Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Who Offers Leadership To The Pechanga Tribe?

The gauntlet has been thrown down at the Pechanga reservation. Pecahnga tribal chairman Mark Macarro is no longer the golden boy .

Is a Maziel destined to lead the tribe again?

Can Andrew Masiel become the new chairman via another recall attempt? Can he earn the trust of the people when he partners with a child molester?

Can our congress stomach that partnership? Andy should be looking elsewhere for votes

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Chumash Tribe Sues IRS for Double taxation

Capitol Weekly tells us that The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians has sued the Internal Revenue Service, claiming the agency double-taxed them and owes them a refund that could total in the millions of dollars

But the tribe maintains that this contrasts with California law, which states that casino income is exempt from taxes, but only if the recipient is a member of the casino tribe, living on the same reservation as the casino itself, or if they are living out of state.

The dispute arises out of the 2003 and 2004 tax years. According to Feldman, the IRS could levy these taxes on these revenues from the tribe or directly from its members in their individual tax returns, but not both.       Read the rest at the link above.

From the Comments:

The Santa Ynez casino is not located on eligible "Indian Lands" as defined in the Indian Gaming and Regulatory Act. It is not and never was a "reservation" although the tribe calls it a reservation and the land has never been brought into federal Indian trust. In fact the tribe and it's casino operation owes back taxes including unremitted sales taxes it has collected from unsuspecting customers thinking they were paying state "sales tax" when that 8 3/4 percent of each sale was pocketed by the tribe. An audit will likely disclosew they owe back property taxes and state income taxes totalling in the millions. Hopefully this latest attempt by the tribe to get a "refund" of taxes will expose the fact that it is the Sanrta Ynez Chumash that still owes millions in upaid taxes and the end result will be that they will be forced to pay them as they should have been long ago. The State and Santa Barbara County (who furnish all of the public services and infrastructure to the tribe, its casino and related businesses, has been deprived of these tax revenues needed to pay for all these public services and infrastructure and which have been a burden on the other non-Indian taxpayers. Maybe now these non-Indian taxpayers will be made whole!

Stay tuned.   But maybe some audits are in order?

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Mixed Blood Uintas Losing Battle of Attrition to Federal Government

When you have the full force of the United States Government trying to exterminate your people, it's difficult to mount a defense of your history and ancestors.   Here's a story about the Mixed Blood Uintas, who were terminated by our government.

Here's a link to their website

In this website is chronicled the history of the Ute Partition Act of 1954 (UPA) and the effects it has had on the Terminated mixed blood members of the Uinta band of Ute's and their action to repeal the "UPA". Read and learn the true facts about the Discrimination brought upon 490 once independent, self-supporting, productive American Indian's, who were reduced to welfare rolls in less then ten years.

No Unique Group of Americans illustrates the vulgarity of a failed federal policy more than the Mixed-Blood Uinta's of Utah. Who were once full members of the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation located in northeastern Utah and who find themselves "non grata" in the land of their birth...

A Government policy called termination, carried out in the early 1950's. A policy of assimilating American Indians into main stream American society which was allowed to go "awry". Assimilation designed to force American Indians out of their culture and told to forget their history.

Why have scholars and the mainstream media avoided the saga of the Mixed-Blood Uinta’s? Your first thought would be this doesn't happen in America, would seem the most obvious. But the real reason this story is ignored simply because they are not considered Indian enough and is a kind of “racial dualism” that is deeply rooted in Anglo-American thought, and this dualism carries over into scholarly dichotomies of “Indian and white.” (Warren Metcalf’s “Terminations Legacy” page 3) But the real reason is the vast amount of wealth powerful non-Indian individuals (Grifter's) and entities are receiving, surreptitiously, under the UPA by chicanery and claiming titular which is a canard!

There's a lot to learn from there site.   Please take a look

Descendents of Slaves Left off Cobell Settlement; Perpetuates Racial Discrimination

I bet many of you did NOT know that tribes like the Cherokee OWNED SLAVES.

Descendants of slaves owned by the so-called Five Civilized Tribes challenged the $3.4 billion class action settlement in Elouise Cobell et al. v. Ken Salazar, in a class action of their own. The Harvest Institute Freedman Federation says the Cobell settlement was racially discriminatory, with the United States paying off descendants of treasonous Indian slave-owners who took the South's side in the Civil War, while stiffing descendants of the Indians' slaves.

The $3.4 billion settlement in Cobell v. Salazar, which will be implemented under Title I of the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, "is racially discriminatory and perpetuates past unlawful racial discrimination," the Freedman Federation says in its own class action.
During the Civil War, the Seminole, Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek and Chickasaw tribes cut ties with the Union and entered into treaties with the Confederacy. In 1866, the tribes had to make new treaties with the United States to regain their land and trust beneficiary status, according to the complaint.

Part of the deal was emancipation of the tribes' slaves, the Freedmen, and though each treaty was different, the slaves of each tribe were to be accepted into the tribe and given various amounts of land in order for the tribes to be given their trust benefits, the class says.
The Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes were reluctant to take the deal; the Choctaw never gave its freedmen the land they were owed and the Chickasaw never adopted them into the tribe, the complaint states.
The Claims Resolution Act will give the descendents of these tribes assets while denying trust benefits to the freed slaves that were "swindled" of their land.
The Cobell case challenged the government's mishandling of Indian trust assets. The "settlement reaffirms the existence of a trust relationship between the United States and Native Americans dating back to 1887," according to the Freedmen's complaint.
But the class adds, "by reason of racism and misfeasance members of the putative plaintiff class were excluded from the receipt of proceeds of these land transactions and therefore did not have individual money accounts established, although under the treaties with the defendants establishment of these accounts for Freedmen was mandatory."

Read more at COURTHOUSE NEWS     Creek Freedmen    Cherokee Chief in Hall of SHAME

UPDATE:   THANKS to Indian Law Daily for linking to us.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Pala Chairman Robert Smiths Meets With President Obama at Conference

The chairman of the Pala Band of Mission Indians met with President Barack Obama on Thursday as part of a 12-member delegation of tribal leaders to discuss American Indian issues ranging from law enforcement to health care. Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro was not chosen to meet with the President.

The face-to-face meeting with the president was part of the larger White House Tribal Nations Conference, a one-day meeting held at the Department of the Interior in Washington, D.C., to give tribal leaders an opportunity to meet and talk with representatives of the Obama administration.

Pala Chairman Robert Smith said he was honored to have been chosen to represent California Indian tribes at the meeting with the president.


"It was quite an experience," Smith said. "I was surprised and happy." 

In the 20-minute meeting, Smith said, he emphasized the need to appoint more American Indian judges in federal courts and the need for more funding for the Bureau of Indian Affairs to provide services for poor and nongambling tribes.   Violations of civil rights by Indian tribes should also be a topic of discussion

Rincon Lawsuit Against California May Get Supreme Court Review

A lawsuit filed by the Rincon Band of Mission Indians against the state could be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court next year.

The lawsuit was filed in 2004 by the North County tribe after negotiations for a new gambling agreement with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger fell apart. The tribe said the governor was violating federal law by insisting that tribes pay money into the state's general fund in exchange for more slot machines.

"We embarked on this course because Arnold Schwarzenegger's illegal extortion of tribal governmental revenue violates our sovereignty and federal law," Rincon Chairman Bo Mazzetti said.

The tribe stood to lose tens of millions of dollars under a deal offered by the Schwarzenegger administration while generating little for the tribe itself, according to court documents.

Schwarzenegger's office did not return calls for comment. The governor has maintained that the state negotiated in good faith, and he was confident he would prevail in the lawsuit.

The Rincon tribe owns a Harrah's brand casino and hotel in Valley Center. Tribal leaders have said they are willing to pay to offset problems related to their casino as long as the money goes back to local communities and does not stay in state coffers.

Schwarzenegger was elected in 2003 in part on a pledge that he would get gambling tribes to pay more money to the state as a way to offset California's growing budget deficits.

A divided three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. District Court of Appeals in April upheld a lower court ruling that sided with the Rincon band. In the 2-1 ruling, written by Judge Milan Smith Jr., the court said the governor's revenue-sharing demands amounted to an illegal tax.

Schwarzenegger asked the Supreme Court to review the ruling. On Monday, the Supreme Court asked the Obama administration to weigh in on the Rincon case. The Justice Department's opinion could determine whether the justices take up the case in their 2011-12 term or let the appeals court ruling stand.

Saturday, December 18, 2010

President Obama Announces Endorsement of UN Declaration; Will POTUS address issues of Human Rights Abuses in INDIAN COUNTRY?

It's a good move for our President to lend his endorsement, but will it be wind through rotted sails? We have so many human rights issues here in Indian Country that many tribal leaders should be EMBARRASSED.

During the second annual Tribal Nations Summit in Washington, DC this morning, President Obama announced that the United States will lend its support to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Prior to this morning's announcement, the United States had been the lone holdout of the original four nations to vote against the adoption of the Declaration by the UN General Assembly in 2007; the other three (Australia, New Zealand, and Canada) have all since reversed their position.

AIRRO held listening sessions on the abuses in Indian Country, that we wrote about in April:

Indians from various parts of Indian Country recently participated in several listening sessions hosted by the American Indian Rights and Resources Organization ("AIRRO"), a Native American civil rights group.

The sessions were held to allow individuals, groups and tribes an opportunity to testify regarding violations of basic human and civil rights in Indian Country. The testimony and recommendations given at each of the sessions will be used by AIRRO to prepare a report which will submitted to the United Nations for use in the Universal Periodic Review of rights issues within the United States.

"The sessions were important for the simple fact that they allowed individuals and groups the opportunity to provide information regarding an issue, that up till now, had gone unreported," stated AIRRO President John Gomez, Jr. "Many people are unaware that tribal officials have committed gross human rights violations against their own citizens. And many more would be surprised to hear that the United States government is largely responsible for allowing the violations to occur and continue."

Please see:   Apartheid at Pechanga    Genocide in Indian Country       Pechanga's ICRA Violations    Temecula Massacres

The United States has created an environment for human and civil rights abuses in Indian Country. As long as tribal officials can invoke immunity to escape prosecution and individuals are denied redress for violations of their rights, the number of human rights victims in Indian Country will continue to grow," added Gomez.

The attendees at each of the sessions provided recommendations to address the rights abuses in Indian Country. Well some stated that federal courts should have the authority to review tribal actions that allegedly violate the rights of individuals, most said that the federal government must provide meaningful enforcement of existing laws enacted to protect individuals from abuses by tribal officials.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

WHY It's Right For Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro To Not Represent Tribes with President Obama

Hunter cousin A'amokat had this in the comment section and we thought it deserved to be promoted to a full post.

Thank you to the Obama administration for not allowing people like Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro to represent Indian country today in Washington DC.

Why, do you say, is this important to us?

 Chairman Macarro presided over denying us due process of law when we were disenrolled from the Pechanga tribe in 2006 (OP:  We were the second large family to be disenrolled) so he doesn't deserve to represent Indian country to the administration in any way, shape, or form.

Imagine for a moment that your citizenship in your nation was being questioned and you are summoned in front of a government committee, in this case the enrollment committee of your tribe, who had among the panel sitting in judgment of your fate individuals who had filed the initial challenge of your citizenship in the first place.

This first challenge was disallowed for obvious reasons but after this close family members and the friends of those same committee members submitted statements against your citizenship.   (OP:  Think of it as the relatives of Justice Clarence Thomas, Scalia, Breyer, Ginsburg providing statements demanding the Supreme Court act.   Do the words recusal and improper come to mind?)

This time the challenge is allowed and even though you request to Chairman Macarro that those committee members with a clear conflict of interest be made to be recused from ruling on your case, they are allowed to sit in judgement of you and your family's fate.  (OP:  For good measure, a tribal council members's MOTHER and AUNT are on the committee)

At the initial hearing in front of the government committee questioning your citizenship in your nation you are not allowed to have an attorney present to represent you and you are not allowed to have any copies of the transcripts of the proceedings so even though the committee left out key steps of the procedures in place, you cannot document this without official transcripts so it is your word against the committee's word.   (NO representation, no discover, no right to confront accusers, no writing implements, and NO responses from the committee)

Not surprisingly the committee rules against you keeping your citizenship in your nation by a slim one vote margin.  (OP: and that one vote was "bought" by enrolling that voter's family, even though a moratorium has kept other family's members OUT of the tribe for a decade.)

The committee consisted of six members who sat in judgement of your keeping your citizenship or not and the committee members with the clear conflict of interest were three of the committee members, all of the votes against your family, with the chair not voting as the chair only would have voted in the event of a tie.

You appeal your case to the executive branch of your government, in this case the tribal council, where one of the councilman is the son of a committee member, the nephew of another committee member, and a close relative of people who submitted statements against your citizenship so he should have been made to be recused from ruling on your appeal but he is also allowed anyway to sit in judgement of your family's fate.

Once again not surprisingly you lose the appeal of the decision to take away your citizenship by one vote.

At this appeal hearing in front of the tribal council you again were not allowed to have an attorney present with you but not only that, you were not allowed to ask any questions or to even to take any notes as note taking instruments of any kind are not allowed in the hearing room per a letter you received from the tribal council prior to the appeal hearing.

The equal protection clause of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians' constitution and bylaws under Article V, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Missions Indians, says the following:


So government officials, as you are looking into this blog, our tribe's own constitution was violated when we were disenrolled for, among others, the above reasons.

But if a tribe doesn't follow their own rules, who can make them do so?   So we need enforcement of the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA).

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Tribal Reps from Civil Rights Violating Tribes Redding Rancheria, Pechanga and Enterprise DENIED Opportunity to Meet With President Obama

In a bit of good news regarding justice in Indian Country, know human and civil rights violators nominated to represent Indian Country in meeting with President Obama denied opportunity to attend meeting.   

Mark Macarro of Pechanga, was nominated to be the representative of the western region:   DENIED
OP BLOG Hall of Shame Member and Nominee from Enterprise Rancheria Glenda Nelson:       DENIED
The nominee from Redding Rancheria, which eliminated the Foreman Family 8 yrs ago:           DENIED


Thank You to White House Staff for DENYING violators a meeting with our President.  And CONGRATULATIONS to  ROBERT SMITH from PALA for being the west coast representative.

IETAN CONSULTING: Anatomy of a Lobbying Firm, Working to Keep the Small Tribes From Enjoying the Benefits of Gaming

MOVING this post forward, since the Senate seems so interested today.  Thanks for visiting.

Recently at an NCAI (National Conference of American Indians) meeting, a handout worked its way around the meeting. This handout details the incestuous nature of a lobbying group IETAN CONSULTING and allies in the Obama Administration and Congress. This is particularly insightful in light of Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein's recent work to keep tribes from gaining casinos as their land is placed into trust.
We've posted on trust land issues before, concerning Mark Macarro.

While you would hope and think that Native American lobbyists would be working for the good of all Native people, sadly this isn't the case. As the document will show, IETAN has been working to keep smaller tribes from enjoying the benefits of gaming. Isn't that reprehensible?

We've posted numerous times of the civil rights violations of some of IETAN's clients, including the incredibly rich tribe, The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians and other tribes like the Picayune Rancheria and the Redding Rancheria. Comically, they also have clients that Open Secrets lists as HUMAN RIGHTS. How can they give an effort to protect one tribe's human rights, while working for other principal clients that have destroyed the civil and human rights of their people?

Here's the multi-page document on IETAN CONSUTULTING:

Ietan Story: Tribal Lobbyist Firm

Now, this document paints with a broad brush and throws Jack Abrahamoff's name about. We do know there is a connection between former IETAN team member and Abrahamoff, but we'd take that with a grain of salt. We will have more on IETAN, Holly Cook Macarro and AKIN GUMP.

Read more about the brutally corrupt treatment of Indian People at Pechanga, Picayune and Redding.

Monday, December 13, 2010

Pechanga Makes it More Difficult for Schools to Receive Money Stolen From Tribal Members

The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians has stolen some $280,000,000 from tribal members they terminated via disenrollment.  Now, their friends at the Press Enterprise reports that the tribe will make the schools jump through some hoops to get their donations, which now total over $2.6 million in the last 13 years.    Hey, where did the other $277,400,000 go?

Donations from the Pechanga Development Corp. will help purchase varsity uniforms for players at Murrieta Mesa High School, buy music and scripts for Lakeside High School's band, dance and drama programs and support ninth-grade orientation at Chaparral High School in Temecula.

Southwest Riverside County high schools have come to rely on the annual donations from Pechanga, which date to the 1998-99 school year. This year, most schools received $35,000, with Murrieta Mesa receiving $30,000 because it is new and doesn't have a full student body yet.

Educators were probably the most outspoken against perceived 'possible' civil rights violations in AZ after they enacted a law the mirrored federal law.   Yet, they casually turn a blind eye to a tribe, Pechanga that HAS violated the civil rights of many of their tribe members.   They have:
  • Taken away tribal citizenship.
  • Stripped members of their right to vote
  • Take away health care for seniors
  • Denied members due process of law, including legal representation, even writing implements
  • Herded members into groups for hearings not allowing each to defend themselves
  • Subjected some to ex post facto laws
Why aren't these educators exercising their moral outrage at what Pechanga does?   Instead of 30 pieces of silver, it's a few thousand dollars.  Would they have accepted donations from South Africa during apartheid?

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Censorship of Bad News: Not All News is Fit to Print at Pechanga.net

The website Pechanga.net which is owned by Victor Rocha, a Pechanga tribal member,prides itself on being the internet news resource for Indian Country, should be ashamed this week.

Word came from the Pechanga Reservation in Temecula that long time chairman Mark Macarro, who first made news as the spokesperson for Indian Gaming in California, and later as the chairman who destroyed many lives of longtime Pechanga people by not following the Pechanga Constitution and Bylaws via moratorium, and later with the disenrollment of two large families and their votes, was the subject of a recall petition.

Original Pechanga's Blog contacted Mr. Rocha and asked why we didn't see news of the recall attempt on one of the richest tribe's chairman, he responded that "he didn't consider the blog a news source".     That's fair enough, as this blog is still growing, but finding an audience from:  The BIA, House of Representatives, Dept. Of Justice, The President's Office, The Senate, all of which have check Original Pechanga's Blog at least once in the last 10 days.   Yet, HE is a news source and HE is first cousin to Mark Macarro and his mother used to dine with Hunter descendents regularly.    It's curious that Rocha is censoring the bad news, don't you think?

If you bad news of your own tribe, are you and accomplice, or a newsman?   Why not let Indian Country know that Macarro is being looked at by members of his own tribe for ouster?    There also was no report about a Pechanga tribal member,a manager at the casino that is under investigation from the F.B.I.     You, dear readers, make the call.

Friday, December 10, 2010

CA Indian Tribes Against Harry Reid's Poker Bill; Reid Says It's Still Alive

The Tribal Alliance of Sovereign Indian Nations, a 14-tribe organization that includes the biggest Southern California gaming tribes, including Morongo and the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, has been circulating a letter opposing the bill on the grounds that it would shut tribes out of this potentially lucrative new form of gaming.   Remember that the Pechanga Band tried to keep Californians from voting on expanded gaming.     How can an organization that represents about 3,000 people hold so much control over our politicians?

Reaction from tribes to Reid’s bill was generally negative. Much of this has to do with Reid’s historically cozy relationship with Nevada casinos, and many believe the bill is written in such a way to give these casino interests a leg up over tribes in offering Internet poker.  Does anyone believe the tribes would want to SHARE with Las Vegas?

Meanwhile, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said late Wednesday that his proposed online poker legislation is still alive - contrary to some published news reports.

Juaneno Recognition DELAYED Again: Frustration Mounts

A ruling on whether the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians should get federal recognition expected next week has been pushed back 60 days, another in a series of delays.

The new deadline for the decision by the Office of Federal Acknowledgment, called final determination, is now on or before Feb. 14

In the letter dated Wednesday, Director Lee Fleming, says that "the Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs Larry Echo Hawk has granted a 60-day extension for the Final Determination (FD)."

A decision, already pushed back a few times, had been expected on or before Dec. 15.

"The Office of the Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs needs this extension to allow for review of the recommended decisions," said Fleming in the letter informing petitioners.

Joe O'Campo and Sonia Johnston are listed as Petitioner No. 84B, the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians, while Anthony Rivera is Petitioner No. 84A, the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation. The federal government is evaluating both petitions simultaneously.

The divided groups have sought federal recognition for nearly three decades.

If the Juaneños become a tribe in the eyes of the federal government, the group will be recognized as a sovereign nation.

Read more in the OCREGISTER

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Harry Reid Fails in Attempt to Get Internet Gaming into Tax Deal

Our friends at HOT AIR are reporting that Harry Reid was trying to sneak an online gaming proposal into President Obama's tax deal.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying to use the tax cut package President Barack Obama brokered with Republicans to legalize online poker, POLITICO has learned — a move that could further complicate the deal Obama announced Monday.
Already, the online poker proposal has exposed the Nevada Democrat to charges of flip-flopping on a controversial issue, as well as using his Senate leadership position to repay big casino interests that helped him win reelection in a hard-fought campaign against Republican Sharron Angle last month.

The National Indian Gaming Association is opposing Reid’s effort to insert the online poker language in any tax cut bill, said an official with the group, Jason Giles. He asserted it gives an advantage to Las Vegas-based gambling operators while discriminating against tribal operators.  OP:   Tribal Gaming Nations want to discriminate all by themselves.

BUT, late in the day, it looks like Harry couldn't pull it off:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told the Las Vegas Sun after a press conference this afternoon that despite a flurry of last-minute lobbying, he would not be adding legalization of online poker to his list of objectives during the lame duck.
“We’re still working on that, we’re not able to,” Reid said.

Glenda Nelson Enterprise Rancheria Civil Rights Violator, Should She Pass a White House Background Check?

We've written on OP Blog's Hall of Shame Inductee Glenda Nelson before HERE   and HERE    She is a nominee to be the western representative to President Obama's upcoming Tribal Nations Conference.   Shouldn't stripping rightful members from their voting rights and tribal membership just prior to being recalled be enough to disqualify her in her background check.  Do we want someone like this close to the President?    Her actions would relate to EIGHT MILLION CALIFORNIANS being stripped of their voting rights.  

Currently Chairwoman of the Enterprise Rancheria tribe, Glenda Nelson was at the forefront of the disenrollment of 72 of her fellow tribal members. Those same 72, subsequently disenrolled members, had signed a recall petition against Nelson and four other members of the Enterprise Rancheria Tribal Council who were guilty of taking multiple cash distributions from the tribe's Human Services Fund for the needy.

Ironically, Glenda Nelson was the tribe's Treasurer in September 2003 when this occurred. She successfully suspended the 72 members, pending disenrollment, in a manner timely to prevent those members from voting in the recall election scheduled to be held seven days later.

Nelson orchestrated the systematic violation of the 72 member's civil rights and has never made any attempt to rectify the injustice that occurred as a result of her actions.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs, in spite of the violations of tribal law committed, turned the other cheek on the acts committed by Enterprise Rancheria's tribal government.

How would eliminating 25% of the vote affect tribal elections?  

Here's how:   In the most recent Enterprise Rancheria tribal elections in 2003, prior to the disenrollments in Sept. 2003, there were only 115 total votes cast from the 215 voting members.  Needless to say the 72 members who were suspended pending disenrollment made up two thirds of that 115 total votes cast. That's why the 72 were suspended. To stop the recall vote that was due just a week later. Once the 72 were suspended the recall election was over as there was no way it could proceed.

Imagine if Democrats could get 2/3 of the Republican Senator eliminated?       So, it's only 180 Americans killed on 9/11 at the Pentagon would say the  1.2 Billion population Chinese.   It has to be relative.   Would Al Gore have been President if he could have eliminated 250,000 Republican votes in FL.    Well that's RELATIVE to what Glenda Nelson did to save herself from recall.

Yes, Tribal Members Who Live Off the Reservation SHOULD be Paying State Tax

We did, when our last full year of per capita paid in 2006 from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians was $268,000, we paid over $20,000 in state income taxes.   And that was with a bundle of deductions from mortgage interest payments.

The Pechanga Tribe has a line of Mailboxes and PO Boxes which are currently undergoing re-allocations.  

Capitol Weekly has a good story up on The TAX MAN

Indians can avoid paying taxes on some income, but that exemption doesn’t apply to money generated by Internet poker or other endeavors involving off-reservation computer servers — unless those businesses also satisfy those rules.
The FTB sends out between 500 and 600 of these letters a year, according to spokesman Dan Tahara. He added that the letters don’t represent a new crackdown, nor are they the result of a court case the FTB won earlier this year against a southern California gaming tribe.
In fact, he said, its business as usual.
“This is actually nothing new,” Tahara said. “This is part of an ongoing effort.”

Tribal income is exempt from taxation — but only under very specific and often misunderstood circumstances. These rules, meanwhile, could have implications for how new gaming enterprises are structured in the future, especially if tribes are able to gain a large stake in online poker franchises in California.

The FTB also puts out a booklet, “Taxable Income of Native Americans,” that details what kinds of income are exempt from state taxes. Another brochure available on the agency’s website notes that “many people are under the impression that California Indians do not pay income tax.”

In order to exempt payments from state income taxes, the money has to come from a “tribal enterprise” conducted by a federally recognized tribe. It has to be generated on a reservation, and the tribal member has to be a member of that tribe living on the same reservation where it was generated

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

President Obama to Host Tribal Nations Conference; Tribes with Human Rights Violations To Attend.

Below is the tentative schedule for the Tribal Nations Conference hosted by President Barack Obama. One elected tribal leader from each federally recognized tribe is invited to attend the December 16th event. Additionally, there is a smaller meeting on December 15th where the President will meet with one tribal leader from each of the 12 BIA Regions. Tribes from the respective regions have been asked to nominate a tribal leader to represent their region.  We understand that leaders from both Redding Rancheria and the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, who have violated the human and civil rights of their citizens and reservation allottees.

It is a shame that tribal leaders who have violated the human and civil rights of their own citizens and many others have been invited to attend. It would be an even greater injustice if a tribal leader responsible for such egregious acts is actually selected by the White House to participate in the December 15th meeting with the President.   They should be relegated to the 'back bench' and given the courtesy due, say, white leaders of South Africa from pre 1990's.

Tentative schedule for White House Tribal Nations Conference
Monday, December 6, 2010

President Barack Obama will host the second White House Tribal Nations Conference on Thursday, December 16.

The event will take place at the Interior Department in Washington, D.C. The tentative schedule follows:
8:30 AM - 9:30 AM -- Opening Session (Open to Press)
9:45 AM -12:15 PM -- Break Out Sessions (Closed Press)
12:15 PM - 1:45 PM -- Lunch
1:45 PM - 3:30 PM -- Closing Session (Open to Press)

THOUSANDS of tribal citizens and others have had their civil and human rights violated by tribal people from:  Redding, Picayune Rancheria, Enterprise, Guidiville, Robinson Rancheria, Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians.    Who'd have thought that the UN Declaration on Indiginous Human Right would reflect so poorly on our OWN Indigenous Leaders.

Monday, December 6, 2010

Picayune Rancheria Disenrollment: 50% of Tribe Terminated, Lives Destroyed; Carole Goldberg Said, "overblown". Tell that to 600 Terminated Picayune People, Carole Goldberg

Since the Office of the President of the United States checked our blog today looking for posts on Carole Goldberg, I thought it an opportune time to bring the Picayune Rancheria Disenrollment story to the front.

Mary Martinez sat on the grinding rocks of her ancestors - giant boulders with holes used for thousands of years to crush acorns.

"This is where my grandmother used to sit, pounding acorns to make flour in the old ways," she said, closing her eyes to let the memories seep in. "I ground the flour, too, like my grandmother's mother and her mother before her.

"It's what you do as an Indian. I am a Chukchansi Indian," she said.

She is - and she isn't.

The 77-year-old Martinez has been kicked out of the Picayune Chukchansi tribe in the tiny Madera County town of Coarsegold - the tribe where she was vice chairwoman just two years ago, the tribe that is full of her cousins.

The tribal council threw her out last year, just as it has tossed out almost half its membership that in 2000 was 1,500 strong. It's the biggest disenrollment of any tribe in California, observers say.

The council explains it as a readjustment of records to more accurately reflect who deserves to be a Picayune Chukchansi and an official member of the tribe.

"Each tribe, under sovereignty, has the right to set its own membership, and that may be difficult at times, but it is necessary," said Chanel Wright, a spokeswoman for the tribe. "It's about doing what's best for the tribe."

But Martinez and the 600 other outcasts say it's all about greed. They blame the Chukchansi Gold Resort and Casino, a gigantic building of neon, slot machines and card tables that for five years has reeled in millions of dollars for those lucky enough to call themselves tribal members.

"They kicked me to the curb so they could keep more money for themselves," Martinez said, tearing up as she visited the historic grinding rock, used by local Indians for millennia, near the tribe's rancheria. "Our ancestors would roll over in their graves if they knew."

Carole Goldberg, chair of the UCLA Native Nations Law & Policy Center, called complaints over disenrollment overblown.

UCLA Law Prof.Carole Goldberg

OP:  OVERBLOWN?   Elders health care ended?  Children's educational access denied?   Heritage destroyed?  Income taken away? Access to Federal programs refused?  Voting rights stripped?  OVERBLOWN?

"Some of the human drama is being amplified," OP:  On the contrary, Carole, it's not amplified ENOUGHshe said. "The tribes concede their sovereign authority if they talk to the non-Indian world, so they don't say much, which just leaves opponents to do much of the talking.

"But the reality is that the new money has made a difference in immeasurable ways."      OP:  Yes, let's measure:  the money has been able to buy politicians, secure lobbyists to keep small tribes from gaining casinos, kept newspapers from writing negative stories so as not to lose ad revenue, camouflauged tribe's dirty deeds with small donations to local charities.

Read more: SF Chronicle

Bryan Galt, former Picayune Enrollment Chair Responds

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Focus on Pechanga: When a bad neighbor does Some good things. Do the Democrats Tacitly Approve?

In this update of a story we wrote about a couple of years ago..It’s been a decade since Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro asked the People of California to help Native Americans in their quest for self-reliance. I believe that most people took self-reliance to mean that Native Americans would help take care of their own people with the proceeds of Indian Gambling. This is the messaging of every public relations campaign during every California referendum on Indian Gaming, Each time the leaders of Pechanga were the face of the California Native community.  Behind the scenes, however plans were already being made to strip families of their inherent rights as Temecula people and long-standing members to share in the fruits of gaming.

Unfortunately, then, self-reliance to Pechanga means keeping rightful people from joining the band and removing people via a process benignly called "disenrollment"  who don’t think the way the leadership wants them to think, so there will be no dissent among the membership. The Council’s policy is cash your check and shut the hell up.   Democrats, think what would happen if the Republicans could keep 25% of you from voting for your choice of leadership.   Do you think your choice would win?  Republicans, what would you think if the Democrats or even a civil rights group like the NAACP accepted readily this type of behavior?

Pechanga’s Constitution and Bylaws provides for OPEN ENROLLMENT each January, yet in 1997 the band approved a petition, which called for a moratorium on member enrollment so that the tribe can get caught up with the applications. There are 10 members on that committee, how long could it take to catch up? The will of the people was the rule of law in an enrollment matter, upheld by the tribal council.   There has been no "catching up", in fact people who have a right to be in their tribe, just as their cousins are have been kept out for two decades, a paper shuffle that people like Frances Miranda kept going so they couldn't be on their land as members.

When the people passed a valid petition to halt all disenrollments in 2005, the tribal council maintained that the petition couldn’t be enforced, because the general council had no authority in enrollment matters.   When in fact, Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro knew full well that the general membership of the tribe has the final word. Let’s get this right, the general council says the people could keep people OUT, but they can’t keep people IN?

So, we have the Pechanga Tribal Council acting in a shameful manner by eliminating 25% of their citizenry. They stripped this group of their status as Native Americans, and grabbed their share of per capita payments to grow their own.  Many people don't understand per capita, but they do/should understand that if we get rid of 135 people, making $17,000 per month, it adds up to $2.3 Million per month, they can split between the remaining people.  They keep rightful members from their place at Pechanga via disenrollment and moratorium and abused the elders and children of two families, terminating their cultural heritage.   With the subsequent disenrollment of the Hunter family, there is an additional $2.1 million to divvy up.   This is in per capita only, it doesn't include the college scholarship which could easily be worth $25,000 per year.

In direct contradiction to these reprehensible actions, Pechanga donates to groups like the Boys and Girls Clubs, The Temecula Valley School District, and other organizations, which gladly take generous donations from the tribal government.   Of course, remember now that Pechanga had an additional $5.3 million to share PER MONTH.   A yearly donation of $25k here and there wouldn't make a dent in that.

Friday, December 3, 2010

Pechanga People "Disenrolled" en Masse a Historical First

Time to bring this post forward please read and check the link for more.

UPDATE: Rob at  Blue Corn Comics thinks that this article below is just Pechanga bashing. Well that may be true, but why are there no articles BASHING the other three tribes. Isn't it proper and just to bash a tribe that needs bashing and wouldn't a tribe that has treated its people so badly, be bashed?

Mark Cooper has an extensive article that details the shameful actions of Pechanga. Purging the tribe of longtime members.
Please read the whole thing

Tribal Flush: Pechanga People "Disenrolled" en Masse

On the eve of what could be the largest gambling expansion in U.S. history, a tale of power, betrayal and lost Indian heritage

Wednesday, January 2, 2008 - 12:00 pm Link to the rest of the story

John Gomez Jr. parks his silver family van in the back row of one more anonymous strip mall off California’s Highway 79, an hour and a half southeast of Los Angeles, on a windswept ridge overlooking the Temecula Valley.
Gomez, his dark hair barely betraying a sprinkling of gray at his temples, steps out of the van and walks away from the mall, to a barren dirt lot marked off with adobe walls.“This is where Pablo is buried,” he says as we peer over the locked iron gate.

Pablo is Pablo Apis, the celebrated 19th-century “headman,” or chief, of the Temecula/Pechanga Indians, who was given more than 2,000 acres of land in exchange for his work at the Mission San Luis Rey. Gomez, who is a direct descendant of Chief Apis, jiggles the lock on the gate. He has no key.“This is where a lot of our people were buried,” Gomez continues, “including those killed in the famous Temecula Massacre.” He’s referring to the killing of several dozen Indians by Californio militias in the closing days of 1846. Apis survived and, indeed, the 1875 treaty between the Temecula tribe and the U.S. government, though never ratified, was signed at the chief’s village adobe home.

Today, on a corner of Apis’ original land grant, a few minutes down the road from the desolate burial ground, towers the $350 million Pechanga Resort & Casino, the glittering 14-story pleasure dome so familiar to Southern Californians from the promotional and political-advocacy commercials in near-constant rotation on local television stations. With 522 rooms, 185,000 square feet of casino floor, 2,000 slot machines, more than 150 table games and seven restaurants, along with Vegas-class showrooms, nightclubs and comedy lounges, the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, as the tribe is now known, runs the largest and perhaps most profitable of California’s nearly 60 Indian casinos.

And now, under terms of a deal negotiated by Governor Schwarzenegger, ratified earlier this year by the Democratic-led state legislature and set to go before voters in the February 5 primary election, the Pechanga and three other Southern California tribes may soon triple their battery of slot machines, allowing each of the four Indian groups to operate twice as many slots as any Vegas casino. If the referendums go through, the four tribes — Morongo, Agua Caliente, Sycuan and Pechanga — will be responsible for the largest expansion of gambling in recent U.S. history.

But it’s Gomez’s tribe no more. At least as far as the tribal leadership is concerned. Gomez and 135 adult members of his extended family (and 75 or more children) have been purged from formal Pechanga membership; they have been “disenrolled.”

They were accused of no crime, no misbehavior, no wrongdoing, no disloyalty. But a series of tribal kangaroo-court hearings, bereft of even the pretense of due process, ruled that one of the family’s deceased elders was not an authentic tribe member and, therefore, not withstanding their years of service to the tribe, they were all to be banned.

What it’s come to goes beyond tribal pride. As a result of the disenrollment, many in the Gomez family, which accounts for some 10 percent of the total Pechanga tribe’s membership, have lost their federal standing and benefits as American Indians. Some have lost their jobs at the resort. All of the adults, including Gomez, lost the generous per capita monthly payout, derived from casino profits, that was given to each adult of the tribe. When the Gomez family’s expulsion was finalized in 2004, that was about $15,000 per month. Currently, for those who remain members of the tribe, the figure has risen to about $40,000 per month.

The sharp increase is due in part to a second wave of purges, finalized last year, which disenrolled another extended family, this one descended from Paulina Hunter and representing yet another 10 percent of the tribe. That second purge went ahead despite a tribe-commissioned expert probe that concluded that Hunter was, in fact, a Pechanga.

Simply put: The fewer the tribal members, the bigger the payout.

Some of the elderly disenrollees found themselves cut off from tribal clinics they helped to build. Some of the younger ones lost their education subsidies. What all the disenrollees have in common is not only the sudden loss of significant income but erasure of their collective cultural history and identity.
“Yes, we lost homes and cars. Some went into bankruptcy,” Gomez says. “But mostly I was saddened for my family and for Indian country in general. It’s not just your money they’re taking away but also your heritage and your future.”
With Indian gaming revenues now near the $30 billion mark nationally, disenrollment has rocked and divided Indian reservations from coast to coast.
“Gaming has brought in the dominant culture’s disease of greed,’’ Marty Firerider of the California American Indian Movement told the Indian Country Today newspaper.
Gomez first got into trouble with his Pechanga tribe in 2002, when, as a trusted legal adviser, he was elected to the tribal-enrollment committee, along with a cousin and a member of the Paulina Hunter family. These were sensitive positions. After the tribe won its first minor gambling concession in 1996, and after California voters approved major Indian gaming rights four years later, it was only natural that there would be an increase in those suddenly claiming membership.

“As soon as we were elected, we found that the committee was doing all kinds of strange things,” Gomez says. “On the one hand they weren’t adhering to an enrollment moratorium and on the other they weren’t properly processing the minor children of those already enrolled.”
Gomez and his new allies began an investigation.

The boom quickly dropped on them. Within weeks a letter emerged from a group called Concerned Pechanga People, a small faction closely allied with the tribal leadership and its chair, Mark Macarro, which accused Gomez and his family of not being legitimate Pechanga. By the end of the year, Gomez’s extended family were notified of pending disenrollment. During an internal process that lasted more than a year and a half, Gomez put together binders of documentation proving — at least to virtually every outside observer who has reviewed them — his Pechanga ancestry.

But the tribal leadership, in closed-door sessions that adhered to no formal due process or rules of evidence, held to its position that one key elder in Gomez’s lineage — Manuela Miranda — had left the traditional village after her marriage and, therefore, her descendants weren’t really Pechanga. The claim, according to several experts, is prima facie absurd, as the history of American Indians is based on such dispersion and diaspora.

Read MORE at the link above

How Pechanga's Enrollment Committee Members Frances Miranda, Ihrene Scearce and Ruth Masiel Irreparably Harmed HUNDREDS of Pechanga Citizens.

Hunter Cousin A'amokat raises some good points in our comment section that I though deserved a promotion to a full post.  It has to do with getting a fair and impartial hearing from the Pechanga Enrollment Committee.   Disenrollment of hundreds of Pechanga people by three despicable people.  (AKA the 3rd Pechanga Massacre) Do you think that black South Africans got fair hearing from their white rulers under apartheid? Would Americans expect a fair and impartial hearing from Iran?

A'amokat: Article V of the Temecula Band's constitution and bylaws, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians,says:


Irehne Scearce and Ruth Masiel are the sisters of Raymond Basquez Sr, who submitted a statement against our tribal membership, and they were closely related to at least ten other people who submitted and/or signed another letter that was against our tribal membership.

Francis Miranda was also closely related to a person who signed the letter against our membership and these three women were party to a challenge of our membership that was submitted against us before any evidence was even presented that would have warrented opening up an investigation against us.
I know I have posted this information about a million times and I have asked the following question just as many times.
How was allowing those three women to sit in judgement of us and to rule on our fate in our disenrollment case not malice or predjudice against us and how does it not violate the equal protection clause of the Band's constitution and bylaws under Article V?
We can document what I have stated by at least six letters that were sent to the enrollment committee and/or the tribal council asking for the recusal of those three women from participating in our disenrollment case but our request was ignored by both the committee and the council. How fair is that?

OP:    Here is some pertinent information from a previous A'amokat post:

1. Applications that had the required number of signatures for approval (6) but were never processed. When confronted with this a committee member who was responsible for processing new applicants, a descendant of Candarlaria Nesecat Flores, replied, “I don’t care if it has 24 signatures on it, if I don’t think there is a bloodline, I’m not processing it.” OP: Frances Miranda was a descendent of Flores, and was on the enrollment committee.

2. Some 40 applications of children of enrolled tribal members were banded and set aside so they would not be processed because the committee members from the CPP faction of the tribe, who to that point had controlled the committee by having a majority, had no intention of enrolling these children. OP: Keeping children from their rightful place in the tribe. Their lineal descent was proven. This created a virtual moratorium on membership.
3. The new committee members found that there were families where one sibling was enrolled and another was not, even though both submitted identical applications at the same time.
4. Applications that were placed in the moratorium, even though the applications were submitted prior to the deadline, and the individuals had repeatedly contacted the committee to follow up on their status.

5. Refusal to sign enrollment applications or birth certificates for individuals who are members of families they don’t like
We keep working to get the story out front, the unethical tribal council of Pechanga hides behind the cloak of sovereignty.  Would people stand up for Wal-Mart is they cut wages and cut all health coverage?   NO, they'd exercise their moral outrage and quit shopping at Wal-Mart.   Shouldn't the same be done at Pechanga, which has cut of rightful per capita payments, health care, educational assistance, the right to be buried with family at Pechanga cemetary...

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Enjoy Biscotti with Your Coffee - A Family Business

If you enjoy your morning coffee, you'll enjoy it even more with homemade Biscotti.   Shipped directly to your home or business.   Take a look at a family business.

Thank you to our readers for checking out all of our family businesses on the sidebar to the right.   There are no paid ads on this site.

Pechanga Disenrollment: The Video, See Macarro Lie/Obfuscate

This details the disenrollment of Pechanga members in 2006. My family, which was the second family to be terminated from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians. Please listen to THEIR expert speak. WE DID NOT HIRE Dr. Johnson, the foremost expert on California Indians PECHANGA DID. Why did they not believe their OWN expert? Because he didn't come to the conclusion they wanted.

SADLY, Lawrence Madariaga, Hunter Family Elder, has passed away. This happened because Frances Miranda, Ihrene Scearce and Ruth Masiel disregarded their experts report, and believe a CHILD MOLESTER instead.

Why is Sen. Dianne Feinstein Working For Tribes That Violate The Civil Rights of Their Membership?

UPDATE:   Malcolm  Maclaclan  has more to the story at CAPITOL WEEKLY   A portion of that:

It appears unlikely that either approach would pass before next year, leaving current urban casino efforts in limbo. In the meantime, anti-casino groups continue to fight the Point Molate project and another proposed casino, this one by the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria. That tribe has been fighting heavy opposition to a proposed casino in Rohnert Park, a city of 41,000 located 50 miles north of San Francisco. That land has been taken into trust. On Oct. 1, the National Indian Gaming Commission granted the tribe clearance to build a Class II bingo style casino if they wanted; they need a state compact if they want to build a more lucrative, Class I slot machine-based facility.

Senator Dianne Feinstein has an editorial up in the Contra Costa Times 

CALIFORNIA VOTERS settled the question of casino gaming back in 2000 -- or so it seemed. Proposition 1A authorized the governor to negotiate gambling pacts that would make Nevada-style casinos possible for "federally recognized Indian tribes on Indian lands in California."
The words "on Indian lands" are the key to Prop. 1A. This made it clear that gaming is appropriate only on a tribe's historical lands. Voters endorsed this bargain, approving Prop. 1A with 65 percent of the vote.
But today the spirit of this proposition could be violated by major casinos proposed around the state on lands that are not "Indian lands" -- some of which are more than 100 miles from tribal headquarters.
This is "reservation shopping," in which tribes from rural areas seek federal approval to acquire lands in trust in densely populated urban areas.
The goal: To put casinos where the most potential gamblers are -- even if it disregards the will of California voters
The most recent Propositions on Indian Gaming in California, promised us balanced budgets. That not only didn't happen, we are getting less money than before.

In her editorial Mrs. Feinstein willfully disregards what is happening with California's Indian country. Civil rights and human rights are being violated by tribes such as the Redding Rancheria, Picayune Rancheria (Fresno area) and The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians (Temecula). What do they have in common? Their lobbyist IETAN. They are working with Sen. Feinstein to stop expansion of gaming by other tribes. Each of the aforementioned tribes have terminated a significant portion of their membership so they can steal those eliminated tribal members per capita checks. Original Pechanga's Blog has details that local news seems not to care about, though more truely, they want to protect their advertising revenue from gaming.

WHY are gaming tribes against smaller tribes gaining a casino? To control market share. Is Indian self reliance only good for those tribes that have gaming NOW? What about the 50 or so other tribes in CA that would benefit? Ask yourselves, WHO benefits more from Sen. Feinstein's legislation? Californians, or gaming tribes?

We will have more on the lobbyist IETAN shortly..

Remember When Tribes Promised Gaming Would Be Good for ALL Tribes?

REMEMBER when the big tribes that Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein is trying to protect PROMISED Californians that Indian Gamings would benefit all tribes. It didn't work out that way. And now is looking even WORSE for small tribes as the larger tribes work to keep them from sharing in gaming success.