We brought you the story last year about how The Pechanga Resort and Casino mistreated a group of Vietnam era motorcyclists
Several Vietnam Veterans went to Pechanga Casino today on their motorcycles for the advertised event "Vets Eat Free" at the buffet. They called in advance to make sure they could wear their Vietnam Vet patches on their vests and were given approval.
Security pulled them out of line and told them to leave. They did not want "bikers" at the buffet and they would be arrested for trespassing. The vets explained that they had called in advance. Security allowed them to eat, with a guard present, and then made them leave the casino premises
Funny how Pechanga doesn't have an issue with their own thuggish bikers who bring Mongols onto the reservation who are friends with one you will find on Megan's Law.......hmmm, Mongols OK......veterans..no way.
Temecula Patch has the story again
"That's understandable, sometimes they crack down," Ingersoll said. "But Pechanga has no signs or anything. They can profile, pick and choose who they don't want to come in. This happened last year, and I'm still waiting to hear from the tribal council."
"The outcome was they ignored us," Ingersoll said. "Now with Veterans day coming around again a lot of people have been asking me about what happened. Well, this is what happened - they ignored us."
Not surprising, Chairman Macarro doesn't live on the rez and only comes to the Government Center which is 250 feet inside the guard shack, when he has to, which isn't often, as the tribe, outside of custom and tradition, has only had three meetings this year.
Here is from a Temecula Patch commenter Anotherview, which gives his "view" of Veterans: Odiously, he throws his status as a military veteran in the face of others, to cow them to accept his view. He renders himself an embarrassment to modest veterans who know the value of their service while having no need to broadcast it. He should consider closing his mouth, and conform to the sensible rules in place for the benefit of all
As to their own veterans, they treated them just as shabbily, they scrubbed their website of Pechanga veterans's which we wrote about.
That should raise some bile about going to their buffet on Veterans Day, don't you think? Veterans should STAY AWAY from Pechanga.
Read about ONE PECHANGA VETERAN, who they posthumously stripped of citizenship. The cabin he helped build in 1957 is still standing.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Susan Bradford Files Suit Against Huffington Post and New York Times for Breach of Contract and Copyright Violations
Friend to Original Pechanga's Blog, Susan Bradford has announced that she has filed suit against the Huffington Post and New York Times. We have posted many articles from Susan, primarily about Jack Abramoff. Here are the details
In the case of the Huffington Post, an editor, Nico Pitney, offered Bradford compensation for her articles on Republican super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff in 2008 when Sen. John McCain was the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. After receiving her articles, Bradford was promptly cut from the Huffington Post. Shortly thereafter her work appeared under the byline of another reporter, who was plugging his own book on Abramoff as an "exclusive." That HuffPo blogger claimed that he received his information by "secretly interviewing" Abramoff even though the lobbyist was not authorized to give interviews -- a condition Abramoff established up front with all reporters before he agreed to meet with them.
Of all the reporters who met Abramoff in prison, the HuffPo blogger is the only one who has claimed spontaneous prison confessions from Abramoff. In contrast, Bradford, who met Abramoff frequently in prison, compiled the original story, based upon substantial original paperwork, rigorous research, and interviews with hundreds of sources, none of whom were Abramoff. Bradford was a regular presence at the tribes, as the Natives can confirm, where she methodically pieced together the scandal behind the scandal. A Huffington Post editor even grabbed Bradford's paperwork mid-discussion and ran out of the room to photocopy it, despite her request that he not do so. Bradford is claiming breach of contract.
In a separate case, a New York Times reporter, Jo Becker, somehow acquired Bradford's Huffington Post submission, portions of which she paraphrased in the Times, without having secured the permission or assigned proper attribution to Bradford. Earlier that year, Becker announced that she had heard about Bradford's scoop "from a friend." When Bradford declined to collaborate with Becker, the Times reporter somehow managed to acquire Bradford's story anyway, through sources close to the Huffington Post, and brazenly ran to press with it, in violation of copyright. Essentially Becker adopted Bradford's theme of the rivalry between Scott Reed and Jack Abramoff, while spinning the story to reflect negatively on Abramoff.
Bradford is represented by Jon Moseley, an attorney who successfully challenged CREW's frivolous corruption charges against former Tea Party candidate for Senate, Christine O'Donnell.
Check out Susan's website: http://susanbradford.org/ Susan's book: LYNCHED is available there.
In the case of the Huffington Post, an editor, Nico Pitney, offered Bradford compensation for her articles on Republican super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff in 2008 when Sen. John McCain was the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. After receiving her articles, Bradford was promptly cut from the Huffington Post. Shortly thereafter her work appeared under the byline of another reporter, who was plugging his own book on Abramoff as an "exclusive." That HuffPo blogger claimed that he received his information by "secretly interviewing" Abramoff even though the lobbyist was not authorized to give interviews -- a condition Abramoff established up front with all reporters before he agreed to meet with them.
Of all the reporters who met Abramoff in prison, the HuffPo blogger is the only one who has claimed spontaneous prison confessions from Abramoff. In contrast, Bradford, who met Abramoff frequently in prison, compiled the original story, based upon substantial original paperwork, rigorous research, and interviews with hundreds of sources, none of whom were Abramoff. Bradford was a regular presence at the tribes, as the Natives can confirm, where she methodically pieced together the scandal behind the scandal. A Huffington Post editor even grabbed Bradford's paperwork mid-discussion and ran out of the room to photocopy it, despite her request that he not do so. Bradford is claiming breach of contract.
In a separate case, a New York Times reporter, Jo Becker, somehow acquired Bradford's Huffington Post submission, portions of which she paraphrased in the Times, without having secured the permission or assigned proper attribution to Bradford. Earlier that year, Becker announced that she had heard about Bradford's scoop "from a friend." When Bradford declined to collaborate with Becker, the Times reporter somehow managed to acquire Bradford's story anyway, through sources close to the Huffington Post, and brazenly ran to press with it, in violation of copyright. Essentially Becker adopted Bradford's theme of the rivalry between Scott Reed and Jack Abramoff, while spinning the story to reflect negatively on Abramoff.
Bradford is represented by Jon Moseley, an attorney who successfully challenged CREW's frivolous corruption charges against former Tea Party candidate for Senate, Christine O'Donnell.
Check out Susan's website: http://susanbradford.org/ Susan's book: LYNCHED is available there.
Monday, October 10, 2011
Preliminary Vote Totals On Cherokee Nation Special Election; Absentees Still to Be Counted
The Tahlequah Daily Press is reporting that the IN PERSON votes have been tallied and the results thus far are: Bill John Baker 6,223 and Chad Smith 4,046.
There were 12,000 requests for absentee ballots. (In June, 75 percent of the approximate 8,000 absentee ballots were returned, so obviously, this tally will take some time.) Percentiles for now: Baker, 60.6 percent; Smith, 39.4 percent.
Local Cherokee know that Chad stinks like a fish, but will outlanders have enough votes to carry him through?
There were 12,000 requests for absentee ballots. (In June, 75 percent of the approximate 8,000 absentee ballots were returned, so obviously, this tally will take some time.) Percentiles for now: Baker, 60.6 percent; Smith, 39.4 percent.
Local Cherokee know that Chad stinks like a fish, but will outlanders have enough votes to carry him through?
Elizabeth Larson Reports: Robinson Rancheria Tribal Members Convene to Kick Out Tribal Council
Our friend Elizabeth Larson has the story of BIG HAPPENINGS on the Robinson Rancheria, a COMPLETE change in the tribal council. You will recall that tribal chair Tracey Avila was just arrested on embezzlement charges.
After four years of strife resulting from overturned or delayed elections and the disenrollments of dozens of tribal members, a majority of the members of the Robinson Rancheria Band of Pomo decided they had had enough.
Meeting on Sunday afternoon at Elem Colony in Clearlake Oaks, tribal members acted, in their words, to take back control of their tribe by kicking out the sitting council, installing a new one and voiding the tribal government structure.
“It just shows that we're all fed up,” said EJ Crandell, who by meeting's end would find himself among the newly elected council members.
According to the organizers of the Sunday meeting, based on Bureau of Indian Affairs guidelines and the tribe's own constitution, approximately 75 enrolled members – or 51 percent of the tribal roll – needed to take part in the voting to make it valid.
Of the close to 100 people present, it was determined that 79 enrolled members were present, clearing the way for them to move forward on a slate of 12 resolutions.
And move they did, swiftly voting unanimously to nullify a 31-year-old tribal constitution and removing from power the sitting tribal council, which includes Chair Tracey Avila and members Curtis Anderson Jr., Michelle Monlo, Kim Fernandez, Stoney Timmons and Nick Medina.
“It's a new world. It's a new path,” said Clayton Duncan, who was elected the interim tribal chair.
Along with Duncan, the new interim council will include Bruce White, Nathan Solario, Monty Orozco, Rosita Anderson and Crandell, a slate accepted as part of the agendized resolutions.
The new council will spend the next 90 days working to get the tribe's operations back up and running, appointing new committees and setting up an election for permanent officers.
Click this link for the rest of the story at the Lake County News
We invite all other tribes to stand up to those corrupt tribal councils that act outside their tribal constitutions.
After four years of strife resulting from overturned or delayed elections and the disenrollments of dozens of tribal members, a majority of the members of the Robinson Rancheria Band of Pomo decided they had had enough.
Meeting on Sunday afternoon at Elem Colony in Clearlake Oaks, tribal members acted, in their words, to take back control of their tribe by kicking out the sitting council, installing a new one and voiding the tribal government structure.
“It just shows that we're all fed up,” said EJ Crandell, who by meeting's end would find himself among the newly elected council members.
According to the organizers of the Sunday meeting, based on Bureau of Indian Affairs guidelines and the tribe's own constitution, approximately 75 enrolled members – or 51 percent of the tribal roll – needed to take part in the voting to make it valid.
Of the close to 100 people present, it was determined that 79 enrolled members were present, clearing the way for them to move forward on a slate of 12 resolutions.
And move they did, swiftly voting unanimously to nullify a 31-year-old tribal constitution and removing from power the sitting tribal council, which includes Chair Tracey Avila and members Curtis Anderson Jr., Michelle Monlo, Kim Fernandez, Stoney Timmons and Nick Medina.
“It's a new world. It's a new path,” said Clayton Duncan, who was elected the interim tribal chair.
Along with Duncan, the new interim council will include Bruce White, Nathan Solario, Monty Orozco, Rosita Anderson and Crandell, a slate accepted as part of the agendized resolutions.
The new council will spend the next 90 days working to get the tribe's operations back up and running, appointing new committees and setting up an election for permanent officers.
Click this link for the rest of the story at the Lake County News
We invite all other tribes to stand up to those corrupt tribal councils that act outside their tribal constitutions.
How the Pechanga Band's Tribal Council VIOLATED Their Own Constitution
Our cousin A’amokat was nice enough to put together a post of how the Pechanga Tribal Council, led by Mark Macarro has violated the Tribal Constitution.
Here are some examples of violations of the Pechanga tribe's constitution and bylaws as relating to the disenrollments and the moratorium.
1. The Temecula Bandof Luiseno Mission Indians constitution and bylaws, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians, states under Article II (membership):
"The membership enrollment will be opened the first month of each year by the Band's Enrollment Committee"
Violation: The moratorium on new adult tribal members because the constitution and bylaws does stipulate open enrollment is the first month of each year.
Under Article VIII (meetings):
"The simple majority of members present shall rule and decide in all matters of government and business of the Band, unless stipulated otherwise in these Bylaws."
Violation: The tribal council allowed the enrollment committee in 2006 to disenroll the Hunters after the petition to outlaw disenrollment was passed into law by the people in 2005. The people are the final authority in matters of who is enrolled and who is disenrolled, not the enrollment committee, because the Band's constitution and bylaws does not state the enrollment committee has this authority.
Under Article V:
"It shall be the duty of all elected officials of the Band to uphold and enforce the Constitution, Bylaws, and ordinances of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians; and, also, uphold the individual rights of each member without malice or prejudice."
Violation 1: Allowing people who started the disenrollment challenges of disenrollees in both 2004 and 2006 to rule on the disenrollment cases of the disenrollees and who were close relatives of key witnesses against them shows malice and prejudice against tribal members.
Violation 2: The tribal council did not uphold and enforce the law that outlawed disenrollments that was passed in 2005 by allowing the Hunters to be disenrolled in 2006.
There is tribal legal precedent regarding enrollment issues that the enrollment committee is not the final authority in these matters.
In 1986, after the lineal descendants of Rose Murphy including sitting tribal councilman Russell “Butch” Murphy, were turned down for tribal membership, the people voted to overrule the committee to take them in as tribal members.
So the claim in the March 2006 letter from the tribal council to the general membership, just two days before the Hunters were disenrolled, that the people could not question or interrupt the enrollment committee regarding enrollment or disenrollment is flat out not true and Russell Butch Murphy is living proof this is the case!
Here are some examples of violations of the Pechanga tribe's constitution and bylaws as relating to the disenrollments and the moratorium.
1. The Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians constitution and bylaws, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians, states under Article II (membership):
"The membership enrollment will be opened the first month of each year by the Band's Enrollment Committee"
Violation: The moratorium on new adult tribal members because the constitution and bylaws does stipulate open enrollment is the first month of each year.
Under Article VIII (meetings):
"The simple majority of members present shall rule and decide in all matters of government and business of the Band, unless stipulated otherwise in these Bylaws."
Violation: The tribal council allowed the enrollment committee in 2006 to disenroll the Hunters after the petition to outlaw disenrollment was passed into law by the people in 2005. The people are the final authority in matters of who is enrolled and who is disenrolled, not the enrollment committee, because the Band's constitution and bylaws does not state the enrollment committee has this authority.
Under Article V:
"It shall be the duty of all elected officials of the Band to uphold and enforce the Constitution, Bylaws, and ordinances of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians; and, also, uphold the individual rights of each member without malice or prejudice."
Violation 1: Allowing people who started the disenrollment challenges of disenrollees in both 2004 and 2006 to rule on the disenrollment cases of the disenrollees and who were close relatives of key witnesses against them shows malice and prejudice against tribal members.
Violation 2: The tribal council did not uphold and enforce the law that outlawed disenrollments that was passed in 2005 by allowing the Hunters to be disenrolled in 2006.
There is tribal legal precedent regarding enrollment issues that the enrollment committee is not the final authority in these matters.
In 1986, after the lineal descendants of Rose Murphy including sitting tribal councilman Russell Butch Murphy, were turned down for tribal membership, the people voted to overrule the committee to take them in as tribal members.
So the claim in the March 2006 letter from the tribal council to the general membership, just two days before the Hunters were disenrolled, that the people could not question or interrupt the enrollment committee regarding enrollment or disenrollment is flat out not true and Russell Butch Murphy is living proof this is the case!
Here are some examples of violations of the Pechanga tribe's constitution and bylaws as relating to the disenrollments and the moratorium.
1. The Temecula Bandof Luiseno Mission Indians constitution and bylaws, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians, states under Article II (membership):
"The membership enrollment will be opened the first month of each year by the Band's Enrollment Committee"
Violation: The moratorium on new adult tribal members because the constitution and bylaws does stipulate open enrollment is the first month of each year.
Under Article VIII (meetings):
"The simple majority of members present shall rule and decide in all matters of government and business of the Band, unless stipulated otherwise in these Bylaws."
Violation: The tribal council allowed the enrollment committee in 2006 to disenroll the Hunters after the petition to outlaw disenrollment was passed into law by the people in 2005. The people are the final authority in matters of who is enrolled and who is disenrolled, not the enrollment committee, because the Band's constitution and bylaws does not state the enrollment committee has this authority.
Under Article V:
"It shall be the duty of all elected officials of the Band to uphold and enforce the Constitution, Bylaws, and ordinances of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians; and, also, uphold the individual rights of each member without malice or prejudice."
Violation 1: Allowing people who started the disenrollment challenges of disenrollees in both 2004 and 2006 to rule on the disenrollment cases of the disenrollees and who were close relatives of key witnesses against them shows malice and prejudice against tribal members.
Violation 2: The tribal council did not uphold and enforce the law that outlawed disenrollments that was passed in 2005 by allowing the Hunters to be disenrolled in 2006.
There is tribal legal precedent regarding enrollment issues that the enrollment committee is not the final authority in these matters.
In 1986, after the lineal descendants of Rose Murphy including sitting tribal councilman Russell “Butch” Murphy, were turned down for tribal membership, the people voted to overrule the committee to take them in as tribal members.
So the claim in the March 2006 letter from the tribal council to the general membership, just two days before the Hunters were disenrolled, that the people could not question or interrupt the enrollment committee regarding enrollment or disenrollment is flat out not true and Russell Butch Murphy is living proof this is the case!
Here are some examples of violations of the Pechanga tribe's constitution and bylaws as relating to the disenrollments and the moratorium.
1. The Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians constitution and bylaws, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians, states under Article II (membership):
"The membership enrollment will be opened the first month of each year by the Band's Enrollment Committee"
Violation: The moratorium on new adult tribal members because the constitution and bylaws does stipulate open enrollment is the first month of each year.
Under Article VIII (meetings):
"The simple majority of members present shall rule and decide in all matters of government and business of the Band, unless stipulated otherwise in these Bylaws."
Violation: The tribal council allowed the enrollment committee in 2006 to disenroll the Hunters after the petition to outlaw disenrollment was passed into law by the people in 2005. The people are the final authority in matters of who is enrolled and who is disenrolled, not the enrollment committee, because the Band's constitution and bylaws does not state the enrollment committee has this authority.
Under Article V:
"It shall be the duty of all elected officials of the Band to uphold and enforce the Constitution, Bylaws, and ordinances of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians; and, also, uphold the individual rights of each member without malice or prejudice."
Violation 1: Allowing people who started the disenrollment challenges of disenrollees in both 2004 and 2006 to rule on the disenrollment cases of the disenrollees and who were close relatives of key witnesses against them shows malice and prejudice against tribal members.
Violation 2: The tribal council did not uphold and enforce the law that outlawed disenrollments that was passed in 2005 by allowing the Hunters to be disenrolled in 2006.
There is tribal legal precedent regarding enrollment issues that the enrollment committee is not the final authority in these matters.
In 1986, after the lineal descendants of Rose Murphy including sitting tribal councilman Russell Butch Murphy, were turned down for tribal membership, the people voted to overrule the committee to take them in as tribal members.
So the claim in the March 2006 letter from the tribal council to the general membership, just two days before the Hunters were disenrolled, that the people could not question or interrupt the enrollment committee regarding enrollment or disenrollment is flat out not true and Russell Butch Murphy is living proof this is the case!
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Deadbeat Dad from Viejas Band of Mission Indians Now Forced To Pay for HIS Children
A Wildomar mother who has been fighting to collect child support from her children's father, a member of the wealthy Viejas Band of Mission Indians in Alpine, has finally succeeded.
Christina Brown, who is not a tribal member, had taken her ex-husband, Sonnie Brown, to court to force him to pay child support and won. But the courts were powerless to collect thousands of dollars in late payments because the state can't garnishee the money that tribal members receive from casino profits.
Brown's ex-husband was not immediately available for comment.
Courts can sentence tribal members to jail for failing to pay, but they can't touch the money due to tribal sovereignty.
Brown's story brought statewide, public attention to the problem last year.
Last month, Brown finally received a $747 check in the mail after the Viejas tribal council reviewed a petition she submitted and agreed to voluntarily garnishee her ex-husband's monthly casino stipends ---- known as "per capita" payments ---- which total about $240,000 a year.
The amount Brown receives in the future is likely to increase to about $4,000 a month, she said. The smaller amount last month was due to a mistake in the paperwork, Brown said.
Brown, 39, said she was thankful for the tribe's decision.
"They made a huge difference in my kids' lives," she said.
Read MORE of Edward Sifuentes article From the NCTIMES
Christina Brown, who is not a tribal member, had taken her ex-husband, Sonnie Brown, to court to force him to pay child support and won. But the courts were powerless to collect thousands of dollars in late payments because the state can't garnishee the money that tribal members receive from casino profits.
Brown's ex-husband was not immediately available for comment.
Courts can sentence tribal members to jail for failing to pay, but they can't touch the money due to tribal sovereignty.
Brown's story brought statewide, public attention to the problem last year.
Last month, Brown finally received a $747 check in the mail after the Viejas tribal council reviewed a petition she submitted and agreed to voluntarily garnishee her ex-husband's monthly casino stipends ---- known as "per capita" payments ---- which total about $240,000 a year.
The amount Brown receives in the future is likely to increase to about $4,000 a month, she said. The smaller amount last month was due to a mistake in the paperwork, Brown said.
Brown, 39, said she was thankful for the tribe's decision.
"They made a huge difference in my kids' lives," she said.
Read MORE of Edward Sifuentes article From the NCTIMES
Cherokee Nation Election Officials Begin Counting Today, Results Due Wednesday
The election for Cherokee Principal Chief is over and counting begins today. Cherokee officials, which failed to provide adequate election results in the last election, say they will have votes counted by Wednesday.
On Friday, Cherokee Freedmen protested outside the BIA in Muskogee as many freedmen had not recieved their membership cards.
Marilyn Vann said they still have their 1866 Treaty Rights. She drove 320 miles to exercise her right to vote and her committment to the process.
On Friday, Cherokee Freedmen protested outside the BIA in Muskogee as many freedmen had not recieved their membership cards.
Marilyn Vann said they still have their 1866 Treaty Rights. She drove 320 miles to exercise her right to vote and her committment to the process.
Friday, October 7, 2011
Chad Smith Campaign Used Copyrighted KJRH Video Against Bill John Baker Campaign
We caught this exchange of TV station KJRH Channel 2's Facebook Page. The Chad Smith campaign sent out videos that were copyrighted material without permission of the station. One more reason why Smith is in our HALL OF SHAME
Why has this station allowed news footage to be used in a youtube video to speak against and ridicule the Appointed Principal Chief Joe Crittenden and Candidate Bill John Baker, as well as the Cherokee Freedmen. Not only that but this video makes it look as if you are supporting and endorsing exChief Chad Smith. I am NOT pleased in your actions.
Baker, Crittenden, Freedmen
www.youtube.com
Bill John Baker and Joe Crittenden are standing up for the Freedmen..
I agree - I posted a complaint about this yesterday, but have not heard anything yet. I received this channel 2 news video in an email yesterday asking me to watch this video and donate money to the Smith Campaign. It was sent by the Chad Smith campaign to Cherokees living at large. Does Channel 2 support these views??
KJRH The Channel 2 video is being used without our consent, or the consent of our parent company. We were made aware of it just this afternoon and we are working to get this video removed.
The video has been removed, but can you unring a bell?
Why has this station allowed news footage to be used in a youtube video to speak against and ridicule the Appointed Principal Chief Joe Crittenden and Candidate Bill John Baker, as well as the Cherokee Freedmen. Not only that but this video makes it look as if you are supporting and endorsing exChief Chad Smith. I am NOT pleased in your actions.
Baker, Crittenden, Freedmen
www.youtube.com
Bill John Baker and Joe Crittenden are standing up for the Freedmen..
I agree - I posted a complaint about this yesterday, but have not heard anything yet. I received this channel 2 news video in an email yesterday asking me to watch this video and donate money to the Smith Campaign. It was sent by the Chad Smith campaign to Cherokees living at large. Does Channel 2 support these views??
KJRH The Channel 2 video is being used without our consent, or the consent of our parent company. We were made aware of it just this afternoon and we are working to get this video removed.
The video has been removed, but can you unring a bell?
Cahto Tribe Loses Their Disenrollment Case
For years, tribes in California and across the country have been kicking out members – sometimes over objections that those being “disenrolled” have legitimate claims to being part of the tribe. In most cases, the federal government can do nothing, and hasn’t tried.
That’s what makes the Sept. 22 federal district court ruling against the Cahto Tribe of the Laytonville Rancheria so unusual. The appeals court ruling essentially told the tribe to let 22 members back in, or risk losing most federal benefits. The tribe has 60 days from the ruling to file an appeal.
But don’t expect the ruling to start a trend. The tribe had an unusual constitution which allows the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to withhold money if they believe the tribe is kicking people out without reason.
That’s what makes the Sept. 22 federal district court ruling against the Cahto Tribe of the Laytonville Rancheria so unusual. The appeals court ruling essentially told the tribe to let 22 members back in, or risk losing most federal benefits. The tribe has 60 days from the ruling to file an appeal.
But don’t expect the ruling to start a trend. The tribe had an unusual constitution which allows the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to withhold money if they believe the tribe is kicking people out without reason.
Most California tribes do not have this kind of provision in their governing documents. The Cahto Tribe was also able to vote and change their own constitution in 2006 to get rid of the provision — but the disenrolled members filed their appeal in 1999, so they were still subject to the old rules.
The ruling also helps illustrate the strange relationship that California tribes have had with the federal government in general and the BIA in particular. Some critics of tribal disenrollment have praised the BIA’s pursuit of this case — while maintaining that the agency has a checkered history in terms of protecting the rights of tribal people, and still needs major reform today.
“The court decision says they did not move legally,” said Dale Risling, Pacific region director of the BIA, which brought the suit. “So we have to consider the actions the tribe takes from this point on. If the Sloan-Heckler family are not including, it looks like we probably wouldn’t be able to recognize the actions of the Council.”
Risling didn’t lay out a specific dollar figure, but did say there is a lot at stake for the tribe: “They get some of their basic budget funding for the operation of the tribal government, they get housing grants, road services money, various federal program monies.”
This money would remain unspent with the BIA, Risling said. If the federal fiscal year came to an end without the tribe resolving the membership issues, he added, the money would permanently go back to the federal government.
According to the tribe’s website, they have a reservation of about 200 acres near the town of Laytonville, population 1,200, 170 miles north of San Francisco on Highway 101. About 250 people live there, but there are only about 50 voting members in that group.
The ruling comes 16 years, almost to the day, when 22 members of the family, many of them direct descendants of a prominent deceased chief, were disenrolled from the tribe. For years, Gene and Alice Sloan have led the group as they sought reinstatement, and become a noted leader in the larger movement of disenrolled former tribal members. The case dragged out for years, partially because it had to go through a long standard internal review at the BIA.
The tribe does have another source of income — but the Red Fox Casino is known as the smallest tribal casino in the state. It’s an alcohol-free facility. It lists just 93 slot machines and a few gaming tables, but according to Gene Sloan, there’s only about 30 to 40 operating at any given time.
Like many tribal disputes, this one starts with the casino. Sloan served on the tribal council for several years in the 1970s, he said, and spent one year as chairman. In 1995, responding to complaints from tribal members that they were getting little or no income from the casino, he said he and others started looking into the operation and found accounting issues suggesting someone may have been skimming money.
The situation quickly escalated, and the FBI and Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department came onto the reservation to keep the peace. The Sloan-Hecklers were able to get their critical appeal in 1999, but then the case disappeared into a long process through the Indian Board of Internal Appeals within the BIA, which had to rule on jurisdictional and process rules before the agency acted. Last December, the Sloan-Hecklers’ longtime attorney, Tim Vollman, died in a bicycle accident before being able to see the case through.
Laura Waas, central California director of the American Indian Movement (AIM), said that the power to do good today came from actions decades ago designed to rid the federal government of giving benefits to American Indians in California. The Cahto Tribe’s unusual constitution comes out of what is known as the termination era.
From the 1940s through early 1960s, the federal government sought to assimilate many American Indians into the larger culture. A big part of this was taking away federal recognition of many tribes. California, with numerous small tribes, was particularly affected. The effort peaked with the Termination Act passed by Congress in 1953.
Waas said that act had a goal, and many American Indians believe that is the same goal the federal government has today: “To get rid of Congressional trust responsibilities to Indians.”
Instead, she said, she’d like Congress to pass legislation pushing tribes to change their relationship with the federal government – specifically, to put in a standardized set of rules to protect people who are legitimate members of tribes.
When the Cahto tribe got their federal recognition back in 1967, they ratified a tribal constitution designed to maintain access to federal benefits, Risling said. Within the document was a very simple formula for determining who is a tribal member: those living on the Laytonville Rancheria as of October 31, 1944, and all of their direct descendants who can show they are at least one-quarter American Indian.
Therefore, the given reason for disenrolling the Sloan-Heckler members — that they have shown up on the membership rolls of other tribes — was irrelevant. The BIA argued, and the court agreed, that the Sloan-Heckler members met the requirements.
Despite the win in court – and those who have hailed the decision – Risling confirmed that the BIA was a reluctant participant in the case.
“As far as we’re concerned, we would rather not be involved in enrollment issues,” Risling said. “But if an issue comes up, we have to comply with their laws.”
In most cases, the BIA does not have this authority. It does apply to a few other California tribes, though Risling said he was not sure of how many.
One tribe in a similar situation is the Robinson Rancheria Band of Pomos. But the BIA upheld the disenrollment of 45 people there last year. The tribe also owns a 600-slot-machine casino, giving them a greater degree of financial independence.
The best-known recent case of the federal government getting involved in tribal membership comes from the widely-covered dispute between the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma and the Cherokee Freedmen, descendants of former slaves owned by tribal members. The tribe’s effort to expel these 2,800 people – about one percent of the total membership – has been going on for a quarter century.
It also led the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to freeze $33 million that would have gone to the tribe – something allowed under the treaty the tribe signed with the federal government way back in 1866. The case is ongoing.
Despite the case being “put on pause” inside the BIA for so many years, Gene Sloan said he is quite happy—and that he hopes it leads to change in federal policy.
“We wanted to set a precedent for other tribal people that were disenrolled,” Sloan sa
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Hope and Change for the Cherokee Nation; Last two voting days Thursday and Saturday
IF those who want change in leadership at the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma don't vote, they deserve what they get in Hall of Shamer Chad Smith.
Eligible Cherokee voters who have yet to cast ballots may do so Thursday and Saturday at the tribe’s election office in Tahlequah.
Election officials plan to begin counting ballots at 8:30 a.m. Sunday. In other news, there will be a protest Friday at the BIA office in Muskogee.
Eligible Cherokee voters who have yet to cast ballots may do so Thursday and Saturday at the tribe’s election office in Tahlequah.
Election officials plan to begin counting ballots at 8:30 a.m. Sunday. In other news, there will be a protest Friday at the BIA office in Muskogee.
Morongo Tribes Ups Ante in Property Dispute; Changing Street Name
A road name change stirred up a lot of past problems for a Banning developer.
Lloyd Fields fought for change with the Morongo Tribe for years. Now, it's finally happened, but not the one he wanted. Fields Road, named after his father, Harry, will soon become Malki Road.
A spokesman for the Morongo Tribe of Mission Indians tells News Channel 3: "Changing the name to Malki Road will minimize confusion and provide easier public access and visibility to the Malki Museum, which is located on that road."
The name change is only the beginning for Fields, though.
Fields owns 41 acres on the west side of Fields Road. He said he had wanted to develop the land, but in order for people to get to his property, they would need to go through this gate. The Morongo tribe doesn't let non-tribal members through.
The tribe says, "At the requst of the city of Banning, the Morongo Tribal Council is reviewing options regarding the gates, which could include voluntarily moving our guard station at the tribe's own expense to further accommodate our neighboring landowner, Mr. Fields. "
"That will determine if it is on public right of way or not. If it isn't, the tribe will not have to move it, if it is, the tribe has said that they will move it onto their reservation property," City Manager Andy Takata said.
"He said three months ago that they were going to do it then. They're stalling," Lloyd Fields said. "If they're going to add insult to injury, if they're going to take my name off Fields Road after they have in effect destroyed my property value, then I think that Banning has a duty."
"If it is on tribal property, there's nothing the city can do," Takata said.
Fields said there is something the city can do, and he's going to make sure it's done
Lloyd Fields fought for change with the Morongo Tribe for years. Now, it's finally happened, but not the one he wanted. Fields Road, named after his father, Harry, will soon become Malki Road.
A spokesman for the Morongo Tribe of Mission Indians tells News Channel 3: "Changing the name to Malki Road will minimize confusion and provide easier public access and visibility to the Malki Museum, which is located on that road."
The name change is only the beginning for Fields, though.
Fields owns 41 acres on the west side of Fields Road. He said he had wanted to develop the land, but in order for people to get to his property, they would need to go through this gate. The Morongo tribe doesn't let non-tribal members through.
The tribe says, "At the requst of the city of Banning, the Morongo Tribal Council is reviewing options regarding the gates, which could include voluntarily moving our guard station at the tribe's own expense to further accommodate our neighboring landowner, Mr. Fields. "
"That will determine if it is on public right of way or not. If it isn't, the tribe will not have to move it, if it is, the tribe has said that they will move it onto their reservation property," City Manager Andy Takata said.
"He said three months ago that they were going to do it then. They're stalling," Lloyd Fields said. "If they're going to add insult to injury, if they're going to take my name off Fields Road after they have in effect destroyed my property value, then I think that Banning has a duty."
"If it is on tribal property, there's nothing the city can do," Takata said.
Fields said there is something the city can do, and he's going to make sure it's done
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
CA Assembly Speaker John Perez (D) Takes Hefty Donation from Pechanga Tribe, Which Violated the Civil Rights of Their People and One that Practices Apartheid On their Reservation
The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians has cut a hefty check to Building California's Future, the ballot-measure committee of Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles. This means that Speaker Perez turns a blind eye to the civil rights violations and the tribes practice of APARTHEID
The Temecula-area tribe's Sept. 15 contribution was reported Monday.
The tribe briefly made an end-of-session push for legislation designed to block the Liberty Quarry project near Temecula. The bill stalled at its first Senate hearing but could be resurrected in January.
Why do we think Perez would have supported the Arizona boycott for “possible civil rights violations”. LOOK AT YOURSELF Mr. Speaker. You help Pechanga get away with civil and human rights violations in TEMECULA CA. Not to mention the THEFT of citizenship. That is NOT the same as asking someone to see their ID or required paperwork.
Give the donation BACK.
The Temecula-area tribe's Sept. 15 contribution was reported Monday.
The tribe briefly made an end-of-session push for legislation designed to block the Liberty Quarry project near Temecula. The bill stalled at its first Senate hearing but could be resurrected in January.
Why do we think Perez would have supported the Arizona boycott for “possible civil rights violations”. LOOK AT YOURSELF Mr. Speaker. You help Pechanga get away with civil and human rights violations in TEMECULA CA. Not to mention the THEFT of citizenship. That is NOT the same as asking someone to see their ID or required paperwork.
Give the donation BACK.
Monday, October 3, 2011
What's in a Name? To Washington Post, Niggerhead is Offensive, Redskins Isn't
Indian Country Today has a story up on the polical flap involved in an old family hunting area of Presidential Candidate Rick Perry in the Washington Post. They rightfully slap the Post for it's use of the offensive to Native Americans word: Redskins
Anyone who read the story The Washington Post published over the weekend, lamenting Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry’s alleged inaction on changing the name of the “Niggerhead” hunting camp his family has frequented for decades, knew that this was not good news for Perry. But few in the mainstream media have pointed out The Post’s own abuse of language in continuing to refer to the D.C. football team by the name “Redskins”— a word that many Indians find just as offensive as many African Americans find the N-word.
On its website, in fact, The Washington Post juxtaposed its stories about Perry next to a story, titled “Redskins on Hold, Escape Win Over Rams.” The newspaper’s editors apparently did not recognize the irony.
Many newspapers recognize the offensive word and refuse to use it in their articles, instead using the Washington football team. Redskins, a term going back to colonial times when bounties were offered on Indians, $50 pounds for a healthy Penobscot male.
Bob Gough, a leader with the Intertribal Council on Utility Policy, breaks it down:
“Sir, which is worse: That a potential presidential candidate from Texas has a family hunting camp that was once named ‘Niggerhead’ or the Nation’s Capital, where he is hoping to move, still proudly supporting a sports team named ‘Redskins’?
“Your paper’s contra-positioning of ‘Niggerhead’ v. ‘Redskins,’ with expressed concern over only one of these terms, seems sadly, but blatantly racist and hypocritical.”
The New York Times uses the offensive term five times in an article about John McCains chances to win the presidency. So the liberal papers, are very selective in their outrage.
Never mind that the story is untrue, as our friend Jazz Shaw points out here . The hypocrisy of our news media stands out like a drunkards nose.
Our friend Sherri Mitchell says: Its astounding that this type of terminology, used to memorialize the slaughter of a people, is still being used casually and recreationally by American society. Its Shameful
Anyone who read the story The Washington Post published over the weekend, lamenting Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry’s alleged inaction on changing the name of the “Niggerhead” hunting camp his family has frequented for decades, knew that this was not good news for Perry. But few in the mainstream media have pointed out The Post’s own abuse of language in continuing to refer to the D.C. football team by the name “Redskins”— a word that many Indians find just as offensive as many African Americans find the N-word.
On its website, in fact, The Washington Post juxtaposed its stories about Perry next to a story, titled “Redskins on Hold, Escape Win Over Rams.” The newspaper’s editors apparently did not recognize the irony.
Many newspapers recognize the offensive word and refuse to use it in their articles, instead using the Washington football team. Redskins, a term going back to colonial times when bounties were offered on Indians, $50 pounds for a healthy Penobscot male.
Bob Gough, a leader with the Intertribal Council on Utility Policy, breaks it down:
“Sir, which is worse: That a potential presidential candidate from Texas has a family hunting camp that was once named ‘Niggerhead’ or the Nation’s Capital, where he is hoping to move, still proudly supporting a sports team named ‘Redskins’?
“Your paper’s contra-positioning of ‘Niggerhead’ v. ‘Redskins,’ with expressed concern over only one of these terms, seems sadly, but blatantly racist and hypocritical.”
The New York Times uses the offensive term five times in an article about John McCains chances to win the presidency. So the liberal papers, are very selective in their outrage.
Never mind that the story is untrue, as our friend Jazz Shaw points out here . The hypocrisy of our news media stands out like a drunkards nose.
Our friend Sherri Mitchell says: Its astounding that this type of terminology, used to memorialize the slaughter of a people, is still being used casually and recreationally by American society. Its Shameful
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Cherokee Freedmen's Federal Case Dismissed; U.S. Government SHOULD withhold funds
Does the U.S. Government support treaty violations by the Cherokee? Did we support apartheid? Well, we know the BIA/Department of Interior gives blanket support via their inaction to the apartheid practiced at Pechanga and Redding, but is that honorable?
Filed in 2003 by a group of freedmen descendants against the Cherokee Nation, then-Principal Chief Chad Smith and then-Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, one lawsuit claimed that the tribe violated the Treaty of 1866 and the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by stripping the freedmen descendants - the descendants of former slaves of the Cherokee - of their tribal citizenship.
The lawsuit came after the freedmen descendants were not allowed to vote in the tribe's 2003 election.
Among the suit's requests were that the court prohibit the federal government from recognizing any Cherokee election, distributing any federal funding to the tribe or recognizing its government-to-government relationship with the tribe until the descendants' citizenship is restored.
In his decision, U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy wrote that the tribe never waived its sovereignty in the lawsuit, leaving him no option but to dismiss it because sovereign nations cannot be sued without their consent.
"The suit cannot proceed without the Cherokee Nation, and the Cherokee Nation did not waive its sovereign immunity such that it can be joined as a party to this suit," Kennedy wrote.
Jon Velie, the freedmen descendants' attorney in the federal court proceedings, said in an email Friday night that the decision to dismiss one of the lawsuits does not change the status of the 2,800 freedmen descendants whose citizenship was restored on Sept. 21. They can still vote in the special election
The agreement, he wrote, will remain in place while the other lawsuit is pending.
Read the Rest of the TULSA WORLD story
Filed in 2003 by a group of freedmen descendants against the Cherokee Nation, then-Principal Chief Chad Smith and then-Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, one lawsuit claimed that the tribe violated the Treaty of 1866 and the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by stripping the freedmen descendants - the descendants of former slaves of the Cherokee - of their tribal citizenship.
The lawsuit came after the freedmen descendants were not allowed to vote in the tribe's 2003 election.
Among the suit's requests were that the court prohibit the federal government from recognizing any Cherokee election, distributing any federal funding to the tribe or recognizing its government-to-government relationship with the tribe until the descendants' citizenship is restored.
In his decision, U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy wrote that the tribe never waived its sovereignty in the lawsuit, leaving him no option but to dismiss it because sovereign nations cannot be sued without their consent.
"The suit cannot proceed without the Cherokee Nation, and the Cherokee Nation did not waive its sovereign immunity such that it can be joined as a party to this suit," Kennedy wrote.
Jon Velie, the freedmen descendants' attorney in the federal court proceedings, said in an email Friday night that the decision to dismiss one of the lawsuits does not change the status of the 2,800 freedmen descendants whose citizenship was restored on Sept. 21. They can still vote in the special election
The agreement, he wrote, will remain in place while the other lawsuit is pending.
Read the Rest of the TULSA WORLD story
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)