The Bureau of Indian Affairs is strongarming the small California Valley Miwok Tribe over it's handling of a disenrollment issue. Meanwhile the BIA quakes from it's responsibility when it comes to protecting the civil rights of THOUSANDS of California Indians
There will be a protest tomorrow in Sacramento, here is the press release:
The California Valley Miwok Tribe invites you to join us in our open protest against the local Bureau of Indian Affairs, Dept. of the Interior, Central California Agency
Our Tribe is a federally recognized Tribe that is listed in the Federal Register as an Indian Entity Recognized and Eligible to receive services from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The Central California Agency - BIA is illegally trying to re-organize a federally recognized Tribe that has never been terminated, that has a Custom and Tradition Tribal Constitution ratified by the Tribe in March 2000. The local BIA has been illegally withholding our Mature Status 638
Contract since 2008 and by refusing to confirm to the California Gambling Control Commission who our duly elected Chairperson is, BIA has caused the CGCC to illegally withhold the Tribe's Revenue Sharing Trust Fund Monies (RSTF) since 2005.
Our civil rights have been violated. The local BIA is also violating federal law
MORE LATER
My grandmother's probate for her share of Paulina Hunter's allotment went through after we were disenrolled but her official probate documents from the United States Department of Interior identify her as a Mission Indian (Pechanga Band).
ReplyDeleteSo clearly the United States government still considers us as Pechanga Indians even if our tribe at this time "officially" does not.
So if the BIA can go after the Miwok tribe for disenrolling someone that they recognize as belonging to that tribe, then they should do the same thing across the board to any other tribes, including Pechanga, that unlawfully disenroll people regardless of their financial status.
But since the Pechanga disenrollments reportedly CDIB certificates have been changed for individuals who previously were designated as Pechanga to either San Luis Rey or Temecula.
So has someone been tampering with historical records at the Riverside BIA office but they have been unable to alter the land records and did someone from the Pechanga tribe have something to do with this?
This is backed up by the reaction of someone from the Pechanga cultural department when the moratorium person SanJuanflorist told him that her CDIB said Pechanga and he was upset and reportedly said they couldn't do that anymore, apparently for non tribal members.
So has Pechanga's monetary influence tainted the local BIA office towards the tribe's agenda?
But even they couldn't tamper with legal court documents like probate records.
So to my understanding the Riverside BIA Director changed in the last year from James Fletcher, of Pechanga. Has anyone contacted the new Riverside BIA Director to see if they are more receptive to the disenrollments or the moratorium? If the moratorium is truly illegal and the tribal council refuses to follow the tribe’s constitution wouldn’t it be up to the BIA to do something? Also, if someone has altered documents at the BIA such as the 1940 census couldn’t they investigate and correct that?
ReplyDeleteShouldn't there be an equal protection argument in the courts?
ReplyDelete