The San Diego Union-Tribune Letters to the editor

I take issue with some of the facts as presented in the Feb. 3 news story, “Tribal-court challenge rejected,” about the Jamul casino fight and the effort of legitimate Jamul Kumeyaay tribal members to save their precious village.

First, the “judge” has never been a judge in California. He was hired by tribal members to sit on a regional inter-tribal court. This court is not a recognized California court.

Second, Walter Rosales, Karen Toggery and 85-year-old Vivian Flores, residents of the Jamul Indian Village, are not “dissidents.” They are in fact the rightful residents, true Jamul Kumeyaay Native Americans who have resided on the tiny property for many years. Rosales has lived there his entire life.

Their opposition to a casino in Jamul has led to a hostile and contentious takeover of the tribal leadership and now the threatened eviction of Rosales and Toggery. Rosales and Toggery have refused to join the new tribe, which has teamed with Lakes Development to build a huge, multistory (12-30 stories) casino complex on four-plus acres. Their steadfast opposition has lead to Toggery losing her status as a Native American. She is now an Urban American. She no longer can receive her health care and other benefits provided to Native Americans. Nor do they participate in the $1.1 million that non-gaming tribes receive from a state fund.

The truth is most of the current pseudo tribal leadership members do not even have Jamul Kumeyaay blood, they have not lived at the village and they were not even enrolled as tribal members until the casino proposal. To settle the controversy, Toggery is asking that the Bureau of Indian Affairs require DNA testing and a data base to prove rightful tribal membership.

Your news story stated that Rosales and Toggery have pursued a series of unsuccessful lawsuits. Actually, the original lawsuits were filed in the California court system, which is the wrong venue for Native American membership and land disputes. Currently, two lawsuits are in U.S. district courts. One seeks to address the rightful owners of the property based on the deed language. The other seeks to determine the rightful tribal members based on their genealogy. Both are critical lawsuits that have been ignored repeatedly by the current tribal leadership, the casino developer and the staff writer.

Where was your article about the recent Jamul community meeting where over 400 residents turned out in opposition to the casino? Why hasn’t the Union-Tribune delved into the growing practice of arbitrarily dis-enrolling members when they question or oppose the actions of the tribal leadership?

MARCIA SPURGEON
Jamul

© Copyright 2007 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

Posted on February 15th, 2007 by admin
Filed under: Gaming, News, Opinion