Alameda Native History Project

Category: Archives

  • One More Reason Why Land Acknowledgment is Important: Letter to Museum of San Ramon Valley

    The following is an email sent to John Keenan, volunteer at the Museum of the San Ramon Valley, in reply to his request for topics for Zoom Lectures at the museum:

    Land Acknowledgement is an important step in naming and acknowledging the people who actually belong to this land. It’s a proclamation that has no legal implications, as far as I can tell. But it is the first step in naming the people whose land you are on, and acknowledging the circumstances which forced them off of it, and into obscurity. It is an attempt to undo the continuing erasure (or omission) of the history of our people, and one way to begin the process of inviting Native American people to be a part of the planning process; as well as to make space for the representation of the actual lived experiences of Native American people.

    By acknowledging this land is Ohlone territory, you are honoring Ohlone people by referring to them by the name that they chose for themselves. And you are helping to correct the inaccurate representations of who has been here (“since time immemorial”–but at least for [7,000] years.)

    Many times, historical societies, and museums refuse to acknowledge, or take seriously the factual (historical) background of this place. But it only takes the introduction and study of archeological, ethnographic, and direct statements by Native People, in the last 50 years for one to realize, and determine that this is indeed Ohlone Territory.

    For instance, the last recorded tribal group in your area was the Verona Band of Indians, they appeared in at least two Indian Censuses, J.P. Harrington’s Research, and most recently in Randall Milliken’s detailed and thorough analysis of Mission Records. The Verona Band of Indians was recognized as a tribe by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and is known today as the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, which claims the entire San Ramon Valley area as their homeland. Furthermore, overtures made to the existence of groups in places like “Lisjan”, are direct references to places where Ohlone people lived and worked on ranches in the post-Mission Period–as “Lisjan” is a Maidu place name for Pleasanton, California.

    Inline attachment: image showing Muwekma Tribal Territory, “Some of the Direct Muwekma Ohlone Lineal Descendant Tribal Districts and Villages”

    In spite of this, museums and historical societies, such as the Museum of the San Ramon Valley, continue to insist that the tribal groups of your area were Miwok; when, in fact, they were Miwok-speaking Ohlone People. And the only reason Ohlone people were misidentified was because of the blind reliance on the languages spoken by the Native People here as the sole identifying indicator of a tribe’s identity. This, of course, is a result of the fact Miwok was the primary language spoken in California Missions. (However, Jose Guzman, pictured below, spoke Chochenyo, which is an Ohlone language.)

    By continuing to misidentify Ohlone people–who are alive and well today–and refusing to acknowledge their lives, and contributions to this area, is continuing to omit large portions of a rich and interesting history, some of which can only be presented by Ohlone People, themselves. This is aside from the reliance upon, and repetition of, what’s widely seen as explicitly racist, antiquated, and offensive language and references to Native American People, often still seen in museums, and historical societies, today.

    [Inline attachments: 1. picture of Ohlone ancestor, Jose (“Joe”) Guzman, seated in a chair, holding a cane, on a ranch in Niles, California–unidentified woman standing behind him, perhaps one of his daughters;
    (2.) Jose Guzman’s son, and grand-children, also in Niles, California. Both pictures were taken in 1934.]

    It is for these reasons, among many others, that Land Acknowledgement is an important facet to honoring the people of this area. But it is also a step forward in presenting accurate historical information, and respectful representation, of the people whose land you are on, and benefit from.

    It is also for these reasons (among many others) I would be unable to present information about Native People in the San Ramon Valley area under the guise that they are “Miwok”. Because I know this is a false representation of the facts.

    Please find the attached “Muwekma Greeting”, an official document published by the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. It is extremely thorough and detailed; the most pertinent facts have been verified and augmented by the Bureau of Indian Affair’s own Research and Acknowledgement Division.

    I hope this will help you as you consider which topics and information the Museum of the San Ramon Valley chooses to present to the public. I am copying this email to the museum’s main email address, as well.

    Very truly yours,

    Gabriel Duncan

    Attachment: “Muwekma Greeting”

    Muwekma-Greeting-City-of-Oakland-and-Alameda-Native-ArtDownload

  • Coyote Hills Translates All 35 Trail Markers to Chochenyo: Honoring the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area

    Muwekma Ohlone Tribal Members unveiling first Trail Marker in their language, Čočeño (Chochencyo), at Coyote Hills Regional Park (aka Máyyan Šáatošikma)

    On Sunday, November 27, 2022, we gathered at Máyyan Šáatošikma (aka Coyote Hills Regional Park, in Fremont) to witness the unveiling of the first of 35 trail markers, redesigned, and translated into Čočeño (Chochenyo).

    Čočeño is the official language of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, once recognized as the Verona Band of Indians, and comprised of all of the known surviving American Indian lineages aboriginal to the San Francisco Bay region who trace their ancestry through the Missions Dolores, Santa Clara, and San Jose.

    It was through the work of J.P. Harrington, and Ohlone Ancestor Jose Guzman, that the Čočeño language was preserved, and survived centuries of attempted erasure.

    The renaming of these 35 trail markers–which account for all of the trail markers in the Coyote Hills Regional Park–are the culmination of decades of (continuing) partnership with the East Bay Regional Park District.

    The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area is a bonafide tribe, with more than 600 enrolled members. Muwekma holds elections for their leaders, who are now Charlene Nijmeh (Chairwoman), Monica Arellano (Vice Chairwoman). Muwekma has a strong Tribal Council, made of elders and enrolled members; without whom the re-awakening of the Čočeño language, and traditions, such as almost-forgotten dances, would not be possible.

    As supporters of Tribal Sovereignty, of Ohlone People’s struggle for recognition, for Land Back, and those who wish to Decolonize, and Rematriate The Land: Remember that Muwekma is a bonafide tribe–and not a corporation, like the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan “Nation”, INC.; or the Sogorea Te Land Trust.

    The important distinction between these groups is that Muwekma has been here since time immemorial. That Muwekma can trace its lineage in the San Francisco Bay Area back to at least 7,000 years ago. That Muwekma accounts for hundreds of Ohlone People. That Muwekma holds regular elections, and–most importantly–Muwekma can back all their claims with extensive documentation, including pictures going back to at least the 1930’s.

    Picture of Jose Guzman in Niles, California; taken 1934. Unknown Photographer.
    Resources for Supporting the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area:

    Sign the “Restore the Homeland” Letter

    Sign the “Restore Muwekma” Letter

    There are more ways to support Muwekma, at http://muwekma.org

  • New Tonarigumi Commemorates Alameda Historic Japantown

    New Tonarigumi: Alameda Historic Japantown Markers

    Alameda Historic Japantown Plaque and Marker at the Buddhist Temple of Alameda (2325 Pacific Ave, Alameda, CA 94501)

    First picture at the Alameda Buddhist Temple; second picture at the Alameda Marketplace.

    Alameda Historic Japantown Plaque and Marker at Alameda Marketplace (1650 Park St, Alameda, CA 94501)

    These historical markers and plaques are dedicated to the Japanese, and Japanese-American, residents of the City of Alameda, who endured dispossession, displacement, and internment, during World War 2…. Only after enduring the intense racism and discrimination of White Alameda for decades before.

    Note: I cannot share the images, or words used in Historic Alameda Newspapers to show you how strong White Alameda’s racist and hateful vitriol of Japanese (and Chinese) immigrants was; because these images and words are so offending as to be considered harmful material still to this day.

    But it’s fair to say that non-white immigrants were never welcomed here, in the City of Alameda–nor were these immigrants ever allowed peace, quiet enjoyment, or credit for the awesome contributions they made to the development and advancement of the City we see today.

    We can never forget the injustices the American government has imposed upon every single non-white group of people to ever exist within this country.

    While white people love to point out that a very small group of them came forward to protect Japanese land and property from seizure and destruction, it’s the majority of white Americans who wholeheartedly supported the separation and internment of Japanese and Japanese-American people.

    So, when we start having a real conversation about land back and honoring the Ohlone people of this place, I want you to include all Ohlone people and not just Sogorea Te Land Trust, and Corrina Gould—organizations which demonstrably only account for a very small fraction of the total Ohlone population living today.

    It’s a shame that the Alameda Museum had no part in this project, at all.

    But I want to congratulate the City of Alameda, and Downtown Alameda Business Association, for actually including the voices, perspectives, and participation of the the Japanese-Americans who were actually affected by these racists policies and laws.

    As we continue forward in healing from the injustices and injuries of America’s racist past, the participation of those people who were actually affected by these shameful periods should be critical, tantamount, and–indeed–inextricable from the memorials, contrition, and reparations still to come.

    Map of Alameda Japanese American Businesses of 1940. Map credit to JapantownAtlas.com.

  • Open Letter to City Hall: Reach out to other affected tribes before granting exclusive rights to their land

    We sent out numerous letters to City of Oakland Officials, today. [Here’s the contact list we used.] This is what the letter said:

    Alameda Native History Project
    2201 Shoreline Drive #6334
    Alameda, California 94501
    (510) 747-8423
    info@alamedanativehistoryproject.com

    October 31, 2022

    Oakland City Council
    Oakland City Hall
    1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza
    Oakland, CA 94612

    -VIA EMAIL-

    Re: Proposed Cultural Conservation Easement at Joaquin Miller Park (Agenda Item #10 22-0849)

    Dear City Council Members, and Staff,

    I am writing to ask you to include all Ohlone people in the planning and consultation for the proposed cultural easement at Sequoia Point, in Joaquin Miller Park. Currently, there are only plans recognizing one Ohlone tribal group, the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.

    However, if Sequoia Point is to be treated as a Tribal Cultural Resource, then Tribal Consultation should take place with all of the Ohlone tribal groups. I know that you are familiar with Tribal Notification Requirements; so it’s especially dismaying that Tribal Consultation was not solicited from any or all of the groups in the Native American Heritage Commission’s Tribal Consultation Lists.

    These groups include, but are not limited to:

    1. Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista
    2. Confederated Villages of the Lisjan
    3. Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe
    4. Indian Canyon Mustun Band of Costanoan
    5. Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area
    6. Northern Valley Yokuts Tribe
    7. The Ohlone Indian Tribe

    Granting exclusive rights to use, and access, a Tribal Cultural Resource, as an easement in perpetuity, without consulting with other real parties in interest ( i.e., these other tribal groups) is a serious mistake that does not have to be made.

    Please reach out to other affected tribes before granting exclusive rights to their land.

    Sincerely,

    Gabriel Duncan

    Alameda Native History Project
    2201 Shoreline Drive #6334
    Alameda, California 94501
    (510) 747-8423
    info@alamedanativehistoryproject.com

    OCTOBER-31-2022-LETTER-TO-OAKLAND-CITY-COUNCILDownload

  • Self-Dealing or Ineptitude? – Sogorea Te Land Trust Easement Moves Forward Without Tribal Consultations

    Now that initial excitement over the announcement of a proposed cultural easement for Ohlone people at Sequoia Point (5-acres in Joaquin Miller Park) has died down, it’s time to do the actual work of looking at the legislation proposed to Oakland City Council Members, and deciding if this really is a just, and equitable “Land Back” project.

    While Sogorea Te Land Trust spokesperson, Corrina Gould, is also the alleged Tribal Chairperson of a corporation known as the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.–we noticed that Corrina’s group was the only Ohlone tribal group consulted with while developing a cultural easement that is meant to benefit all Ohlone people.

    Other tribal groups which claim Joaquin Miller Park – Sequoia Point, as part of their Tribal Homeland include:
    1. Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista
    2. Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe
    3. Indian Canyon Mustun Band of Costanoan
    4. Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area
    5. Northern Valley Yokuts Tribe
    6. The Ohlone Indian Tribe

    So why weren’t these other tribes contacted, and invited to take part in the development of a cultural conservation easement for their land?

    All of the tribal organizations listed above have documented ties to “bands of Indians”, and full-blooded Indian acenstors who appeared on Indian Censuses in the late 1800’s, and early 1900’s–which is a requirement to prove ancestry/degree of Indian Blood, and also petition the Bureau of Indian Affairs for Federal Tribal Recognition.

    If added to the list above, Corrina Gould’s company, the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan “Nation”, INC. would be the newest and least documented tribal group.

    The Ohlone Indian Tribe would be the second newest organization–but this corporation was founded specifically to accept the deed to the Ohlone Cemetery in Fremont, California. The Ohlone Cemetery was probably the first parcel of land back given to any Native American tribe by the Catholic Church (…ever.)

    In fact, out of all of the tribes listed above, most of these tribes have their own Land Trusts, including the Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan, which is currently the only federally recognized California coastal tribe between Sonoma and Santa Barbara. As such, Indian Canyon enjoys their own tribal land base, and Federal Land Trust.

    This begs the following questions:

    1. Why haven’t any of these other (arguably more legitimate) Tribal Organizations been contacted?
    2. Who is Sogorea Te Land Trust really trying to return land to?
    Because, right now, it appears that Corrina Gould is engaging in a form of self-dealing, in awarding her own corporation an easement in a transaction that she should be barred from negotiating because of her clear Conflict of Interest.

    The onus to perform due diligence in reaching out to other tribal groups; exercise a duty of care to ensure these tribal group’s right to consultation (and participation) falls squarely on the City of Oakland.

    However, as a land trust, which has no official Tribal Affiliation in their bylaws, or articles of incorporation, it seems incumbent upon Sogorea Te Land Trust to reach out to the tribes they claim to be working (in a fiduciary capacity) towards the return of land for…. And invite them to participate in a project that is meant to benefit them.

    This is Sogorea Te Land Trust’s duty to Ohlone People; as an organization which claims to work for Ohlone people as their “clients” (for lack of a better term.)

    Excluding these other tribal groups from consulting with the City of Oakland is a violation of well established (and accepted) rules and procedures provided, in part, by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatration Act, AB52 (Tribal Consultation), and the California Public Resources Code–which all require Cities and Lead Agencies (in this case, Sogorea Te Land Trust) to contact the Native American Heritage Commission to receive a list of tribal organizations they must request consultation from before proceeding with proposed project or plans on public lands. (Like a city park.)

    More importantly, this is a complete disregard for the Tribal Protocol that Corrina Gould has been so vocal about.

    In fact, Corrina Gould’s number one claim at any protest, is that “tribes were not consulted“.

    Which is ironic considering the fact Gould hasn’t consulted any other tribes in the creation of this proposed easement at Sequoia Point.

    In fact, it looks like other Ohlone tribes are being actively excluded by Corrina Gould, in order for her to engage in what looks suspiciously like Self-Dealing, and Fraudulent Behavior.

    We know that Tribal Outreach and Consultation has not occurred, or even been attempted, because “tribal consultation” is conspicuously absent from the Agenda Report & Legislation for the proposed easement; along with any mention of Oakland City Staff, or STLT’s efforts to reach out to other tribes who are affected by, and are real parties in interest to, the cultural conservation easement proposed at Joaquin Miller Park, in Oakland.

    Hopefully the Oakland City Council will put a hold on their vote on the Cultural Conservation Easement, in order for the City of Oakland and Sogorea Te Land Trust to actually consult with all the local Ohlone tribal groups, and bar Corrina Gould from engaging in negotiations on behalf of Sogorea Te Land Trust which she obviously has a deep, and personal, conflict of interest in.

    Oakland City Council Agenda for Nov. 1, 2022

    Agenda Report on Item 10 22-0849: Cultural Conservation Easement To Sogorea Te’ Land Trust In Joaquin Miller Park

    Proposed Legislation re: Cultural Conservation Easement To Sogorea Te’ Land Trust In Joaquin Miller Park

    Cornell Law School – Legal Information Institute “Self-Dealing“

    Amah Mutsun Tribal Band Website

    Amah Mutsun Land Trust Website

    Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribal Website

    Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area Website

    Muwekma Ohlone Preservation Foundation (Land Trust) Website

    Northern Valley Yokuts Page – Native American Heritage Commission Digital Atlas

  • Oakland City Council: Vote No on Ohlone Cultural Easement at Sequoia Point

    It’s not the fact that Sogorea Te Land Trust may be receiving a Cultural Conservation Easement grant of 5-acres of land, called Seqouia Point, in Oakland’s Joaquin Miller Park that bothers me.

    Or that this is the product of Libby Schaaf’s (Mayor of Oakland) unilateral dealings with Corrina Gould (Spokesperson for Sogorea Te Land Trust, alleged Tribal Chair Person of Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.)

    It’s the fact that other local Ohlone tribal groups weren’t consulted during the process of creating the easement we see proposed today.

    Also: this still isn’t LandBack. It’s just an easement.

    Land is not being conveyed from the City of Oakland, to any entity, as Sogorea Te Land Trust claims. An easement just gives them the right to use Sequoia Point as they chose, within the parameters of the Memorandum of Agreement entered into by the City of Oakland and Sogorea Te Land Trust. The City of Oakland retains ownership of the 5-acre area in Joaquin Miller Park–part of Oakland’s Recreation and Parks Department.

    There are some important limitations listed in the propose ordinance you can find in the City of Oakland – Calendar. This includes a clause regarding public access, as well as permit free operations within the scope of the agreement and zoning requirements.

    But this is a small part of a large document, that also excludes the Sequoia Point land grant, and (possibly) any future projects at the Point, from certain CEQA, NAGPRA, and AB52 Rules, which have requirements that projects on or near Tribal Cultural Resources must follow a consultation and scoping process with representatives of all the tribal groups of the area.

    Bypassing these requirements would completely preclude any other tribe’s rightful claim to be a part of, or hold a share of interest in, this easement. Other tribes would not get a say in what happens at Sequoia Point, a place which other Ohlone groups claim as a part of their tribal homeland. Where each of the Ohlone Tribal Groups should share an equal interest, and have an equal voice.

    The most curious part of the Agenda Report, regarding the “Cultural Conservation Easement to Sogorea Te’ Land Trust in Joaquin Miller Park” is the section marked “Public Outreach / Interest”. This section, in its entirety, states:

    City staff and the Land Trust have conducted substantial outreach. The Land Trust, both with and without City staff, met with the Friends of Joaquin Miller Park several times to receive input and feedback about the project, and the organization enthusiastically supports the project. District 4 Councilmember Sheng Thao hosted an online Town Hall about the project on September 13, 2022. More than one hundred people registered for the meeting and participants expressed strong support for the project and no opposition. The Land Trust and City staff have also presented the project multiple times to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. The Commission recommended formal and enthusiastic approval at its meeting on September 14. Since the project was publicly announced on September 8, 2022, there has been a broad expression of support and enthusiasm from the public at large.

    City of Oakland Agenda Report for Item # 10 22-0849, on for City Council Meeting Nov-1-2022
    The passage above contains no mention of City Staff attempting to contact other tribal groups in the area.

    Proponents of the easement appear to have had one very popular online Town Hall, and contacted the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, and the Friends of Joaquin Miller Park, for their opinions.

    But there is no mention of either City Staff, nor Sogorea Te Land Trust, reaching out to any other Ohlone Tribal Group in this area other than the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.–who is conveniently fronted by the same person as the Sogorea Te Land Trust, Corrina Gould.

    Most projects or proposals on this scale would require some form of Tribal Consultation, or Scoping; this proposal especially, because–for all intents and purposes–Sequoia Point is being considered, or treated, as a Tribal Cultural Resource.

    When a city is creating an Environmental Impact Report or Assessment for any proposed public project (or project on public lands) they must exercise due diligence in requesting from the Native American Heritage Commission a list of tribes to consult regarding possible Tribal Cultural Resources possibly affected by the project, and develop ways to avoid or mitigate damage to those resources.

    This is an example of a 2019 Tribal Consultation List for Richmond, California.

    2019 Tribal Consultation List for Richmond, California – This list is public record and was included as part of an EIR filed in the City of Richmond, California.
    As you can see, there is more than one Tribal Organization to consult with. There are seven organizations on this Tribal Consultation List, next to the associated tribes composing those organizations.

    FYI: No, this list is not radically different in Oakland, California. I couldn’t find one quickly enough to use as an example. But please believe me, it looks the same, and still has more than one Tribal Organization. [… It’s also really difficult to track down one of these lists outside of an Environment Impact Report/Assessment.]

    My point is: cities are required to send letters to every single one of these organizations requesting consultation. Those letters, and replies by tribal representatives, must be filed in the Environmental Impact Report/Assessment; along with a report regarding the request for consultation and any subsequent consultation and scoping activities.

    The law requiring requests for consultations, and the consultation lists, were created and required in order to ensure that Native American land rights are respected; Native American Graves, and Cultural Resources are preserved, and protected from desecration.

    This is done by codifying the Tribal Consultation process in the California Environmental Quality Act; thereby ensuring that Native American Tribes have a voice, and a say, in what happens on their traditional homelands, to their sacred places, and tribal resources.

    The preamble of AB52, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, both specifically state this is the legislative intent of these laws.

    The well-defined and accepted procedure of the Tribal Consultation Process was not followed to create the proposed Sequoya Point Cultural Easement.

    To grant this land to one Ohlone group, without even talking to the others, is wrong; and in opposition to the Equity of all Ohlone People of the San Francisco Bay Area.

    Choosing to award one single tribal group with land grants, while simultaneously excluding all others, sows division among indigenous people. And it interferes with tribal sovereignty in a way that disenfranchises thousands of indigenous people from having ownership of a place and project that is supposed to be for them.

    The City of Oakland is meddling in tribal politics in the same way the US does in the Middle East. Or Haiti. Or any other place where people have turned around and said, “maybe that wasn’t such a good idea.” Where the actual people living in those countries have done things like burn flags, and tell us to get out. [Judgments reserved.]

    The same way that some tribes were denied recognition by the US Government for petty, arbitrary reasons from the start–just as other Tribes were arbitrarily, and capriciously unrecognized [“removed from the Tribal Rolls”] during the Termination Era for the same.

    This meddling is unwelcome, and sets a dangerous precedent across the rest of the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as California. The precedent that Tribal Consultation doesn’t matter.

    Tribal Consultation matters.

    All Ohlone Tribal Groups should be consulted, and have an equal share–and an equal voice–in the Ohlone Cultural Easement at Sequoia Point.

    Excluding the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as other tribal groups, from what’s happening at Sequoia Point, is not equitable. And the easement should not go forward without proper consultation with all affected tribes of the this area. Especially since this is a land grant made in perpetuity,

    https://opr.ca.gov/ceqa/tribal/ – Governor’s Office of Planning and Research “Tribal Resources”

    PDF – Native American Heritage Commission, Tribal Consultation Under AB52: Requirements and Best Practices

    http://www.muwekma.org – Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area website

  • Text of CA Senate Joint Resolution re: Muwekma Ohlone Tribe Federal Recognition

    Amended in Senate June 08, 2022

    CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2021–2022 REGULAR SESSION

    Senate Joint Resolution
    No. 13

    Introduced by Senator Cortese
    (Coauthor: Senator Wieckowski)
    (Coauthors: Assembly Members Kalra, Lee, and Low)

    March 07, 2022

    Relative to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe.

    LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

    SJR 13, as amended, Cortese. Muwekma Ohlone Tribe: federal recognition.

    This measure would urge the United States Congress and the Department of the Interior and its Bureau of Indian Affairs to reaffirm and restore the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe as a federally recognized Indian tribe and include the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe in the Federal Register as a recognized tribe.

    Fiscal Committee: NO

    WHEREAS, The United States Federal District Court of the District of Columbia recognized in Muwekma Tribe v. Babbitt (2000) 133 F.Supp.2d 30 that “The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is a tribe of Ohlone Indians indigenous to the present-day San Francisco Bay Area. In the early part of the Twentieth Century, the Department of the Interior recognized the Muwekma Tribe as an Indian tribe under the jurisdiction of the United States. In more recent times, however, and despite its steadfast efforts, the Muwekma Tribe has been unable to obtain federal recognition, a status vital for the Tribe and its members.”; and

    WHEREAS, The United States Federal District Court of the District of Columbia recognized in Muwekma Ohlone Tribe v. Kempthorne (D.D.C. 2006) 452 F.Supp.2d 105 that “The following facts are not in dispute. Muwekma is a group of American Indians indigenous to the San Francisco Bay area, the members of which are direct descendants of the historical Mission San Jose Tribe, also known as the Pleasanton or Verona Band of Alameda County (the “Verona Band”). From 1914 to 1927, the Verona Band was recognized by the federal government as an Indian tribe. Neither the United States Congress nor any executive agency ever formally withdrew federal recognition of the Verona Band.”; and

    WHEREAS, The Muwekma Ohlone people, who never left their aboriginal land and were once pronounced extinct by anthropologists, have retained their culture and social identity for the past 230 years; and

    WHEREAS, The Muwekma Ohlone people have left a record of approximately 13,000 years of human history; and

    WHEREAS, The United States government maintained a “trust” relationship with three Costanoan tribal groups, including the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, historically identified as the Verona Band, by the Bureau of Indian Affairs from 1906 to 1927; and

    WHEREAS, The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe was wrongly removed from the Federal Register in 1927 despite its “trust” relationship and its previous efforts to foster and secure federal recognition as an Indian tribe; and

    WHEREAS, The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe enrolled with and was approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs during the years between 1928 and 1933, inclusive, 1948 and 1957, inclusive, and 1968 and 1971, inclusive, under the 1928 California Jurisdictional Act, attended Indian boarding schools between 1930 and 1950, inclusive, and have since organized according to the Bureau’s directives, but still have no right to be legally considered an Indian tribe without first obtaining reaffirmation and formal acknowledgment by the Secretary of the Interior; and

    WHEREAS, There are over 600 individual descendants of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe in the San Francisco Bay Area who have been identified by the Bureau of Indian Affairs; and

    WHEREAS, European migration led to the near decimation of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe and the lack of formal recognition after 1927 by the Department of the Interior suggests a disregard for the cultural diversity and historical presence that the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe has offered to our state, including service in the United States Armed Services in previous wars and military conflicts spanning from World War I through the present day; and

    WHEREAS, Several California counties and elected officials have officially supported the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe in its efforts for recognition through legislation commending their efforts and historical and social accomplishments, supporting requests for historical claim by the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, and urging the federal government to reaffirm and restore the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe as a federally recognized tribe; and

    WHEREAS, It is imperative that the Department of the Interior and the federal government officially recognize the historical and social history of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe through its efforts to attain federal recognition; now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the Senate and the Assembly of the State of California, jointly, That the Legislature does hereby urge the United States Congress and the Department of the Interior and its Bureau of Indian Affairs to reaffirm and restore the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe as a federally recognized tribe and include the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe in the Federal Register as a recognized tribe; and be it further

    Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the United States, to the Secretary of the Interior, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to the Majority Leader of the Senate, and to each Senator and Representative from California in the United States Congress.

    This text of the Senate Joint Resolution Number 13 was taken directly from the California Legislative Information website. You can find more information about the Senate Joint Resolution for Federal Recognition of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe–as well as read the current text of the resolution–on the official CA Legislative Information website, at:

    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/face/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SJR13

    To Learn More About The Tribe’s Efforts, visit the Muwekma website, here:

    http://muwekma.org/learn-more-about-the-tribes-efforts.html

  • Christian Prayers at Powwow: How Praying to Your Oppressor’s God Colonizes Your Soul

    This past week, we remembered the children who were forced into Boarding Schools, and never left. As we wore orange shirts, and declared “never again”; “never forgotten”; and “bring them home”… there’s an even larger group of contemporary Native Americans who asked for all of these things in the name of Jesus Christ.

    But, is it appropriate?

    Praying to the god of the people who buried our ancestors in mass graves at boarding schools, while hand-in-hand with the descendants of the very same people responsible for the massacre[s], enslavement, and forced conversion of millions of Native Californians?

    Indigenous Family Visiting a Mass Grave, in Canada, where Indigenous Children were buried in unmarked graves at an Indian Boarding School

    This might seem like a big kumbaya moment for people who want to “Kill the Indian”, and “Save the Man”. This might seem like reconciliation for the horrors of Manifest Destiny, and the colonization of California, and the rest of the “New World”.

    it’s not the truth.

    Indigenous people should not be proud of their white-washed conversion to the Judeo-Christian faith; nor should they uplift the racist, violent, two-faced ethics that come with a set of beliefs that are (arguably) wholly responsible for the ills of modern Native American society.

    Ills like colorism, homophobia, anti-blackness, syphilis, tuberculosis, and blood quantum. Just to name a few.

    In a time when there is so much emphasis on Indigenous people “reconnecting” to their roots, and cultures; on learning our Native Tongues–I beg the question:

    Why is the opening prayer at Powwows in English, and to the very God used as an excuse to kill and displace millions of the very same people gathered to dance and celebrate Native American/Indigenous culture?

    Land Back Protest
    Decapitated statue of Junipero Serra. (CC BY-SA 4.0 Tzerrer)
    Land Back Protest Black Hills
    Protesters against the Dakota Access Pipeline, in solidarity with Standing Rock [GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 (S L O W K I N G.)]

    In a time when the effigies of people like Junipero Serra are being torn down; when we oppose oil & gas pipelines, and lithium mines en masse; and we shout slogans like “Land Back”, and “Decolonize”…

    Why are powwows a safe space for Colonization?

    Probably because Pow-wow, and powwowing seem to have been created in New England, in the 17th Century, by the Pennsylvania Dutch, and German-speaking colonizers, as rituals and practices meant to heal people and livestock, using the Bible as their primary source of reference and power. The word powwow actually referred to the Priest performing these Catholic/Christian rituals–and not to any gathering, or specific ritual, itself.

    “The Long Lost Friend”, German Powwow Book, published in 1819. Full Text Here

    Whether the word powwow was created by the Narragansett tribe in Rhode Island–to refer to a priest [which is the same meaning of the German word]–or whether the people simply re-appropriated the New English word to refer to their own medicine men (because that was something which white people could understand more easily than the true indigenous concept of a priest or holy person,) we will probably never know.

    It is also possible that, when Roger Williams wrote “A Key into the Language of America”, in 1643, that he was unable to distinguish between a hybridized language–which had already been influenced by the Dutch and German speaking colonizers–and the actual, canonical, language used pre-contact by Narragansett people.

    But the European roots of the word and practice of “powwow” cannot be ignored.

    What’s more interesting, is the that opening prayer at many powwows are Christian prayers, in English, which closely match the prayers set forth in German powwow books, published three hundred years ago.

    At first, I viewed powwows as sad, desperate dances that Native Americans were forced to perform in front of U.S. military officers, and their families–like how Spaniards forced Mission Indians to dance for their entertainment–but now it looks like the term, and concept, of “healing through dancing” is directly drawn from the Germanic roots of a European culture and practice of “powwow”.

    And the reverence, and deference given to the Native American Powwow Master of Ceremonies–who speaks the opening prayer–bears no recognizable difference from the treatment given the German folk magic “powwow” priest.

    This will obviously be upsetting to people who have based their entire identities around the Native American Powwow, and Powwow Dancing, but this could be the exact reason why powwows were able to exist throughout all decades of colonization–because powwows either are, or were seen as, direct analogs to something which exists within the German and European traditions of folk magic.

    The erasure of indigenous culture hinges on Europeanizing indigenous beliefs and cultural & spiritual practices. Whether through Spanish Catholic, or Germanic/Dutch Christianity, religious analogs, and false equivocations were always used by white people for their own selfish aims: namely land and resources.

    By re-writing the fundamental identity of, and Christianizing core indigenous beliefs, white people can more easily tell us who we are, and what we believe, to further their goal of the destruction of indigenous culture, and assimilation of indigenous people. Thereby completing the conversion of people they considered as “dirty heathens”, and achieving their stated goal of “Killing the Indian, and Saving The Man”.

    Because, once you are under the jurisdiction of the White God, any white priest holds (or with-holds) the power of eternal salvation (or damnation) over you. This was the ultimate aim of Catholic Missions in California: the subjugation of indigenous people to the power of The Church.

    But it appears that German and Dutch colonizers were able to re-write indigenous history and culture, while simultaneously “studying”, and attempting to “preserve it.”

    This practice is most apparent during the “Salvage Archaeology” period. But it is also so insidious as to have been introduced to us by white people as our own culture and beliefs, after the colonizers’ very purposeful destruction of the same.

    Image of Mormon Prophet, Joseph Smith, “Preaching to the Indians”

    Without our records, our stories, and our histories, it is nearly impossible to fight the misinformation fed to us by white scholars and academia.

    Indigenizing colonized spaces begins inside of you.

    One way to fight indigenous erasure is to stop praying to our oppressors’ God; and to reject the concepts and trappings of a religion that was used as an excuse to kill millions of our ancestors in His name.

    A Note To The Reader:

    It is entirely speculation as to the true roots of what we call Powwows today. This subject has not been examined very closely by scholars, or researchers, as far as the author can tell. Any information and/or references that you have on this topic would be greatly appreciated. Please think critically about everything you are told regarding our past and history, and always take what you hear with a grain salt. But do your own research, and check the citations.

  • Alameda Is Not Becoming a ‘Food Desert’, You’re Just More Privileged Than You Think

    During the most recent Alameda City Council Meeting, the very real possibility of Safeway closing on Bay Farm Island was brought up as something which would leave Bay Farm without any means or hope for getting fresh produce, and other nutritious foods. The term “food desert” was used, as well as a definition. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) characterizes food deserts as low-income neighborhoods that distinctly lack supermarkets and grocery stores.

    Low-income census tracts with a substantial number or share of residents with low levels of access to retail outlets selling healthy and affordable foods are defined as food deserts.

    Ver Ploeg, et al. “Mapping Food Deserts in the United States” USDA, Dec. 1 2019, https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2011/december/data-feature-mapping-food-deserts-in-the-us/

    The reality of Low-Income Households, situated too far from Supermarkets, Grocery Stores, etc. is something that is finally being identified, and studied.

    These areas are typically urban, rural, and semi-rural environments, where lack of vehicle access, public transportation, or just the sheer distance to a grocery store, prevents people from being able to purchase and transport healthy, fresh, nutritious food to their dwellings.

    In urban areas, the closest and cheapest food sources are often only places like Fast-Food Chains, and Convenience Stores.

    Unfortunately, these food sources are trash. And “ultraprocessed foods” like frozen pizza, hot dogs, store-bought cookies, ice cream, microwave dinners, Fast Food Burgers, Chicken Nuggets, and more, have been linked to certain forms of cancer, and help to provide an early death for those who can’t afford or access fresh meat and vegetables.

    In rural areas, the impossible-to-travel distance from one’s house to any grocery store can mean that people just don’t eat, at all. Or, the amount of food which can be purchased is severely limited by the actual cost of going to and from the grocery store, and/or the amount of time it takes to make the trip is too long.

    Having lived in both types of Food Deserts, it’s easy for me to look around at the City of Alameda and see the abundance of Food Sources, and their Connections via Public Transit, and find a place that is not recognizable as a food desert in any shape or form–at least, not in Bay Farm.

    Upon researching this subject, I discovered that Bay Farm actually is considered a “Low Food Access Area”. Which is surprising, because Bay Farm also has the highest concentration of Home Owners Associations in the entire City of Alameda.

    When the substantial addition of housing begins in Bay Farm, the Harbor Bay Landing will already have been re-developed with multi-unit housing. And it seems inconceivable that another grocery store won’t pop up, just like the Alameda Marketplace did–if a big store like Whole Foods, or Safeway, don’t beat them to it.

    The take away is that Alameda Point really needs some Services.

    That’s really what this map says to me.

    For an area that used to have its own grocery store, the former Naval Air Station has become a point of embarrassment, specifically because of The City’s neglect of its residents. It’s something no one talks about. Just like the soil and groundwater contamination….

    But we need to address these issues if we plan to be here for another 50 years. We can’t just focus on building parks, and leasing buildings to the highest bidders.

  • Forms of Recognition: Alameda’s Anti-Asian History

    Recognition and Acknowledgment can only do so much; we know. But it’s the start of a larger truth and reconciliation process that America needs to engage in.

    This may be a project that focuses on Native American “stuff”, but…

    Native American History isn’t the only American History that has been ignored by Alameda’s Colonial Historians.

    “The Chinese Vegetable Vendor”, Bancroft Collection, UC Berkeley Bancroft Library, (undated.)

    Asian-American History is largely overlooked; despite the fact that Alameda was the terminus for the Intercontinental Railroad. And Chinese people are primarily credited for building the railways connecting the Eastern and Western United States. There was an influx of Chinese immigrants, who would become the backbone of a service industry, in California.

    During the same time:

    1. Alameda was being founded (1853);
    2. Intercontinental Railroad terminus in Alameda (1869);
    3. Chinese Exclusion Act (1882);
    4. First Excavation of “Sather’s Mound” for San Francisco Call (1892);
    5. During 1908, during reporting on the second (and final) excavation of the Mound Street Shellmound, a “Chinese Vegetable Garden” was pictured, and described in newspaper articles, to be on the shellmound itself.
    “The Alameda Indian Mounds”, San Francisco Call, Sep. 11, 1892

    In the last example, the “Chinese Vegetable Garden” was pictured as part of a “Chinese Camp”. The garden itself appeared to be fairly large, and the image seemed to show the boundary of the camp itself butting up against more farmland.

    “A Comparison”, the Alameda Argus, July 25, 1878.

    In Alameda and Brooklyn townships there are not less than 300 Chinamen engaged in gardening operations.

    “A Comparison”, the Alameda Argus, July 25, 1878.

    Research into “Chinese Vegetable Gardens” around the San Francisco Bay Area, California, and beyond, show that these “gardens” were misnomers. In reality, these “gardens” were farms; and could cover several acres. Many were terraced.

    Chinese Vegetable Gardens, Portland, Oregon, c. 1909 via Oregon History Project.

    These farms produced food for entire towns. Not just the Asian-American people who would later be confined to Chinatowns across America.

    Sam Hop Co., San Francisco, California, Feb. 5, 1908

    In historic City of Alameda Municipal Codes, there are laws against the sale of vegetables specifically by Chinese people who did not purchase a vegetable sales permit. These kinds of laws were created as economic barriers to knock the legs out from under any possible competition with white grocers and farmers. White people were so blinded by their own poison that they had no problem publishing their thoughts in black & white.

    “The Determined Heathen”, Alameda Daily Evening Encinal, April 7, 1894

    Chinese-Americans were already barred from owning land, and were excluded from full citizenship because of the same racist, white supremacist ideologies that were already affecting African-American, and Indigenous/Native/First American people. And, just like them, Chinese-American History has been largely ignored, and unspoken.

    Despite the extraordinary measures by white people to insulate their fragility with false “exceptionalism”–by cheating, and excluding fair competition at every turn–rumors of Chinese wealth generated through farming began to circulate.

    One rumor claimed that a man was able to amass $4,000 within four years, and return to China a well-off man from just the sale of vegetables, alone. [$4,000 in 1890 is roughly equivalent to $123,581.54 today.]

    Untitled, Undated (between 1880-1910), picture of Chinese Man with Pail of Vegetables in His Left Hand

    Such was the contempt for any nonwhite citizen of Alameda, that a strong opposition rose by White Alamedans against the minority farmers, who–despite feeding the island–began to be demonized for “benefitting” from the “best land for residences”; and for their practice of enriching bad soil with manure. The land owners who rented to Chinese immigrants, the Alameda Board of Health, Alameda Chief of Police, were all assailed as enemies of Alameda; responsible for the detriment of city life, and degradation of Alameda’s haut monde.

    This story continues. But it’s continued in the shadows of Alameda’s white history. The accomplishments of the Chinese immigrants who literally built this island were re-appropriated and claimed by White Men, who are extolled as “heroes” and “visionaries”. When it is truly the work of the (non-white) global majority.

    Of course, none of this history has been made available at the Alameda Museum. Maybe one day soon multi-cultural and multi-ethnic Alameda History will be made available to us all. George Gunn, Alameda Museum’s White History curator was allowed to quietly retire like the coward he is. And the Alameda Museum is currently looking for a new curator. [Good luck.]

    Stay tuned for more.