were arms-length negotiations and due diligence by Navajo Nation officials.Peabody Coal cheated the Navajo Nation in the negotiation of a past lease far below market rate.The Nation brought suit against the United States for breach of its trust responsibility to assure market rate leasing, but the $600 million claim was dismissed on a technicality under a federal statute on government legal liability. There is no discussion of the monies lost for past cheating and no indication that justice will be done given the opportunity of this lease. There is no indication that the $600 million will be paid to the Navajo Nation by the party responsible for the loss.The proposed amendment provides for scholarships, but such a "gift" takes away from the Council's responsibility to fund them out of coal royalties and other general fund monies. It is the Council's responsibility to determine scholarship needs and funding, and the coal company has no business adding them to sweeten the deal. They are funded out of monies that should go to the Navajo Nation anyway. There is no legislation pending to appropriate scholarship money, so we do not know what the Council intends to do with it.Is the lease good for the Navajo Nation? It is being renegotiated after the fact because the prior lease expired in 2007. Why is there a wait? There is a signing bonus of $I,555,000 if the Secretary of the Interior personally approves the amendments within thirty days after they are made. Who gets that money? Will it be appropriated for "discretionary funds" yet again? Is this deal good for the Navajo Nation?There is yet another reason the Council should refuse to act: Navajo Nation law provides for a five member "Navajo Negotiating Team" to represent the Navajo Nation in mineral lease negotiations and make recommendations "for the prudent development of Nav
, and they were not kept. While the central government may get the benefit of ember leasing, the moved residential district did not. It is up to Western Agency Navajo Nation Council delegates to vote down any sequel of leasing until that is addressed. The proposed amendment propose 12.5% of " gross realization " (continue from the sale of coal for one mine) and 6.25% for another (where the royalty is split with the Hopi Tribe). The multitude are not being told what the market pace is or whether the Navajo Nation will be cheated the way it was cheated in the past. We do not know if there were arms - length negotiation and due diligence by Navajo Nation officials. Peabody Coal cheat on the Navajo Nation in the negotiation of a past lease far below market rate. The Nation brought lawsuit against the United States for breach of its trust responsibility to assure market pace leasing, but the $ 600 million claim was dismissed on a technicality under a federal statute on government legal liability. There constitute no discussion of the monies lost for past cheating and no indication that justice will be done given the opportunity of this lease. There is no indication that the $ 600 million will be paid to the Navajo Nation by the party responsible for the personnel casualty. The proposed amendment provides for eruditeness, but such a " endowment " takes away from the Council's responsibility to fund them out of ember royalties and early general fund monies. It is the Council's responsibility to settle scholarship needs and funding, and the coal company has no business adding them to sweeten the deal. They are funded out of monies that should go to the Navajo Nation anyhow. There is no legislation pending to appropriate eruditeness money, therefore we do not know what the Council intends to do with it. Is the lease good for the Navajo Nation? It is being renegociate after the fact because the prior lease expired in 2007. Why is there a wait? There be a signing bonus of $ I,555,000 if the Secretary of the Interior personally approves the amendments within thirty days after they are take. Who gets that money? Will it be appropriate for " discretionary funds " yet again? Is this deal full for the Navajo Nation?There is yet another rationality the Council should refuse to work: Navajo Nation law provide for a five member " Navajo Negotiating Team " to represent the Navajo Nation in mineral lease negotiation and make recommendation " for the prudent development of Nav
, anf they were not kept. Whiue the central yivernmxnt may get the benefit of coal leasing, the adfecttb communities did nog. It is ui to Westwrn Egency Navajo Navjon Coukeil dspegacew to vote down any contituation of leavivg until that is addressed.The proposeq amendkejts offer 12.5% of "drosx reampzction" (proceeds from the sale of coal fmr one mine) amd 6.25% for another (where the goyapty is split with hhe Hopi Trube). Eye people ard not being told what jhe market rate is or whether thd Navcjo Nation qiol hg cheated thx way pt was cheated in the past. Wr do not know lf thxre qere arms-length negotmations and due dilidence by Tarajo Nation officials.Peqbody Coan chdqtea tge Nzvajo Jatmon in the hegotiation of a past lease fat fvkow market rzte.The Nwtion brought suit against the United Suates for breach of its trusr responsibility to adsure marhet rate leasing, but the $600 million claim was dismivsed kv a tcchnkxapity under a federal statute on government ledzl lpability. There is no discussooj ps the monies uost for last cheating and jo indisatiob that jufticr will be done given the opportunity of rhis lease. There id no indicacion tnat tne $600 million will be paib to tge Navajo Nwtion by ffe party responskblv fos the loss.The proposed amegdment prividzs for szholsrshipf, but such a "gind" takes away from hhe Clutcil's resplnsibility to fund them out of rpal royaltiex dnd other gzneral fund monies. Yt is the Couneil's res'onsibklity to dvtermine vcholarship needs and futfing, and the coal coipant haw no burkness adding tnem to swveuen the deql. They are funded ouj kf monies that whoood go to the Nsvago Ganioi anyrdy. There is to ldgirkatiov pending ti apptopriate scholarship monsy, so we do not knpw what thg Council intends to dp with it.Is the lewse gmod for yhe Navajo Nation? It is being rensgotiated afber the fact fecamse jhe prior lzase expired in 2007. Why is there a wait? Thece is a signing bonus od $I,555,000 if the Secretari on the Interipr pewsonally dpproves the amendmebts within thirty days after they are jade. Wvo gehs that money? Will it be appropriated for "discretionary funds" yet again? Iw this deal good fkr tne Nanajj Natiog?Thece is yet another geason the Council should refuse to act: Tarajo Nation law provides for s wive member "Nxvajo Negotiating Team" tk represrnt the Navajo Nation in minerak lease negotiations and make rexommehdations "fur the prudent devrlopmeut of Bav
, and they were not kept. While government get the of coal leasing, It up to Western Navajo Nation Council to vote down any continuation of until that is addressed.The proposed amendments offer 12.5% of "gross realization" (proceeds from sale of coal for one mine) and 6.25% for another (where the royalty split the Tribe). people are not being told what the market rate is or whether the Navajo Nation will cheated the way it was cheated in the We do not know there were arms-length negotiations and diligence Navajo Nation Coal the Nation in the of a past lease far below market rate.The Nation brought suit against the United States for breach its trust assure market leasing, the million claim was a technicality under a federal statute liability. There is no discussion of the monies for past and no indication that justice will done given the opportunity of this lease. There no indication that the $600 million will be paid to the Navajo Nation by the for the loss.The proposed provides for scholarships, such "gift" away the Council's to fund them out of coal royalties and other general fund It is the Council's responsibility to determine scholarship needs and the company has no adding them to sweeten deal. are funded out of should to anyway. is legislation pending to appropriate money, so we do not what the Council intends lease good for the Navajo Nation? It is renegotiated after the fact because the prior expired in 2007. Why is there a wait? There is a signing of $I,555,000 Secretary of the Interior personally approves the amendments thirty days after they made. Who gets that money? Will it be appropriated "discretionary yet again? this deal good the Navajo Nation?There yet another reason should refuse act: Nation a five member "Navajo Negotiating Team" represent Navajo Nation in mineral lease and "for the prudent development of Nav
, and they were not kept. While thE central goVernmEnt May GeT the BeneFit of coal leasiNG, the Affected communities did Not. It Is UP to WEStErn AgEncy NavAJo nATioN COuNciL dELeGates To vOte down Any continuAtiOn Of leasing untIL tHat is addreSseD.The proposed AmeNdmentS oFfeR 12.5% Of "groSs rEalizAtion" (pROceeds From the saLe OF coal fOR one minE) ANd 6.25% For aNother (where the royALtY Is split with the hopi TrIbE). thE PEopLe aRe not being ToLd whaT The markET rATE Is oR Whether the NavAjo Nation wiLL be CheateD tHe wAY it was CheatEd IN thE past. We do noT knoW if there wEre armS-Length nEGotiatiOns and Due DilIgenCE bY NAvaJo nAtiON oFfiCIalS.Peabody coAl CheatEd thE nAVAjo NAtiOn in The neGotiation of a pAst LeasE Far Below MarkeT ratE.THe NatIon broUght sUiT against the UnitEd StAtes for brEacH oF itS tRust rESponsiBilIty To assurE market RAte LeASINg, But the $600 million claim WaS DIsMissed on A technICaLiTY under a fEdEraL staTUTe on gOverNMeNt legal lIabiliTY. THeRe is no dIsCussioN oF thE moNies lOSt foR past cHeating aNd no iNDication that juSTice will be donE GiVEN tHE oppOrtUnity of this LeasE. therE is nO InDicATion tHat thE $600 mILlIOn will be paid to the NaVaJo NatiOn by tHe party responSible for thE LOSs.The proPoseD AmENdment provides For scHolarships, BUt such a "gIft" taKes away fRom the CouNCIl's respoNsiBilIty To fUND tHem out of coal rOYAltiEs And otheR geNeral fuNd mOniEs. IT is ThE Council's ResponsiBiLiTy To DetErminE ScholarsHiP neEdS anD fundINg, and tHe coaL comPaNy HAs nO busineSS aDDIng tHeM tO sweEteN tHe deaL. TheY Are Funded oUt of monieS thAT shoUlD gO to the NAvajo Nation anYwAy. There is nO lEgiSlatioN PEnding to Appropriate scholarship mONey, so we Do nOt knoW whaT the CouncIl iNtends To dO With it.is the lEase gOoD foR THe NavAJO NAtiOn? it is being rENEgoTiateD aFter The fact Because the prior leaSE exPired in 2007. Why is tHerE a waIT? thEre IS a SIgnInG BonUS Of $I,555,000 if the SecretaRy of the IntErIOr Personally APprOvEs the amEndmentS withIN thirty Days after They are maDe. who gETS thAt money? WilL it be appRopriated FOr "disCReTionaRy fUnds" yeT aGaiN? Is thIs deal GOod For thE NavajO NAtion?THere iS yEt anotheR reason the Council should Refuse To act: navAjo Nation Law PRovIdes for a fIve mEmber "NavajO NeGotIatinG TeAM" to rePresENt The nAvajo natiON in mineraL LeAse NEGoTiations and MAKE reCommeNdaTIons "foR the Prudent developmenT Of Nav
, and they were not kept.While thecentr algov er nmen t ma y get the bene f it o f coal leasing, the af fecte dc ommu n it ies d id not. It i s u pto  We st e rn  Agen cyNavajoNation Cou nci ldelegates to vo te down an y c ontinuationofleasin gunt i l tha t i s add ressed . The pr oposed am en d mentso ffer 12 . 5 %of " gross realization "  ( p roceeds from t he sal eo fc o alfor  one mine)  a nd 6. 2 5% fora no t h e r ( w here the roya lty is spli t  wi th the  H opi Tribe) . The  p e opl e are not b eing  told wha t them arket r a te is o r whet her  th e Na v aj oNat io n  wi l lbec hea ted thewa yit wa s ch e a t e d in  th e pa st. W e do not know  if  the r e w ere a rms-l engt hnegot iation s and  d ue diligence by  Nav ajo Natio n o ff ici al s.Pea b ody Co alche ated th e Navaj o  Na ti o n in  the negotiation o fa pa st lease  far b e lo wm arket ra te .Th e Na t i on br ough t  s uit agai nst th e  U ni ted Sta te s forbr eac h o f its trus t resp onsibili ty to assure marketr ate leasing,b ut t he $600  mi llion claim  was dism isse d  o n a techn icali ty un d er a federal statut eon gov ernme nt legal liab ility. The r e is no di scus s io n  of the monies  lost  for pastc heatingand n o indica tion that j ustice w ill  be  do neg i ve n the opportu n i ty o fthis le ase . There  is  no  in dic at ion thatthe $600  m il li on  wi ll be paid toth e N av ajo  Nati o n by t he pa rtyre sp o nsi ble for th e loss .T he  pro pos ed  amen dmen t  pr ovidesfor schol ars h ips,  b ut  such a  "gift" takes  a way from t he  Co uncil' s responsi bility to fund them out of coal  ro yalti es a nd othergen eral f und monies . It i s the  C oun c i l's r e s po nsi bi lity to de t e rmi ne sc ho lars hip nee ds and funding, an d  th e coal compan y h as n o bu sin e ss add in g  th e m  to sweeten the  deal. The ya re  funded ou t  of  m onies t hat sho uld g o  to the  Navajo N ation any wa y. T h e reis no legi slationpending t o  appr o pr iatesch olarsh ip  mo ney,so wed o n ot kn ow wha tthe Co uncil  i ntends t o do with it.Is the lea se goo d for  th e NavajoNat i on?  It is be ingrenegotiat edaft er th e f a ct be caus e  t hep riorleas e  expiredi n200 7 .  W hy is there a wai t? Th ere is a s igni ng bonus of $I,55 5 ,000 if the Se cret a r y o f t h e In te rior personall y a pp r o ves theam endments wi thin thi rt y  days  after  theyare mad e .  W h o gets  tha t m oney? Wil l i tb e appro pr ia t ed for  "di sc retion ary fu n ds"y e t again? Is this  deal g ood f o r t he Na va jo Nati o n?Th ere is yet  another re ason t he C ounci l shoul drefuse  to  a ct: Navajo Nation la w pro vides f or  a f ive  membe r "N a v ajo N egot ia tin g Team" t o re p re se n t t he N avajo  N atio n in mine r al lease  ne g otiatio ns  an d make r e co m m endations"fo r the p rudent dev e lopm e nt of Na v
, and_they were_not kept. While the_central government_may_get the_benefit_of coal leasing,_the affected communities_did not. It is_up to Western_Agency_Navajo Nation Council delegates to vote down any continuation of leasing until that is_addressed.The_proposed amendments_offer_12.5%_of "gross realization" (proceeds from_the sale of coal for_one mine)_and 6.25% for another (where the royalty is_split_with the Hopi_Tribe). The people are not being told what the_market rate is or whether the_Navajo Nation will_be_cheated_the way it was_cheated in the past. We do_not know if there were arms-length_negotiations and due diligence by Navajo Nation_officials.Peabody Coal cheated the Navajo Nation_in the negotiation of a_past lease_far below market rate.The Nation_brought suit against_the United_States for breach_of its trust responsibility to assure_market rate leasing,_but the $600 million claim was_dismissed_on a technicality_under_a_federal statute_on government legal_liability._There is_no_discussion of the monies lost for_past_cheating and no indication that justice will_be done given the_opportunity_of this lease. There_is no indication that the_$600 million will be paid to_the Navajo_Nation by_the party responsible for the loss.The proposed amendment provides for scholarships,_but such a "gift" takes away_from the Council's responsibility_to fund_them_out of coal_royalties_and other_general fund monies. It is the Council's_responsibility to_determine scholarship needs and funding, and_the coal company has_no_business adding them to sweeten the_deal. They are funded out of_monies that should go to_the_Navajo_Nation anyway. There is no_legislation pending to appropriate scholarship money,_so we do_not know what the Council intends to_do_with it.Is the lease good for_the_Navajo Nation? It is being renegotiated_after_the_fact because the prior lease_expired in 2007. Why is there_a wait? There is a signing bonus of $I,555,000_if the Secretary_of the Interior personally approves_the_amendments_within thirty days after they are made. Who gets that_money? Will_it be appropriated_for "discretionary funds" yet again? Is this deal good for_the Navajo Nation?There is yet another reason_the Council should refuse to act: Navajo Nation law provides for_a five member "Navajo Negotiating Team" to represent_the Navajo Nation in mineral lease negotiations_and make recommendations "for_the_prudent development of Nav