Category: Archives

  • Lecturing in a Museum Which Doesn’t Represent You

    An Open Letter to Reverend Michael Yoshii, and Serena Chen, two of the lecturers set to speak in the Alameda Museum’s “Virtual Speakers Series”, for AAPI Heritage Month Lecture Series tomorrow, Monday, May 23, 2022.

    Here’s the flyer:
    Alameda Museum AAPI History Month Virtual Speak Series Flyer, links to AlamedaMuseum.org

    Background: I tried to call Lillian Galedo, but I wasn’t able to reach her for comment. I sent letters to both Reverend Michael Yoshii, and Serena Chen.

    Serena Chen responded by giving me a call, and we had a conversation that touched on this subject, as well as much more about Chinese-American History, Japanese-American History, Serena Chen’s work in passing smoking laws in the Bay Area, as well as her advocacy for the preservation of Angel Island Immigration Center.

    Reverend Michael Yoshii hasn’t gotten back to me yet, re: the letter. But I know that he’s received it. And I actually asked him a lot of questions.

    The reason why I wrote to these people, is because:

    I am a researcher in the city of Alameda. And, my primary focus is on the Native American History of Alameda. However, it was impossible for me to research this topic and not notice the lack of representation of any non-white historical Alamedans at
    the Alameda Museum.

    This bothers me, because my interest in history is not bound to my own ethnic group; and I believe that history’s lessons are infinitely more important, and more valuable than hiding the misdeeds of a city. And that, the truth of what happened to us, Alameda’s nonwhite citizens, is better aired out, discussed, and reconciled. I think that hiding these chapters of our history only creates more animus, and sets us up for future conflicts we don’t even know why we fight.

    05/18/2022 ANHP Letter to Serena Chen, and Rev. Michael Yoshii

    In my letter to the Reverend Yoshii, I asked him specifically:

    How does it make you feel that Alameda Museum does not have any permanent exhibits about the Japanese-American experience in Alameda?

    Does it bother you that the businesses, homes, wealth, and anything valuable (like family photos, heirlooms, and other precious things), that you, your family, and your compatriots had to abandon, or have taken away, aren’t even mentioned at all in Alameda’s official history?

    If the Alameda Museum were to create a permanent exhibit featuring Japanese-American History and Experiences in Alameda, what would you like to see reflected about your own history, heritage, culture, and contributions to the City of Alameda?

    In my letter to Serena Chen:

    I mention that I found things about the Chinese Pioneers in Alameda that I thought were really cool. And was excited to share with her, and people interested in Alameda History.

    But, in both letters, I invited them to consider addressing the lack of representation of their history, heritage, and culture in the Alameda Museum.

    After all, Serena Chen, Rev. Michael Yoshii, and Lillian Galedo, will all be lecturing at the Alameda Museum, which has no permanent exhibit to AAPI History.

    So, as soon as their voices fade, so will any representation or mention of their histories, heritage, or cultures. Histories which are rich, interesting, and worthy of being shared just as much as the white, victorian-obsessed history that Alameda Museum chooses to share–at the price of excluding all BIPOC people.

    I’d like to invite you tune in to watch and learn; support Serena Chen, Lillian Galedo, and Michael Yoshii, as they share their family history, and experiences with us; and advocate for meaningful representation of AAPI heritage, and history in the form of permanent exhibits in the Alameda Museum.


    Alameda Museum
    Virtual Speaker Series
    AAPI Heritage Month
    Feat. Serena Chen, Lillian Galedo, Reverend Michael Yoshii
    Monday, May 23, 2022
    7:00 – 8:30 PM
    Event on Zoom
    Link to Event Info @ AlamedaMuseum.org
    Link to Event Registration @ Zoom.us


    Letters:

  • Alameda Museum: 74 Years of White History?

    The Alameda Museum was founded in 1948; seventy-four years ago. It is a public institution, which is dedicated to fostering public interest in the history of Alameda.

    The mission of the Alameda Museum is three-fold:
    1. To accumulate, catalog, conserve, and display appropriate documents, photographs, objects, and artifacts relating to the city and its residents;
    2. To foster the preparation and publication of materials relating to the history of the city and its residents; and,
    3. to provide educational opportunities and experiences relating to the history of the city and its residents.
    In these 74 years, the Alameda Museum has focused almost exclusively on a few things in Alameda’s history:
    • The Victorian Era Colonization of Alameda, including:
      • Historic Alameda Home and Garden Tour
      • Historic Architecture
    • Railways:
      • Trans-Continental Railway Terminus (Western Pacific Railroad)
      • Narrow Gauge Commuter & Regional Railways
    • Neptune Beach – often referred to as the “Coney Island of The West”
    • [Sterilized] Biographies of People Who Lived In Alameda:
      • Exclusively white people;
      • Almost exclusively rich;
      • Often responsible for racist or discriminatory policies, or just went on record (themselves) as having racist beliefs;
      • Sometimes donors to the museum;
      • Furthers the idea of White Exceptionalism, while excluding everyone else.
    Alameda Preservation Society newsletter, featuring story about the “History of the Alameda Legacy Home Tour”. The Alameda Preservation Society, Architectural Society, and Alameda Museum are inextricable from each other.

    On its face, Alameda is being billed as the Bay Area’s “playground of the rich”, a “Garden Island Paradise”, the “Coney Island of the West”….

    Advertisement for Neptune Beach, in Alameda, California
    A place held as a shining example of Western Conquest,
    The pinnacle of [White] Society.

    The embodiment of “manifest destiny”, proof of divine providence; and vindication for everything America did in the name of White Supremacy, and the freedom to believe in White Exceptionalism.

    This is the paradise white people had to build, to justify everything.

    Because, if the “Second Great Awakening” was just a lie; and white people weren’t chosen to rape, pillage, and burn every village they encountered…. If God didn’t give them a pass for enslaving other humans, or any of the other atrocious shit Protestantism, or Christianity, or whatever says “He” gave them a pass for… that means something unimaginable. And white people would never have had to deal with it, if they had just killed us all. But they didn’t.

    And, the short-term thinking behind a blitzkrieg that left people alive is coming home to roost now. Because we are still alive. And the affects of white terror, and the attempted genocide, exclusion, abuse, and torture of human people has never been fully addressed by white people. In fact it makes them really fucking uncomfortable. It should.

    It’s easier to exclude us from history when no one’s around to tell the story. White people certainly haven’t talked about it. So, it never happened, right?

    Dedication of plaque at Lincoln Park (1909). Ishi, the last Yahi, is seen (center) with Alfred Kroeber, and T. Waterman. In a few months after this picture, Ishi would die from colonizers’ Tuberculosis.

    This fantasy “Victorian paradise island” narrative continues to be presented, despite the obvious cracks in its alabaster facade. Despite the sustained objections to Alameda Museum’s focus on only white, colonial history, and the museum’s neglect & omission of non-white history during any month which isn’t an [AAPI/Black/Indigenous/…] History Month.

    But, the Alameda Museum Displays Native American Artifacts….

    It’s true that the Alameda Museum has Native American Artifacts. Some of these are actually Ohlone Grave Goods, stolen from the shellmound on Mound Street. (And all of them were mis-attributed to “a branch of Miwok”.)

    Native American exhibit on display at Alameda Museum. Many of these artifacts are stolen grave goods, which were mis-attributed to the Miwok Nation (not even correctly to Coast Miwok), instead of the Ohlone Tribal Nation, who actually were the First Alamedans.

    Let’s be honest, though: a collection of mortars and arrowheads, and a picture of the dedication of the plaque at Lincoln Park to the people found in the the Shellmound at Mound Street, doesn’t really cover the story.

    The Alameda Museum isn’t capable of answering questions about the Native American Artifacts they have on display, much less the history of anyone else. So, they refer people immediately to the Alameda Free Library any time there is a query on this topic, or pretty much any other topic that isn’t Alameda’s White History.

    Shellmounds are cemeteries. The plaque in Lincoln Park has a number of Native American remains recovered and used to pave Bay Farm Road: 350.

    When you call the Alameda Museum to ask about the shellmounds, the “alameda indian mounds”, you might get someone who actually tells you that shellmounds were trash heaps. Which is so shockingly ignorant, you have to ask if you’re really calling a museum.

    The Alameda Museum has no mention of this event, or the practice of using shellmounds to fertilize the gardens that Alameda was so famous for.

    Even the gardens at the Meyer Home, which is owned and curated by the Alameda Museum, were fertilized using Ohlone remains from the Shellmounds of Alameda.

    Meyers House with plaque.

    The Meyer Home, sits on an estate with four buildings.

    One of which has exhibits dedicated to architectural salvage, and building design. There is another building (almost an accessory dwelling unit) which serves as an art gallery. And yet another adobe-like structure which held more objects from expeditions in Africa, and other things which rich white people in the Late 19th, and Early 20th Centuries would collect as “curios”.

    The author would like to note that the abundance of objects, like: furniture, architectural salvage, dolls, toys, fashion accessories, the Kitchen Display & Lady’s Study, and more; which clutter the Alameda Museum belong in, and would be marvelously curated in a house.

    Seems like a lot of unnecessary work to recreate and maintain the facsimiles of rooms in a house, when the Meyer House is available as a museum itself; the way the USS Hornet – Sea, Air and Space Museum is an aircraft carrier; and the Air Naval Museum is an air terminal.

    This would actually give the Alameda Museum the space to focus on curating the City of Alameda’s History beyond just its founding, and Victorian Era.

    Alameda Black, AAPI, and Indigenous History Have More Parallels than Intersections

    In the context of the Alameda Museum: our representation is limited to brief, tokenized explanations of our existence, without the revelation of Alameda’s history of racism and discriminatory practices. These recognitions and acknowledgements only come once a year, during our respective “History Months”.

    Even though the Alameda Museum Lecture Series invites people to lecture on their personal experiences, heritage, history, and culture, there are still no permanent exhibits to nonwhite history. So, when the echoes of our voices fade from the walls of the Eagle Hall, so does any representation of us and our existence throughout Alameda history.

    We’ll circle back to this.

    The Alameda Museum is not the only museum which exists in the city.

    There are four other museums:
    • The Pacific Pinball Museum
    • California Historical Radio Society Museum
    • USS Hornet – Sea, Air and Space Museum
    • Alameda Naval Air Museum

    Here’s how their multicultural representation breaks down….

    I was actually really surprised by the positive representation in the Air Naval Museum. I really enjoyed listening to some KDIA playlists I found through the California Historical Radio Society. And the inclusion of the Walking Ghosts of Black History into the USS Hornet’s programming is awesome, and a long time coming.

    Pacific Pinball Museum

    I found out “#pinballsowhite” is a thing. And, pinball does use a lot of racist, and sexist imagery. I’m not sure what I was expecting to find, but the answer is “racist”. Pinball has historically used racist, and offensive images.

    California Historical Radio Society Museum

    I found an article about KDIA Boss Soul Radio. Which is really cool. And I was surprised to find this information. But music is black af. I don’t care what you think about Elvis, or the Beatles, or Bob Dylan, they all stole that shit from Robert Johnson.

    USS Hornet – Sea, Air and Space Museum

    Recently, during the month of February, Black History Month, of 2022, the USS Hornet hosted three exhibits by The Walking Ghosts of Black History. These exhibits were on the hangar deck–next to the Apollo Mission stuff–and featured:

    1. African American Medal of Honor Recipients
    2. Outstanding African American Achievements in the United States Military
    3. African American Military Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Program Participants [think: NASA; like Katherine Johnson, and Guy Bluford.]

    This isn’t the first time the Hornet has hosted The Walking Ghosts of Black History, either. It almost makes up for the fact that The Hornet has almost no black representation, normally. (They do have a whole section for Japanese-Americans who served during the war, however. Which is actually really intense, and the most reverent section of the entire ship, IMHO.)

    Alameda Air Naval Museum

    The Alameda Air Naval Museum is devoted to the history of the Alameda Naval Air Station. I was actually worried I wouldn’t find anything about Black People or African American History, because the USS Hornet didn’t seem to have anything the first time around.

    But I found a really nice obituary, and biography, of Clifton Wainright. Clifton was employed at the Alameda Naval Air Station as a Program Manager, and Flight Test Engineer. He was also the first black All City quarterback and the first black Oakland Tribune “Athlete of the Year”.

    Overall, I was pretty impressed by the thoughtful and meaningful efforts to curate inclusive, and relevant history, and happy that I found what I did. I actually learned a lot.

    Representation isn’t just showing a face or a picture, it’s recognizing the contributions of that person, and their excellence and achievements, in their field.

    These bits of history from other museums stimulated my curiosity, and fascination. I want to learn more about Alameda History:

    I want to see what the Chinese Gardens looked like, as a model. I want to be introduced to their garden designs, crop management practices, and the vegetables they grew to feed Alameda.

    I want to see a wall with portraits of the African American families who came to Alameda around the passage of the 13th Ammendment for the Abolition of Slavery. And I want to see their kitchens, fashion accessories, fancy dress, architectural salvage, and business displays, too.

    I want to know about the BVs, and the housing on the former Alameda Naval Air Station. I want to know if the Alameda Housing Authority was really liquidated to pay for the Chuck Corica Alameda Municipal Golf Course.

    Cover art regarding the June 1966 “camp-in” at Alameda’s Franklin Park, by Mabel Tatum, and the Citizen’s Committee for Low-Income Housing, to protest the eviction of hundreds of families from an Alameda Housing Authority housing project, without re-location assistance, or placement at another Alameda Housing Authority property. [Because the other housing projects were White-Only.]
    I yearn for an Alameda Museum which is inclusive, accurate, and fair. And I think it’s their duty, as a public institution, to provided history relevant to all Alamedans.

    I want to be super clear here: this has nothing to do with the fact the Alameda Museum is volunteer-run. The Black Panther Party For Self Defense was also volunteer-run. The Alameda Native History Project is also volunteer-run.

    The issue is that the Alameda Museum is supposed to be a city museum. It is supposed to curate and present to us the history of Alameda. Not just a small slice of some zealously over-idealized fantasy of an island that did not exist the same way for People of Color.

    The issue is that the Alameda Museum has excluded us. All of us.

    And when you actually look at the history of Alameda, you can see why: Alameda was a town full of really racist white people, who definitely did not want to de-segregate housing; and who have reaped all the benefits and rewards of the discriminatory policies laid by the founders of this island, and re-inforced subsequently by acts of the City Council up until … when? The 1990’s? Some people would say it’s till happening.

    Why Making Marginalized People Do The Work You Never Did, Isn’t the Win You Think It Is

    Picture of the “Clinton Family Exhibit” at the Alameda Museum, in 2018. This exhibit was the first mention of African American History in the 70 years Alameda Museum has existed. This exhibit was supposed to be permanent when it was installed; however, there are no pictures or mentions of this exhibit today, four years later. [Picture taken by Rasheed Shabazz.]

    The Alameda Museum was open for 70 years before they offered a single “permanent” exhibit on African-American History, in 2018.

    At this time, George Gunn, was celebrating his 47th year as Curator of the Alameda Museum. (His first day was March 20, 1971, according to an Alameda Museum publication.) So, this would also mark the first time in 47 years of curating Alameda History that he’s ever actually curated the history of nonwhite Alamedans.

    Though, if you visit the museum’s website, you will notice this exhibit isn’t listed anywhere. In fact, the only reporting on the existence of this exhibit is from Rasheed Shabazz, in 2018. Probably because he did all the work of getting the exhibit installed.

    The reason this exhibit even existed was because it was a half-hearted attempt to address the extensive, and documented history of racist actions and policies committed or enacted by the City of Alameda–specifically racial housing discrimination, and forced re-location of Alameda’s Black Families–

    And to respond to direct criticism of Alameda Museum’s Curator, George Gunn, as someone who is uninterested in curating anything other than white, colonial, history–to the point of excluding the history of any other group of people, and obstructing research by people of color, by gatekeeping, and denying that materials on anything other than Alameda’s White History even exists within the Alameda Museum’s Archive.

    Other authors ignore–or are ignorant of–Black Alamedans, and choose to focus primarily on architectural preservation. George Gunn, curator of the Alameda Historical Museum’s book Documentation of Victorian and Post Victorian Residential and
    Commercial Buildings, City of Alameda, 1854 to 1904, painstakingly compiles Alameda housing records, yet does not include the lost homes of the Hackett brothers at 1608
    Union and 1828 Grand St.

    Rasheed Shabazz, “Alameda Is Our Home”, 2013, University of California Bachelor’s Thesis in African American Studies, Social Science.

    In fact, George Gunn’s unresponsive, and dismissive treatment of the research into Alameda’s nonwhite history by people of color has been noted by several historians, and researchers. Take this other quote from Rasheed Shabazz’s Tumblr account (DaSquareBear):

    In 2012, i visited the Museum when i started my research. I asked the curator, George Gunn, if the Museum had materials related to African Americans in Alameda. He mentioned the Clintons, but directed me to the library instead.

    On February 10, 2018, during my first Black Alameda Walking Tour, we stopped at the Clinton home. An heir of the family told me that they had donated materials to the museum.

    I visited that afternoon. The material was in four boxes. Gunn showed me the materials. When he showed me the glasses and told me, “They were of substance…. they had nice things.”

    I replied, “They lived. That makes them of substance.”

    Rasheed Shabaz, March 10, 2018, via Tumblr

    Rasheed Shabazz wrote “‘Alameda Is Our Home’: African Americans and the Struggle for Housing in Alameda, California, 1860-Present“, for his bachelor’s thesis. It’s extraordinarily researched. Has a great voice, and measured perspective. It deserves to be re-published, and celebrated, just like Imelda Merlin’s “Alameda: A Geological History”. Except Shabazz’ work is better, because it’s actually about the people of Alameda.

    This seems to be the only research, or work published on Alameda’s African-American History, where African-American History is the sole focus. And the first mention of the African-American, or Black History, of Alameda, by the Alameda Museum, in its entire existence.

    This work was also created without the help of the Alameda Museum.

    Because of curator George Gunn’s obstruction, it’s sadly notable that Shabazz did not have access to the Alameda Museum’s archives–a trove of primary sources, and relevant artifacts–while he researched the history of Alameda. This means that there are more materials, and stories, which are actively being excluded from Alameda’s history by (of all institutions) the Alameda Museum.

    Not only did Shabazz finally gain access to some of the materials he was looking for, the Alameda Museum made him a Director, and Shabazz holds walking tours, and organizes lectures on Black History every February.

    But is this really a win? A seat at the table where you can’t eat; and the “privilege” of doing their work for them? There is no African American exhibit, anymore. That’s a back-step. The Alameda Museum still has no meaningful representation of any other group. And Shabazz has fallen silent on these issues since becoming a Director at the Alameda Museum.

    This raises uncomfortable memories, and even more uncomfortable questions. As someone who used to be “invited” to take part in the annual “Thanksgiving Show” at a radio station, somewhere in the North Bay, I know what being the token person of your race feels like. And I have been placated by shallow buy-ins, and bald-faced lies, as a youth organizer.

    So, when I see Rasheed Shabazz’s name and face on flyers. Hear his voice speaking in lectures. Then watch, as the Alameda Museum quietly removes the Clinton Family exhibit, and relegates Shabazz to Black History Month only. And all the energy and movement behind representation suddenly stop…. It looks like the usual pattern of pacification and superficial conciliation.

    What can you do to help?

    Call the Alameda Museum: (510) 521-1233

    Let them know that 74 years of focusing exclusively on White History is enough.

    Email the Alameda Museum

    Send them questions about your own history, culture, and heritage. Ask them where African American people, Asian American, and Pacific Islanders were during the time of the Victorian Era, and how come nonwhite people are excluded from permanent exhibits.

    Call Alameda Museum Curator, George Gunn: (510) 521-0802

    Invite him to retire.

    UPDATE: George Gunn has retired. Apparently, the Alameda Native History Project was one critic he did not survive.

    Four or five moments – that’s all it takes.

    Deadpool
    Rasheed Shabbaz reached out to me to let me know that he was personally bothered by some of the comments I made here.

    I agree with him, and am glad that he reached out to me; because, now I understand. So, I think I need to make this absolutely clear to the reader:

    In my criticism of the Alameda Museum, I did note the circumstances surrounding Shabbaz’s election to the Alameda Museum Board of Directors. What I failed to mention is that Rasheed had tried to join the board two times before; and was stonewalled. I also failed to tell you that it’s a big deal he’s even on the board because of Alameda Museum’s 74 Years of Unassailed Whiteness.

    Rasheed Shabbaz worked hard to get where he’s at. His work deserves to be given the same attention and adoration that works by Evanosky and Merlin receive. Rasheed’s advocacy, and organizing for the renaming of Jackson Park was the engine that turned it into Chochenyo Park. Rasheed’s growing list of accomplishments and contributions cannot be understated.

    As such, I do not want you to come away with the impression that Rasheed Shabbaz is anything less than brilliant, and committed.

    What this paper is commenting on is the Alameda Museum, and speculating on whether or not letting Rasheed Shabbaz join the board was not done because he was the only black person around, but because Alameda Museum realized its exclusion of BIPOC people could not continue any longer, and they would have to integrate, because their exclusionary practices were coming to light, and beginning to make Alameda Museum look bad.

    After all, how can you really turn down a qualified candidate for director when there’s no limit on how many qualified directors the Alameda Museum can have?

    Whether or not Rasheed Shabbaz actually performs the duties, posesses agency, or authority, or is just there for show was not the question I was asking. I was really asking whether Alameda Museum had any intention of actually focusing on any nonwhite history beyond Black History Month, AAPI History Month, etc.

    It’s my opinion that the Alameda Museum’s conduct in excluding BIPOC has been racist as fuck. And I wonder how hard Rasheed has to fight to get anything done.

    If there are false promises like, “oh, just help us catalog the collection, then we’ll work on ‘your thing’;” or, “just help us with this history month”, then we’ll get to you; then it’ll happen; “we’ll get to whatever you’ve got going on.”

    I know this is stuff he can’t comment on because he is a board member. And it’s kind of unfair to talk about this while he can’t really say anything. But maybe that’s a symptom of the problem, and not really a personal jab.

    Maybe I’m saying, just because Rasheed is a member of the board, and head of a committee, doesn’t mean the board is going to suddenly vote for everything he pitches. I’m not saying he doesn’t have agency. I’m saying the board didn’t elect him twice before, what makes any of us think they’re going to suddenly vote for his plans and ideas–no matter how well thought-out and presented they are.

    Because I can guarantee he’s tried to change the exhibits (for the better) at the Alameda Museum on at least two occasions; and one of them was after he was elected.

    And the placation and silencing that I spoke of is par for the course in Non-Profit Politics.

    But, yeah, Malcom X did have some shit to say about the Million Man March; and his perspective on the march being rebranded and reappropriated, denatured, and watered-down is the example I am pointing to. Am I trying to attack the character of, or indict the one person who is the most qualified to actually be on the board? Absolutely not. I’m saying that this looks like some sus nonprofit board shit that white people pull when they have no intention of actually doing anything more than looking good and pretending to be inclusive; while at the same time setting someone up to be the scapegoat for how come this sudden inclusion didn’t work.


    Full disclosure: the Alameda Native History Project has also been having significant issues gaining access to Native American, and Alameda Historic Collections since 2019, when this project began. Though my personal inquiries into this topic began in the early 90’s, when I was a child, and I just never gave up. [And I never will.]

  • 3 Ways Public Art Promotes Pan-Indian Confusion

    While being billed and paid for as an “homage to the gentle savages which once roamed the coasts and hills of this area thousands of years ago”:

    Many of the images presented to you as “Native American Art”, and installed in places like Parks, Malls, Skate Parks, and other Public Spaces, and “Public Arenas”, are actually the romanticized interpretations by (a) someone who is not Native American and, (b) does not know enough about their subject matter to truly allegorize the sacred dances, symbols, and objects they attempt to vivify.

    The result is a vitiated version of true Native American Cultural Representation Through Art. An impoverished image of who we are, and our physical connection to The Earth; The Animals; Our Ancestors; And All Of Us.

    These images are created with the “understanding” that Native Americans are gone. That we no longer live in a physical sense.

    We take up space in the imaginary place the artist has created. In the place with forests, and mesas; and lakes; and horses; and deer; and the Wolf howling at the Moon; and Iron Eyes Cody.

    It’s probably the same place in your head….

    The same place where “Indian Blankets” are half off. Where you can buy your own “Native American flute” out of a bucket at the door. Next to the Cigar Store Indian; and the “You Are On Stolen Land” t-shirts.

    These images don’t just affect you. They affect us.

    One: It Makes Us Forget Who We Are

    Aside from beating us down by starvation literally; economically; educationally; culturally; and spiritually: these images help erase our sense of individuality in both Tribal and Personal identities.

    We are enshrouding ourselves with the stereotypes they created for us.

    We are letting them convince us that this is who we are. That we don’t exist unless we conform to these images. Their idea of “American Indians”, “Gentle Savages”, “Proud Chiefs”, and “Sexy Squaw”. Those are Halloween costumes.

    We’re convincing ourselves that, unless we aren’t beading, or praying, or posting performative “Indian” [stuff] on social media that we aren’t Indians. That we don’t exist without the identities they try to place on us.

    But we do. And that’s the First Way Public Art Promotes Pan-Indian Confusion: It makes us forget who we are.

    Like, who we really are.

    Two: Pan-Indian Images, Made By Non-Native Artists, Shut Out Contemporary and Authentic Native American Art and Voices (and create false subject matter experts, who only perpetuate the myths of colonization.)

    The artists who rendered these images we see in public become considered subject matter experts, and go on to create more “culturally appropriate” or “culturally inspired” artwork for architects, corporations like tech companies, and more city governments, and municipalities.

    These works of art are now cited as “Native American works”; and referred to as historically & culturally accurate representations of people–who are very much real, and alive, today–as though they were no longer here.

    They contribute to the myth that we’ve just disappeared, somehow.

    This is effectively re-colonizing these places with attenuated versions of us; homogenized stereotypes of the “Indians of California”. Representing the sanitized beginning, middle, and end of an entire civilization that “wasn’t” murdered, buried in mass graves; and pulverized, to be hidden in the very cornerstones of the institutions designed to govern them out of existence…. And yet, still came out fighting like Schrödinger’s Cat

    These works of Public Art help to indoctrinate new generations into the Myth of The Colonization of California. The one where we all just simply disappeared; were “killed by the Spanish”; or “became Mexicans.” …That California was open, lush, and willing.

    This not only prevents true Native American Artists from being featured, or recognized in their own homelands. But, the popularity, and entrenched nature of Public Art (something that’s usually made of steel, or metal, and set in concrete), literally cements these images in the public eye; helping to gloss over, and tune out the real history, living voices, and work of contemporary Native Americans as people and artisans. In favor of the commercialized, white-washed, Pan-Indian images and stereotypes that stalk us everywhere we go.

    We have to stop considering non-native people as the gatekeepers of Native American culture, or the experts on our lives, and lived experiences.

    Three: Works of Public Art Do Not Absolve Governments of Their Duty to Recognize and Honor Native American People

    Public Artwork concerning Native American People should do the following:

    1. Never be a sculpture of a Native American person, unless it was actually made and designed by a Native American person, or a person of Native American Descent.
    2. Be built/created/assembled by Native American people;
    3. In print: acknowledge the Native American Genocide, California Genocide, or the Mass Murder and Removal of Native Americans for the Exploitation of Their Land and Natural Resources as the reason why the viewer is standing in an outdoor mall, and not a lush field–with rivers, fresh air, salmon, and singing forest animals–today;
    4. Recognize the People Whose Land We Are On by Name, and the name of the Tribal Nation as it may appear in Treaty;
    5. Recognize that Public Art cannot undo the past, but it is a way that we can all remember our history, honor our ancestors, and heal together from the sins of our fathers.

    Public Art is a component, and not the whole solution.

    These things should be employed in concert with serious policies of Native American Inclusion & Acknowledgment, like:

    • Native American Representation in City Government, City Events, City Planning
    • Renaming of Some Parks, Streets, Schools, and Other Public Buildings/Spaces
    • Establishing Historical Sites and Districts
    • Rehabilitating, Maintaining, and Protecting the Local Environment
      • Consider doing these things in a sustainable way, with native plants, non-neonicotinoid pest control, and by eliminating nitrogen (fertilizer) run-off.
    • Specifically Prohibiting Development in “Restricted Resource Zones”
    • Actively soliciting local Native American people, artists, and historians, for input and education about their history.

    Just for starters.


    Stay tuned….


    Links in this Article/More Reading:

    https://alamedasun.com/news/new-public-art-place-north-shore

    https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/true-story-pocahontas-historical-myths-versus-sad-reality

  • Ohlone: The First Alamedans, “Were Not a ‘Branch of Miwok Indians’”

    When “The Spanish” came to the San Francisco Bay Area, they called all of the people who lived here “Costanoans”; and promptly killed, and corralled them into the California Missions; then began to colonize the land by bringing cows, catfish, eucalyptus, and other foreign plants and animals.

    The primary language for the Mission San Jose was Miwok.

    Miwok was a common language for most missions in the San Francisco Bay Area. But, Coast Miwok is the name of just one Tribal Group in the Northern Bay Area. In fact, Coast Miwok and Miwok consider themselves as distinct Tribal Groups of their own; and should not be confused with one another.

    Richard Levy’s 1978 essay, entitled “Costanoan”, and featured in the California Volume of the Handbook of North American Indians, edited by Robert F. Heizer… has been widely relied upon since its publication. Despite its obvious errors, and out-dated nature. [For instance, the term “Costanoan” was already beginning to fall out of style. It was recognized as a blunt umbrella term for an entire region, which is actually diverse af.]

    Before Richard Levy’s 1978 “Costanoan” Essay was published, J.P. Harrington had already come through the Bay Area–in 1921–to document and study California Native American Languages. This is where Harrington documented the existence of a language called “Chochenyo”; and recorded it separately from the known Miwok Language.

    In fact, it was Harrington, in 1921, who first recorded the phrase, “Yo soy lisjanes.” Words spoken by Jose Guzman, the last Chochenyo speaker, and “Captain” of what was then known as the “Verona Band of Indians” by white people.

    But the Verona Band was just a small part of a larger group known collectively today as Ohlone People.

    It was noted, then–in 1921–that these languages (Chochenyo and Miwok) somehow fit into the “Penutian” Language Tree; and that a completely different group of people from the South-West of the Delta Area around Byron (ostensibly, the “other side” of Mount Diablo) spoke a Yokutian dialect.

    In fact, from the work leading up to Richard Levy’s 1978 “Costanoan” Essay, the following facts were already established, peer-reviewed, and easily discoverable by scholars such as Levy, and Alameda’s Imelda Merlin–who was a UC Berkeley student herself, and within easy counsel of Kroeber, now infamous (and former) head of the UC Berkeley Anthropology Department, and Phoebe A. Hearst Museum….

    Anyway, these established facts were:

    • There is a group of Yokutian-speaking people who live on the East Side of Mount Diablo, up to at least the “Byron Delta Area”, probably spanning farther east toward the Sierra Foothills–joining the rest of the Yokutian-speaking area;
    • Neither Miwok, nor Chochenyo languages were related to the Yokutian-speaking Tribal Group in language, and diverged in custom;
    • The aforementioned group of people were errantly included under the term “Costanoan”, despite the obvious differences in language, religion, and culture;
    • Miwok is a language, and also a Tribal Group;
    • Coast Miwok and Miwok are two different Tribal Groups;
    • Chochenyo is a separate and distinct language from Miwok, spoken by at least one East Bay Tribal Group that has called themselves the “Lisjanes”–and been called the “Verona Band”, among other names;
    • Both Miwok and Chochenyo are linguistically related to each other, as branches, not as derivatives of one or the other.

    The detrimental effects of Richard Levy’s work have undermined the fundamental understanding of the Indigenous Bay Area landscape, reducing it to something uniform, monolithic. The historical narrative Levy pushes in this work is out-dated; even for the time it was published.

    It should also be noted that Levy’s work presented several claims, conclusions, and information that simply wasn’t corroborated or supported by citations, or other evidence.

    In spite of these facts, the “Costanoan” essay is still relied upon by Park Services, City Governments, Developers, (and more,) today.

    Levy’s work has been heavily relied upon for a number of reasons:

    1. It was published in what is still considered to be one of the most authoritative volumes to this day: The Handbook of North American Indians;
    2. It’s short;
    3. It has pictures.

    The map included with Levy’s essay was heavily relied upon up until the seemingly arbitrary placement of markers, and borders were pointed out.

    But let’s be clear. The difference in time between when these papers were published in academic journals, and when they get published in books, like “The Indians of California: A Source Book” is notable enough for me to point out that the public side, and the interior, academic, research side of the the anthropology/archaeology/ethnology department are completely different. They move at completely different speeds.

    And students/student-researchers are privy to material that just isn’t available to anyone outside of that institution.

    So let’s shift gears to look at yet another scholar.

    This one probably shouldn’t even be cited as a reference for Alameda Native History, anymore–given lack of credible citations and research regarding what she termed as “Aboriginal Settlement”.

    Her name is Imelda Merlin, and her thesis was published as a book in 1977 as “Alameda: A Geographical History”.

    This book has been referred to as the Alameda “historical bible“.

    However, Merlin’s thesis is actually dated in 1964–thirteen years before publication of her book. The thesis was submitted for partial satisfaction of the requirements for a Master’s Degree in Geology.

    Should I point out that Geology is not archaeology, anthropology, linguistics, or “ethnology” in any recognizable form? Because Geology is the study of the Earth. You know, like rocks, and how mountains were formed.

    In the second chapter, “Aboriginal Settlement” [p. 16], Merlin presents a brief history of “man’s” occupation of the area now known as Alameda.

    Here, Merlin refers to Ohlone People (known then, at least, as the Lisyan, Costanoan, and Verona) as a “branch of the Miwok tribe”. The citation for this claim refers to the unpublished, personal correspondence of Robert F. Heizer. It is unknown whether Merlin claims Robert F. Heizer shared this information during the interview, listed the bibliography; or whether there is a letter in Robert Fleming Heizer’s correspondence file that says this.

    But, remember the name Robert F. Heizer (aka “R. F. Heizer”) because he’s all over this.

    Merlin did not cite any academic research paper, archaeological or ethnographical reports to support her assertion that Heizer said this; in spite of his own work–contrary to the preponderance of academic papers that Heizer compiled and published, himself.

    If the interview in the bibliography was performed by Merlin, as the interviewer, how come she didn’t include the transcript? If the interview wasn’t performed by Merlin, who was it performed by? What was the date of the interview?

    Is the Heizer interview in the bibliography the ‘(Heizer, Personal correspondence)’ that Imelda Merlin refers to?

    [Please, don’t get me started on the maps.]”

    Me, This Article
    Yes, I honestly expected Imelda Merlin, in the 13 years between submitting her thesis, and publishing it as a book, to fix some of these issues. I expect anyone who has that much time between writing and printing, to have edited the […] out of their manuscript.

    This is troubling for a number of reasons; not the least of which is that Heizer (most probably) didn’t say that.

    Merlin’s assertion that the unnamed tribe of Alameda, and its adjacent lands was “now thought to be”, a “branch of miwok” really flies in the face of what Archaeologists, Anthropologists, and Ethnologists actually believed.

    J.P. Harrington’s 1921 Linguistic Survey of the Niles/Pleasanton area was well-known, and continues to be the authoritative reference concerning Ohlone People from Mission San Jose, and descendants, and family of Jose Guzman. Harrington’s work (as already mentioned in length) makes a clear distinction between the Chochenyo, and Miwok language; as well as Miwok and the “Lisjanes”.

    In 1955, Alfred Kroeber, and Robert F. Heizer, had already written “Continuity of Indian Population in California From 1770/1848 to 1955”. This work specifically distinguishes between “Miwok” and “Costanoan” people who appear in the Mission Rolls.

    This was, of course, after publication of Robert Heizer’s 1951, “Indians of the San Francisco Bay Area”, in the Geologic Guidebook of the San Francisco Bay Counties (Bulletin #154); which made it clear:

    The San Francisco peninsula, western Contra Costa County, and Alameda and Santa Clara Counties were the home of the Costanoan tribes.”

    First paragraph of the Preface to the “Indians of the San Francisco Bay Area”, Geologic Guidebook of the San Francisco Bay Counties. Bulletin 154, Division of Mines, Ferry Building, San Francisco, 1951.

    Mind you, “Costanoan” territory started out as the whole of the San Francisco Bay Area, and then kept getting smaller, and more defined, until it became the area we now associate with Ohlone Territory.

    Ohlone Territory is the area from Yelamu, to Huchiun Aguasto, from below Ssalson, to way far down, past Carmel, and well into the Santa Cruz Mountains.

    In Merlin’s second Heizer citation, “The California Indians”, we are brought to what was considered the sequel of….

    The undisputed authority on the California Indians, A.L. Kroeber, heads the list of outstanding anthropologists whose writings have been selected to appear in this book.

    Here, then, for the first time since the appearance, many years ago, of A.L. Kroeber’s Handbook of the Indians of California (Smithsonian Institution, 1925) is a book which covers the material and social cultures, the archaeological findings, and a wealth of other materials on the Indians of California.

    Dust cover of “The Indians of California: A Source Book”, Compiled and Edited by R. F. Heizer and M. A. Whipple, Fourth Printing, 1962, Cambridge University Press, London, England

    The Handbook of the Indians of California, mentioned above, was also edited by Robert Heizer (aka “Robert F. Heizer”, aka “Robert Fleming Heizer”.)

    So, Heizer is all over this stuff. As an editor, and a contributing author.

    Of all the works bearing Heizer’s name, the “Indians of California” took pains to specify, exactly, the relationships of the Tribal Groups of California with each other.

    This came out in the form of maps, data tables, and hundreds of pages of narrative.

    Despite some of the most “authorative”, widely publicized, even celebrated source material on the “Indians of California” at her finger-tips.

    In her own citations.

    Somehow….

    Merlin writes:

    Man was present on the shores of San Francisco Bay at least 3500 years ago according to Carbon-14 tests made of shellmound material (Gifford, pp. 1-29). Since at least one mound has revealed a layer of skeletal material below the present ground level, in much the same way as did the Emeryville mound, presumably Indians now thought to have been a branch of Miwok Indians, (Heizer, personal correspondence) occupied the Encinal as early as they did the adjacent areas.”

    “Alameda: A Geographical History”, Imelda Merlin, 1977, Friends of the Alameda Library, Alameda Musuem, Alameda, California, [p.16]

    The most important fact here is that the word “Costanoan” isn’t mentioned at all.

    Well, that’s what people thought in 1964.” Was one reply, when I brought up this in recent conversation with Valerie Turpin, VP of the Alameda Museum Board.

    But it isn’t the Miwok who people thought occupied the Encinal as early as they did the adjacent areas.

    In 1964, people thought Native Americans from the San Francisco Bay Area were called “Costanoans”. People already knew that Costanoans were different, and distinct from Miwok, Pomo, Delta Yokuts, and all the rest of the “Indians of California”.

    I expressed my confusion as to why Imelda Merlin would be so wrong. I shared with Turpin the breakdown of Merlin’s sources, including the “most authoritative” sources by A.L. Kroeber, and Robert F. Heizer.

    I also mentioned other work, which was published, just one year after Imelda Merlin’s book was published. It’s called “The Ohlone Way”.

    Malcom Margolin wrote, or contributed, to three of the most famous books about Native Americans in the San Francisco Bay Area:

    • The Ohlone Way
    • The Way We Lived
    • Life in a California Mission (Introduction)
    These are non-fiction narrative books; collections of stories, and songs; not academic research papers, or post-graduate theses.

    Even though they’re made by a white man, for a white audience, Margolin’s work was the kind of stuff that brought solace, as I pined for home. Oh yeah, and the references to Margolin’s work can be found in Park Service Project Plans, CEQA filings, Berkeley City Council Briefs, etc.–right next to the references to Levy, and Heizer we’ve already covered, above.

    Certainly, Margolin would be a fine resource to consult, when curating an exhibit on the First Alamedans, and the way they lived.

    More recent events have brought the fact that Alameda is Ohlone land into the forefront of the conscious of almost every person who lives here.

    Those, of course, were the visible protest actions against housing development in West Berkeley [which isn’t where the shellmound actually is]; and, before that, the takeover of Wintun/Patwin land, in Vallejo, by an activist who was the self-proclaimed “chairwoman” of the corporation known as the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC, which claimed to be a forgotten Ohlone Tribe.

    In reality, Corrina Gould was a rogue “fallen member” of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area; who refused to go back home, even though Muwekma offered her enrollment in the tribe.

    Despite the bad optics, and the confusion, we now know that, “Ohlone People are The Native American People From the San Francisco Bay Area”.

    Because of all of this “awareness”, a City of Alameda park was renamed to “Chochenyo Park”, in recognition of the Ohlone language spoken in the Alameda area.

    The City of Alameda even voted to donate city funds to the Sogorea Te Land Trust, a purportedly Ohlone Land Trust, using the Wintun name for Glen Cove, in Vallejo… and has no affiliation to any Tribal Government, whatsoever. [FYI: Nonprofit corporations cannot be Tribal Governments because the exercise of Tribal Sovereignty is not a “Charitable Purpose”.]

    The City stopped short of issuing a Land Acknowledgement, though.

    But this seems like enough for the Alameda Museum to take notice, and update their website, and exhibits.

    But the issue still lingers:

    Why didn’t the Alameda Museum vet Imelda Merlin’s book?

    Why didn’t they check the citations?

    When asked why the Alameda Museum only relied upon this one resource for their information (Imelda Merlin’s book), I was told that they are simply sharing the information the Museum was given when the Native American Grave Goods from the Alameda Shellmounds were transferred from the possession of the Alameda Free Library, to the Alameda Museum, sometime in the 1970’s.

    But what about the ethical, and legal duties behind possessing, and curating, Native American Grave Goods?

    What about:

    1. Proper identification of the Native American Grave Goods, and Native American Artifacts in the Alameda Museum’s possession?
    2. Proper attribution of Native American Grave Goods, and Native American Artifacts to the correct Tribal Group?
    3. Asking the Native American Tribes for permission to possess the Native American goods and objects already in their possession?

    I mentioned the prosecution of David van Horne, and how he was ordered to return the Native American Grave goods as a function of law. And how pursuant suits have ended in order to return the goods to the tribe’s possession “just because that’s the law.”

    I let Valerie Turpin know that simply possessing the Native American Grave Goods without permission put them in violation of the NAGPRA laws.

    She told me that the Museum had reached out to a few groups, and was working on that. I asked her if the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC. was one of the groups, and informed her that I’m now the CEO of that corporation; as of January 2022.

    I told Valerie that the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area is the actual Ohlone Tribe of this area: Named In Treaty.

    But that the California Native American Heritage Commission is the proper authority to contact, to determine who the Most Likely Descendants are, for the things in the Alameda Museum’s possession.

    When it came to discussing “help”; voluminous reminders that the Alameda Museum is entirely run by volunteers, I just have to get this out of the way:

    1. Museums are supposed to be an authority on their subject.
    2. We expect museums to verify the authenticity and provenance of their exhibits before curating them.
    3. Being “volunteer run” should not be an excuse for why the Alameda Museum’s exhibits are less credible than a 4th Grade Science Fair Project.

    What did I want to do to help?

    When the Alameda Museum and I first met: I offered to scan the entire card catalog with our production scanner that scans at 130 Pages Per Minute. This was just because I wanted to find what I was looking for; and scanning the entire catalog seemed like a win for both of us. I specifically mentioned that it would be a good time, then, because of the COVID-19 Lockdown, and this extended period of free time.

    I never heard back on that offer. [I didn’t think the Alameda Museum took me seriously.]

    But, I remembered. And, when I brought it up, I learned that the Alameda Museum Card Catalog had been entirely scanned, and was now in a database. That database, while not public (and still being worked on), was available to be searched only in the Alameda Museum.

    So I basically asked how come the Alameda Museum didn’t just search its own database. Turpin asked me if I would help research.

    I responded that the Alameda Museum has the only holdings on this subject that I haven’t seen. They (the museum) probably have the only remaining primary sources regarding this subject. And, that, once they locate their materials, that I (of course) would be able to cross-reference that with everything that I already have, and have put together.

    Then she asked if I made that map of the shellmounds in Alameda.

    Yeah.

    Valerie mentioned the problem. The problem that these artifacts could be taken and locked away from the world’s view forever. And I really understand that fear. Because I feel it, too. As a lover of history. As an inquiry-based, tactile, experience-seeking, life-long learner.

    I told her the California Indian Museum had the same problem. But they solved it. By “inviting contemporary Native Americans to come and make some contemporary Native American stuff.” The whole museum is filled with it. It’s in Sacramento, California. And it’s beautiful.

    We left it there.


    But here is the link to the California State Indian Museum.

    Stay tuned to find out what happens next.

    NOTE: This article was amended to include a brief mention of the California State Indian Museum’s solution to the idea that Native American Grave Good, Artifacts, Objects, Resources, and Other Things could simply be “locked up” and “no one could see them.” Because these Native American Artifact Laws do have a chilling effect on the activities of Museums.
  • Alameda’s Racist History: If You Won’t Share Ours, Give Back Our Artifacts

    “Alameda Museum: / If you won’t share our history, give our artifacts back / Celebrate the First Alamedans just / as much as your Colonizer Heroes. / Alameda’s Racist History” Title art for @AlamedaNativeHistoryProject on Instagram.com.

    Alameda is a model colonial city. Their Victorian houses, and expansive gardens have been written about for hundreds of years. Regular Alameda Garden Tours, and Alameda Legacy Home Tours extoll the virtues of Alameda’s First Colonizers.

    These historical celebrations routinely leave out facts, such as,

    “This garden was fertilized by using human remains found in one of Alameda’s three shellmounds.”

    Or,

    “This sidewalk was constructed using one of the over 350 Native American bodies found in the ‘Sather’s Mound’.”

    The Alameda Museum is exclusively devoted to commemorating and memorializing Alameda’s White History, while simultaneously ignoring and minimizing the existence and contributions of people of color; and the atrocities committed by those who are purported to be such heroic goliaths of Alameda History, today.

    This is all done in the shadows of people like Rasheed Shabazz, someone who had to trace his own Alameda Legacy to bring us Black Alameda History, which was never touched upon, or even considered by an all-white museum staff, and curation team. [

    Sure, the Alameda Museum invites us to search their archives. But the word “search” belies the onerous nature of digging through files and card catalogs which aren’t actually indexed or organized in any useful way.

    People always offer us the chance to do their work for them, like it’s a favor to us.

    But let’s be clear: an archive that isn’t indexed or organized is trash.

    The real issue here, is that the Alameda Museum has existed for so long without ever: (a) indexing their holdings; (b) focusing on anything other than Alameda’s White History; or (c) ever asking for permission to possess the Native American Funerary Objects, and Grave Goods in their possession….

    The issue of Alameda Museum’s possession of Native American Grave Goods and Funerary Objects is especially salient considering their absolute lack of respectful handling of the Historical Events Surrounding the Sather’s Mound, and the Destruction and Morbid Uses for Alameda’s Shellmounds.

    Simply put;

    Alameda Museum, if you’re not going to engage the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, ask for permission to possess their artifacts, and present respectful, and responsible, information regarding the First Alamedans: then you don’t deserve to possess their artifacts.


    Stay tuned for more.

  • You Don’t Know Jack About Native America

    “You Don’t Know Jack About Native America / Stop giving money to organizations and ’causes’ you know nothing about. / Research your Land Acknowledgment before you profess it.” Title art for @AlamedaNativeHistoryProject on Instagram.com.

    Stop giving money to organizations and “causes” you know nothing about.

    Non-profit organizations cannot be tribal governments. (The exercise of Tribal Sovereignty is not a charitable purpose.)

    Organizations, like Sogorea Te “Land Trust” claim to be devoted to returning native land to native hands….

    But which tribes are these organizations actually associated with?

    Real Tribal Governments:
    1. Will be able to break down their history with facts, and evidence;
    2. Are recognized in Treaty–even if the government won’t recognize their own treaties. (And they have a documented reason for why they are not mentioned in Treaties. [e.g. Tribal Warfare, Government Favoritism of One Tribe Over Another, etc.])
    3. Hold elections.

    The last point is super important. You can’t call yourself a Tribal Chairperson if there was never a vote. And, especially, if your Tribal Government is really just a corporation.

    If the “Tribal Government” you’re working with has never petitioned for Federal Recognition from the Department of the Interior; that’s a red flag.

    If the California Tribal Government you’re working with claims to be a California “State-Recognized Tribe“; that’s blatantly false.

    California does not have a Tribal Recognition Process.

    The California Native American Heritage Commission does not have the authority to recognize tribes. Only the Bureau of Indian Affairs can do that. [Absent certification as a Tribe by the BIA, no action to protect tribal lands may be maintained, United States v. 43.47 Acres of Land, 855 F. Supp. 549, 551 (D. Conn. 1994)]

    Research your Land Acknowledgment before you profess it.
  • In Defense of Native America: The People versus David Van Horn

    “In Defense of Native America: The People Versus David Van Horn” cover art for @AlamedaNativeHistoryProject on Instagram.com

    An archaeologist is sued by the California Attorney General, and the Native American Heritage Commission for the return of stolen Native American Artifacts.

    Santa Cruz Sentinel; Nov. 09, 1990

    People v. Van Horn (1990)

    The only “published” case in California where any entity is being sued by “The People”.

    In this case: the State of California is suing David Van Horn, and Archaeological Associates, Ltd. (a company owned by him and his wife, Ruth) for the return of Native American artifacts and remains in his, and his wife’s, possession without Native American consent.

    David Van Horn, an archaeologist hired by a City to examine land The City intended to use as an industrial park, found two burials, and related funerary items and goods. Also present, and a party to this action, is Horn’s assistant, Robert White. Tribes weren’t aware of the discovery until the Oceanside Blade-Tribune reported it, and hinted that Van Horn, and his archaeological consulting company were trying to conceal the existence of the discovery.

    Once tribes found out, they grouped together, engaged Kern County, City governments, and demanded that the remains and everything be returned to the tribes.

    This lead to a meeting, where David Van Horn agreed to return the remains to tribes. But, in a later meeting, he refused to return metates that were buried somehow on top of the remains; arguing that objects placed on top of buried remains were not “funerary objects”, or grave-related goods; he asserts his “expert opinion” that the metates were simply put there to “weigh” the body down.

    Van Horn publicly showed contempt for NAGPRA, and claimed he was being unfairly persecuted for doing legitimate, scientific, work. He even went as far as to throw doubt that the representatives of several Native American tribes demanding return of these objects were even related to the bodies discovered.

    This was the ultimate in sleazy denials. I bet the demurrer was fantabulous. Because, Van Horn threw out everything he could in his defense. Archaeological Associates, Ltd., claimed ignorance, and pointed to David Van Horn as the party ultimately responsible for breaking the law.

    A year into the dispute, the California Attorney General, and Native American Heritage Commission filed suit to compel the return of the objects.

    The statutes were clear that it is against the law to posses Native American Artifacts without Native American consent. Summary judgment was granted against David Van Horn. Van Horn, and Archaeological Associates, Ltd. were ordered to return the Native American artifacts, and repatriate Native American remains, to their Tribal Nation.

    In the end, it didn’t matter how much David Van Horn tried to fight culpability for his actions, and continued possession of Native American artifacts, without Native American Consent. It didn’t matter because he never argued whether or not it was against the law to possess those objects.

    And so…

    the issue of fact becomes one of law and loses its triable character if the undisputed facts leave no room for a reasonable difference of opinion.

    (Reid v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 557.)
    The California Attorney General published an opinion on this case:
    2007 Cal. AG LEXIS 23, 90 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 89
    Santa Cruz Sentinel; Nov. 23, 1990

    There were also criminal charges filed against David Van Horn, and his assistant, for knowingly desecrating Native American graves. The case was ultimately dismissed.

    However, the criminal case against Van Horn is notably “the first use of a 1988 state law that makes Native American grave robbery a felony.”


    Stay tuned for more.

  • New Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC. parts ways with Corrina Gould

    The Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC. has changed from a mutual benefit corporation, to a Public Benefit Corporation dedicated to “relief of poverty in urban rez (sf bay area), mutual aid admin.”

    This is a change from the tribal government Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC was purporting itself to be.

    The original Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC operated in obscurity.

    In the “Tribal Consulting Industry“, the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC, was known for having a propensity for burning bridges with industry experts and professionals who came to actually help Corrina Gould, and her family. As well as interfering with, and “hijacking” the land and struggles of other Native American tribes. Corrina, herself, is known for attacking and bullying people behind the scenes.

    As soon as I reported my experiences with Corrina Gould, and started showing you my research, I was contacted by other people who had bad experiences with the Gould’s, and Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC.

    They told me that this is typical behavior by Corrina Gould; and that they, too, had experienced bullying, betrayal, or some other type of harassment/mistreatment by Gould, her family, and followers.

    My sources gave me their own stories, and more than one honestly suggested that it’s not worth my time to cover this topic; expressed concern over being harassed by Gould’s “followers”. Told me that they could be dangerous. But it’s difficult not to talk about this. Because people ask me about this subject pretty frequently.

    I’m not the only person to take a look at how Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC., and Sogorea Te Land Trust were set-up, and see red flags. But no one wanted to report on this subject because they’re afraid of being called racist, misogynist, being cancelled, or just harassed by Gould, her family, and followers.

    You don’t know about this, because–up until now–Corrina Gould has managed to bully people who question her into silence; or discredit anyone who disagrees with her by calling them, “colonizers” or “karens”.

    This all describes efforts by Corrina Gould to avoid the question. To deflect scrutiny back on to her “attacker”.

    Corrina Gould’s supporters enable this, by blindly believing everything she says, without thinking critically about the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, and how come Corrina Gould isn’t enrolled in the tribe that she’s from; the real Ohlone tribe in the San Francisco Bay Area.

    Instead of being led by pure emotion, and zero analytical thought: how about read a book or something?

    Actually look at the court records, and all of these other documents which are public, and available to you.
    If you’re woke-woke, you do your own research, right?

    You question authority and find out for yourself, right?

    Maybe not.

    I also wanted to believe the narrative that Corrina Gould has created, because it’s so powerful, and attractive, and righteous.

    But her narrative only lends more obfuscation to the situation; and levies the ignorance and confusion surrounding Bay Area Native History, Land Trusts, and what a Tribal Government really is.

    There’s supposed to be a segue here, but I can’t think of one to say I want to look at these two things:

    Corrina Gould’s failed negotiations at West Berkeley; and the lie of Glen Cove.

    These events are important, because:

    • They are well-known;
    • What I’m about to say is easy to verify; and,
    • This topic hasn’t been critically addressed, until now.

    “West Berkeley Shellmound”

    The most important thing you need to know is: CVL was offered a cultural center, outdoor park, and money for use of the land in West Berkeley, until it was to be completely turned over to Ohlone people in 99 years or something–which is a lot of rent money. (This article, from Berkeleyside mentions the cultural education center.)

    But Gould refused this offer, out-right, and continued to make unreasonable demands, and unrealistic counter-offers, all the while telling the public that Native American people were being ignored.

    In reality, Corrina Gould walked away from the sweetest deal for urban land back that I’ve never found an equivalent to.

    In fact: it was because Tribal Consultation had occurred in West Berkeley–using Andrew Galvan’s archeological company–that we know the Spenger’s Parking Lot in Berkeley is not a shellmound.

    The City of Berkeley’s “West Berkeley Shellmound” historical district was purposely created in a space larger than the footprint of the actual shellmound because the people who planned and created the district didn’t know where the shellmound actually was. These details all came out in the litigation over the West Berkeley Shellmound, and is public record.

    From the perspective of everyone involved in West Berkeley, except for Corrina Gould: the parties attempting to negotiate with Corrina delayed the project, made extraordinary good faith concessions in negotiations. The City and Property Owners (Ruegg & Ellsworth) did everything they could, short of stopping construction of housing during a housing crisis.

    The planning process had already taken place; the Environmental Impact Report was finished; and, Tribal Consultation and Scoping was completed with the West Berkeley Shellmound’s Most Likely Descendant (as determined by the Native American Heritage Commision), Andrew Galvan.

    The bulk of Corrina’s legal battles have been fought behind the auspices of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC.

    But claiming to have “fought battles” in court, when you’ve barely been allowed to file as an intervenor is a stretch. The most that Corrina Gould managed to do during the ensuing litigation was delay the inevitable, and make things extremely expensive for everyone, except her, and CVL (Sogorea Te Land Trust paid for the attorneys.)

    The City of Berkeley knew its hands were tied, that it would be improper to deny Ruegg & Ellsworth’s permit, and contrary to law. But, Corrina Gould wanted the development stopped, at all costs….

    Even though it was too late in the process. Even though tribal consultation had already taken place. Even though Corrina Gould didn’t have the tribal authority to sue for an injunction; because the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC is not a Tribal Government.

    So what did Corrina Gould do?

    Gould threatened to sue the City of Berkeley (May 2018), if Berkeley didn’t deny Ruegg & Ellsworth’s project permit.

    Even though the City of Berkeley knew it was improper to deny the permit; and contrary to existing law (SB 35.)

    Even though Tribal Consultation, and two archeological studies had been conducted; and concluded the parking lot wasn’t where the shellmound was; and the “overspread”, “remnants” of the shellmound underneath the lot certainly was not a “structure” by any of today’s standards. It was probably moved from a different location, where the mound actually was. [Perhaps for road building, or agriculture.]

    The City of Berkeley knew that they could be sued by Ruegg & Ellsworth; which would cost tens of thousands of dollars, and likely end in defeat.
    But the City still denied the project permit. And it did end in defeat….

    Ruegg & Ellsworth filed for a writ of mandate to compel Berkeley to comply with SB 35.

    First, The Alameda County Superior Court ruled in favor of the City of Berkeley denying the permit.

    Then, Ruegg & Ellsworth appealed the ruling of the Superior Court, and was ultimately awarded judgment, and granted a mandate to compel the City of Berkeley’s compliance with California law.

    From the perspective of CVL, and Sogorea Te, this story ends abruptly; with the filing of an appeal to the California Supreme Court. There was a lot of hype about “taking the fight to the supreme court”.

    Fundraising and Social Media Campaigns went into high gear.

    Balance of the “Shellmound Defense Fund” is $77,633 as of Jan. 24, 2022. [shellmound.org]

    But we never heard about the outcome.

    The California Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal on the West Berkeley Shellmound.

    Even that article makes the mistake of not recognizing Confederated Villages of the Lisjan as a Corporation, versus the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, which is actually comprised of, and represents the real, bona fide, Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.

    We’re talking about thousands of people legitimately enrolled in a tribe, versus, a brand-new corporation (from 2017) that claims to have “over 85 members”, and has been around “since time immemorial.”

    Corrina Gould argues that “her” tribe is unrecognized. That they are being treated unfairly, and ignored. Gould has also said she shares a common ancestor with Muwekma, in Jose Guzman–but that they are not the same tribe, somehow.

    When you look at their websites: CVL never mentions Muwekma. Sogorea Te Land Trust never mentions Muwekma, either.

    But, somehow, their “historical background” seems to mirror perfectly the real story of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.

    Both corporations (CVL and Sogorea Te Land Trust) made their mission to advocate for Ohlone people, and put native land, into native hands. But neither organization has dedicated their assets to any specific Native American tribe that is State or Federally recognized, or even proven their connection to Jose Guzman past the barest allegation.

    The lie of Glen Cove (“Sogorea Te”)

    We know that Corrina Gould managed to procure an easement at Glen Cove.

    Gould claimed this was a victory because “Native voices were heard.”

    But was this a victory?

    The actual story of the negotiations, and real struggle happening concurrently with the very visible occupation of Glen Cove is much different than what’s been covered in the news.

    What you don’t know is that this easement came at a great cost to the local bands of Wintu, and Patwin tribes. That the “Memorandum of Understanding and Settlement Agreement” at Glen Cove (“Sogorea Te”) would cost tribes $100,000 dollars.

    At both Glen Cove and West Berkeley, Corrina Gould claimed that Tribal Consultation had never taken place.

    This is absolutely incorrect.

    Tribes at both Glen Cove, and West Berkeley accepted the invitation for consultation and scoping at the very beginning of the development process; and had conducted, and concluded business with the respective developers and responsible parties long before a decision was made to issue the permits for construction.

    Consider this quote from Kesner Flores, in an East Bay Times Article by Tony Burchyns, May 19, 2011, Legal options examined in Vallejo’s Glen Cove park development dispute :

    District officials have been in almost daily contact with Kesner Flores, a member of the Cortina Indian Rancheria band of Patwin Indians. He is acting as an intermediary between the district and three Patwin tribes.

    The Colusa, [Cortinas] and Yocha Dehe bands support the project, Flores said, because it would cap, with a foot of soil, vulnerable archaeological resources supposedly belonging to the tribes.

    “There is one thing that a tribe does not do — take another tribe’s territory,” said Flores, referring to the protesters, who he considers a “community group” with no tribal authority.

    Flores was only quoted once telling us that Glen Cove Park was Patwin land.

    No other news coverage mentions the fact that Corrina Gould, and other protestors, are interlopers on another tribe’s territory.

    Flores didn’t directly say that Corrina Gould was interfering with other tribes’ business. Or that Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC didn’t belong there. Because, Native Americans largely try to avoid direct confrontation where they can.

    (At this time: Sogorea Te Land Trust wasn’t even born yet; but the corporation has no representation from the Native American tribal groups/bands associated with Glen Cove, to this day.)

    Ignoring the objections of Kesner Flores–who was the Most Likely Descendant of the Glen Cove Shellmound, and represented 3 different bands of Patwin people–was exactly how not to “come correct“, and truly contrary to the Native American Tribal Protocols, which Corrina Gould tries so hard to champion.

    According to the [Native American Heritage Commission], the Glen Cove Water Park (GCWP) site is Patwin Territory, and the most likely descendant is Patwin member Kesner Flores.”

    Draft Environmental Impact Report Glen Cove Waterfront Park Project, State Clearinghouse No. 2001092044

    The truth is: Tribal Consultation Occurred…
    without Corrina Gould

    Neither of these consultations included included the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, INC, nor Corrina Gould, because:

    CEQA Flowchart. The Public Review Period is marked towards the middle of the page.
    1. Glen Cove is Wintu & Patwin land (not Miwok), and, regardless of whether or not Karkin people shared, owned it–or whether or not the area was actually community property–it doesn’t matter, because CVL is from Oakland.
    2. Kesner Flores was determined to be the Glen Cove Shellmound’s “Most Likely Descendant” by the Native American Heritage Commission.
    3. West Berkeley was consulted by the one-and-only Andrew Galvan, the Most Likely Descendant of the West Berkeley Shellmound. Galvan is a well-known, direct descendant of Dolores Marine Galvan. He is the docent of Mission Dolores, and directly affiliated with the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
    4. Glen Cove park was consulted by several Tribal Representatives, including, Kesner Flores, who NAHC determined is the Most Likely Descendant of the Glen Cove Shellmound remains.
    5. Legally, Corrina Gould has no standing; she’s not Patwin; and CVL is not a Tribal Government, nor the Most Likely Descendant of a shellmound in Vallejo, California.
    6. Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC has only been allowed to file as an intervenor in ongoing matters in the past; and Corrina Gould’s lack of standing–even as the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC.–has been laid out clearly by the judges of every court case they’ve ever been involved in.

    Corrina Gould’s connection to Muwekma

    The present-day Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is 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; and who were also members of the historic Federally Recognized Verona Band of Alameda County.

    muwekma.org

    Why does nothing in the Muwekma literature–including the Department of Interior petitions for Muwekma Federal Re-Recognition, which contain hundreds of pages of ancestry information & expert analysis–ever mention Corrina Gould, or her mother, Joann Tucker?

    Every enrolled/disenrolled/or potential Muwekma Ohlone Tribe enrollee can trace their ancestry straight back to their full-blooded ancestor.

    That’s how this works. For every tribe.

    In the case of Muwekma: this ancestry is readily available. Gould’s mother, at the very least, should appear in the records. But her name does not. None of the records I found contained any concrete link between Corrina Gould and Jose Guzman.

    However, I’ve been told that there could be a link. But, the bottom line is, no one has found it. And Corrina Gould has stayed deathly silent on this subject.

    The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area has been researched extensively by the Bureau of Indian Affairs; Muwekma tribal members and scholars (, such as Alan Leventhal,) have accomplished so much more of their own research into their history, ancestry, heritage, culture, and traditions, that the link between Corrina Gould and Jose Guzman should be clear and convincing.

    That information should be right there. The entire tribal rolls are listed in the Muwekma Petition for Federal Recognition.

    I’m not kidding. About any of this.

    We, as Native Americans, descendants, have to know who our nearest, full-blooded “Indian Relative” is. We need to be able to prove it to become enrolled in a tribe, or receive a tribal descendant ID card.

    Did you know: If Corrina Gould really is related to Andrew Galvan, “seven great-grandmas back”, then she could be as Native American as Elizabeth Warren is. However, if her Great-Great-Grandfather were Jose Guzman, she could be as Indian as I am.

    It’s a fallacy to believe something is true unless proven otherwise. How does one prove non-existence? How can you say that you believe in something like miracles, or gods, until someone can prove that they don’t exist? You can’t even prove they exist in the first place.

    Believing Corrina Gould’s claims does not make them true.

    You can’t believe harder than you think.

    You’re not “woke” if you do that. Being woke means thinking critically, and asking questions, especially to authority; working actively to sabotage, destroy, and deconstruct the systems of misogyny and enslavement that we are all caught in.

    However:

    Truth is not an opinion. Truth is a verifiable fact.

    Instantly refusing to ask the question, refusing to entertain the thought, or have the discussion about this subject is really detrimental to the true struggles of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, for Federal Re-Recognition.

    This is the problem with the current assumption that Corrina Gould is a legitimate “Tribal Chairperson”, just because she says she is.

    That the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC is some tribe that we’ve never even heard of, that was here the whole time.

    It’s not true.

    No one asked why all the officers of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC had the same last name. Or which Villages were a part of the Confederation. (How come we never heard from them–the other villages in the Confederation?)

    If Sogorea Te Land Trust is trying to return native land to native hands, why is “Muwekma” completely absent from their website? Do they simply intend to grant land to Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC?

    Up until now, Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, Inc. was a mutual benefit corporation, which is different than what we think a nonprofit corporation is.

    In a true nonprofit, its assets would be dedicated to a charitable purpose, such as to an Indian Tribal Government. This “dedication of assets” should appear as a clause on the organization’s Articles of Incorporation. It does not appear in CVL, or Sogorea Te Land Trust’s articles of incorporation.

    So, which tribe(s) are Sogorea Te Land Trust, and Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC associated with?

    Because it’s not Muwekma, or Colusa, or Cortina, or Yocha Dehe.

    There is a black-out on this subject which needs to stop.

    Native American tribes are not corporations.

    Beware of corporations which pose as Tribal Governments.

    Native American Tribes cannot be 501(c)3 tax-exempt organizations, because the exercise of sovereign powers is not a charitable purpose.

    Every tribe must exercise its sovereign powers to administer tribal governance. The struggle of every tribe is for sovereignty. Sovereignty over self, over land use, over water rights, and more.

    Even though the IRS uses the term “federally recognized tribe” in their documentation, the “exercise of sovereign power” is the operative phrase.

    What is the excersize of sovereign power?

    “Rev. Rul. 60-384, 1960-2 C.B. 172, provides that even though a wholly owned state or municipal organization may be separately organized, it is not eligible for IRC 501(c)(3) exemption if it has substantial regulatory or enforcement powers in the public interest. These powers traditionally are referred to as sovereign powers.

    The three generally acknowledged sovereign powers are:

    • Power to levy and collect tax on its behalf
    • Power of eminent domain
    • Police power”

    From: IRS Reference Guide for Exempt Organizations Closely Affiliated with Indian Tribal Governments

    Hint: this is probably why there’s a clever distinction to remind you “Shuumi” means gift (a.k.a., “donation”.) Because Land Tax is an example of regulatory/sovereign power.

    So, this means: Gould’s purported position as “Tribal Chairperson” of the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, INC was only stating her position as CEO, and President of The Board of that corporation.

    Even though a Board of Directors is a “council”; a Board of Directors is not a “Tribal Council”.

    And there was no way Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC was representative of a “confederation” of villages, because the chief officers, were all principally related to one another.

    There was no visible representation from any Ohlone Village, specifically. The former Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC only stated they were in occupied name-of-territory-here; but they never alleged that they were from or a representative of any village, specifically.

    Despite the prohibition against nonprofit corporations wielding sovereign power: CVL seemed to exist primarily to fight eminent domain battles in court, using questionable legal theories to back frivolous lawsuits which they had no legitimate standing for; because suing corporations over something you state is “your land” is an exercise of sovereign power.

    The recognition of Corporations as “akin”, or equal to, real Native American Tribal Bands, and Tribal Governments is an error.

    Without correction, this error will result in Real Tribes losing even more land, rights, and recompense for the terror and genocide they survived; and for which the Federal Government entered into treaties granting tribes–like the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area–a landbase; and lots of other things which the Federal Government doesn’t honor today.

    The refusal to cover this issue has created a lot of ignorance.

    And the lack of answers to basic questions people have about East Bay Tribal Culture has created even more confusion.

    But organizations, like Sogorea Te Land Trust, and the former Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC are basically using the ignorance of the general public to divert attention and funds away from the legitimate struggles for Land Back and Federal Re-Recognition of the true descendants of enslaved “Mission Indians” of the San Francisco Bay Area: the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.

    Underneath all of this was the pallor of Corrina Gould’s prior conviction for fraud,

    which I found referenced in a civil “Confession of Judgment”, during a summary search of the Alameda County Superior Court Records. The Criminal Case File itself was destroyed, but the Alameda County Superior Court Criminal Records still had something indexed, which included information about Corrina Gould’s conviction, offense, et cetera.

    I could make this really long. And try to explain to you in excruciating detail, “Why you shouldn’t give money to someone who’s been convicted of fraud.

    I could tell you about Bernie Madoff, Rachel Dolezal, or Yolanda Saldivar…..

    But, honestly, if you got this far down, and you still need another reason to pay attention to the red flags surrounding Corrina Gould….

    I’ve got some great beans I really think you’d be interested in!!!


    Save shellmounds, not parking lots.


    Links:

    Docs:

  • The Side Effects of Institutional Gatekeeping of Tribal Knowledge & Native American Sacred Sites and Cultural Assets

    From the beginning of my life, I never had the opportunity to learn about my culture, or where I was from. For the first 12 years of my life, I never even saw another Paiute person.

    This was because I was adopted at birth. I knew that I was Native American. That I should be on a reservation somewhere in Central California. But, instead, I found myself in Alameda; trying to navigate the expectations and life plans set by my new, white, parents.

    This kind of estrangement is common.

    It comes in many different forms, for many different reasons. Boarding schools are pointed to, most often. But cultural estrangement started in California with the Mission System. It continued on through Mexican Occupation, when the missions were secularized, and “Spanish” land was granted to Mexican citizens, and select Indigenous People, who were associated with the Missions as ranchers and herders, or were deeded land in some other way. This was actually the first Native American “buy-in” that occurred in California.

    When the American government came in, their imperative was to destroy or pacify people who they viewed as “savage”, and sub-human. Giving land to these people who Americans found so hard to wipe off the face of the planet was unheard of. All land, property, and wealth held by the First Californians were immediately seized, destroyed, or transferred to white interlopers.

    Some Native Americans went into hiding. Claimed to be Spanish. (They already spoke Spanish.) …Leaned into their baptismal names.

    This was the second estrangement.

    American Occupation came with a number of different attempts to destroy, pacify, and ultimately assimilate and “breed out the savage”. Each of these attempts divided (and sub-divided) tribal groups; moved us farther and farther away from our homelands, each other, and purposely tried to destroy everything linking us to the old ways. This was a sophisticated attempt at genocide, and population control; and people need to stop minimizing effects of this recent history on Indigenous People in America, today.

    Native American People have been forced to live as Prisoners of War since the 17th Century. For more than three centuries, Indian Children and Infants were taken from their families, and placed into Missions, Orphanages, Boarding Schools, and worse. For most of the 19th and 20th centuries, it was legal for White Women to take Indian Children away from their families, and keep them as “wards”. [Like in the series “Them”.]

    So it’s not uncommon for a Native American Person to be so estranged from their family and culture. To have such a conflicted self-image of what it means to be Native American, and what Native American really is. For Spanglish to be spoken on the rez out here, in California. For former “Mission Indians” to be so heavily involved in the Catholic Church, and the veneration of the Missions.

    But what if a Native American Descendant from California doesn’t want to go to the Catholic or Mormon church to find out about their own people?

    What if they’re tired of listening to a narrative from white people’s perspective? From the Eastern U.S. perspective of tribes like Dine, Lakota, Sioux? From the perspective of people who view Native America as a homogeneous group?

    Where does someone go to find the stories of their specific tribe? The songs of the place they come from? Pictures of their ancestors? The history of their reservation? Where their ancestors lived before that?

    Where do you go when your only sources are generic, pan-Indian narratives, and single-page, one-sentence mentions of your tribe?

    I decided to search historic newspapers, museums, government, and institutional records.

    Historic Newspapers are hard to locate. And even harder to read for free. Many of these newspapers were taken out of circulation, and stored on microfilm. Even more are locked behind Ancestry.com (and affiliate) pay gates, specifically. It is interesting to note that “Ancestry” is based in Salt Lake City, Utah, though.

    Museums store items by the Date Received; not by Keyword, or Subject–which shows that Museums have historically been about accounting and fundraising more than they were about collecting items which they intend to reference, much less curate. This makes the situation even more problematic, because researchers are expected to do the work of tracking something down, and often times creating a new library information system in the process. [Basically, re-cataloging every single object to find the two or three that were actually being sought after.]

    The amount of free labor some museums get on the backs of unpaid researchers is very disproportionate to the amount of useful information researchers actually find when laboring for said museums.

    Government Records only had to be stored for a certain period of time. Certainly, anything more than 100 years old was more likely to be destroyed, than it was preserved. Much of the City of Alameda records were converted to microfilm; combined with transcriptions of the Official Alameda Newspaper of Record, then simply labeled “Historic Rolls”.

    Much of these rolls contained little to no useful information, and was simply a transcribed duplicate of several newspaper reels, which were also available. Still, missing records stymied my search. It almost seemed as if things were intentionally removed from the City of Alameda Historical Record between 1910, and 1960.

    Other cities which were consulted, like Pleasanton, San Leandro, and Hayward, do not have historic newspapers from before the early 1900’s. These inquiries were usually passed on to local museums. Then on to local genealogical and historic societies–where the inquiry usually died. This is to say that there are no contrasting reports available from other historical newspapers (yet.)

    Governmental Chain of Custody

    Furthermore, because of the changeover from Spanish, to Mexican, to American hands: the chain of custody of important documents was broken each time the land changed hands. The U.S. Government was not interested in keeping prior records[; which also explains the fundamental lack of understanding of tribal cultures American anthropologists still experience to this day.]

    This is why the “California Land Grants” case happened, in 1851. Because rich Mexicans (and Spanish ex-pats) were getting jilted out of their land they had old titles to, by white people, who claimed their American land deed superseded any other. (I mean, this is consistent with the U.S. policy of west-ward expansion during the late 1800’s, to test Mexico’s control over ‘The West’, and eventually gain control of California–among other territories.)

    Mission/Spanish/Mexican records are still somewhat of a mystery and records were basically abandoned “as the vine withered”.

    This is because many of the missions and forts Spain installed in California were actually remote forward operating bases.

    Paperwork flowed back through California, to Mexico, and over the Atlantic Ocean, to Spain–when everything was working as planned. This organization was already broken down by “Corporate Office”, “Regional Managers”, “District Managers”, “Store Managers”, “Shift Managers”, and Baristas.

    So, when the Spanish were sent back to Spain, those documents stayed here, were hastily mailed out, or were destroyed.

    When the Missions were secularized, those documents were abandoned, taken by cardinals (or whoever), or destroyed.

    Anything that wasn’t specifically removed and preserved was probably destroyed in the [totally righteous] fires that destroyed many of the the San Francisco Bay Area Catholic Missions the first time.

    So, when it comes time to track down the records of these organizations; it’s necessary to chase them all the way back to the original departments and agencies which created them. This search almost always leads to institutions like the University of California, at Berkeley.

    Why? Because, it turns out, the University of Berkeley Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology, and the U.C. Berkeley Library has the largest collection of relevant materials within 50 miles.

    Institutional Records and Academic Studies

    Academic Institutions, like The Smithsonian, and the University of California, made their names on robbing the graves of Native American and Indigenous People all around the world.

    Thousands upon thousands of bones, and cultural artifacts are in the custody of these institutions, waiting to be returned to their descendants, and laid to rest in the manner of each of their hundreds of individual tribes. More than half of the remains are “tribally unaffiliated”; and stay in limbo, because they have no living descendant to receive them, and no ancestral land to be laid to rest in.

    The “researchers” who did this physically separated people from their final resting places, mixed and miss-matched parts of other people’s bodies together, failed to properly label our ancestors, and now have what amounts to a “spare parts bin” of archaeological malfeasance.

    As much as Archaeologists and Anthropologists would like you to believe the opposite, these bones were found by systematically cutting open cemeteries, and removing rows of bodies under the guise of “legitimate scientific research”.

    They did this all the while wondering, “Where did these people disappear to?”

    Knowing full well that Indian Wars were raging nearby.

    Conflicts such as:

    Sioux Wars – 1854-1891 in the Great Plains
    Ute Wars – 1850-1923 in Utah
    Apache Wars – 1854-1924 in the South-West

    They wondered…

    Even with the knowledge that an Indian Reservation or Indian Town existed within 100 miles of any place mentioned in any anthropological or archaeological study/survey from 1860-1920.

    These “ethnologists”, anthropologists and archaeologists were living through the California Land Grant Cases.

    Anybody in the business of “antiquity” should well know the whereabouts and disposition of any of the Indigenous People whose graves, bones, and property they were “studying”, or auctioning off to private collectors.

    Especially when the battles were making front page news daily.

    There is no answer for this willful ignorance, and unethical exclusion of important facts and datum. The narrative of Native American History, as told by colonizers, is full of these types of falsities, and lies by omission. And things like this really call to question the accuracy, and reliability of any of these works.

    If you can even get access to them.

    Institutional Gatekeeping of Tribally Affiliated Knowledge/Artifacts

    Because Universities, Museums, and other Grave Robbers (“hunters of antiquities”, “tomb raiders”, etc.)–as well as Ethnologists, Linguists, and Archaeologists–stole bodies; sacred, ceremonial, and cultural artifacts; caused the damage and loss of cultural land and sites; and attributed Native American intellectual property to themselves, instead of to the Native American creators of said property;

    And,

    Because of the sustained and forceful objections to the theft and kidnapping of Native American Bodies and Culture by Native Americans, and The Public; as well as demands for the return of Native American Remains and Items & Artifacts:

    The Native American Graves Repatriation Act was enacted Federally, and by the State of California to protect the Graves, Remains, Cultural Sites, Artifacts, and Other Native American Objects within the State; as well as to create a framework for the repatriation of Native American remains in the possession of Universities and Institutions.

    The Native American Heritage Commission was created in California to directly administer these efforts. In 1982, the Commission was authorized to make a determination of “Most Likely Descendant” when Native American remains are found. Most Likely Descendants are people or tribal groups who have documented ties to the land where Native American Graves were disturbed, and Native American bodies have been found. The Native American Heritage Commission is charged with assisting Tribal Notification, and the process of Tribal Consultation by the Most Likely Descendants.

    The tribal consultation process only offers two ways to “mitigate” the damage to Native American Graves, Remains, Landmarks, Objects, and/or other Funerary Things:

    1. Re-bury the remains in a place where they will not be disturbed;
    2. Remove the remains, and return them to the Most Likely Descendant for proper burial.

    The process of notification goes something like this:

    1. Human remains found, notification to Coroner.
    2. Coroner determines remains are Native American, and therefore under the jurisdiction of the California Native American Heritage Commission (CalNAHC).
    3. CalNAHC provides a notification list to property owner. This list contains the contact information for Tribal Groups who are Most Likely Descendant(s) of the Native American body found.
    4. Tribal Group is notified and only has a certain amount of time to make a response as to how the Native American remains should be treated, or how a project can avoid disturbing cultural resources.

    If the Tribe does not respond within 30 days of notice, the developer or property owner will be able to continue work, unencumbered by the Native American Graves Protection Repatriation Act. And, in the case of housing development, the building process will be allowed to be streamlined, via AB 831, an act relating to housing, and declaring the urgency thereof.

    But, if the Most Likely Descendant and Property Owner are not able to reach a compromise….

    Say the MLD wants absolutely no more development of the land; and the property owner (CalTrans, Ruegg & Ellsworth, San Rafael Rock Quarry, etc.) is unable to reach a compromise, the desecration will be allowed to continue if the developer simply alleges they tried their best. The construction just won’t be “streamlined”, and will have to go through the normal Environmental Assessment procedure; and will likely still result in the destruction or desecration of Tribal Cultural Resources.

    The aforementioned refers to situations where Native American Graves and/or Remains (funerary objects, etc.) have been found.

    CalNAHC also plays a role when Public Entities, like Caltrans, Amtrak, Los Angeles Public Works, East Bay Municipal Utility District, East Bay Recreation and Parks Department, the City of Menlo Park, etc., want to develop anything on what’s considered “public land” or subsidized by public funds.

    We’re talking: Public Works Projects, Improvement Projects…. Things which translate into freeway on or off-ramps, giant rain water caches underneath Glen Cove Park (in Vallejo, California), water pumps in Alameda, Treasure Island, San Francisco… BART stations, Water Treatment Plants… And more.

    All of these places around us started as project proposals.

    And each proposal needs to comply with local, state, and federal law. Each facility, site, or subject property–after being built–needs to operate in compliance with local state, and federal law.

    Namely: CEQA. The California Environmental Quality Act.

    CEQA was one of the first set of laws that recognized Native American Graves, Objects, etc., as being valuable, and worth saving.

    Because of CEQA, when these proposed public works projects, projects on public land, or projects using public money, are submitted, they are also required to perform an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

    You’ve probably seen the Public Notice of Hearing(s) that are posted on the front of buildings, or on the fences outside of where buildings once stood.

    These are Required Notices to The Public. You. These hearings decide the very fate of the sacred places which have, up to this point, become Shopping Malls, and Subdivisions with Waterside Parks.

    These Notices tell you when a Water Treatment Plant, Waste Management Facility, Shooting Range, or Quarrying Operation has an upcoming Permit Hearing.

    In fact, multi-year operations, like the San Rafael Rock Quarry, are required to resubmit an Environmental Impact Report periodically, and submit to a public hearing (to the County Board of Supervisors, in this case), to keep their permits, and continue operating.

    These EIA’s are often very long (more than 40 pages,) and contain a multitude of very technical information regarding the current state of the land intended to be “used”, and the speculative impact of the operations intended upon said land (e.g. pollution, destruction of natural habitat, etc.) The specifics change with every project. However, the demands of the Environmental Impact Assessment remain constant.

    Recently, the passage of Assembly Bill 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) codified the inclusion of a single question regarding “Tribal Cultural Resources”:

    Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

    a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or

    b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.”

    Because of this, the California Native American Heritage Commission is charged with yet another duty: maintaining a Tribal Contact List for CEQA Purposes, per AB 52 (CA PRC §21080.3.1…); and when Cities and Municipalities create their General Plan [among other things], per SB 18 (CA GOV §65352.3).

    The California Native American Graves Protection Repatriation Act, and the authoritative statutes empowering the California Native American Heritage Commission, specifically state the importance of the “confidentiality of information regarding specific identity, location, character, and use of those [Native American] places, features, and objects.”

    In the courts, this has often played out as the misreading of statute from “confidential” to “secret”. However, statutes surrounding the confidentiality of Native American (Tribal) Cultural Resources simply state that NAHC is “not required” to disclose certain records, or information specifically enumerated in the California Government, and Health & Safety Codes.

    The statutory scheme, as it stands:

    requires Tribal Cultural Assets to be listed (in a confidential appendix) in Environmental Impact Assessments. The specific information regarding the Tribal Cultural Resource is hidden. But general, non-confidential information regarding the Existence Of A Tribal Cultural Resource that could be significantly effected by a proposed project should be published and made available to the general public. [PRC §21082.3(f)]

    These public sections of the Proposed Environment Impact Report, or Proposed Negative Impact (“Declaration”), which mentions “Tribal Cultural Resources”, will be small. Maybe the heading won’t even catch your eye. And the “general information” presented on the document will minimize the existence of Tribal Cultural Resources, even though the report is supposed to clarify how significantly the Tribal Cultural Resource will be affected.

    In fact, the EIR, or Negative Impact Declaration, is supposed to tell you how damage to Tribal Cultural Resources could have been mitigated, or the circumstances behind why the destruction of Tribal Cultural Resources was “unavoidable”. It should say whether or not Tribal Consultation (or “Scoping Activities”) were conducted or concluded, or if an agreement was reached with the direct Lineal, or Most Likely Descendants of the Tribal Cultural Resource.

    The EIR, or Negative Impact Declaration should make it clear whether or not the tribe even responded to invitations for consultation. That information should be in bold. But it’s not. And, who actually knows how to read an Environmental Impact Report?

    At some point, we have to realize that our ignorance is being taken advantage of every day.

    The fact that we are distracted every single waking second is an advantage that is being leveraged against us in the long wars of attrition against corporations and governments who want nothing more than to exploit our land, and tear the bodies of our ancestors out of the ground to build condos that cost $1.5-2M, each.

    This is why property owners refuse to register Native American Historical Sites. Because this land is worth more money than many of the people who live on it will see in our entire lives. This land is worth more than us. And erasing us, or creating a statutory scheme that makes it easy to disregard Native American objections to the desecration and theft of our land, also makes money for themselves while they do it.

    This is a Billion dollar industry that Native American “Consultants” are sucking the dew off of in only the most parasitic, “bottom-feeder” kind of way. The disrespect to the bodies of our elders. Our great grandparents…. It’s all just for the zero’s.

    No matter how the statute is written. No matter how much commitment legislators and politicians can claim to have, the easy-out that Developers and Governmental Agencies has hinges upon the responsibility of a Tribal Organization to respond to these “invitations” for tribal “scoping” and “consultation”.

    The statute presupposes that Government Agencies and Developers are law-abiding. But, when it comes to the required “consultation” with Native American Tribes, Lineal, or Most Likely Descendants… all of the exceptions hinge upon the “nonparticipation” of Native Americans.

    (d) In addition to other provisions of this division, the lead agency may certify an environmental impact report or adopt a mitigated negative declaration for a project with a significant impact on an identified tribal cultural resource only if one of the following occurs:

    (1) The consultation process between the California Native American tribe and the lead agency has occurred as provided in Sections 21080.3.1 and 21080.3.2 and concluded [in an agreement with Tribal Consultants.]

    (2) The California Native American tribe has requested consultation pursuant to Section 21080.3.1 and has failed to provide comments to the lead agency, or otherwise failed to engage, in the consultation process.

    (3) The lead agency has complied with subdivision (d) of Section 21080.3.1 and the California Native American tribe has failed to request consultation within 30 days.

    Assembly Bill 52

    According to Assembly Bill 831, housing projects meeting the above criteria would still be “streamlined”, removing most of the public response and permit hurdles necessary for quick development.

    The problem is that Native American Graves, Cemeteries, Cultural Sites, and Sacred Lands are still being given the green-light for demolition.

    They are being rubber-stamped for desecration by a function of law that simply added Notification, and “Due Process” instead of actual Justice, and Accountability.

    There must be a way to advocate for Native American Tribal Cultural Resources, like Graves, Cemeteries, and Sacred Places, when Lead Agencies and Private Developers receive no response through the Tribal Contact List.

    Either the Native American Heritage Commission must step up for all of these places, or they need to devise an apparatus that will allow true conservation work (the very basis of NAHC’s Mission) to take place without them.


    Stay tuned for more.

  • Who are the people who inhabited the area now known as the City of Alameda?

    A Frequently Asked Question about Ohlone People, the First Alamedans, and the Tribe Fighting for Federal Re-Recognition.

    This is one such reply.

    (more…)