I struggle to find some truth in Marcia Spurgeon’s letter about March 10, 2007, and what happened in Jamul.

To begin with, Walter Rosales, Karen Toggery and her son Ayul were legally evicted. As a real estate person, I am sure that Spurgeon understands evictions. They happen every day. On Indian lands, the local enforcement agency, in this case the San Diego Sheriff’s Department, has no authority to enforce evictions. This is a glaring weakness of Public Law 280, but one we have to live with.

These people were served notice, per tribal ordinance. They were allowed to appeal through the Intertribal Court of Southern California at which time Judge Anthony Brandenburg ruled in favor of the tribe. On top of all of this, both were offered the same monies that tribal members received to relocate.

The evictions were peaceful. The evictees were not “brutally forced from their homes” and, as you can see from the previous paragraph, did not have their “civil rights violated.” And, by the way, although the Jamul Indian Village was the lifelong home of Rosales, this is not the case with Toggery.

If the friends and supporters of Walter and Karen had merely stood by, there would have been no use of batons or pepper spray. As evidenced by a video of the incident, the citizens of Jamul trespassed by sneaking back onto the reservation, re-occupied a house, and confronted the tribal police both inside and outside of the house. The tribal police were greatly outnumbered and reacted with what they considered appropriate force.

Spurgeon refers to the village as Walter and Karen’s ancestral lands. While I will agree that they do have a claim in ancestry, so do the other 50-plus tribal members who asked to have Walter and Karen removed.

The tribe did not agree to “refrain from destroying the homes for a week.” Chairman Leon Acebedo made it clear to all that the Jamul Executive Committee would have the final say on that agreement. The chairman should not have had to end the standoff in the first place. That standoff was taking place on property owned by the tribe and the people refusing to leave were, again, trespassing.

What gives Spurgeon or any other non-Jamul tribal member the right to determine who has a rightful home on the Jamul Indian Village property? As non-members, they have no rights on our tribal lands except those granted by the Jamul tribe.

The Indians of Jamul did not historically have a constitution, an enrollment or an eviction ordinance. These were things that were forced on us in order to gain federal recognition. When we follow the rules that all of you ask of us, it is unfair to criticize us when things work out contrary to your wishes. If you must criticize us, at least get the story straight.

BILL MESA
Chairman, Jamul Indian Village of California

© Copyright 2008 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

Posted on April 5th, 2008 by hunwut
Filed under: Opinion, Reservations