For real, though, once they run out, it’s going to be a minute before another run is printed. And you’ll be forced to make due with one of our other awesome maps.
Nothing about this is an act of charity, or legitimate “return” of native land. The fact that the property being purchased is a 2.2 acre parking lot–instead of a real shellmound–is kind of embarrassing; especially because these headlines are so wrong.
Just because the City of Berkeley City Council voted on an agenda item with the title:
Adopt first reading of an Ordinance authorizing the City to acquire the portion of the West Berkeley Shellmound located at 1900 Fourth Street and also authorizing the City to transfer that property to the Sogorea Te Land Trust, thereby returning the land to the Ohlone people.
Does not mean that land is actually being returned to Ohlone people.
It’s a conclusory statement based on the bandwagon fallacy: that donating money, creating cultural easements, and transferring property to the Sogorea Te Land Trust benefits Ohlone people.
And this false equivocation between a non-Ohlone organization, and “The Ohlone People” is dangerously close to the impersonation of a tribe. Especially when the transfer of money, property and benefits meant for the enjoyment of an Ohlone Tribe goes to an organization which is neither a Tribe, nor Ohlone.
2. The City of Berkeley did not Buy the West Berkeley Shellmound
The City of Berkeley only chipped in about $1.5 Million worth of City Money. That’s less than 10% of the total purchase cost of the West Berkeley Parking Lot–which is $27 Million Dollars.
I just want to note that the Valuation for the land at 1900 4th Street, which are two parcels [57-2101-1-3, and 57-2101-5], is currently $9,690,000.00 (or $9.69M).
…And also let you know that the valuation for this property jumped between 2022, and 2023; from a combined (Land + Improvements) value of $1,306,140, to its current, $9,690,000. That’s a difference of $8,383,860 in value, in just one year. I’m not sure if this has to do with $60K worth of delinquent property taxes being paid in December 2023. But there hasn’t been any obvious change on the ground which would indicate a higher valuation.
All of this is to say that a purchase cost of $27 Million Dollars is way more than what the land is worth.
So, there’s actually a really good chance the inflated cost of the property includes legal fees and losses involved in the decade long struggle of the property.
And, if that’s true, this is much more of a win for the developers than it is for anyone else. Like, $18 Million Dollars more.
3. Sogorea Te Land Trust is Not An Ohlone Tribe or Organization
Sogorea Te is not even an Ohlone word. Sogorea Te is a place name for Glen Cove, in Vallejo, which is currently Wintun and Patwin Territory.
Sogorea Te Land Trust is a non-profit Land Trust that’s supposedly gathering money to purchase [Ohlone] land to return to indigenous people; support “rematriation”; and create urban gardens, and community centers.
However….
None of the money Sogorea Te Land Trust has raised, has benefited any actual Bay Area Tribe.
The only group benefitting from the Sogorea Te Land Trust’s work seems to be a corporation posing as a Tribal Government, the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.
But the fact that:
Sogorea Te Land Trust is so often being confused with an Ohlone Tribe, or representing an Ohlone Tribe; and the fact that,
Sogorea Te is now accepting land on behalf of “the Ohlone people”; and the fact that,
Sogorea Te Land Trust is not correcting this misidentification, false equivocation, or,
Making it clear that the Sogorea Te Land Trust is not an Ohlone tribe, and does not speak for one…
Means that the Sogorea Te Land is getting closer and closer to impersonating a tribe, or at least benefitting from the false impression that the Land Trust is an Ohlone Tribe or Ohlone Tribal Organization–which it is not.
4. The West Berkeley Shellmound is not “endangered”
It’s destroyed.…
But it’s easier for people to believe they are helping to “undo”, or “right centuries of wrong” by allowing a Land Trust to purchase an insignificant piece of what’s left of the West Berkeley Shellmound.
Wallace, W.; Lathrap, D. (1975) Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Vol. 29, “West Berkeley (CA-Ala-307): A Culturally Stratified Shellmound on the East Shore of San Francisco Bay” https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4616g044
I would argue: the only reason the West Berkeley Shellmound has received so much attention is because it’s a flat, empty space which is easy to fit a hundred protestors on top of. [Other shellmounds are behind fences, and protected by Oil, Quarry and Other Industries’ Private Security Companies.]
But, as a sacred site that needs protecting, the West Berkeley Shellmound is at the bottom of the list–mostly because it’s already 👏🏽 been 👏🏽 destroyed 👏🏽; and, also, because the Spenger’s Parking Lot is not where the shellmound used to be.
Map of West Berkeley showing CA-Ala-307 (West Berkeley Shellmound)
The historic location of the West Berkeley Shellmound is on the other side of the train tracks, under what’s now mostly a Truitt & White Lumber Yard.
5. Lisjan has never been the name of any Ohlone Tribe
Lisjan (or “lisyan”) does not appear in any historic mission records–or anywhere else–until 1921: when a Muwekma Ohlone ancestor (Jose Guzman) said “Yo soy lisjanes“, to define himself as someone from the Bernal, and Alisal Rancherias, in what’s known as Pleasanton today.
Aside from the fact that “Lisjan” appears in an interview of Muwekma ancestor Jose Guzman, which occurred about 87 years after the secularization of the Missions in California: there is nothing to prove that an Ohlone village named Lisjan ever existed. In fact, the only thing passages referring to “Lisjan” prove is that “Lisjan” is the place name for Pleasanton, California; not East Oakland–where Corrina Gould claims the “Lisjan” homeland is.
To dive in deeper to the references of “Lisjan” in the 1921 interview of Jose Guzman: Guzman was busy discussing how his family came from the North–which was Nisenan territory, where the word “Lisjan” came from–to Pleasanton. In this passage, Guzman talked about his family’s history, and of his grandfather speaking Russian.
But, let’s be clear: Lisjan is not an Ohlone word at all.
So a woman calling herself the chairperson of an Ohlone “tribe” (which is supposedly a “confederation” of Ohlone villages) named after Pleasanton, but based in East Oakland, should be considered extremely suspect. 🚩🚩🚩
But Corporations are not Tribal Governments, because Tribal Governments are Sovereign Nations which exist outside of the normal U.S. Corporate Structure.
7. Corrina Gould isn’t a tribal chairperson.
There are a number of different reasons why Corrina Gould is not a Tribal Chairperson. The fact that the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. is not a tribe is the strongest. And it’s evidenced on the faces of everyone you see in every picture of CVL’s “tribal members”.
Real Tribal Leaders are actually voted for by Tribal Members who represent all the different families which make up a Tribe.
Look at the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area:
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe was federally recognized; they have a documented 10,000 year history continuous habitation in the San Francisco Bay Area; not just Federal Documentation, but family trees, and DNA documentation directly linked to archaeological sites.
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is comprised of all the remaining known Indian lineages who survived the California Missions. They have over 614 enrolled tribal members.
The reason why the Muwekma Ohlone tribe seems like it’s “The San Jose Tribe”, or is only in Santa Clara is because Mission San Jose was down in Fremont. That’s where all the “Indians” got let out from when the Mission systems closed down. So that’s why the Governor issued an order re: squatters on Mission Lands; and why the present-day Muwekma population is distributed the way it is. [That is a completely different historical topic for another day.]
“But we have members all over the Bay Area,” Muwekma Chairwoman Charlene Nijmeh told me. This includes places outside of San Jose, like Castro Valley, Oakland, Berkeley, San Francisco–and even in Manteca, and Sacramento, and beyond.
But this is an argument about Traditional, Hereditary Muwekma Territory. And that territory includes Berkeley, and Oakland, and Alameda, and Albany. This whole area is Muwekma Ohlone Territory. The only reason they’re not here is because they haven’t got their land back.
When you look closer, the “tribe” Corrina Gould purports to represent is comprised only of her own immediate family members.
Official Portraits of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, Inc. have never shown many (if any) members of the tribe Corrina Gould purports to be the Chairwoman of.
Take this into consideration when you compare the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. to real tribes, like the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area–which has 600+ members from many different families, who have well-documented, hereditary links to their land and ancestors.
If Corrina Gould were really trying to educate the public, she would have told you the truth a long time ago, and actually stepped aside to let the real tribe she came from benefit from the work she purports to do “for Ohlone people”–instead of doing it for her personal benefit, and the benefit of her immediate family members.
It’s up to you to educate yourself before you give money, land, or support to Native People.
We get it, you feel guilty about what your ancestors did Native Americans.
But your desperation to absolve yourself of your White Guilt, and the Sins of Colonization lead you into problematic “fixes”, following straw man causes which end up contributing to the erasure of the very people you’re trying to help.
The Alameda Native Food Project is a program offered by the Alameda Native History Project, which seeks to educate the public about Traditional Native American Ingredients, Cooking Methods, and Contemporary Indigenous Cuisine.
The Native Food Project is a wonderful opportunity to learn more about Native American connections to the natural world through the food they cultivate and enjoy.
Share the Experiences, Ingredients and Cooking Methods you learn at the Food Project with your family and loved ones!
Become a Food Ambassador
Introduce your friends to the delicious, nutritious, indigenous ingredients you learned about at the Native Food Project!
Food is the best way to travel the world and learn about other cultures and history without ever leaving home!
Join us for a series of workshops offered throughout the year.
Wait up… I thought this program was called the “Indigenous Food Lab“???
Funny story…
It turns out the term “Indigenous Food Lab” was trademarked.
So now the program is called the Alameda Native Food Project.
You can contribute to the annual Alameda Acorn Harvest by giving us access to the ground around your Oak Trees. (Yes, it’s that easy.)
During the Alameda Oak Tree Survey, we identified 405 properties; which host at least one Oak Tree. Those locations were cross-referenced with the Alameda County Parcel Map; resulting in the discovery of 440 parcels.
During our survey, we identified at least 405 properties which have Oak Trees.
Once everything was processed and plugged into our GIS systems, we were able to identify the footprint of Alameda’s “Bolsa de Encinal“.
1859 Coast Survey Map showing “The Encinal”.
What is la Bolsa De Encinal?
→Bolsa; Spanish, noun.: meaning bag, or purse
→Encinal; Spanish, noun.: meaning Holm Oak grove
→Alameda; Spanish, noun.: poplar grove
→Bolsa de Encinal: Purse of Oaks [It sounds better in Spanish.]
→Encinal de San Antonio: San Antonio Oak Grove
This place we call “Alameda” has been known by many names. All of them have referred to the oak grove (or forest).
La Bolsa de Encinal came about because this place (a peninsula) was like a little pouch or purse attached to the mainland. A purse of oak trees….
The Encinal, or Encinal de San Antonio, literally means “the oak grove”, or “San Antonio Oak Grove”.
And “Alameda” itself means a (poplar) grove of trees.
But make no mistake: “Alameda” is unceded Muwekma Ohlone Territory.
2024 Alameda Oak Tree Survey
Looking at this image, you might not be able to fully recognize the actual density of what we discovered represents an urban forest right where the “historic Bolsa de Encinal used to be.”
The real take-away was that you can’t talk about Alameda’s Oak Forest as a thing of the past.
Alameda’s Oak Forest
Sure, it can be hard to see when you’re surrounded by Victorian houses, and mid-century apartment buildings….
But when you take a step back and look at the big picture: you can see it clearly.
The Oak Forest of Alameda. Bolsa de Encinal.
Despite the fact that many of the oldest Oak Trees in Alameda have been felled by mismanagement, habitat loss, and development; there were still plenty of big old healthy Oak Trees that we found all over the city of Alameda.
We also learned that Coastal Live Oaks (queercus agrifolia) have been designated as a “protected tree” by the City of Alameda (A.M.C. §13-21.7[c]).
And that same code section states: “Any oak tree shall be replaced with a minimum of [two] oak trees”.
This means Alameda’s Oak Forest is not only alive and well, but the island itself is subject to some reforestation efforts.
Why did we perform this survey, anyway?
This survey was necessary to plan for the Alameda 2024 City-Wide Acorn Harvest; which is happening this September and October.
Check out the Oak Tree Registration Form to learn more about how property owners with Oak Trees can contribute to our first annual acorn harvest.
If you are a property owner with an Oak Tree on your property, check out this Oak Tree Registry Form to learn about the specific ways property owners can contribute to our harvest.
If you represent a local business, organization, class, school, or community group, or tribe, and you want to participate in planning, organizing, and/or any other aspect of these activities, reach out via email.
Or, use the form below:
Harvest/Oak Tree Contact Form
[contact-form-7 id=”b1779e1″ title=”Oak Tree Harvest Survey Contact Form”]
The Alameda Native History Project is proud to announce their Cultural & Educational Program Offerings for 2024-2025.
2024 Acorn Granary Challenge
Beginning July 1, 2024; and, Ending on July 31, 2024.
Mix modern and traditional methods of acorn granary construction to create a semi-permanent structure which will hold the acorns from our First Annual Acorn Harvest.
The challenge is creating something that will withstand the elements over winter.
We will meet as a team to construct these Acorn Granaries. Together we will learn about the different kinds of Acorn Granaries; integrated pest management uses of California Native Plants; and how indigenous technology works to keep food safe for centuries.
This is a series of free events which happens 10am-2pm Every Sunday in July.
Take part in the First Annual Alameda Acorn Harvest.
Learn about the ancient Live Oak Forests of this place now called “Alameda”. Learn about the nutritional value and the cultural significance of acorns.
There are a number of different ways in which everyone can participate. Please check out the list of roles available on the Sign-Up Form, right after our Community Guidelines.
Snacks, Water, Coffee, and Lunch, will be provided.
A Never-Before-Seen Map of Alameda’s Indigenous History
Can you imagine elk running down Park Street?
Cotton Tail Rabbits hopping among giant Live Oak trees on Grand?
Gathering blackberries at Chochenyo Park? Oysters on Regent? Making tule boats at Alameda Point?
This map combines historic elements to tell the story of Alameda before.
Developed for elementary and middle-school students to learn about local indigenous history: this map shows Alameda–before it became an island–with selected plants and animals that lived and thrived here.
These plants and animals include: Wildcats, Ducks, Blackberries, Deer, Flamingoes, and more!
This map includes the historic wetlands of the Bay Area; and the Oyster Reef zones in Alameda, two never-before-seen layers of local history (until now.)
This map is a tool that can help people imagine the ecosystems organizations like the Wild Oyster Project, and Save The Bay are working towards saving and restoring.
Imagination is one of the strongest tools in the decolonization toolbox.
One of the ways the Alameda Native History Project “Decolonizes History” is by developing, producing, and distributing accurate, relevant, and interesting educational materials for Classrooms, Community Centers, and Institutions.
The Alameda Native History Project offers updated, often novel, and never-before-seen images, maps, and infographs about the Indigenous History of this place we call the “San Francisco Bay Area”.
Our continued impact will be measured by the number of classrooms we connect with the maps and information educators want and need to fill the gaps in existing curriculum regarding local indigenous history.
This will result in students who can finally receive the answer to the basic questions about Native American History. Questions, which–until now–have simply been glossed over or ignored in mainstream, sanitized, Social Science, History, and Arts & Humanities curriculums.
The proceeds of this fundraiser will go towards putting one of these maps in every core/history class and school library in Alameda.
If you make a minimum donation of $25, and include your mailing address in the comment on this donation form (your comment is private), you will receive a Historic Alameda Ecology Map.
5% of the cost of printing will go back to local Alameda schools.*
You can have a direct impact on Decolonizing History, too!
By providing tangible support for our mission, you can be the reason why people know this is Ohlone Land; why that makes it our responsibility to be good stewards to the land; and how important it is for us to respect Indigenous knowledge and lived experiences, and advocate for the return of sacred places, tribal objects, and ancestral remains.
Alameda Native History Project is fiscally sponsored by The Hack Foundation (d.b.a. Hack Club), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit (EIN: 81-2908499).
*5% of total cost goes back to school via printer’s giveback program on a per transaction basis. We choose the Alameda school recipient.
By now there should be no doubt that most museums, which display or hold Native American artifacts, directly benefit from grave robbing, or the often racist, prejudiced language and ignorant beliefs regarding Native Americans first uttered by now dead anthropologists [like Alfred Kroeber], and perpetuated by the ailing volunteers and aging septuagenarians responsible for interpreting and curating these artifacts today.
Many of these museums do no care to get the information or facts straight, and continue to present California Native Americans as “extinct”, “disappeared”, and brush off or dismiss any mention of actual living Native people as someone trying to raise trouble.
Advocates for the truthful portrayal, accurate naming, and return of tribal objects and remains are often called “hostile”, dismissed as rabble rousers, and subjected to projection by the very people who should have read White Fragility.
Even more infuriating is the belief consulting with any Native American individual on any subject–whether or not it’s related to the stolen Tribal Grave Goods or Ceremonial Objects in these Museum’s possession–is used as cover for the Museum to continue to disregard the wishes of the very real, and still living Native American people who have a lawful claim, and a legal right to demand the return and repatriation of these Native American Tribal Resources and Cultural Objects.
In fact, many of the people museums choose to consult with regarding Native American artifacts are not Native Americans at all.
Truthfully, Native American people are consistently shut out of events, exhibitions and lectures about their own culture and identity.
A lot of apologists will say “it’s not like this anymore”; or dismiss the Standard Operating Procedures museums as a thing of the past…. But these conditions till persist.
Native American People continue to be discounted, ignored; and their history, culture and contributions continue to be minimized and ignored.
But the truth remains: The artifacts and objects on display in most museums have been stolen from Native American People, their graves, and do not belong to the museums who refuse to return them.
There are three main reasons why Museums refuse to return Tribal Cultural Objects.
The first is that there is no Federally Recognized Tribe which claims these objects to return them to. This is especially true for the Repatriation of Native American Remains.
It’s a shame that these institutions are unwilling to do the research and work necessary to properly identify Tribal Cultural Objects and Native American Remains to repatriate the same way they did the research to identify and prepare the same goods and burials for exhibition.
It’s despicable the way Museums claim such helplessness and ignorance when it comes time to give stolen objects back, even though the exact same objects are the she subjects of fundraising events and lectures proudly given by white anthropologists, and non-native experts, even today.
Charlene Nijmeh, the Chairwoman of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, talks about how the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe was removed from the rolls of Native American Tribes simply for the purpose of denying Ohlone people in the San Francisco Bay Area their right to a tribal land base; because land in the Bay Area is so valuable.
In this same way, institutions like the University of California Berkeley (which holds the remains of thousands of Native Americans) are incentivized to claim an inability to identify which tribes the bodies in their crypt belong to.
So, too, are Museums incentivized to weaponize their incompetence in order to keep their pilfered goods.
This is a completely reprehensible argument that bears no merit, as far as I’m concerned. Simply because these same people would not agree that their family members are more valuable being dug up, defiled in the name of science, and put on display without so much of a whisper of their name or life’s story.
It’s worth saying, “If you’re not okay with your grandma being dug up and put on display, why are you doing it to mine?”
The blatant disrespect of Native American Graves as things which can be dug up, broken, moved to a landfill, reburied, and used as overspread is something which has been enabled by the statements of people like Alfred Kroeber, who explicitly declared entire tribes of Native Americans (like Ohlone people) “extinct”.
It s because these remains are considered “ancient”, or attributed to a time before our modern history where no living descendants exist–“pre-historic” for all intents and purposes–that oil companies, city, state and federal governments have dug up the bodies of our ancestors with impunity. And why money is still being given to universities to study our ancestors’ remains, even today.
But this is a fallacy, because Native American people are not extinct; they have not disappeared. We are still here, today. And we do not want anyone digging up our relatives to build pipelines, parking lots… or “for science”. Period!
(How come laws against the abuse of a corpse apply to every body except for Native American bodies?)
The third, and final, reason why institutions refuse to even consider returning stolen Native American artifacts to tribes is an extension of the preceding “more valuable for science” reasoning.
However, the very basis of some museums’ refusal to return tribal objects is clearly rooted in the scarcity mindset.
Museum Fallacy #3:
“If we give away all of our artifacts, we won’t have any left!”
“If we give away all of our artifacts, we won’t have any left!” This was actually said to me by a volunteer at the Alameda Museum.
This is dissonant because many museum’s holdings are made of stolen property. Repatriation is the only correct course of action; anything less is a travesty.
This standing also presumes the only thing of value the museum has to offer is the exhibition of original artifacts, no matter how broken or uninteresting those artifacts are; and, in spite of the fact that curators and museum staff and volunteers have no […] clue how those objects are used, where they actually came, or what the history of their use and development is.
In all of this, there is not even a hint of concern about whether or not the museum has a duty to investigate/research, find, and try to contact the tribe associated with the Native American objects and artifacts in their possession.
Consideration of actual Native American People is so far removed from the discussion, it’s a little ridiculous.
Representation of average museum volunteer docents. (AI-generated.)
The idea that there aren’t enough artifacts is a fallacy based upon a false sense of ownership and authority magically imbued by the mere possession of these stolen grave goods.
The implied scarcity mindsight that the only thing which gives museums like the Alameda Museum any value is a handful of broken pieces of bones and tools–which no one knows the use for (or even the names of)–is laughable in its appeal to ignorance.
The fact that Alameda Museum is not, and has never been, the place to see Native American artifacts belies this mindset as a straw man argument for the lack of interest or determination of the museum to change or do any better. But, in the end, it’s the museum which must do the work.
So let’s get down to brass tax here:
Museums need to get real about the fact that no one cares whether or not they exhibit real artifacts if their exhibits are trash and don’t actually provide any education value; especially if Museum Staff & Volunteers don’t know anything about them. [There’s no value here.]
Returning Native American Grave Goods is the right thing to do. (It’s probably illegal for museums to possess them.) And Museums owe money, and other restitution, to Tribes for their illegal conversion of Tribal Property.
Contacting Tribes to begin the repatriation process is necessary.
Museums need to seriously consider purchasing replicas made by Native American artisans in exchanging for the return of Grave Good and Ceremonial Objects.
Museums are required to pay Indigenous People for their time and consultation at a rate commensurate with like professionals in the same or similar industries–regardless of whether or not those Indigenous Consultants have any academic credentials.
Indigenous Peoples’ lived experiences and actual subject matter expertise are more valuable than any degree.
Indigenous science is valid.
Indigenous science is a distinct, time-tested, and methodological knowledge system that can enhance and complement western science. Indigenous science is about the knowledge of the environment and knowledge of the ecosystem that Indigenous Peoples have. It is the knowledge of survival since time immemorial and includes multiple systems of knowledge(s) such as the knowledge of plants, the weather, animal behavior and patterns, birds, and water among others.
Indigenous people are experts.
Museums will do well to remember these facts when treating Indigenous People with the reverence and respect they deserve.
Alameda Native History Project has a standing policy to never contact or involve Tribal Members or Tribes unless there is a clear and tangential Tribal Benefit To Participation.
And as a direct response to the continuing tokenization and empty promises of non-indigenous corporations, governments, and individuals who seek to monetize the appearance of Indigenous People at their events, solely for the exclusive benefit of the hosting organization/corporation.
And, while people like Corrina Gould are more than happy to take a check for their appearance, and play the part of a Tribal Chairperson; the real Indians–bona fide Native Americans–actual, self-respecting Indigenous People–will likely never respond to these invitations.
Because Land Acknowledgements don’t mean shit to someone looking across the sea of pale faces who now occupy their tribal territory, destroy their tribal homelands, and want us to acknowledge that this land is stolen by the very same people who are giving us these false platitudes and empty promises.
I mean… really… how do “well-meaning”, “progressive”, non-indigenous people manage to come up with more and more ritually ridiculous ways to re-traumatize a group of people they tried to murder, and wipe off the planet?
And they think letting us tell them they’re thieving, murderous interlopers is doing us a favor? No, Land Acknowledgments are yet another song and dance indigenous people are being expected to perform (for free) to put white people at ease.
The earliest examples of the Land Acknowledgment ritual goes back to Australia in the form of a “Welcome to Country” ritual, which is meant to put newcomers at ease, in order to form a friendly relationship between indigenous people, and their visitors, so mutually beneficial exchanges can begin between the two groups.
[Read that as: Welcome to Country rituals were created by aboriginal people to appease white people, and put them at ease in order to foster an exploitive/extractive interaction which didn’t result in aboriginal people being massacred; yet. See also: Dear White People, and, What It Means to Be Unapologetically Black, to understand why “putting white people at ease” is even a thing.]
Mind you, every interaction with white people during the “Discovery Era” was exploitive and extractive; and, of course, only benefitted the colonizer with free food, riches, labor, etc.
It’s important to note the similarities between the intent of both Aboriginal Australians, and Indigenous, and First Peoples of the Americas, when meeting newcomers.
In a very American context: Native Americans dancing exhibitions commonly occurred at Forts and Missions to appease visiting dignitaries and military officials; and were another way for indigenous people to ensure their ongoing survival. By making their captors look good in front of their superiors, and put white people at ease in doing so. [“Look how well he commands the savages under his control!”]
Veritably, the white-washed version of the “discovery” and “founding” of America includes references to the “First Thanksgiving” as a celebration of how Native people “helped” white people to survive a place these Colonizers knew nothing about, and would have perished in, if left on their own.
The clean, anesthetized, version of White History yields so many selfless examples of Indigenous generosity and kindness.
And demonizes the audacity of indigenous people who object to the taking of their land, destruction of their resources, and kidnapping, enslavement and abuse, and murder, of their people.
Such examples of White-Washed History include:
“The Indians gave us their food so we could live,”
“The Indians agreed to move off their land so we could build our cities,”
The Indians agreed that white people were superior, and decided to learn their language, religion, and culture, so they could finally abandon their dirty, heathenness savagery and live clean and pure, like God intended.
It’s all so guilt free.
White History carries with it a sense of smugness and blamelessness, which purports to release all white people, all colonizers (and their descendants), of the liability for their damages, ill-doings, and complicity, in what today are called War Crimes, and Crimes Against Humanity….
And Land Acknowledgments are just another way to side step “all of that ugliness.”
Using Indigenous People to perform Land Acknowledgments gives white people another way to avoid acknowledging the ugliness of their ancestors. Because it makes us apologize for them, for everything they did, including stealing our land.
Even worse, Indigenous People giving Land Acknowledgments can sometimes give corporations and organizations the green light to continue desecrating sacred land, exploiting natural resources, and completely disregard indigenous people from that point on because we already apologized for them.
And, even more worse than that: when indigenous people give headdresses out to people like The Pope: it really signals absolute forgiveness for something which white people haven’t even begun to admit to, much less atone for; and releases them from the burden of ever performing a genuine confession, reconciliation and/or atonement.
Most of the time, Land Acknowledgments are used in the place of real soul-searching, and a meaningful truth and reconciliation process.
When pressed, organizations will fess up pretty quickly:
“We didn’t invite you here to acknowledge the wrong-doings of our ancestors, or the continuing injustices against Native Americans we commit, or are complicit in….
“We really just wanted someone with shell jewelry and feathers to burn sage, give a blessing–and play the part of what we believe an idealized Native American should look like, so we can check that box on our Diversity Equity and Inclusion component for this year….
“We didn’t actually mean to do any work.“
But maybe you should do the work of making sure the tribe you contact is bona fide; making sure the money you donate actually benefits indigenous people; and making sure you understand that land acknowledgments are meaningless tokenization without true tribal benefits.
On Monday, September 4, 2023, the City of Alameda’s five-year agreement with the Alameda Museum to provide archival storage expired.
According to the agreement, the Alameda Museum, as an Independent Contractor, would provide the following:
Be open to the public for free at least 15 hours a week.
Be open for free group tours, especially for education based groups.
Store historical records of the city and provide archival preservation.
Dedicate 25% of warehouse to archival storage.
Dedicate an additional 25% of warehouse to the City’s historical exhibits, including documents and photo archives from the Library, City records, Police and Fire Departments, Alameda Recreation and Park Department, and other City records.
Assist with providing archive digital photos and text for City historical interpretive signage as requested.
The agreement made it clear the Alameda Museum is a Service Provider; and not a Civil Servant.
The agreement also provided a standard of care:
Provider agrees to perform all services hereunder in a manner commensurate with the prevailing standards of like professionals or service providers… all services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel[.]
Service Provider Agreement Between the City of Alameda and the Alameda Museum executed 09/05/2018
In the Recitals, the Agreement states that the Alameda Museum “possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, volunteer and staff time, and knowledge to provide the services described in this agreement on the terms and conditions described herein.”
But, even when this was signed, in 2018, the Alameda Museum didn’t possess any of the skill, experience, ability or background to perform these services.
George Gunn wasn’t qualified to preserve historical documents; and he didn’t.
George Gunn was an architect; not a serious records preservationist, or an archivist. Sure, he was able to inventory houses outside of the museum. But he never inventoried or organized the inside of museum in any useful or practical way–and this is a truth uncovered by what was supposed to be a routine records request that started almost four years ago.
Before 2019, the Alameda Museum had never bothered to organize the catalogue by Keyword, or Date.
Museum staff had simply redirected visitors to the Alameda Free Library, hoping the Library would do the Museum’s heavy lifting for them; instead of providing access to the relevant materials the Library actually transferred to the Museum.
This is why it always feels like a run-around.
Because the Alameda Museum always tries to redirect you to Alameda Free Library, even if the Library referred you to the Museum.
But this story lead straight to the Alameda Museum from the beginning; and I was not going to be redirected. I had the receipts.
I was following up on a number of items referenced in historical newspapers as donated to the Alameda Library; so I knew those items were in the possession of the Alameda Museum because of the transfer.
Of course the Museum didn’t know what I was talking about at first, and forced me to show them my sources to validate my inquiry.
Despite inheriting such a well organized, and cross-referenced volume of data and objects from the library, the Alameda Museum still managed to index it in a way that made it impossible to search the historical City Records, and City Exhibits. This was the second major hurdle.
When George Gunn finally left, the shadow of his leadership still remained.
The Museum Warehouse was not indexed. And, despite the efforts of the Museum’s volunteers, many of Alameda Museum’s holdings that were indexed, were indexed incorrectly.
This isn’t just proof Alameda Museum wasn’t in compliance with their contract; these circumstances underscore the need for the Archives to be maintained and preserved by a qualified Archival Preservation specialist.
Identification, dating, authentication and assignment of keywords of Alameda Museum’s artifacts needs to be performed by qualified persons. Data Entry and Cross-Referencing of existing card catalogs needs to be performed accurately, and with care.
And this is not to mention the financial and existential challenges George Gunn left Alameda Museum Board Members to deal with in his wake.
None of this is an excuse for the fact the Board Members didn’t do anything to encourage Gunn to provide the services or fire him. Point of fact: Gunn was constantly co-signed; his seat was never contested.
George Gunn, for his part, was belligerent in his noncompliance and perceived omnipotence [read: hubris].
George Gunn thought he would always be able to “survive” his critics… But he resigned in 2021, two years before the Museum’s contract expired.
While people like Dennis Evanosky [sorry, Dennis] and Woody Minor lauded Gunn’s “accomplishments”: Gunn’s only listed accomplishments reflected his own personal interests–outside of the museum–and unintentionally highlighted that Gunn’s notable achievements did not confer a public benefit.
Coincidentally, Dennis Evanosky was a signator to the Agreement with the City of Alameda, as the President of the Alameda Museum Board of Directors.
Museum Lacks Skilled Staff or Volunteers to Provide Preservation Services
Even if the Alameda Museum has been able to stay open for the 15 hours required of it for some of 5 years of this agreement, the Museum certainly does not have the volunteer or staff time to provide the archival services necessary to manage and preserve Alameda City Records.
This is because the Alameda Museum lacks any staff or volunteer hours to do the work that piled up during George Gunn’s tenor.
The Alameda Museum openly admits this:
They lack trained staff, they’re volunteer run.
They don’t have enough staff or volunteer hours to provide access to the Archives.
Board members are largely only scheduled for 2 hours a week.
The Alameda City Records are invaluable, priceless materials the City pays to be conserved in a warehouse suited for archival preservation.
Charging for Admission & Tours At Meyer House could Violate Agreement
Meyers House required $5 cash only admission fee.
The Service Provider Agreement specifically states the Museum must be open to the public (for no admission fee) for at least 15 hours per week.
Is the Meyer House exempt from the Agreement for some reason?
If so, the Meyer House and Garden hours of operations should not count towards to the total amount of time the Alameda Museum is open to the public.
Which would bring the Alameda Museum’s total time “Open To The Public” to only 7.5 hours–exactly half of the 15 hours the museum is required to be open for.
Museum Does Not Have Important Documents Regarding Transfer of Artifacts From Alameda Library
To be honest, my research request has less to do with the Alameda Museum, than with the Official City Repository they are paid to manage.
For context, my research request with the Alameda Museum started on November 24, 2019. And I was looking for archival materials like Newspapers of Records, Archival Photographs and Documents from the Library, City Records from the Council and other Departments and City Offices, as well as objects, artifacts, and other things donated to the Alameda Free Library’s Museum — all materials that were transferred to the Alameda Museum for safe keep, per the Service Provider Agreement between the Alameda Museum and the City of Alameda.
The first hurdle was the Museum’s lack of useful, practical, or accessible index/catalog.
Today, Valerie Turpen claims the Museum’s holdings have been catalogued and can now be searched by keyword — which was impossible before. But this doesn’t mean that my records request has been satisfied, or that I am any closer to reviewing the historical documents I request nearly four years ago.
Part of the reason is because some records are missing.
For instance, it appears that all records of the donation of Ohlone Artifacts to the Alameda Library are missing. There is no record of when the artifacts were donated, or by who. Every artifact in the “Native American Collection” seems to bear the same boiler-plate language:
Part of a collection of objects found in the largest Shellmound, also known as Sather’s Mound in Alameda, or smaller mounds. The excavations at Sather’s Mound were carried out in 1908 by Captain Clark, an amateur anthropologist. The items were donated to the Alameda Free Library, and passed on to the museum when the museum moved to a separate location.
Alameda Museum, “Native American Artifacts” as of May 31, 2022
The images above are a small selection of the Ohlone Artifacts stolen from the Alameda Shellmound and put on display as “Miwok” artifacts until I called the Museum out for their inaccuracies in 2019.
As you can tell from the object description quoted above: the exact provenance is impossible to tell because of Alameda Museum’s failure to accurately identify these stolen burial goods, and preserve integral paperwork related to their “donation”.
The plain and obvious disregard for indigenous objects and history stands in sharp contrast to the careful cataloguing and indexing of the white, Victorian-era artifacts proudly displayed and advertised by the Alameda Museum.
And it begs the question: How can the Museum have spent so much time cataloguing all of the objects owned by white Alamedans, from artwork to silverware to shoes, to the smallest, most inconsequential objects… but completely neglect the provenance, identification, and indexing of the most historically important objects in the entire Alameda Museum: proof of what life was like for the First Alamedans.
These artifacts were celebrated and popular during the early 1900’s. Several lectures were given on the Alameda Shellmounds, which featured artifacts now in the possession of the Alameda Museum.
Is this indicative of how other collections in the Alameda Museum are being mismanaged, improperly attributed, and haphazardly stored?
What other “city exhibits” are being neglected and what other records have been lost by the Alameda Museum?
When’s the last time the Museum even took inventory of their holdings? Seems like the answer is never, if their holdings weren’t even catalogued in 2019.
How could the Alameda Museum have let these conditions persist for so many decades?
Has the City ever inspected it’s own Archives for Compliance with the Service Provider Agreement?
All signs point to, “No”.
Maybe it’s time for the City of Alameda to take a better look at how the Alameda Museum has mismanaged the City Archives;
And either take serious steps to provide required access to those Archives at the Alameda Museum;
Or put out a Request for Proposals from qualified records storage and preservation companies.
