Message-ID: <25765543.1075844935744.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 03:49:00 -0800 (PST)
From: lslade@modrall.com
To: laruzow@concentric.net, louis.soldano@enron.com
Subject: Re: Recent Discussion of Offer - Navajo Nation
Cc: bill.cordes@enron.com, johnny.mcgee@enron.com, michael.moran@enron.com, 
	stanley.horton@enron.com, steven.harris@enron.com, 
	tim.aron@enron.com, wes@modrall.com, jw1000mac@yahoo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: bill.cordes@enron.com, johnny.mcgee@enron.com, michael.moran@enron.com, 
	stanley.horton@enron.com, steven.harris@enron.com, 
	tim.aron@enron.com, wes@modrall.com, jw1000mac@yahoo.com
X-From: "Lynn Slade" <LSlade@modrall.com>
X-To: laruzow@concentric.net, Louis.Soldano@enron.com
X-cc: Bill.Cordes@enron.com, Johnny.McGee@enron.com, Michael.Moran@enron.com, Stanley.Horton@enron.com, Steven.Harris@enron.com, Tim.Aron@enron.com, WES@modrall.com, jw1000mac@yahoo.com
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Stanley_Horton_1\Notes Folders\All documents
X-Origin: HORTON-S
X-FileName: shorton.nsf

** Proprietary **

Larry, very interesting reports.   It may be wise for TW (and other 
companies) to monitor and comment through channels you consider appropriate 
on the developing proposals for the statutes waiving immunity for contract 
claims.  This reminds me of a discussion I had with Steve Boos (who as you 
know is legislative counsel to the Council (or a similar title)  at a CLE in 
Albuquerque.  We discussed the effort last year to provide a limited waiver 
which he suggested he favored, and he asked whether it would be an inducement 
for business to invest on reservation to have a waiver of immunity for suits 
on contracts with the Nation.  Of course, I said it would be and we talked 
briefly about what states and the U. S. do.  I'd be interested in further 
intelligence on that initiative.

I'd also appreciate a copy of the agenda for the financial meetings.

Thanks for your always valuable window on Window Rock.

Lynn
_____________________
Lynn H. Slade
Modrall, Sperling, Roehl, Harris & Sisk, P.A.
Post Office Box 2168
Albuquerque, NM 87103-2168
Telephone: (505)848-1828
Fax:  (505)848-1889
E-Mail: lslade@modrall.com
www.modrall.com

>>> "Lawrence A. Ruzow" <laruzow@concentric.net> 03/18/00 01:17AM >>>
I also received a call today from Luralene Tapahe, Esq. of the NNERTF and the
Department of Justice concerning another client. I took advantage of the call
to discuss with Ms. Tapahe my discussion of March 16th with Akhtar Zaman and
she generally confirmed what Mr. Zaman had told me.

Ms. Tapahe also advised me that as of today, no replacement on the NNERTF from
the President's Office had been made for Sharon Noel, Esq. whom, as you know,
is (acting) Chief of Staff and, apparently, will be too busy to serve on the
NNERTF.

As you probably know, there is a big meeting in Window Rock next week called 
by
President Begaye to discuss whether the Navajo Nation should try to charter 
its
own bank (more broadly, on the subject of how to find capital for 
development).
The cast of characters for this meeting is quite impressive. If anyone wants a
copy of the agenda, please let me know.

Finally, I attended a meeting of the Navajo Nation Council's Judiciary
Committee yesterday. After some spirited debate, they agreed to recommend to
the full Council a "Little Tucker Act" with a limited waiver of sovereign
immunity to enforce contracts.

Lawrence A. Ruzow

Louis.Soldano@enron.com wrote:

> Mr. Zaman called Larry yesterday to discuss the most recent offer.
>
> Larry had the opportunity to discuss with Mr. Zaman the sense of urgency on
> TW's part and the desire to meet with the decision making body - the
> NNERTF.  Apparently Mr. Zaman was of the impression that TW would not be
> pressed to take legal action until the ROW expired.
>
> Mr. Zaman was encouraged by the TW approach of an incentive but offered no
> insights on the acceptability of the offer.  He did promised to review it
> with the task force in the near future and indicated that Johnny could
> expect a response in the near future regarding the letter and the request
> for a meeting.
