Collage art of a shellmound with historic Alameda newspaper articles in the background, with the title words “Save Shellmounds Not Parking Lots”. Artwork by Gabriel Duncan.
While these places may be on our traditional homelands, and within our tribal territories: Brownfields properties and Supferfund sites are neither appropriate, nor respectful gifts of atonement to the Indigenous People the entire Western Hemisphere was stolen from.
It is a waste of resources for indigenous non-profiteers, like Corrina Gould, to focus primarily on post-industrial sites, like the place she alleges is the “West Berkeley Shellmound“.
It is an improper use of our allies’ time, energy–and money–to have them marching around an empty parking lot, and futilely protesting an established and thriving shopping mall (Bay Street Emeryville).
All of this takes away from the reality: Ohlone cultural resources in the San Francisco Bay Area are being destroyed by development at an alarming rate.
Without intervention, Native American cultural resources, like shellmounds, and the fragile ecosystems they inhabit and have supported for over 10,000 years, will be destroyed. Paved over, without a second thought for anything other than their “fair market value”.
Parking Lots and Abandoned Post-Industrial Spaces are not a priority; compared to Federal Recognition, Federal Land Grants, and the establishment of a Tribal Land-base and an official, recognized, Ohlone tribal reservation, and sovereign tribal territory.
Urban Gardens do not address the Land Back movement in a relevant way.
In fact, PR events like the dedication of part of Joaquin Miller Park, in Oakland, and the renaming of a park in Alameda, are completely irrelevant to the actual cause of land back, rematriating the land, and the real priorities of bona fide tribal governments, like the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area–a tribe Corrina Gould would be a member of, if she weren’t so focused on personal gain, instead of advocating for her own tribe, and all Ohlone people.
As long as people realize their time and energy is better spent on an achievable goal, like Federal Re-Recognition & The Establishment of a Muwekma Land-base: Land Back is something we can see happen within our lifetimes.
For more information on how you can help Ohlone people regain Federal Recognition, and get their Land Back, visit the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area’s website at: http://muwekma.org
Or that this is the product of Libby Schaaf’s (Mayor of Oakland) unilateral dealings with Corrina Gould (Spokesperson for Sogorea Te Land Trust, alleged Tribal Chair Person of Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.)
It’s the fact that other local Ohlone tribal groups weren’t consulted during the process of creating the easement we see proposed today.
Also: this still isn’t LandBack. It’s just an easement.
Land is not being conveyed from the City of Oakland, to any entity, as Sogorea Te Land Trust claims. An easement just gives them the right to use Sequoia Point as they chose, within the parameters of the Memorandum of Agreement entered into by the City of Oakland and Sogorea Te Land Trust. The City of Oakland retains ownership of the 5-acre area in Joaquin Miller Park–part of Oakland’s Recreation and Parks Department.
There are some important limitations listed in the propose ordinance you can find in the City of Oakland – Calendar. This includes a clause regarding public access, as well as permit free operations within the scope of the agreement and zoning requirements.
But this is a small part of a large document, that also excludes the Sequoia Point land grant, and (possibly) any future projects at the Point, from certain CEQA, NAGPRA, and AB52 Rules, which have requirements that projects on or near Tribal Cultural Resources must follow a consultation and scoping process with representatives of all the tribal groups of the area.
Bypassing these requirements would completely preclude any other tribe’s rightful claim to be a part of, or hold a share of interest in, this easement. Other tribes would not get a say in what happens at Sequoia Point, a place which other Ohlone groups claim as a part of their tribal homeland. Where each of the Ohlone Tribal Groups should share an equal interest, and have an equal voice.
The most curious part of the Agenda Report, regarding the “Cultural Conservation Easement to Sogorea Te’ Land Trust in Joaquin Miller Park” is the section marked “Public Outreach / Interest”. This section, in its entirety, states:
City staff and the Land Trust have conducted substantial outreach. The Land Trust, both with and without City staff, met with the Friends of Joaquin Miller Park several times to receive input and feedback about the project, and the organization enthusiastically supports the project. District 4 Councilmember Sheng Thao hosted an online Town Hall about the project on September 13, 2022. More than one hundred people registered for the meeting and participants expressed strong support for the project and no opposition. The Land Trust and City staff have also presented the project multiple times to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. The Commission recommended formal and enthusiastic approval at its meeting on September 14. Since the project was publicly announced on September 8, 2022, there has been a broad expression of support and enthusiasm from the public at large.
City of Oakland Agenda Report for Item # 10 22-0849, on for City Council Meeting Nov-1-2022
The passage above contains no mention of City Staff attempting to contact other tribal groups in the area.
Proponents of the easement appear to have had one very popular online Town Hall, and contacted the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, and the Friends of Joaquin Miller Park, for their opinions.
But there is no mention of either City Staff, nor Sogorea Te Land Trust, reaching out to any other Ohlone Tribal Group in this area other than the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.–who is conveniently fronted by the same person as the Sogorea Te Land Trust, Corrina Gould.
Most projects or proposals on this scale would require some form of Tribal Consultation, or Scoping; this proposal especially, because–for all intents and purposes–Sequoia Point is being considered, or treated, as a Tribal Cultural Resource.
When a city is creating an Environmental Impact Report or Assessment for any proposed public project (or project on public lands) they must exercise due diligence in requesting from the Native American Heritage Commission a list of tribes to consult regarding possible Tribal Cultural Resources possibly affected by the project, and develop ways to avoid or mitigate damage to those resources.
This is an example of a 2019 Tribal Consultation List for Richmond, California.
2019 Tribal Consultation List for Richmond, California – This list is public record and was included as part of an EIR filed in the City of Richmond, California.
As you can see, there is more than one Tribal Organization to consult with. There are seven organizations on this Tribal Consultation List, next to the associated tribes composing those organizations.
FYI: No, this list is not radically different in Oakland, California. I couldn’t find one quickly enough to use as an example. But please believe me, it looks the same, and still has more than one Tribal Organization. [… It’s also really difficult to track down one of these lists outside of an Environment Impact Report/Assessment.]
My point is: cities are required to send letters to every single one of these organizations requesting consultation. Those letters, and replies by tribal representatives, must be filed in the Environmental Impact Report/Assessment; along with a report regarding the request for consultation and any subsequent consultation and scoping activities.
The law requiring requests for consultations, and the consultation lists, were created and required in order to ensure that Native American land rights are respected; Native American Graves, and Cultural Resources are preserved, and protected from desecration.
This is done by codifying the Tribal Consultation process in the California Environmental Quality Act; thereby ensuring that Native American Tribes have a voice, and a say, in what happens on their traditional homelands, to their sacred places, and tribal resources.
The preamble of AB52, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, both specifically state this is the legislative intent of these laws.
The well-defined and accepted procedure of the Tribal Consultation Process was not followed to create the proposed Sequoya Point Cultural Easement.
To grant this land to one Ohlone group, without even talking to the others, is wrong; and in opposition to the Equity of all Ohlone People of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Choosing to award one single tribal group with land grants, while simultaneously excluding all others, sows division among indigenous people. And it interferes with tribal sovereignty in a way that disenfranchises thousands of indigenous people from having ownership of a place and project that is supposed to be for them.
The City of Oakland is meddling in tribal politics in the same way the US does in the Middle East. Or Haiti. Or any other place where people have turned around and said, “maybe that wasn’t such a good idea.” Where the actual people living in those countries have done things like burn flags, and tell us to get out. [Judgments reserved.]
The same way that some tribes were denied recognition by the US Government for petty, arbitrary reasons from the start–just as other Tribes were arbitrarily, and capriciously unrecognized [“removed from the Tribal Rolls”] during the Termination Era for the same.
This meddling is unwelcome, and sets a dangerous precedent across the rest of the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as California. The precedent that Tribal Consultation doesn’t matter.
Tribal Consultation matters.
All Ohlone Tribal Groups should be consulted, and have an equal share–and an equal voice–in the Ohlone Cultural Easement at Sequoia Point.
Excluding the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as other tribal groups, from what’s happening at Sequoia Point, is not equitable. And the easement should not go forward without proper consultation with all affected tribes of the this area. Especially since this is a land grant made in perpetuity,
This might seem like a repeat of the circumstances which led to the hostile take-over of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC.: A well-known non-profit organization with dubious claims of tribal sovereignty, and a lack of transparency which was suspended as a corporation by the California Franchise Tax Board for failure to pay taxes and/or file required financial documents.
The fact that Sogorea Te Land Trust is subject to a California Franchise Tax Board Tax Lien was discovered by a Lien Notice filed in Alameda County, on 8/23/2022, as Instrument #2022146941.
It’s unclear if Sogorea Te Land Trust’s Tax Exempt Status will be Revoked, or if the corporation itself will be Suspended by the California Secretary of State (like the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC. was;) but we will continue to provide you with updates as this situation evolves.
In the meantime–if you actually care about whether or not the Land Trust you support (like Sogorea Te Land Trust) adhere to ethical standards, and sound fiduciary conduct, we recommend checking the Land Trust Accreditation Commission’s Website, and searching for the land trust you support.
[Spoiler alert: Sogorea Te Land Trust is not an accredited land trust.]
This is an excerpt of a letter sent to ARPD’s Amy Wooldridge, the Alameda Recreation and Parks Department Director; as well as City of Alameda Mayor Marilyn Ashcraft, Vice Mayor Malia Vella; and Council Members: Tony Daysog, Trish Herrera Spencer, and John Knox White [who made the original announcement concerning the indigenous land management of property on Main Street, between Stargell and Singleton.]
Hey Amy,
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I wanted to address two things.
1. The Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. is not a Tribal Government; it is a nonprofit corporation.
The name of the true Ohlone Tribe of this area is the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Muwekma has been known as “Costanoan”, the “Verona Band”; and they have self-identified as “Yo soy lisjannes” [“Chochenyo Field Notes”, Harrington, 1921]. Additionally, the present-day Muwekma Ohlone Tribe is comprised of all of the known surviving American Indian lineages aboriginal to the San Francisco Bay region who trace their ancestry through the Missions Dolores, Santa Clara, and San Jose; and who were also members of the historic Federally Recognized Verona Band of Alameda County. [Muwekma.org; as well as both their BIA petitions for federal recognition.]
Federal Recognition could help Muwekma in the following ways, as they relate to ARPD, and the City of Alameda’s relationship with CVL:
A Land Base would be established for Muwekma in the Bay Area,
This may include ANAS/FISC Alameda property; and other open space in the City of Alameda.
Land Banks held by agencies like the East Bay Regional Park District will be transferred to Muwekma
Muwekma would be endowed with the Legal Standing required to bring suit for the cessation of excavation, destruction and/or development of Tribal Cultural Resources in the City of Alameda–
And, this might leave ARPD and the City liable, should they irrevocably devote land and resources to a corporation that is not actually a tribal government (please be careful, because we need our Parks and Rec Department; it would suck if they lost funding because it was reappropriated as restitution, or a settlement.)
Theoretically, there should also be a conveyance from Sogorea Te Land Trust to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area at this point–as Federal Recognition would render the necessity/mission of a land trust to hold land for an unrecognized tribe moot.
Aside from the factual issues with recognizing a corporation less than 5 years old as a Tribal Government; there is the political consideration.
Muwekma is a tribal nation that is trying to regain federal recognition. One of the most crucial elements they must prove in their petition is that Muwekma has existed as a continuous group since the last time they were recognized as a tribe; and that the tribal governance structure has retained its political influence on said group. This has been extremely difficult for them to plead at the level the BIA requires. And several prominent politicians have spoken out against what they believe is an arbitrary and capricious refusal by BIA to reconsider Muwekma’s petition for tribal recognition. [This is on top of previous judicial opinions also in favor of reconsideration.] But, there is another way that Muwekma can regain Tribal Recognition; and that is by an Act of Congress.
However, to affect this action, Muwekma must have a broader political influence beyond its own membership. This means they would have to gain wider public support for their cause, in order to effectively encourage congressional representatives to introduce legislation renewing Muwekma’sTribal Recognition.
I believe that the City of Alameda, and ARPD’s public endorsement of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC. as an Ohlone tribe is an error which is detrimental to the rights and struggles for recognition and sovereignty of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area insomuch that it lends false validity to a corporation that is fraudulently portraying itself as a Tribal Nation to benefit a small group of people over the needs of thousands of bonafide Muwekma Ohlone Tribal Members.
It also contributes to the erasure of all of the people whose ancestors were ground up to pave Bay Farm Road; grade former train tracks in Jean Sweeney; and fill marshland around Krusi, and Harrington Parks, among others.
It is for these reasons that I strongly suggest ARPD, and The City, reach out directly to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area before you consider doing anything else.
2. Ongoing Contamination of Soil and Groundwater At or Near Linear Park (On Main Street, between Singleton and Stargell)
I’m concerned about the most recent Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment data regarding Benzene and Naphthalene found in ground water samples around this site. These chemicals were found in 2021 data, and no mitigation activities have occurred, as this site is now open and being investigated. It’s reasonable to assume that groundwater contamination is transient, and could affect Linear Park because it has a drainage ditch well below the surface of the surrounding land, including all sites appearing on the map below. This is the same drainage ditch Tule grows in now.
Additionally, I would like to note that Linear Park itself has been subject to contamination from leaking underground storage tanks (UST’s); which contained gasoline, diesel, lubricating oil, waste oil, and other hazardous materials; which released harmful chemicals, including the two listed above (among others), into the soil and groundwater directly upon the property now referred to as Linear Park.
There are also 26 points within 1,000 feet of Linear Park which have been affected by soil and groundwater contamination, much of the land surrounding Linear Park are subject to Land Use Restrictions expressly against digging/excavating, or using groundwater. Some of these Land Use Restrictions prohibit Schools or Housing from being built on those parcels because of the risk to human health (specifically to children.)
Additionally, there is the existence of the Toxic Marsh Crust, which lies 4-18 feet below the surface of any given point on the map presented here, and presents an unknown and unmitigated hazard to any plant or animal for the foreseeable future. For your reference, the highest water level sampled for this area was given at 3 feet below ground surface (BGS); and the drainage ditches are at least four feet deep.
Please find the attached PDF “CLOS_L_2002-01-14.pdf” which is a letter from the Alameda County Healthcare Services Agency, Environmental Services, Environmental Protection, Hazardous Material Specialist Eva Chu, addressed to the City of Alameda. This document details the contamination at the point where the tule grows in Linear Park, at Singleton and Main Street. This letter notes current concentrations of hazardous materials, and examines how the underground storage tanks were removed, and the land treated.
On top of the soil used for backfill being contaminated, polluted groundwater pumped from the site was sprayed onto the soil to suppress dust during work… further contaminating an area that was supposed to be cleaned.
All of this points to:
A strong possibility that the soil and groundwater harbor contaminants dangerous to humans;
The certain necessity to test soil and groundwater in this area to determine its safety.
Furthermore, certain safety plans must be created before digging, trenching, or groundwater may be used. The attached report also states that the corrective action for this parcel must be reviewed if land use changes.
Currently this land is technically wetland and flood mitigation for tidal surges which typically flood this area. The proposed use: to grow plants for food, clothing, and medicine to be consumed, inhaled, smudged with (,etc.); is clearly a much different use[–for human consumption vs. flood mitigation]. Therefore the re-evaluation of these parcels is not just a good idea, it is an enumerated necessity, according to Hazardous Materials Specialist Eva Chu.
Please find the attached “Map Showing Past & Present Contamination in City of Alameda Proposed ‘Indigenous Land Management’ Parcels”
It is for these reasons that I strongly object to letting anyone manage any part of, or consume any thing from Linear Park–at all–until the question of contamination has been thoroughly examined, and competently settled.
Thanks for your attention to these matters. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me.
The City of Alameda, Alameda Museum, and City of Albany all need to know that hyping Corrina Gould so much is really detrimental to the struggles of the actual Ohlone tribe of this area.
As much as you hate to hear me continue to say this, I’m going to be even more clear: The Confederated Villages of the Lisjan “NATION”, INC. is not a tribal government.
CVL is not a confederated group of tribes because there is no other tribal government to confederate with that isn’t already fully incorporated into the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco…
CVL was originally created as a mutual benefit corporation to benefit only one family, those related to Corrina Gould by birth or by marriage.
And, CVL was only created to bolster the illusion that Corrina Gould was a real tribal chairperson; even though her organization held no votes, and isn’t diverse enough to represent Ohlone people as a political group beyond Gould’s immediate family.
As much as you don’t want to listen; don’t want to look; it is necessary to break the black out on this subject.
Because your willful ignorance is what’s actually causing damage. Not my insistence on reiterating the facts of the matter.
I’m not a misogynist like Gould would have you believe. When I say #rematriatetheland, this is what I mean: honor the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area by recognizing their Sovereignty as a Tribal Nation of thousands…
By recognizing the OG Ohlone. The original, indigenous, woman-led resistance.
By not recognizing people like Charlene Nijmeh, Monica Arellano, and Dolores Marine Galvan, you’re only contributing to the indigenous erasure. And disrespecting tf out of the people you should be taking pains to build relationships with.
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area doesn’t need your #shuumi. They need their Federal Recognition Restored.
That’s how Ohlone People get their land banks, land base, and land back.
Nothing short of Federal Recognition will do this.
Created using derivatives of open-source data, including (but not limited to) USGS, NOAA, USCG, NASA, Google Earth. Analyzed, processed, and produced by the Alameda Native History Project, using open-source software available to anyone with a smart phone, and the most basic computer.
Why did the Alameda Native History Project create these maps?
Necessity
The first map created by the Alameda Native History Project was the geographicaly-conformed (or “geo-conformed”) version of N.C. Nelson’s historic 1909 Map of the San Francisco Bay Region Showing Distribution of Shell Heaps. This 20th Century version of Nelson’s map was painstakingly converted, and conformed, to 21st century Geographic Coordinate Systems.
Geo-conforming Nelson’s map made it possible to accurately plot the coordinates marked on Nelson’s map; and perform Present Day Observations of the Bay Area Shellmounds.
The San Francisco Bay Area Shellmound Map now has over 300 confirmed locations. The accuracy of this map has improved considerably over time; and the research version is now accurate to within 100 feet.
This was because maps like those featured by the Stanford University’s Spatial History Lab were little more than photocopies of the original coastal surveys, with graphic overlays.
While this might be impressive to some, the lack of any real functionality or new information derived from this kind of exercise was underscored when I tried to find/use this information in the context of the Shellmounds of Alameda.
Stanford University, Spatial History Project1909 N.C. Nelson Map of the San Francisco Bay Region Showing Distribution of Shellheaps
This made it necessary to recreate a map of the historic shoreline of the San Francisco Bay Region, and hand-plot more than 300 shellmounds, just so I could view these maps and take screenshots of them to share with you. All in an effort to show you where the Shellmounds of Alameda are.
Clarity
Reproduction of Whitcher’s Survey.
The same geo-conformance process was applied to an historic map of Alameda, which has become the Alameda Museum’s sole reference concerning the shellmounds of Alameda: Imelda Merlin’s “Alameda: A Geographical History”. This book is a Geology Master’s Thesis, by Imelda Merlin, who lived and died in Alameda, California.
The fact that Merlin was an Alameda resident; and that Alameda Museum owns the copyright to the book should be immaterial to the generally dubious nature of a photo-copied map, with hand-drawn notations.
In spite of the fact that Imelda Merlin was a student at the University of California, Berkeley, it appears that the most relevant information created by N.C. Nelson–for the archaeology department of the same university–was avoided altogether by Imelda Merlin in her work.
For the aforementioned reasons, it was determined that Imelda Merlin’s work merited careful scrutiny and interrogation.
Because, at this point, I already had two other sources of location information compiled for the Alameda Native History Project:
1. Public Records Aggregate
Any mention of Alameda Shellmounds in the following archives/libraries/collections:
All references to the Alameda Shellmounds at the Alameda Free Library:
this includes references in the Historic Alameda Newspaper Archives, and the “Alameda Historic Reels”;
as well as Clipping Files, Alameda Historical Society Card Catalog [Defunct];
Library Catalog, and Special Collections.
Online Newspaper Archives, Indexes
Online Finding Aids
Genealogy Websites, National Archive, and More.
References were logged, and copies of the documents were saved. Then the documents were analyzed, information was extracted, and processed to produce an aggregated list of locations of the Alameda Shellmounds–according to explicit references in these sources.
Then the locations were geocoded, and plotted to create a map that … I don’t even know what to call. “Shellmounds Mentioned in the News”?“Historic Shellmounds”?
“Public Records” is not a very attractive label; but it might be the best label for that layer on the Alameda Shellmounds Map. [So, in case you ask “What is the Public Records Layer on the Alameda Shellmounds Map”, now you know.]
2. Nelson’s Map of the SF Bay Region Shellmounds
Like I said, this was the first map I painstakingly recreated. So, therefore, I had the locations Nelson marked within Alameda.
When I analyzed the base map printed in Imelda Merlin’s book, I was able to use these sources to help conform Merlin’s base map with current Geographical Coordinate Systems, so I could plot the positions marked in the Imelda Merlin layer in the Alameda Shellmounds Map.
I used innumerable copies of maps, surveys, photographs, and other visual representations of Alameda, from 1880 to 1910 to help conform the “Whitcher Survey” referenced in Merlin’s Map. I was never able to find a true copy of the “Whitcher Survey”. The survey is not at City Hall–as Merlin’s book states–or in the Alameda Free Library. The Museum did not have it, at last check.
I also looked to see if any map copy provided by the official website of a University, or Government Institution, or the publisher itself, or a credible archive, actually included similar shellmound positions during the time Merlin’s map was created.
TL;DR: they do not. Not even the Land Grant Case Maps, or the legit Combined, Drafted, or Official Coastal Surveys of that time, have even a hint of a shellmound anywhere. (I even tried to find a copy of the coastal survey used in a well-known documentary about the Shellmounds of West Berkeley, but was unable to track down the file before publication.)
However, even though Merlin’s map diverges from the Official Historical Record, she did capture something in her hand-drawn sketch: all of the dots on her map correspond to places where Ohlone graves have been found.
In spite of the fact Merlin calls the First Alamedans “Miwok”–instead of Ohlone. In spite of the fact that Merlin doesn’t even mention the map in the actual narrative (or “text”) of her book. In spite of the fact that the map was published in her thesis (which was then published a few years later, in a book) without any references, or citations–aside from the coast survey base map.
Somehow, she manages to highlight the same places I have located using mentions of Ohlone graves and Native American remains found in historic Alameda newspapers. Many of these discoveries happened decades after the publication of Merlin’s work. …Which could indicate that these discoveries are coincidences, rather than correlations.
It makes sense that the discovery of human remains would be carefully guarded; only mentioned in whispers between Alameda insiders, and related professionals. Certainly, the newspaper would be encourage to leave anything like that out. … At least until the houses were sold.
It’s not hard to have editorial control when real estate companies were the primary revenue sources for local Alameda newspapers. Furthermore, the Redline wars in Alameda were brewing long before residents voted to approve Measure A, in 1973.
In a “closed”, racist, housing economy, where BIPOC are excluded, and declining property values could be caused by even a whisper of non-white interest in a neighborhood: the prevalence of bones underfoot could undermine the appeal of an entire city.
Historic Redline Map showing Oakland, Berkeley, and Alameda
Alameda was probably a place where the surrounding Indigenous communities would come to bury their dead.
When you take into account historic newspaper articles like the one below (from 1893;) and the preponderance of subsequent articles concerning Native American Graves and Remains found, and then plot those locations into their own map, you get a layer of “Remains & Relics Found”.
While it is the Euro-Centric imperative to determine a single point; and explicit boundaries: the size and nature of the shellmounds was as much a mystery to these colonizers as it is to us today. For different reasons though.
Early anthropologists, archaeologists, and ethnologists lacked the imagination necessary to make the logical leaps necessary to recognize the purposefully obscure nature of our infrastructure, or decode the metaphors we left in notes and drawings for our friends.
Because of this, and because white people destroyed as much of our stuff that they possibly could (on purpose [I don’t know why]), we are now–in many cases–left with the remnants of remnants.
Because the records concerning these events, and the mere existence of the massive burial grounds under the City of Alameda, and the cities of the rest of the San Francisco Bay Region have been actively concealed, and suppressed, this story has remained untold.
“Alameda’s Indian Mounds“, published in The San Francisco Examiner, on Sunday, March 26, 1893:
“When the progressive Alamedan decides to build a home of his own on a section of the encinal that have been allotted to him by his favorite real estate dealer…
“He does not order work suspended when the excavators, who have undertaken the task of building his prospective basement, run across a well preserved skeleton or turn up a hideous looking skull.
“He has become used to such things and he knows…
“in all Alameda there is scarcely a square yard of ground that does not harbor the crumbling remains…”
The pieces of the puzzle can still be found.
And so, Nelson’s Map, Merlin’s Map, and the Public Records map were offered as three separate layers of the Alameda Shellmounds Map; so that you may also discover and analyze the similarities and differences between the locations, yourself.
The other layers mentioned, such as “Remains & Relics Found”, and more are also available to view using the layers panel of the Alameda Shellmounds Map.
As our records continue to grow, and new information found, the map and this site continue to grow as well.
Aesthetic & Availability
Let’s face it: no one wants to look at nth generation copies of copies.
I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of trying to squint, and adjust brightness, contrast, and gamma until I can barely almost read the most important part of this chapter….
I want to look at a webmap of the San Francisco Bay Area Shellmounds. I need my experiences to be more interactive, and offer more than an empty citation to a book I can’t even find anymore. I want to see a scan of the book. And read the citation myself.
But even that’s not enough. I find myself getting triggered by the language of these old, dead, white men that I just want to fight.
Most of these narratives are written from an all-white perspective, often using racial slurs, and offensive descriptions. For the past 74 years, the Alameda Museum has furthered the “gentle savage” myth that permeated Victorian Era culture in America. And continues to push the idea that Ohlone people just disappeared from Alameda, and the Bay Area, entirely.
It’s been the same narrative since “time immemorial”. (Even that phrase is from a white-washed narrative meant to pander to a White Gaze that isn’t even a majority anymore.)
California History, when it comes to Indigenous People, is broad, at best. Very little space or effort is given to properly naming, or describing Native Americans, how they looked, where they lived, what they ate….
Most textbooks will even allude to American Indian relationships with White People as something symbiotic; and leave this chapter of history conveniently blank, to make room for the concept of Manifest Destiny.
The history that we are being taught has specifically avoided the policy of indigenous extermination enacted by a California Governor in the late 1800’s; California’s military support of Indian Wars in Oregon in the early 1900’s; or, how Los Angeles stole water rights from Tribal Nations in the Central Valley and has helped to destabilize the California ecosystem, with devastating effects.
We are not taught about this.
We have instead been dazzled by trains, bridges, and pretty houses with gardens, like babies with a ring of keys.
California is the most diverse state in terms of Tribal Nations, with over 300 Indigenous Languages Spoken in California, alone. We are astronomers, conservationists, artists, engineers, doctors, and so much more. Our stories and contributions matter.
Ohlone people still live in the San Francisco Bay Area. The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area could use your help in fighting for federal recognition.
The Native American, Indigenous People that you speak of like they went extinct in the 1800’s; those people are my great-grandparents.
The first step in justice for Indigenous Californians is recognizing us.
This is why it’s important to update the aesthetic of Historical Curation, and Exhibition Design, to utilize the tools we have in the 21st Century to reach learners everywhere, using the interactive multimedia methods they use and engage everyday.
When “The Spanish” came to the San Francisco Bay Area, they called all of the people who lived here “Costanoans”; and promptly killed, and corralled them into the California Missions; then began to colonize the land by bringing cows, catfish, eucalyptus, and other foreign plants and animals.
The primary language for the Mission San Jose was Miwok.
Miwok was a common language for most missions in the San Francisco Bay Area. But, Coast Miwok is the name of just one Tribal Group in the Northern Bay Area. In fact, Coast Miwok and Miwok consider themselves as distinct Tribal Groups of their own; and should not be confused with one another.
Richard Levy’s 1978 essay, entitled “Costanoan”, and featured in the California Volume of the Handbook of North American Indians, edited by Robert F. Heizer… has been widely relied upon since its publication. Despite its obvious errors, and out-dated nature. [For instance, the term “Costanoan” was already beginning to fall out of style. It was recognized as a blunt umbrella term for an entire region, which is actually diverse af.]
Before Richard Levy’s 1978 “Costanoan” Essay was published, J.P. Harrington had already come through the Bay Area–in 1921–to document and study California Native American Languages. This is where Harrington documented the existence of a language called “Chochenyo”; and recorded it separately from the known Miwok Language.
In fact, it was Harrington, in 1921, who first recorded the phrase, “Yo soy lisjanes.” Words spoken by Jose Guzman, the last Chochenyo speaker, and “Captain” of what was then known as the “Verona Band of Indians” by white people.
But the Verona Band was just a small part of a larger group known collectively today as Ohlone People.
It was noted, then–in 1921–that these languages (Chochenyo and Miwok) somehow fit into the “Penutian” Language Tree; and that a completely different group of people from the South-West of the Delta Area around Byron (ostensibly, the “other side” of Mount Diablo) spoke a Yokutian dialect.
In fact, from the work leading up to Richard Levy’s 1978 “Costanoan” Essay, the following facts were already established, peer-reviewed, and easily discoverable by scholars such as Levy, and Alameda’s Imelda Merlin–who was a UC Berkeley student herself, and within easy counsel of Kroeber, now infamous (and former) head of the UC Berkeley Anthropology Department, and Phoebe A. Hearst Museum….
Anyway, these established facts were:
There is a group of Yokutian-speaking people who live on the East Side of Mount Diablo, up to at least the “Byron Delta Area”, probably spanning farther east toward the Sierra Foothills–joining the rest of the Yokutian-speaking area;
Neither Miwok, nor Chochenyo languages were related to the Yokutian-speaking Tribal Group in language, and diverged in custom;
The aforementioned group of people were errantly included under the term “Costanoan”, despite the obvious differences in language, religion, and culture;
Miwok is a language, and also a Tribal Group;
Coast Miwok and Miwok are two different Tribal Groups;
Chochenyo is a separate and distinct language from Miwok, spoken by at least one East Bay Tribal Group that has called themselves the “Lisjanes”–and been called the “Verona Band”, among other names;
Both Miwok and Chochenyo are linguistically related to each other, as branches, not as derivatives of one or the other.
The detrimental effects of Richard Levy’s work have undermined the fundamental understanding of the Indigenous Bay Area landscape, reducing it to something uniform, monolithic. The historical narrative Levy pushes in this work is out-dated; even for the time it was published.
It should also be noted that Levy’s work presented several claims, conclusions, and information that simply wasn’t corroborated or supported by citations, or other evidence.
In spite of these facts, the “Costanoan” essay is still relied upon by Park Services, City Governments, Developers, (and more,) today.
Levy’s work has been heavily relied upon for a number of reasons:
It was published in what is still considered to be one of the most authoritative volumes to this day: The Handbook of North American Indians;
It’s short;
It has pictures.
The map included with Levy’s essay was heavily relied upon up until the seemingly arbitrary placement of markers, and borders were pointed out.
But let’s be clear. The difference in time between when these papers were published in academic journals, and when they get published in books, like “The Indians of California: A Source Book” is notable enough for me to point out that the public side, and the interior, academic, research side of the the anthropology/archaeology/ethnology department are completely different. They move at completely different speeds.
And students/student-researchers are privy to material that just isn’t available to anyone outside of that institution.
So let’s shift gears to look at yet another scholar.
This one probably shouldn’t even be cited as a reference for Alameda Native History, anymore–given lack of credible citations and research regarding what she termed as “Aboriginal Settlement”.
Her name is Imelda Merlin, and her thesis was published as a book in 1977 as “Alameda: A Geographical History”.
This book has been referred to as the Alameda “historical bible“.
However, Merlin’s thesis is actually dated in 1964–thirteen years before publication of her book. The thesis was submitted for partial satisfaction of the requirements for a Master’s Degree in Geology.
Should I point out that Geology is not archaeology, anthropology, linguistics, or “ethnology” in any recognizable form? Because Geology is the study of the Earth. You know, like rocks, and how mountains were formed.
In the second chapter, “Aboriginal Settlement” [p. 16], Merlin presents a brief history of “man’s” occupation of the area now known as Alameda.
Here, Merlin refers to Ohlone People (known then, at least, as the Lisyan, Costanoan, and Verona) as a “branch of the Miwok tribe”. The citation for this claim refers to the unpublished, personal correspondence of Robert F. Heizer. It is unknown whether Merlin claims Robert F. Heizer shared this information during the interview, listed the bibliography; or whether there is a letter in Robert Fleming Heizer’s correspondence file that says this.
But, remember the name Robert F. Heizer (aka “R. F. Heizer”) because he’s all over this.
Merlin did not cite any academic research paper, archaeological or ethnographical reports to support her assertion that Heizer said this; in spite of his own work–contrary to the preponderance of academic papers that Heizer compiled and published, himself.
If the interview in the bibliography was performed by Merlin, as the interviewer, how come she didn’t include the transcript? If the interview wasn’t performed by Merlin, who was it performed by? What was the date of the interview?
Is the Heizer interview in the bibliography the ‘(Heizer, Personal correspondence)’ that Imelda Merlin refers to?
[Please, don’t get me started on the maps.]”
Me, This Article
Yes, I honestly expected Imelda Merlin, in the 13 years between submitting her thesis, and publishing it as a book, to fix some of these issues. I expect anyone who has that much time between writing and printing, to have edited the […] out of their manuscript.
This is troubling for a number of reasons; not the least of which is that Heizer (most probably) didn’t say that.
Merlin’s assertion that the unnamed tribe of Alameda, and its adjacent lands was “now thought to be”, a “branch of miwok” really flies in the face of what Archaeologists, Anthropologists, and Ethnologists actually believed.
J.P. Harrington’s 1921 Linguistic Survey of the Niles/Pleasanton area was well-known, and continues to be the authoritative reference concerning Ohlone People from Mission San Jose, and descendants, and family of Jose Guzman. Harrington’s work (as already mentioned in length) makes a clear distinction between the Chochenyo, and Miwok language; as well as Miwok and the “Lisjanes”.
In 1955, Alfred Kroeber, and Robert F. Heizer, had already written “Continuity of Indian Population in California From 1770/1848 to 1955”. This work specifically distinguishes between “Miwok” and “Costanoan” people who appear in the Mission Rolls.
This was, of course, after publication of Robert Heizer’s 1951, “Indians of the San Francisco Bay Area”, in the Geologic Guidebook of the San Francisco Bay Counties (Bulletin #154); which made it clear:
The San Francisco peninsula, western Contra Costa County, and Alameda and Santa Clara Counties were the home of the Costanoan tribes.”
First paragraph of the Preface to the “Indians of the San Francisco Bay Area”, Geologic Guidebook of the San Francisco Bay Counties. Bulletin 154, Division of Mines, Ferry Building, San Francisco, 1951.
Mind you, “Costanoan” territory started out as the whole of the San Francisco Bay Area, and then kept getting smaller, and more defined, until it became the area we now associate with Ohlone Territory.
Ohlone Territory is the area from Yelamu, to Huchiun Aguasto, from below Ssalson, to way far down, past Carmel, and well into the Santa Cruz Mountains.
In Merlin’s second Heizer citation, “The California Indians”, we are brought to what was considered the sequel of….
The undisputed authority on the California Indians, A.L. Kroeber, heads the list of outstanding anthropologists whose writings have been selected to appear in this book.
Here, then, for the first time since the appearance, many years ago, of A.L. Kroeber’s Handbook of the Indians of California (Smithsonian Institution, 1925) is a book which covers the material and social cultures, the archaeological findings, and a wealth of other materials on the Indians of California.
Dust cover of “The Indians of California: A Source Book”, Compiled and Edited by R. F. Heizer and M. A. Whipple, Fourth Printing, 1962, Cambridge University Press, London, England
The Handbook of the Indians of California, mentioned above, was also edited by Robert Heizer (aka “Robert F. Heizer”, aka “Robert Fleming Heizer”.)
So, Heizer is all over this stuff. As an editor, and a contributing author.
Of all the works bearing Heizer’s name, the “Indians of California” took pains to specify, exactly, the relationships of the Tribal Groups of California with each other.
This came out in the form of maps, data tables, and hundreds of pages of narrative.
Population “Table 1” Showing Costanoan and Miwok as separate GroupsMentioning Dances Miwok Received from Costanoans“Map 1” Penutian Language Family List, Showing Costanoan and Miwok as different LanguagesThree examples of Miwok and Costanoan Tribal Groups mentioned as separate, and distinct groups. Figure 1 shows a population “Table 1” with Costanoan and Miwok separate. Figure 2 mentions that certain Miwok dances were received from Costanoan Groups, from the Kuksu Big Head cult, specifically. Figure 3 shows “Map 1”, and gives a “Penutian Family” language list, showing Costanoan and Miwok as separate branches of the Penutian Language Family.
Despite some of the most “authorative”, widely publicized, even celebrated source material on the “Indians of California” at her finger-tips.
In her own citations.
Somehow….
Merlin writes:
Man was present on the shores of San Francisco Bay at least 3500 years ago according to Carbon-14 tests made of shellmound material (Gifford, pp. 1-29). Since at least one mound has revealed a layer of skeletal material below the present ground level, in much the same way as did the Emeryville mound, presumably Indians now thought to have been a branch of Miwok Indians, (Heizer, personal correspondence) occupied the Encinal as early as they did the adjacent areas.”
“Alameda: A Geographical History”, Imelda Merlin, 1977, Friends of the Alameda Library, Alameda Musuem, Alameda, California, [p.16]
The most important fact here is that the word “Costanoan” isn’t mentioned at all.
“Well, that’s what people thought in 1964.” Was one reply, when I brought up this in recent conversation with Valerie Turpin, VP of the Alameda Museum Board.
But it isn’t the Miwok who people thought occupied the Encinal as early as they did the adjacent areas.
In 1964, people thought Native Americans from the San Francisco Bay Area were called “Costanoans”. People already knew that Costanoans were different, and distinct from Miwok, Pomo, Delta Yokuts, and all the rest of the “Indians of California”.
I expressed my confusion as to why Imelda Merlin would be so wrong. I shared with Turpin the breakdown of Merlin’s sources, including the “most authoritative” sources by A.L. Kroeber, and Robert F. Heizer.
I also mentioned other work, which was published, just one year after Imelda Merlin’s book was published. It’s called “The Ohlone Way”.
Malcom Margolin wrote, or contributed, to three of the most famous books about Native Americans in the San Francisco Bay Area:
The Ohlone Way
The Way We Lived
Life in a California Mission (Introduction)
These are non-fiction narrative books; collections of stories, and songs; not academic research papers, or post-graduate theses.
Even though they’re made by a white man, for a white audience, Margolin’s work was the kind of stuff that brought solace, as I pined for home. Oh yeah, and the references to Margolin’s work can be found in Park Service Project Plans, CEQA filings, Berkeley City Council Briefs, etc.–right next to the references to Levy, and Heizer we’ve already covered, above.
Certainly, Margolin would be a fine resource to consult, when curating an exhibit on the First Alamedans, and the way they lived.
More recent events have brought the fact that Alameda is Ohlone land into the forefront of the conscious of almost every person who lives here.
Those, of course, were the visible protest actions against housing development in West Berkeley [which isn’t where the shellmound actually is]; and, before that, the takeover of Wintun/Patwin land, in Vallejo, by an activist who was the self-proclaimed “chairwoman” of the corporation known as the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC, which claimed to be a forgotten Ohlone Tribe.
In reality, Corrina Gould was a rogue “fallen member” of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area; who refused to go back home, even though Muwekma offered her enrollment in the tribe.
Despite the bad optics, and the confusion, we now know that, “Ohlone People are The Native American People From the San Francisco Bay Area”.
Because of all of this “awareness”, a City of Alameda park was renamed to “Chochenyo Park”, in recognition of the Ohlone language spoken in the Alameda area.
The City of Alameda even voted to donate city funds to the Sogorea Te Land Trust, a purportedly Ohlone Land Trust, using the Wintun name for Glen Cove, in Vallejo… and has no affiliation to any Tribal Government, whatsoever. [FYI: Nonprofit corporations cannot be Tribal Governments because the exercise of Tribal Sovereignty is not a “Charitable Purpose”.]
The City stopped short of issuing a Land Acknowledgement, though.
But this seems like enough for the Alameda Museum to take notice, and update their website, and exhibits.
But the issue still lingers:
Why didn’t the Alameda Museum vet Imelda Merlin’s book?
Why didn’t they check the citations?
When asked why the Alameda Museum only relied upon this one resource for their information (Imelda Merlin’s book), I was told that they are simply sharing the information the Museum was given when the Native American Grave Goods from the Alameda Shellmounds were transferred from the possession of the Alameda Free Library, to the Alameda Museum, sometime in the 1970’s.
But what about the ethical, and legal duties behind possessing, and curating, Native American Grave Goods?
What about:
Proper identification of the Native American Grave Goods, and Native American Artifacts in the Alameda Museum’s possession?
Proper attribution of Native American Grave Goods, and Native American Artifacts to the correct Tribal Group?
Asking the Native American Tribes for permission to possess the Native American goods and objects already in their possession?
I mentioned the prosecution of David van Horne, and how he was ordered to return the Native American Grave goods as a function of law. And how pursuant suits have ended in order to return the goods to the tribe’s possession “just because that’s the law.”
I let Valerie Turpin know that simply possessing the Native American Grave Goods without permission put them in violation of the NAGPRA laws.
She told me that the Museum had reached out to a few groups, and was working on that. I asked her if the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC. was one of the groups, and informed her that I’m now the CEO of that corporation; as of January 2022.
I told Valerie that the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area is the actual Ohlone Tribe of this area: Named In Treaty.
But that the California Native American Heritage Commission is the proper authority to contact, to determine who the Most Likely Descendants are, for the things in the Alameda Museum’s possession.
When it came to discussing “help”; voluminous reminders that the Alameda Museum is entirely run by volunteers, I just have to get this out of the way:
Museums are supposed to be an authority on their subject.
We expect museums to verify the authenticity and provenance of their exhibits before curating them.
Being “volunteer run” should not be an excuse for why the Alameda Museum’s exhibits are less credible than a 4th Grade Science Fair Project.
What did I want to do to help?
When the Alameda Museum and I first met: I offered to scan the entire card catalog with our production scanner that scans at 130 Pages Per Minute. This was just because I wanted to find what I was looking for; and scanning the entire catalog seemed like a win for both of us. I specifically mentioned that it would be a good time, then, because of the COVID-19 Lockdown, and this extended period of free time.
I never heard back on that offer. [I didn’t think the Alameda Museum took me seriously.]
But, I remembered. And, when I brought it up, I learned that the Alameda Museum Card Catalog had been entirely scanned, and was now in a database. That database, while not public (and still being worked on), was available to be searched only in the Alameda Museum.
So I basically asked how come the Alameda Museum didn’t just search its own database. Turpin asked me if I would help research.
I responded that the Alameda Museum has the only holdings on this subject that I haven’t seen. They (the museum) probably have the only remaining primary sources regarding this subject. And, that, once they locate their materials, that I (of course) would be able to cross-reference that with everything that I already have, and have put together.
Valerie mentioned the problem. The problem that these artifacts could be taken and locked away from the world’s view forever. And I really understand that fear. Because I feel it, too. As a lover of history. As an inquiry-based, tactile, experience-seeking, life-long learner.
I told her the California Indian Museum had the same problem. But they solved it. By “inviting contemporary Native Americans to come and make some contemporary Native American stuff.” The whole museum is filled with it. It’s in Sacramento, California. And it’s beautiful.
NOTE: This article was amended to include a brief mention of the California State Indian Museum’s solution to the idea that Native American Grave Good, Artifacts, Objects, Resources, and Other Things could simply be “locked up” and “no one could see them.” Because these Native American Artifact Laws do have a chilling effect on the activities of Museums.
“You Don’t Know Jack About Native America / Stop giving money to organizations and ’causes’ you know nothing about. / Research your Land Acknowledgment before you profess it.” Title art for @AlamedaNativeHistoryProject on Instagram.com.
Stop giving money to organizations and “causes” you know nothing about.
Non-profit organizations cannot be tribal governments. (The exercise of Tribal Sovereignty is not a charitable purpose.)
Organizations, like Sogorea Te “Land Trust” claim to be devoted to returning native land to native hands….
But which tribes are these organizations actually associated with?
Real Tribal Governments:
Will be able to break down their history with facts, and evidence;
Are recognized in Treaty–even if the government won’t recognize their own treaties. (And they have a documented reason for why they are not mentioned in Treaties. [e.g. Tribal Warfare, Government Favoritism of One Tribe Over Another, etc.])
Hold elections.
The last point is super important. You can’t call yourself a Tribal Chairperson if there was never a vote. And, especially, if your Tribal Government is really just a corporation.
If the “Tribal Government” you’re working with has never petitioned for Federal Recognition from the Department of the Interior; that’s a red flag.
If the California Tribal Government you’re working with claims to be a California “State-Recognized Tribe“; that’s blatantly false.
California does not have a Tribal Recognition Process.
The California Native American Heritage Commission does not have the authority to recognize tribes. Only the Bureau of Indian Affairs can do that. [Absent certification as a Tribe by the BIA, no action to protect tribal lands may be maintained, United States v. 43.47 Acres of Land, 855 F. Supp. 549, 551 (D. Conn. 1994)]
Research your Land Acknowledgment before you profess it.
The Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC. has changed from a mutual benefit corporation, to a Public Benefit Corporation dedicated to “relief of poverty in urban rez (sf bay area), mutual aid admin.”
This is a change from the tribal government Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC was purporting itself to be.
The original Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC operated in obscurity.
In the “Tribal Consulting Industry“, the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC, was known for having a propensity for burning bridges with industry experts and professionals who came to actually help Corrina Gould, and her family. As well as interfering with, and “hijacking” the land and struggles of other Native American tribes. Corrina, herself, is known for attacking and bullying people behind the scenes.
As soon as I reported my experiences with Corrina Gould, and started showing you my research, I was contacted by other people who had bad experiences with the Gould’s, and Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC.
They told me that this is typical behavior by Corrina Gould; and that they, too, had experienced bullying, betrayal, or some other type of harassment/mistreatment by Gould, her family, and followers.
My sources gave me their own stories, and more than one honestly suggested that it’s not worth my time to cover this topic; expressed concern over being harassed by Gould’s “followers”. Told me that they could be dangerous. But it’s difficult not to talk about this. Because people ask me about this subject pretty frequently.
I’m not the only person to take a look at how Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC., and Sogorea Te Land Trust were set-up, and see red flags. But no one wanted to report on this subject because they’re afraid of being called racist, misogynist, being cancelled, or just harassed by Gould, her family, and followers.
You don’t know about this, because–up until now–Corrina Gould has managed to bully people who question her into silence; or discredit anyone who disagrees with her by calling them, “colonizers” or “karens”.
This all describes efforts by Corrina Gould to avoid the question. To deflect scrutiny back on to her “attacker”.
Corrina Gould’s supporters enable this, by blindly believing everything she says, without thinking critically about the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, and how come Corrina Gould isn’t enrolled in the tribe that she’s from; the real Ohlone tribe in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Instead of being led by pure emotion, and zero analytical thought: how about read a book or something?
Actually look at the court records, and all of these other documents which are public, and available to you.
If you’re woke-woke, you do your own research, right?
You question authority and find out for yourself, right?
Maybe not.
I also wanted to believe the narrative that Corrina Gould has created, because it’s so powerful, and attractive, and righteous.
But her narrative only lends more obfuscation to the situation; and levies the ignorance and confusion surrounding Bay Area Native History, Land Trusts, and what a Tribal Government really is.
There’s supposed to be a segue here, but I can’t think of one to say I want to look at these two things:
Corrina Gould’s failed negotiations at West Berkeley; and the lie of Glen Cove.
These events are important, because:
They are well-known;
What I’m about to say is easy to verify; and,
This topic hasn’t been critically addressed, until now.
“West Berkeley Shellmound”
The most important thing you need to know is: CVL was offered a cultural center, outdoor park, and money for use of the land in West Berkeley, until it was to be completely turned over to Ohlone people in 99 years or something–which is a lot of rent money. (This article, from Berkeleyside mentions the cultural education center.)
But Gould refused this offer, out-right, and continued to make unreasonable demands, and unrealistic counter-offers, all the while telling the public that Native American people were being ignored.
In reality, Corrina Gould walked away from the sweetest deal for urban land back that I’ve never found an equivalent to.
In fact: it was because Tribal Consultation had occurred in West Berkeley–using Andrew Galvan’s archeological company–that we know the Spenger’s Parking Lot in Berkeley isnot a shellmound.
The City of Berkeley’s “West Berkeley Shellmound” historical district was purposely created in a space larger than the footprint of the actual shellmound because the people who planned and created the district didn’t know where the shellmound actually was. These details all came out in the litigation over the West Berkeley Shellmound, and is public record.
From the perspective of everyone involved in West Berkeley, except for Corrina Gould: the parties attempting to negotiate with Corrina delayed the project, made extraordinary good faith concessions in negotiations. The City and Property Owners (Ruegg & Ellsworth) did everything they could, short of stopping construction of housing during a housing crisis.
The planning process had already taken place; the Environmental Impact Report was finished; and, Tribal Consultation and Scoping was completed with the West Berkeley Shellmound’s Most Likely Descendant (as determined by the Native American Heritage Commision), Andrew Galvan.
The bulk of Corrina’s legal battles have been fought behind the auspices of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC.
But claiming to have “fought battles” in court, when you’ve barely been allowed to file as an intervenor is a stretch. The most that Corrina Gould managed to do during the ensuing litigation was delay the inevitable, and make things extremely expensive for everyone, except her, and CVL (Sogorea Te Land Trust paid for the attorneys.)
The City of Berkeley knew its hands were tied, that it would be improper to deny Ruegg & Ellsworth’s permit, and contrary to law. But, Corrina Gould wanted the development stopped, at all costs….
Even though it was too late in the process. Even though tribal consultation had already taken place. Even though Corrina Gould didn’t have the tribal authority to sue for an injunction; because the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC is not a Tribal Government.
So what did Corrina Gould do?
Gould threatened to sue the City of Berkeley (May 2018), if Berkeley didn’t deny Ruegg & Ellsworth’s project permit.
Even though the City of Berkeley knew it was improper to deny the permit; and contrary to existing law (SB 35.)
Even though Tribal Consultation, and two archeological studies had been conducted; and concluded the parking lot wasn’t where the shellmound was; and the “overspread”, “remnants” of the shellmound underneath the lot certainly was not a “structure” by any of today’s standards. It was probably moved from a different location, where the mound actually was. [Perhaps for road building, or agriculture.]
The City of Berkeley knew that they could be sued by Ruegg & Ellsworth; which would cost tens of thousands of dollars, and likely end in defeat.
But the City still denied the project permit. And it did end in defeat….
Ruegg & Ellsworth filed for a writ of mandate to compel Berkeley to comply with SB 35.
First, The Alameda County Superior Court ruled in favor of the City of Berkeley denying the permit.
Then, Ruegg & Ellsworth appealed the ruling of the Superior Court, and was ultimately awarded judgment, and granted a mandate to compel the City of Berkeley’s compliance with California law.
From the perspective of CVL, and Sogorea Te, this story ends abruptly; with the filing of an appeal to the California Supreme Court. There was a lot of hype about “taking the fight to the supreme court”.
Fundraising and Social Media Campaigns went into high gear.
Balance of the “Shellmound Defense Fund” is $77,633 as of Jan. 24, 2022. [shellmound.org]
Even that article makes the mistake of not recognizing Confederated Villages of the Lisjan as a Corporation, versus the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, which is actually comprised of, and represents the real, bona fide, Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
We’re talking about thousands of people legitimately enrolled in a tribe, versus, a brand-new corporation (from 2017) that claims to have “over 85 members”, and has been around “since time immemorial.”
Corrina Gould argues that “her” tribe is unrecognized. That they are being treated unfairly, and ignored. Gould has also said she shares a common ancestor with Muwekma, in Jose Guzman–but that they are not the same tribe, somehow.
When you look at their websites: CVL never mentions Muwekma. Sogorea Te Land Trust never mentions Muwekma, either.
But, somehow, their “historical background” seems to mirror perfectly the real story of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Both corporations (CVL and Sogorea Te Land Trust) made their mission to advocate for Ohlone people, and put native land, into native hands. But neither organization has dedicated their assets to any specific Native American tribe that is State or Federally recognized, or even proven their connection to Jose Guzman past the barest allegation.
The lie of Glen Cove (“Sogorea Te”)
We know that Corrina Gould managed to procure an easement at Glen Cove.
Gould claimed this was a victory because “Native voices were heard.”
But was this a victory?
The actual story of the negotiations, and real struggle happening concurrently with the very visible occupation of Glen Cove is much different than what’s been covered in the news.
What you don’t know is that this easement came at a great cost to the local bands of Wintu, and Patwin tribes. That the “Memorandum of Understanding and Settlement Agreement” at Glen Cove (“Sogorea Te”) would cost tribes $100,000 dollars.
At both Glen Cove and West Berkeley, Corrina Gould claimed that Tribal Consultation had never taken place.
This is absolutely incorrect.
Tribes at both Glen Cove, and West Berkeley accepted the invitation for consultation and scoping at the very beginning of the development process; and had conducted, and concluded business with the respective developers and responsible parties long before a decision was made to issue the permits for construction.
District officials have been in almost daily contact with Kesner Flores, a member of the Cortina Indian Rancheria band of Patwin Indians. He is acting as an intermediary between the district and three Patwin tribes.
The Colusa, [Cortinas] and Yocha Dehe bands support the project, Flores said, because it would cap, with a foot of soil, vulnerable archaeological resources supposedly belonging to the tribes.
“There is one thing that a tribe does not do — take another tribe’s territory,” said Flores, referring to the protesters, who he considers a “community group” with no tribal authority.
Flores was only quoted once telling us that Glen Cove Park was Patwin land.
No other news coverage mentions the fact that Corrina Gould, and other protestors, are interlopers on another tribe’s territory.
Flores didn’t directly say that Corrina Gould was interfering with other tribes’ business. Or that Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC didn’t belong there. Because, Native Americans largely try to avoid direct confrontation where they can.
(At this time: Sogorea Te Land Trust wasn’t even born yet; but the corporation has no representation from the Native American tribal groups/bands associated with Glen Cove, to this day.)
Ignoring the objections of Kesner Flores–who was the Most Likely Descendant of the Glen Cove Shellmound, and represented 3 different bands of Patwin people–was exactly how not to “come correct“, and truly contrary to the Native American Tribal Protocols, which Corrina Gould tries so hard to champion.
According to the [Native American Heritage Commission], the Glen Cove Water Park (GCWP) site is Patwin Territory, and the most likely descendant is Patwin member Kesner Flores.”
Draft Environmental Impact Report Glen Cove Waterfront Park Project, State Clearinghouse No. 2001092044
The truth is: Tribal Consultation Occurred… without Corrina Gould
Neither of these consultations included included the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, INC, nor Corrina Gould, because:
CEQA Flowchart. The Public Review Period is marked towards the middle of the page.
Glen Cove is Wintu & Patwin land (not Miwok), and, regardless of whether or not Karkin people shared, owned it–or whether or not the area was actually community property–it doesn’t matter, because CVL is from Oakland.
Kesner Flores was determined to be the Glen Cove Shellmound’s “Most Likely Descendant” by the Native American Heritage Commission.
West Berkeley was consulted by the one-and-only Andrew Galvan, the Most Likely Descendant of the West Berkeley Shellmound. Galvan is a well-known, direct descendant of Dolores Marine Galvan. He is the docent of Mission Dolores, and directly affiliated with the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Glen Cove park was consulted by several Tribal Representatives, including, Kesner Flores, who NAHC determined is the Most Likely Descendant of the Glen Cove Shellmound remains.
Legally, Corrina Gould has no standing; she’s not Patwin; and CVL is not a Tribal Government, nor the Most Likely Descendant of a shellmound in Vallejo, California.
Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC has only been allowed to file as an intervenor in ongoing matters in the past; and Corrina Gould’s lack of standing–even as the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC.–has been laid out clearly by the judges of every court case they’ve ever been involved in.
Corrina Gould’s connection to Muwekma
The present-day Muwekma Ohlone Tribeis comprised of all of the known surviving American Indian lineages aboriginal to the San Francisco Bay region who trace their ancestry through the Missions Dolores, Santa Clara, and San Jose; and who were also members of the historic Federally Recognized Verona Band of Alameda County.
Why does nothing in the Muwekma literature–including the Department of Interior petitions for Muwekma Federal Re-Recognition, which contain hundreds of pages of ancestry information & expert analysis–ever mention Corrina Gould, or her mother, Joann Tucker?
Every enrolled/disenrolled/or potential Muwekma Ohlone Tribe enrollee can trace their ancestry straight back to their full-blooded ancestor.
That’s how this works. For every tribe.
In the case of Muwekma: this ancestry is readily available. Gould’s mother, at the very least, should appear in the records. But her name does not. None of the records I found contained any concrete link between Corrina Gould and Jose Guzman.
However, I’ve been told that there could be a link. But, the bottom line is, no one has found it. And Corrina Gould has stayed deathly silent on this subject.
The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area has been researched extensively by the Bureau of Indian Affairs; Muwekma tribal members and scholars (, such as Alan Leventhal,) have accomplished so much more of their own research into their history, ancestry, heritage, culture, and traditions, that the link between Corrina Gould and Jose Guzman should be clear and convincing.
That information should be right there. The entire tribal rolls are listed in the Muwekma Petition for Federal Recognition.
I’m not kidding. About any of this.
We, as Native Americans, descendants, have to know who our nearest, full-blooded “Indian Relative” is. We need to be able to prove it to become enrolled in a tribe, or receive a tribal descendant ID card.
Did you know: If Corrina Gould really is related to Andrew Galvan, “seven great-grandmas back”, then she could be as Native American as Elizabeth Warren is. However, if her Great-Great-Grandfather were Jose Guzman, she could be as Indian as I am.
It’s a fallacy to believe something is true unless proven otherwise. How does one prove non-existence? How can you say that you believe in something like miracles, or gods, until someone can prove that they don’t exist? You can’t even prove they exist in the first place.
Believing Corrina Gould’s claims does not make them true.
You can’t believe harder than you think.
You’re not “woke” if you do that. Being woke means thinking critically, and asking questions, especially to authority; working actively to sabotage, destroy, and deconstruct the systems of misogyny and enslavement that we are all caught in.
However:
Truth is not an opinion. Truth is a verifiable fact.
This is the problem with the current assumption that Corrina Gould is a legitimate “Tribal Chairperson”, just because she says she is.
That the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC is some tribe that we’ve never even heard of, that was here the whole time.
It’s not true.
No one asked why all the officers of the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC had the same last name. Or which Villages were a part of the Confederation. (How come we never heard from them–the other villages in the Confederation?)
If Sogorea Te Land Trust is trying to return native land to native hands, why is “Muwekma” completely absent from their website? Do they simply intend to grant land to Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC?
Up until now, Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, Inc. was a mutual benefit corporation, which is different than what we think a nonprofit corporation is.
In a true nonprofit, its assets would be dedicated to a charitable purpose, such as to an Indian Tribal Government. This “dedication of assets” should appear as a clause on the organization’s Articles of Incorporation. It does not appear in CVL, or Sogorea Te Land Trust’s articles of incorporation.
So, which tribe(s) are Sogorea Te Land Trust, and Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC associated with?
Because it’s not Muwekma, or Colusa, or Cortina, or Yocha Dehe.
There is a black-out on this subject which needs to stop.
Native American tribes are not corporations.
Beware of corporations which pose as Tribal Governments.
Every tribe must exercise its sovereign powers to administer tribal governance. The struggle of every tribe is for sovereignty. Sovereignty over self, over land use, over water rights, and more.
Even though the IRS uses the term “federally recognized tribe” in their documentation, the “exercise of sovereign power” is the operative phrase.
What is the excersize of sovereign power?
“Rev. Rul. 60-384, 1960-2 C.B. 172, provides that even though a wholly owned state or municipal organization may be separately organized, it is not eligible for IRC 501(c)(3) exemption if it has substantial regulatory or enforcement powers in the public interest. These powers traditionally are referred to as sovereign powers.
The three generally acknowledged sovereign powers are:
Hint: this is probably why there’s a clever distinction to remind you “Shuumi” means gift (a.k.a., “donation”.) Because Land Tax is an example of regulatory/sovereign power.
So, this means: Gould’s purported position as “Tribal Chairperson” of the Confederated Villages of Lisjan, INC was only stating her position as CEO, and President of The Board of that corporation.
Even though a Board of Directors is a “council”; a Board of Directors is not a “Tribal Council”.
There was no visible representation from any Ohlone Village, specifically. The former Confederated Villages of the Lisjan, INC only stated they were in occupied name-of-territory-here; but they never alleged that they were from or a representative of any village, specifically.
Despite the prohibition against nonprofit corporations wielding sovereign power: CVL seemed to exist primarily to fight eminent domain battles in court, using questionable legal theories to back frivolous lawsuits which they had no legitimate standing for; because suing corporations over something you state is “your land” is an exercise of sovereign power.
The recognition of Corporations as “akin”, or equal to, real Native American Tribal Bands, and Tribal Governments is an error.
Without correction, this error will result in Real Tribes losing even more land, rights, and recompense for the terror and genocide they survived; and for which the Federal Government entered into treaties granting tribes–like the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area–a landbase; and lots of other things which the Federal Government doesn’t honor today.
The refusal to cover this issue has created a lot of ignorance.
And the lack of answers to basic questions people have about East Bay Tribal Culture has created even more confusion.
Underneath all of this was the pallor of Corrina Gould’s prior conviction for fraud,
which I found referenced in a civil “Confession of Judgment”, during a summary search of the Alameda County Superior Court Records. The Criminal Case File itself was destroyed, but the Alameda County Superior Court Criminal Records still had something indexed, which included information about Corrina Gould’s conviction, offense, et cetera.
I could make this really long. And try to explain to you in excruciating detail, “Why you shouldn’t give money to someone who’s been convicted of fraud.“
I could tell you about Bernie Madoff, Rachel Dolezal, or Yolanda Saldivar…..
But, honestly, if you got this far down, and you still need another reason to pay attention to the red flags surrounding Corrina Gould….
It’s not just a salty catch-phrase. It’s a plea for reason, and a plan to move forward in realizing the protection and return of sacred Native American sites in the San Francisco Bay Area.
The only way to protect sacred sites, like Shellmounds, and Petroglyphs, is by actively protecting them.
This means:
Recognizing the difference between corporations who claim to be tribal governments, and actual Tribal Governments.
Empowering Tribal Law Enforcement with the Authority to Arrest and Prosecute Non-Indians Within Their Sovereign Borders
Adding Sacred Sitesnot protected by Tribal Law Enforcement to the “Beat” of the Law Enforcement branches of the Bureau of Land Management, USDA Dept. of Forestry, Cal. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, etc.
Utilizing modern surveillance technology to serve as witness to crimes like vandalism, theft, and dumping.
By concealing these heritage sites, we begin to make them taboo. They become places we don’t go to anymore. Places that we could lose our connection to, ironically, because we wanted to protect them.
