STOP THE CASINO 101 COALITION

Myth vs. Fact

WHAT THE FIGR SAYS, WHAT THE RECORD SAYS:      Here are some quotes from a variety sources that are attributed to several FIGR tribal leaders.  Compare what they say to what the record shows, and make up your own mind! 

 The FIGR Says:  "...the governor is required by federal law to issue a compact to us."  Chairman Greg Sarris, "Mid-County Madness" , by Joy Lanzendorfer, The North Bay Bohemina, August 18-24, 2004 
 
  The Record Says:  The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act only requires a governor to negotiate in good faith with tribes.  Governors are not required by law to give any tribe a compact, and according to BIA Director George Skibine,  the federal government cannot compel the governor to do so.
 
The FIGR Says:  "If the MOU is overturned, the tribe says it will likely sue the city for breaking a business agreement. 'One of our options would be to sue for the amount we would have lost by not having the casino,' says Sarris. 'Do you know how much that would be? More money than Rohnert Park would have in a hundred years.'"   "Mid-County Madness" , by Joy Lanzendorfer, The North Bay Bohemian, August 18-24, 2004
 
The Record Says:   The FIGR has already broken the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which was site specific to the orignal site one mile West of the current site.  The original site was at the corner of Wilfred and Stony Point Road.  "Site specific" means that the casino building site is named specifically in the MOU as a condition of the MOU.  When Station Casinos purchased the new site one mile away, they  violated the MOU.  The FIGR acknowledged in a September 8, 2005 memo to Rohnert Park that the MOU would have to be "amended to reflect the realities of the new site." 

 The FIGR Says:  " In the 1920s, a steep, 15-acre rancheria in Graton, near Sebastopol, was set aside for the "digger Indians" to live in camps -- but Sarris said in a 2000 interview that there was never enough room for more than six families. " (San Francisco Chronicle, "Indian tribes campaigning to open casino" , August 18, 2003)
 
 The Record Says:  If Sarris knew in 2000 that only a few Indians ever lived on Graton, why did he tell the House Resource Committee on May 16, 2000, that "75  members"  moved on to the Rancheria immediately after it was purchased?  There's no evidence in the record that even six families ever lived there.  One man, Andrew Sears, and his wife moved there in 1937, and no one else lived there for another eight years, when a single woman, Laura Faber lived there until 1950.  About 1950-1951, Truvido, along with his wife and child, and Everill moved onto the Rancheria.  In 1952, the Field Agent found "3 adults, 1 child" living on Graton.

The FIGR Says:  " In fact, the Graton Rancheria, which was purchased and placed in federal trust for the Tribe in 1920, did serve as a "reservation" for the Tribe - albeit a tiny one - until 1960, when federal officials removed the trust status of the land...."  FIGR Chairman Greg Sarris, The Community Voice, January 26, 2007  AND  fFrom the FIGR web site at http://www.gratonrancheria.com/ourpeople.htm:   "This land (Graton Rancheria) was ...removed illegally from trust in 1958, and what remains today is a 1 acre parcel which is called the Graton Rancheria."

The Record Says:  We have acquired the original deed for the purchase of the Graton Rancheria by the federal government dated November 8, 1920.  The United States took the title to the land in fee and not in trust for the benefit of any Indian tribe. In order for Graton to have been placed in trust, there would have been hearings held, with notice in the Federal Register and in local newspapers, and the title would have been converted to trust status.  According to government records, none of this happened.  That's a fact. Graton Rancheria was never, never trust land.   There is a huge difference between trust land, which is what Indian reservations and/or Indian-owned land are, and fee land, which is how we all own our land.  Graton Rancheria was never, never a reservation.

The FIGR Says:  In 2000, in a December 2003 Metroactive (Bohemian) article, FIGR Chairman Greg Sarris said, " When recognition was restored, Sarris said publicly that the tribe wasn't planning on building a casino. The tribe explored other options, such as organic food processing, a cheese factory, and a winery, Sarris says, "all of which need capital or there is already a glut of here." "No bank was going to give us money," he continues. Enter Station Casinos, which also bankrolled a controversial casino in the Sierra foothills outside Auburn. "Any good economist will tell you we made a prudent decision. As I tell my friends, do the math." (The Graton Band's Last Stand, by R.V. Scheide, The North Bay Bohemian, December 4-10, 2003.)

The Record Says:  Four years earlier, in an April 1999 interview with Greg Sarris in the Pacific Sun, "Sarris (said) that banks have already approached tribal leaders about crafting loan packages and developing business ideas.  Only environmentally sensitive options will be considered, he adds."  (Gathering of the tribes, by Mike Thomas, UpFront, The Pacific Sun, April 7-13, 1999)

The FIGR Says: "15.45 acres were purchased in Graton for our members. Seventy-five members moved on in 1920". (FIGR Chairman Greg Sarris in his testimony to Congress, May 16, 2000)

The Record Says:  Even the FIGR's own September 1997 report submitted to the government in support of its restoration efforts does not make this claim.  

The Rancheria was purchased in 1921. It was not purchased for the use of any specific tribe, but was intended "for (the) use and occupancy by the Marshall and Sebastopol bands of homeless California Indians." 

No "members" of anything moved onto the Rancheria in 1920 or in 1921. In fact, no one lived there at all until Andrew Sears moved onto the property in 1937. At this time, the area Indian Agency Superintendent asked Washington for permission to open Graton Rancheria up to any California Indian, which was done. 

The FIGR Says:  "...President Clinton signed legislation restoring federal recognition to the Coastal Miwoks...Tribal chairman Greg Sarris...said it has been a ’long, hard battle’ to regain federal recognition, which was taken away by the California Rancheria Act of 1958." (Greg Sarris, North Bay Indian Tribe Regains Federal Status, San Francisco Chronicle, December 30, 2000), AND, "...the Miwok tribe discovered a small parcel of land in Graton that had been set aside as a reservation area for the local Miwoks in the 1920’s...The group's federal status as a recognized tribe was terminated in 1966 under the California Rancheria Act of 1958." (Tribal Spirit, The North Bay Bohemian, March 9-15, 2000)

The Record Says: No tribe lost its federal recognition at Graton with the enactment of the Rancheria Act, as there was no tribe there in the first place. The only thing the Rancheria Act did at Graton was to pass ownership of the land from the federal government to private individuals at the request, and with the full, informed compliance of those individuals.   And, because no one lived on the Rancheria from 1921 to 1937, occupancy of the Graton Rancheria was not limited to Coast Miwok or Southern Pomo. "The deed for the land did not contain any limitation or provision as to what Indians should be settled thereon. ...there is no limitation or reason why other landless Indians (other than those from Marshall and Tomales) may not be located thereon." (Letter from Assistant Commissioner William Zimmerman, U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, Office of Indian Affairs, to Roy Nash, Superintendant, Sacramento branch of the Indian Agency, July 11, 1937) One of the three recipients of the Graton Rancheria land was in fact, 1/4 Shasta and 3/4 White.

The FIGR Says: (Speaking of the period following the enslavement of Native Americans in California) "Most surviving Miwok were moved to a 20-acre parcel of land near Graton in Sonoma County. In the 1950s, when the federal government terminated the Miwok as a federally recognized nation, the few remaining Indians were kicked off, all except one family.'' (FIGR Chairman Greg Sarris, Coastal Miwok Seek Ties to the Land San Francisco Chronicle, February 4, 2000)

The Record Says: No one was "moved" to Graton Rancheria ever.   Indians who chose to live there could apply for an assignment, and it was strictly voluntary. No one was kicked off the Rancheria upon its dissolution. The land was distributed to the three adults males who lived there, or their legal heirs. One of those males, Frank Truvido, lived there with his daughter Gloria, who still lives there today.  It was Frank Truvido who, along with the other two men, helped the government establish exactly who lived on the Rancheria prior to the Rancheria Act vote. 

The FIGR Says: "Unfortunately, state and federal agents didn't mention concepts such as property taxes to the new landowners when they showed up at the rancheria. ‘Anybody who could was out harvesting, and it was never explained to them.’" (From an interview with FIGR Vice-Chair Lorelle Ross, The Graton Band’s Last Stand, The North Bay Bohemian, December -10, 2003 issue.)

The Record Says: (1) No one was "out harvesting". In fact, it was Lorelle Ross’s own grandfather, Frank Truvido, Fred Everill and Andrew Sears told an Indian Agent exactly who was living on the property during the Agent’s field visit in August 21, 1952.  The field notes are very detailed, and these three men provided the details. (Excerpts from these filed notes can be found in the PDF file "Supporting Documents 2 of 3" found above ) (2) All three men who wound up owning Graton land were intelligent and articulate in English.  One of the men, Fred Everill, was 3/4 English (Cornish), whose family owned land in Siskiyou County.  His brother Charlie owned a ranch and an asbestos mine.  There is no evidence that these three men did not understand the concept of paying property taxes.  The government sent out two letters to the new property ownder and/or their heirs, explaining that the properties would be subject to normal taxes.

The FIGR Says: "As levels of indebtedness increased, tribal members began selling off their property. Ross' father was one of the last ones to hold out, but eventually debt forced him to sell all but one acre of his land." (From an interview with FIGR Vice-Chair Lorelle Ross, from The Graton Band’s Last Stand, The North Bay Bohemian, December -10, 2003 issue.)

The Record Says: Ms. Ross’ grandfather, Frank Truvido, received 1.23 acres of land in 1966. Fred Everill and Andrew Sears were dead by 1966.  Appropriate Probate hearings were held for each man's estate, and their holdings of .76 and .83 acres respectively, were passed on to their legal heirs.  Frank Truvido was Andrew Sears heir, and he inherited his portion of Graton,.  Fred Everill had nine heirs. according to the June 14, 1920 letter from Special Indian Agent John Terrell, this land was located in what was called the "Gold Ridge Fruit Belt".  Even in 1920, this was expensive land, with a spring-fed stream running through it and valuable redwood trees.  Agent Terrell commented on the high price of the land he was buying.  According to Terrell, the land that became the Graton Rancheria was expensive because it was "entirely surrounded by fruit orchards and berry farms".  

The FIGR Says: When the government agents came out to talk to the Rancheria residents about the Rancheria Act, all they found were "three old men who couldn’t even speak English". (FIGR Chairman Greg Sarris, California’s Lost Tribes, Beyond the Dream LLC, aired on KQED in April, 2006).

The Record Says:   The "three old men" were Graton residents Frank Truvido, Andrew Sears and Fred Everill.   In John Terrell’s June 14, 1920 letter, one of his comments on the local Indians was that "Most of these Marshall Indians are bright, energetic, speak good English, and far above average.".   Beyond Mr. Terrell’s observation, though, is the fact that

1. Frank Truvido attended St. Vincent’s Catholic school from "age 6 to age 18" . His handwritten note referenced earlier indicates that his command of English was excellent.

2. Andrew Sears was born and raised in the town of Sonoma, as were his parents, a town where English is largely spoken. We know from the record that Mr. Sears was a valued employee of local farmer Pete Gregori, and he was also known to the local Sheriff. There is no indication from either of these sources that he could not speak English. Indeed, he apparently speaks clear English to the Field Agent on August 21, 1952, who had no trouble understanding any of the men. In addition, according to probate Court records, Mr. Sears, upon executing his will, went to the local tavern to have the owner witness his signature. The tavern owner, Louis Mauc, testified under oath at the Hearing on the will that "He (Mr. Sears) asked me if I could be a witness." . Mr. Mauc also testified that he was not an Indian, so it’s probably safe to assume that Mr. Sears’ request was made in English, as Pomoan languages were and are not widely spoken, especially not by White men..

3. Fred Everill was 3/4 White. His White father was an Englishman from Cornwall, and his mother was 1/2 White and 1/2 Shasta. Mr. Everill grew up in the town of Hamburg in Siskiyou County. There are good records that indicate his brother, Charles, spoke English, so it’s reasonable to assume that Fred Everill also spoke English. Certainly, if Mr. Everill couldn’t speak English, then he could not have easily communicated with his father, mother and brother.

The logical conclusion, based on the record, is that Andrew Sears, Frank Truvido and Fred Everill spoke normal, conversational English.

All three men later (much later!) signed the ballots to dissolve the Rancheria in good, clear handwriting, although Mr. Everill’s was a bit shaky due to his advanced age. No one, for example, marked his ballot with an "X".   No mention is ever made that the men couldn't speak English.   Frank Truvido indicated in his handwritten letter to the Indian Agency, that all three men had signed a letter to Congressman Scudder thanking the government for the Rancheria Act and for the opportunity to own their own land.

Enter content here

Enter content here

Enter content here

Stop the Casino 101 Coalition, Rohnert Park, CA

FAIR USE NOTICE
  
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.