In June 2025, I was invited by Courtney Cummings, a Northern Cheyenne, Arikara, and Muscogee Creek woman who serves as the lead organizer of the Richmond Powwow, to support the 15th Annual Richmond California Powwow. We met at an event I was co-organizing and became friends. Courtney asked me to help with Powwow planning, and I agreed. I set up her Instagram Powwow account, attended multiple events with her, and designed the official Powwow flyer.
This was an important year. It marked the fifteenth anniversary of the Richmond Powwow, and the event was scheduled to be held at the Richmond Civic Center in the Memorial Auditorium. That venue is a major upgrade from previous years. Courtney told me it had been difficult to keep the Powwow going in recent years because it was hard to find a space. She was proud to have secured the venue and excited for the event. I supported it because I believed in what it could represent.
The Powwow was originally described to me as a way to honor local Native history. My first flyer concept was designed around the Santa Fe Indian Village in Richmond, a historic shoreline community where Native families lived in converted boxcars. That history is rarely acknowledged, and I wanted to center it. When I showed Courtney the design, she said the boxcars looked too “sad” and asked for something more cheerful. She said she wanted a “Native flower design,” like the floral beadwork we often see, with a style similar to traditional Mexican flower motifs. I revised the flyer based on that feedback and created a second version, which became the final one.
Courtney also offered me the $150 Powwow Planning stipend, and I told her to use it for the Powwow instead. She said it should go toward sponsoring a special, so I chose a Sneakup Special. I was not doing this for compensation. I knew there was a good chance I would be doing more than just donating graphic design services. I would probably also end up spending my own money, and possibly some of ANHP’s money as well. I believed in the purpose of the event and showed up in good faith.
I even took time off work to help Courtney move out of an unsafe space. That wasn’t part of any agreement. I did it because I thought we had a friendship and a shared commitment to the community. That makes what happened next harder to excuse.
Even though this was the fifteenth anniversary of the Richmond Powwow, and it was being held at the Richmond Civic Center, Courtney had no serious plan to include Muwekma. What she offered instead was a wishy-washy, noncommittal idea about maybe having them do a tule boat demonstration or giving them a table. No one had asked for that. It was tokenism. There was no plan to honor them, no invitation to speak, and no effort to recognize their authority or presence on the land where the event was taking place.
Richmond, Huchiun-Aguasto, is Muwekma Territory. It has been for over 10,000 years. Not including Muwekma is more than an oversight. It is an act of erasure. It disrespects the real, traceable roots of the Tribe and the 600-plus enrolled Muwekma people who descend from this place.
Courtney also asked me to speak at a youth education event hosted by the Point Molate Alliance on July 1. The official invitation was sent on June 18, 2025, by Pam Stello, Co-Chair of the Point Molate Alliance, which is a project of the Blue Frontier Campaign. I accepted the invitation on June 24. Pam acknowledged my acceptance and said she would follow up with additional program details, but she did not send those details until June 29, less than 48 hours before the event.
The session was initially presented to me as an opportunity to speak about the local Native history of Huchiun-Aguasto, the Point Molate shoreline, and Ohlone history more broadly. I assumed this was the kind of Native history and Ohlone history they wanted, because it should have been obvious that I advocate for the actual Ohlone Tribe. Courtney knew this. We had already had several conversations about the Sogorea Te’ Land Trust, Corrina Gould, and the harm they have caused. I expected that my role would be to speak about the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, the importance of tribal recognition, and the protection of sacred sites and tribal cultural resources.
But when Pam finally sent the program on June 29, it was the first time I saw that the session was titled “Ohlone History and Point Molate Hopes,” and that Courtney was listed as the Point Molate representative for the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan. I was never told any of this. Courtney never disclosed that she would be acting as an agent for the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, Inc. or Sogorea Te’ Land Trust. I use the word “agent” deliberately here because she was doing business on their behalf, representing them publicly, and promoting their agenda.
This was not a misunderstanding. It was a bait and switch. I was invited under one set of expectations, then set up to co-present with someone representing a fraudulent group that I had never agreed to support. Courtney had a duty to disclose that she would be representing the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan at this event. She did not. She knew who I was, what I stand for, and what the Alameda Native History Project represents. We had spoken directly about Sogorea Te’ Land Trust and Corrina Gould. She knew how important it was that Muwekma be acknowledged and respected. But instead of being honest, she withheld the truth and let me walk into a situation that would have compromised my integrity and betrayed the very Tribe I advocate for.
CVLN is not a tribe. It is a nonprofit organization created in 2018. It has no federal or state recognition, no tribal governance, no enrollment, no treaty history, and no documented continuity. The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area is the only federally recognized tribal successor to the Verona Band. Muwekma has a documented line of tribal governance and a legal and ancestral connection to Point Molate and the broader Huchiun-Aguasto area.
The Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, Inc. (formerly, “Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, Inc.”) and the Sogorea Te’ Land Trust have been condemned by Muwekma in a public statement titled “Corina Gould’s Wide-Ranging Identity Fraud, the Sogorea Te’ Land Trust, and the So-Called ‘Lisjan Nation.‘” These two entities, along with their founder Corina Gould, have used nonprofit frameworks and cultural tokenism to erase Muwekma’s presence and position themselves as gatekeepers to land and visibility in the Bay Area.
Courtney never responded to the email. When I followed up by text, she laughed.
That moment did not hurt my feelings. It exposed everything. It showed she knew exactly what she was doing and that she did not care about accountability, respect, or the harm she was causing. She left the conversation completely and became singularly focused on getting the Powwow flyer. This was not just a lapse or miscommunication. It was intentional avoidance.
After I formally withdrew from the Point Molate event, cited the erasure of Muwekma, and sent the Tribe’s official statement, Courtney never once engaged with the core issues. She did not follow up about the statement, did not acknowledge my withdrawal, and made no effort to address the harm she helped facilitate. Her silence made it clear that she had no interest in truth, accountability, or sovereignty. She was only concerned with getting the Powwow flyer in hand, regardless of the serious concerns I had raised or the betrayal involved.
So I gave her the flyer, exactly as she requested. I added “HONORING MUWEKMA” on purpose, because it was clear she never intended to. That flyer was delivered without compensation, under a limited-use license, and in full alignment with the values of the Alameda Native History Project.
This is not about personal drama. This is about sovereignty. This is about refusing to participate in the erasure of the only Ohlone Tribe with federal recognition, historical continuity, and legal standing in the territory where this Powwow took place.
If you are unfamiliar with the details or want to understand the full context, read:
There are a number of things I want to say about this article:
First, this is a culmination of 5+ years of research and investigation. And it was only because of the Official Statement by the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area [included in full at the end of this article] that I was finally able to put together some missing pieces about Corrina Gould’s relationship to Muwekma—specifically her descent and her belonging to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. During the course of researching this matter, I interviewed Tribal Attorneys, as well as members of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, and representatives from several local organizations who freely volunteered their reasons for no longer working with Corrina Gould.
Second, I used ChatGPT to help me write this article—specifically because I needed help keeping track of the sections, its tone, and to make sure that I created something complete and ready for publication. That said, the facts presented in this article are not AI hallucinations. This article was carefully constructed and painstakingly reviewed, over and over again, to ensure the veracity and completeness of the information presented here. My sources are open and available for anyone who wants to verify them.
Third, I was not paid to write this article. Doing the right thing, reporting the truth, and telling the historical background of Bay Area Native American history is the mission of this project. It’s what we do. And we do it without asking for compensation. This is an independent organization, and we are beholden to no one.
Fourth, I will not respond to personal attacks. I will not waste my time proving to anyone who I am. I do not care what you think. If your argument does not lie within the context of the material presented here, it is irrelevant to the message of this article. And your desperation to escape the truth and ignore the facts—laid bare here—is your choice.
1. Introduction
For years, Corrina Gould has positioned herself as a tribal leader, a rematriation visionary, and a voice for Ohlone land return. She has founded organizations, signed land agreements, created a land tax, received millions in funding, and claimed to speak on behalf of Ohlone people. But her story is built on fiction.
Corrina Gould is not the Chairwoman of a tribe. She is the head of a nonprofit corporation. The so-called “Confederated Villages of Lisjan” did not exist prior to 2018. It has no documented history, no enrollment records, no government, and no collective identity beyond a name she gave it. The Sogorea Te’ Land Trust is not an Ohlone organization. It is a nonprofit corporation led by a single unenrolled individual—someone who only discovered her genealogy because the real Ohlone tribe shared it with her.
That tribe is the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area: the only tribal government with documented continuity, legal standing, and ancestral responsibility for this land. Muwekma are the living successors of the historic, federally recognized Verona Band of Alameda County. They descend from the Indigenous people forced into Misión San José de Guadalupe, Santa Clara de Thámien, and San Francisco de Asís, and today, Muwekma has over 600 enrolled members. They have fought for their sovereignty, defended their sacred sites, and preserved their genealogy and governance through every wave of erasure—missions, courts, colonization, and nonprofits.
And yet, Muwekma is being erased again—this time not by settlers, but by activists claiming their identity, collecting land and donations under their name, and silencing them with the language of “solidarity.”
This isn’t just confusion. This is colonization, rebranded and crowd-funded. It is settler violence in a progressive disguise. It is a lie that has been funded by foundations, platformed by institutions, and repeated by people too afraid—or too lazy—to ask basic questions: Who governs this tribe? Who are its members? Where is the money going? Who was consulted? What elections have been held?
This is a pattern of identity fraud, land misappropriation, and community displacement, and it has gone on for too long. The time for “raising questions” is over. The answers are here. And this is the record.
2. The Myth of the Confederated Villages of Lisjan
The “Confederated Villages of Lisjan” (CVL) did not exist prior to 2018. It has no historical precedent, no documentation in early ethnographic records, no mention in tribal enrollment rosters, no record in legal proceedings, and no lineage-based governance structure. It is not a tribe. It is a name invented by Corrina Gould—retroactively applied to give the appearance of a tribal coalition that never existed.
The word “Lisjan” itself is poorly understood and inconsistently used. Gould cites a 1920s interview with her ancestor, José Guzmán, who described himself as “Lisjanes”—but this was simply a reference to the place he was from: the Nisenan name for the Pleasanton area. He did not say he was from a “Lisjan Tribe.” He did not describe a confederation of villages. He was a Muwekma ancestor who spoke Spanish—maybe as a third language, after Nisenan and Chochenyo–he did not speak English, and was likely describing location, not identity. And yet, Gould has used this single, mistranslated phrase to build an entire tribal identity.
Gould publicly presents herself not just as a tribal member, but as a Tribal Chairwoman—a title that holds formal and legal weight in actual tribal governments. But her organization has no tribal enrollment. No constitutional structure. No elections. No council. No ratifying documents. There is no list of what “villages” make up the supposed confederacy. There are no lineages publicly claimed. No other representatives from these villages ever appear at events or claim descent. It is a title without a people. A nonprofit corporation posing as a nation.
In reality, Gould descends from the very same lineages as the enrolled members of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. She requested her genealogy from Muwekma in 2005, and the Tribe provided it. It was only through Muwekma’s documentation and research that she learned she descends from Muwekma ancestors. But instead of enrolling or standing with the Tribe, she took that information and built her own identity-based platform—weaponizing the documentation shared with her in good faith.
Her family is not excluded from Muwekma. In fact, her relatives—including her aunt and uncle, and their extended families—have been enrolled Muwekma members since 1995. Gould made a choice not to enroll. And then, she made another choice: to leverage Muwekma’s genealogy, history, and sacred sites to build her own nonprofit brand.
She presents herself as a Tribal Chairwoman—but she is the chair of a corporation. And she uses that corporation to appear as if she governs a sovereign tribal nation, when in fact, she governs nothing but a grant-seeking nonprofit made up of herself, her daughter, and a cohort of non-Native allies and unaffiliated supporters.
The result is a cheap knock-off of a tribal government, built on the illusion of collective identity and the erasure of the very people whose legacy she claims to protect. Her statements and symbolism are packaged for public consumption. But there is no tribal infrastructure behind it. No cultural authority. No community accountability. It is a performance built on selective ancestry, strategic branding, and the quiet theft of another tribe’s history.
3. Funded Fabrication and Institutional Complicity
Since its creation, the Confederated Villages of Lisjan and its sister organization, Sogorea Te’ Land Trust, have received millions of dollars in grants, donations, and land transfers—funding that was intended to support Indigenous land return, cultural revitalization, and tribal sovereignty.
But that funding is not going to a tribe. It’s going to a nonprofit corporation with no elections, no enrollment, no federal or state recognition, and no documented governance. The public has been led to believe that Sogorea Te’ Land Trust is an Ohlone-led effort to rematriate ancestral lands. But in reality, the land is not being returned to a tribe—it’s being handed to an individual, and the nonprofit she controls.
The most egregious example is the West Berkeley Shellmound. In 2023, the City of Berkeley announced that it would transfer the historic site to Sogorea Te’ Land Trust. In the meeting minutes, the city described the action as “returning the land to the Ohlone people.” But this was a lie. Sogorea Te’ Land Trust is not an Ohlone tribe or tribally governed entity. The land was not returned to Muwekma—the only federally documented tribe connected to that site. Instead, it was handed to a nonprofit that claims Indigenous identity without legal or cultural accountability.
This “return” was made possible by a $20 Million dollar grant to Sogorea Te Land Trust by the Katalay Foundation.
This confusion is not accidental. Gould has intentionally blurred the line between nonprofit and tribe. She invokes language like “rematriation,” “sovereignty,” and “traditional territory,” while never disclosing that her organization has no formal recognition, no election process, no ratified tribal rolls, and no council oversight. Funders and institutions allow it because it’s easier than doing the work of real consultation.
Organizations that have partnered with CVL or STLT include:
These institutions have played a role in fabricating legitimacy. They’ve repeated claims without verification. They’ve entered into land agreements and awarded grants without consulting the federally documented tribal government whose sovereignty they’ve bypassed.
This is not accidental. This is the institutional funding of a fiction.
And every time a university, foundation, or nonprofit puts Sogorea Te’ Land Trust on a panel, signs an MOU, or writes a check, they’re not standing with Ohlone people. They’re standing with a narrative built on erasure—one that excludes the very tribe whose homeland they claim to “rematriate.”
4. Weaponizing Rhetoric to Avoid Accountability
Corrina Gould frequently accuses her critics—including enrolled Muwekma members—of “perpetuating colonial violence.” She uses the language of decolonization to shield herself from scrutiny and shut down legitimate questions about her identity, governance, and funding. But this is not decolonial work—it is the strategic misuse of anti-colonial rhetoric to avoid accountability.
This tactic has proven effective, especially among non-Native supporters who are unfamiliar with the difference between actual tribal sovereignty and self-appointed identity. In Gould’s framing, any critique becomes “lateral violence,” and any push for clarity is “divisive.” As a result, even basic questions—Who are your enrolled members? When do you hold elections? What is your governance structure?—are dismissed as hostile.
The irony is unavoidable: Gould accuses others of colonial harm while collaborating with the very institutions that enforced settler violence—churches, universities, real estate developers, and city governments. She denounces the legacy of the Catholic mission system while operating out of a church. She claims to speak for Ohlone people while silencing Muwekma, the tribe she descends from.
The harm here is not theoretical. Every time Gould uses progressive language to shut down real tribal voices, she reinforces the structures of colonization. She replaces truth with optics, community with control, and shared identity with personal branding.
This isn’t what decolonization looks like. It’s what erasure looks like—draped in the language of justice, funded by people too uncomfortable to ask questions, and defended by institutions more interested in performance than accountability.
5. A Reckoning Rooted in Research
This project didn’t begin with opposition. It began in good faith.
In 2020, I supported Corrina Gould. The City of Alameda was considering renaming Jackson Park to Chochenyo Park—a gesture I backed without hesitation. Gould was present at those discussions. At the time, her narrative seemed compelling. Her cause appeared righteous. Like many people, I wanted to help uplift a story that claimed to center Indigenous land and sovereignty.
So I began researching, intending to support her work. I looked for historical records, linguistic references, maps—anything that could substantiate and elevate her cause. But what I found instead was something Gould never expected anyone to look for: the truth.
And that truth pointed, again and again, not to a “Confederated Villages of Lisjan,” but to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area—the living successors of the Verona Band of Alameda County, recognized by the federal government in 1906 and unlawfully removed from recognition in 1927. Every credible source I found—mission records, ethnographic interviews, enrollment documents, BIA files—told the same story: this is Muwekma land, and Muwekma never left.
It was Muwekma who preserved the genealogy. Muwekma who fought for recognition. Muwekma who kept ceremony alive and language breathing. It was Muwekma who gave Corrina Gould the documents she now uses to claim Indigenous identity—and it is Muwekma she now displaces.
People are quick to give Corrina Gould credit—for symbolic gestures, shellmound walks, and public speaking. Some even claim she “saved the West Berkeley Shellmound.” She didn’t. The Shellmound was already destroyed. It’s a parking lot. Meanwhile, former Muwekma Chairwoman Rosemary Cambra helped save an actual Ohlone cemetery from destruction during the construction of the 680 freeway in the 1960s. That cemetery was later returned in 1971 to Andrew Galvan via the Ohlone Indian Tribe Inc., through a historic and unprecedented decision by the Catholic Church. “It’s the only piece of Californian mission property returned by the Catholic Church to a group of Indians, that I’m aware of,” said Galvan, curator of Mission Dolores in San Francisco.
That wasn’t an isolated act. In 1967, Phil Galvan [“Mr. Ohlone”] successfully advocated for the naming of Ohlone College in Fremont—ensuring that a major institution would carry the name of his people and their land. And in 1985, Rosemary Cambra again took direct action—striking an archaeologist with a shovel to stop the desecration of her ancestors’ graves by developers attempting to build a hotel in downtown San José.
These are real, measurable accomplishments—land protected, history recognized, sovereignty advanced—achieved not through branding or ceremony, but through resistance, strategy, and leadership.
Photo courtesy of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay AreaPhoto courtesy of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay AreaPhoto courtesy of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay AreaPhoto courtesy of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay AreaPhoto courtesy of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay AreaPhoto courtesy of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area
In 2024, Muwekma embarked on the Trail of Truth, a 90-day cross-country journey from San Francisco to Washington, D.C., to demand federal recognition and justice for unrecognized tribes. Along the way, they were joined by members of over 30 other tribes, fostering national intertribal relations. Upon arrival in D.C., they faced violent responses from law enforcement, including arrests and physical confrontations, as they attempted to bring their message to the nation’s leaders. Despite these challenges, Muwekma’s commitment to sovereignty and recognition remained unwavering.
Meanwhile, Corrina Gould—while formerly associated with service delivery at the American Indian Child Resource Center—has used her platform through Indigenous People Organized for Change and especially through Sogorea Te’ Land Trust to build what is, at its core, a personal fundraising machine, not a tribal government. And she built it at the expense of real Muwekma—and in the Chochenyo context, Muwekma means “the people” [“la gente“.] She has rebranded the people as herself, and turned their collective legacy into her private gain.
Her base of support is not grounded in local tribal governance. It comes largely from non-Native institutions, funders, and Native individuals with no ancestral ties to this land. Meanwhile, the real Ohlone Tribe is pushed aside in favor of symbolic leadership that offers visibility, but not accountability.
Once faced with the facts, I had to admit that I was wrong. I had been led by a compelling story—but the truth was stronger. So I did what solidarity demands: I apologized, publicly withdrew my support for the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, and committed to telling the truth.
Because protecting Indigenous sovereignty sometimes means telling hard truths—and refusing to participate in feel-good illusions.
6. The Harm Is Real—And Measurable
This isn’t just a difference in opinion. It isn’t a clash of personalities. And it certainly isn’t a harmless misunderstanding.
When institutions platform Corrina Gould as a tribal leader, or treat the Confederated Villages of Lisjan as a legitimate tribal government, they are doing more than making a mistake—they are actively undermining the sovereignty of the real Ohlone Tribe. They are diverting resources, land, funding, and political capital away from Muwekma, and into the hands of a private organization with no legal standing, no elections, and no tribal citizenry.
This harm isn’t abstract. It’s measurable.
Millions of dollars in philanthropic and public funding intended for Indigenous land return and cultural revitalization have gone to a nonprofit corporation with no recognized tribal status.
Public institutions, including cities and universities, have entered into consultation relationships with Gould and her affiliates, bypassing Muwekma entirely—despite Muwekma’s documented federal recognition and direct ancestral connection to the land in question.
Land acknowledgments, educational materials, and grant applications are being written and approved using a fictional framework, misleading the public and distorting the historical record.
Nonprofits and state agencies increasingly treat Sogorea Te’ Land Trust as the default Ohlone contact, creating a monopoly of voice that drowns out the actual tribe’s legal claims and cultural continuity.
These are not harmless errors. They are a form of structural erasure—the exact kind that has plagued Native nations for generations. When land meant for Indigenous people is given to a nonprofit posing as a tribe, that is not reparation. That is dispossession in progressive packaging.
This is particularly dangerous because the harm is disguised as justice. The very people who claim to be “decolonizing” are recoding colonization into a new language of rematriation, visibility, and inclusion—but behind the optics, the effect is the same: the real tribe is left out. The real tribe is defunded. The real tribe is made invisible.
And let’s be clear: the people being erased are not theoretical. Muwekma has over 600 enrolled members. They are the living successors of the Verona Band. They have filed lawsuits, preserved records, won recognition, buried their dead, held their ceremonies, and never left their land.
But when outsiders accept Gould’s narrative at face value—when they hand over land and money without due diligence—they don’t just cause confusion. They help erase those 600+ people from the public record and from the future of their own homeland.
This harm is worsened by the fact that many of Gould’s supporters are not Ohlone, not from this territory, and in many cases, not even Native. Her occupation of Sogorea Te (Glen Cove Park in Vallejo) was carried out over the objections of local Wintu and Patwin tribal leaders, who viewed her presence as invasive and inappropriate–and who were already in the middle of negotiations with the city. Once again, her support came not from the tribes whose land she claimed to defend, but from outsiders—many of whom lacked the cultural or historical context to recognize the damage being done.
This isn’t pan-Indigenous solidarity. This is outsider-enabled erasure masquerading as justice.
And if you’ve ever promoted Corrina Gould as a tribal leader… If you’ve ever funded Sogorea Te’ Land Trust believing it was an Ohlone-run tribal entity… If you’ve ever written a land acknowledgment, curriculum, or policy that names CVL without verifying its legitimacy…
Then you’ve been part of this harm.
You didn’t just uplift the wrong narrative. You helped erase a federally documented tribe. You helped redirect land, funding, and power away from 600 living descendants of the Verona Band—and handed it to a nonprofit that exists because Muwekma gave one woman access to her genealogy.
This isn’t theoretical. This is real. Real people. Real land. Real erasure.
You didn’t decolonize anything. You just changed the branding.
7. This Is Muwekma Land
Photo courtesy of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Let’s be clear: this is the unceded ancestral homeland of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
The East Bay—including the very places where Corrina Gould operates, where cities write “rematriation” into land agreements, and where nonprofit funders congratulate themselves on “land return”—sits squarely within the ethnohistoric territory of the Chochenyo- and Thámien-speaking Ohlone tribal groups and intermarried Muwekma Ohlone and Bay Miwok ancestors. These were not abstract “villages.” They were governed communities with kinship ties, linguistic identity, and ceremonial responsibilities. Their descendants are now enrolled in the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe.
These people were forced into Misión San José de Guadalupe, Misión Santa Clara de Thámien, and Misión San Francisco de Asís. Their names and records exist in the mission rolls, in the ethnographic interviews, in the early court filings, and in the federal Indian rolls. Their presence on this land was never erased—only ignored.
Muwekma didn’t vanish. Muwekma was excluded—deliberately and illegally. And they never stopped fighting to be seen.
They are not a nonprofit. They are not a brand. They are not “one of many Ohlone groups.” They are the documented, federally acknowledged, and unlawfully derecognized successors of the Verona Band of Alameda County—and the only Ohlone tribal government with a continuous ancestral, cultural, and political presence in this region.
They are the tribe that:
Has maintained ceremonial stewardship of sacred sites and burials.
Has documented every ancestral line with forensic-level precision.
Has filed for federal restoration and fought institutional exclusion for over a century.
Has survived the missions, the ranchos, the Gold Rush, the boarding schools, and the bureaucracies—and is still here.
To pretend that this land is “returned” by handing it to a nonprofit corporation with no governing authority, no intertribal legitimacy, and no community accountability is not just inaccurate—it is a continuation of colonization.
It is the institutional funding and support of settler colonial violence—the same erasure, dispossession, and genocide that removed tribes from their land in the first place, now rebranded as “rematriation” for white comfort.
The land hasn’t been returned until it’s returned to the people it was taken from.
This is not “Lisjan territory.” This is not “rematriated space.” This is Muwekma land.
8. To Stand With Ohlone People Is to Stand With Muwekma
By now, the facts are clear: the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area is the only tribal government with documented continuity, legal standing, and ancestral responsibility for this land. Their aboriginal homeland includes what is now known as San Francisco, San Mateo, most of Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa Counties, as well as portions of Napa, Santa Cruz, Solano, and San Joaquin Counties. The present-day Muwekma Ohlone Tribe consists of the descendants of the Indigenous people who were forced into Misión San José de Guadalupe, Santa Clara de Thámien, and San Francisco de Asís. Cities like Oakland, Berkeley, Emeryville, Albany, El Cerrito, Richmond, Fremont, Hayward, Niles, and Pleasanton sit squarely within this territory.
Still, some people will ask, “Why are you criticizing other Indigenous-led groups?”
Here’s the answer: “Representation isn’t just about who shows up — it’s about how they show up. When groups claim Indigenous identity without tribal recognition, without elections, and without consulting other Native peoples, it’s not real representation. Holding people accountable protects Indigenous identity — it doesn’t attack it.”
Others will say, “Aren’t you worried this undermines solidarity?”
Not if you understand what real solidarity is. “Solidarity built on misinformation is a weak foundation. Real solidarity requires honesty — even when it’s uncomfortable. Protecting Indigenous sovereignty sometimes means telling hard truths, not participating in feel-good illusions.”
And if you’re asking, “Well, what should I do instead?”
Start here: “Support federally recognized and state-recognized tribes, or groups with real historic documentation and transparent leadership. Always ask: Who benefits? Who was consulted? Where is the money going? Good intentions matter — but real relationships and accountability matter more.”
Let’s stay focused on the facts. It’s not about personal feelings — it’s about who has the rightful voice, and who’s building legitimacy at the expense of Indigenous communities.
If you’ve platformed Corrina Gould or the Confederated Villages of Lisjan without doing your homework, then yes—you’ve been misled. Now that you know Sogorea Te’ Land Trust is not an Ohlone tribe or organization, it’s on you to stop giving them money and land. Because at this point, you’re not helping—you’re enabling the lie. You’re disrespecting the real Ohlone Tribe and their 600+ enrolled members, and you’re disrespecting their ancestors’ living legacy.
Non-Native people created this problem, and then doubled down and made it worse. So it’s on them to fix it—by demanding accountability. Find out where your money is going. Ask who’s being left out. Demand that Sogorea Te’ Land Trust include the rightful Ohlone tribe of the East Bay: the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
If non-Native people are really about all this land defender and water protector, rematriation, land back rhetoric they love to post about— Then they’ll fight just as hard for a real tribe As they fight for a fucking parking lot.
“Indigenous sovereignty isn’t a brand. It’s a responsibility to the ancestors and a duty to future generations. I’m here to protect that — without apology.”
An Ethnohistory of Santa Clara Valley and Adjacent Regions: Historic Ties of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe and Tribal Stewardship Over the Tupiun Táareštak Site (CA-SCL-894) Monica V. Arellano, Alan Leventhal, Rosemary Cambra, Shelia Guzman Schmidt, Gloria Arellano Gomez (2014) PDF Link
Public Statement on Corina Gould, the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, and Sogorea Te’ Land Trust Received directly from the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area (May 1, 2025)
Ohlone/Costanoan Indians of the San Francisco Peninsula and Their Neighbors, Yesterday and Today (2009) Randall Milliken, Laurence H. Shoup, Beverly R. Ortiz – for the National Park Service PDF Link
A Time of Little Choice: The Disintegration of Tribal Culture in the San Francisco Bay Area 1769–1810 (1995) Randall Milliken – Ballena Press Anthropological Papers No. 43 Publisher Link
J.P. Harrington Chochenyo Field Notes and Vocabulary (1921) Smithsonian Institution – National Anthropological Archives, Collection of John Peabody Harrington
Ancient and Modern Genomics of the Ohlone Indigenous Population of California (2022) Severson, Ramstetter, Kennett, et al. — Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) PDF Link
A Call to Action from the Alameda Native History Project
OUR MISSION IS TO:
Advocate for tribal restoration,
Promote Native American representation, and,
Educate the public about Indigenous rights and perspectives,
Honoring the ancestral legacy of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, and,
Enriching our community through innovative tools, immersive experiences, and collaborative efforts.
Through initiatives like ACORNS!, the GIS Lab, and Land Lab, we bring this mission to life.
ACORNS!
ACORNS! is a year-round program, aligning with natural cycles: acorn harvests (fall), seed germination and curriculum development (winter/spring), community seedling giveaways and culinary classes (spring/summer), and ongoing tree nursery management.
GIS Lab
The GIS Lab is a core component of the Alameda Native History Project, and its founder is an Opensource Geospatial Foundation Member. We are currently in the process of pursuing accreditation as a Geo For All Lab, further solidifying our commitment to open-source geospatial education and community empowerment.
We are committed to fostering the free exchange of information, training our community members in open source software and, showing people how to use open data to both learn and advocate.
Our goal has always been to enable tribes and indigenous people to collect, analyze, and store sovereign data using a myriad of tools and methods. But it’s our immersive educational tools that we need the most support to develop.
Land Lab
Launching the Indigenous Land Lab has taught us valuable lessons, informing our approach to infrastructure development and community engagement. The natural materials available, open workspace, and potential as a restoration nursery are too much to pass up.
Once we are able to get the Land Lab going, we will be able to support the rest of our projects with the actual materials we need, by producing them ourselves, rather than having to buy them. And we would be able to model actual acorn granaries in situ.
Join us in empowering the Alameda Native History Project – your support will directly fuel these initiatives, fostering a deeper sense of community and Indigenous cultural connection through immersive experiences and events.
This was created as a direct response to our community’s need for restorative justice–making things right.
You likely feel a personal connection to Indigenous People. You want to contribute to the well-being and sustainability of First Peoples locally, and around the world. (Especially Ohlone people who are the first inhabitants of the San Francisco Bay Area.)
We wanted to help guide you towards contributing to reputable, accountable, and transparent organizations making measurable positive impacts in the local Indigenous and Native American communities.
We wanted to re-frame “decolonization,” “landback,” and “rematriation” (all centered around returning ancestral lands to their original Indigenous caretakers) into locally actionable concepts that celebrate the plurality and diversity of our local community organizations, and the work they do to:
Uplift our voices. Empower and Advocate.
Cultivate wellness, vitality and expression.
Preserve and celebrate our Heritage and Traditions.
Benefitting the local Native American and Indigenous Communities of the San Francisco Bay Area means looking at the big picture.
Our diversity is our strength. Understanding the inter-tribal nature of the Bay Area, as well as being able to recognize true Tribal Governments, and Indigenous Organizations is essential for your role in supporting Indigenous Liberation.
By presenting you with local Indigenous organizations making a positive, measurable impact in the community, we are re-focusing attention on community driven initiatives with a proven track-record of success and accountability.
We acknowledge that the Bay Area is an Inter-tribal Urban Reservation. That the continued un-recognition of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area has resulted in political erasure and loss of Muwekma’s hereditary homelands in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, San Jose, and parts of Napa, Santa Cruz, Solano, and San Joaquin counties.
We occupy Muwekma Ohlone Land. And we should do what we can to honor the first people of the Bay Area.
You deserve to know that your contributions are being used to benefit Ohlone People and the greater Native American Community. This is why it’s essential to contribute only to organizations which are transparent, accountable, and provide a measurable positive impact to Ohlone People and local Indigenous Communities.
Dedicated to preserving Ohlone culture, language, and traditional practices, this foundation supports the direct needs of Ohlone people in the Bay Area. Contributions fund cultural revitalization, education, and ancestral territory preservation efforts, promoting Ohlone self-determination and community well-being.
(Pronounced “courage”) seeks to unlock the leadership of young people to “dream beyond bars.” From their website: “We look to young people to lead the way in transforming our communities by investing in their healing, aspirations, and activism.”
Promotes Community Wellness, Provides direct Medical Care, Celebrates the rich Culture and Heritage of All Nations through diverse programming and events, including the Indigenous Red Market, and Annual NAHC Powwow.
Provides wellness and rehabilitative services to Native American People from all over the Nation. Many tribes send their members to the SF Friendship house for care. [As of writing, the website is down. Best way to reach them is to call. (415) 865-0964 Ask for Finance, or: Lena Ma ext. 4021, or Pinky Huree ext. 4012]
Intertribal Friendship House
Legit Native American community center in Oakland. A small place with a big impact. From their website: “Intertribal Friendship House (IFH), located in Oakland, CA, was founded in 1955 and is one of the first urban American Indian community centers in the nation… For urban Native people, IFH serves as a vital “Urban Reservation” and cultural homeland, providing a crucial space to stay connected to their heritage and traditions.”
Our community deserves better than empty promises and appropriation.
By supporting transparent, accountable organizations that truly benefit Ohlone people and local Indigenous communities, we can create meaningful change.
Let’s reclaim our responsibility to honor the first people of this land and work towards a future where Indigenous voices are amplified, not erased.
Together, we can make a difference – let this be a starting point for positive action.
An Investigative Report by the Alameda Native History Project
Preserving Accurate Ohlone History and Culture
The Alameda Native History Project is dedicated to preserving the accurate history and culture of the Ohlone people. As part of this effort, we have conducted research on Sogorea Te Land Trust, a non-profit organization [501(c)(3)], and its claims of representing the Ohlone people.
Why We Investigated
We followed this story because it was newsworthy and of significant public interest. Moreover, we believe that people have the right to know where their money is going, particularly when it comes to donations intended to support Native American communities–in this case: Ohlone people, the First Alamedans.
Concerns and Findings
Our research has raised several concerns about Sogorea Te Land Trust’s claims and actions:
Claims by trust leaders, particularly Corrina Gould, about being part of an Ohlone tribe called “Lisjan“, which is actually a Nisenan name for “Pleasanton”, not East Oakland or Berkeley.
Over the past three years, the Alameda Native History Project has reached out to Sogorea Te Land Trust multiple times seeking clarification on these issues, but they have not provided any substantive responses.
Call to Action
We encourage everyone to seek out multiple sources and consult with Ohlone elders and experts before supporting or promoting initiatives related to Ohlone history and culture. Specifically, we recommend reaching out to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area and other Ohlone leaders who may have valuable insights and perspectives on the issues raised in this report. By engaging in open and respectful dialogue, we can work together to ensure the accurate representation and well-being of the Ohlone people.
What did Alameda look like before the Oakland Estuary was dredged out; and Bay Farm, South Shore, and the West End were filled in?
Where was the Live Oak Forest? What kind of animals roamed what was once known as la Bolsa de Encinal?
The new Alameda Historic Ecology Web Map shows you in exquisite detail, using never-before-seen GIS data compiled and developed exclusively by the Alameda Native History Project.
You can have this map on your wall. Find out how: visit our merch page now.
Decolonizing History
The Alameda Native History Project decolonizes history by providing real and accurate information about the geography and ecology of places like Alameda, which is occupied Muwekma Ohlone territory.
Before now, only over-copied handouts, and over-generalized information has been made available by Alameda’s Historians and Schools. No concerted effort has been made to update this content since (at least) the 1970’s.
This map is a wake-up call for Alameda Historians….
And a challenge to the groups like the Board of the Alameda Museum, and Alameda Historical Commission, to step up their game, and, meaningfully and accurately represent and honor the contributions and lives of all Alamedans, like Quong Fat and Mabel Tatum, with permanent exhibits, public art made by someone of the heritage it represents, and historical districts commemorating more than Victorian houses.
Because, mentions only in museum newsletters, city council declarations…. Or once a year appearances at speaker panels for [AAPI/Black History, Pride, Native American, etc.] Heritage Months are not cutting it.
Featuring Alameda’s Ancient Live Oak Forest, Historic Shoreline, and Bay Area Historic Wetlands layers.
All juxtaposed against the modern day landscape to provide accurate scale and positioning.
Available in several sizes.
Preview the new Alameda Shellmound Map V.2. Available in 3 sizes. Get it now!
More Detailed Historic Geography
Because of the juxtaposition of the historic peninsula with it’s present day silhouette, it is much easier to see which parts of Alameda were physically connected and formed the peninsula more recently known as the “Encinal”.
Both Alameda and Oakland are in a region referred to as Xučyun (also known as “Huchiun”.) Xučyun is part of the ancestral homeland of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. Muwekma have lived in the Bay Area for over 10,000 years.
Includes All Four Alameda Shellmounds
For the first time, all four of the Alameda Shellmounds have been put onto one map. Most people only know about the shellmound on Mound Street. But there are more shellmounds, in Alameda. There were over 425 shellmounds in the Bay Area. Including Alameda’s largest shellmound, at the foot Chestnut.
Why is this important?
The existence of the three other Alameda Shellmounds was overlooked by all of Alameda’s previous historians*, including long-time (since retired) curator of the Alameda Museum: George Gunn.
From 1948, to 2020: the Alameda Museum falsely identified the First Alamedans as “a branch of Miwok”, instead of “Costanoan” or Ohlone.
The Alameda Native History Project is responsible for stepping forward and correcting the record, and educating the public about the real Alameda Native History.
This map proves that Alameda History is more than Victorian houses.
This place we call Alameda was once called “La Bolsa de Encinal”. Meaning, “the Encinal forest”. Because the peninsula was host to a verdant, “ancient”, Live Oak forest. (The forest still exists. It just looks different.)
Many of the first accounts of the historic peninsula use rather idyllic, and paradisaic language to describe the rich pre-contact ecosystem that thrived here.
Alameda was once referred to as a “Garden City”. This is the place where the Loganberry was supposedly born.
Historic Shoreline
tl;dr : Everyone wants to know where the landfill is. [There! I said it, okay?] They don’t even really care where Alameda used to be connected to Oakland. Or about the ancient whirl pool in la bahia de san leandro. But, whatever.
Look closer, and you can see the footprints of present day buildings. That’s the landfill.
For real though, I made this layer using pre-1900 shoreline vector data I compiled for the Bay Area region, and stitched together.
Bay Area Historic Wetlands layers
In Version 1, I made a kind of sloppy polygon with historical shoreline vectors, and painted it green. It was a good placeholder for the historic marshes and wetlands of the Bay Area.
Version 2 features the finely detailed historic wetlands layer created for the Bay Area Shellmounds Maps. It features very precise cut-outs for historic creeks, channels and waterways; and features full-coverage of the Bay Area region.
If you want some actual historical eco-data, check out the San Francisco Estuary Institute. They have some brilliant historical ecology GIS you would probably love, if you’ve read this far.
The Alameda Shellmound Map, Version 2, is ground-breaking in its completeness and exquisite detail.
[Footnote: Imelda Merlin mentioned numerous shellmounds in her Geology Master Thesis, but none of her assertions were backed up with any relevant citations. And geology is not archaeology, ethnology, or anthropology, the areas of study that normally concern themselves with Tribal Cultural Resources like shellmounds.
Furthermore, the famous “Imelda Merlin Shellmound Map” was actually a map of Live Oak trees present in Alameda at the time Merlin wrote her thesis (in 1977).
The “Map of Whitcher’s Survey of ‘The Encinal’ in 1853. In Alameda City Hall.”, cited on page 104 of Merlin’s thesis, has never been found by Alameda City Hall, the Alameda Free Library, or the Alameda Museum.
Certainly this means Imelda Merlin has failed to meet the burden of proof required for institutions like Alameda Museum to take reliance upon her claims re: Whitcher’s Survey, and locations of any mounds. Yet, somehow, Merlin’s geology thesis was Alameda Museum’s sole reference regarding shellmounds. (For years Imelda Merlin’s geology thesis was viewed as the authoritative source of information about Alameda shellmounds.)]
Decolonize History
One of the ways Alameda Native History Project decolonizes history is by interrogating the record. This means tracking down and reading citations. Critically evaluating reports and studies for bias. And calling out poor research, and prejudiced conclusions for what they are.
We decolonize history by updating the maps and diagrams of our past. Producing accurate, fact-based educational and reference materials to replace the biased and inaccurate educational products–which are still misinforming our schoolchildren and the greater public today.
By providing a more nuanced and comprehensive perspective; and doing away with the old, over-copied handouts from decades past: we are able to shed the misinformed, and racist, stereotypes and quackery that typify generations which brought us things like: “kill the indian, save the man”, Jim Crow, and “Separate But Equal”.
We vigorously challenge the cognitive dissonance of so many California Historians, asking “Where did all the Indians go?”, at a time when the entire United States had declared war on Native Americans. … Including the first Governor of California, who called for “war of extermination” against California Native Americans.
These ideas, stereotypes, attitudes, and beliefs have managed to propagate themselves time and time again in the textbooks and lesson plans used to “educate” countless generations of Americans.
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.
“Lisjan” has been referred to as a Traditional Ohlone Village Site, in East Oakland.
Both the San Leandro Creek, and San Lorenzo Creek bear the name of “Lisjan” creek.
But “Lisjan” isn’t even an Ohlone word.
“Lisjan” is what Nisenan People call the city of Pleasanton, California.
Uldal, J. & Shipley, W. (1966) “Nisenan Texts and Dictionary”
And, just to be clear: Pleasanton wasn’t called “Pleasanton” until the 1860’s. Up to that point, it was called “Alisal”, or “Alizal”, or “El Alizal”, or “Alisal Rancheria”. And, before that, Alisal was the Bernal Rancheria.
And Nisenan People are not Maidu People. They’re totally seperate tribes.
You could say, the present day Nisenan capitol is Nevada City, California….
The “definition” of Lisjan, a Nisenan Word…
In 1929, A.L. Kroeber published “The Valley Nisenan“, which contained an expansive, and categorized Nisenan vocabulary; and a decent explanation of phonetics. However, this was only a short list, which did not contain Place Names. But, this book is an indication of the linguistic study and research going on behind the scenes, in California, in the early 20th century.
It wouldn’t be until 1966, that Hans Jørgen Uldall, would publish “Nisenan Texts and Dictionary“, with William Shipley. This volume includes some very adult stories. So, beware. But, there are Nisenan-English, and English-Nisenan dictionaries in the back.
Uldall’s dictionary contains the entry for “Lisjan”; as a Place Name for Pleasanton, California.
But, how did that name, get all the way up to Nisenan territory, 100 miles away from Pleasanton? And 45 years after Harrington’s interviews? Why is “Lisjan” being touted as a traditional Ohlone Village Site in deep East-Oakland, if “Lisjan” is another name for Pleasanton?
Excerpt from “Chochenyo Field Notes” showing the word “muwekma”.
J.P. Harrington’s “Chochenyo Field Notes” (1921)
One of the most-cited references in Ohlone History…
In 1921, J.P. Harrington performed a Language Survey of Native Americans in the East Bay. Harrington gathered numerous languages during this time, including the “Chocheño” language; which is known as the East Bay Ohlone language, today. Despite being deeply flawed, and extremely sus at times, this document continues to be a primary influence on mainstream discussions about Ohlone History in the San Francisco Bay Area.
One of Harrington’s interviewees was a man by the name of Jose Guzman. Guzman was interviewed, along with a man named “Angelo”, and a third man who is known as “informant”–presumably, Harrington’s fixer. Francisca is another interviewee who appears separately from Jose and Angelo, most times.
This volume is incredibly informative. Even though, a good portion of the information provided by Jose Guzman, and Angelo become problematic in many places–when viewed in context with later anthropological work, and the lack of clear attribution to a speaker (if any) in many of the entries. This is a problem with Harrington, really.
A majority of contemporary work on East Bay Ohlone People cite J.P. Harrington’s “Chochenyo Field Notes”, from 1921.
This document is never more than one step removed from almost any article or research paper.
But who’s actually read it? As daunting as these tomes look in the beginning: I have to be honest, and tell you, it’s not as bad as it seems. 355 pages of hand-written notes goes kind of quickly if you can hang with the kind of Spanglish that’s spoken on many a rez, today.
It’s easy to get a feel for the personalities of the interviewees by how their interviews progress; and even the type of setting. Some interviews were taken at gatherings. There are write-ups of methods of fabrication for food and tools; songs; as well as old stories, passed down to Jose Guzman. Harrington’s hand-writing also changes, depending on the speed of the information he’s being given, and whether or not he’s having a good day. Sometimes, he had to switch pens, until ultimately finding a pencil.
In the beginning, Harrington focuses on the basics. Where are you from? What’s the name of your tribe? Have you heard of these people? Can you tell me the history of this place?
Harrington wouldn’t ask twice about something the same day. He would circle back to it again, on another day.
As his notes progress, the words move to phrases. The lists become Chocheño lists, with Spanish or English translation.
This is how “Lisjan” kept popping up.
Harrington’s Synthesis of Chocheño VS. The Way Chocheño Was Actually Being Spoken
Aside from where the notes explicitly said who the speaker was, or whether or not the interviewees agree, it’s difficult to tell the difference between Harrington’s own ideas and synthesis of Chocheño; and the Chocheño language as it was actually spoken.
The following entry shows how Harrington took a variation of the phrase “makin miwikma” (we are good people), and applied it to “lisjan”, to form “lisjanikma”–which, to Harrington’s understanding of Chocheño, means “lisjan people”.
makin lisjanikma, we are lisjanes. approved lisjanikma but could not get tongue around it.”
The result was a valid form of the word. But not a word which was actually in use; or even really pronounceable.
This would continue on the next page, with:
makin Jinijmin, somos muchachos, cannot say *makin jinijminka inf. tells me clearly
Hand-writing is unclear for “mak[n]ote”, “mak[in]ote”, “mak[s]ote”, “mak[‘n]ote”…
This is when I started suspecting there may have been drinking involved in some of these later sessions with Jose Guzman and Angelo. (Because it looks like they’re having fun, and getting kinda goofy at times.) The informant’s answer seems to say more about the philosophy, or [machismo] culture, of the group being interviewed. I can actually see it playing out:
You can’t just say, “We’re some men.” You have to say, “Puros muchachos estamos aqui!”
It was at this point, that I started noticing the strong Spanish-language influence in many of these examples of Chocheño given to Harrington by Chocheño speakers.
References to “Lisjan”
Page 54: The Ind. name of the Chocheños is lisianij.
In the first few pages, we find an entry that says the “Indian Name” of the Chocheños is “Lisjan“.
This may seem like an authoritative, and all-encompassing reference. But the specifics change over time.
Page 59: lisjanis, In. Infor. They said that S.Jose was an early mission [upside-down triangle symbol]; they called the Inds. here sometimes los viejos cristianos. Jose knows this trbu. too and uses it every day, in talking to me.
In the next entry, we find out that San Jose Mission Indians were also called “los viejos cristianos”.
We also find out that Jose Guzman references San Jose Mission Indians this way, as well. No location information is given yet. But that changes.
Soon, there are distinctions made between who is, and who isn’t Lisjan.
On page 95 of the PDF, a paragraph begins with “lisjanes were the San Jose.” It goes on to say that, neither the Doloreños, nor the Clareños, were Lisjanes.
Page 95: lisjanes were the San Jose — the name covered up as far as S. Lorenzo Angelo thinks. 8ing. lisjan. yo soy lisjan. The Doloreños were not lisjanes, nor were the Clareños. [Mention of Dumbarton Rail Bridge (opened 1910) at bottom of page?]
This entry includes a little more information about location. It states that the name Lisjan covered up as far as San Lorenzo. This is interesting, because the very first entry said Lisjan is the “Indian Name” of the Chocheños.
It’s also interesting, because the Chocheño-speaking Indians at San Lorenzo were called “Los Nepes”. Which means, they were considered a completely different group by Harrington’s interviewees.
Unfortunately, this entry only gives us a rough northern boundary to a possible Lisjan “territory”, certainly not enough information to pin to a certain geographic region. This also means that “Lisjan” was definitely not located in present-day Oakland, at all.
Pages 105-106: kana lisjanka, yo soy lisjan. makin lisjanikma, we are lisjanes. approved lisjanikma but could not get tongue around it.
The next entries that we see, are on pages 105 and 106. While the phrases “yo so lisjan”, and “we are lisjanes” are present; so is a real problem.
There is no distinction between the words and phrases that are actually used/spoken in Chocheño–and given to Harrington; and, the words and phrases J.P. Harrington created, or invented, on his own, and “pitched” to his informant, and interviewees.
Using the information found in Harrington’s notes, I prepared the following visual aids.
I wanted to find the answers to a number of questions I had:
Where is Lisjan? Is it in Oakland, Pleasanton, or somewhere else?
Who are the Lisjanes? Are they a specific group, or family?
Regarding what Angelo said about a Northern Boundary for Lisjan: is it possible the boundaries for Lisjan fall within the historic bounds of Mission San Jose?
Map showing Historic Place Names, Mission San Jose, and approximate North and South Mission Lands boundaries, as surveyed in 1852.
Where is Lisjan? Is it in Oakland, Pleasanton, or somewhere else?
[If this is the only document you’re going by….] And, if the Northern bounds of the name “Lisjan”, were located just before San Lorenzo, that means that:
Lisjan was not located in Oakland.
Lisjan was not bound by the historical Mission San Jose property lines.
Pleasanton was probably not called “Lisjan” by locals.
Who are the Lisjanes? Are they a specific group, or family?
Not much light is shed on who the Lisjanes are. While Jose Guzman probably declared himself Lisjan; it’s unclear the extent of Angelo’s affiliation to the name. At one point, one man touches his chest and tells Harrington that he is Lisjan in name, but his heart is from somewhere else.
Does this mean that Lisjan is somehow a transitory, or new affiliation based on where someone lives, now? Is this person simply saying something akin to, “I left my heart in San Francisco?” Or, “My heart yearns for home?” Or even something like, “This heart was made somewhere else; my blood pumps the blood of my ancestors, from a different place than here?”
We are told that the San Jose’s are Lisjan. The indian name for Chocheños from Mission San Jose are Lisjan. Indians from Santa Clara, and Dolores are definitely not Lisjan. Los Nepes aren’t Lisjan, either. And a tribe, from Sunol, the name of which no one could remember, was never affiliated with Lisjan.
This was one of the reasons I began to suspect that the bounds of Lisjan could be tied to the property lines of Mission San Jose.
But, alas, no matter which San Lorenzo you draw the Northern boundary of the name Lisjan upon, they always exceed the extent of mission property lines.
