Post by blackcrowheart on May 2, 2006 13:05:55 GMT -5
Eddie Vedolla is a Pomo, was raised on the Guidiville Rancheria by a grandfather who was a Pomo, and is so proud of his heritage that he served five years on the Guidiville tribal council.
But those who succeeded him on the council said he is not a Guidiville Pomo, and they simply expelled him from the tribe.
"We grew up on the Guidiville Rancheria. My grandfather raised us," he said. Being expelled is "incredibly devastating. It just devastated my whole family."
Vedolla, 66, is among a growing number of American Indians who say they've been banished from their tribes simply for opposing tribal leadership and policies. The issue has great financial implications, because, among other things, expelled members cannot receive shares of profits from Indian gaming. But perhaps more than that, their right to declare their heritage as Indians is at stake.
Frustrated and angry, Vedolla was among 40 people who demonstrated Friday at City Hall in Richmond, where the Guidiville Band wants to build a casino even though their proposal faces great hurdles.
Eager to publicize the issue and pressure tribal leaders, Vedolla and others plan to protest wherever tribes try to build casinos. Besides the Guidiville Band, the Scotts Valley Band of Pomos is interested in building a casino in Richmond. The Lytton Band of Pomos operates Casino San Pablo in nearby San Pablo. There are more than 50 Indian casinos in California.
"It's an important opportunity to use the leverage of the casino project to tell the cities and counties like Richmond who they're dealing with," said Eric Enriquez, 35, of Ukiah, who claims membership in the Pinoleville Rancheria but expects to be expelled for his views.
It's not exactly clear how many Indians have been expelled from their tribes, as the Bureau of Indian Affairs does not maintain statistics. But protest organizers claim more than 1,500 people from 23 tribes nationwide have been banished since 1995.
Membership requirements vary from tribe to tribe, as do the policies and procedures regarding expulsion. But critics argue some tribes are purging long-established members after subjecting them to laborious genealogical investigations and requiring they provide birth, death or marriage certificates going back generations to prove their tribal heritage.
In the past, tribe members were allowed to prove their heritage using wills, baptismal or land records or even names listed in a family Bible.
"It's a mega-issue," said Laura Wass, a former American Indian Movement leader who is now director of the American Indian Legacy Center in Fresno. "You've got a lot of full-bloods, a lot of three-quarter people, who are not being recognized by their tribes."
Vedolla got a letter in April 2003 telling him the tribe was revoking his membership, along with those of his mother, two sisters and niece.
Guidiville tribal officials did not return messages left this week for comment. Vedolla says tribal leaders told him his family was listed as being members of two tribes. He says that's true, but notes that families from different tribes often intermarry and that dual tribal memberships were never a problem in the past.
With the revocations, Vedolla and his family lost their right to vote in tribal elections. His niece lost her tribal scholarship to San Francisco State University. And they were each cut off from the $2,455 quarterly dividend checks tribal members receive from California's Indian casinos.
Vedolla, who served on the Guidiville tribal council from 1991 to 1996, says he was expelled for raising questions about tribal leaders' spending practices and casino plans. He wanted to know how the proposal was being organized and how casino revenue would be spent.
"Along with other members, we wanted to know what was going on with the programs. We were interested in accountability," he said. "I became a pain in the butt to them."
Vedolla is fighting the expulsion and filed an appeal in 2003 with the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs. He expects a ruling within a few months.
Although a bureau spokesman confirmed the agency is reviewing the matter, its decision will be largely irrelevant. Each tribe is a sovereign nation, so the federal government can do nothing more than issue an advisory opinion on the validity of the expulsion, said Dale Risling of the Pacific Region of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
"The Bureau of Indian Affairs does not get involved with enrollment issues," he said. "That's an internal matter for tribes to resolve."
To give the government a stronger role would require a change in federal law, which is exactly what some people are hoping to achieve.
"What we're hoping for is an amendment to the 1968 Indian Civil Rights Act," said Mark Maslin of the American Indian Rights and Resource Organization (AIRRO), which organized Friday's protest in Richmond.
AIRRO and others want the law amended so Indians can appeal tribal rulings and disputes to federal court if they feel their civil rights have been violated. They argue that giving the government a say in such matters is not without precedent.
"Membership has gone from Congress setting it for us to all these local tribes setting their own rules," Wass, of the Legacy Center, said. "So if one family has it out for another, or if there are Indian people who don't know each other, with one flick of the wrist they can be gone."
Article writen by Jason B. Johnson at jbjohnson@sfchronicle.com.
Shawn D. Dorris
Forever JD's girl.
Nigada aniyvwi nigeguda'lvna ale unihloyi unadehna duyukdv gesv'i. Gejinela unadanvtehdi ale unohlisdi ale sagwu gesv junilvwisdanedi anahldinvdlv adanvdo gvhdi.
Translation
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
(Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)
But those who succeeded him on the council said he is not a Guidiville Pomo, and they simply expelled him from the tribe.
"We grew up on the Guidiville Rancheria. My grandfather raised us," he said. Being expelled is "incredibly devastating. It just devastated my whole family."
Vedolla, 66, is among a growing number of American Indians who say they've been banished from their tribes simply for opposing tribal leadership and policies. The issue has great financial implications, because, among other things, expelled members cannot receive shares of profits from Indian gaming. But perhaps more than that, their right to declare their heritage as Indians is at stake.
Frustrated and angry, Vedolla was among 40 people who demonstrated Friday at City Hall in Richmond, where the Guidiville Band wants to build a casino even though their proposal faces great hurdles.
Eager to publicize the issue and pressure tribal leaders, Vedolla and others plan to protest wherever tribes try to build casinos. Besides the Guidiville Band, the Scotts Valley Band of Pomos is interested in building a casino in Richmond. The Lytton Band of Pomos operates Casino San Pablo in nearby San Pablo. There are more than 50 Indian casinos in California.
"It's an important opportunity to use the leverage of the casino project to tell the cities and counties like Richmond who they're dealing with," said Eric Enriquez, 35, of Ukiah, who claims membership in the Pinoleville Rancheria but expects to be expelled for his views.
It's not exactly clear how many Indians have been expelled from their tribes, as the Bureau of Indian Affairs does not maintain statistics. But protest organizers claim more than 1,500 people from 23 tribes nationwide have been banished since 1995.
Membership requirements vary from tribe to tribe, as do the policies and procedures regarding expulsion. But critics argue some tribes are purging long-established members after subjecting them to laborious genealogical investigations and requiring they provide birth, death or marriage certificates going back generations to prove their tribal heritage.
In the past, tribe members were allowed to prove their heritage using wills, baptismal or land records or even names listed in a family Bible.
"It's a mega-issue," said Laura Wass, a former American Indian Movement leader who is now director of the American Indian Legacy Center in Fresno. "You've got a lot of full-bloods, a lot of three-quarter people, who are not being recognized by their tribes."
Vedolla got a letter in April 2003 telling him the tribe was revoking his membership, along with those of his mother, two sisters and niece.
Guidiville tribal officials did not return messages left this week for comment. Vedolla says tribal leaders told him his family was listed as being members of two tribes. He says that's true, but notes that families from different tribes often intermarry and that dual tribal memberships were never a problem in the past.
With the revocations, Vedolla and his family lost their right to vote in tribal elections. His niece lost her tribal scholarship to San Francisco State University. And they were each cut off from the $2,455 quarterly dividend checks tribal members receive from California's Indian casinos.
Vedolla, who served on the Guidiville tribal council from 1991 to 1996, says he was expelled for raising questions about tribal leaders' spending practices and casino plans. He wanted to know how the proposal was being organized and how casino revenue would be spent.
"Along with other members, we wanted to know what was going on with the programs. We were interested in accountability," he said. "I became a pain in the butt to them."
Vedolla is fighting the expulsion and filed an appeal in 2003 with the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs. He expects a ruling within a few months.
Although a bureau spokesman confirmed the agency is reviewing the matter, its decision will be largely irrelevant. Each tribe is a sovereign nation, so the federal government can do nothing more than issue an advisory opinion on the validity of the expulsion, said Dale Risling of the Pacific Region of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
"The Bureau of Indian Affairs does not get involved with enrollment issues," he said. "That's an internal matter for tribes to resolve."
To give the government a stronger role would require a change in federal law, which is exactly what some people are hoping to achieve.
"What we're hoping for is an amendment to the 1968 Indian Civil Rights Act," said Mark Maslin of the American Indian Rights and Resource Organization (AIRRO), which organized Friday's protest in Richmond.
AIRRO and others want the law amended so Indians can appeal tribal rulings and disputes to federal court if they feel their civil rights have been violated. They argue that giving the government a say in such matters is not without precedent.
"Membership has gone from Congress setting it for us to all these local tribes setting their own rules," Wass, of the Legacy Center, said. "So if one family has it out for another, or if there are Indian people who don't know each other, with one flick of the wrist they can be gone."
Article writen by Jason B. Johnson at jbjohnson@sfchronicle.com.
Shawn D. Dorris
Forever JD's girl.
Nigada aniyvwi nigeguda'lvna ale unihloyi unadehna duyukdv gesv'i. Gejinela unadanvtehdi ale unohlisdi ale sagwu gesv junilvwisdanedi anahldinvdlv adanvdo gvhdi.
Translation
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
(Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)