That's 14 years that Hunter descendants have been stripped of their tribal citizenship, due to unconstitutional actions by the corrupt Pechanga Tribal Council.
And collusion with enrollment committee members, including Bobbi LeMere (who, in a quid pro quo, got her sisters enrolled in the tribe, even though scores of others were in the moratorium READ Corruption Exposed… ) Ruth Masiel, matriarch of the crime family and mother of council member Andrew Masiel Sr. and Frances Miranda, who two years before, had seen to it that her OWN FAMILY members, the descendent of Manuela Miranda were also stripped of their citizenship. Irhene Scearce received justice in death.
Concerning Disgraceful Actions by the Pechanga Tribal Council
In a notice dated August 7, 2006, the descendants of Paulina Hunter, an original allottee of the Pechanga Indian Reservation, were informed that the Pechanga Tribal Council and the Pechanga Enrollment Committee had denied their appeal to over-turn the Enrollment Committee’s earlier decision to disenroll the family.
The Hunter Family members were disenrolled in March of this year when the Enrollment Committee concluded that their ancestor, Paulina Hunter, was not a Temecula Indian.
Along with disenrollment notices from the Enrollment Committee, a memo from the Tribal Council explained that it had decided that a law passed by the Tribe’s governing body in July 2005 to bar future disenrollments applied to all tribal members except the Hunter Family.
The disenrollment of the Hunter family was initiated when several statements were presented to the Enrollment Committee claiming Paulina Hunter was non-Indian or not a member. One such letter came from a convicted felon serving time in the California State Prison system for child molestation.
In response to the allegations, the descendants of Paulina Hunter provided numerous documents as proof that Paulina Hunter was indeed of Indian ancestry and was an original Pechanga/Temecula Indian. These documents were required to be certified, while the "so-called evidence" against the family was neither sworn, nor certified. They disregarded evidence, while accepting hearsay.
In fact, a report prepared by Dr. John Johnson, the curator of anthropology at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, at the request of the Enrollment Committee concluded that a "preponderance of the evidence" from surviving historical records and census documents shows that Paulina Hunter was a Pechanga member who lived in Temecula and was allotted reservation land. There is no greater authority on this issue than Dr. Johnson. The research was almost two thousand dollars, but the tribe was not charged for all the preparatory work that Dr. Johnson had done throughout his career, surely saving the tribe more than $10,000
"My feeling is it's a faulty interpretation of the record to reject this family. Paulina Hunter was definitely a core member of the Temecula Band of Luiseño Indians," Dr. Johnson said. "I don't understand the decision other than it is not based on fact. It is based on conjecture and politics."
The disenrollment of the Hunter family is the second such disenrollment of a large family from the Pechanga Band. Each has occurred just months before scheduled tribal elections for Chairman and Tribal Council.
The expulsions of the 2 families removed significant opposition to the current administration and others running for tribal office.
Each “disenrollment” was done in violation of both tribal and federal laws which are intended to protect the rights and privileges of tribal members.
Specifically, the members were denied the due process and equal rights protections provided in the Indian Civil Rights Act, as well as language in the Band’s Constitution and Bylaws which mandates that tribal officials uphold the individual rights of each member without malice or prejudice. The disenrollments reduced the Pechanga Band's enrollment by nearly 30%, and each enrolled member, including those responsible for the violations of human and civil rights, could reap additional profits in the tens of millions of dollars.
Here are some of the infractions the Bobbi LeMere led committee committed:
The Appeal Procedures state that the purpose of the appeal is in identifying any infraction to the disenrollment procedure or any unfair and/or partial handling of a disenrollment case pursuant to Procedures § 9, page 4. The Enrollment Committee committed numerous errors or infractions of fundamental Pechanga law and procedural Pechanga law as follows:
1. Knowingly violated the will and intent of the General Council by continuing disenrollment proceedings after General Council’s vote to suspend all disenrollment;
2. Erroneously made determinations in contradiction of Dr. John Johnson’s anthropological report prepared on behalf of the Enrollment Committee;
3. Erroneously based disenrollment on an issue allegedly found in the enrollment application which applies to persons applying for membership after 1996;
4. Erroneously relied on a personal statement of recognition from the Dept. of Interior 1928 application over numerous other more credible sources;
5. Erroneously relied on a personal statement from the Dept. of Interior 1928 application of a person who is not a direct ancestor of Appellants;
6. Erroneously interpreted the personal statement in the Dept. of Interior 1928 application that San Luis Rey Mission Indian is not synonymous with Pechanga or Temecula Indian;
7. Erroneously made a finding that the Pechanga Reservation contained distinct Tribes—Temecula and San Luis Rey;
8. Violated the Pechanga Band Constitution by imposing a more restrictive membership standard than contained in Article II: Membership;
9. Ignored the Official Enrollment Book of 1979 as the original source document for determining Membership as stated in the Constitution;
10. Violated the Pechanga Band Enrollment Committee Guidelines by conducting disenrollment procedures without a lawful quorum and by reviewing disenrollment cases out of order for the purpose of stacking the Committee;
11. Contradicted previous actions and decisions of the Enrollment Committee;
12. Failed to indicate any mistakes or irregularities in the Appellants enrollment and failed to conduct the review of the Appellants’ case in a fair and/or impartial manner;
13. Violated the Indian Civil Rights Act by retroactively applying 1996 Enrollment Application to Appellants;
14. Violated Constitution and Disenrollment Procedures through application of more restrictive standards;
15. Acted negligently in the review of the Appellants case.
Council member Andrew Masiel should have recused himself, as he was judging an appeal on an issue in which he had guided his MOTHER and his aunt, Ihrene Scearce.