The URL can be used to link to this page

1-A Agenda Correspondence - Pacheco• ". Main Office Three Park Plaza, Suite 120 Irvine, CA 92614 Office: 714.462.1700 Fax: 714.462.1785 September 27, 2021 VIA E-MAIL AND FEDEX Jeff Ballinger City Attorney City of Palm Springs Palm Springs City Hall 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs California 92262 jeff.ballinger-c@palmspringsca.gov Riverside Office 3649 Mission Inn Avenue Second Floor Rotunda Riverside, CA 92501 Re: Palm Springs City Council Meetingon September 29, 2021, Agenda New Business Item 1A., Consideration of Human Rights Commission Draft Resolution Apologizingfor or City's Role in the Actions Associated with Section 14 and Consideration of Human Rights Commission Resolution HRC 21-001 Recommending Removal of the Frank Bogert Monument from the Front of Palm Springs City Hall, and Possible Direction to City Staff. Dear Mr. Ballinger: This correspondence shall serve as an objection to the Palm Springs City Council's intention to approve the above item on its agenda which would result in the removal of the statue erected of mayor Frank Bogert. While in separate correspondence we provide the City of Palm Springs ("City") with items of evidence we offer for the Council's consideration, as well as all other City officials and appointed members, this correspondence includes, but is not limited to legal objections to the proposed action. It is clear that the City has not followed its own municipal code, nor followed state law for it's proposed action. ��bl�c, Comrml� P&N September 27, 2021 Page 2 City's Failure to Follow the Palm Springs Historic Preservation Code The Council has expressed an overwhelming desire to relocate the iconic statue of Mayor Bogert that has graced City Hall for decades. In fact, Mayor Bogert's statue, by act of the City Council, was erected as a part of Palm Springs City Hall on March 31, 1990. Clearly, the Council believed, and voted along those beliefs, that Mayor Bogert's statue reflected elements of the City's cultural, social, economic and political history. To argue otherwise is to ignore the obvious fact he was a celebrated Mayor of Palm Springs that presided over the City's tremendous growth and significance. We note additionally that Palm Springs City Hall was designated as a Class 1 Historic Site on October 2, 1996, by order of the City Council, thereby including Mayor Bogert's statue as an appurtenance of the property and its designation. Such a designation may include a structure, building or object on the site. Palm Springs Historic Preservation Code, Section 8.05.020. Given the timing of placement, subsequent designation and that the Bogert statue is obviously an object on the site, Mayor Bogert's statue is protected by the City's own municipal code. We note also that there was no carve out of the statue in the original Class 1 designation of City Hall. Given statutory construction, it is presumed under the law that the governing body knew they could make an exception for the statue from the designation and chose not to do so, thus tacitly including it within the designation. Further, the demolition or alteration of Class 1 Historic Resources is not subject to speculation, but the law. The Historic Preservation Code requires that a Certificate of Appropriateness be issued prior to any permit being issued for such alteration or demolition. See Palm Springs Historic Preservation Code, Section 8.05.110A. There is a process for the certificate that has clearly not been followed. Further, there are four narrowly defined criteria for the alteration or demolition of the statue, none of which have been followed. Nor could it be given the requirements of findings that do not conform to the very clear reasons espoused by the Council for the statue's removal/alteration. Palm Springs Historic Preservation Code, Section 8.05.110E. Revisionist history is not a basis for altering or destroying historic resources under the law. It is evident that the City officials, in a rush to judgment, have ignored their own laws. My clients encourage the City to follow the law prior to any vote to remove the Mayor Frank Bogert statue. City's Failure to Follow the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") The City's past and continued designation of City Hall and its statue of Mayor Frank Bogert triggered not only the municipal code regarding historic sites within Palm Springs, it also triggered California law. P&N September 27, 2021 Page 3 Pursuant to CEQA, a project, or act, that causes a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is considered to be an act that significantly impacts the environment. California Public Resources Code §21084.1; §21060.5. A "substantial adverse change" is defined as "...demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of an historical resource would be impaired." California Public Resources Code §5020.1(q) (Emphasis added.). The City has declared City Hall and its statue of Mayor Frank Bogert an historical resource to be protected and preserved, as noted above. Local designations of properties recognized by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution, as here, are those historical resources that qualify under California Public Resources Code §21084.1 and are therefore protected by the law. California Public Resources Code §5020.1(k). Consequently, the City must prepare an environmental report (EIR) pursuant to various sections of CEQA. California Public Resources Code §§ 21080(d), 21082.2(d), 21100(a), 21151(a). Given that the City has done nothing to satisfy CEQA obligations, particularly the preparation and review of an EIR, it is error for the City to proceed to relocate, at the least, the Mayor Frank Bogert statue from City Hall. We encourage the City to follow state law prior to any vote to relocate, or alter, the Mayor Frank Bogert statue from Palm Springs City Hall. City's Failure to Follow and Respect California Civil Code & 987 Which Protects Fine Art There should be no question that the Mayor Frank Bogert statue is an acclaimed piece of fine art created by an internationally respected artist, Raymundo Cobos Reyes. Mr. Reyes has exhibited his sculptures and paintings not only in his home country of Mexico, but all over the world. State law prohibits anyone, including municipalities, of intentionally committing "...any physical defacement, mutilation, alteration, or destruction of fine art." California Civil Code § 987(c)(1). Only the artist who created the fine art may authorize the any alteration of their work. Id. The purpose of the law, embodied in California Civil Code § 987(a), embraces ideals and principles of which the Palm Springs City Council should take note: "The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the physical alteration or destruction of fine art, which is an expression of the artist's personality, is detrimental to the artist's reputation, and artists therefore have an interest in P&N September 27, 2021 Page 4 protecting their works of fine art against any alteration or destruction; and that there is also a public interest in preserving the integrity of cultural and artistic creations." Failure to abide by California Civil Code § 987(a) subjects the offender to litigation which can include, injunctive relief, actual damages, attorney's fees and costs, and punitive damages. California Civil Code § 987(e). The law requires notification to the artist, which we know for a fact has not been done by the City, as we have already contacted him. Lastly, there are other legal impediments to the intended course of conduct by the City's Council. We reserve the right to assert all such claims and bring them to the attention of unbiased and fair review in a court of law. Very truly yours, Rod Pacheco MISSION INDIANS April 22, 1966 Palm Springs City Council City Offices Palm Springs, California RE: City Clean -Up Campaign Program Gentlemen: AP; CITY MANAGER When something is wrong it is not uncommon to hear many voices of protest, but when some constructive act is performed it is all too frequently followed by silence. The Tribal Council for the Agua. Caliente Band of Mission Indians want you to know that they commend you for your recent Clean-up Campaign and they ask that you consider this letter as a note of their appreciation. Veer , y truly yours �_"Ial -, /' 1 4 � - /1-Z T_ Edmund P. Siva Chairman 3 : P&N PACHECO INEACH Pc Main Office Three Park Plaza, Suite 120 Irvine, CA 92614 Office: 714.462.1700 Fax: 714.462.1785 September 27, 2021 VIA EMAIL AND FEDEX Jeff Ballinger City Attorney City of Palm Springs Palm Springs City Hall 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs California 92262 jeff.ballin eg r-ckpalmsprinjzsca. og_v Anthony Mejia City Clerk City of Palm Springs Palm Springs City Hall 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs California 92262 city cy lerk(?palmspringsca og_v Riverside Office 3649 Mission Inn Avenue Second Floor Rotunda Riverside, CA 92501 Re: Palm Springs Citv Council Meeting on September 29. 2021. Aaenda New Business Item IA., Consideration of Human Rights Commission Draft Resolution Apologizingfor City's Role in the Actions Associated with Section 14 and Consideration of Human Rights Commission Resolution HRC 21-001 Recommending Removal of the Frank Bogert Monument from the Front of Palm Springs City Hall, and Possible Direction to Cit Siff. Dear Mr. Ballinger and Mr. Mejia: As you know, Mr. Ballinger, from our previous interactions on the subject of the Palm Springs City Council consideration of the removal of the Mayor Frank Bogert sculpture located at City Hall, I represent a group of Pam Springs citizens known as the Friends of Mayor Frank Bogert. I also represent his widow, Mrs. Bogert. It appears from the above agenda item, and the information attached to the agenda by City officials, that the Council intends to vote on the above item on Wednesday September 29, 2021. P&N City of Palm Springs September 27, 2021 Page 3 Included within the drop box and the thumb drive is correspondence identifying our legal objections to the City's proposed action to remove the statue. We encourage a thoughtful review of the significant impediments to such a Council vote, and the ramifications if one goes forward which results in removal. If for some reason you reject these items of evidence, we expect an explanation from the City why it would refuse to consider evidence regarding an important resolution to City residents. Further, any rejection of the evidence we submit will not preclude our use of it, in its entirety, in a court of law. Should you have any difficulty accessing the information we provide please call me directly on my cell phone at 951-743-8887. Very truly yours, Rod Pacheco RP/cml Attachments: As stated thumb drive. The rest of the items, noted here in items #1-11, are to be delivered via email in drop box form and a thumb drive. "KW-,` P&N PACHECO NEACH PC Main Office Three Park Plaza, Suite 120 Irvine, CA 92614 Office: 714.462.1700 Fax: 714.462.1785 September 27, 2021 VIA E-MAIL AND FEDEX Jeff Ballinger City Attorney City of Palm Springs Palm Springs City Hall 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs California 92262 jeff.ballinger-c@palmspringsca.gov Riverside Office 3649 Mission Inn Avenue Second Floor Rotunda Riverside, CA 92501 Re: Palm Springs City Council Meeting on September 29, 2021, Agenda New Business Item IA., Consideration of Human Rights Commission Draft Resolution Apologizingfor or City's Role in the Actions Associated with Section 14 and Consideration of Human Rights Commission Resolution HRC 21-001 Recommending Removal of the Frank Bogert Monument from the Front of Palm Springs City Hall, and Possible Direction to City Staff. Dear Mr. Ballinger: This correspondence shall serve as an objection to the Palm Springs City Council's intention to approve the above item on its agenda which would result in the removal of the statue erected of mayor Frank Bogert. While in separate correspondence we provide the City of Palm Springs ("City") with items of evidence we offer for the Council's consideration, as well as all other City officials and appointed members, this correspondence includes, but is not limited to legal objections to the proposed action. It is clear that the City has not followed its own municipal code, nor followed state law for it's proposed action. PN September 27, 2021 Page 3 Pursuant to CEQA, a project, or act, that causes a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is considered to be an act that significantly impacts the environment. California Public Resources Code §21084.1; §21060.5. A "substantial adverse change" is defined as "...demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of an historical resource would be impaired." California Public Resources Code §5020.1(q) (Emphasis added.). The City has declared City Hall and its statue of Mayor Frank Bogert an historical resource to be protected and preserved, as noted above. Local designations of properties recognized by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution, as here, are those historical resources that qualify under California Public Resources Code §21084.1 and are therefore protected by the law. California Public Resources Code §5020.1(k). Consequently, the City must prepare an environmental report (EIR) pursuant to various sections of CEQA. California Public Resources Code §§ 21080(d), 21082.2(d), 21100(a), 21151(a). Given that the City has done nothing to satisfy CEQA obligations, particularly the preparation and review of an EIR, it is error for the City to proceed to relocate, at the least, the Mayor Frank Bogert statue from City Hall. We encourage the City to follow state law prior to any vote to relocate, or alter, the Mayor Frank Bogert statue from Palm Springs City Hall. City's Failure to Follow and Respect California Civil Code 4 987 Which Protects Fine Art There should be no question that the Mayor Frank Bogert statue is an acclaimed piece of fine art created by an internationally respected artist, Raymundo Cobos Reyes. Mr. Reyes has exhibited his sculptures and paintings not only in his home country of Mexico, but all over the world. State law prohibits anyone, including municipalities, of intentionally committing "...any physical defacement, mutilation, alteration, or destruction of fine art." California Civil Code § 987(c)(1). Only the artist who created the fine art may authorize the any alteration of their work. Id. The purpose of the law, embodied in California Civil Code § 987(a), embraces ideals and principles of which the Palm Springs City Council should take note: "The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the physical alteration or destruction of fine art, which is an expression of the artist's personality, is detrimental to the artist's reputation, and artists therefore have an interest in REE • rnE UEYEOr EUR. rM 5pn"L fAil. . Apr01Z. I= FRANK BOGERT MAYOR OP PALM SPRINGS N• NICIPAL -M ��uu ..FFNNtTOO.� VOY for OrIF ■ �ReiNEo.cF ft�OUFa ■ Rnk�.Ee Eus�rr�Eie n R CMFEOk � dnrY n w FR1Mf EOOEM &i S1man CwnU�lan, ■ RVA Wa�p g Or~M=1 rr _� E —"!, Wp,'r,— After considering all candidates for Mayor we feel that FRANK BOGERT is the only candidate qualified to be Mayor of Palm Springs. PhD. k. , LWal Buda RN MA ruora nm owwmn roEucr nrua woto aw,cwrn. r....r.: nFEr w�a •.a .v. �NI.G Id6].As�Frq>mCN �r7 r• r+ rl :z O r-L _ O t�+ Pi ZO '0 p a Aj U 1�. W n b 0 fw'f >> 7 a 0` 7 m N a 'w O o w 0 S! - 0 a^- r=D 0 = m m n w >> o^ T n w r m w 3 i" n cm - w m a 1 3>> a 3 3 o n s 0 o N$ a n w a o o w c c a ro c 3 n n o 3 F a o o �, c oa _^ a 0 s o m o 'r a- o w °: m m 3 m su ° ro � n rno ° m m � r� C° 3 m=^ 4, r* n nor, ro ? v R w^ a n a= n- a Q m a ro o m m y N n i N 0 0 3 Sr C O = a d N W 0 '•� w N Pi < O 7 O o m o 3 n Ln m c p, " m n N C. c yo m o c 3_ =- Z 3 Q a o N m n ru _'0 w a m m m 0 0 0 m cu n 1_ n - c c OQ N N T w a QQ rmo N ODO S m 7 a O 00 m n W N r+ w V+ w o° = rao a `� `�°- N n o w w r<° c 0- 0 °° SU Q 3 o n o V1 y v N w _� o a o O 0 CL o om oC PN Nw w, a F C mrNo F Cw vo� M.- SU 3 w n wN 3 3 ei, o w o m m vC a C C w `� ^ A 00 C O vrti r�D C W o W �. fwsu ',1 ^� o M y m Sr o W N 0 Nn o o °' 3 w j w rai ' D 0 3 n n m C m m A- N m o c s m? N w N a > j w 3 1c n W c m ;u 0 n c w v Q 0 < O ,-an � <` m ?' � rD fwNi n o^ o N W o C W - G .C. lu m a n r=o c a u m a m o a w w :: N S 3 w D 0 3< ao m e rp pm, r��o r^o S Sr,� = D^ 3 w w m m m n w� wm� o m m m n o� m ,a^•. m w m? ro n m w °O n? w 0 w rmo m < ^ m r�o o w n ro O �. w. ac N . R ^ x w a s a+ < = w 0 m= m N o a o 5 a c n n a o m n 3 0 3 ^ 3 ,w 3 D w c- m 0 fu c ^ a ¢ w Cl.-0 3 m v >>- o m ^ r�o n 0 v n m c >> _. 3 o Q n n 0 a N °° s m o N r. a o o p m 3 m a 3 i Q o m ro a 3 m o W o ? G ti F; N �G ONO h f�D = vwi W S a r�D fO 1 06 d w R 0 w = w g a g, S 5 0 0 f E N o, o- w x '� o, -., = v N w w n a o m m m- - lb w n m o o Q 0 3 0 m n c n `� No w m w_ ^ a ?. on n n o rD m r w ? ^ o n c 3 m N o w a aoa ao n r* o x o r� as o 3 3 ;p T. 3 w a 9 f° j 3 o x a rn '° w>> n N Sr ? 3 v o m o w N e a v 3 a n w m N a 0 a 3 w N o O _ N n< OC ^ o m ro < 1�] C< N = w w^ c a -+ 3 m m ro '^ o 3 0 a- o 0 a ro w _ n cm o 0 0 o w>> j- w T a r-o >> v i a N a 0 a � n n w< m m 3 fD 3<� c D a ro o n 0 i" 3 m m m a m o x o m n 3 as o N .» . m? ao = 0 a m>> m i� D z o. to m o 3 0 a 3 N N w o 00 as M n CD m ao c mm °' °' o a s `� ? n d SU a a - w » s K 3 - 3 a 0 _ N= 3 p w f a N -_ n n o 0 o 0 E c < V o< T D a^ fD '< rp N a< o _ N o s o ro °>>> r m o WW < rp " o a_No D O f�D Q^ m R+ io ,c O N - v_, m N �' m a '^ 7 Q O p � d m w 3 QO o' 3 m 7 w W n w w f - =- P. � m m m 0- :3. ao n m m o C- 0 m n n- o m r o fD T om f1 Q O � o � 3 7 `G ru j � � N � �^ O v0i i n w S m � m o a° w n 3 rn n n w 3 c mCL. ru w `, m rp a F a c w o - n a'o ib w o c n c 3 c w 'a m v m a w w fD o w w 3 'o ro n n>> y s 3 w w_ m ao N ,� w a m N w r^o m < m m 3 0 m a m m - nm ro ^ n - a d r., m N x m m N m 0 n 7 ? iD n 00 O o C O w C !3n D j Q ^ m `< a Q m o �• rn N O 3> .w-� ., W >° n C c n n; = m ao a m r w o �' w >> ">> °' p o- w n o a 0 x m w c 0 0- n m =- m m ^ w o n 3 E n ^` x m r+ �. w o r<o o °: o °-'. T ao n ,,, n s w a x a N w 5 o 0" m„ 0 y o 3 0 n m io -- m - o cu D o w w - o o m m m 3 0 N Q N a 3 w N �" o, N n 7 _ K w 3 n C N m 320< e�nDx� N b W w •�• N o H T w e y w y w w e _ r s R, 3 LP LP Est i 1. i Mtl m e o m l< `0 o 3 c w m ,� n M m= -^' w v � a w w p' w a? Mm 3 m 3 m Q n N O' o o oq o w d g d'0 3 o n 3^ o< n - G su o m a a w m 3 m N m '» o �' c a a sr -< ? g = o < w °� " o m w' to O f d Q m n O f O S 'E o w= .. m U n m o o a- m= m m a= oo m w e a• m m vi w Q �. m m d o O= m? `'c. w' w w is `� n c N d d o oq Q p m= w- w 3 0 o to > >' O a' N o' j m c m n 2 w 3 3 5. o. 00 � a m w 3 ;< 3 n F' m a ,<o o ? a U tT m n m .p O 0=0 7 n a c 0 a C S M f° S m 3 N < m .� S d m Oq m In m N > > m r! an v? '° <^ > j - m m w= 3 w QO d 3 'a 3 d w 3 w ro o d oo N o p o 5 s Cr w v d f m o m o d m tro m or a y . 3 v d m w 0 to o a ='• = mD w m a i o N 3 c 3 tu a 0 00o s w_ a 0 a w 'm °�, `° m ? v ' n ox r = w o v r^o a c m A .w•. w m v a s m v p w m m A '� m a N c '� < nCrQ w w w n f 3 c m n 3. o m< f° w o� c co o m 3 l<o = 0 0 r n y N ^• ^ w c d o< a r o o m O m a I w a d w m x m '^ 3 a c_ N x m 'c c° o w m 'c a x vw ro o 'r o c o m m w_ 3 x w>> w = o n m r o o w o D 3 K o w 3. w fD ^ o n O o m cm w x o- w oo n 3 i� o m m> i o m x p' o T. 3 a> 3 - _- o=. o a O i d w m ao m m_ Qo d o m m o a N _< o o v o m r. m x w to w r d o^< m U 3 3 m == m ' rD O Do d O w taD -- w O 3 m a 'A A m m '� Sp �G a W '^ Go - oo ao o D C= c o n O c = o m m D m .�•. w m 0 o f w < `Z to 7 x d w C i to w o a m S i a G A c Ocr n w W o a^ N m 0° w a R o m n w m O d x o .m. o > S m n= d a �. m a c '" I" o w to o _. ? d 3 a m a o 3 v 3 w m>> w o+ °' ° a- p 0 3 < m N N n 3 j a m o o =- 3 od n= n ? m -= o m w o_ w n d vo ' o w m w r3o o- ^ w d >> to l0°o w' o o n S d i. x o' v 3 3 a m m ro O m 0 p' ° o' X y Q m o 'd `G°- y ° Qwo. o o a° a o ao o v o n�- m m c r 3 f - w N o Q oo m S cm . 7 C w d m `< !`� Qq 7 r0i r+ d :Q 7 :Q aq A 6 O m - w 3 °- s s c o o w o c ? s m- o s s D 3 ° H m m d o o w O m m 3 w M o-m o m o- Q A r00�o m n w o o n w N y a o M d N 3 ^. 0 0 3 W S G nn 7 m N N C, C H 7 U w S^ U Q O m O ^ O c j G1 N m OQ K m S O < !m'1 °' d w ID - w -. ° 0 '' 'i a 3 IZ C 3 w — 3 >- m n rt o i< w to <o n R y< ro o= 0 3 O N m m O lu O d C d rSq' o T d m _ a < N <_' s l o w Q d w n o x. 3 a 3 n c o `� o d a 3 n n lc to - m n y>> w w to JC n w a 'O aq m d N m G N w d r+ Oq ? op S p S m d 3 C w o o c o A d w o- w 1 w IGq Z. v. mn m o �» w w� � y m m 3 d d w fD !C'1 7 C m :: o m V fD, oq 7 d a o O? 3 oq c m^ o o m m=' > > o- c n o M o d o. 3 w v Z =r m p�, o. _ n 3 Imo w f p' m a f f< c o o fD x- s m y w x c n n 3 ^ m m d? = a m = m w o n o=_ m do r^ H y°= pm O 3o L O °: d= m m �„ M m < H C w m o M — o o. '"' ^ w m w vwi O C 7 < O K G n O w o w 7• X' O IC d= N y Q o o w e �° x 3 o' o_ n 3 0 3 -' 3 g o a 3 c d c •■ m ^ o c w 0 Q° ' c w_ a o m^^ o T w_ o w v 3 we .mo m n io owq O C a S W d 0 O C 3 m O O .w•. m ,< li C n n m w d w 3 �° mn o A w^ a a 3^ a o M m m w o= `o ryy1 O Q? N 1n N S G m m j on U 7 W = D_ m d qq I� �• a m H w w S �• a d m a O IUD d Oo S O _. a '* s- o - O o W O N ^ d C� n U > N `° a N d 30 0� m m 0=Nu C O H A Q F < =• d o ^_ m a>> CL o m= o s 3 d w s o ao m o o y fD ^ O d w f�D m m m w S u m = F `.+ c_ d N w oo a 3= m w o o , 0 a< d i i= i m- a ° m m ^ o cr m? a 3°" to ° n m m f a o o= a o io a 0>> n m 3 C O Q' d io w C . D Jr Q S d z = m > > m O n 7 Q r^. O ' °° 3 uCi o. ,c c- - �c a c m m m= c -' .+ m =. G U U i< F a< m �' ? n m w U I_n >• m o- � - _ 'm -. m o. In o m D < w= m° o R io _ ^ CM o ° G m n o- m< g o- m n o ,� U 3 ro ro m d o < c 3 Q io G m .wnT. o s m w o Q m r�o � 3 N< �- m m fD oq r3o n m- Q 3 °: m << °° ?; w d rfo � rmo 7 - w to = d w w m O O" m F N w O d o d w N U m 0 m N C O 3 Imo >> o w p m o o m c o 0 o a o m o N m m o P' m o? w d 7- �c v 3 w U M m s c m w. �c M o UQ m o c _4 s c m 3 m °= < M » r ? m a 3 a s 0o fD c m 3 m S w ' O K X N d c o Sr A n _. qo 3 oq 3 3 M w i fo w _ F is c n w n > > o w m c d o mM wd a _ mZFI � a C 3 0 = a o m m 3 'd Cl. c `o- O n s. ao N w c 3 w o a w on M 10 S T 0� m x- m n M s n c w ^ 0. o srd N do= m o 0 3 w .� tnw am ° < o M F 7 H A N N 0 U R o w e d' 3 0 3 d w O£ d o v to N O m 3 - o - w omo a o `< o0 o mv 0 0- :^ F w U O- 7 O n S O ^ m C 3 0 o n. m - cw 3 0 ' zr f Qo o I=o c M, R.•. m o d O / 3 w w m a m m w O S r - m m x � m m m u m w a' o - m o x H G O w C m x O m n _ iS w C. c o w x an = ao 3 = 3 v g v a, 9 ° J J= F J o= o 2 0 = °: w fD ° o n m n S o < m m N c o m J F a m- D= m o v o n b I a J w J< o ° 3 0o J ° v m m J m w o J m m v_ w, 3 3 m ao o= o J a o w n m J m m oo J ^ m N n.1 3 v n o- 3_ a° n c 0 a< 3 oo v c -cTi 3 `< v� 3 r�i N w Y m m <_ j V f ry w ° C > w c m .c ? w x. w ~ m c H oa m J m F o 3 J N �' o OT ti _ ww ^ a •n n o O o J w m ?- F C w wn m G W o °. w J °' ao 0o m N w ry .� � C n = n ^ c A, wJ - ro n m o o o n? o w10 v m A v .mJ. `�° '" aJo �, p C. o0 c ro. N < n J _ m c° m o c n< N '+ n s o 3 a T wJ c o m m o � c o x oo m 0 ao s m J N J P- n `� m m n y w .. u. y m J w 0 a c n� c y o v w ou c io x <- io c 3 o wwPwoowm ° aow3=°mmm c - = 3 w c J p io 3 3, ^p ,w. 3 o m 9 3 o Q < N?• aJo m 3 a, m s v I.0 O m 3 n w = y� w m° m o 0 m9 c f0 3 vo m K < F oa F _ c _. o n o w m N o a m w p 1 ° < a o- w 3 0 N ao c 3 = J ^ F n N A m o n m 3 < w a� m c o0 o N p o o n m 3 c o 0 v m-- m 3 n p- x- m 3 n m ^ < m m w N 3 m o d ; 3 a m p 3 a a= w J m 3 O 3 = m E a o ^ J 00 3 0 - i. o J m c- c nm Q n m m o o c S. r mP H m 3 J c o N 3 F = 0 3 o• c o= c= m 3 m n m w = O n o nR O o 3 FF ^ w- n e o mm m m f D n`Gm A J c^w n `.+ ^cQv 3' ° c �n m 0 c �n n 3 J wi wo n ^o m O a oa mm ao 3a3amo J v N�nw w o a o o Or- 3OQ m cr no m w0H o m3 �F n ° a 0 w < v m 3 J s 0 A N C o• ,rmo J �+ o w m n ;; 3 n 3 �^ > j. o o> mo P+ a m n c ck = Q y W ;w m < °° m m � 3 '" ao f w F+ o m F o m 3 Q o T o• a-N°. N oo n 0 oo j ° C w Fr N m I o^ 3 m D o w 3 c o o a m w J m r A '� 3 J = N ao n m p:• o m 3 0 0 �. ° m w ° a n m 3 s N o a c o N. m N �• n c c O m m u° m 3 J o o o J m• 3 n c. o+ "» w m n m-0,3 0 w° o c N oo w o N ?-' N n J N_ n 0 0. o < N ' m J D w n ro m Q• as n J n v m 3 .t w o J o-^<, n 'J^ oo c aJo o° o c ^ m m J m .N m F o r m u w o c w^ J oo x m m° 3 0• °-' J 3 ?. o m N 0 c> ° o E 3< a -, `° c m m n N w o C n ao ` 3 m >> N o y i 3 w w m oo c a n m 9 w 3 .c+ c N y m Q N N ^ R m O .n w _ c c a ,,; < J J v o o m n o0 N m m 7 w C `C p O ,. W !D n Z v w a 0 3 w o oJwo ^' w' o v wJ '^ w x- w 'n ° m 0 a .a w v o a o m J m oo w= A f 3 'c^ a N n a 3 0 c m=- o-= 3 S. �c J F c -• J m F oa n n O m m w m m m 0O m oo w m = °.' ° °: n o m ,< N n v s c m 0 o J w ry^ o n N �. n v N w c. p m � J ° J J Jo J °n ? 3 m < N n J N w mo = Jo m w n m o N i m n 3 v m su c 3 �. 3 J m .. m n ^ J? a= n N 3 w m o m u^ O G C w < y J o w n= y .wa -i a p p J m o - .c ,� ro -• ° w — J c^ J w J m s o ,^t a o J- 3 is m _= J s o n 0° - o o' Q m m M. m ao m- m m° m_ A m n o 3 m w A n Oa w n u�i m v Z2 = w m w m = o a H N v^i n � a C m ON a � m Q J 5 ,� w m W ,F c m w o C =. �`° '°na 3 3 m �_^. c ,c 0 c o o w a n n J o$= m w ?. o v�i y m � H am s w n= n w m a 3 3 3 m o OJa m n 3 m 0 2 v m A y H J 3 oJo 'o A F n° w m w m N awG m N N N F ^ m u^mi w v -i a in C— w J N �' J i G N m 0 o o O n n" G? 3 J C m 3 N N `m �' >>> m w a n m o w. '`° N m �' a• `o a '< J �n n 0 w m J w a c ? a aC n l< a o m m �G l< m 7 aq 'vi ry r a c / 1, - n - F � � s - C• y N w v c sa M9GrH MZa<rH PF M G) C*I C•' C M t" C M M K K 'M 0~ M_ 'a t7 t•" < H l7 t" M Gl C l7 G M Li ti y ,� O W K O G O_ cr cr N of N< O (D O C' p1 M N O w O. rrD K u `o rJ G A "'� w ra. C' C �' N C+ „d O "� r G 'd C 0 A w =° w a: �' a �' ai w �' p r�D 'b 7 O w m A w n `� w J ^: o X G•f " y O G (Aoa Cl 10 vo 7 p Ci w 7 C ro A ao lu w '° p G G w C C rip '�y o n a ano �. K a 'Sf O f9 Dc "a G C1 r. C rp r7 O C n t7 K w =� n r fCYO 'D fD rD rD •�� H A O ... t9 O N "�'J f'1 M O < M O n A C t~O w ri d o w f 1O+' p.. G�. Mrti7 nron es i n �ao Gn y ro a a to o oC o^p 0 yl ° m G to ° wn am ra c N �. x G n n C G n, „may n y G n n =' o IV SU CD r, c 0 Ln a m cc A A W a �p ii �Z ry 0 n m m w O yr O .2 >E: la,n n t n p W in nrpp � p n O � A (� y " n o rNm. 3Qj ° o `N° 0_ d V w ro n 'o M ro :3v o n n 3 o 3 Ph. rr m 3 0< v n' f D o0a o f °N' m o N^ o =. w o° m p w o °° ,� 3 3 o m n `° o 'm :: m Nb '$' a w< v `° < N 3 n °_:, umNi 3 vw� 0° tD N w w o 3 y o c n m A A p O O n N O o m C n ^ a O• Oo H ~` m O- N 1 m O S N N > j N N m O O -' nH az w N^ c 3 NO m< w< ro on o <� 0ww c w w <3 o w myC v 0, ac rp rmf+• a+ n c O N r A w. oa o � 3 2r r=. - _ K A m 7 G m !Z ° ^ A A O in N ~L < 3 n K O. .� 7 c pj O ° D_ Y n n N A D m Q M 30 w rw, o w � w K? O 7 w `cr Vl O m y o a+ >> '^ m m m iO o �. k o 3 N p, < n r< p• n m 3 m w n m o z s =. o ro o m w 3= n 3 4 w 3 m w c m o n $? a n o. o >> n o w w o n G1 a n„ O O ao m m O w 'n 7 p: N `n C 3 w c w< m 3 3 n c R <o N a OO rco p m O, ? w 3 °' n o 3 w N 3• w s a4 m n o p A m w o v .7 w� n H w m oT N o w m v o a- w n yr �< I n O. G 0�0 7 N 7 N fi O w = i m f0 n m m S 7 N O < p w O v N O N p ^_, Q v: m n w 3 w o s F 0 3 m w o -• m rm, m w t o sw p o w ro m N Q � w ro ro m y r. N °o ^. awo `° °° �. ° v n 3 m w 3 w rO ,c p r« o v p c m m iO' w o` p m o p w f co 3 o m 3 m QI.0 o c w w » o m m ao N a o n n n m m m 3 m o o i w n O m ^ QQ 7 oO rD a ca m O 7 OC Vw 3 C m o° n= c io o m <o a' < n< a n x QO a c c m n rnO n ° i< 3 ro n p?< N rO �° m f o• n° m N w o 'c o - c ^ a O ° o a o 3 p w 4 3 a m n< cr m N f^ a a Q m m w ° f D Q �y r°o. m, m a m w o w C, m n F C O `G 7 n n rp = In n 0 m m :b N N N Vi d ' :� M o- n c c w T v v w w z Or' z v -• n v o 0o D --� n m w - v an o- o p v f u i �; p o p a. 3 o o s m m �_ P � o N o o p C a m m w n p, w m N N v o m o n m n o w o< _S = N N o O ? W 7 00 V V m M O ° m U Z V C w C n Q' C m m — 7 o _. ? m - N o oO a= w a< w m 3 O z ° n o 3 ° N° iO m ° N w o n m F 7 S A a,=a OW O_ m m N N j m yj rwr 7 N S. m O_ C N O m Q 3 N n rn, w o w m v+ oO 3_ o m '< >• o n F p o w ao F r o a m r-3O N o 0 c 3 Q a ^' p' r, c ^' N i n •-'- n° 3- o n e •o m ao ^ is OQ 0 c" o w w 3 3 N =, D a m v - w m o o a m o o. w �D S n Q y< ro _ o w w c v n 3 w m Oa s 3 m o c a n o n ?; << on D N n N? o ^ O" m So 3 awo o 3° 3 3 0 ° <° w p m o p `° o a r, n fD a� c N o p m m o A n a '° rw^ ^ w< N w e m w o c o-° c o a O 3 w o- 3 m G) f y p i n '^ m -• x o v i m m_ m 3- a n m v w n o io f° ° 3 w w W C w 7 O o N G 3 n �_ N cr F N 3 �. C O < m vN w to O 3 p N 7 m O 00 m C m v w o 3 v w_ m- c 3 p c Y m o n >> a N 3 Fr m rw, o- .0 n m w- ° o .. v A_- n 3 f D v o a w ° w o w 3 v o a w m- o n 3w m o m n v m v -< w r'O a7O ° M rsO o m m p 3 a 3 o m n m n a p 3 o n n o rn O w w m m 3 N rr w n m n 3O 3 3 w wn w w m o> n v a- 0 Oco o n o a 3 < m n w f v m EL p n- 0 m o o v_ c o m o w cr rn m m y c o -� cu -. x n° - n m ^°" v n^ w a - N °' 3• N - s c F M. 0 3< w w c n v S OO w v m y ro N m n a N y^ c '"' m '^ ro o =• - N m m ., o n v -^ S m o. w' 0 3° ° N N ago ?? v ? w a? '» m _< ^ CO °� a 3 n m Q p 3 0 o m 1.7 a N O ro m = m LU H w 3 �. O� to aq {II• m �' ^ O O N = R' n H N =O. w l< .� O !� m _ N O 7 M m u n - m n c� x Q m c w v o c° Oa m 3 W o o nt o o a w o N ' o a w a^° %a 3 m v 1D a v z rrD n _'n ? o m o m n n n m m 3 n m y rn a' m m - m o rn o m S an c = c' m p r<o o p v Q m p o p 3 a r7o =. v a D ^• c o m s v c 3 a o n 3 °: o °< m° w io °o c m m p o m Opo w n c =' m m 3 w N m w m o c v m p o - p r�o m O n 3- ao N m _. w c O - w ro o m o m n m i< 3 w w c m< < n a� m n- n p N f+ y m ^ cr o n n y^ 'n o A N p o 0 0 N o m n o n o_ ' n d N w m w " n o ?' w o m Oo m w rco o- m a o a' o w_ o_o' rco n, v; w -� v rn n 3 ^ m p, o. 3' w' o �o w F m w rna o^ w o: m n o n 3 ooc• 3 o o w n v- w p n n�-_ m > o m n w < m m o?- w 7 m C O -• O Mu O .< w m C n m a_ n a = 0 O m O o ?a w f o p v m s a on oo m w v n° o rho c' n y on p 9 m N n v o N? n 3 n = 7 W m-0 � rD m .. D- On 'O O N w on w m °: i o m G w m m IA r L o C `G y O 7 m 0 0> > n 3 v o _ i o0 w o n v °o ^. m m � m n o w m 3 a n n w m ODc m" o0 3 c cr w a _ 7 x = O m p - n m - p n ' > > p N N S C _ fD O W S w p m m _ N m fD ri 00 N 3 n m 7 '< r0 = l< aq 00 fD in w m m m w .-+ N n m O n n N n w m a 5 N ^ pO 7 R H N w Oi r�D O mri XX V' a Elm vo Y o b n N O N n m 7 F p ,. O p w m O N v o w o w b CL p^ ^ w o a c O w m ty w h o m ev w co �• p A w� �° a `., b m� p, � w tr t, w- 0 m m N v ,�, o' `° N °° o S MM rM� 3' c v N 3 °.' v= `° `^ 0 3 N 10 - ro 3 r0 w v _ N o o 3= f D p o o � °n vD ^ o< i m M M w o' n N n o c ri o o m o o y_ 3 f an am oo' m 'n n v w io �D w w .p. 'n m o D of i9 3 yp ru .< �w O ro 0 o a w w P' �, g o F. o -. ^ o w o a N ° p o o n w V�yy� ^ a- n- D ^ m= ^ 3 n m oo p c < c K o w o = m V °-' _ o ro ^ s n ro n P, v n I p N n o. rSo n p F•0 M w- w �. a w o d w � w = o C w Q. M twA a H S a �..� 7 << a g Q � m w � .^+ o � m � P' rsn w o Fi z c D w 3 .^. ro fD w c w w 3 a< o= o m" o F. n ro O m yOy `4•Ii ^ m `-^ ,c fD o p, o n `D 3 a c o< T w <^ p n a o= " Q - m �• H - p R o w o n 3¢ c `< n yr c = c o' m w 3 6_ f r; ar N _ a _ v w a o o ,f°„ w m r" o m w m o y N w w>> c n s w o F n p� H n o m o m ao n o m a a i n^ o N v in .�+ a m e o' w C = o. p n- m 3 cCy. n Q - 7 T m n < m p n o. A .0 s w n w p c w F v `° w^ p w W x f 3- D m m n o p m o 3 ru f N o p m w ^ rn o'a m_ w f n o y 1�y o 0 0 o a' n w _ o p o N v c av c o y N w ,-' -- c y :� Ir o - a w w D p a in w r�r — m p G y - c w a 7 i` a? m s w m m I m o N °o r° O = n w w ao P s rn n v m cl 3' 3 ; m o w c o m o v c 3- o o N m p ao v w m o m a o o=o m o a w m w w o w o H < ao w w _ ao o N o < � an m c w w m n a 3 c^ o m N o =° w y< m n o v D ra°,�» r° n o 3 _ W W 3 N < T 00 tD a d p w o o p OQ w W p ^ ? ao p apo m a+ m ^ w o c v a N 3 n D c w w O< a w a ur N N n s a m a o r3° p =o ^ o w' ^- a s o °: m N u, ,-. w s o a 3 ;^ .'. 3 v o Io vw, o m- m p; < n o= m ran = o o ° v a p w r3o v w 3 4; n w 3 C p Q < m z !n .< c n ZEv o w < ao o w n> > < w m m o 1 0= N == o c% w- m m n a a rn m n a m I m m y ro �, > >' n- O m 3 CD v m a 0 ti ZrIr n C a P 00 m ,H� O 0 A y ^• p 1D o 3, w o00 3 `� a c w m m A y R14, lb 0 0 a a m a oa N M,a a aw or. it h + w w c c 0 n v �^ w 10 we n a p o C we o" a? a y C n A 0 m o V o n x -4 a �� m m m c C Gi' p^ o`' m �, S y R p' cn^ nw0v v m n n�w3 -1 wc 3 ma w su o n o'0 m Q y a < n n >n n 3 w o �qM3Ma a ,w n">> m o o w v a° 3 f D w n m m a w `a w= 3 0 C w W c �; C N > > 0 ^ j N N w w rNo m n fDN- m v o m 0 0, n Oo 0, as p, 0 3r0o m c c>> n ow 3 a c < m ni-0 -i 3 w S o ° n=w ww ca o iO rc A c n s? w- w ri _ a n r° r o m w a M 3 ^ n = o Mw w =__ o m 0- ^ 3 o o 'Ir 3 G Nm oN w c- '<u o-- a' c n To_ I ' QW m Cc w w n m 0- oj Q w ip M Oo o=NO n ^mno 3 ra y2 uj o 3w n p a^ p=- o p N w n n m ?; v -�- = 0 EL O O o w I w c - rD m c_ j m o a v a ro w F O_ r3o n o m o° 3 as 5 ° o n n p- n w m p T 3 3 a m 3 m o g .. '^ m m w !o ^. Oo 3 ro n _ p rO m oo = p, a ;:w a ti C w w o Q s n N w w w °< m< p w m_ io ° w ?. n rO 3 D m o ,. 3^ ao p m N f o- = n O _ S N f < cz = U 0 w fD w W �p a < s w c^ a N o M rO o m n m< o n N R n N 3 n s? o N° 'a a? w w a n c w w= M=o o M N p > C n d f0 p n O N 000 N o M `a m N U C - n N D n ry a to p = N fa ?, N :.3 �< d w v !a 7 C C ? 0• > > _" fD n n o D N (p N S N -1 " `G N S 7 n PU -0 w ^ o- v<-' i rco w = o f p' rn m ro N^ o np T °° m EL n cn a o m o m o Q w a o M n$ 0 3 m o m o n 3 0 0< °° _ o i 3 n m° n p c o 3 fD � w N i w 10 o0 7 n ;IDI �O m 0 = o n s w M N w m N C •° v p N fD g 3 m v, m 3> > _3 n w r'O o v .. n n R° v< M o n a + n n �" 3 rO N m a 00 n^ -= as m? 3 m w N < m n n <� m 7 P+ !D RW m to D_ m N W M d m 7 _ 1� N ° = �< O A m Q. i � � v N o w v, n ao � o• - O - - Oa o - I ro ^ `< p Nao a .p N O m `< o Pu .^. j 00 = 3 _ _ w r v o a v v o m m v w w fD c :' m o v a °= (D (D N O '0 pi - O R M m o c>> = n p = o< vP _ �+ c v o o r. m o c w 3 3 pi a << a o ^ 6- 3= 0 o m^ o n _. v o m w D_ N ro 3 n m o ro n v m o o o< m m o ri n o w m src a o g 'U s -w' m M m `° �^" o s M o y °' wn ao' <" w° -� rc 3 �. o c M 4 7 p w N o r^ a+ p �. w 2 1 n O S 3 7 - N n ao D N c m y o v w>> o^ n w o ,w., m ao fn F ao f M w 0 �• o .N. n N m n = iO w 7• �' W W 2 p a m O N ado N w N C j w y d °° S a .. n. n fn P'. "' c ro .1 m 0° c < rho Oo IIo in w o o M c^ c^ o o w w n ao ^- w a v>> i ao n> > n o c w << w o n w m o. w a 3= n n o w ro m M o ': ^ n 0Mw- m < o m D m< 3 c v � N n w rO n n oo n an o c n- v w - MQ> 2 p Q m ,, oC o a 3 0 3 n A fD N c o w 3 3 °' C y I K G � N �< (D � lSD o N n `•� � c ,N. M N 7 M (1 N N M M r7i O N c CC fD N w N ? 3 fD 0 7 3 m 3 M a m ON• aDo o w n> j n � m m -+ >_ > 3 o � 0 a m ° m w = m w `N° 0O Oo v, 3 0 -' f° ro fD F' o p' < o M p^, y o p c m w 3 n' - w q -0o< n w O p m y 3 w OQ M c O N v p_ w. c H= i I?_ n w w o d a. n o� o w � '. a w M f+ o Q, 1-. w' v n wwi N O A W O 7 N (D 7 T C O W i1 N =p Oo .. o j= = N M - m m w o 3 o o S ° N w o0 o c o o n m rD c c o `_^ v m 3 0 lu _ m m 0 w fD m c N a= a N- n O 3 o w 0 m J N p 7' n n C co n N fD w n ry Q ' M G M. 0 .^ N w 1a 3= N o m 3 aq N o - 0 0 ro m m o m o< p ^ o o rO w o a m o o c w m ^ A c R mn x 0* 0 0 � s N A o � o ,m< � w n ra Soo S a N am-o. O c a 7su O � 7 w N ^ 7 N _ n to S £ a S 7 N £ a S 7 VU .. < m 0- IN :3m n w Co. 3 M = io z m F1 x H M d to FI M NJ y 3 W ra w n m j m' m am 7 7< 3 v n? ' 3 n .0 .0 mp, m T 0 W. m w' m w N w i m < o r=o m °' c in c c w < In = . w s. n m uw N 3 > n n ^• w o a o c 3� ,_» = Inc mSol aL c_ 7 m n £ N 3 -• C m a o. c S o K ° v' n 7 n ao 7 T O c 7 n °: v 3 m c^ m w n v c f 7 C r. '- W ° � O M= m w .wi ^ n m :< a S N n rp O O s `a c :' 'm" o o° 0 3 0 c O_ w°eD= n, £ 3 3 0 m 7 c C C 7 3 j m tiS, fm't A rco n 7 pY N 0 W W K m w �< = N O = £ 0 O MrN N .Jom N n -. nrr a ^ C m CCO w o N 3^ m n 0 0' c 3 Coo < m a m s Ca. o n D N m N o 3 p rn �' < YNYY o n o 3 X n y m m 0 o_$ ra N m n w m a-<°• W m tA pY C m^ w N c m 7 r m :< n umY 13 £ 3 D w m n 1 n 1- _ 7 z w v �£ o D£ c P w ao = ac n w w _S w m 7 o m Q o 0 0 p o = o< 7^ to rI'Dno m y m w m A !o _ `_�° pY m x w c s n. m m ' K w ° (y m _ W < n 7 w a'O 7 m— m 7 d m w N 7 p: ^ n M °- o o ^ Pt 0 m n O ,� o m n m (CD a a r w H Q' 0 N 0 7 5G = 7 7 n m w u£wi J S 0 > � 7 =• ° Q yY H C m p •• j p. C m rW- w O 3 _C = p N• as 0 7 N N N £ ? (p m N n w C = n O p m< N 7 7 N -= n 7 m m O O 3 £ m r'+ n m m N ^ 00 T n C < = S Nn w O y m < oa n uNi 7r C m 7 O - m 3 as w N m 0 W N < O = n ° w C O = %a m NC = £; < m m = n o n'< w a s -£ c m n a '< w ?^ 00 w— N tc Z n^ 0>> o m o r. _ c 7• w n m m A ° w < 7 ^. O 7 w pu E. r•r _ D 3 O n 7 7• m x w m O C w S 7 O ao O N m m w 7 ? m = 40 N O ID 7 a0 O? m ._. oo m m w C m = £ S N ° r<10 G O (D O n 3 7 n - J n m o w 0. n O• m c 0 0• m v 3 3 3 a w a J o 0 0 Sr0 w n m m w n m _. m n w M °: m m o _. w 0£� M 7 0 7 j m R n 3 £ a y n n ° n m £ 7 n 0 `=m - umi m ON N m �n .< W ° N N 0 0 7 su = m n£ n = w c< m 0 0 m ^. w• i o s m n 3 = v w N ao No ^n = D' m w N m an O• N W O `G = 0 7• c m °_ w w I n can n y 0 0 0? S N O C m C" O N m a n n< "— J C D a m m _n �°^ m w- 0 n ,wn m a £° 7 o a c° 3 ,c ° v e, _ m N= w m n£ 3= w v .o m -• .e a£ f =- m •o a=o w n m vui < pY o on as m w N 7 O a r=+ w vw'i N N m = K N W A N = S 7 ^ 7 N ^ �' L m O 3 v' w m = 0 m m N n A- ° _ 7 O m n io _n O £ w n £ 7 7 _ n OQ N.0 £ m O < m Ci. O N 7 rL w 3 w £ 7 S w m m w 7 _. C S n^ n H= n S ;M; w m w au o N N m'- n o m m � 0 D= J» m w a 3 w v 0 v o _. ao =_ 3 7 ? o n m n 3 o w D i n n 3 Cr ^. N o a (Y A 0 c 3>> °O % c c w J aco _ m c n 7 m m 3 M^ 3 0 Q.F° m o 0 3 EL m � o- - o v w m N- w a o m 3 °„ >> 00 o r 0 w= D w n a m '» w o n 0 ro n 3 o» OQ m < ?. N cm OU CL ? m j. N C C G y 7 m 7 CD N Q j m m N a Q r �►�-` II I II � II o nL==711111 = 3 < a m ^. o N m = a n a ao it N N 00 N D < 04 m N O O' 0 m N .•r N n << S m 3 wQ 'moo P� m J -� w £ = w a S N J D MM L[ m .0 N V1 £ N N m m w AY ?; m y 7• n w 2? m N = r^t O N N m p m su N .O o 0 0n v w 3 '^ p a ma o = o o' w. ° a a m 5 3 Go 3 a a o w a a a o M m' p^ c c vmi N w m N 7 N O ° S a o m _c o fD i n n m N •O d 7 rp O m o n CL o 0 n C ra w o � _eto _ O^ m 3 Coo w l< NY = y w o w o 3 3 N n m gnu WI O m ° w w n = 0 m- n 7 3 m— m c 0, £ J 0 0 7 r� a is o. s c� D 3 m D r 77F�� F i I Y { y � 1 • • �' � Y ' r l r S y'`.� r rI Vi, 0 0 f 0 A O 0 0 3 0 fp 7 3 3 r=o N mJ °nO_ Sm x3 Nm� w 3. LD wJ mJ N m m v So S m � O' Q a m 3 ? J ^ 3 a 0 w r'+ d Q D ? 'O Q 3� 7 w 7a o- 7 ^ M. S- m io < l a m W m w fD w m a ,vNi y n o .o - omo J• < v, .n m m D S a w .7► m a w n '^ = a< a n a o ,» a �+ J M m o m w w a - m_ 3 w 7 n w o o 0 3<- '• = 0 3 o c c C, o a' o v 7 o v v� ^ fD `< J m m o o° 3 J ,N» f ro J w w J o f w< o m o w '< 3 v m 7 c 3 y J s J o 3 n < n oa w -• m m < o m m w C r•e 7 N � .a+ m fD m H t^SD y p' H 7 m �< < a N n m w M< H R m O S f� O N S N p o 3 J a m� a m 'c m S, w 3 n p ^- o w 7 o F m ° m aq m D 7 m S n o _. O to c f N c J w a, m a y m m 3 0 3 c- ^. °- 3 w 7" m <^ o vi = w °° v_ S m ^ roo c n N a- d 7? p 7 n n m 7 0 0 3 ^= D w_ io m? 7 o w° m J- n w o70 o i 3 w °" w '_c a PI O N 7 n y f+ !moo INi1• d 7 ^ C ID W N n 7 -' C. ?: V N 0o N N ° = 7 0. 7 r* a 00 p C w n ,C re n .< o _ w S m 1 z J 7C -mi 3 a^ m^ 00 o w S a 7 w w w o w io m s 0 m 3 w 7 w _ v w cro m 7 x v o m 7 m o w ° ^ oo N f m m rho =. F+ o n 7 D 3 3�< pp J H o n m Z m a-0 a o oo m a r+ C 7 m o w 7 w fD o• N c= `° c' w `° 3 'w^ m m N Uml ° X o N r -- °i O J m m S d w N �" `< 3 w "_' o m w ' N m ^D. N �• < N c 7 ,,, n 7 n o o c D n m• o o Q' w 3 Q n n m c w^ 7 m tp m 3 `< r+ 7 rr - n - 0 f0 `< 3 S a pi y' fD D - r- N r' a pp 7 O a m Oo w m w m o c < n n m w n w n M C N o c om m o n'NO w n" J oDa m a o M R J 7 vi S N m tp m Q a K 7 C n C 3 C S ry `c v C j 3 3 m .N. O 7 V - m m m fD j O n a m ° w a v m CX rD O N O _ m c n m 7 3 wol 3 S Q N ^? N N m om t o R a l J+ a 7 a> w W '+ m C S O w C m m w w m n O O a n w w O m O 7 m oo rr ' r+ m 7 - 7 n rr0 c n m= a m c u, ro u, o• -^. n 3 N _; .. y o m a a m 3 m c a D f^o 7 n n w Q 0 N C !2 .we 7 v m N N > > n a S? C O C '< -Oi. N A a Q m 7 j 7 a °c° w c o °O rm7. w o S wn o° r. 7 o c= on 3 n `N° S fD °° 10 ° O 3 n w Oa J a c J m 3 ? - ° 7 n "' p' 7 m m m m N O S m m n N A N H n °7 Q w m x a a o o °J UQ 3 070 o n f 0- ° , CFOn m x 3 ° s s 3 n -7 m '< o f m �c - o o x o :o �mn. o c D m p fD m y 3 �, oo m m vc ir p a 0 m N ^ 7 O O' m ° 7 G O' m oo `< m -. V m S° N 7 O m tmn m K .a+ m cm S c < v o 7• m m F 3. N w o w w o p c i w_ n w w o cL m n ? N 3 J m ^ m w= w 7< m O Q O' o 3 ao n w S w o °' w w o' m �n S C N OD N O7o O m < a m ? S S C'1 a A m O ° ° W n N m fD ° ty°, vOi' m o ^ J D '< 3 `fnD J 7 n m_ °' a7a o70 °° ° o m 3 3_ 3 m 3 o 0 0 W e 'm < c 3 o g S c m= o^- m o 0 3 S n_ o>>= y .mJ. M S S =r - m om o `NO W w J => 3 j N m w -' m n_ w a 7 00 « w am m 7 S a am m 7 t m a. a S i 7 S Oo m a m = 0 G S. - 3 R< a 7 0- o m D :r c w D= v o f f N m w Q c. C a O p' C m n m w N m Sr C .n r. m a4 m Pm, H `� S w m 7 C uCi 3 °' -o w N c w J J ° 7= p a o 3 n c J _. n w A S c s N o0 b o 3 J m' c J °�. O^ m o°7� n 7 3 rr`o c Ao a n c m w p ° v o ID J w C ID P. 7 3 c g> w S p'- c n 9 o n a o 0 7 T w 3 3 m w 7 m n S p'. a < m O ^ w d J a 7 o S oo O w o Q v: o N. �° m pp N m a J w i 7 aFD' m o m mn o 3 w 3 ro m G �' c 3 c p w o m N a S n J w. c o m 3 n m m w N n w 'n = m o o is o w o o o n o w n v J m o a 3" O° p m m� n N ^ N 3 a S? m w �_ o m �o 0 0 w f 3 m w w o m w oo m c w-o n a m S R m° ^-,- m 7 = 7 c n i T m ° y vo S 3 T o y 1D 7 m�< 7^ ^ m o < m w= o o c N» 4° °^ N m ^ m m w 3 y 3 N a<° 3 a m o m w a a n n w 7 v m r- _ ° m 7 m Ov cr : m 3 0 mo 1�1 fD m c ra' 7 p'. d w N N Oa. n m S r+ 7 C rD a m �^ w -� a w o fSG a J : o c w o m o m io 0 o n o a� T m n m K m o p g w m? u= � a= rho m o O' _. Q R N S 7 " N W n Q F oo W m m J O < °? 0 3 a o i 3 m 7 = o m r n J c n n oo w a 7 f Q 7 1wn m `< m o. n o m D m c c S w= w m � r` J n n Omo J 7 fnD m om 1D f<D io .. y m `" n x r� o m N$ o? a w N m 5 lD cL w „ w N C `". fD o J P w N V1 n„ ^ ��.,? n w f (p w N N. R m o ,.. 'o O pa J .. P+ W a S O `< m ° �• ya. w '^ a m <_. m w OM N S o w° 3= o m o v m 3 J o o a r c m m- t, w J m� co J w a a m m m io < f w m w c; a s^ m x< n S p n o o n o o m= J^. C m w m o J 7 ? v c c m w v n o4 n n umw f r o o f o K y° c o w m> EL a 7 .- � C I w. " � 3 m O N N < N '� J .fl � -� -n m m to w �, w o o f O m m m j 3 m S 7• !� R O N Pi o C rNo wLmll w o ni 000 o. �', o m °' w s m n^ w - c r 3 w 3 m m p' w °: o° n p c ;, �' ^ n m w .� m w m n n w w< o 3 < w o w a m. ' m oo c o n ° S D !^ G c a N p. m a n J_ u _ o �: � 3 0 3 Du 3 w o m w su s m p; 0 0O ° o S a m n o 0cL a 3 w o N < _. oN m °-' _ °ma' °° c w J n w D m n v? c G s 3 u, m o a 7 N w- m 3 r'o n W w w^ n m �^ p, m o w S m m ° n oa a 3 0 m w a Jc n i 3 `� m °c c? a? f w o w- 0 7° m S g _. > m R w m r a m^ o w o w w c m J a a d w c a w 7 m m , _ m N rD m� N N N n n N m w fD O N N a �c Oo 7 m m w m o a J m n m O �++ Cr c r; o n �- o W o n n a N - °" o n w -' = c w 11 w n= = _� x f; c o m o R' c s m w o s- ao N a a °' c c w=° m w °^= n o w= o w f .n ° ro o m y `° v o- " 3_ w ?' a w `° _. w `° ° o n c= v' a o? n ^ ° ^ w m n m 3 m x - 3 c° m m o y a w. m N w 'w n �. c m n ? n w °'. a 0. =' m r=n O n j Q w o>> n 0 n o 0 0- c n n y w c o-= w °: ,O+ m r^o n y �, O io N oo w ro < O a m a '^ ,� �^ o F w ° N m _ m n ° o = o m o c a o a o N m 3 3 N a n �' w a ° n m c 3 0° o m c n w o< o w w a. o a< a -°° ° w w o c w m N w_ y �_ w `< `� .. n ra^, io n. o ° m r3o = 'o ran o raoo ? 3 N `o y o a v m �' 0 w _�. !D m m w O n n ,+ S r=+ m n ._. O N W d A a O °" N O !D m n O O _d D r<D ° w w O o -. N 7 ^ m = n m 3o ° F o on°0 w � ° = a P 3 o < m ao m° o m o j w o 0 °< w 3 m ;a 3a oo = 3 ao >� ° ^ O,m ao Q� o.°w o 3 -° 9wm aQo°= Om m N < w o m m a a N� ° m 0 o- < :3 n ' w - o a ow om-- w V < m<0 mw c 0 n a� i c, y� m< a n �. ? m w io r3o c rso r. ?: m w w o mo w s °= 3 v Q w o m w N o c o - i,_ < 3 m a m c= n 3= w e n: * iu m o- roo < °= N m a c = m w° o w v o ru< m a" m r m c. w>> w n m a `° w e o o in ° m o o n 3 0 < On " ° L 3 N' Z JO j rw. O O a S N m n a=G O j p _< Eo °• m m d? a w m o m �, o o_ 3 3 `, i m m ro o m vy c fD `° m c no o= m p ,< a m o o `< ^ � n :^ w fD o- o< Q c m C w o- .0 n m i° c a `° �. ° _ c m- c oo ro y n ° w w a o 3 o w 3= m o Q o c° a o s w' j N n S. N° 0 m o Q a N = m a 3 0 -i - m m fD 0= c a o-= 3- n o c n = s w N w o m_0 N T m 3 m ^ ° 0 = F < 2=- w ^ 0 0 n tD 0 m__= o N m cn a N N n c c n fD = c w° w r^. w" 3 c 3 o c w m - w o y f 3 �o < w D< w m Q m_ o o 0° n m - a m m- n°= N m- °^ 3 °, o w o n= v c °° a m uC m n ao io w _. n m 0_ v�i n m w m n n 0 OG < w c o_ a ro w -. `� ,» p, s .. n w ( < ° -. a o m m a S d m m o> Q S `° o o cr m w m 3 J m O' m O.. O 0 m ]nC N ° mm = w m 6�—+ ao n n x w m m w n m n= n m m f ro n o o. m m n w h a m •' g N < a- ? o m c Er< >• ry C^ < o e °p w e 1D a m u •�, ? a m dam. 'naam� Qcn 0-to ootry Oo oKc m a !r mO omCL �maO.� nKm NS+` � NOq O�RN Na m Q eft 14, Y: w n o o w c 7 - J =' K w m n a n m 7 0 7 0 rD = -0 a 1. m � m -^ O m S w m •a w J J S J m o- w w m w < %< 3 n o- o� m o. M m a a f° w f .0 - Oa o pC m e '. > �_ o r0 y 0 a �. a o m a 3 o F w• rmr _ = 3 'mr' m ^ J Y. Q N ' w j J C p N ^' N d m W = C m n a D ; m 00 C. w o0 3 o c .w. m a °:.� o^ °: O- _ ^ 0 0 0 p: a O 3 .wr n N o ° w° m `< m - '-^ ? `° = 7 ^ ' C n N O m a P= °' C �'^ o ° "' J f "� 3 `° o ° C y' O `� `� v, J "_'• !" ° j 3 w o `° 3 _ m c c m p �` J 3 0' o ?? pi n `< ,=fl v w J_ = m r�D It m w 0 n fD o n r'a <?' >• ° w N n w 3 '� w e i °+ 3 w c r=o w O v c 3 m e nmi r o y w J O m V f' in ^ a 0 O O m n �= c C 7 w w W w m d N = w n W- y s c N O m J D r^+ r'+ -• m o m a'a n ^ m= p S m o 3 a o m w Q m a- O' ° ^ ? J N W ID W a o m J O o o J 41 J: ° a w m •O = H Sr m 3 D o=< w w n m Cr m m c N w v rt r m 3 yr = a a v o o ao w N oo w o c c o w- 3 c w w a 3 ?: n n w y R w° c 3' o m `mo m a o a w e n�o ^ n F a N Q m J <° a o'No m v o �^ o S' c> -, m J m O O' c oo n m m v^i y' w^ w m OU J N d p w ^ w m J m w w m_ n o^? w r. m m m ao 3 w 'w„ y w y o w uw, ° m �' °y^ ? o °Q m v `c VI oo m n m J a m H J 0a p p o ro s n o ao n !, J m N s w m = p' u, _ '.Wo C o w 3 a eJ•' ro y a°o 0 0° 0 m -Na o F a=° r<o J c ,m w m° o w D o m 'a n a° m o n o o CD w 3 aNN c n moo w ' > ^^ 3 o w an arKo co 3 o i3 m m en o ,w o xm u - ,» ¢, c _n p , W J m m o C 3 ry a J S S N vC °° m Q a 7 m o N _' ° S j C p0 ° 0 O 00 w s° n o m m °. v c p: _ °° n ro fD < ro n o W N w r<a a w m ou 2 c r=o I a m3 m N J a- 7 ° mo o n v rwa n __ ^O 7 m 0 0 w < 0 J l< J 3 o a m - O m n w m ao 7 C m, -. d J ET w = m O� ,c„ m 0 0 ^ ro c O w- o o J m o n v n v 33 = o <= w S = m s '^ w Q N m o - m v a Q - - � � a = 7 O S T °' ''i 0^=i j N < v3 � !D ° j 'w r=o m =" � w' C rno m G. - m oo U w fD w c � r. a w Wr J: m ?.' °; _ N °' W a C p '" °' °' ' N ^ ^. m m' l< o n m o v w v T a o �< o o ao = m m N ao m O^ w rao < ratio u� w m m = s J- c "' v f N N ,. oo N w c 0 w n n o p Om c a =' > Ju 3- m n a c m °° m w J a x n? 0 o w o rL m m J J M= ' N ,wr, -0. ^ o< o v am- n- a w r0° <°' i w m o w s c w m m n° m m r=o a- J< 3 0 o o n n D oo w 3 ° c° y o F Q r=, w= n w v w m u m w o m a w a w o 3 n o=? a m w c J 0 m= w a g oo w x m J m n o F. 0 3 i n' w J a s o n w a c m y a ti c''> o_ o W P+ m J ? c> ° m- w J c p=, ri - m �2 �< V J da n _ a R m m J a a o m c o N n 'n n 3 m = o J !� to m n '•C m c 0 c w a c a m aq -- w a w -+. w C m J a d 0-- m - O' O a n - n= w w- v 7 m J < w ti W in m v O W rC+ 'n c 3 n m a �'-' 3. o w A i °' ?: a y o a- 3 w? o o w w a o r°, j c rn W= rno n a ,^< w f, o - V oo c W o '" �= ° c x J 3 m ro r? c ro n c w° �^n io O o w° n o w w a'- n in o J< n o 3 m a m w a p, o C a 0o m P" w O m n o in p m = 3 N o 0 m m C J a v 3 = oo en O !a O - n o H p a p G -1 ° 3 s p w ' > ? J J S R Q m a _. a y oo a m = J w m O C < J o -• P w a v O ao n ^ J O 3 N w N - J N =� � m= 'rJ, w O 3 m w m rD v w - a m y - n c- z ao m n o N a m r� J m ,2 _ m o Q w = a Y a'o a w p' v' w - N o o, ° r=o 3 m m 0 o G 3 J �_ 3• x m w D 3 ' ti c m' o f o p c- ^ c^ m m° ra J S r o< m= is 0 w< Sr s a 3 '^ w a n io a n x m w m w a w w O N O� C W H w C ' m m W n J N M „ x> m T > _ m rwi f'1 _ m< o o V1 C 3 °' m e 3 a'G f'i = m <� m w _n a c v 3 n,< o° v o ' o: o• c 5 .. - S - o w a w go ati^ 0 m < _ 00 o ao c o w= = m c n^ a m m °° o a y c f E w w a y ^. w r� ,c, N �• �' J r3mo o N a o o w p `° 0 w _ ° '° w c "' ; o' 3 O v w D �a J_ in - c 0 � v� J o- o o' 3= w a m O {t L uN a o A w m = 'O w O m ^. 30 <..o c S v a m c w m w^ a m w v o 0 O OO W n w 3 n r^ o m w ^ 00 N C N 3 f o a i r=o J o y, -. R w c c fD V > i o O m J a m O .^•. J w c o- 0 ' a r'+ o .p H w w o w o j m CZ 5 a o N w °J wCL ?; ^ m o Q o Q n -� �° l o-n o Q c i o v. o a io m m -• Sr a c 3 N M 3 w o m Sr o c F o c m w w .� o 0 3= m a= 3 m v m �+ f 3=,^ io• m c o o v f >• ur ro io ra 0? o �< s m 0° a m T c-0 m ro p a g o F 3 - co J o m c J D a Q m S n L W m m m v m ? 3 a °: J C C m N w lu a 3 ra m S m !^ w o n m " O m n m' c= S m J o ro C a 3 c S o n oo ao w .- n c S a p^ 3= m ro o m m ro ? 3� _ m v < J m w � m 3 ^_ c � n o f e m A CrO N C S m �< O m n o io O S �C - N R 3>> o n a o ri a v? m� N as J m w - L m rao m 3 w O O n= m m' a, o o, x m v o n v m v 3 0 3 0 m _ n < o R, o a o a d a o N" c v i 3 c o <a o n o o ^, J n o m w `z m e m.0 m w m w a; _ J J O m m _. n _° m- O 0 D o m o w a w 3 0 au o o m� m m 3 3 n v v J f o 0 0 uw a< �c i^ o J^ a^ m w C C a= J ^ C tD a .Je a 00 0 0 a: O m N 3 J m m C O co -o d C r N m 3 O m� Vr ' O' rma O p J C j S J -� N n -0� 0 J m a J O J C +_ w N ° O m O n p 5 N O_ ^ ^O N w J O Oa 0 - 7 w p 40 w^ w. w R'T a < 7 n O a m n o �' = °v n is .mi a a m M. p m o .Ci Q. o m_ 3a o 0. n r, o c 3 n D° a 0 c o 3 `M o m o J s m 3 m 0 m n N `L c m o n= o ro a n o N=_ v o s 3 L m m m � S J m x O' 3 D < m n _' 0 -- ° - L m ^ Q 04 _ o^ m S o O H N J m m C aq O J w Q - w' C 3 o n n n c anti ^ c a'o 0O m m- =^ N' Q aO N m= ^< n m o d To n W Imn rSD S C p J N W m O < Q o S vmi ' S w A = 0 (D m rye O a J = N G 7 � 7 O ^ m u m n^ w J J n J m a J m H n R o m m N 'w=+ _ n = o v u m H F m as a �c 0 New Opposed By Local a ,A rr 1.--ndian Land Equalization Plan Ordered l.r. ri 11URTT FIRST TtiAR a ram, The Desert Emplre's Daily Newspape• VOL XXXI. NO. 127 12 Pages Palm Springs, California. Wednesday, June 25, 1958 PHONE FA 5.5005 Single Copy 10c v1Jt� Wld W aWey' _amo_. 1neMi� d Allol�ihlfb 10 , "Al Mial al witlrbelaAS�i n faidie irlbN owot M _ n: rl,tpo'� or�i5ad i n m N MI dity`o� ai�bdWa� d therltimedl { r'. siTts'W 1 nhieee' to Mesita brlel{ Iatlia''dwl I dli i Udtiid ' ny Indiay whoyrin.^ ti ... � yd tb. plan ;lM?tier •`in.a rst b ' ^ all per cmlp f lh nart.�tirv, Ac6lms i TO -Ray, sfmp,o 9ffii p e<te"Mtt<IY el t k 'ak d n III Vaal oU s'' f Iha TnMI Cauadl. AroS i4 meal t M 'aid A!!,.�Thl b pti 1� o[ e t ad'rid al the cairt thesoc ode, r n a e M F 1 E�,of f I W Gaeta lw . as bstN ^by U. bu• old Wlit the c n 1 aart am. of adtah Altair, k a h t.'th �i6. t Wofe ad the b eel aailod for at IMns' ill etoned ILL do 7o datileoy a tribe a'd' 1 buUoA eta' SR73aa Willi ailrv. •to the htyhest value d'aa'r bell thpl'G"rfipt il4^poU`� All' 6ibdlIadr;'.bieb h I. nT pay;buµlc .116imein: aad the zy has M1een.' toiled under the,Muniliiilon yio..piap: 'i. p'eea<aled lent-Nph�. SJP • .cram, .,l be undu`the,icudtrhi; p?;et ;nlpa6iioa up to a"'norm' frNF. ,151fCU RRX I_ it the of the individual-IndiAn, hid; iirf oT'fSis Ilan. CtpMe31 had ben sW"M by ratrh.g to IRe price t lr`tyeaie !{ialrr "W dthnrlly v 4ed in the Seer Iary of inlanor a nd-nal be nblfifi d M tW br b n If Rurtilu tf ladtan Aftara;; the dudpt Milem G. Math. of lea c by the he nen.,%a Ai mnxb iwti numb<r of sera thn, Mrrlr11 also had hyMed d'vo ezample Lea polaiea ou}�"IRAi 01 . rh•'be'uR6h" to nny',InAisn u the ecuallouab order dutiaY Iht Palm 5prinA Avlro"il, Idlje its".aCRF dhA fn mersbeF It Clem Stlgdo eau Lae phed ailatt,d sad that all he'Ia,M'hofily" .salt Like ec[iy:,MIN flirt nnmhr that ba did W. k'wa d the iadxe na • Id have is Abldr byats'. "bribF d+a,:t"ziuotioa,up fo Wt had brrn informed f the pion, lea's We e" y has •u`rRU tp66y TlibSxSfyr4p�^lop tie re, b,A Ib. order to nee this plan. w61 d—locment of d. ppa m the ' . wiped for tba Department of la- NI —al Beiha she- rill. be We Luo AItn'NILL, area diieNdr ler?a7 by Robert tirmL —start t Gard nee, a.d,r 'la'limear St a farWarbir Ad. ao—or,4 'aa,th. e<rctary by We 1 SMor: r k < a d a1I1 tie. Mo 4 s pm< that ' farlhre shut w Oliare, a ld fbl the a bs the nd,.owaen. n W 14 butd be rods aMlna tun don 'ray Ibe ra.ai Nbii th;ng the, Is'd uchsnXes.,arould be ap WJ his arti bean prapuaed.' I IT :Mu. RE mld4q! before pr ed. the I bons are ad by the ha Ifei•' 'd hat the I di�id nl lb• M1 FptTALVd G th land,. kI au a tl_;ih th liMgm Ill d'pM aidd la i the mount �Al at r<ceesary t tat' §all th d lkf In dtterodn ,,'the, n of th 'tlilot nrnts U a letter by lanpa Aclongles W the bib, aad bn finch Way u•'4 be pb' G dNb ll held Ypy ((tt{{yy�I aophnl nM W d a for land. 4 GrgF $'',fa Ina Wne am a to to to I. Aodls teaanr. Eree>I. Lee,.a Id tbat the 'Ihdlam or n, +llTal:Lr sdrtuned -p lbe Fig. 27 Press coverage of Olinger speaking before a meeting in Palm Springs between the tribe and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, contending that the federal government's equalization plan would 'completely destroy the local tribe" and that she and her fellow Tribal Council members vow to wage an all- out fight against it. Standing: Olinger; seated,left to right: attorneys Warren Slaughter and Gillar Boyd. The Desert Sun, June 2S,1958. 32 YOU CAN'T EAT DIRT leasing, developing, or selling of tribal lands, or from the fees collected by the corporation for the use of the mineral hot springs and the Indian Canyons. While the tribe's communal lands —its reserves, including the sacred mineral hot springs and the hallowed Indian Canyons —were not specifically designated for allotment or sale in this bill as part Of its proposed equalization procedures, the legislation had no proviso that would prevent this horror from happening in the future.as At the October1957 congressional hearings, to which tribal members turned out in record numbers, Olinger testified that this plan could operate to annihilate the tribe 69 "Our tribal lands ... are as meaningful to our tribe as Mount Vernon and Yellowstone National Park are to the United States at large, and equalization with land alone would force our members to lose the tribal identity associated with our reserves," Olinger proudly stated5" She also relayed that the tribe was equally concerned that the current proviso for tax immunity vis-h-vis Indian land had not been made a permanent condition. The fear that it could be changed in the future, which would have devastating economic consequences for the tribe, was based again on the fact that the government would have a dominant seat at the boardroom table. "The [equalization] bill is fraught with serious danger" to the Agua Caliente Cahuilla, contended Olinger. The Indians are "extremely apprehensive about a corporation the bill proposed," she continued, "which would administer tribal lands and accomplish equalization ... it resembles a Frankenstein which they are reluctant to create for the fear it might later destroy them"s' In rejecting outright the idea of a corporation configured and controlled by the BIA, Olinger argued further that Indian land must be securely exempt from taxation. She also suggested an alternative by which Congress would set aside the sacred reserves, in perpetuity, thus protecting them from liquidation and the equalization process. instead of dividing the tribal reserves in order to make up the difference in equalizing the 104 47- acre allotments in question, she recommended that Congress make an equalizing cash appropriation to tribal members$' Charging that the equalization plan Jnitiated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and approved by Assistant Secretary of Interior Roger Ernst "creates an eco- nomic and cultural crisis for both the City of Palm Springs and the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians." the Indians last night took two steps to stop the action They drew up a tribal letter di- rected to the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, asking for its support of House Resolution Ina, a bill to provide for t he equalization of allotments on the Agua Caliente Reservation and for other purposes, and in other correspondence asked Secretary Ernst to hold olf the enforcement of the bureau's plan. IN THEIR LETTER to the City Council the Indians also asked for support in contacting executive and legislative representatk es to ask for early hearings on the new bill. HR 13323 was introduced into c o n g r e s s by Congressman D. S. Saund July 8, and is now refer- red to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. Most important to the City of Palm Springs is Section 4 of the bill Which will allow the sale of Section 18, the airport, to the City of Palm Springs, by the Indian Tribe. THE MAIN POINTS of the bill as proposed by the Agua Caliente Band of Indians include that any Indian living at the time of the enactment of the Act shall be giv- en an allotment in accordance with provisions of the existing law, and that no further allot- ments of land shall thereafter be made to any other or future mem- bers of the Band. their heirs or devisees. except for the purpose of equalization, Fig. 18 Press coverage of Olinger and the Tribal Council seeking support from the city of Palm Springs in their fight against the federal government's plan for equalization. Olinger asked the city to endorse the Tribal Council's alternative proposal, House Resolution 13323. The Desert Sun, 3111y 29, 1958. Indians Ask City to Aid With Equalization Bill Seek Early N.Y. Stock Exchange �prY..�, E a ;7: **J//�■�� WEATHER E. F. MUTTON O CO. Action by '•e � Congress The Desert Emplre'a Dolly Newepeper e" r m C-61 A od VOL. XXXI, NO.250 10 Pop. Palm Spring,, C.Ilfp io, T..,da 1"Ir 29, 1958 PHONE FA 55005 Si,91, Copy 10, THE FIGHT TO PRESERVE TRIBAL IDENTITY The congressional hearing on equalization in Palm Springs in the fall of 1957 was followed by congressional inaction. Thus, in March 195B, the Interior Department notified Olinger that, given the pressing Segundo court order, it had no other option than to prepare a land equalization plan based on the district court's "existing authority," which meant proceeding immediately with equalizing the allotments using the tribal reserves.53 The Interior Department admitted that this approach stood to produce a result that would be considerably less advantageous to the tribe than Senate Bill 2396, but pointed out that "we do not feel we can delay further."5G In response, Olinger again launched an aggressive campaign to overturn this decision. Her first order of business was to gather together the Tribal Council and issue a resolution, released in April 1958, that stated that the tribe would "initiate and undertake whatever action is required to have the Congress of the United States pass legislation which will set apart from any allotment or equalization program, the said existing Tribal reserves."551ts singular objective was for the reserves "to be held in perpetuity and in memoriam for the benefit and use of the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians"56 Olinger then wrote Congressman Saund, again asking for his support and explaining her serious concern that equalization under the "statutory authority" would be worse for the tribe than Senate Bill 2396.57 She also wrote Senator Knowland, conveying: "The Bureau of Indian Affairs has made a decision on equalization of allotments on the Palm Springs reservation that will destroy tribal identity completely. I am asking you as my senator to request the Bureau of Indian Affairs give you a full report"O Regardless of Olinger's fast and furious efforts to block the plan, Commissioner of Indian Affairs Glenn L. Emmons sent a letter to area BIA director Leonard Hill, dated June 19, 1958, instructing him to proceed with the process of allotment under the current "statutory authority," specifically noting that this directive would supersede any previous order, adding, "We regret the necessity for including the reserves in the equalization program"59 Pushed to the limit, Olinger and fellow Tribal Council members promised to wage an all-out fight against the federal government's equalization program, claiming that it would "liquidate" the local band .° Strategically speaking to the press in June 1958, days after hearing the news, Olinger said: "I don't feel the Bureau of Indian Affairs actually knows what it will do to destroy a tribe, and I don't believe that is what its policy has been. This is completely destroying a people. It's the most unfair thing that's ever been proposed."" Surprised and "in a state of utter shock," she gathered together tribal members at a meeting in Palm Springs in late June 1958 to address what she termed "an economic and cultural crisis"" Associate Commissioner Lee was in attendance and Olinger pressed him, asking if the proposal had been approved by the Secretary of the Interior and if Judge William C. Mathes — who had handed down the court order in the Segundo case in the first place —knew of these turns of events (Fig. 17)63 He replied that the Assistant Commissioner of the Interior Department had authorized the plan, and that he did not know if Mathes knew the status. Importantly, though, Lee cracked open the door of possibility, admitting that it could be stopped by the tribe or Congress, but if no further action was taken, it would have to go into effect. For Olinger, this faint glimmer of hope offered her more fuel to energize her already electrified struggle to overturn the government's plan, which one tribal member characterized as "a sound proposal —if we were in Russia."64 While the government had stalled making a decision on equalization after S. 2396 had been thwarted at the congressional hearing in Palm Springs in October 1957, Olinger continued working on the problem, getting to know Congressman Saund better and consulting with him and tribal attorney Simpson on refining some of the alternatives for equalization brought up during the fall hearings. she authorized Simpson to "undertake and initiate on behalf of the Band any and all acts which might reasonably be deemed necessary and proper by him to prevent ... the equalization plan presented by the Bureau of Indian Affairs."ss Olinger also marshaled the support of the city, which understood that the current incarnation of the equalization proposal no longer suited their best interests either (Fig. 18). The result was that the city and tribal attorneys came together and prepared a revised bill that was introduced on July 8, 1958, by Saund as House Resolution 1332361 Intended to obviate the negative effects of the bureau's proposal, the new bill was a three point, do-it-yourself equalization plan designed to empower band members to take all necessary and proper steps to OF TWO WORLDS, YET OF ONE SiIND 33 w f r m v 7• n 1 o g o 3 F c v_ CO d < o• n o P. w c w c w v 7 o m r o w w o c.100c w o S* c `d m w 0 m�� c o^_ c o_ oa 0 7 w' 7 w v o< a m m v c ro ' m?= m 3< m �° v m 7 n 3 m Q m 3 0 <_ n 7 v w .+ ^ a m v o om w p c m w m ' 0 m m° p 'a < vw 3 A '» n d c °.° 3 m w x o v N °° a io 3 r<o m? fD - go c v w 0 ° w 0$ '? __ w 7 3^ oo m o d? d o m w n w v a y 11 m d Sr o ff 7 7 m O'o w 0 w m c 3 n° w' °�° ° c 3 w d 7 c v c 3 m - aI_ c o w m w m rCi ry C m n m 7 m .�•. m y 7 n d c 7 C O O N N m 04 ° !4D W 3 O ff_ m O' G a< w ^ 3 w m m n w w 3 F 0 a m n=< f S m 7 w m ? d m r" c. w m v N Q m 7- x '^ w 7 3. r2 a c m n c ac i vi = `� =* m 7 v .. o m m L �^ m q 7 S m c 7 c �n m p, d — o ° S. j ?; p o :3 w o m 7 n 0 r y _ _ a,G ear N m S n n _ n < w m < m d O m 7 vmi m w m 7 d O0 F+ 0 ° A 00 ~ m w C m ° m n 3 O n v� m o> o0 o w ? o- m n °' �, ? - w 3 3 ,< 3 _ 3 w s m < N o 7 �n O m „7, c -. 7 r� 7 m �n < m m= n n ao w H 7 m �^ o- ,w„ v 0 o c ,� m v, m e �. _. N u. 7• 0 w e c_ ,s m w i^ n f? o m n w 7? n w m m< n m m- m m w 7 3 ' m c= m o' `o ' o o m^ n c a 0 c p w a w `� 'c n 3 "^ T -_ P Ou m �_ o 7 m m C n d M m lu 7' 1 v a m 7 w n _ r� w m m g c 3 D a m n o'0 3 7 a o w c 7 M. n o r c o n m- n w v c i w fD m 7 N n w a w n n O r: o o N v 7 m .'+ — m m- c ^ n m w W m a 7 m ] m u, 7' O w Q n n d ,Q in m w C �' n j w d m 7 O 8 `^ d G. O v a° 7- a^ o u m o- 0 m o o• 7 0o ry 7 =. �• 7 v a c m2 c 30 N 3 w w m ° o �• 0 3 "o o c c° g 7 a v m° w mm `� 0'o w `� w 0 m- m 2). n 7 n m m a ri w o n i 3 m o m m c f0 w T ro n f M n m 9 0o ° m 7 a< m m :� 7• n N � 3' m m C 00 w n 00 7 3 m m 7 O oo c U w m m re ^ w m n N Ou n m 0 O A c C � N d� m d w O' mw ..., O 'o- W 0 7 < M* 7 m m o o w w a o o<% .'. 0 o m 3 c w m w 'm 0 7 x- a n o4 -0 To m moo m^ n y '^ `o = = a v m .. c o 0 ° m rho v w m m s ~ W. M `r0 '? d^ ao 7 w > n c < ° 0 A ,c-e '. o `v`Mi ` d N !D 3 m V�i Oa N a N Cr 0_ m .w-e j H m w D o m m o° A w 3 v+ 3 w_ u+ � i c oo y < a m m Oo m m m '. m m > ^ w a m ro T m N S v O w v >• 7 S umi O n m 3 0 sr UQ 0 v w m m O R m y r� 0 30 3 v 3o a n 3 m a m m m w o� c o o o o o o y w m v m o o. w `o ' 3 K `o W. A vi 0 m i a .;; � o C n N n m d n 0 v=mi 7 m �n = H 0 rm^-r ^ O lO m D °' o n 7 7 7 (D V m 0 w :� � w 7 o v w__ m m S n 3 0 3 7 �+ 3 m w m = x Oo w o v_ 3 7 c y� R N H N 7 .0 m m O 7 0Q oo m a c w w s m m w O' w c v o o Q w° a m M Oa 0 p w n ^no OO 2• `.. w vn = 3 w 0- a m y N m g c w w' D a n a' m c m - LA c H c o n W f 3 w' o- w p m m 3 3 A a io m< 0� 3 3� 3 a 3 n m < m �. m 30 0 d w 7 I-' ru - o M <o n 3 m v au 0. 3 w 7 n 7 w N d= H S a N R m ID K D O 7 0'O °� n rQ O m m `< m 4° m `< ( m oo W m 7 m w n a° v 7 < Oc m m 4? lip T a° �, '• »ym mr^. a '^� ii ! pie'.; g'A l 42A. V N y N S O ,dap �e o .'-o m• � ��a a� in iRm e"s 0 r° cr C N ° N O O Y^ O W N tR se 0 o x i �� w H• 7 0� � •n c �� i m Cx1 0 w o � n rL %•' W M � `J O i N � M N W � Q• N r r• oc vt n < H c o• f0 y < W pal o d 3CL , 0- a m moo" w R a 0. � This dry, matter-of-fact response fixed Olinger's determination even further. She immediately contacted Ernst, saying, "From both our personal and telephone conferences, you can appreciate how disturbed I have been over the equalization plan for Palm Springs ... and again I wish to request that you do everything in your power to bring the Bureau's plan ... to a halt in order to permit the members of my Tribe to resolve the equalization problem in their own way."72 Ernst responded dismissively: "Both you and I have the same goal in mind," he wrote, "and it is always a pleasure to exchange ideas with you"73 He proceeded by acknowledging the declaration that Olinger had sent him, signed by over twenty adult members of the tribe, and offering his assessment of what fairness would be for tribal members (see p. iiS). "I should like to point out that by and large it is the minor members who are on the lower end of the equalization scale. Surelyyou will agree that the Department must consider and protect their interest"74 With the demeanor of a careful, guiding protector, Ernst concluded his paternalistic commentary by saying,"While I am fully aware that you don't like a plan which utilizesall tribal properties for equalization, we feel that we have no alternative."" One can only imagine the anger and frustration that such a terse and condescending reply would provoke, but Olinger wasted no time on negative energy and instead turned herefforts toward pressing hercause even harder. She immediately authorized tribal attorney Simpson to send a letter in response, suggesting that it was preposterous that "they have no alternative" and, significantly, posing a veiled threat that if this BIA plan were to go forward, it would only lead to further litigation.76 Simpson argued that the BIA plan would not solve the disparity that had led to all the previous litigation by tribal members, and that as far as minors were concerned, "it is the expressed belief of several guardians that their legal duty to minors would require the filing of additional lawsuits against the Government if the Bureau's plan becomes a reality."77 The portent of continuing litigation appears to have sobered the Interior Department. After Simpson raised this specter on behalf of Olinger and the Tribal Council in his September 1958 correspondence, there is a prolonged period of quiet on the department's part. When Congress convened again in early s959, Congressman Saund reintroduced his equalization bill, now identified as House Resolution 5557)$ In turn, Olinger kept the political pressure on, noting Saund's introduction of H.R. 5557 and promising that, if Congress did not pass this bill, the tribe would proceed with its own equalization plan. In May, Congressman Saund contacted Olinger, notifying her that her insistence had worked and that "at long last, congressional hearings have been scheduled on H.R. 5557;" and she promptly answered that she would be personally present at the hearings beginning in early June. The summer and fall of 3.959 was an intense period when Olinger's efforts and those who supported her began to pay dividends (Figs.19, zo). With the June and July hearings on H.R. 5557, a positive momentum was set in motion. As a witness, Olinger argued for "speedy approval" of the Equalization Act as well as the Long -Term Leasing Act, which had been linked to the equalization bill. "My tribe needs vitamin M—money. You can't do anything without that," she contended 79 Olinger linked future economic development on the reservation to the passage of these two bills, using it as leverage, saying: "a spa is under construction in the tribal mineral springs reserve area. This and a proposed 53,5oo,000 hotel are being built by the Palm Springs Spa, Inc. of which Samuel Banowit, Beverly Hills, Calif., is president "OOThe press coverage elaborated, saying that Banowit "is ready to go ahead with construction of the hotel as soon as Congress passes the equalization bill"81 Olinger's persistent and well -orchestrated strategy succeeded. By September zi of that year, both the Equalization Act (Public Law 86- 339) and the Long -Term Leasing Act (Public Law 86-326) were approved by the House of Representatives and the Senate81 Debating the Long - Term Leasing Act into the wee hours of the morning, and on the eve of adjournment, weary congressmen ultimately put the bill through 83 Meanwhile, the equalization bill —as introduced by Saund and supported by the tribe —was passed relatively seamlessly, considering all the tenacious fighting over this particular piece of controversial legislation. On October zz, President Eisenhower signed both bills into law in what was described as "two of the most important pieces of legislation ever affecting Palm Springs" (see P. 125). Press coverage noted: "Combined, the two laws will encourage development and integration of all Indian lands"84 Olinger and the Tribal Council succeeded in revising the outdated and restrictive leasing laws that had long thwarted the economic development of Indian lands. This exceptional group of female leaders also won, once and for all, the prolonged legislative battle to finalize and equalize land allotments. They had successfully marshaled all the resources at their disposal and tirelessly worked the system to resolve this extremely complex and contentious issue that had for decades fractionalized the tribe and hindered its progress. At the same time, they staved off power grabs for their sacred lands, preserving them in perpetuity for their own, internally determined uses and as essential symbols of tribal identity. They effectively dashed any hopes on the part of the city and the federal government of using large portions of the reservation for private development or a national park. Both long- term leasing and equalization were remarkable legislative victories, and despite how they were amended and distorted at times, they were critical legal and business steps in building a strong foundation for the tribe's future growth and prosperity.85 Yet in the process, Olinger and her all - women Tribal Council accomplished something even greater than these individual milestones —they maintained the tribe as a sovereign nation. OF TWO WORLDS, YET OF ONE MIND 35 IMAGINING A NEW AND BETTER TOMORROW one of the extraordinary aspects of Olinger's leadership is that she maintained a laserlike focus on the future while she and the Tribal Council struggled in the present for long-term leasing and the settling of land allotments. Undeterred by protracted legal battles, excessive infighting, and personal betrayal in the here and now, she forged ahead, imagining anew and better tomorrow for her tribe. Well before there was a positive outcome to the pressing legal issues at hand, Olinger and the Tribal Council had boldly moved to reinvent the reservation in yet another significant way. They dreamed of a master plan for all the Indian lands in Palm Springs. After Olinger became chairman of the Tribal Council in 1954, this dream eventually became a reality. For a master plan to ultimately work, though, longer -term leasing had to be in place and land allotments had to be finalized. Executing such a plan would have been impossible without a clear understanding of land titles and sufficient lease terms, both of which were required by real estate investors and developers. Olinger and the Tribal Council addressed the proverbial causal dilemma of the "chicken or the egg" by adopting the risky strategy of working the various legal and planning initiatives on parallel tracks. Even though longer -term leasing and equalization were pending,yetwerebyno meansasure bet, thisuncertaintydid notdissuade them from preparing a master plan, even if that plan were dependent on there being a resolution to these important issues. In other words, they were simply preparing for this beneficial result, convinced that their transformative vision for the reservation would, over time, be realized. Their actions were the very definition of progressive entrepreneurship: being innovative, seizing opportunity, assuming risk, and building for a better world that was already real in their mind's eye. Propelled by the successful passage of Public Law 25S—the first long-term leasing legislation for Indian land and for which they had lobbied vigorously —Olinger and the Tribal Council began investigating how best to develop the reservation's land and natural resources. A tenfold increase over the five-year lease terms that had debilitated the reservation for decades, this legal milestone allowed them to envision a different kind of Indian territory. In the summer of 19S6, after reviewing proposals from two internationally recognized architectural and planning firms, Skidmore, Owings& Merrill and Victor Gruen&Associates, Olinger and the Tribal Council selected Victor Gruen to prepare a "master land use and development plan" for the reservation B6 In character with Olinger's innate sense of style and nose for quality, she hired the best available talent she could engage on behalf of the tribe. Gruen was internationally known for having invented the modern shopping mall —a large, self-contained complex replete with a variety of stores 36 YOU CAN'T EAT DIRT ,'roan n, ssnr ssrse �' UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF INMAN AFFAIRS n:re m'�ato 'r-a ifftae Paul .[•-ro ilk L'�68 ...,.t nr 'rnon 4 ague tates L., 'oath ,nnmY ''rtvs avrriy L1114, :'•,14ntinto tt:9f r[ 'itwl •• •']LLthland •rt L;,' mr t•, �/ r9anlution 1 1 :r June 3[ i:53 To '�e7S ..ipccoJ �r:p1oY 7 "lr Ptrr, en dam ot,,d:r ^n1 Salaalt �Lsae -r,J r�,ppTq,exiael o ,.,r t:;e .^..art *.anoY[c tel 'rae •,n•1 deOvLJTf'l21t ,d' tTa :ua ,'ell-. u!.0 �anrvatton land roan"oes. e 3nva rmi,.atcd ti:,, r-A itr'in roG l�4ingk eao,![,t¢art �nA LRn .,ifitrs to :•.cr*n"e t.r euSL�O ,y ,rtth i'rd for rite i,rso,,,tton 3 v .solar Lr M1 ne ad'e`*voo tdctl n 6'a "fir oUr ':adrvstiou• {pq� itf Joey ^L,� 'Lo- 10 or Lnd Lan .erairs L , . •. :pttat+, ;:, ,f this 0 at:nrt. ';nry tcily'N,ao. a LL�ntd •,;d 'f i crem3nto '.r'm uffice d ML3 Olir✓.ar and restaurants and designed as a landscaped promenade. An Austrian immigrant who had Fled the Nazis, Gruen established himself anew in New York during the late 193os and 1940s. He proceeded to transform the shopping experience there and elsewhere in America, soon becoming branded as the "mall maker."tr He and his team of professionals — composed from the interrelated fields of architecture, engineering, and planning —made the "mall" a focal point of urban development after World War Il, fashioning a symbol of postwar prosperity and fostering a sense of shared community. In designing a successful hub of shops and eateries, Gruen was embraced by the highest echelons of American architecture. Modernist architect Philip Johnson applauded him for "creating a true civic art and architecture"" His rapid ascent paralleled Fig.21 letter of hire from Tribal Council to Victor Gruen & Associates June 11,1956. v �aEy xo5.ocp> "t7 y' ��n,'-P y�g•o"gn��g_� 0 5m�mc��'�yA^o�wW�a��"�'�a=�=d"''"ao°�� O a�'<;;e'r'dZns�'a<c ei3 C'. �+. �.'�+�0`°e�° mo m ^o...p�??�.mi`g„hm c m �• n o CQ t,]j a`CZ .* s�'C. s'Ftiw '°"3c^.• mNwE(] •G:aaofD,'.3i3^3 $ F�n'a•o..° m -.v a� �7 �/"�R� /�'1 xgve 6 ,',y n •ee .. y n I • •°"G °n �Pw� yHm �mm ry�ry<in < voc.,w3 me Fewi'= v��°°•£ 7 p°¢�SYc F 'F Y >R,_ .s N 6 "' O �' �. � Q e Y y •� N OG S N O r• ~ p� C 7 z g as H O e�y C s�i °moo. pj B',�t9 mio..-'. ,-�•m'Ro. v�rsm mc� �s?�'po v„ y1 �2 y o` m Q° � ' o 0 7. �� ip `.S - � � 4 o r, c � ' w •O �.�., r'1 •�.yw y mm�.^ �o a•v G`�'m omw-^] o�. E.^va w•7 .:m c.w V� --�� ai•n— ca er m°,nA C F. 33'-".°. m m ��' of (�=•ynGGm iD �' � ° `^ A Em o ° o [+1 Q1 C pr Gr 'fl A d m ° a'.04� P " •�. ° w o n N C Y' S m 6 T. q n qr' LT w� i 'l �r,O:.il-n gN� ^m$ i3w�i' K 5 i�� q¢� q 3 gsu' till D n �. o n ��' ,!?�'�� 5?�n�m a. m %' m 7 » 4 R ,.0 7 s �." •p°i °o' `3• `.% ifl s X �'' n S R3 - R $ ~Y. °" �r3• `<wi35 Qm m,^ o°i #v°a.-�P3 c�inc oA yk �,a9e y a`�• ` �� w �'- pg' �' g o co cv 45 Rd�'�Z 0 .//1�1•• eD i E e �1 mx no •k g 9 .- o rC� o - m a m p -' _ q A V nrl�o gm ooi3'o' zp�> cfj a?n S ..tea �, O R �3 a�`3x•4>e! 0 3 3 °f�� 7cya w$ o °�c o 3 e r N m a e£ n Y ry < �s w B C n°-e+3ookmw yk�o.:=.-m ��c•o �9 cMNH'w° >6m m m ° m " `° •�3 .3� Gam. i.�.�{R y�C �e Se��q m N a �r'°>•Cmv _ o y° y w N u y o. (a H o M � LL o a Y R'2$ �+CD & m rm °9�,� z- m` $ m y „' oaa " r3• o ee E. G a c. n 3 a; c c �' m CD S 6 B c a x S+ a' a omk'cc•�m� a oCy ov �v. 3y£� ,o m'_° �°' n'c^ �� ' 4 3 (fa ?.3 f IF m7oo w^^».� E•�n q?�¢�> n. ' ''r°m'£°m'3c n�•fl, a� a vn,n-,•.> �� ;'m " 3 y S° ❑ �`0y ..."mac H>V � °� !•�mm a. �a �d N H'n'e � P-' a.e C` m 10 C w Q— 0° = 7 O N z K �n 7 V •+ °, 3 D c n 3 m N 3 m c° _. m< c o o c m o° 3 c a 3>> m, o a n D w 3 3 - n N i crQ H < y N R 3 X a`°u rD. C ? .n. ^ _. w N Ou 7C N ^ ? < � m '" 0 < `° w >>> o v s o < m w m o m N= D oo < 3 c 3 o N o n w 3 0O n ° m v m o^ N m w 3- w n n o c a o c a c> > m w o o m o ° w m Q w o 0 0 00 = v o 0 3 o a 3° w N^ o° O m 0 0 °° n �- c w n= m ° p ° n o=$ m o 3 ^moo ^ 3 0 a °> o? o 0 o g° 'm w o n= ° o f D ? S, = Q n 3 w o=° m 3 m n° mom, w 3 3 m ^ Q o a r° A o v 3 o w w m o?= a° m� 00 < n �o w o w L fD �D w v �• G1 m p H n m -m 7 n O n N o m ^ o o< _ u, o w w w c& o o -. m °: o 'c v 1e ^ w �• c ?>> w ri 1D m pi 3� == m F Q n io m m c io m i = _ m! m o v� w _. n o w w w o ao �^ •'`, c o o= y n» a m= _? c w< 0 0 o as ro =• f p n w=< Q, w fo z c 3 a F, c v n m 7 a° ? m o o Q c °_ ^ �n w" K 3 ° o ro N w n m io v m r?° ;• f- m 3° i? i< c m o m w c w o o ,,,I_< oa = o w �? o- ? p m o c ,n o o- mn v c ° o n w o w - m o m o o = o= a A o 3= o = 3 3 o. n n a y a o N Fo io' o w ,,, 3 =^ o w n • D. o a �. -. < A Q o o o o y N w = v o m c. °O n n M. :° m s n s o ^ y w n yn i o aQ°° N P' A 'g� n A '" m m o w f .e ° v A Q G1 `° w ": =• * A ao o' 3 A a n w o 4o n o n m= v v- 3 0 0 a o - 3 m n v a o 'm m< w c° �» P o 3 =° °° w i w ao °^^ v o w= n o r a 3 c c o S.�_ C L — n w< '^ °^�° w a m o a o H w m o o• a n? i o o o j c 3 w m 3 y `� .' „',- m o w K w o f =. o y a y n m o in N m= m c 3 p� '_^. w e `° C H Q d !G n m m w A n N y^ ^ o ao G �• pi .p 7 m o `< .=i '^ _• m O' - o N n m w lu< 3° 3 K _°_°_ n o f m o m -- o° n> > 3 0 < N °- on m =w 3 m o g n w 3 3 I = m o o?_ ° n w To ° o° S n m n m m o = m c m^ o °•v° H c n c c D c = m !^ � n m F+ a m m c Q m m �• ^. w o' c A io m yn N• s E m w n m i`oi, 'a o w 3= a l n I .'. m m w o w Q o m m_ z w �n o n rn n ..� c n w a c S. > w v m c _ < w. ° m D 3 is ao° o v n c = 3 o m o o° o a Y v 3 w o o c o a o a o _� n o=o m w c 3 0 m m w e n m o n n m v ao v ,� m as n = c ,_» n o 0 3 0- o w m o- = m $= n a '� O a ww o aN w ° w= p w �" a a= I c 3 n= o w m N T m �' n n. �^ = n ? m m w '� Gi '� v w m m � < �^ ro 0 ^ w>> oe n w o s l m m � oo c = m n= m •m< as c r o vwi P. 3 m N c s n 3 w Nm m n ° o i—n' o F T ? w m o !A mo ^. a N a m= N o n `� w ° H= ae n O m vi ,-. ri m m ,. m 'G �n g = lG (D Y v. m n N K = as m is w an m '^ m� m S. v o o N v N =. m Q v p p uwi N io s Do = c T n 3 o w o o c v M n D n w v o o N o> S m r o° m n 3 um v o m m Ap ao 0O ^< 3 D f o m 0° 2. 0 w w 3 m m oo o m c w a ci ro d v= ^T ^ m w c= m o 3 c+ uv n w Q. a N m 3 n= a m w a 30 0 o T n m w? a o y m o 3 a 0 ° m w c w n v H 3 c o v_ o o c v o- m 3 m m ono am c" o c w ° R w w n r o n m m F+ d = N ,n a n w c vo :» w w< d G'1 c fD ^ -i m v`o, R" F•1 v m o .. n m v, 3 m - _ �+ • o F a y m o+ m w o. ,� T ,^n o n 3 N __ ao m N o M. m m u'^i ao N N- > ^ m o o; ro mac, 'a vo v N I. o fD v v 3- D w A' m o Q MCl n o m g M w" 3' A�= 0 -C w� c� w= m w> "— w w no j N o c w ° c o p° c °v° �» m'^ n° 3 m- o- v m v F. o �j�/1 m m ;+ v< w ^° oo < M 00 0 � a n f v - o �. , w o' 2— o <_ �1. 1 Pi o o 0 0 = m $_ e a w o ci a x o n 3 w n w w o v n a v o o v 3 y �+ o m in m ° �< = is N =. , 0 N N n n m N o a w 3 v x D 3 v w o> >. > 3 o m _ ao M w o i. ^ n° n c f° c 0 w o o a c- w A w� m o c ° n D s S o N o i m= H 3 d v _ N 3"� ^— o o m M ° 'o 3 = 3 m c? w °. = m s� v c _ a 3 o A c w S. c c 3 ^= y v v m n n o= A .a+ _ �_,' i °' n = m m m a '- w o N '^ w o. �• a o0 o r�o r3o m w c w n M n ' $ °_° w m %,u ° 1c, o w s o w N w v��, v c n w am o f �• S p n W to N M H ? m ° m 7 H w ^ m n =1 N -^i. n m p W w F j• _ V m '° o• < A. '-^ M �^ v °' `< m c. v r=o 3 a. m m o 00 a v ,�„ -- a. o ov _ F 3 a s o N w a ,� w c n m >? i o o a Copu 3 r a 3 0 a w m w a m m v_ `� v m '» a o w o a w a° o^ m o n- m v f p M o a Q fy m m n - y= o " a c m m CL o a w w o -• o� m L w <° n w oo �n °_ o m 3= w v .; m o 3 = d m - 0 3. >> o w o o Q. w m '" m = 0 � m e n° `° n m e O< N ao o. vo 0 c 3 o o w 3 3 m N m °— ?: n D 3 0?" w m c ? N n m io N ° i v+ 0 o f, 0 3 0 m 3 m m '^ T s a d r�^o N °—' _ m �n v w w c a ^^ �' w 3 0 0 ,mo, Q ro o io m m o o• '" °,°� 3 fD o < c fD 9 o n 3 'a c w w m 0 o °d m o 3 v 3- =, M c ou C 3 o w o� 3 m w to Vi H f C o ,C Q. o• 0- c Uo ca. m w N n m o' -= w � o w� w Q N R a m oco r� 2m^ _ 1D �. d d = iG m I< In Q. m - m O 00 d = m A IN O c a m o? v ^ s Ali o v d o Z w m °. v w o — "o m R, 3 n a v < �n oo �. m ,. n 7 m rr O C D O o v �•! n o• d m o w f_ c m y om m 3 N N O� -7 w n •Do O N F' !^ N ^ d = w = n d F �a co o w c — N w N n n > > c ^ ono a — °O c gr c w m aw a m m>> d 3 a C p' n c N_ Er 3 tl° n m 7 m O m Fck S. 'm Fr p S m o w �^ m v o a m a-o m c mo m m o m c n s n N ^, n v n n a n _ m m d w a 3 m� co w' P z °°. m m < c LAa m a w' o m y m w w ,a cQ o 03 v °^° w 3 30 o w a d o N N aca. F n w o a n n m n m m o G1 uo 06 S a- n m m n y= n rmo ? oo �c l< m m 5 _ m om 7 e 8 8 N �• .�^ p 0 X w N 0 W w ° y '< o:r a C m o N w N ^7 m �y m N y° 5< P 7 w w t� a 0. NMI W is 7 a e ES p m a o.96 Nv y° C w 1 m o a a` T° S o m 3± m G' n a v n m w v o. m � n m� o o v_ R ^ J o o J 3 m J J j Q w w o o ° o f 7 x pQj' a w C a a o a ^ o o m 7 N a fD n o< m S N O. n o o n w m o- - w w w= Sr c w w? J o 3 n cm n° o m w r<o• w on a m n n n c� o c°^ p a m 2 o c o w l x w m f m a o> o c o J J x n o o J o o r< a c o w a R a w J w o c m 3 w J J 3 c o J o J w _ fD m J N < Sr o0 m 0 oa w w o. w e n a� o- w �, m N ro o ,^� ?: m w m '° a n a r J m n- c J 3 m o m w J- m I`o o j E ° o ,^+ N A W d w 0°C m R C w y w n c A N << d p' A j d» C N J w Q rwi J o n Q d ? O R n m m o ° n - a 3 < cm, :E 0 3 ^ o N x v m vmi ^ w .mJ �, m v, m w m n. K c c fD F f I m J o o m- I v w fD— N 3 n, T w c v 'o < o a Jo o o w^ _ N N n J c^ 7 w fC o 7 H N w w c o c m N � o w .^+ - �. a' J n fD ° vl m T `" n N o �• m 0 -� Oyo m S x o n o N N 0 m n m x o m o 'o I 3 n y. w o J o c y o i o o J in m J oG J 3 ^ o S p OV ^ n a w 3 °• 00 ^. m°' 'v° 0 3' oo v� J o c ^. .^. o w m m p N n n n 0 J v v° o 0 J a j o n >- . 00 o o'Fo `° °° 3 y on cr H 3 ' N oo w r> o o w `a K ': kp: x 0O eb p S O io p' m O v, m o C o rj J w m p: m w 7 n m ,- uwi d a c o a� w>> m ao n N w o g- 3 p c c n N c m m n m m o w o m w o o m N 3 ^ v o m n O mm m w ^ g K m o ao v C J o 3 as J N n p' m :^ mW 'n O w y ? 3 ° o. i� o oQ o C C 7 0 5 O x' o w f�D G^�i j n n c J 1�PD w y ? 3 f d G J o o w �• ^ m m o N n' :m,n ^ mr n a oo m o o n W oo m -• N J S = n j oo 5 m Q w a m o a 2° w a w m c f rvo ro c n J a o n o ro -� o a w aw n o i< c m o- w w o n J 0 -q w o o 0' m 3 N o w c J o m n o a m ro N J a n m o o_ (m J y n. J^°= w 3 o n o m �e �' o o o^ su n =' �o c' o !� o a c w o y^ 3 m w. `m n° m oJo o N n J o ? m^ x m n w o 3 m o� m o f O_ J m m J O K C J J "` S J m w n n J m _ w o J n_ 0O 3° m T 'o x ry o a m 3 o N a v o w n C C ' n o J n J n w ouJ m< w v l O w J n y w o n m L m - o !D f1 m S of N N n 5 o o J c p, n N o n o n w 3o J= n 3 c N w m r<o '-" N J J ^ v c a m o W n m m o J o m n N m O x (CD w OJO !mD w 7' n n w f m� c -� n ? a ^ n H o J w w ?^ - ^ w -^'� J N -=- N p n C m '< y^� J O' m Vt j K o m - n K < 7 o a J m J n m N w � !^ w°� .. m n n S 3 J OQ w w 1` _. n J- x o n yi n o m o oo w !o 3' y me ,� ° o o x 3 H w w n y». o J ^. m m 3 D a w w o 0 3 3 w m- 3 o m n Q 00 c a c n v w w J w w m J m m ^ J o v w c S N N o o m 3 uo m 2 m o f 3 0• F m o ? a m w w f m rJo n o t, REINVENTING SECTION 24 The resulting master plan proposed a complete reinvention of Section 24, foreseeing the use of nearly the entire 64o-acre parcel. What little development there was on Section 34 had been located on the perimeter, due in large part to the absence of an interior street system. To counter this, Gruen acid his team planned to open up Section 14 by placing an "island" in the center of the square -mile block, accessible by a new main arterial road that bisected the parcel and led up to the island, wrapping around it and connecting to existing main streets (see p.142) The island was to be the heart of a commercial center, where resort hotels and a major shopping center with off-street parking would be grouped, drawing users to the area's inner sections. At the same time, Gruen envisioned the first major integrated golf course in Palm Springs, around and through which commercial and residential properties would harmoniously weave."s Like the island concept, the golf course was intended to make effective use of the inside spaces, which would naturally make them more valuable, especially those tracts placed directly on or immediately adjacent to the greens.i' In addition tothegolfcourse,spa, major resort hotels, retail shopping outlets, and residential spaces, Gruen's plan included a centralized gathering place called the Jacinto. Conceived as a multipurpose facility, this point of rendezvous would have three primary uses: community center, health and recreation center, and convention center. Discussions about a convention center in Palm Springs had long been underway, but had yielded nothing due to the absence of an economic feasibility study. Gruen's model proposed viability on the basis that the complex would have one convention center that would be jointly shared by the various resort hotels. His plan even took into account space for an elementary school and churches. The extant tribal cemetery was to remain without alteration, while a new tribal headquarters was proposed, calling for a main building dedicated to tribal administration and a secondary structure setaside for managing the tribe's leasingand othercommercial affairs. Nearby, a third and separate locale would serve as a space for US government offices. In his final master plan, Gruen identified three of the most difficult challenges: the existing allotment grid, the still -limited lease periods for Indian land (fifty years instead of ninety-nine years), and the current inhabitants of and "blighted" conditions on Section 14117 The historic manner in which this Indian land had been divided created allotments that formed a rigid geometric pattern, which was unsuitable, in parts, for Gruen's more organic master plan. In order to gain greater flexibility, Gruen and his team explored options for adjusting this framework withoutjeopardizi ng individual ownership rights. "The premise on which our master plan is based," he wrote, "is thatthe Indian allottees retain full legal rights to their holdings but that the plan of development need not 40 YOU CANT EAT DIRT "29 O:i 31 32 33 ?i i 34 35 i ' I ! 42 41 (� , 39, B 3T I J 38 i ! j ! 1 1 L' 2D1 f )2 64 L TI •� OLIVIA • I Is - 1 AMADC W , c r '- li ANDREI d E r_ TANCIUIT 1 ARENAS i i u l _ i ' z — --- — BAARIST i 1 'L SATURN] 1 `--- — — Ii a o o o w5 6N - a c v w c w w -i n a v w a Ou `°°u,°, `o1=o<II mmm m `m�' rNoOdn `o�o mApD _•. in °° n>j . rm w m c v°_.CX=^n?. ^PNo o > n ?' .aRo voo c 0�• 0 3o^ �wm aDoo fUD v,n=j m a ow_ m m oO 3 M n OU, o °o mon N m c vm d M- m < NZ o wn m m C oN7o� wmn o N mYUG. F<cpi; wlu o N ao - - m< m o Ao t im 3 0"a , wm m Nw m m cm 3 d7' 0 m°-"n ss P o n 3 w a o oo p ^ w o f NFr EL m o ` ° m 9mu ° v3t1l Mn o m mo c' m v 3 K N r? m m n o g �. c �..a n r '� o w °' �', ro v n rn 3' w m Cr0° ?; wa m v c° n� f m b o a o a m w w n o r < w Pi m m n n n° w w c w^ 3 N N° N c< r<o rm' n °° 3 o 3o oa 3 w c° 0 an m 3 y P L o<-o s o n ° o m '» n o ID Mo - o o v a c o °. ° r' om z w n n^ 3 N m c w o m o v c 3 m o n a+ O n 0 v n 3 ao w m a w' w n m on m? a m y m _ o N m °0 0 oo w ci 3 c a `� oo a n o 0 o w m T m �+ o- N m s 3 '^ - n > m m o s '+ n C 3 3 m N y < m °O - 3 o m 00 o w m °$ m o m p �° a oo v 3 m^IU <>> a M 3 o n r<o D° o" v an `< j < m a n ro o o c in D K T u, m v n a O o v � O c c 3 vi �• mm a w y o? ? o l M P�+ w e ro o m C o ca f o v o o m m v m w 0 w o m w o M o o m n ^ o- v�-i• v a ^. rn c N Q m r- L1 m a c. _ rb �• n m ^o �• m < m o C o m r3o I o`°a x° c o -' o N w e < m ^ a n m m 0 3 3 3 °-' m x c > > 0 3 o ao °O �c m m 3 3 f m w ? 0 0 °< Q^ m o Q c m m a x o c m m n o n m o m c 0 m 3 a o m m m n^ 'w•. 0 o vw�i O �< m ry N vmaf t�i•1 0 Q m V o in `" ^ " o R O n v. w N NO O. O W o D m w m o N o o o v a m m a c= p� N cm �' d° � o v o� i 5. � <m o > > °q = v v oo a n n v m a o o a<° v w o m m o m o ui K a m 3 a° o N y o n oc c n o o°>> m m m< m 7' c n Sr U x� C o O in rl 7 1n � a m 0 00 0o m n m c n= `° w `� s w^ Sm^ n T n_ v a n n 2o 3 3 n v m ? o ro j r: o° o c o. Q Q m c, o m o w -� -• ° c o a ru ° ^ Cl.c o m m m - o O o ° m m v m . m n a c s w 0 n 3 o v, o� w m o� °' v � w o= .�- w n m m i c m m m o o m w ro o_ c N F w v n n fD N m .. c, o m c o m o4 v m 0 o '° .^» n^ 3 o fD N 3= N I o S< v M 'o p O n -- c° 3 v o o O O C O m a O - w C is m m o y a H a C r. o - z O m w uc, C- q m °: c- o�?; o 0-� o o. R o. m w m.- Q .^ ^. N v 23 m 3 w rro o w' '» l< w =r wa wn o poo - amn o a m nm p- n om wo oa0 a0o c cNo°asr co o c wo m 0w�a o a S. 0 g o ^_f w m 3 n onomw 3o m m <m n w CF. in Glm 3 ^ m 3 o= m McQ > m m mw w .m ro m 0 mo mo0O a mn ^- non ° > o w io w m v o v n W o c n° 3 m m � 0 `° o a w 0 o m w n 0 7 a o o n 3 3 0> o- a<? = m LA m n o c n>> o w 0 °c m s o x ro w l r'o < a o 0 N; o N . o m v= w m ° o= c v 3^- o m o m m. ID m m c CL m 0 3= w< n w v rc', `= a s> ? ?_ 3 a w o o c N• m n �' 3' m m rn00 m w c 3 oa w w �o m oo w m s n w r° c < m m c as ao p O N 0 S (D a n U C n N m C F 7 O m n ^ m N a_. 3 m n °c aq 3 3° o< > j o c 0 o v =r a v-° n w m: m v< m n< n m m? o n^ m n w 3 W 3. m 0, ° c o 0 aoo a o? AJ o y `m. a o o a' o n 3 :: c m a N y _ S rp rc. Q 1 0 7 o C Ta C W 7 ao m v`n a m ."'» m s — m - v o m m m Q c G1 3 c v, .< O N m oa r mw n D n - m a '* nr w 3 n x o v o �. ci o Q w F n `< 1 w ro 3 v� m C w v, 3 n m m m a ro x R w v o a+ c m O x m 0 0 0- .< ^, r�o v w o- n M n o a o 0 n n- GQ m 3 m N a 3 c n v c m^ o ° = 0 3 ro m_ o �c m m ?; m e 'n >� m 0 v m o_ 0> o f f.0 a o n m x 3 O a m < v n o o3. ? v^i p m o° m < M w m m< m C < o rD O 01 m 1 <. m= c r�o p w m c O o0 m n w n ry 3 n r� 3 0 n m m o s n w -, 0 s m = 3 a• a o v m m. 3 n o n w, ' - m i - -, v; m w n o. S s 3 m< n a c' i n n m f D c o00 o N m a o o s f° s ° w o. �' o a c 3 °: °� 0 3 0- o, n n o - o o o w o m a Q o m m ^ < < F fD d o S '� w S N w C n o rl n m n a 7 R n o y 7' m w O n x o o a m *. m m o m o as o w w 3- m v v " w ? m v a o m °: o w s �c n n 0_ n m ?, s a• vu m w v -+ c to a m 0 ° 3 n 0 o- o 0 0� n y ^. m° = " n m o `< 0 w a< n m m m 0• ^. o' ^ w o v o m °' n� cm m m n m o o c Cm 3 m R m n °° n o v m n- 0 a 3 0 '? s m o° c 3 m o+ s s? w j °' w< o m `° °c° o a 0 ro n a ^ T o m v 2 o a v c n? .9 0 o m- W_, ao = m 0O o o O N v� $u 04 °' -� o w w a no v a w n w w m a? m° p S` mcr ? w o �• c, c. ^ _. m ^. w _ m n r G o ^+ n o m n y v w- 3 a^ N m< n o w 3 0 3 mCL - m c m w o m n < v c c oo o Q a m m 3 v K a o m o ^ m m o v o o n Gl m n w c m O n uw nv, `a 3 in w 0 n o = F 3 y w �c 0- an F m m 0=0 �'_^ N N ^ o m `G N 7 °v+° o O. C. 7 ,^e :� vmi 2 .�^+ N + Q f r�D o vOi 2 p' Q. rwi v�i• �' 0'O G 14 as a "blighted area."131 Charles German, local director of the BIA who succeeded Ned Mitchell, described parts of the square -mile tract as "one of the worst slums I've ever seen. A lot of development has bypassed the city because of the legal technicalities which have delayed subdivision of the tract "137 At the same time, a local realtor was quoted as saying it was a "cancerous growth"138 Newspaper writer George Ringwald painted a vivid picture of the city sector in a pivotal article titled "Section 14 Big Bottleneck in Palm Springs Growth"�39 "It is an area without recognized public streets," he wrote, "where, indeed, street names have been applied to what are no more than rutted dirt lanes, leading nowhere. Homes are deathtraps of tinder -dry wood where families crowd in on one another in unsanitary profusion. Garbage and trash litter backyards and vacant lots. Beer cans are strewn along roadways. It is a breeding place for crime and vice.... In any community, the area would be a disgrace.."u, A keen observer of the Section 14 dilemma, Ringwald, like Gruen, felt that a solution was not the responsibility of the tribe alone. "The problem of what to do with Section 3.4—and at times it must seem insurmountable to even the most ardent optimists —is not that of the Indians alone," he wrote.141 Because of Section 14's critical role in the future growth of Palm Springs, and because, after having been incorporated in 1938, the city had assumed certain limited jurisdiction over the Indian lands within its borders, Ringwald believed that the local government should take the lead.141 Olinger, too, was vocal in her effort to encourage the city to take action for the interests of the Section 14 residents. Ringwald reported that, in an official meeting before the city fathers, she "told the City Council here today that it is going to have to face up to the dual problem of relocating the resort city's low-income minority groups and providing some low-income housing for them"143 Olinger asked the mayor and city council members: "What are we going to do about low-income housing?"ub "It's a problem that has to be faced"145 Since the tribe did not have the financial resources to relocate residents and build them new housing —one of the many reasons it was seeking economic development through longer -term leasing —it presented an alternative. Olinger told members of the city council that the tribe could supply a site if the city could finance the construction.A6 As Ringwald noted, however, this generous offer received little acknowledgment, and even worse, no action. City Manager Robert Peterson replied, saying that he had tried to interest three developers in building low-income housing in the area, but the discussions went nowhere since these businessmen felt that the land in the resort city was too valuable to use for low-income housing. To that, Ray Jackson, acting director of the local Bureau of Indian Affairs, added: "We can see the day rapidly approaching when we're going to have to clear off this land to make it available for long-term leasing. We would like to see something done now in planning for housing for these people before they're faced with a crisis. We don't want to just move these people out 42 YOU CAN'T EAT DIRT in the street, but if it comes to a choice, the Indians are just going to have to be cold-hearted and take their property for better use"147 The record shows that Olinger made every effort to find a workable option for the residents of Section 14, most notably in offering the city a piece of Indian land for the construction of low-income housing. For her, the clearing of Section 14 was not about race or class. After all, she had lived on Section 14duringher childhood,among thediverse population of working-class blacks, Latinos, whites, and Indians, and understood from where she came. She also understood that, even though many Indians had moved away from the area by this time, some remained and she realized that they would be subject to the same trauma of displacement and relocation. She didn't wantthem or anyone else to sufferas a result of the tribe's development plans for Section 14. Over the years, she had watched her ancestral homeland degrade due to onerous laws and government neglect. Asa tribal leader, her aim was to turn this around. She addressed the current inhabitants and subpar living standards on Section 14 from the subjective perspective of Indians as minorities seeking the freedom to exercise their rights and create economic opportunities for themselves and their children by preparing for a development project on Indian land that was conceived and executed by Indians. For her, that was the only racial dimension. She has said, "It didn't matter what color skin the residents had; they could haveall been purple! The issue was,this was our land and we had a right to develop it" 41 Olinger believed in the principle of being able to upgrade Section i4, but was perfectly in sync with Gruen in searching for constructive solutions to this complicated issue.�69 In concluding his master plan, Gruen emphasized to Olinger, the Tribal Council, and all tribal members that its implementation depended on tribal members working together. "We believe this cooperation need only consist of adoption of the master plan by all members"1$0 Going forward, this unified purpose would still mean that all further aspects of the development would be subject to the personal choice of individual allottees, regardless if they chose to negotiate their leases with a single developer or a group of developers, or to combine their allotments with those of other tribal members in order to form a single group of allottees, or a "unit" In other words, all members of the tribe had to agree to the principle of developing Section 14 according to the improvements suggested by Gruen & Associates, but, beyond that, all other aspects of the development would remain an individual concern, guided by personal preference.151 In this way, Gruen and Olinger were intent on maintaining the discrete property rights of tribal members. "The allottees have the freedom of choice," wrote Gruen.lil Within the conceptual and practical framework of the plan, tribal members would be able to negotiate the sale or lease of their property as they saw fit. The result would be an integrated, planned development created through sale or lease agreements made by each tribal member. In addition to urging cooperation, Gruen made a special effort to inform tribal members of their options for development, even though he acknowledged that these recommendations fell outside the purview of planning. He did so given the unique challenges presented by developing this Indian land. He also encouraged the tribe to obtain legal and economic advice. With that caveat, he proceeded to discuss how tribal members could involve either a single developer or multiple developers working together to execute the various parts of the plan as devised, two different methods by which, he said, "the developer must take the initiative "�53 He clearly pointed out, however, that there was an alternative by which "the Indian may take the initiative."1so In this scenario, Gruen explained that the tribe as a whole could, having first adopted the master plan, put it out to bid. The bid structure would have a minimum and would require that the tribe accept the highest offer. Gruen noted that this was a "technique now standard among cities involved in redevelopment or urban renewal work." 1ss In the end, he frankly admitted, "We do not believe it to be the ideal method for this particular case (actually, we do not believe it to be entirely satisfactory in urban renewal work either)"i56 His primary reason for warning the tribe about this "accepted and more -or -less standard method" is that it would result in a loss of landownership rights for tribal members because it would require each allotted Indian to agree to abide by an overall tribal agreement?57 "No longer would the individual Indian have any control over who developed his property or how much [emphasis in the original document] that person would pay, providing it was the highest amount offered that was above the minimum"156 Given its various, complex development options, Gruen exhorted that the single greatest arena for discussion about the master plan should be within the tribe itself. By the time he had submitted his final version, he was aware that some tribal members had already rejected the concept and that there were differing perspectives within the tribe on how best to manage and develop the Indian land in Palm Springs.159 Coupled with the obstacles inherent to developing Section 14, these differences made the process particularly difficult. Gruen's last paragraph of his master plan acknowledges these divergent viewpoints: "We recognize that probably the most important single phase —and one which cannot be discussed here —is the resolution of aims and goals of the Indian owners on an individual and personal basis. Varying economic circumstances and varying political and social views tend to cause great variation in not only the end but also the means."i60 Gruen also stressed his point that timing is all important in land development, presenting the tribe with an agenda to consider for negotiating with potential lessees. "We would estimate," he wrote, "that it could not be less than go days and, because of the urgency of the situation, we would urge that it not exceed six months. In order to meet this time schedule, an intensive public relations program will be required "161 Olinger and the Tribal Council worked diligently to effect the timely and frank discussions for which Gruen called. They made multiple copies of the Gruen master plan and sent a sample by certified mail to each adult tribal member and then scheduled special meetings to review it.,', Olinger and the Tribal Council also launched a major media campaign. They prepared a press release and distributed it to all the leading newspapers and radio stations. In February lgs8, they strategically held a press conference, not in Palm Springs but in Los Angeles, at the Hilton Hotel, thinking that this central location would make the news accessible to more journalists. Their effort paid off in that their plans received significant press coverage (see p.157). During that same period, Olinger and the Tribal Council also held a daylong informational event on the reservation in order to stimulate interest in Section 14 and its master plan. They invited nationally prominent real estate developers, bankers, and businessmen for a detailed presentation of the plan, a bus tour of Section 3.4, and a panel discussion. Officiating at the conference were Olinger; Ben Southland of Gruen & Associates; the area director of the BIA, Leonard Hill; the local officer of the BIA, Charles German; and tribal attorney Ray Simpson. If an outside team of planning professionals envisioned Section 14 in a way never before imagined and the attendant media attention brought national awareness to the extraordinary development opportunities on Indian land in Palm Springs, these fast-moving and forever -changing forces may have intimidated some tribal members. By the time of the special tribal meeting in January 1958, the master plan had already encountered opposition, and as a result, the assembled tribe was unable to reach common agreement. The reasons for resistance ranged from ignorance, confusion, and apprehension about the master plan to concerns that an allotted tribal member might do better financially by holding out and trying to develop, lease, or sell his or her property independently. A review of the minutes for that meeting shows that no specific determination was made either way, revealing instead an interesting hesitancy about the Gruen master plan. "Although the proposed plan is in no way mandatory or binding upon the allottees," states the record, "all interested investors are invited to contact the Palm Springs Office of the BIA, thereby allowing consideration of bids and alternative proposals"i63 This willingness on the part of the tribe to contemplate other planning designs, since the Gruen master plan was not "mandatory," suggests a lack of commitment to the Gruen plan. This uncertainty carried forward in the tribal minutes for February lgs8 when a decision was again not forthcoming, and, instead, a recommendation was made suggesting further meetings between the tribe and the city's planning department in order to discuss the Gruen plan.164 The tribe's delay in making a decision about the master plan prompted Gruen and his colleagues to ignore their own advice about refraining from offering specific development strategies, as these were outside the purview of a tribal planner. On March lo,1958, Dan Branigan wrote Olinger and the Tribal Council one of the firm's last substantive OF TWO WORLDS, YET OF ONE MIND 43 letters on the subject, saying "because of our earnest desire to see the proposed development on Section 14 become a reality... we have taken it upon ourselves to outline the various courses of action we believe may be taken at this time"16s Hoping to assuage the concerns of tribal members, he included a list of approaches by which the tribal members could consider moving forward with the Gruen master plan. His suggestions augmented those tactics already touched on in the master plan, while they also offered new possibilities, all itemized in a pro -versus -con format. Fresh options included forming a land development company in which each allottee would become a shareholder, approximate to the appraised value of his or her lands, or engaging atribal business manager who would work out the lease terms with each individual allottee and then negotiate for the tribe as a whole in accordance with the plan. With this determined effort, Gruen & Associates encouraged Olinger and the Tribal Council by saying that "there are always holdouts in any development of this magnitude and Section 14 will be no exception," and "that the plan could be adjusted to address the'holdouts' as long as their land was not in critical locations or their holdings were not extensive"166 A week later, Branigan followed up these specifics with a letter that advised Olinger and the Tribal Council against meeting with the city planning officials, arguing "that until the tribe comes to an agreement among themselves as to what their course of action will be, any meeting with the city would be disastrous to the tribe" He was concerned that the city could take advantage of the tribe's hesitancy by seeking "certain concessions" based on an impression government officials might get that tribal members were not in full agreement.167 Beyond that, Gruen and his team felt the clock ticking. Fully aware of the dynamic of timing in land development, they could sense that the opportunity for the tribe to develop Section 14 under a unifying plan might be slipping away. In retrospect, early 1958 was a critical turning point in the Gruen master plan story. From that moment forward, doubts about a unified scheme began to solidify among some tribal members. Tribal minutes of the period show that consideration of the plan started to taper off as its complexities began to overwhelm. At the same time, suspicion became an equal partner with complexity. Even though the Gruen plan was Indian driven —conceived and promoted by Olinger and the Tribal Council with input from the tribe —there were tribal members who distrusted it. Given the tribe's history with land dispossession and disputes over rights and jurisdiction, there were those who justifiably harbored lingering fears about if and how a plan of this magnitude would materialize. There were others who evidently did not trust their fellow tribal members. Perhaps the single greatest reason that the Gruen master plan was rejected in its fullest form was human nature. Fear —of change, of the unknown, and of one another —was, once again, a powerful countervailing force in the fight to modernize the tribe. Olinger has referred to the Gruen master plan as "Vyola's Flop," feeling that she failed in explaining its intricacies. 44 YOU CAN'T EAT DIRT Yet as Gruen himself observed, development on Indian land presented "specialized problems"168 No matter the amount of explanation, the various development options were simply too difficult to comprehend and too dependent on past historical events and enemies to assuage anxiety. Gruen's urging for "cooperation" among tribal members seems like foreshadowing. This plea appears throughout his master plan but is most forcefully reiterated in the final paragraph: "While we have sincerely attempted to devise a plan for the highest and best use of the land and still maintain a maximum of flexibility and independence of individual action, there remain nevertheless, many areas of cooperation"i69 Gruen concluded this passage and thus the master plan with this sentence: "Without this cooperation through resolution of differences, no plan — the one we propose or any other —can ever become a reality."170 Other important factors shifted the tides, creating a perfect storm. During early 1958, the tribe's fight for equalization and longer -term leasing intensified, particularly as the federal government attempted to seize sacred tribal reserves for equalizing land allotments. Naturally, this turn of events drew attention away from the Gruen master plan. Tribal minutes and resolutions from this time evince a waning focus. By July 19sB, news reports confirmed that the plan of "sticking together and leasing [Section:14) on asection-wide basis" had failed.171 "In Sacramento this week," said reporter John Beckler of the Associated Press, "Bureau Area Director Leonard Hill admitted that plans for developing the section as a single package had fallen through."171 Beckler added, "Real estate people now are faced with the problems of dealing with the Indians on an individual basis and developing in a piecemeal fashion"�13 CREATING THE PALM SPRINGS SPA Olinger and her all -women Tribal Council had wisely prepared for this possible outcome. Long before the tribe became engrossed in the complexities of equalization and before fears of the Gruen master plan took root, they had been managing several interrelated development initiatives in order to ensure success in some form or another. While working on the Gruen master plan, they had been cultivating the inaugural long-term lease of Indian land: the lease for what became the Palm Springs Spa. understanding that the Gruen master plan may not go forward in its fully conceived form, but rather in parts over time, they deliberately concentrated their energies first on its spa component, promoting it as a related but independent project (Fig. 27). This was a logical course of action, given that the mineral hot springs was the tribe's single most important and valuable natural asset. For Olinger, creating a brand new upscale spa on Palm Springs' Section 14 would be a cultural and business triumph for the tribe. Regardless if it were part of roily enterprise Friday, Feb. 7, 1958 B-) r An: Effort to Improve Chairman Viola Olinger of the Palm ;Springs eIgua Caliente Indian Tribal'tatincil is in tt"ashington seek. ing Federal approval for the tribe to lease .its -historic hot water springs in downi"wn Palm Springs for a maior resort. ,development. The tribal council says it cannot describe the proposed development to the press yet but --we hope the Federal government finds grounds to ap- prove it. The hot water springs which huh. ble up from an earthquake fault in the center of thwresort city were the original attraction to Palm Springs. Thcy should be developed along.with the later attractions which have made Palm Springs world famous. As this newspaper's Palm Springs news bureau reports, such a develop- ment would not only increase the In- dians' income and be an asset to the community, it could well be the springboard for the development of the entire square mile of Indian land v`hich surrounds the springs and has fain fallow in the midst of lush earl growth. Fig. 17 Above left, Press coverage of Olinger lobbying for the first long-term lease of Indian land. The lease pertained to the eight acres on Section r4, in the heart of Palm Springs, where Samuel Banowit eventually built the Palm Springs Spa. The Daily Enterprise, February 7,1gS8. Fig. 28 Above right, Press announcement of the first long-term lease of Indian land. In a historic agreement, the tribal hot springs and the surrounding eight acres were leased by the Agua Caliente Cahuilla to developer Samuel Banowit for the purpose of an upscale spa and adjoining hotel. Los Angeles Herald B Express, February 13, 2958. Los ArVI s Oerald Il lamss Tbondey, Feb.13,1968 • California Mission Tribe Signs Pact Lease Indian Spring For Swanky Spa Mission Indians of Palm Springs today leased an eight -acre plot in the heart of the resort town, where a 200-room $1,700,000 hotel will be built around the original hot springs, a grand scheme to start, she and the Tribal Council were convinced that a modern health resort would surely encourage further development in other areas of this prized parcel, and thus would lead to fulfilling the dream of the Gruen master plan, if only in stages. More importantly, they believed that creating the Palm Springs Spa as the signature property in the reinvention of Section 14 would lead to economic growth and well- being for the tribe. In his "hypothetical tour" of Section 14—written as the prologue to his master plan —Gruen had imagined the spa as it would be ten years in the future, after carrying out the plan. He wrote that the tribal hot springs, "originally a clear, sandy pool into which mineral water bubbled from a rock fault deep below," were "now contained in an elaborate establishment, combining pools, gardens, screens and buildings"3' Keeping this grand vision foremost in their minds, Olinger and the Tribal Council were as determined as ever to maximize the benefits of this individual development opportunity. During the summer of 19S8, when Olinger was in the national spotlight as a woman tribal leader, hailed as the "Lady Chief" in charge of making "one of the biggest real estate deals" ever on Indian land, the economic potential of the tribe's mineral hot springs was grasped by the media.�75 Associated Press columnist John Beckler acknowledged that the Gruen master plan had been turned down in its largest expression, but noted that the spa element had "received a tremendous boost" when the respected Chicago developer Samuel W. Banowit had leased eight acres of tribal land, including the mineral hot springs, in order to build The site, part of a 640-acre plot owned by the tribe and its members, is located at In- dian ave. and Tahquitz dr. It was secured on a 50•year lease by the aNtional Proper, ties Inc. and the Indians will get a rental of $36,000 a year plus 5 per cent of the gross. The deal was announced jointly at a press confer- ence in the tSatler Hotel by Samuel W. Banowit of Los Angeles, president of the corporation, and Mrs. Viola Olinger, ebairman of the Aqua Caliente and Mis. sion Indian Council. Other representatives of the tribe attended and their attorney, Ray Simpson, an- nounced that the federal and state governments had ap- proved. work is beginning Ion. medlately and the new hotel Is expected to open neXt Jan. uary. The mineral waters at 164 natural temperature will be a feature of the new spa and will be used in several pools, but the spring itself will be bridged and glass -covered and maintained as a monument for the Indian tribe. a 52 million spa and S1.7 million hotel (Fig. 28).176 Beckler understooi that even without the fully realized Gruen plan, the tribe stood to di well, referencing a recent financial analysis of its land. He reported tha "things are looking up. A 1956 appraisal of the [Agua Caliente Cahuilla property fixed the average per capita assets at $339,577 or S764,049 pe family."177 He went on to point out that the city, "squeezed in between , io,000 foot mountain and the surrounding Indian lands," had nowher, else to expand but on Indian land, so the spa project —alone ortied to th, Gruen master plan —was key to the tribe seizing its economic future 178 Called se-khi (boiling water) in Cahuilla, the mineral hot spring originate deep below the Coachella Valley from an intricate web of Paul lines, most notably the San Andreas, with their heat and mineralizatioi being the result of ongoing seismic activity.i19 For the Agua Calient Cahuilla, this natural wonder —surrounded by abundant groves of paln trees —was magical, and it served as the tribe's physical and spiritua center —a sacred place Leo The hot springs soon became the essentia point of attraction for the firstwhite settlers whoclearly recognizedthei inherent value. Brevet Captain loss Romero offered the earliest writtei account of these bubbling waters, recording them in his diary and calling them "agua caliente," when he and his team of Mexican military explorer: were looking for an overland route from Sonora, Mexico, to California during 1813-16. Ever after, these rejuvenating waters fascinated future pioneers of the Palm Springs area. From the 185os, when the Bradshav Stage Coach Line located a stop at the springs, to the 188os, when Judgi OF TWO WORLDS, YET OF ONE MIND John Guthrie McCallum moved from the foggy climes of San Francisco to the warm, dry desert, primarily to help his ailing tubercular son, the mineral hot springs gained increasingly as a draw. In i886, interested in capitalizing on this wellness trend, Dr. Wellwood Murray created the region's first lodging establishment —the Palm Springs Hotel —across from the mineral springs so that he could offer his guests the water's health benefits, and, by extension, advertise the healing powers of his new resort. In the early twentieth century, the burgeoning Southern California film industry, just two hours away by car and an easy skip by plane, came to see Palm Springs as a deluxe getaway for health, fitness, and beauty. In 2928, the luxury hotel El Mirador opened its doors and Hollywood celebrities, including Douglas Fairbanks, Mary Pickford, and Lillian Gish, were seen on its elaborate grounds, establishing early ties between thedesert resortand moviestars and others ofthe international elite. By the 3.95os, the now well-known "movie colony" of Palm Springs was firmly in place, with such A -list luminaries as Frank Sinatra and Bob Hope maintaining second homes in the area. In this extravagant milieu, Olinger found herself appropriately focused on creating the first luxury spa in Palm Springs. Upgrading and enlarging the tribal hot springs had been a priority for Olinger and the Tribal Council since 1952. In the Tribal Council's first Annual Progress Report, issued that year under Lorene McGlamaryand Olinger's leadership, they singled out this wonder of nature as the focus of their attention for a future development project, stating, "The Council is planning to improve and expand the present facilities in order to realize the full potential of the springs as a community asset" (see P. 93).'s' Their commitment to renovating the tribal hot springs provided a major catalyst for modernizing the outdated federal leasing laws that had long controlled the reservation. The historic General Leasing Act, or Public Law 255, which was enacted in August 1955, was developed by Olinger and the Tribal Council initially to accommodate the creation of the Palm Springs Spa. Without tenable lease terms, they knew the tribe would be unable to attract quality developers and investors. Despite the extraordinary achievement of P.L. 255, Olinger and the Tribal Council began immediately mobilizing for revised legislation, arguing that the fifty-year total lease term under P.L. 255 was inadequate and that, as Gruen recommended in his plan, it should be upgraded to the originally proposed lease term of ninety-nine years. In January 1956, they prepared a tribal resolution stating, "Public Law 255 does not permit sufficient lease tenure to obtain the investment capital needed for the full and highest economical development of the eight acres of Tribal land including the Mineral Springs ... we do hereby restate that we favor and urgently recommend the passage of... a 99 year lease term"3, Olinger and the Tribal Council members then gathered testimonials from local businesses and financial institutions, presenting them to the federal government and pointing out their common belief 46 YOU CAN'T EAT DIRT IN DEEP COTFki[SA77v• I—' I`— I•••,...v_ ,. ,-" securing lisnger leases on IncDl InEiian l..I.as, S. dill. The lacy countID Iza to [ . SLllalµah lilN'ilil:ncan,[hcyrcnD�atiDnof the PFit4ic11 �lsrdirTn the a �ernmLHilyinrllesi=xtion for sSitl�9ear leasc4 Ijiks wilt Agan Ca11COU 'rribitl Council x'ith i1w hope 111a} it would pass Con;ress dris l'I4airman Y5'vla r)iir:ker and liareau of Indian year. II)OCIL Sun P1IoI01- rig.29 Olinger conversing with Samuel Banowit, developer of the Palm Springs Spa, and Leonard Hill, Bureau of Indian Affairs area director from Sacramento, about securing longer -term leasing for Indian land in Palm Springs. The Desert Sun, April 26,19S8. that "a lease period as near permanency as possible (is needed] to ensure the highest and most economical development of this potentially valuable resource. 's3 Meanwhile, Olinger had been speaking with investors about the spa project. In fall 19s6, after a year of talks with various businessmen and bankers that led nowhere, she opened discussions with the Chicago -based financier and developer Samuel Banowit, who had been described as "A Man Who Makes Dreams Come True" (Fig. 29).194 Trained as a lawyer, Banowit "stumbled into real estate," as he liked to say, after the Great Depression, eventually enjoying professional success in his new and unexpected career. As president of National Properties, Inc., headquartered in Chicago, he had real estate holdings spanning from New York to Los Angeles. At the time Olinger and the Tribal Council were seeking investors and builders for their spa resort, Banowit was in charge of a modern, state-of-the-art construction project in Beverly Hills, and its proximity brought him to Olinger's attention?ts In several important ways, Banowit was an ideal match for Olinger. His proclivity a� 0 0 0 0 ran ° m 3 3 r3o � a > > � o N a 7 a7o � o w o• '" a >• � � f v °' �, n N n W c= ro `� c c o m `, _ o m F n w 7 a w n `< ° r7o rw^. `° '" 7 W n 7 ^ 3 w^p vn n m o W u= < o n 3 00 00 c w^ o n W N j n 7 w 7 3 a c n <_ N N G N << W O a c O7O n 7 f D N a N 00 ry ? N O W P! w = o s o W ^ 0. N v 0• a m 7o m x- 7c 7 y o m n m 3 m c w 7 o N c n 7, w, n 7 w v� p a- a v n 3 s v S c m n O 7 �n 0° - o w a n w a n ,p 7• ^ 3 T m w N Co 5. a m o 0 7a o 3 o m '° rmo 0- w m < n n 3 0 f 7 m D 0 0 3 C a 7 N N d N n 7 K W N v 3 m 7 N W M _ Vo 0.i T H r N � F., W a r� m 3 p, m o v m �c o o• 7 m tu m ro m a w 7 7 < w 7 m 7 w u, W e 3 3 o < o '� .2. m 3 o N c v = n < p v oo A 3 s< 7 v w o N ° c Q 3 M o 4 A F o �o <o � �° .^m+ � N a Sa M w a d 'a w w w o N� m 0 c m n ^ m ,7. ° = 7 ^ m n c G x W n m N ^ `l O m H 7- 7. fD v p' iC-. v w 7 " 7: m ° f w m ^. m c m 7° 0 7 v o F m m o m w m m o w- w v 3 w n 7 0 C S= O w >• j .w. o N S n n n < S m N .7. S m n W a O n N n 7 m M m 7 v v m 7 a w w o c a m 7 m i o o m m W Fi w 7a ^. o n ^. �p s A o m n p: N QCO -m.. O: n Vl y o ^ m m 7 ry S 7 v o j W >' S ^ o C w W K w '� m ° ^ W Ri 0 3 m 4 ^° 0 m— r m 3 m a ^+ v N 3 o w i o. n N>> m w n w 0 m M ^, D w c 3 3 Q M a° m o m y o a m < Q? v wNo T s u o m Q o 0 0 0 N y do m vw °. o 7 3p 3 0 w ?: �7 w f o W< s a o w n o o n n 7 w ' w v c c m e m m w 3 c o 7 m n 7 1 j °° o o f a w o 0 3 n m m m= ro, W p, ^° S 7 N N m v� a o• 7 wn m 00 0 v 7 N 0 0< ° p `i w p H a o m cm) � m °'+ a o+ W v° m w x o m v �n p' - 3 c m n 7 :E a s c v r. m c N R c ° �; w ;t 7 - r� n ro 'p m n "' 'p o m p' o .. n °' c '^ c °, rcp n m -., o s- m 0- n N m o 7 3 4 m g o N 7 c O< n ,n n a 3 .. c m? m v 7 p iv T .: ° o n 3 ; m c `- > j W7 v w o° w n w c 7 N N- m c c S m n N O W °• O f w m m o a W ^. O m 7 W a < N 7 7 !D m rr S= w G ° m N m S S K O `t w m = C m p �< m o m n m m O n 7 vi 7 N V w F n' — O S w C �G •O 'r N N 3 •O S m 7 C W w m 7 fD W a Vi n m- 7 m o 7 y � o n o n 3 N m 7 n w o 7 a c S. m W a ao a c 3 woo v M m n < o= w n w w _. ?_ w io a 7- 3 w N W N w o w m a n o- oo w 7 p, o n< 7 m v ^ �. w N m n c f Q 3 m v< 7 n Gl G 5 O m N O N 7^. n D N N m H n n O n m 7 N '� A fu S cm m m ° 7. '+ 7 m 7! 7 vci rco - 7 3= 0O a° 3 m °-' o w °' m ?; f N c v o .. 3 '. to a 3 0 w' w m s w n 4 _0 n !p m N 3 7 n d? N Vf O. ui 1? ° K n d 7 N 7 K m Fb 7 w f^0 N 7 27"' 7 w iu 0 n o "0 v° O O n m c OF n = n w m v 7 on m=0?? S. w c 0 N a 'n o. n o o m N w m Sr a a c Q 49 EL m w o o° 3 w C.�G n !D A-0 0 N �.•. W O 0 ^ 'M '0 m .^i m N N v < S? o m n F S. n^ m N ° vw—i u7i i 3 C n v n N . w n = N K ^ w n f D r<o •^» ? ? .lw^» H L S N c N •O w 0`No n n w? 7 m m ° C O w w 7 O p- 7 3 S n 7 C fD p 3 n w 3 T W m y .c. c o ro �n m << m n `� n n 7 io ,_, s o w o io 3 m o r 3 7 M 7 3 w o w n 3 o m 0 _ n p 7 x N v a m 3 fD. O G In 7 O A m m w O _ n 0= m m= x a S< Vi V n m In O o a 7 Sp ° f 3 m 3 m o a m c 7 p w 3 0 7 n N N z m a? m op a o N o m- m v m o7 - w' n w o w w o a o m m o n w c o 3 m N m' a w 0 n 0 v m v w m m M o o '� u s e D 7o 3 �' N m .n ° m w n m w 3 m? n a? 3 W7 % v w w �, w o r0 v= N° n m o n 3o f < a, 3 0 < m N m n m o 0 0 o a n w 0 0 7" o70 3 m M o < o o `A a o nw s v o^ R 3 w a .cN. c m oni X n %< Co N m o M 7 n D v 7 cu <> n ju m n n _� -a' o `o _n d ^ f° c °• v= i v n m �, A c< is ° w_ p w w 3 m n o v o m 7 _ o w= o_ m a 7< c n a m w m - m 3 W C c n N 3 ° W 7 n 0 O m m O 7 N 7 W �, 7• o` O ca U. W w e N v o. N m 7 1p Ri w m m N °° w C O O S d N Vt w 7 C_ M A a x c oc y c o n 3 W w m _. n a m m w o rn 7 v c w a i n m m n N w w a c a 7 D' O m )C -, T 7 S Cvi 0 A w N n N w FD' 7 H `n O, W n N 7 7 m -Oi. 7 N t7_1 N 3 p S n G j. O C O n N m? N N m H M n 3• n f n R o 7 w w W o W 7 •O• 0,- f0 o v - `•z ro o a' 3 s 0 c n 3 ? mx. v x mN, 3= 7 n= A o n w m m= p,m W, o< 3 w m w 3< m 7 7 M o o o< n c c c ^» .Sr oww 3 w 1D x° m 3 ° °: c^ 0 0 �c v m= a a o ff < M Er O C C W n m m C .w. n m N N `j w n m m �{ W O. T n W G w O O w w m W N 7 N 7 N f S w a 7 a = 3 m w M m 3 n o o ro � w c w_ n �^ o w °O m n n p' o o to i n n x 7 m N G g' O C 7 ID X w a a 3 V ?; 7 m 3 C a c_ W W S T 7 �,wt `° n d C w w n ^ w wo 0 W o n" w n m m m n ^ o n^ ^ < m - o, o ci n n D 7 N< 7 n O o a 0 n e w 3 7 Q m o n 3 0 o o m c 7 m n m o S< ° 3' ^+ w w 3 3 n m p7 v w= v ao v s m 3 ^- c A a c w y o o nn c s moo. o N c e A m W o °n n. c o N+ M w a w-^. w A v c m-o " a 3 °o w 3 N cc w 3? 3 w m w ,», o 0 0- o. 3 c r~o c Co v n= y a - 7• 0 m c v m o m- a_ 3 Q �• ^. 3 v° ^ ,c+ w R o v a n o c °� m n? c �' v .^. o o ° n> > a= 7 o c o m 3 n' w m o w? 7 n _ o a n N o^ o n o m pNp n o n �C O C n n m a 7 a v w O O s 7• w 7 C S S � Q a °� a m m vci w .� G m n w n m Q N o G vwi .w-. = ,.g N m w n r n = n 3 >• o >• 3 w o o m o o 0 w a A= 3 w J J w J a o w J m m o 7 n ^' J o' o V o o cr wm o A o n o m 3 o o J m o N lu a c c v v�> w c n> o c v F wN W C n w a 0 a J 0o n m N fD w v v o y < a oOQ w 2 3 �o 7' H w O n a o J rn J• v m w J o w a J ao' c� m X I m m o aJo N a O w �° au °�° ^ro 3 � ro j G S. ena Oo J ft J �' .0 !(n G 00 N m N n _ p o N ^w N 00 N C O Q o f o w 3 w<o w c o° o o n C L N ? O m? n '< �p $ .� N J 4 L1 N 10 J rr m a P+ n m m IT o rD o + J w J? n v. w w N as n w' 3 n 3 o w w '•; J9� N f N C d n w 3 n N w Q 5 o0 o o _ J 3 30 D. m N 3 0 a w 3 a c mw wJ ° 3 io a, w s i 3 S ao a .o ae %• o w o ° Q J w w w 3° w dc^ o• w c w w a °N m fD 3 �� o a N w s cL 'u J o o A N w a^ J a o o o N l< c 'e m a m Q roc c f. awo a a A s a a m >> n ro n N° ro oe o s = . 3 J w a o< a w w J 0 m n m w m J' J ° J J p f9 w N O in C J s ao o n m a + c n c m m o w w o °i y w n c 3 0 3 0 3 = w n o w o> a 3 w w w GI m w m x g o f p r 3 n w D w W 00 > > O ^ O a O y w 7 7 a m O O 01 7' - 7 m u o '� w m m n u r a_ cx ao m T° D 3 c 7 F c c» c N 3 N . m m� a m m r30 w m o c H m y M. 7 C C QQ 7 O 1A c Q `G O m O O' N N A .w+ do p=q IU N y UQ w O 7 .nr C m 7 f01 .Nr °i f0 3 w N wo_ ^ w N N fm1 J tw-D O J 7 N d m (^U � ^ '. ,.., 1171 N >• f� w a C _ A a c y m O A N D p i w o c GQ �c' ^ w O UD O H OQ �p in N 0. n G O 0U N. m m o N w Q. m G 'w.. m ? �^-�. f^SD y C G N W c< c m c> j o w w' o a a° v o w F N o0 <� N v v y 3 w ?> > m 3 o a -9. w n 3 w w^ m D f o. 3 N N. n o °- o > i m m 30 a c v 3 0 3 o° S o Q S o ao c o f a o0 m n o ^. v �n o 7 o w c 00 >• w w D 3 w 3 N or w w 3 n 3 n< ?: °c ^ opu n ou cm c o o w f m° oSr n ^-. w fD 7< n c° u a m-!? 7 w Q rmi f=i C S N ; UC mO O � 7 OL m ° - N a fwl �_ w O o w 7 00 a° O. `° >• ,. m o '" in w o• m w o o. f a w G1 c o w c °' rao Do o o a °= `, 3 c m o w o F -m a °, ° v w w 3 a c m m o i0 3 �o 1 3 0 ? n c m 3 �' n ° ° N 3°° n c a w m m ° w w ^ o ?; ? o n Da o 3^ n w o DD owo N o D m a v n p o m c 3 o O 7 °° m m+ n ,n m n<? m m °i n 3 0' °° o c fD � p: m °' m.< T w Q '° m m w m N m m m o c o n Q H A. ° o o' co a 3 m N n oa o w o m w A N N roo 3 a 3 r30 a 3 w c w- >^ f° m °� o0o Q °�° °00 2. m cr m n w .ow m m ff < 7 m° o 3 w c m m o "- O Co d m � r A a N ID m fi C m f1 N n w fD N• N 3 0 Do, S o Do o m c a n° c m 3 c o c a w w 3 m o m w 7 a x w ' c w < w w _ m w o ? o Q `" 0 o o m o N °- N m w a o N m H Ov, ° a wS 3 m w° • m °; c n w o ^ c R m" < o ^ c o w '� o o a s a n a Qa X O 'c `G o O m O S 3 S w N m _ 7 w O- S 3 O ° 0 o a ° o Da mm o m x w w o m°� o m a 3 n o H v W v� O m O v', 3 `G o O< m S i0 m aiv m m M w 1n m p' O N F m °' ^ c o° ?< w o 3 c `c 6 ° EL w�-- 06 w o 3' o°^ w w o m 3 9 r o m. n D Go 4 ': rr a a o w o a w ? o m e ^ '° a yi ? n S v>>° o v w D " N m o" c Q o m o c 'm0 f 3 .W Q n i- a ° w o a o o n w f. w c X w. c m a o m - m o N R o w .w o r. D alloO v w G 3 ^. w n s ? a N, 3 m < y m e ro o Do m m F 0O� 3 w o v o :c w n m e o. ^+ O 3 UD m 2 °° - n o 0 3 a w w n o m o w 3 0 0 0° n m 3 D w w m n w m 0 n w° m o ^ p° o 7 c� c D 3 7< a o N w S 0 c o ^. c N 3 0 �c o m c c o c ° �, m 3 m N- m �o o• m 7 °O o w o ao m ° 7 w o- °' x m cr o- ° o O 7 ^ n >' m In w 1 H w m° w 7 w m A Q O o ^ O 00 DD m in N _ w G m �G DD oo G. m y1 w G UD e-i a N UD O. M ." 6 m O . y A vw o- 7 m m w= m o w 0^ r0 O G N O w o 7 d m N z o m 3 o m c= OQ o 3 T o N O 7 < O p a 3 ^ H 7 m c N m o m o o m m w N IU ON 0 O m H 3 w w N m Vi 40 a c ri . o. o a w in M i3i, m n m a 3 0 3 3 0 o o 0 7 0 o r m io 00 m cm CC DD N m S G w m f U7 = C v -° m " 7 m ,o. m ,» B n o• w" ''< Q w Doo c D °° m M o 0 7 o o p �r^o n N i0 c s m `» m f w- m m c° v N 00 m d 0 CU N t7D �; N p: G m 7 •�O N y g 7 O O _ a 7 x. VC w ,-,7• m„ c 7 m m ac re tD j 0. 3 m 7 7 a a Nm a m w� m o w 7^ w w o 0 3 y w a' - O 7 n m w o. m fD n N o o• a m c m Do7 0 O m = N m m n n o a O w m m DD Da eq vC c m - o f o 7 c N m m 0 N w 3 N R a w o m.n N x o H L n a o - n m P. UQ o DiDn m i+ ui j m C m 7 o c C OU 7 m m w Mtn W p S w m CL i0 � O° N c m m 2 � - m in o• � °: ^ DD w m DD o O n O N > > C o r o Q w N 'Na N < > w p o c a ON o• vOi Otw7U o m n o A :^ G OQ �< G. C w n o w 0.O^ G K OQ m d SUMMARY OF BOGERT'S CONSERVATORSHIP OF PETE SIVA The Report misrepresents Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva • The HRC embellished Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva and his involvement in the Conservator program overall. The HRC truthfully describes the inequities and discriminatory nature of the Indian Conservator program but untruthfully attempts to associate Bogert with these wrongdoings. In reality, Bogert was an ally of the Tribe and a defender of its sovereign rights. Any reference to Bogert's conservatorship in the Report needs to be contextualized, specifically with regards to the circumstances by which he reluctantly became a conservator. Pete Siva's wife, Bernadine Siva, set the record straight in June of 2020: "I have been reading the comments about Frank Bogert and his Statue. I believe the statue should not be removed or destroyed. Frank Bogert was an Honorable and Honest man. I feel I must share this with you. When a few Judges, Attorneys and business men got together and decided that the Indians were uneducated and not capable of handling their lands and income, which was a potential gold mine, they created the Guardian and Conservatorship Association. I am not sure but the Bureau of Indian Affairs must have known about this. There is no justification for this Association, most of the Indians had very little income and had to have food on the table and retain a Tribal Attorney. My late husband Edmund Peter Siva, a Tribal Member, told me his story. He said `The Attorneys and Business People with the help of the Superior Court were appointing Conservators like someone in an orchard picking Indians for themselves like they were picking fruit from the trees.' He did not want whomever picked to take his estate, which was by the way very small. He had known Frank for a number of years and he asked him to do him a favor and take over as conservator to prevent this from happening to him. Frank said you don't need a conservator, you are smart and have your father and are capable of managing your own affairs. Finally, after much conversation pro and con Frank said as a favor to you I will be your conservator. (He) really did not want to be associated with the group of Lawyers and business people in this Association, and he never was. The only Conservatorship Frank had was my husband. My husband and the Tribal Elders did not like it but the papers were drawn up, taken to the Court and the Indian's lives were taken over more or less until 1965. Frank was one of the first to sign off as a conservator."' o Mrs. Siva's statement reaffirms the following details about Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva: 1 Bernadine Siva post on Facebook, June 30, 2020 • Bogert had no involvement whatsoever in the creation, implementation or management of the Conservator program. In fact, he didn't want to be associated with the program or with other conservators, as Mrs. Siva states. • Because Bogert was so well respected and admired by the Tribe, he was the only person Mr. Siva trusted to serve as his conservator. • Bogert knew the Conservator program was unjust and onerous to the Tribe, but as a favor to Mr. Siva and his family, he reluctantly agreed to be his conservator. • Bogert was the first conservator to voluntarily release an Indian "ward" from conservatorship. He did so against the wishes of other conservators and lawyers who were egregiously profiting off Tribal members under conservatorship.2 o Bogert himself corroborated Mrs. Siva's statement in an interview with the Desert Sun in 1991, saying: "The judge would appoint a conservator, they'd charge the Indian for a lawyer, then lease the land. But they'd get the money, and the Indian wouldn't get anything. There were a lot of abuses ... I was a conservator for (Pete Siva), and I was the first to turn someone loose. The judge (McCabe) was very angry. "3 o In an article written by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist George Ringwald, Bogert was quoted as saying: 'I've always been for the Indian and I've been against the conservators because most of them haven't done anything for the Indian." Ringwald claimed that this statement by Bogert was "the most critical comment made by anyone from within the conservator group.114 o The HRC strongly implies that as a conservator, Bogert profited off of Section 14 evictions and the demolition of substandard dwellings. This is false. Bogert voluntarily signed off as a conservator in July of 1963. City -coordinated evictions did not begin until one year later in 1964 and city -financed demolition did not begin until more than two years later, in October 1965. o On May 5, 2021, Chairman deHarte claimed that Bogert was "found guilty" of fee splitting by the Department of Interior and that the task force "ordered all improperly gained fees held in trusts for the landowner."' This is categorically false and indicative of the many untruthful and misleading statements made throughout the HRC's Report and by Mr. deHarte himself. The word "guilty" is never mentioned once in the Interior's report with regards to Bogert and no corrective action was "ordered" against him. 2 Desert Sun, "Lawrence Crossley and the fight against conservatorships for Indians," July 19, 2020 3 Desert Sun, "Checkerboard, Greed, Lies and a Modern Fable," October 13, 1991 4 Daily Enterprise. "Some fee splitting acknowledged in Indian cases," December 7, 1967 5 HRC Special Meeting, May 5, 2021 1 o Additionally, the daughters of Pete Siva submitted the following letter to the HRC and the City Council titled "Cease and Desist": "The family of Edmund Peter Siva (Deceased Cahuilla Elder) demand that you stop using his name in regards to his relationship with Frank Bogert. A relationship and life long friendship which you do Not know anything about. Your attempts to slander these men and use the name of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians as a pawn in your game, is disgusting. Please remove our Father Edmund Peter Siva's name from the HRC Report, and from PS city councils agenda." o Bogert and Mr. Siva were both lifelong, close friends of Bogert's, making the HRC's attempt to use them both to defame Bogert even that much more shameful. Mr. Siva and Bernadine Siva held Bogert's Mayoral victory party at their home in 1982.' (See party photo.) o In 1966, Pete Siva sent a letter to the city council thanking them for their help in clearing Section 14. The letter read in part: "The Tribal Council for the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians want you to know that they commend you for your recent Clean -Up campaign and they ask that you consider this letter as a note of their appreciation. "8 - Edmund Peter Siva, Chairman of the Agua Caliente Council, April 25, 1966, in a letter to the City Council thanking them for their help cleaning up Section 14. Note that Edmund Peter Siva went by "Pete Siva", who Bogert voluntarily released from conservatorship in 1963 o Given the facts above, all attempts by the HRC to tie Bogert to wrongdoings by other conservators, and the Conservator program overall, should be dismissed and discredited. (See Bogert and Siva photo.) The Department of Interior's investigation was strongly refuted in Congressional testimony The focus of this investigation was not on Section 14 itself or Bogert, but rather on the malfeasance by individual judges and lawyers in the Conservator program. Bogert's name isn't mentioned a single time after analyzing more than 165 pages of Congressional testimony from the hearing to review the Interior's findings on the Conservator program. He was alluded to once (not by name) in the hearing, but only in a positive light as being the first person to voluntarily end his conservatorship.9 6 Letter submitted to the City Council and HRC, May 10, 2021 Desert Sun, "Frank Bogert wins PS mayoral bid," April 14, 1982 8 Edmund Siva letter to City Council, April 25, 1966 9 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 90-258 2 • Many of the findings of the Department of Interior's task force were thoroughly discredited and refuted by numerous individuals who testified under oath at the same Congressional hearing in May of 1968. Due primarily to a conflict of interest with the head of the task force, the Interior's findings were described under oath as "disgraceful," the "grossest distortions of facts ...in a governmental publication," "erroneous," "biased," and that investigators "deliberately ignored facts known to them that demonstrate the falsity of the charges."10 (See conflict of interest in Appendix F.) • An exhaustive and earlier investigation of the conservator program in 1963 found no wrongdoing with regards to fees charged by conservators, including Bogert. The Department of the Interior — which conducted this 1963 investigation and later launched another investigation on the same conservator program in 1968 — concluded "there may be a number of instances where fees appear to be high, yet after a close analysis of the services in fact rendered, it cannot be said that they are unjustifiably so."'1 • How can two separate investigations on the same topic, conducted five years apart by the same federal department, come to such different conclusions? Simply put, "at the time the (conservator) program commenced, there was no similar program anywhere in the United States. For that reason, among other practical reasons, there were no guidelines. There were no established policies.1112 Additionally, the conservator program was plagued by "chaos and confusion1113 and it was a program "of trial and error."14 Some conservators exploited the ill-conceived, unstructured nature of the program for financial gain and at a great expense to their Tribal "wards." With no legal precedent or concrete laws by which to assess the actions of conservators, the Department of the Interior was merely able to provide subjective commentary and analysis on conservator fees and on the program overall. • Accordingly, due to this lack of clarity surrounding conservator regulations, the head of the Interior's task force was only able to offer an opinion that Bogert's fee -splitting as a conservator was improper. Indeed, the task force said in its report, "We are of the opinion that this fee splitting between a broker and conservator .... is improper under California law."15 The task force leader's opinion on the conservator program was strongly refuted in Congressional testimony for two primary reasons, 1) the aforementioned conflict of interest and 2) the task force leader had limited experience assessing complex fiduciary/conservator fee structures (see issues with the Interior's findings in Appendix F. Bogert was never 10 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 90-258 11 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 208 12 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 221 13 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 219 14 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 172 15 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 65 3 "found guilty" of fee splitting nor was any corrective action ordered against him as the HRC's Chair, Ron deHarte, claims. Regardless of the Interior's opinion on Bogert's fees, Bogert (as detailed earlier) only became a conservator in the first place as a favor to the Siva family. Again, any attempts by the HRC to tie Bogert to the wrongdoings of the Conservator program and to individual conservators should be dismissed. • Finally, in a highly critical editorial titled "Indian Probe Incompetent" (see editorial clipping), the Desert Sun also pointed out the investigation's flaws and questioned the objectivity of the investigators, saying: "As the Bureau of Indian Affairs continues to investigate the handling of local Indian estates by conservators and guardians, it becomes more clear that the bureau itself is not competent to take over the job. In fact the bureau has shown it is not even competent to conduct the investigation. As more examples of carelessness and lack of objectivity in the investigation come to light, one has to question the motives of the investigators. " The editorial went on to identify and detail three major errors in the investigation and concluded by stating: "We are not convinced that these errors are only a matter of carelessness and do not involve a certain amount of prejudice ... In other words, is the bureau conducting a witch hunt or an impartial investigation?,,16 The conflict of interest associated with the Department of Interior's investigation The findings of the Department of Interior's Investigation were strongly refuted in Congressional testimony due primarily to a significant conflict of interest with the head of the investigation's task force, Mr. Robert Cox. This conflict of interest and its effect on the biased, incomplete findings of the investigation can be summarized as follows:" 1. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), which the Department of Interior oversees, was responsible for implementing and overseeing the Conservator program. The Conservator program was the main focal point of the investigation. 2. Prior to creating and overseeing the Conservator program, the BIA in conjunction with the Department of the Interior passed a series of laws (primarily restrictive leasing laws) which were detrimental to the Agua Caliente Tribe and directly caused countless problems and inequities for its members. As detailed throughout this Rebuttal, these laws directly led to the Section 14's slum -like conditions. 3. As a result of these laws as well as the conservator program that the BIA was responsible for overseeing, numerous Indians filed complaints with the BIA. 16 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 134, January 9, 1968 17 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pgs 90-258 4 4. The Department of the Interior, which oversaw the BIA, created a task force to investigate these complaints, and appointed Robert Cox (of the same Department of Interior) to head the investigation. 5. This of course posed a massive conflict of interest. The task force leader was tasked with investigating accusations both he and the department he worked under (the Department of the Interior) were responsible for. These accusations came as a result of ill-conceived policies and laws the Interior (through the BIA) had enacted. 6. As a result of this conflict of interest, "it was obvious that the investigation would not be an impartial one, but would attempt in some way to distort the facts and mislead Congress."" In fact, furthering the impartiality of the investigation, Mr. Cox in 1965 was appointed "Resources Trust Officer" for the Palm Springs Office of the BIA, and worked with the court in the administration of the very Conservator program he was now tasked with investigating.19 Essentially he would have to implicate himself (in addition to his own department) had he conducted a fair, objective investigation. 7. Accordingly, Mr. Cox chose not to focus his investigation on himself or his own department, but on individuals associated with the conservative program that his department was charged with overseeing. Focusing on the root cause of failed BIA policies undoubtedly would have brought much scrutiny and criticism to him and his superiors. 8. Therefore, the findings of the investigation were highly biased, inaccurate, and misleading in order to deflect blame from the BIA and the Department of the Interior, and instead to condemn individual conservators. While some individual conservators were undeniably guilty of taking advantage of their Tribal wards, the investigation's findings omit the complicity of the BIA and Department of Interior in these injustices. Accordingly, the following statements were made under oath at the Congressional hearing. These statements detail this conflict of interest and the overall problems with the investigation: We resent having to explain erroneous statements made by investigators seeking to whitewash the agency by whom they are employed... This investigation should be made by an independent objective agency ... The charge of conflict of interest demonstrates that the task force is biased and unqualified to perform its function. The investigators have deliberately ignored facts known to them that demonstrate the falsity of the charge. "20 - Robert A. Schlesinger, attorney, Congressional Testimony May 1968. • "In a Report of this nature it is apparently the intent of the authors to vilify individuals in order to protect the inadequacies, improprieties and lack of concern on behalf of the Bureau. "21 18 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 172 19 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 209 20 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 133 21 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 213 5 Henry V. Cleary, Attorney for the Association of Conservators, Guardians and Allottees of the Agua Caliente Indian Lands and Estates May, Congressional testimony May 1968. • "(The Bureau of Indian Affairs) always chose to look the other way until it was too late, then all of a sudden comes this big investigation. It happens time after time, only this time it was conducted in a most disgraceful manner by the Bureau of Indian Affairs officials. People, Indian, and non - Indian alike, have been unfairly accused publicly and without a chance to present any explanation or reason for action which they may have taken. The Bureau should know that nothing is resolved by making someone else look bad in an attempt to hide the egg on your own face. ,22 - Vyola Ortner, former Agua Caliente Chairman, Congressional testimony May 1968. Ortner is explaining the flaws in the Department of Interior's Investigation. The task force leader, "was quite frank in stating that he was serving in two capacities, one as an investigator and one as a trust officer, more or less, for the Bureau. "23 Additional issues with the Interior's findings: In addition to the conflict of interest, Mr. Cox's analysis and findings indicated he was unqualified to investigate the technicalities of conservatorships and guardianships. • Claims and statements made by Mr. Cox in the report "indicates that the authors of the report are wholly unconversant with the nature and value of professional and fiduciary services.1124 • "The Report mis-quotes applicable facts and law."25 • "The conclusion reached by the Task Force in connection with one incident is based upon a newspaper article and the conclusion reached in the other instance is based upon false assumption of California law."21 • The report falsely assesses "excessive fees" by using income as a benchmark when in reality that is faulty and inconsistent with how Fiduciaries actually operate under Probate Code, Sections 1500 and 1852, of the California Probate Code.27 22 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 117 23 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 195 24 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 210 25 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 210 26 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 214 27 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 216 A • "It is apparent that the Task Force started out from the false premise that fees should be charged to income but not only that they should compute the costs of the total income to be earned during the life of the leases so that the true costs of the development of the Ward's property can be ascertained.1128 • Mr. Cox's lack of knowledge relating to fee calculations and how fiduciaries operate overall, resulted in him grossly miscalculating the percentage of fees conservators were actually receiving. o Mr. Cox asserted that conservators were collecting 44% in fees from their wards, when in reality that figure was closer to 5.2%29. o "Mr. Cox doesn't know what he is talking about.1130 The inequities caused by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Department of the Interior The quotes below demonstrate 1) the detriments that the BIA and Interior had on tribal members 2) the negative impact these Federal agencies had on tribal lands (Section 14). These quotes also demonstrate why, presumably, the task force leader omitted these facts from its investigation. Any objective investigation would have highlighted these injustices and implicated the very federal agency that was conducting the investigation. Therefore, the task force leader focused his findings on individual conservators instead of his own department (which was responsible for the Conservator program). • "History has indicated that the Bureau of Indian Affairs has been a total failure in helping the members of the local Tribe. "31 - Attorney Henry Cleary, Congressional Testimony May 1968 • "Unfortunately, the (BIA) at the time of the inception of our organization, was making no efforts whatsoever to actually promote the lands of the Agua Caliente Indians. As a matter of fact, the few efforts that were made before and after the inception of our association were inept in that the (BIA), through directives and policies in Washington, set such ridiculous standards for the leasing of Indian lands, that for a good period of time after the inception of the conservatorship program and the establishing of our association, the Indian lands were unleasable because of the impractical conditions placed thereon by the Bureau and the Secretary of the Interior.1132 - Attorney James Hollowell, Congressional Testimony May 1968 28 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 217 29 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 253 30 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 232 31 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 146 32 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 158 7 • "The Bureau of Indian Affairs has operated in an unimaginative manner and has only nominally met its responsibilities. The object of the Bureau should be to best prepare the Indian to become a responsible citizen. In this it has sadly failed. »33 - Vyola Ortner, Congressional Testimony May 1968 • "I personally feel that the blame lies with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I feel if inequity and injustice are being practiced, they surely must be corrected... The Bureau of Indian Affairs does not represent the best interests of the Indians any longer"34 - Vyola Ortner, Congressional Testimony May 1968 • "This slum area (in Section 14) had been encouraged by the Bureau of Indian Affairs through their lack of foresight, in granting 30-day permits and only authorizing 5-year leases on any Indian land." ' - Mr. Hollowell, Congressional Testimony May 1968 • "The Bureau of Indian Affairs had not developed Indian land or allowed the Indians to develop their land to such an extent that they could support themselves."' - Mr. Hollowell, Congressional Testimony May 1968 • "In all frankness I must say that I am appalled that the state of affairs described in the report has not only existed under ostensible state and federal supervision; it has flourished ... a share of the responsibility for the present state of affairs in Palm Springs rests upon the shoulders of this Department. "37 - Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior, essentially confirming his Department's role in the inequities of the Conservator program and the slum -like conditions of Tribal lands. `7 want to say that I agree with one of your earlier conclusions very, very definitely, among others, when you speak about the lack of the Bureau of Indian Affairs initiative on the subject of leasing programs for Indian lands."' Congressman Ed Edmondson, Congressman from Oklahoma and Chairman of the Congressional Hearing (also a former lawyer, Navy Veteran, and FBI agent), May 1968 33 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 136 34 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 136 35 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 160 36 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 166 37 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 166 38 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 172 0 • As a grand gesture to recover some prestige with its Indians and the public, the Interior Department in 1949 requested and received consent of Congress to lease land on a five (5) year basis. What thoughtlessness and lack of planning went into this request is unknown ... Yet the Interior Department proudly declared this is progress, but nevertheless continued its practice of granting thirty (30) day permits thus encouraging and increasing the slum area theretofore developed by the Bureau on Section 14 in the heart of the City of Palm Springs. "3' - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 • "Again, at a great cost for the individual Indian, it was necessary for the Courts in the case of the United States vs Pierce, 235 F 2d 885, to declare the Bureau had been unequitable.... The Interior Department could not explain it to them for had it done so it would have committed the unforgivable bureaucratic sin of confessing it did not know what to do or how to handle the Indian land Problem in Palm Springs."' - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 • "The Interior Department, not having studied matters and having always to learn the hard way, again had to acknowledge another grave error which again delayed the Indian from receiving his just due from his allotted land."41 - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 "After initiating the Conservatorship and Guardianship Program in the California Courts the Bureau has abandoned its responsibilities and has left the appointment of the Conservators and Guardians to the Courts.,42 - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 "In the 1950's the Secretary was directed to get out of the Indian business. In order to enhance his opportunity of doing this the Equalization Act was adopted. The Bureau since that time and until the present Task Force intrusion refused to take any active steps to carry out the mandate of Congress. "43 - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 39 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 205 40 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 205 41 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 206 42 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 208 43 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 215 9 W L-:,%-06 W-EP:1 -A PHOTO #544 Frank Bogert and Pete Siva at Bogert's victory party after being reelected Mayor in 1982. Siva and his wife, Bernadine, held Bogert's victory party at their home. Bogert reluctantly served as Siva's conservator from 1960-1963 as a favor to the Siva family. He was the first conservator to voluntarily release a Tribal member from conservatorship. Siva became Tribal Chairman and in 1966 sent a letter thanking the City Council for assisting the Tribe with clearing Section 14. Doing so allowed the Tribe to begin developing its land and lifting Tribal members out of dire financial conditions. Bogert and Siva would remain lifelong friends. Bernadine Siva, Pete Siva's widow, stated "I believe the statue should not be removed or destroyed. Frank Bogert was an Honorable and Honest man." The daughters of Pete Siva called the HRC's report "disgusting" and "slander(ous)" and demanded that the HRC stop using their father's name in regards to his relationship with Bogert. as Private collection 10 Editorials -Opinion THE DESERT SUN FUEUSNIMB CO. ESTAKISNEtt I Waaard L iirssta w, halides Gel W. Seh.esa t"reitlldse 12 MR Prart Ow ee6r, �..* t isuCoMffft The Indian Probe Incompetent As the Bureau of Indian Affairs cmlinucs to Investigate the handling of local Indian ¢stales by conserva. fors and guardions, it becomes more clear that the bureau Itself is not competent to take over the job. In fact the bureau has shown It Is not even competent to conduct the investigation As more examples of earelm. lies" and lack of abjectivity In the Investigation come to.light, one has to V.U.the malives, of the lives, tigatom. The Investigation has gaesttoned IN, amount of fees*p�li to conserve. tors and attorneys 'for the' estate's There may be come j istiticailo i for questwing the fees. but it is elranie that the fees aluays`are depressed only in relation to become and not In terms of the value of the total es• we bandied and the services per. formed. A veil of suspicion has been cast upon almost every one of. the per- sons who have served the.lndlins In their estate matters.'The,"Au his Ufted that veil froimlm'y one con. servitor, Culver NkboK who it commended as having dose a good job for his Indians. The failure of the bureau to specifically clear oth. er trustees would seem to suggest That no others have performed prop- erly, a premise we find impwible to accept The Desert Sun already has dls covered three major errors in the Investigation's preliminary report submitted Sept. 26,1957: Item: The report suggested that Municipal Court Judge Eugene Ther. teau was derelict in administering the estates of John Joseph P IM* and Frances Palencia because an that was obvious to a reporter Item The report accused a cW servator, Stanley Spoegelrnan, of ov- erbtating the assets of his ward and of making an unauthorized purchase of property. The overstatement sup- posedly Involved a lia OM piece of Property in Palm Springs wtsleb the bureau thought had been purchased for 614090 The unauthorised pur- chase supposedly was a 29 oD0 house in Banning the bureau thDLWM had been purchased for 12,i7s In an Informal'ceurtrvom discus Man last Fr''dav,' spiegelman es. plained that the 614,060 had pur. chased a holf.talerest to the Palm Springs property 1. o! which the ward already osvntd:UN otber half inter. est Again HIS curious that trdined auditors had jilted to find the previ. ous hall Interest in previous ac. countings, Sp{cgelinoii'glm shoved (hat the Bannirsg property bad been a gill to the Indian and was not an unauthor• lied purchase. The payment found by the bureau we, to clear up back mortgage payments. As In 711olitaa's case, the bar eau jumped to a conclusion wothout conferring with the conservator who could have ck ared up any questions The report also contains other accusations, Done of which the bur- eau has subatanttated ro for We are 1101 convinced that these errors are only a matter of careless- ness and do not Invoke a certain amount of prejudice Did the bureau go into the Wtstignimn wiih a pm conceived notion• 1s it making as sumptlons and jumping to ¢wain lions that justify its preeoorepiloas and overlooking facts and documents that do not support its notions, In PHOTO #2145 Editorial by the Desert Sun on the Department of Interior's (via the BIA) investigation on the Indian Conservator program. Titled "The Indian Probe Incompetent," the editorial states, "it becomes more clear that the (BIA) itself is not competent to take over the job. In fact the (BIA) has shown it is not even competent to conduct the investigation. As more examples of carelessness and lack of objectivity in the investigation come to light, one has to question the motives of the investigators." (Go Back to Rebuttal) 45 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 134, January 9, 1968 11 w ► = O O ! S FO- Z Z 0 AD F- ► ! gr O O !� • • W • f 0 • m !<= d• O O W J W► W• w Q V ! W <° 1- O= r Y O S S J a _ S • O 10 O O ADY ! _ W F W < a a. < 6 L 7 N O< O v <! O N f! 1t7 0= W Z W W W J O W W to ►•>¢ W t W ! W = t 0 m Y 44 •! J O 0 W F Y O O q ►- < _ O ► IL i f► F S J Z 1A 1 • O < /J < YO. W at s• aWi e W 0 W Z0 J W h O W 0 0 Z 1L 1d O F. O 16 W O •< W m< F S< J= W a W • W F- = W r• m W s W s M m W <IL cc ao_ _ } W W < m• S 0 0 F° W to O L W (. r W< s N W= F ~ < L J Z Z <9 W D a W 0 X F► O to 0 11 Z W W W W 1 1~A 0 Z W s fr s t w 0 a s a. —Z Z W w 9 O < •X3 so.t-rnm w W 9 S s= • W Z O 4 J J YZ AL • _ n = < 9 a < i ► < < a I a W W } > a W W Y <_ J a Z = F O O Aid= W to 2 O O ► 1- ! < O Y Z O W 1r N aO ac L < W S Z ~ ; Y Y M' ~ N O = Z C ► �- O M W O W I- Z is } O J < W O < Z S O W WAt z 1- < t� O < O < F W S O W W aa��-J IL 0 K Q W 1- t O O Z Y • W V W < J O Z 0 < 10 J L J S 1A O to. J F- ► o W O O O 7<C o j 4 1 F • < < i W i W • WSW woc1WW ! < ! J O W 10 J U. J Z J °m O W a W W•< < Y L • aC & < Ir 'S > ► < W t7 W W S W a m O r la < ~ ~ W p. } N 9 J m W► s O O i Y W • > L W W J W a: W W i> a i d 0. L ! F- O= L O W O> > 0%• W M t Q W t • w w W O • m = < W O • Y 3 may m = IL i < W 10 at W < a v ca r ► r ► .moo J ! _ J Y m < J N ► W W Z cr. J L < Co < W O L < O- <N N • W K .. O Z V W ac W 0 U. W H cc W O a W I V SUMMARY OF BOGERT SEEKING LOW-COST HOUSING FOR DISPLACED RESIDENTS • The HRC concludes that the statue should be removed from City Hall under the premise that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by (Section 14) evictions." Not only is this premise completely false, but the HRC intentionally omitted evidence that would have directly refuted its very premise to remove the statue (see housing timeline . Indeed, the very sources the HRC cites in its own Report provide more than ample evidence to invalidate many of the HRC's false accusations. For example, the HRC cherry -picks information from a Nov. 15, 1968, article in the Desert Sun to support its biased narrative about Section 14 — however, below are quotes from the same exact article that the HRC left out of its Report. These quotes, among many others, directly discredit the Report's premise to remove the statue. Thus, the HRC purposely excluded this rebutting information and crafted a one-sided, disingenuous Report: "Mayor Frank Bogert, long active in trying to solve the housing problems of the minority groups in Section 14 said he thought the Gould -Crossley project would be a good thing. `I think we ought to stretch a point and let them have the zoning they want,' he said. `Due to the housing emergency at the present time, we have to lean over backwards.' Nevertheless, Mayor Bogert emphasized, he wanted to be sure any dwellings built for rentals would be good housing. `I don't want to see another slum area. If someone is going to build a place for these people, it should be good.'... A $2.5 million housing development which will be used for families displaced from Section 14... was the upshot of a previous request, of several months standing, by Mayor Bogert of (the developer) to seek a solution to the problem of homes for the residents of Section 14. "' Bogert worked "tirelessly" to minimize the effects of Section 14 evictions and to seek low-cost housing for its residents • Knowing that evictions and clearing were necessary and unavoidable, Bogert worked relentlessly to alleviate the harms associated with these evictions and to make the best out of an untenable housing crisis (see timeline of Bogert's actions). While Bogert took office in 1958, city -coordinated evictions did not take place until six years later, in 1964, and city - sponsored demolition began seven years later, in October 1965. Although there were evictions prior to 1964, these evictions were executed by private citizens and without city coordination or assistance2. Within that six -year period when he became Mayor and when the city worked with conservators and the Tribal Council to relocate and evict residents in 1964, the record shows that Bogert was resolute on finding solutions to the Section 14 crisis. Specifically, Bogert took the following actions to alleviate the effects of the inevitable clean-up campaign: ' Desert Sun, "The Section 14 Story III, Elation Over Housing Okay Fades as Recession Comes," November 15, 1968 2 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 1 o Held off city -coordinated relocations and evictions until 1964 (6 years after becoming Mayor), despite pressure to do so sooner from tax paying residents, Tribal landowners, local businesses, and conservators. o Worked "tirelessly" to seek low-cost housing for displaced residents.3 o Secured housing certificates from the FHA which provided relocation grants with 100% financing to displaced residents.4 (See Bogert and housing certificate photo.) o Pursued numerous public assistance programs to fund low-cost housing. o Pushed for and supported several privately funded low-cost housing projects (see clipping for one such project), including that of Lawrence Crossley, a Black pioneer of the community and a close friend of Bogert's.5 o Launched an administrative investigation into Superior Court ordered burnings after numerous residents had made complaints.s o Delayed evictions for six months in 1961 to allow 430 families to find housing.' (See eviction delay photo.) hoto.) o Created multiracial citizens committees, consisting of members from the Black community, to assist with relocation efforts and to communicate the city and Tribe's eviction plans with Section 14 residents.$ o Enacted a bond program in 1961 to purchase land that would partially be used for low- cost housing for evicted residents.9 o Ensured that the city complied with all local, state, and federal regulations throughout a complex eviction and demolition process. The Desert Sun described Bogert as working "tirelessly" over the span of 10 years to seek low-cost housing for evicted Section 14 residents.90 These efforts included him continuously pushing for numerous publicly and privately funded housing projects. As detailed in the timeline, the HRC purposely omitted these facts from its Report and falsely claimed that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by these evictions." Select quotes from the housing timeline: "The Mayor, working tirelessly for a low-cost housing project had asked (developers) some months ago if (they) couldn't come up with a solution to the ever- increasing problem of homes for the scores of people who are residing in Section 14"" "Mayor Frank Bogert... has sought to promote a minority housing development in the Palm Springs area"12 3 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 12, August 18, 1961 4 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 298, July 14, 1961 5 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, November 15, 1968 6 Desert Sun, "Section 14 Probe Set," August 14, 1962 ' Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 283, June 27, 1961 8 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 98, November 26, 1968 9 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 161, February 4, 1961 10 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 12, August 18, 1961 " Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 12, August 18, 1961 12 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 136, January 6, 1961 2 "Since Bogert was elected to the council almost three years ago, (he) has been working steadily to get private money to build a low-cost rental unit project for (Section 14 residents) 1113 • Bogert even continued seeking housing for displaced residents after his Mayoral term ended. In 1967 — the year after he left office and with his wife battling breast cancer — he partnered with his close friend the Rev. Jeff Rollins, a leader in the Black community, and the First Baptist Church to develop a.250-unit housing complex adjacent to Gateway Estates 14 (see Desert Sun clippinq). He traveled to Washington, D.C., with Rev. Rollins to lobby the FHA to secure federal funds for minority housing (see Bogert and Rollins photo). • Bogert cared deeply for the welfare of Section 14 residents and was extremely vocal in public forums about the need of low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. The HRC falsely claims in its Report that "city decision makers focused their energy clearing Section 14 for development instead of addressing the core issue of housing for those displaced." In addition to the housing timeline, which provides significant evidence to discredit this claim, below are quotes from Bogert himself demonstrating that he indeed was focused on "the core issue of housing for those displaced": "There is a great demand for low-cost housing for the working force in the city. Something must be done for them... There were a lot of fine people moved out of Section 14. "15 "We do need enough (low-cost housing) to take care of our labor force. There is a terrific demand for housing for the working people"15 "The biggest scandal is that (Section 14 residents) are forced to live in these conditions, because we haven't done anything about it"17 "] don't want to see another slum area. If someone is going to build a place for these people, it should be good"18 "I think we ought to stretch a point and let them have the zoning they want...Due to the housing emergency at the present time, we have to lean over backwards (to allow for zoning for low-cost housing)`9 13 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 136, January 6, 1961 14 Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 235, May 5, 1967 15 Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 235, May 5, 1967 16 Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 235, May 5, 1967 17 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan M. Kray.pg 108 18 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, November 15,1968 19 Desert Sun, "The Section 14 Story III, Elation Over Housing Okay Fades as Recession Comes," November 15, 1968 3 • As Mayor in 1961, Bogert directly hired Charles Jordan, the city's first Black employee and a resident of Section 14. Through this hire, and by advocating for minority interests in general, Bogert directly contributed to the city's first completed housing project for Section 14 residents. Indeed, Jordan was instrumental in the development of Seminole Gardens in 1968, the city's first federally funded, medium -cost housing project which was prioritized for Section 14 residents. Bogert made this unprecedented hire when it was unpopular to do so. When Jordan returned to Palm Springs after graduating from Gonzaga University, Los Angeles Times reporter Ken Reich explained - 'It was then Mayor Frank Bogert who gave him a job as a recreation supervisor. Jordan said he had suggested to Bogert at the time, 1961, that he might not be accepted by whites in that position. Bogert had been adamant about going ahead with the job offer, and it was the beginning of a brilliant career for Jordan. "I o Indeed, Bogert's championing of Jordan, at a time when no Black resident was employed by the city, was the catalyst to a brilliant career. After working as a city official in Palm Springs, Jordan ran the Parks Departments in both Austin, Texas and Portland, Oregon. He was the first ever Black city councilmember in Portland and the first to serve as city commissioner. After leaving public office he ran the Conversation Fund, an environmental non-profit, where he established a land trust for Black farmers. President Ronald Reagan appointed both Jordan and Bogert to the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors, where they worked together to promote nationwide recreational opportunities for citizens.21 Jordan served as an ex-officio member of a multiracial housing committee Bogert created to work with and help Section 14 residents during relocations. As the Desert Sun said, "Jordan made tremendous strides toward greater understanding and respect between all races in Palm Springs and worked toward greater involvement of blacks in community affairs, helping to bring City Hall closer to the (Black) community than ever before.1122 o After being promoted to assistant to the City Manager, Jordan was instrumental in securing funding for and developing the aforementioned Seminole Gardens housing project.23 Serving on the Palm Springs Housing Committee and active in community relations, Jordan worked to understand the needs of the Black community and other minorities and to develop a housing plan for Section 14 residents. o In June of 1987 while giving the commencement speech at Palm Springs High School, Jordan thanked Bogert for taking a chance on him and giving him a job with the city after college.za 20 http://takebackthetimes.blogspot.com/2006/10/memorable-50th-high-school-class.html 21 The Oregonian, "Charles Johnson remembered: Portland's first African American commissioner and long time parks director was "a giant in this city," April 4, 2014 22 Desert Sun, Volume 43, Number 282, July 2, 1970 23 CVRA Community Working Group — Report to Palm Springs City Council, September 27, 2018 24 Desert Sun, "Commencement speaker: You can go home again," June 12, 1987 4 o To recap: Bogert hired the city's first Black employee, Charles Jordan, when he was unable to find another job after college. Jordan, who was a former Section 14 resident, was instrumental in completing the city's first federally financed housing project, Seminole Gardens. This housing project was prioritized for Section 14 residents and is even referenced in the HRC's Report. Jordan went on to have a brilliant political career and positively impacted the lives of many Black citizens, due in part to the chance Bogert took on him in 1961 when others didn't. (See Jordan photo.) Low -Cost Housing Timeline Bogert worked relentlessly to find housing for Section 14 residents and to minimize the effects of the legal evictions The timeline below is just one example of many in which the HRC purposely provides a one- sided, dishonest assessment of Bogert and Section 14. Inexplicably, the HRC falsely claims that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by these evictions"25 and makes similar statements on at least 15 separate occasions in the Report. In reality however, nothing could be further from the truth. Over a span of 10 years, both during and after his Mayoral term, Bogert worked "tirelessly" to find housing for evicted Section 14 residents. The timeline below confirms to what great lengths Bogert went to secure low-cost housing and to address the harms caused by the relocations and evictions. It must be stressed that several of these quotes came from the same articles and sources the HRC cited in its Report. In other words, the HRC saw these same exact quotes and facts but intentionally omitted this refuting information in order to support its false narrative that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by these evictions." • January 196126 o Bogert asks the city for an "Urban Redevelopment Program" on Section 14. o The Desert Sun notes: "Mayor Frank Bogert...has sought to promote a minority housing development in the Palm Springs area" o Additionally, the Desert Sun claims, "since he was elected to the council almost three years ago, (Bogert) has been working steadily to get private money to build a low-cost rental unit project for (Section 14 residents), but the location of it has been the big problem." o "If it is too far from downtown, they can't get into town, and there just isn't any place they can go downtown," said the Mayor. • February 196121 25 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 46 26 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 136, January 6, 1961 27 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 161, February 4, 1961 5 Bogert enacts a bond program for the purchase of land used for the airport. Part of the justification for purchasing the land is not just for the airport itself, but for the development of low-cost housing as well. Indeed, "The Mayor also mentioned that the purchase of the airport by the people of Palm Springs may solve many other problems which to date have plagued the resort community. One of these is the initiation of a low-cost housing project eyed for the north-east corner of the land. According to the Mayor, backers have approached the city seeking such a project." • March 196128 o "Bogert, in his official capacity as Mayor, has served a request to the FHA and HHFA to come to Palm Springs and discuss a federal housing program, especially in connection with their project 221, the replacement of displaced persons... Mayor Bogert said that the federal representatives have looked at a couple of parcels of land which could qualify under the requirements of FHA and HHFA." May 196129 o He later stated that, although the city was rushing the slum clearance of Section 14, the city council was not interested in persecuting anyone, emphasizing that "The biggest scandal is that people are forced to live in these conditions, because we haven't done anything about it." • June 1961 o Bogert announces a six-month moratorium on evictions and demolitions in order to buy time to find housing alternatives.30 The BIA had previously issued a June 1961 deadline for Section 14 evictions, but Bogert issued this six-month moratorium given housing options weren't yet in place for Section 14 residents. Bogert enacted this moratorium after hearing directly from two residents in Section 14 who said they came back to find their homes in ashes.31 o "A promise from Federal Housing Authority representatives to the City Council that action would be speeded to certify city eligibility for financing guarantees for low-cost housing, both private homes and rental property.1132 o Additionally, the Desert Sun states: "Councilmen and members of the Planning Commission had been working more than a year in anticipation of a housing crisis in Section 14 when the June eviction deadline arrived, 'I'm pleased to learn this financing could be rushed through,' said Vice -Mayor Ken Kirk. 'It's shaping up into a definite program and it looks like no one will be actually displaced without getting a better home'... Kirk went on to credit Mayor Bogert and Councilman Ted McKinney with spearheading work on 28 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 182, March 1, 1961 29 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan M. Kray.pg 108 30 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 283, 27 June 1961 31 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan M. Kray.pg 108 32 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 283, June 27, 1961 C-1 obtaining housing for families evicted from Section 14. "They've worked very hard on it." he said. "It's good to see things moving along."" • July 196134 o Bogert creates a special committee, which he leads, to work on minority housing problems related to Section 14. Among those named to the committee is the Rev. Jeff Rollins, a Black community leader and a friend of Bogert's. o This committee had four functions: Inform the community of the substandard conditions in Section 14. Inform the community and those being relocated about the assistance they were eligible for under Section 221, which provided 100% financing for relocation with only $200 down. Assist relocated families in finding alternative housing within their price range. Communicate important updates and details to all related parties of Section 14. o The city submits a program for community improvement "made in support of the city's application for federal aid in relocation housing for persons to be moved from a portion of Section 14 marked a major step toward solving the problems of displacement, caused by area development" o The Desert Sun stated, "As Palm Springs builds for the future, it is working for adequate housing for its citizens." • Mid -July 196135 o Bogert endorses and pushes for the low-cost housing development plans of Lawrence Crossley, a Black city pioneer and close friend of Bogert's. These plans included 150 low-cost, two-story units in Section 20. o "Mayor Frank Bogert, long active in trying to solve the housing problems of the minority groups in Section 14 said he thought the Gould -Crossley project would be a good thing," o In fact, Bogert even pushed city council and officials to relax zoning ordinances to enable the Crossley development to proceed as quickly as possible: "I think we ought to stretch a point and let them have the zoning they want...Due to the housing emergency at the present time, we have to lean over backwards." o Regardless of which low-cost housing projects the city approved, Bogert demanded that the new dwellings be suitable for the people of Section 14: "Nevertheless, Mayor Bogert emphasized, he wanted to be sure any dwellings built for rentals would be good housing. "I don't want to see another slum area. If someone is going to build a place for these people, it should be good." • August 196136 o Federal Housing Association approves a $2.5 million housing development for families displaced by Section 14 evictions. 33 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 283, June 27, 1961 34 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 298, July 14 1961 35 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, November 15,1968 36 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 12, August 18, 1961 7 o The development was spearheaded by N & W Development Corp., whom Bogert had pushed to help find a solution to the housing crisis. Indeed: "The Mayor, working tirelessly for a low-cost housing project, had asked (N & W Development) some months ago if (they) couldn't come up with a solution to the ever increasing problem of homes for the scores of people who are residing in Section 14 and who are presently on notice that they must move from their present homes to make way for a full-scale Indian Section clearance program." o Upon hearing that the FHA and FHAA had approved this $2.5 million plan, Bogert "was elated. It had brought to an end the months upon months of studying for a solution to a problem which was only worsening with time." o Unfortunately, the N & W project ultimately failed as the developers went through a period of "tight money" brought upon by a recession that had hit the country. This recession "set back many major housing and building development projects everywhere," not just in Palm Springs. Additionally, the recession "was particularly harmful to the city's plans for the immediate solution to the problems of Section 14."37 • September 196138 o The city and Frank Bogert secure a certification from the "Housing and Home Finance administrator proclaiming that Palm Springs has qualified for Federal Aid in its Workable Program for community improvement" o "U.S. Housing administrator Robert C. Weaver has determined that this community's program meets Federal requirements .... The certification means that Palm Springs can proceed with its program, under federal assistance, to utilize appropriate private and public resources to eliminate and prevent the development or spread of slums and urban blight: to encourage needed urban rehabilitation; to provide for the development of blighted, deteriorated or slum areas, or to undertake other activities as may be suitable employed to achieve the objective of such a program." • October 196139 o Bogert and the city council "rezoned five acres of Section 20 for 120 low-cost housing units. Developer Robert Gould applied for a low -interest loan for the project and subsequently announced the city had qualified for it." • December 196140 o Bogert and the city rezone seven and a half acres in Section 34 for 200 to 250 low-cost housing units. The developer for this project unfortunately died before the project could get underway and the development was cancelled. • 196141 o As detailed earlier, Bogert hires Charles Jordan as the city's first Black employee. Jordan would go on to serve on a special citizens' committee created by Bogert to assist 37 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, November 15, 1968 38 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 30, September 8, 1961 39 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 40 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 41 http://takebackthetimes.blogspot.com/2006/10/memorable-50th-high-school-class.html 0 Section 14 families with relocation. He was instrumental in securing the city's first federally financed housing project in 1968. • Early 196242 o "Certificates of eligibility for the Section 221 loan plan were distributed by the city's building inspector." These certificates were to provide financing for relocation for Section 14 residents. August 196213 o "The Palm Springs City Council last night ordered an administrative investigation and report on Section 14 burnings carried out under a Superior Court order last month. The council took the action after emphasizing that the city was not involved in the action, nor could it legally make payments for personal goods lost in answer to a plea by 72-year- old Mrs. Florence Fatheree for city payment for her house and household goods." • September 196244 o City approves plans for low-cost homes in the southeast section of town. • Mid-1963 o "A judge struck down a proposed affordable housing project"45 January 1965 o When Indian agent Paul Hand stated that city sponsored public housing could be built on Indian reservations, Bogert asked "Where could you put this public housing?" asked the Mayor. There was no answer to his questions," 46 demonstrating the difficulty in finding land for relocated Section 14 residents. o The city council approves 20 acres to be rezoned in Section 20 for 300 low-cost housing units.47 • September 196548 o When the city needed to enact a "workable program" in order to secure federal funds for low-cost housing and when inspections to comply were lagging, Bogert pushed to accelerate the completion of tasks needed to qualify for the federal program. o "Mayor Frank Bogert however, pointed out that this would delay the program about 4 months and asked Aleshire to proceed as rapidly as possible with the inspection using present staff members...the proposed low-cost housing would be located in the lower half of Section 34. The city has also met most of its workable program requirements, including a master plan and zoning." 42 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan Kray, pg 113 43 Desert Sun, "Section 14 Probe Set," August 14, 1962 44 Desert Sun, Volume 36, Number 44, September 25, 1962 45 Desert Sun, "'It was beautiful for the white people:' 1960s still cast a shadow of distrust over Palm Springs," September 22, 2016 46 Desert Sun, Volume 38, Number 143, January 19, 1965 47 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 48 Desert Sun, Volume 39, Number 44, September 24, 1965 E • November 196549 o Under Bogert's leadership, the city created a human relations commission. The commission was recommended, "partially because it is needed to fulfill provisions of a "workable program" the city has submitted to the federal government for low-cost housing aid" o Bogert, who was a member himself, appointed a multiracial committee, comprised of members representing various minority groups, including Rev. Rollins of the First Baptist Church, Eileen Miguel of the Agua Caliente Tribe, Rabbi Joe Hurwitz, and John Quinonez. • January 1966" o Even up until his last months in office, Bogert was working furiously to secure low-cost housing: o Bogert helped create and conducted a meeting for the human relations commission to "alleviate problems of minority groups in Palm Springs." o Bogert "outlined some of the aims of the present committee. Among them, he said, would be its relationship with economic opportunity programs and with the city's workable program which would pave the way for federal aid in low-cost housing developments. In addition to his constant efforts seeking low-cost housing during his Mayoral term, Bogert even continued seeking affordable housing options after his term ended in early 1966. He did so by partnering with leaders of the Black community. • May 5, 196751 o "Backed by city council support, former Mayor Frank Bogert today prepared to go to Washington in an attempt to obtain federal aid in low-cost housing for Palm Springs. Bogert, who has been working on a program for low-cost housing for 10 years, received a consensus of approval from the council yesterday at a study session.... Bogert will seek a 250-unit housing complex adjacent to the Gateway Estates and will try to get federal subsidies for a 'Model Neighborhood Program' which would include the housing project." "The former Mayor noted that the city has had a workable program for three years, an FHA requirement for aiding private developers in construction of low-cost housing. "There is a great demand for low-cost housing for the working force in the city," Bogert told the council. "Something must be done for them." "Bogert pointed out that as a result of the Indian -owned Section 14 cleanup campaign many of the city's hotel workers and domestics were forced to move to Banning and to Beaumont. "There were a lot of fine people moved out of Section 14," he told the council." 49 Desert Sun, Volume 39, Number 97, November 25, 1965 so Desert Sun, Volume 39, Number 131, January 5, 1966 51 Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 235, May 5, 1967 10 o "(Bogert) said he had conferred with FHA officials in San Francisco on a 250-unit housing development. But, he said, they recommended only 60 units. This is far from sufficient", he added. o "We're not trying to create a paradise to bring in people from Los Angeles," (Bogert) declared "but we do need enough to take care of our labor force. There is a terrific demand for housing for the working people." • May 18, 196752 o The "possibility of getting 180 units of low-cost housing for Palm Springs was described as good today by former Mayor, Frank Bogert, after conferring with Federal Housing Administration officials." o "Bogert and a group interested in obtaining low-cost housing for the city returned this week from Washington where they met with officials." o "With Bogert (on the trip to Washington) was ... Rev. Jeff Rollins, pastor of the First Baptist Church." o "He said the local delegation made the FHA officials aware of the Section 14 cleanup in which a large number of residents were forced to leave Palm Springs for Banning and Garnet and other nearby areas." These residents, Bogert said, still work in Palm Springs and would prefer to live here." • August 196753 o Rev. Rollins speaks before the city council urging them to pass emergency zoning laws in order to facilitate Bogert's proposed development project. o The First Baptist Church and the Los Angeles Psychological -Social Center are co- sponsors of Bogert's low-cost housing project. • September 196754 o Bogert meets with school trustees to push for low-cost housing plans for displaced residents. o Bogert stresses to the trustees that "low-cost development is needed to house the city's hotel work force." o Furthermore, "Bogert said he ... covered Palm Springs thoroughly to locate economically priced land for the low-cost development. The only place they could find, he said, was the proposed location." • November 1967" City Council all but kills Bogert's low-cost housing plans. A council member "indicated the federal rent supplement program on which the development hinged, was untested "and there is no experience on which the city can rely. Federal Housing Administration regulations call for approval by the city council before funds will be allocated" but ultimately the city council disapproved of the rent supplemental program. 52 Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 246, May 28, 1967 53 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 21, August 29, 1967 54 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 35, September 24, 1967 55 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 99, November 28, 1967 11 o "Former Mayor Frank Bogert, who said he had worked for 10 years or more on getting low-cost housing for the area, said it was obvious the council wouldn't listen to the proposal. Rev. Jeff Rollins, pastor of the First Baptist Church which would have been sponsor of the development, termed the action short-sighted on the part of the council." Examples of the HRC falsely accusing Bogert of not seeking low-cost housing and not caring for the welfare of Section 14 residents The Report whitewashes the crucial fact that Bogert went to great lengths to minimize the effects of the evictions (specifically by "tirelessly" working on low-cost housing) and also falsely claims that Bogert, "did not take adequate measures to address the needs of our most vulnerable people."56 The housing timeline provides an overwhelming amount of evidence to refute all of the false and/or misleading claims below made by the HRC in its Report.: • "City decision makers focused their energy clearing Section 14 for development instead of addressing the core issue of housing for those displaced. ,57 • "During this time, civic and business leaders were focused on commercial development and maintaining the resort image of Palm Springs without ensuring the residents they displaced had access to affordable housing or were provided just compensation. "58 • "Regrettably, no low-cost or affordable housing plan was realized to care for Black, Indigenous, persons of color and other working class families displaced under city directed forced evictions. ,51 • "City decision makers focused their energy clearing Section 14 for development instead of addressing the core issue of housing for those displaced. "' • "No city plan for relocation, coupled with racial covenants preventing African Americans from buying land in Palm Springs, displaced residents were forced to disperse to the north part of town. "61 • "Prior administrations recognized access to housing for those evicted was a concern. The plans developed during Frank Bogert's term, for demolition and burning of homes, continued in Palm Springs during and less than two years past Bogert's mayoral term. ,62 56 palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 25-26 57 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report Pg 6 58 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 6 59 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 6 60 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 6 61 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 8 62 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 17 12 • "The fact remains that people of color were banished from city limits and city leaders didn't intervene 43 • "No replacement housing was ever constructed. Rather, the residents were simply expelled through forced eviction and their homes destroyed. "' • "Facing a human rights crisis, why didn't the Desert Sun or city leaders move to upgrade the shacks to improve dangerous or unhealthy living conditions for tax paying residents?,'65 • "Our city leaders did not take adequate measures to address the needs of our most vulnerable people. "66 • "Bogert's Positive Traits and Attributes Did Not Surface to Aid Those Being Evicted.'' • "History documents Bogert was more often found to disregard the values of ethical and moral principles. His decisions in planning and preparing the community for low-cost housing and to plan for financial support of the families the city displaced is a demonstration of behaviors opposite of the positive traits community members have shared at official city meetings"6' • `7n our opinion, the reality of Bogert's decisions and judgement while serving his first term as mayor was mismatched between his actual behaviour and actions and a community's perception of the person he was. "6' • "A society based on norms and values expects one with entrenched values would have acted in good faith and stepped up to stop the eviction process until low-cost housing alternatives and financial support was made available to the impacted families. "70 • "Bogert demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by these evictions. ,71 • "Low -Cost Housing Timeline"72 o The most egregious example of the HRC concealing Bogert's efforts to secure low-cost housing occurs in a section titled "Low -Cost Housing Timeline," whereby the HRC provides a timeline relating to the city's efforts to seek low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. This timeline is further proof of the disingenuous and biased nature of the Report. Despite a voluminous amount of documentation (including in the same articles the HRC cites) that Bogert worked constantly to secure low-cost housing, 63 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 15 64 palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 23 65 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 24 66 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 25-26 67 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 45 68 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 45 69 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 45 70 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 45 71 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 46 72 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 31-32 13 never once is his name mentioned in the timeline. No mention of him pushing private developers to build low-cost housing. No mention of him securing housing certificates from the FHA for displaced residents. No mention of him pushing for and supporting the low-cost development projects of Lawrence Crossley. No mention of the multiracial citizen's committee he put together to study potential solutions to the housing crisis and to communicate with and hear the voices of minority residents. No mention of the numerous quotes of Bogert saying the city needed to find housing for the displaced. No mention of him partnering with his friend Reverend Rollins after he left office to secure low-cost housing. No mention of him lobbying in Washington with Rollins for low- cost housing funding. No mention of him searching for and applying for numerous federal assistance programs. No mention of him hiring Charles Jordan, the city's first ever Black employee, who was instrumental in securing the city's first federally funded housing project which was prioritized for Section 14 residents. 14 fi 4P I PHOTO #273 Bogert with the Rev. Jeff Rollins in Washington, D.C., in 1967. Bogert and Rollins went to Washington the year after Bogert left office to seek funds and approval from the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) to build low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. From the Desert Sun: Bogert "said the local delegation made the FHA officials aware of the Section 14 cleanup in which a large number of residents were forced to leave Palm Springs for Banning and Garnet and other nearby areas. `These residents,' Bogert said, `still work in Palm Springs and would prefer to live here."' 73 Desert Sun, pg 1, May 23, 1967 15 PHOTO #374 Bogert displaying a housing certification to city officials that he and the city were able to secure for Section 14 residents. This certificate would provide Section 14 residents with 100% financing for relocation with only $200 down. The "Housing and Home Finance administrator proclaim(ed) that Palm Springs has qualified for Federal Aid in its Workable Program for community improvement." 74 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 30, September 8, 1961 16 0 PHOTO #12 Charles Jordan in 1976.75 Jordan, a former Section 14 resident, was hired by Bogert as the city's first Black employee. Jordan was instrumental in the development of Seminole Gardens, the first federally funded housing project that was prioritized for Section 14 residents. From Palm Springs, he went on to have an illustrious political career, serving as Portland's first Black city councilmember and city commissioner, running the Conservation Fund, and working with Bogert on Ronald Reagan's President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. He gave the commencement speech at Palm Springs High School in 1987 and thanked Bogert for taking a chance on him by giving him a job in 1961. 75 The Astorian, "Former Portland City Commissioner Charles Jordan Dies At Age 77," April 2, 2004 76 www.r)ortlandof.com 17 BOGERT RETURNS Low Cost Housing Prospects 'Good ' Possibility of getting 180 units Springs for Banning and Gar- federal money with 20 per cent of low-cost housing for Palm net and other nearby areas. In money or planning work pro - Springs was described as good These residents, Bogert said, vided by the city today by former mayor, Frank still work in Palm Springs and Federal funds for the project Bogert, after conferring with would prefer to live here. would have to come from next Federal Housing Administration "The problem is that the peo- year's budget since current officials. ple who work here have to drive funds were used up May, John Bogert and a group interested in every day," Bogert said. Buggs, deputy director in charge in obtaining low-cost housing for The delegation also discussed of the model neighborhood pro - the city returned this week from the possibility of getting a model gram, told the Palm Springs is Washington w h e r e they met neighborhood program which group with officials With Bogert was would include the low-cost hous- A full report on the Washing- ,s Dr Lee Swanson of Goodkin ing tract, but would encompass ton meetings wag to be present- iT and Co , a research group mak- a larger area, ed to the Palm Springs City in ing a local housing survey; Joe This would he a model Council at a study session to- ,f Bolker, interested in building area, financed with 80 per cent day. n• the housing development, and he Rev. Jeff Rollins, pastor of e- the First Baptist Church. .I Bogert said they met Monday Inlwith Robert Jones, an assistant to to the FHA commissioner, who ie f is in charge of low-cost housing, -e and John Alstrup, regional di- lt'rector in charge of FHA's west- ,biem division. it The former mayor said the It group was requesting a housing or development of 250 units is "While we're asking 250 un- its, we think there is a good In possibility of obtaining 180 un- h ifs," Bogert said. g FHA has recommended only ,e 60 units for the housing devel- opment which would be erected 1C adjacent to the Gateway Estates Y The FIiA's 60 • unit recom- Y* mendation, Bogert said, was le based on Its survey of present I. Palm Springs residents requir- ing low-cost housing Ile said the local delegation r' made the FYIA officials aware 19 of the Section 14 cleanup in �s1which a large number of rest - dents were forced to leave Palm PHOTO #1377 A Desert Sun article from May 18,1967. Bogert continued seeking low-cost housing for Section 14 residents the year after leaving office in 1966. " Desert Sun, "Low-cost Housing Prospects Good," May 18, 1967 18 W"Ow v-......,. . a1hr r..'•M�� e �tl Yr w !1i(ir4 The DO"" &Wtf'i LWAWWDaJly' Nl�sp#Dgl s�.T.t iir„�,,wEa�,risi %6* Con ,o: 'TIME our CALLED ON SECT"ION 14 71Y.r. LiLw1 a ti, �.r. 1'.wa wny 7.w �„r' . � trr., r.a..i n. .urr ra►.�r _. Yc-. w.¢S(►. .N"Y•.. ^.rfd. W, r'.n}rrfh, rw Fry ....( LA 7niww 4xr.. p � wwo`M�iq, !e.w 1u. I !a .raw I.�.. ,'ra wW v..L,�Mw w~r• i� 6 Lwr \.%.•x l�.c .aI h..M. 'J..�ww .� 0. 1:ara. M.M A,- e.� N r M 7m. YW .L .fit NEWS I3RiRF ; s l"Y 7iY q.,y,e,... •� L (.� Y �hr MA +vrY tiiw .wf+wa. I art'.M� .yj+e.'� � •..a�..r.ve�`wr .. e..wwr>p.r YY.O. r. `.�... .,• Ali 4 A11.lr�Y-rYiaa t."a arw.E'..fal r Y� rw4w Yr t.kF .r.bY M l4.. a .W1 eYY11M Yryr �y e.r..rr.r. � eM� i y.► rN f..rYveN �,My, ,."M � � a.. �} 6 Y.a .r W. .YY. • .M. MerY r re^. � ti•w •..w.w. b y. +ii+a � '.'kYiM N '+. �Yrr1uSlrirt fYy.ti R PHOTO #1478 Article from the Desert Sun on June 27, 1961. Bogert and the city issued a six-month moratorium on legal evictions to allow residents time to seek housing alternatives and to provide time for the city to explore both private and publicly funded low-cost housing projects. 78 Desert Sun, "Time-out Called on Section 14," June 27, 1961 19 prard Out .«r, •...r....rsw«. M• Wa•r•,dw• •sWinC o.+n xna0•per M„ r.M rr»u. ;. r nwr *!r!,•. WI $2.5 MILLION APARTMENT SLATED FOR..,. -SECTION 14 Wolt-Newman To Construct 8-Acre Project a War 4_rwsni 1� wn i61 . C •w a r' d Plowin Pre New" e64S �YS� li PHOTO #1679 Desert Sun headline from August 18, 1961. The HRC claims this development was proposed in 1968 after Bogert was Mayor, when in reality it was Bogert himself who pushed for the development as Mayor in 1961. The article states, "The Mayor, working tirelessly for a low-cost housing project, had asked (the developer) some months ago if he couldn't come up with a solution to the ever increasing problem of homes for the scores of people who are residing in Section U." 79 Desert Sun, "$2.5M Apartment Complex Slated for Section 14 Families," August 18, 1961 20 Setting the Record Straight The True Story of Section 14 and a Rebuttal to the Human Rights Commission's Defamatory "Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report" September 13, 2021 Presented by Friends of Frank Bogert www.friendsoffrankbogert.org 1 friends of lirr" FRANK BOGERT TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction K The HRC's Report is Deeply Flawed and Ideologically Biased 3-5 - Falsehoods, plagiarism, intentional omission of refuting evidence, and questionable sources 3-5 - The Report's ideological roots and motivations 5-6 Setting the Record Straight: The True Story of Section 14 6-28 - The Report misrepresents Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva 7-9 - The HRC's Report ignores the human rights of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and takes quotes from Tribal Elders out of context 9-13 - Both the Deputy AG's and Department of Interior's investigations were strongly refuted and their findings were incomplete and biased 13-16 - Section 14 evictions were the inevitable consequence of ill-conceived federal laws that predated Bogert's Mayoral term 16-22 - Bogert worked "tirelessly" to minimize the effects of Section 14 evictions and to seek low-cost housing for its residents 22-26 - Additional findings and commentary on Section 14 and the HRC's Report 26-28 Frank Bogert: Quotes, Facts, and History of Supporting Minority Interests 28-32 - Quotes about Bogert from minority members of the community 28 - Frank Bogert's extensive history of supporting various minority groups 28-32 Conclusion 32-34 - Speaking "The" Truth instead of Speaking "Our" Truth 32-34 APPENDIX 35-89 Appendix A 36-56 Photos of Frank Bogert and of relevant topics from the Rebuttal - Photo #1: Bogert and the all -female Agua Caliente Tribal council 36 - Photo #2: Bogert and Reverend Jeff Rollins in Washington DC 37 - Photo #3: Bogert displaying housing certificate for Section 14 residents 38 - Photo #4: City Council and Tribal Council meeting 39 - Photo #5: Bogert and Pete Siva 40 - Photo #6: Bogert and Vyola Ortner in Washington DC 41 - Photo #7: Richard Milanovich speaking at Bogert's funeral 42 - Photo #8: The Palm Springs "Checkerboard" 43 - Photo #9: Bogert, Reverend Rollins, and the First Baptist Church 44 - Photo #10: Bogert and Rollins at Bishop opening 45 - Photo #11: Bogert and Mayor Ron Oden 46 - Photo #12: Charles Jordan 47 - Photo #13: Bogert seeking low-cost housing in 1967 48 - Photo #14: Bogert delays evictions for six months 49 1 Photo #15: Bogert and Eileen Miguel 50 Photo #16: $2.5M housing project for Section 14 residents 51 Photo #17: Editorial Board critique of the Deputy AG's report 52 Photo #18: Bogert and the Mexican community 53 Photo #19: Bogert in "Charro" attire 54 Photo #20: Eisenhower signing Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts 55 Photo #21: Editorial Board Critique of the Dept. of Interior's investigation 56 Appendix B 57-64 Bogert worked relentlessly to find housing for Section 14 residents and to minimize the effects of the legal evictions Appendix C 64-69 Examples of the 100+ problematic issues in the HRC's Report Appendix D ' 70-71 Examples of Plagiarism Appendix E 71-73 Timeline of ill-conceived Federal laws Appendix F 73-81 Additional details on the Deputy AG's and The Department of the Interior's Investigations - The Deputy AG's report was deeply flawed and incomplete 73-76 - The conflict of interest associated with the Department of Interior's investigation 76-78 - Additional issues with the Interior's findings 78-79 - The inequities caused by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Department of the Interior 79-81 Appendix G 82-86 Select quotes and passages - Tribal member related quotes and passages 82-83 Passages from "You Can't Eat Dirt" 83-85 Other quotes and passages 85-86 Appendix H 87-89 Select Exhibits - Letter from HRC Commissioner Terrie Andrade 87 - Email from HRC Commissioner Terrie Andrade 88 - Letter from Tribal Chair Edmund Peter Siva to City Council 89 Disclaimer and Notes - For sake of brevity and clarity, The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians is referred to throughout the Rebuttal as the "Tribe." - For a summary of the Rebuttal's findings, click here to read the conclusion. 2 The following document is a rebuttal (the "Rebuttal') to the Human Rights Commission's (the "HRC') `Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report' (the "Report') on Frank Bogert and Section 14. Contributed to and prepared by Friends and Family of Frank Bogert, including Norm King, Carrie Allan, Negie Bogert, Doug Evans, David Christian, the Higueras Family, Doni Ellison Hubbard (former Section 14 resident), Amado Salinas, Michael Hill, the Russell Family, John Stiles, Stacey Johnson, and Paul D'Amico. Introduction The Human Rights Commission's Resolution to remove Frank Bogert's statue is based on false allegations and an untruthful, ideologically driven critique of Section 14. The HRC's Report fails in four critical areas: 1. It fails to provide a true, objective review of history. 2. It fails to accurately educate the community about Section 14. 3. It fails to bring people together to factually discuss human rights. 4. Lastly, and most flagrantly, it fails to recognize the human rights of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (the "Tribe"). The entire Report is insulting to the difficult journey the Tribe endured throughout Section 14's history. As this Rebuttal will demonstrate, the HRC's Report does not provide any credible or substantive arguments to remove the statue and to defame Bogert. As such, and prior to any further debate or action regarding the Bogert statue, the HRC and the City Council have the obligation to review the true historical facts of Section 14 and to amend the Report accordingly. After a comprehensive review of the HRC's Report and after conducting extensive research on the events in question, below is a summary of the Rebuttal's findings on Section 14, Frank Bogert, and the HRC's Report itself. The HRC's Report is Deeply Flawed and Ideologically Biased Falsehoods, plagiarism, intentional omission of refuting evidence, and questionable sources • The Human Rights Commission's Report' is dishonest, defamatory, and factually inaccurate. The Report isn't an impartial, fact-finding review of Section 14. Instead, the HRC began with a false narrative about Frank Bogert and then proceeded to craft a misleading, error -filled, and incomplete Report to support that narrative. • The HRC fails to provide any credible evidence that Bogert's role in Section 14's redevelopment was driven by racism or by any discriminatory motivations whatsoever. • The Rebuttal fact -checked the entire Report and identified over 100 problematic issues. These issues include false claims, misleading statements, intentional omission of refuting 3 evidence, quotes taken out of context, and attempts to untruthfully associate Bogert with the wrongdoings of other individuals and/or institutions. (See Appendix C.) • The HRC concludes that the statue should be removed from City Hall under the premise that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by (Section 14) evictions." Not only is this premise completely false, but the HRC intentionally omitted evidence that would have directly refuted its very premise to remove the statue (see Appendix B. Indeed, the very sources the HRC cites in its own Report provide more than ample evidence to invalidate many of the HRC's false accusations. For example, the HRC cherry -picks information from a Nov. 15, 1968, article in the Desert Sun to support its biased narrative about Section 14 — however, below are quotes from the same exact article that the HRC left out of its Report. These quotes, among many others, directly discredit the Report's premise to remove the statue. Thus, the HRC purposely excluded this rebutting information and crafted a one-sided, disingenuous Report: "Mayor Frank Bogert, long active in trying to solve the housing problems of the minority groups in Section 14 said he thought the Gould -Crossley project would be a good thing. `I think we ought to stretch a point and let them have the zoning they want,' he said. 'Due to the housing emergency at the present time, we have to lean over backwards.' Nevertheless, Mayor Bogert emphasized, he wanted to be sure any dwellings built for rentals would be good housing. `I don't want to see another slum area. If someone is going to build a place for these people, it should be good.'... A $2.5 million housing development which will be used for families displaced from Section 14... was the upshot of a previous request, of several months standing, by Mayor Bogert of (the developer) to seek a solution to the problem of homes for the residents of Section 14."' The Report is plagiarized (see Appendix D). Of the 48 pages in the body of the HRC's Report, examples of plagiarism were found on 17 pages. • Significant portions of the Report are copied and pasted (in some cases without any citation) from an essay written in 2004 by a graduate student at the University of California, Irvine. This graduate student's essay ("The Path to Paradise") is cited 19 times, by far the most of any source in the Report. The essay uses sensationalized language and is written in a persuasive and, in many instances, opinionated prose. The HRC injects subjective, sensationalized sections of the essay verbatim into its own Report, and attempts to pass these sections off as objective, irrefutable facts. • As far as the Rebuttal could tell, the HRC failed to conduct any primary research when drafting the Report. The HRC certainly never reached out to any members of the Agua Caliente Tribe, the Bogert family, the Palm Springs Historical Society, or anyone for that matter who could provide an accurate account of Section 14 or refute the Report's claims. Desert Sun, "The Section 14 Story III, Elation Over Housing Okay Fades as Recession Comes," November 15, 1968 4 The Report does not contain a single direct citation of "You Can't Eat Dirt," arguably the definitive piece of written, first-hand experience on Section 14 and on the events that led to the necessary evictions. o As detailed later in the Rebuttal, the HRC relies primarily on sources with second-hand, incomplete knowledge of Section 14's history in order to support its criticism of Bogert. These sources/critics ignore or fail to grasp the complex series of events that led to the evictions. Alternatively, this Rebuttal relies mostly on community members and local journalists with intimate knowledge of Section 14, who provide first-hand, reputable accounts of the city's history and of Bogert's character. • The Report was even strongly criticized by one of the HRC's own commissioners. In a letter written to the city on April 27, 2021 HRC commissioner Terrie Andrade stated the following: "The matter of removing Mayor Bogert's statue has, for me, been overshadowed by the means being used to justify it. The accusatory language in the resolution, the presentation of anecdotal information as fact, and the weak sources of opinion used as reference... were unfair at best and at worst, gave the appearance of character assassination tactics to achieve a political goal. The substantiating report.... is, in my opinion, an embarrassing account of trial by media in spite of legal documentation to the contrary. "2 (See letter in Appendix H, pg 87.) In an email sent two days later to HRC Chairman Ron deHarte, Ms. Andrade writes that she finds the sources and "other cherry -picked references" used in the Report to be "anecdotal and highly opinionated." She concludes her email by saying: "Terms such as `dehumanization and devaluation of lives' persecution, terrorizing and the like... found in the report and the proposed resolution, are not corroborated nor can they be solely attributable to Frank Bogert.../ would have hoped that our Commission would have used the opportunity to bridge differences with education and understanding instead of indicting one individual to appease another group.' (See email in Appendix H, pg 88.) The Report's ideological roots and motivations • The Report does not make a legal, factual, or even an ethical argument to remove the statue. Thus, it is reduced to justifying the statue's removal on the basis of ideology alone. Indeed, efforts to remove the statue are politically and ideologically motivated as confirmed by Ron deHarte, the HRC's Chairman: "Some may feel that the recommendation to move the monument is a political effort made to appease one other group. Well, they are indeed correct.' 4 - Ron deHarte, HRC Chairman, May 5, 2021 2 Letter from HRC Commissioner Terrie Andrade, April 27, 2021 3 Email from HRC Commissioner Terrie Andrade to Chairman deHarte, April 29, 2021 4 HRC Special Meeting, May 5, 2021 5 • The Report is rampant with ideological rhetoric such as "whiteness," "white privilege," "unconscious manifestations of racial bias," and "anti -racist values." The point of highlighting this language is not to critique the Report's ideology, but rather to reinforce the fact that this retroactive assessment of Bogert is being conducted through the lens of a present-day, polarizing ideology. The Report is neither an impartial nor apolitical review of Bogert or Section 14. Instead, the HRC uses a set of ideological standards by which to critique Bogert — standards that a significant portion of the community and nation at large find divisive, inflammatory and controversial. Further proof of the Report's ideological roots is exemplified through the very sources the HRC cites to justify its critique of Bogert. One such ideological source cited in the Report is the Journal of Critical Sociology. This Journal publishes "articles from all perspectives broadly defined as falling within the boundaries of critical or radical social science,"5 including publications on Critical Race Theory. Again, the Report's ideological slant is highlighted merely to identify the frameworks and system of beliefs by which the HRC vilifies Bogert and justifies its Resolution to remove his statue in front of City Hall. Setting the Record Straight: The True Story of Section 14 Instead of objectively analyzing historical events to arrive at an evidence -based conclusion, the HRC worked backward and began with an unsubstantiated, biased conclusion that the city's motivations to evict Section 14 residents were discriminatory in nature. It then cherry -picked information from various sources to support that conclusion. This agenda -driven approach led to a Report that was inaccurate, one-sided, incomplete, and purposely misleading. The HRC goes into great detail about the harms caused by the evictions (which the Rebuttal acknowledges), but the Report is devoid of details on the root causes and the historical events that necessitated these relocations and evictions. These root causes are critical in order to assess the city's and Bogert's actions and to understand the Section 14 story as a whole. Additionally, the HRC omitted the importance of Section 14 to advancing the human rights of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. The Report ignores the decades -long fight the Tribe endured to obtain the right to develop Tribal lands on Section 14 in order to improve the economic future for its marginalized, poverty-stricken community. The Rebuttal acknowledges the pain and hurt caused by Section 14's redevelopment and sympathizes with those affected by the evictions. However, an overwhelming amount of evidence supports that the following two statements are simultaneously true: Section 14 was a challenging period in the city's history, and many residents, minorities included, were legally relocated and, in some cases, evicted from their homes. And yet; 2. Relocations and evictions were necessary and inevitable due to decades of shortsighted, discriminatory, and neglectful federal laws affecting the Agua Caliente 5 https:Hiournals.sagepub.com/aims-scope/CRS C.1 People and its lands — laws that 1) Bogert had no involvement in enacting and 2) predated his Mayoral term. Bogert and the city inherited an unprecedented municipal crisis and were tasked with rectifying a housing quagmire. Knowing the redevelopment of Section 14 was inevitable, Bogert went to great lengths to ameliorate the effects of the evictions, specifically by seeking low-cost housing over a 10-year span, and showed no discriminatory motivations whatsoever throughout the process. In fact, he went above and beyond his obligations as Mayor by partnering with leaders of the Black community to find low-cost housing for relocated residents the year after his Mayoral term had ended. His efforts and support of minority interests directly contributed to the city's first federally funded housing project in 1968 — this housing project was prioritized for Section 14 residents. • Despite the HRC claiming otherwise, Bogert was never found guilty, let alone ever formally charged, of any wrongdoing in connection with Section 14 or his conservatorship of Pete Siva. • On May 5, 2021, Chairman deHarte claimed that Bogert was "found guilty" of fee splitting by the Department of Interior and that the task force "ordered all improperly gained fees held in trusts for the landowner.116 This is categorically false and indicative of the many untruthful and misleading statements made throughout the HRC's Report and by Mr. deHarte himself. The word "guilty" is never mentioned once in the Interior's report with regards to Bogert and no corrective action was "ordered" against him. The Report misrepresents Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva • The HRC embellished Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva and his involvement in the Conservator program overall. The HRC truthfully describes the inequities and discriminatory nature of the Indian Conservator program but untruthfully attempts to associate Bogert with these wrongdoings. In reality, Bogert was an ally of the Tribe and a defender of its sovereign rights. Any reference to Bogert's conservatorship in the Report needs to be contextualized, specifically with regards to the circumstances by which he reluctantly became a conservator. Pete Siva's wife, Bernadine Siva, set the record straight in June of 2020: "I have been reading the comments about Frank Bogert and his Statue. I believe the statue should not be removed or destroyed. Frank Bogert was an Honorable and Honest man. I feel I must share this with you. When a few Judges, Attorneys and business men got together and decided that the Indians were uneducated and not capable of handling their lands and income, which was a potential gold mine, they created the Guardian and Conservatorship Association. I am not sure but the Bureau of Indian Affairs must have known about 6 HRC Special Meeting, May 5, 2021 7 this. There is no justification for this Association, most of the Indians had very little income and had to have food on the table and retain a Tribal Attorney. My late husband Edmund Peter Siva, a Tribal Member, told me his story. He said `The Attorneys and Business People with the help of the Superior Court were appointing Conservators like someone in an orchard picking Indians for themselves like they were picking fruit from the trees.' He did not want whomever picked to take his estate, which was by the way very small. He had known Frank for a number of years and he asked him to do him a favor and take over as conservator to prevent this from happening to him. Frank said you don't need a conservator, you are smart and have your father and are capable of managing your own affairs. Finally, after much conversation pro and con Frank said as a favor to you I will be your conservator. (He) really did not want to be associated with the group of Lawyers and business people in this Association, and he never was. The only Conservatorship Frank had was my husband. My husband and the Tribal Elders did not like it but the papers were drawn up, taken to the Court and the Indian's lives were taken over more or less until 1965. Frank was one of the first to sign off as a conservator."' o Mrs. Siva's statement reaffirms the following details about Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva: Bogert had no involvement whatsoever in the creation, implementation or management of the Conservator program. In fact, he didn't want to be associated with the program or with other conservators, as Mrs. Siva states. • Because Bogert was so well respected and admired by the Tribe, he was the only person Mr. Siva trusted to serve as his conservator. • Bogert knew the Conservator program was unjust and onerous to the Tribe, but as a favor to Mr. Siva and his family, he reluctantly agreed to be his conservator. • Bogert was the first conservator to voluntarily release an Indian "ward" from conservatorship. He did so against the wishes of other conservators and lawyers who were egregiously profiting off Tribal members under conservatorship.8 o Bogert himself corroborated Mrs. Siva's statement in an interview with the Desert Sun in 1991, saying: "The judge would appoint a conservator, they'd charge the Indian for a lawyer, then lease the land. But they'd get the money, and the Indian wouldn't get anything. There were a lot of abuses ... I was a conservator for (Pete Siva), and I was the first to turn someone loose. The judge (McCabe) was very angry. "9 o In an article written by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist George Ringwald, Bogert was quoted as saying: 7 Bernadine Siva post on Facebook, June 30, 2020 8 Desert Sun, "Lawrence Crossley and the fight against conservatorships for Indians," July 19, 2020 1 Desert Sun, "Checkerboard, Greed, Lies and a Modern Fable," October 13, 1991 "I've always been for the Indian and I've been against the conservators because most of them haven't done anything for the Indian." Ringwald claimed that this statement by Bogert was "the most critical comment made by anyone from within the conservator group."10 The HRC strongly implies that as a conservator, Bogert profited off of Section 14 evictions and the demolition of substandard dwellings. This is false. Bogert voluntarily signed off as a conservator in July of 1963. City -coordinated evictions did not begin until one year later in 1964 and city -financed demolition did not begin until more than two years later, in October 1965. o Given the facts above, all attempts by the HRC to tie Bogert to wrongdoings by other conservators, and the Conservator program overall, should be dismissed and discredited. (See Bogert and Siva photo.) The HRC's Report ignores the human rights of the Aqua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and takes quotes from Tribal Elders out of context The HRC has angered prominent members of the Agua Caliente Band by taking quotes from deceased relatives out of context in order to support its false claims against Bogert. The families of Richard Milanovich and Pete Siva (both former Tribal Chairs) formally requested that the HRC remove any mention of their families' names in the Report and in efforts to defame Bogert. As of September 13, 2021, the HRC has ignored these requests. Below are statements made by members of Tribal families: o Trista Milanovich, daughter of Richard Milanovich, at an HRC Special Meeting: 'I am speaking today on behalf of the Richard Milanovich family, and the family only. I previously wrote a letter to the PS city council explaining our disapproval of the removal and relocation of Mayor Frank Bogert's statue. My father had nothing but respect and admiration for Frank. Their years -long friendship, both professionally and personally, is a testament to that fact. My father did not believe Frank to be a racist man. He wouldn't have spoken at his funeral if he believed him to be so. He would be absolutely appalled to know that his name is being used in this effort to remove the statute. We are absolutely appalled by it. It is disgusting that you would use his words, but even more so out of context, especially considering we feel you are certainly unaware of what his feelings were on the matter and what his feelings were on the man at the heart of this issue. This is our formal request that you remove any quotes as well as any mention of my father Richard Milanovich in the Human Rights Commission Report ... We do 10 Daily Enterprise. "Some fee splitting acknowledged in Indian cases," December 7, 1967 9 not agree with any mention of him and it is our firm belief that he would feel the same. And again we believe that my father would not believe in the removal or relocation of this statue."" o Additionally, the daughters of Pete Siva submitted the following letter to the HRC and the City Council titled "Cease and Desist": "The family of Edmund Peter Siva (Deceased Cahuilla Elder) demand that you stop using his name in regards to his relationship with Frank Bogert. A relationship and life long friendship which you do Not know anything about. Your attempts to slander these men and use the name of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians as a pawn in your game, is disgusting. Please remove our Father Edmund Peter Siva's name from the HRC Report, and from PS city councils agenda. 1112 o Mr. Milanovich and Mr. Siva were both lifelong, close friends of Bogert's, making the HRC's attempt to use them both to defame Bogert even that much more shameful. Mr. Milanovich spoke at Bogert's funeral in 200913 (see funeral photo) and Mr. Siva held Bogert's Mayoral victory party at his home in 1982.14 (See party photo.) • Ironically, but not surprisingly, the Human Rights Commission ignored the human rights of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians in its Report. The Tribe's decades -long struggle for self -determinism, sovereignty, and for the right to develop Tribal lands is a core element of the Section 14 story — the HRC willfully ignored this crucial point. o Before and during Section 14 clearing, Tribal members were rich in land but lived in poverty due to discriminatory, shortsighted federal laws which prevented the Tribe from developing its allotted land. Former Tribal Chair Vyola Ortner's memoir was titled "You Can't Eat Dirt" for this very reason — the Tribe owned valuable land (specifically in Section 14), but without long-term leases the Tribe could not properly develop this land, generate income, and lift its members out of dire financial conditions. Knowing this, Ortner and an all -female Tribal Council lobbied extensively with Bogert's help (see Bogert and Ortnerohoto) for long-term leases and were ultimately successful in getting Congress to pass the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts in 1959. These laws provided the Tribe with the long -desired 99-year leases required to attract developers and investors to its land. The combination of long-term leases and equalized allotments in the Acts were heralded as the "two most important pieces of legislation ever affecting Palm Springs"15 (see 1959 Acts photo). Upon the passing of these laws, the Tribal Council turned to the city for help with clearing Section 14 so that Tribal members could develop their allotments and begin improving the impoverished conditions of their community. Nothing better describes the Section 14 story, and specifically as it relates 11 HRC Special Meeting, May 5, 2021 12 Letter submitted to the City Council and HRC, May 10, 2021 13 Desert Sun, pg B4, March 28, 2009 14 Desert Sun, "Frank Bogert wins PS mayoral bid," April 14, 1982 15 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts, pg 35 10 to race, better than this passage in "You Can't Eat Dirt" (see additional passages in Appendix F): "For (Ortner), the clearing of Section 14 was not about race or class. After all, she had lived on Section 14 during her childhood, among the diverse population of working-class blacks, Latinos, whites, and Indians, and understood from where she came. She also understood that, even though many Indians had moved away from the area by this time, some remained and she realized that they would be subject to the same trauma of displacement and relocation. She didn't want them or anyone else to suffer as a result of the tribe's development plans for Section 14. Over the years, she had watched her ancestral homeland (Section 14) degrade due to onerous laws and government neglect. As a tribal leader, her aim was to turn this around. She addressed the current inhabitants and subpar living standards on Section 14 from the subjective perspective of Indians as minorities seeking the freedom to exercise their rights and create economic opportunities for themselves and their children by preparing for a development project on Indian land that was conceived and executed by Indians. For her, that was the only racial dimension. She has said, "It didn't matter what color skin the residents had; they could have all been purple! The issue was, this was our land and we had a right to develop it. 1116 • Knowing the vital need to develop Section 14 in order to improve the impoverished conditions of its members, the Tribal Council began making plans to develop the area as early as 1952 (6 years before Bogert became Mayor). That year the Tribal Council "laid the groundwork for a master plan of the reservation, generally, and for Section 14, specifically, which had never been done before to this detailed and professional an extent."" According to the Tribe's 1952 progress report, working with the city to develop Section 14 was "vital to modernizing life in Palm Springs, for Indians and non -Indians alike. Beyond increasing the value of Indian land, the most important aspect of this new way of collegial thinking and operating was the aim of making the local Indians equal and valued citizens in Palm Springs."" Tribal Chair Vyola Ortner stated that "close cooperation" with the city would reflect "a steadily increasing standard of living, better homes, better education, better healthcare and other things that go to make up what we like to call `the American Way of Life."19 In June of 1956, the Tribal Council hired a Beverly Hills based development firm to "make a study and submit plans and recommendations for the most beneficial use and development of the Agua Caliente Reservation land resources... (the developer's) mandate encompassed the entire reservation but focused particularly on the valuable Indian land comprising Section 14 in downtown Palm Springs ... (because) It was the most prized Indian parcel - located near the central business district, capable of producing a high return on investment 16 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts, pg 42 17 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts, pg 25 18 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts, pg 26 19 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts, pg 26 11 (for the Tribe), and now, at long last, poised to reap the fruits of the new federal leasing law.°zo The HRC purposely omits the importance clearing Section 14 had on the advancement of Tribal human rights. Instead of giving a truthful account of how an indigenous, poverty-stricken group came to the city for help in order to improve its quality of life by developing Section 14, the HRC ignored these important facts as they directly refute the Report's claims that evictions/clearings were driven by "privilege," "whiteness," and racism. As it does throughout the Report, the HRC chose not to include these factual, refuting details and instead manipulated the retelling of historical events to support its false narrative and scapegoat Bogert. The Tribe's decades -long struggle to become more self-sufficient by developing its lands consisted of multiple lawsuits against the federal government (one that reached the Supreme Court), extensive lobbying efforts, and numerous trips to Sacramento and Washington, D.C., to meet with government officials (see timeline in Appendix E). It's an illogical and implausible position for the HRC to both 1) support the Tribe's rights to develop its land and improve its financial conditions and to 2) condemn the lawful relocations/evictions. Why? Because legal relocations/evictions were a necessary first step in prelude to developing income producing land for the Tribe. Nearly a century of ill-conceived federal laws created a dilemma in which advancing the rights of one marginalized group (the Tribe) came at the expense of another marginalized group (Section 14 residents). Opposing the legal relocations and evictions inherently meant opposing the Tribe's right to improve its dire financial situation. This critical point is missed by the HRC and other critics who claim to support the human rights of all minority and marginalized groups, and yet who criticize the city's actions. Wedged between the competing interests of two marginalized groups created a predicament for Bogert and the city. As detailed later, he worked "tirelessly" to both support the Tribe's newfound right to develop Section 14 and to minimize the effects of the evictions. o The HRC reveals its complete miscomprehension of the Section 14 dilemma as well as its disregard for Tribal human rights by posing the following myopic, rhetorical question: "Facing a human rights crisis, why didn't the Desert Sun or city leaders move to upgrade the shacks to improve dangerous or unhealthy living conditions for tax paying residents?"21 A lengthy rebuttal could be written on this rhetorical question alone but, in short, the HRC's "solution" wouldn't have generated sufficient income to materially improve the financial wellbeing of the Tribe and would have still necessitated the relocation of Section 14 residents. (Further explanation can be found in Appendix C.) Frank Bogert was an ally of the Tribe. He stepped up along with fellow city council members and responded to the Tribe's request for assistance in dealing with Section 14 when countless government agencies refused to do so (see Bogert and Tribal Council meeting photo). By taking a Richard Milanovich quote out of context in its Report, the HRC 20 "you Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts, pg 37-38 21 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report, pg 24 12 erroneously claims that Bogert was part of a "scheme" to dispossess the Tribe of its lands and insinuates that clearing of Section 14 was done against the Tribe's will. The Rebuttal strongly refutes these false accusations and provides the following quotes from Tribal Chairs publicly thanking Bogert and the city council for their help with Section 14: "Our appreciation goes to ... Mayor Frank Bogert of Palm Springs who has consistently demonstrated that he had both the interests of the Indian people and the City of Palm Springs at heart, and who has time and time again expended commendable effort in helping find a solution for some of our problems." - Eileen Miguel, Agua Caliente Tribal Chair in 1962 (See Bogert and Miguel photo "The Tribal Council for the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians want you to know that they commend you for your recent Clean -Up campaign and they ask that you consider this letter as a note of their appreciation."22 - Edmund Peter Siva, Chairman of the Agua Caliente Council, April 25, 1966, in a letter to the City Council thanking them for their help cleaning up Section 14. Note that Edmund Peter Siva went by "Pete Siva", who Bogert voluntarily released from conservatorship in 1963. (See letter in Appendix H, pg 89) o The quotes above demonstrates that the HRC has chosen to disregard the historical record — the impetus for the Section 14 "Clean -Up" was not driven solely by Frank Bogert, the city council, city "elites," or "power brokers." Not only did Bogert assist the Tribe with Section 14, but he was also instrumental in working with the aforementioned all -female Tribal Council in lobbying efforts to pass the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts in 1959 (see Bogert and all -female council photo). As former Tribal Chairman Richard Milanovich explained: "(Milanovich) said Bogert's contribution to regional Tribes is significant... Hotels eventually developed major properties on the Tribe's land, Milanovich said. `You couldn't get long-term commercial leasing from the (Bureau of Indian Affairs) before Bogert added his lobbying muscle. This was very important. 11'23 Both the Deputy AG's and Department of Interior's investigations were strongly refuted, and their findings were incomplete and biased • The two investigations the HRC references throughout the Report were both found to be problematic for various reasons and their findings were strongly and publicly rebutted: 1. The Deputy Attorney General's Investigation: 22 Edmund Siva letter to City Council, April 25, 1966 23 Desert Sun, "Cowboy to some, legend to Valley," March 4, 2005 13 o First off, the Deputy AG said, "There is no evidence that any crimes were committed in the removal of the residents from Section 14 and the destruction of their homes.1124 After finding no legal wrongdoing with Section 14, the Deputy AG inserted his opinion in his report, and that opinion was influenced by his activist background and ties. The Deputy AG came from a family of well-known political and housing activists25. The Deputy AG's background provides context to the sensationalized language he uses in his report (such as "city -engineered Holocaust"), which reads as if it was written by a political activist with an agenda as opposed to an objective law enforcement official. o The Deputy AG's report was heavily criticized and refuted in a series of articles by the Managing Editor of the Desert Sun in November of 1968. The Editor said the Deputy AG's report was "as biased and nonsensical a report as has come across our desk — ever. The facts on the cleanup of Section 14 were on the record, easy to find — and almost completely ignored."" o Additionally, there were numerous other issues with the Deputy AG's report, including the fact that he failed to interview many of the city's top officials, spent only a few days at most in Palm Springs to investigate an extremely complex matter, and didn't have the resources to conduct a thorough investigation. These issues, which the Desert Sun's Managing Editor details, led to the report's incomplete, inaccurate, and biased findings. o The Deputy AG's following claims, among others, were proven to be false and/or strongly refuted (see further detail in Appendix F): • The City kept no records of the evictions27 • Residents weren't provided adequate eviction notices28 • The City showed no concern for evictees once homes were destroyed (see Appendix 0) o In response to the AG saying that Section 14 was a "classic study in civic disregard for the rights and feelings of minority citizens," the Desert Sun Editorial Board in 1968 said, "We suggest instead that Miller showed a classic disregard for the facts in the case and an `end justifies -the -means approach.s29 (See Editorial clipping.) 2. The Department of Interior's Investigation: o The focus of this investigation was not on Section 14 itself or Bogert, but rather on the malfeasance by individual judges and lawyers in the Conservator program. Bogert's name isn't mentioned a single time after analyzing more than 165 pages of 21 California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, May 31, 1968, Palm Springs Section 14 Demolition, Loren Miller, Jr. 25 https://la.curbed.com/2018/4/18/17202950/loren-miller-attorney-black-history-housing-covenants 2s Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 62, June 5, 1968 27 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 98, November 26, 1968 28 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 621, June 5, 1968 2s Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 621, June 5, 1968 14 Congressional testimony from the hearing to review the Interior's findings on the Conservator program. He was alluded to once (not by name) in the hearing, but only in a positive light as being the first person to voluntarily end his conservatorship.10 o Many of the findings of the Department of Interior's task force were thoroughly discredited and refuted by numerous individuals who testified under oath at the same Congressional hearing in May of 1968. Due primarily to a conflict of interest with the head of the task force, the Interior's findings were described under oath as "disgraceful," the "grossest distortions of facts ...in a governmental publication," "erroneous," "biased," and that investigators "deliberately ignored facts known to them that demonstrate the falsity of the charges."" (See conflict of interest in Appendix FJ o An exhaustive and earlier investigation of the conservator program in 1963 found no wrongdoing with regards to fees charged by conservators, including Bogert. The Department of the Interior — which conducted this 1963 investigation and later launched another investigation on the same conservator program in 1968 — concluded "there may be a number of instances where fees appear to be high, yet after a close analysis of the services in fact rendered, it cannot be said that they are unjustifiably so."32 o How can two separate investigations on the same topic, conducted five years apart by the same federal department, come to such different conclusions? Simply put, "at the time the (conservator) program commenced, there was no similar program anywhere in the United States. For that reason, among other practical reasons, there were no guidelines. There were no established policies.1133 Additionally, the conservator program was plagued by "chaos and confusion1134 and it was a program "of trial and error."35 Some conservators exploited the ill-conceived, unstructured nature of the program for financial gain and at a great expense to their Tribal "wards." With no legal precedent or concrete laws by which to assess the actions of conservators, the Department of the Interior was merely able to provide subjective commentary and analysis on conservator fees and on the program overall. o Accordingly, due to this lack of clarity surrounding conservator regulations, the head of the Interior's task force was only able to offer an opinion that Bogert's fee -splitting as a 30 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 90-258 31 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 90-258 32 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 208 33 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 221 34 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 219 35 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 172 15 conservator was improper. Indeed, the task force said in its report, "We are of the opinion that this fee splitting between a broker and conservator .... is improper under California law."36 The task force leader's opinion on the conservator program was strongly refuted in Congressional testimony for two primary reasons, 1) the aforementioned conflict of interest and 2) the task force leader had limited experience assessing complex fiduciary/conservator fee structures (see issues with the Interior's findings in Appendix F). Bogert was never "found guilty" of fee splitting nor was any corrective action ordered against him as the HRC's Chair, Ron deHarte, claims. Regardless of the Interior's opinion on Bogert's fees, Bogert (as detailed earlier) only became a conservator in the first place as a favor to the Siva family. Again, any attempts by the HRC to tie Bogert to the wrongdoings of the Conservator program and to individual conservators should be dismissed. o Finally, in a highly critical editorial titled "Indian Probe Incompetent' (see editorial clipping), the Desert Sun also pointed out the investigation's flaws and questioned the objectivity of the investigators, saying: "As the Bureau of Indian Affairs continues to investigate the handling of local Indian estates by conservators and guardians, it becomes more clear that the bureau itself is not competent to take over the job. In fact the bureau has shown it is not even competent to conduct the investigation. As more examples of carelessness and lack of objectivity in the investigation come to light, one has to question the motives of the in vestigators. " The editorial went on to identify and detail three major errors in the investigation and concluded by stating: "We are not convinced that these errors are only a matter of carelessness and do not involve a certain amount of prejudice... In other words, is the bureau conducting a witch hunt or an impartial investigation?"' Section 14 evictions were the inevitable consequence of ill-conceived federal laws that predated Bogert's Mayoral term • The HRC provides an overly simplistic, inaccurate depiction of the circumstances surrounding Section 14's relocations and evictions. Bogert and the city inherited an unprecedented and complex municipal housing crisis when he became Mayor in 1958. This municipal housing crisis was the inevitable consequence of nearly a century of ill-conceived and discriminatory laws enacted by the federal government with regards to Tribal -owned lands in Palm Springs. These federal laws directly led to the city's de facto segregation and the slum -like, substandard living conditions of Section 14 (see Appendix . The HRC's Report would lead one to believe that it was Bogert himself that contributed to or 36 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 65 37 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 134, January 9, 1968 ire, caused Section 14's segregated and dire conditions — this is false. Below are select quotes from Congressional testimony in 1968 and from "You Can't Eat Dirt" affirming the federal government's role in Section 14's living conditions and de facto segregation (see additional quotes from testimony in Appendix F): "I think the Congress of the United States has to share with the Bureau of Indian Affairs a great deal of responsibility for that, for their failure to recognize this problem in the leasing regulations that we have set as a guide. We in the Congress, cannot escape our farsighted responsibility for waiting until the late 1950's to get adequate long term leasing authority into the law."38 - Congressman Ed Edmondson (a lawyer, Navy veteran, and former FBI agent) from Oklahoma who led the May 1968 Congressional hearing, speaking about the federal government's role in restricting long-term leases on Indian lands. These restrictions directly led to the dire conditions and de facto segregation in Section 14, which Bogert inherited in 1958. "Recognizing the value of Indian land in Palm Springs, the federal government, in turn, dragged its feet in order to prolong whatever control it had over these valuable assets and to maneuver them to its advantage.'39 - "You Can't Eat Dirt" As a grand gesture to recover some prestige with its Indians and the public, the Interior Department in 1949 requested and received consent of Congress to lease land on a five-year basis. What thoughtlessness and lack of planning went into this request is unknown ... Yet the Interior Department proudly declared this is progress, but nevertheless continued its practice of granting thirty day permits thus encouraging and increasing the slum area theretofore developed by the Bureau (of Indian Affairs) on Section 14 in the heart of the City of Palm Springs.i40 - Testimony under oath by attorney Henry V Cleary at a May 1968 Congressional hearing. Note that the Interior Department (a federal agency) oversees the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Five-year leasing laws made it impossible for the Tribe to develop its land, thereby leading to Section 14's substandard conditions. • Upon Bogert taking office in 1958, a confluence of events outside of the city's control (and to no fault of Bogert's) had culminated to a point where clearing Section 14 was necessary, vital, and inevitable. Three driving factors, all resulting from shortsighted federal laws, led to the evictions: 1. The Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts in 1969 38 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 172 39 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 35 ao Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 205 17 The passing of the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts in 1959 (the year after Bogert took office) enabled Tribal members to finally attract developers and investors to their Section 14 allotments. While the Acts themselves weren't problematic, the fact that they took so long to enact led to further deterioration of Tribal lands. After fighting for decades for these leases, the Tribe was rightfully eager to begin clearing and redeveloping Section 14 the year after Bogert became Mayor. Doing so was vital to the Tribe's economic future and overall well-being. As the excerpt below explains: "Both long term leasing and equalization were remarkable legislative victories, and despite how they were amended and distorted at times, they were critical legal and business steps in building a strong foundation for the tribe's future growth and prosperity." 41 2. The dire and hazardous living conditions in Section 14 Living conditions in Section 14 had become dire, untenable, and dangerous (47% of the city's crime occurred in the area 42). These conditions stemmed primarily from 1) federal leasing restrictions of Tribal lands and 2) the sovereignty of Section 14 land. As Renee Brown, Curator for the Palm Springs Historical Society, explained: "Because Section 14 was on sovereign land and generated no property taxes, the city would not provide services to the area. There were no paved roads and no city services like water or sewage. Residents had to bum their trash, dig septic tanks, run waterlines as well as connect to existing electrical lies from outside the area ... A legal restriction imposed by the federal government limited leases on Indian land to only 5 years; this made home mortgages or loans for construction impossible to secure... Eventually the lack of basic services and inability to secure financing for improvements on existing structures led to the decay of many parts of the community. As time went on, many of the homes that had been constructed without foundations began to fall apart.1143 The ramifications of federal policies were devastating to Section 14 residents, to the Agua Caliente People, and to the city at large. Below are first-hand accounts of living conditions in Section 14, which explain the urgent and vital need to address and clean up the area: "It is an area without recognized public streets... where, indeed, street names have been applied to what are no more than rutted dirt lanes, leading nowhere. Homes are death traps of tinder -dry wood where families crowd in on one another in unsanitary profusion. Garbage and trash litter backyards and vacant lots. Beer cans are strewn along roadways. It is a breeding place for crime and vice ... In any community, the area would be a disgrace.1144 - Pulitzer Prize winning journalist George Ringwald 41 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 35 42 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 159, February 2, 1961 43 Desert Sun, "Section 14 holds a bittersweet place in history," December 27, 2015 44 "you Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 42 18 "Within 100 feet, a slum condition existed, with several hundred persons, including the Indian landlords, occupying substandard dwellings, shacks made of sheet metal, tin, and cardboard. There were no paved streets and, in some cases, lanes were rambling, dusty, and unnamed, and undedicated. Indigent occupancy was commonplace and the area served as a refuge for drunks, vagrants, prostitutes, and floating crap games. It constituted a serious criminal problem for the community. In 1950, a study revealed that 48 percent of the arrests and criminal complaints occurred on one - quarter of Section 14, although it represented only one -thirtieth of the incorporated area of the city. Purse snatching and assaults on women were commonplace after dark... conditions on section 14 were chaotic and sanitation was nonexistent. In this slum section, venereal rates were high, and the Agua Calientes were truly an impoverished and deprived people.1145 - Congressional testimony by the Palm Springs Chief of Police in May 1968 3. The city's "checkerboard" layout The city of Palm Springs was experiencing explosive growth at the time — both residential and commercial. However, it was unable to accommodate this growth due to the federal government's implementation of a "checkerboard" layout in 1876, whereby the city was divided up into squares with allotments for the railroad (and ultimately in the city's jurisdiction) and for the Agua Caliente Tribe. Roughly half of the squares though, those of the Agua Caliente Tribe, were not conducive to development due to the aforementioned leasing restrictions of Tribal lands (see checkerboard layout). Quotes below demonstrate the negative impact "checkerboarding" had on the community and how it created a bottleneck in terms of expansion and municipal development: "It is generally agreed, and most times conceded on all sides, that this 'checkerboarding' poses a multitude of civic and governmental problems for both the community and the Tribe and Section 14 is not the least of the problems. Records show both sectors have often sought avenues for resolving the issue of Section 14, but the critics of the city have seemingly studiously avoided presenting an objective suggestion or recommendation whereby an equitable solution maybe derived. They can find faults, but they can't help find constructive answers"46 "The (Tribe's) master plan report, issued in 1958 explained: `Everybody was playing on the black squares of the checkerboard — nobody was playing on the red. This was all very well for a game of skill, but not at all proper for the development of a city. Indian lands — nearly half of the city — were plagued by myriad (of) problems and lay dormant. A trickle of income — from rents or a fee patent and sale here and there — was not enough to deny the fact that land intended as an Indian birthright was 15 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 129 46 Desert Sun Volume 42, Number 87, November 13, 1968 instead, in the main, a burden and a delusion'... That plan never came to fruition, but its goal was clear. Get people onto the `red squares' of the checkerboard."' - (Note that the "red squares" refer to Tribal lands, including Section 14. The black squares refer to lands under city jurisdiction. The "red squares" were plagued with slum -like conditions due to federal leasing restrictions.) "Of all the Indian land within the city of Palm Springs, (the Tribe's Master Planner) said, Section 14 was the most desirable place to begin. It was the most prized Indian parcel -located near the central business district, capable of producing a high return on investment, and now, at long last, poised to reap the fruits of the new federal leasing law ... Section 14 would bring the most good to the local Cahuilla and would revitalize Palm Springs. The city had nowhere else to grow (due to the checkerboard). "48 • The HRC overlooked these three crucial drivers above and failed to grasp the complexity of the circumstances that led to Section 14 evictions. The Report is abundant in sensationalized language about the evictions themselves but limited on detailing the underlying causes that necessitated those evictions. These underlying causes are crucial to understanding the Section 14 story, to explain why evictions and clearing were necessary and unavoidable, and to provide context to the decisions made by the city and Bogert. The HRC ignores the predicament Bogert and the city were facing and attempts to falsely portray that evictions were purely driven by discrimination or for financial purposes. This quagmire created a zero -sum situation that involved simultaneously trying to address numerous competing interests. Any decision made by the city council would come at the direct expense of another vested party. These competing interests were: 1. Supporting the Tribe's long -sought right to improve its quality of life by clearing and developing Section 14 2. Rectifying the dire, hazardous and dangerous conditions in Section 14 caused by restrictive federal leasing laws 3. Finding housing for displaced residents without funds, land, or resources to do so 4. Navigating the restrictive nature of the city's checkerboard layout in order to facilitate further municipal expansion for residents and commercial interests 5. Responding to local tax paying residents and businesses who had complained for years about the conditions in Section 14 and its negative impact on the city o This was an unprecedented quagmire, one in which there was no precedent to follow, no playbook to adhere to, and no historical comparable situations to learn from. Never before did a city have to manage numerous competing interests such as those the council faced in the 1960s nor did any city inherit a combination of the three 47 Desert Sun, "It was beautiful for the white people: 1960s still cast a shadow of distrust over Palm Springs," September 22, 2016 411 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 38 20 aforementioned drivers that necessitated the relocations and evictions. Pulitzer prize winning journalist George Ringwald said at the time: "The problem of what to do with Section 14 - and at times it must seem insurmountable to even the most ardent optimists- is not that of the Indians alone 49 o Reducing Section 14 merely to racism is not only false, but also disingenuous and does a great disservice to educating the community. To this day, Section 14 remains one of the most complex land use cases in US history. The Managing Editor of the Desert Sun summed up the city's predicament in 1968: "The City of Palm Springs has been damned for something it did - namely, conducting a cleanup of a cancerous slum area - but without a doubt it would have been equally damned if it hadn't!"50 o "But without a doubt it would have been equally damned if it hadn't!"— the last part of the quote above is important to consider. Below are likely consequences had the city not addressed the Section 14 problem: The city would have likely violated the recently passed Equalization and Long - Term Leasing Acts and could have faced legal action from the Tribe and possibly the federal government. 2. The city would have been accused of oppressing a marginalized group, the Tribe, by not enabling it to develop its land and improve its financial condition. 3. The Tribe would have continued to live in poverty with no means by which to monetize its most valuable asset — Section 14 land. 4. Conditions in Section 14 would have continued to deteriorate. Crime would likely have increased. Sanitation and living conditions would have become increasingly dire. Hazardous and substandard dwellings would have continued to exist or even increased in number. 5. Complaints and demands from local residents and local businesses to address Section 14 likely would have escalated and could have even culminated in a class action suit. 6. The city's tax base could have destabilized. Fiscally, it wasn't sustainable for tribal lands (which consisted of 40% of the city's tax base51) to continue generating limited to no tax revenue. 7. Tourism, a significant component of the city's economic future, could have diminished. 8. The city's growth, both residential and commercial, would have been constrained or even halted altogether due to the city's checkerboard layout. 49 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 42 50 Desert Sun Volume 42, Number 87, November 13, 1968 51 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 92, November 19, 1968 21 o The HRC's critique of Section 14 falls short where others, both past and present, have as well. Over the years numerous individuals and media outlets have criticized the city's actions. But these critics often come with an outsider's perspective and with a limited, incomplete understanding of the complex history of Section 14. These critics all make the same mistake of taking a myopic, surface -level view of the effects of the evictions, without grasping the root causes that led to the evictions in the first place — these root causes (primarily federal leasing laws) are imperative in order to understand and assess the city's actions at the time. The impossible predicament the city faced is further exemplified by the fact that virtually no critic (including the HRC) of the city's actions was, or is, able to offer a solution to the Section 14 dilemma, even with the benefit of hindsight. The reason for that is simple: The city and Bogert inherited a crisis for which there were no solutions that would have satisfied all the aforementioned competing interests. Again, the Managing Editor of the Desert Sun encapsulated this point in 1968. While he is speaking about critics in general in 1968, his words are an appropriate characterization of the HRC's Report as well: "Those uttering the most vociferous damnations (of the city's actions with Section 14) can point to no record, even of their own, of any individual or collective positive contribution for resolving the problems and the issues -neither at the time, or before, let alone since! Instead, the critics of the city have chosen to remain negative... The damning finger -pointing has and is being done from the sanctuary of long distance. And after a long interval. They have elected to bask in a piety from having "blown the whistle" even though, after having summoned the arbiter, have produced no more than an incomplete summary of the facts. Distorted? Perhaps. Slanted? Decidedly so. "52 Bogert worked "tirelessly" to minimize the effects of Section 14 evictions and to seek low-cost housing for its residents • Knowing that evictions and clearing were necessary and unavoidable due to the three drivers mentioned earlier, Bogert worked relentlessly to alleviate the harms associated with these evictions and to make the best out of an untenable housing crisis (see timeline of Bogert's actions in Appendix B). While Bogert took office in 1958, city -coordinated evictions did not take place until six years later, in 1964, and city -sponsored demolition began seven years later, in October 1965. Although there were evictions prior to 1964, these evictions were executed by private citizens and without city coordination or assistance53. Within that six -year period when he became Mayor and when the city worked with conservators and the Tribal Council to relocate and evict residents in 1964, the record shows that Bogert was resolute on finding solutions to the Section 14 crisis. Specifically, Bogert took the following actions to alleviate the effects of the inevitable clean- up campaign: Sz Desert Sun Volume 42, Number 87, November 13, 1968 Ss Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 22 o Held off city -coordinated relocations and evictions until 1964 (6 years after becoming Mayor), despite pressure to do so sooner from tax paying residents, Tribal landowners, local businesses, and conservators. o Worked "tirelessly" to seek low-cost housing for displaced residents.sa o Secured housing certificates from the FHA which provided relocation grants with 100% financing to displaced residents.55 (See Bogert and housing certificate photo.) o Pursued numerous public assistance programs to fund low-cost housing. o Pushed for and supported several privately funded low-cost housing projects (see clipping for one such project), including that of Lawrence Crossley, a Black pioneer of the community and a close friend of Bogert's.56 o Launched an administrative investigation into Superior Court ordered burnings after numerous residents had made complaints.57 o Delayed evictions for six months in 1961 to allow 430 families to find housing.58 (See eviction delay photo.) o Created multiracial citizens committees, consisting of members from the Black community, to assist with relocation efforts and to communicate the city and Tribe's eviction plans with Section 14 residents." o Enacted a bond program in 1961 to purchase land that would partially be used for low- cost housing for evicted residents." o Ensured that the city complied with all local, state, and federal regulations throughout a complex eviction and demolition process. • Additional Eviction Facts: o Evictions began as far back as 1951, seven years prior to Bogert becoming Mayor. In April of that year, the "City of Palm Springs, was instructed by the California Housing Authority and the county Department of Health that the dwelling units in Section 14 were sub -standard and should be abated."61 o On several occasions in the 1950s before Bogert became Mayor, city officials declared moratoriums on evictions to allow residents time to find alternative housing.12 o A significant amount of the demolition and clearing took place after Bogert left office in January 1966. o Despite reports to the contrary, the city kept substantial records of the evictions and was never once found to have evicted any residents illegally or without proper notice." o "In all cases... Indian owners either had no leases at all with the residents, or bad leases that contained a 30-day cancellation clause."sa 54 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 12, August 18, 1961 55 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 298, July 14, 1961 56 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, November 15, 1968 51 Desert Sun, "Section 14 Probe Set," August 14, 1962 58 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 283, June 27, 1961 59 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 98, November 26, 1968 60 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 161, February 4, 1961 61 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 98, November 26, 1968 62 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 98, November 26, 1968 63 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 64 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 23 • The Desert Sun described Bogert as working "tirelessly" over the span of 10 years to seek low-cost housing for evicted Section 14 residents.65 These efforts included him continuously pushing for numerous publicly and privately funded housing projects. As detailed in Appendix B, the HRC purposely omitted these facts from its Report and falsely claimed that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by these evictions." Select quotes from Appendix B: "The Mayor, working tirelessly for a low-cost housing project, had asked (developers) some months ago if (they) couldn't come up with a solution to the ever- increasing problem of homes for the scores of people who are residing in Section 141166 "Mayor Frank Bogert ...has sought to promote a minority housing development in the Palm Springs area" "Since Bogert was elected to the council almost three years ago, (he) has been working steadily to get private money to build a low-cost rental unit project for (Section 14 residents)"68 • Bogert even continued seeking housing for displaced residents after his Mayoral term ended. In 1967 —the year after he left office and with his wife battling breast cancer — he partnered with his close friend the Rev. Jeff Rollins, a leader in the Black community, and the First Baptist Church to develop a 250-unit housing complex adjacent to Gateway Estates69 (see Desert Sun clipping). He traveled to Washington, D.C., with Rev. Rollins to lobby the FHA to secure federal funds for minority housing (see Bogert and Rollins photo). • Bogert cared deeply for the welfare of Section 14 residents and was extremely vocal in public forums about the need of low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. The HRC falsely claims in its Report that "city decision makers focused their energy clearing Section 14 for development instead of addressing the core issue of housing for those displaced." In addition to the timeline in Appendix B, which provides significant evidence to discredit this claim, below are quotes from Bogert himself demonstrating that he indeed was focused on "the core issue of housing for those displaced": "There is a great demand for low-cost housing for the working force in the city. Something must be done for them... There were a lot of fine people moved out of Section 14."70 65 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 12, August 18, 1961 66 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 12, August 18, 1961 67 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 136, January 6, 1961 68 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 136, January 6, 1961 69 Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 235, May 5, 1967 70 Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 235, May 5, 1967 24 "We do need enough (low-cost housing) to take care of our labor force. There is a terrific demand for housing for the working people"71 "The biggest scandal is that (Section 14 residents) are forced to live in these conditions, because we haven't done anything about it"72 "I don't want to see another slum area. If someone is going to build a place for these people, it should be good"73 "I think we ought to stretch a point and let them have the zoning they want ..Due to the housing emergency at the present time, we have to lean over backwards (to allow for zoning for low-cost housing)1174 As Mayor in 1961, Bogert directly hired Charles Jordan, the city's first Black employee and a resident of Section 14. Through this hire, and by advocating for minority interests in general, Bogert directly contributed to the city's first completed housing project for Section 14 residents. Indeed, Jordan was instrumental in the development of Seminole Gardens in 1968, the city's first federally funded, medium -cost housing project which was prioritized for Section 14 residents. Bogert made this unprecedented hire when it was unpopular to do so. When Jordan returned to Palm Springs after graduating from Gonzaga University, Los Angeles Times reporter Ken Reich explained: "it was then Mayor Frank Bogert who gave him a job as a recreation supervisor. Jordan said he had suggested to Bogert at the time, 1961, that he might not be accepted by whites in that position. Bogert had been adamant about going ahead with the job offer, and it was the beginning of a brilliant career for Jordan. s75 o Indeed, Bogert's championing of Jordan, at a time when no Black resident was employed by the city, was the catalyst to a brilliant career. After working as a city official in Palm Springs, Jordan ran the Parks Departments in both Austin, Texas and Portland, Oregon. He was the first ever Black city councilmember in Portland and the first to serve as city commissioner. After leaving public office he ran the Conversation Fund, an environmental non-profit, where he established a land trust for Black farmers. President Ronald Reagan appointed both Jordan and Bogert to the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors, where they worked together to promote nationwide recreational opportunities for citizens.76 Jordan served as an ex-officio member of a multiracial housing committee Bogert created to work with and help Section 14 residents during 71 Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 235, May 5, 1967 72 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan M. Kray.pg 108 73 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, November 15,1968 74 Desert Sun, "The Section 14 Story III, Elation Over Housing Okay Fades as Recession Comes," November 15, 1968 75 htti)://takebackthetimes.blogsr)ot.com/2006/10/memorable-50th-hiqh-school-class.html 76 The Oregonian, "Charles Johnson remembered: Portland's first African American commissioner and long time parks director was "a giant in this city," April 4, 2014 25 relocations. As the Desert Sun said, "Jordan made tremendous strides toward greater understanding and respect between all races in Palm Springs and worked toward greater involvement of blacks in community affairs, helping to bring City Hall closer to the (Black) community than ever before."" o After being promoted to assistant to the City Manager, Jordan was instrumental in securing funding for and developing the aforementioned Seminole Gardens housing project.78 Serving on the Palm Springs Housing Committee and active in community relations, Jordan worked to understand the needs of the Black community and other minorities and to develop a housing plan for Section 14 residents. o In June of 1987 while giving the commencement speech at Palm Springs High School, Jordan thanked Bogert for taking a chance on him and giving him a job with the city after college.79 o To recap: Bogert hired the city's first Black employee, Charles Jordan, when he was unable to find another job after college. Jordan, who was a former Section 14 resident, was instrumental in completing the city's first federally financed housing project, Seminole Gardens. This housing project was prioritized for Section 14 residents and is even referenced in the HRC's Report. Jordan went on to have a brilliant political career and positively impacted the lives of many Black citizens, due in part to the chance Bogert took on him in 1961 when others didn't. (See Jordan photo.) Additional findings and commentary on Section 14 and the HRC's Report The Rebuttal reviewed all public comments made regarding the statue removal. This included reviewing comments at two Public Arts Commission Meetings in 2017, four City Council Meetings in 2020, and two HRC meetings in 2021. This review of all public comments found that: 0 81% opposed moving the statue 0 19% supported moving the statue Members of the Black community as well as former residents of Section 14 supported Bogert in his bid for Mayor in 1982. Among members of the Black community who supported Bogert in 1982 were Will Pittman, Mary Pittman, Roy Crawford, and Cora Crawford. Cora Crawford was a prominent leader in the Black community and the Director of the Palm Springs Development Center.80 Mrs. Crawford is quoted in the HRC's 77 Desert Sun, Volume 43, Number 282, July 2, 1970 78 CVRA Community Working Group — Report to Palm Springs City Council, September 27, 2018 79 Desert Sun, "Commencement speaker: You can go home again," June 12, 1987 80 Desert Sun, Campaign Ad, pg A22, April 12, 1982 ay Report on several occasions and was a resident of Section 14. Records show, however, that she moved from the area in 1955, three years prior to Bogert becoming Mayor." o It's revealing and a significant repudiation of the HRC's Report that the very people (Mr. Milanovich, Mr. Siva, Mrs. Crawford, etc) who the HRC alleges Bogert wronged, in one form or another directly refute the HRC's demonization of Bogert. Indeed, whether it be through the words of living family members (in the case of Mr. Siva and Mr. Milanovich) or through a public endorsement of Bogert for Mayor (in the case of Mrs. Crawford), minority residents who knew Bogert and lived through Section 14 paint a much different picture of him than the HRC does in its uninformed Report. • As of 1961, there were almost three times as many white families (including Latinos) than Black families who lived on Section 14.82 The HRC, however, focuses its Report almost exclusively on the experiences of Black families. • The HRC attempts to falsely connect Bogert to instances of institutionalized segregation and systemic racism. In similar fashion to associating Bogert with the wrongdoings of the conservator program, the Report time after time deceptively associates Bogert with inequities of which he had no part or over which he had no control. Essentially, the HRC blames and scapegoats Bogert as an individual for decades of federal discrimination that predated his Mayoral term. An example of this is the title of the Report itself, "Frank Bogert: Palm Springs Civic Leadership, Institutionalized Segregation, and Racial Bias 1958-1966." The Report's title would lead one to believe that Bogert was responsible for institutionalized segregation and racial bias in the city —this is unequivocally false. The HRC provides no credible evidence to support the claim made in the title of its own Report. • Finally, it is important to note the credibility of the sources cited in this Rebuttal versus those cited in the HRC's Report. This Rebuttal leans heavily on community members with first- hand, direct knowledge of Section 14 and the events that necessitated the evictions. These reputable sources provide a complete, nuanced, and factual story of Section 14 and Bogert's actions. The words of several Tribal Chairs, numerous local journalists, the Desert Sun's Managing Editor in 1968, and the Desert Sun's Editorial Board in 1966 all directly refute the false allegations made in the HRC's Report. The HRC's sources, on the other hand, consist primarily of community "outsiders" with limited knowledge of the events that led to Section 14's clearing and who, as the Desert Sun's Managing Editor says, criticize the city's actions "from the sanctuary of long distance. And after a long interval." They, like the HRC, merely criticize the evictions themselves without considering the preceding events that necessitated the evictions and clean-up campaign. The HRC relies on questionable sources — a deputy AG with activist ties, a deeply flawed Department of Interior investigation that was discredited under oath in Congressional testimony, a sensationalized essay written by a college graduate student nearly 40 years after Section 14's clearing, and ideological publications such as the Journal of Critical Sociology — to craft an incomplete, biased, myopic, and untruthful account of Section 14 and Frank Bogert. 81 Desert Sun, History: "Cora Crawford and her new home helped nurture a new community," April 18, 2021 82 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 7-8 27 o The HRC does provide numerous first-hand quotes from residents of Section 14. These quotes are undeniably stirring and poignant. However, attempts to tie these quotes directly to Bogert are misguided and unfair for two primary reasons: • Several of the quotes provided were from residents who were either legally evicted or who moved from Section 14 prior to Bogert becoming Mayor in 1958. • The quotes reinforce the detrimental effects of federal leasing restrictions, as detailed extensively throughout the Rebuttal. These quotes are further proof of the HRC focusing on the visceral effects of the evictions, while ignoring their root causes. Frank Bogert: Quotes, Facts, and History of Supporting Minority Interests Quotes about Bogert from minority members of the community "He was my friend"...Bogert warned him that 'some rednecks' had made threats against (Oden). He let the men know he had Oden's back. 'What he was saying was 'I'm looking out for you .... And he did."a3 - Ron Oden in 2009 (Palm Springs' first Black and Gay Mayoras well as the first ever Chairman of the city's Human Rights Commission84) - (See photo of Oden and Bogert.) • "For me, he was a white man, but he understood my culture"85 - Manuel Gonzales, Mexican National at Bogert's funeral in 2009 "What Frank was doing was making everyone understand you don't have to be putting on airs about your station in life or the color of your skin. What matters is what's in our hearts1186 - Richard Milanovich, Agua Caliente Tribal Chairman in 2009 "Frank Bogert did a lot for Mexican people1187 - Pasqual Quiroz, the first Mexican American born in Palm Springs Frank Bogert's extensive history of supporting and fighting for various minority groups Allegations that Bogert was racist or that he discriminated against minorities are categorically baseless, untrue, defamatory, or misguided at best. While Bogert's contributions to the city are 83 Desert Sun, "Bogert Understood Mexican Culture," March 28, 2009 84 httr)s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYsQXScIU14&t=36s 85 Desert Sun, "Bogert Understood Mexican Culture," March 28, 2009 es Desert Sun, "Unique Personality Recounted," March 28, 2009 B7 Desert Sun, "Palm Springs History Marked By Early Segregation," August 21, 2011 28 well known, those who have ignorantly and disingenuously labeled him a racist should note the following: • Bogert's first wife, Janice, was Jewish. Upon her death in 1974, he married Negie Romero, a Mexican citizen from San Miguel De Allende. His daughter married a Spaniard, and his grandson married an El Salvadorian. He has Hispanic grandchildren who he loved deeply. • He loved and unconditionally supported a gay relative, and, later on in his life, counted members of the LGBTQ community as some of his closest friends. Some of these friends submitted letters to the city council last year in support of Bogert. One such letter: "As a Gay man living in PS for 30 years, my husband and I knew this man very well. His heart was full of fun, laughter and love for Palm Springs citizens. Before, you misguided people take to the streets, know your facts. This city is better because of Frank, and so am L Your posts were inaccurate and show you really do not know Palm Spring history ...This man was my friend. He was NOT Racist and NOT Homophobic. All of you posting on social media, and also those who like these posts are so uneducated about this man. I am all for the fair treatment of ALL America, and if Frank was a Racist, I would be the first to help to remove his statue. But for some of who have posted, you should be ashamed of yourselves, and should research the history of section 14. I loved this man and cannot understand the hatred that is being spewed about him....l stand with Frank Bogert."' — Michael Hill • As Mayor in 1984, Bogert declared December as "AIDS Awareness Month", and was quoted as saying, "I think there is a need for everyone to be aware of it ... I want to help those (victims of the disease) guys all I can.1189 • As a Lieutenant Commander in the Navy, he served courageously and with distinction in WWII, fighting the very ideology of prejudice and racism of which he is now being falsely accused. • He called Mexico his second home and was loved immensely by its citizens (see photo). He was given the Golden Spur award by the Mexican Charro Association, the first non - Hispanic, Caucasian to ever receive the honor.90 Almost 200 Mexican Charros attended Bogert's 76th birthday in Mexico City in 1986 (see Charro ghoto).91 Quotes and anecdotes from a 1987 Desert Sun article on Bogert:92 o "People in Mexico think the world of Frank, not because he has money, because he doesn't." o "They relate to him like a brother. He knows the history of Mexico better than they do. He has always tried to make them proud of what they are, proud of their culture." 88 Michael Hill, Letter to City Council, July 2020 19 Desert Sun, "PS Mayor Designates AIDS Month," November 20, 1984 90 Desert Sun, "Lesson in history from an original," February 21, 2007 91 Desert Sun, "Mayor Bogert to celebrate birthday with Mexico pals," December 31, 1985 92 Desert Sun, "Bogerts' Share Pride in History of Mexico," March 31, 1987 29 • He was close with several of the city's Black leaders including Lawrence Crossley and the Rev. Jeff Rollins, the latter of whom was among the first people to console Bogert at his home after the death of his first wife, Janice (see Bogert and Rollins photo breaking ground on the First Baptist Church).93 • He relentlessly championed for the equal rights and sovereignty of various Native American Tribes. He assisted the Agua Caliente Tribe in Section 14's redevelopment and lobbied on its behalf several times to advance Tribal interests. He counted numerous Tribal members among his closest friends, including Richard Milanovich, Pete Siva, and Bernie Siva. • Bogert chose to live a rather ordinary, middle-class life. He lived in the same modest house for more than 50 years and valued public service above all else. On multiple occasions he sacrificed financial wealth in the private sector in order to serve and promote his true love in life, the City of Palm Springs. Attempts to label him as part of some elite, wealthy, or privileged class couldn't be further from the truth. On the contrary, he was loved and respected by so many residents of the community because he was viewed as a common man — authentic and a straight -shooter. Simply put: He was the antithesis of an elite politician. As Fred Hoover, President of the Continental Can Co., explained to the Desert Sun: o "You'd go out to lunch with him and he spends as much time talking with the Mexican help as he does talking with other people at the table1194 Over 800 people of numerous races, sexual orientations, economic classes, and political parties attended his funeral in 2009. The funeral was held in a Jewish synagogue. This melting pot of funeral goers was a microcosm of the diverse, eclectic, and inclusionary community that Bogert helped build. He was a uniter of people from vastly different backgrounds, and because of that was loved by folks from all walks of life. Among the speakers at his funeral were: o Richard Milanovich, Chairman of the Agua Caliente Tribe o Mary Bono, the wife of Sonny Bono, a former political opponent o Steve Pougnet, a gay former Mayor of Palm Springs o Rabbi Joe Hurwitz, one of Bogert's best friends and a contributor to his statue • Bogert was a constant defender of minorities, a proponent of social justice, and a promoter of minority interests. Among countless documented instances in which he sought to assist minorities when it was unpopular to do so: o Bogert pushed for Jewish residents to be accepted into country clubs and wrote letters on their behalf. At the time, Jewish residents were barred from joining such clubs." o As detailed earlier, Bogert hired Charles Jordan as the city's first Black employee. • In 1962, Bogert spoke in front of 500 people at an event at Temple Isaiah called "Patterns of Prejudice." As the Desert Sun stated, "Mayor Frank Bogert opened the discussion with a 93 Desert Sun, "History column: Mexican heritage deeply ingrained in the story of Palm Springs," July 20, 2020 94 Desert Sun, "Cowboy to some, legend to Valley," March 4, 2005 95 Desert Sun, "Bogert Oversaw Palm Springs Early Expansion," March 24, 2009 30 brief talk on prejudice, pointing up the fact that many of us are guilty of 'unconscious prejudice' in all walks of life. He cited the discrimination shown by people in one profession or kind of work against that of another discrimination against people of other regions; and suggested that each of us search ourselves to eliminate unwarranted feelings of prejudice against any other human being.1196 • In 1966 Bogert was honored as "Man of the Year" by the Palm Springs Chapter of B'nai B'rith, a Jewish service organization that is committed to the security and continuity of the Jewish people and combating anti-Semitism and bigotry. He was given the award at the Orchid Ball which was "scheduled to climax National Brotherhood Week, which is devoted to promoting a better life for all people, regardless of race, color, or creed.1197 In 1983, at a B'nai B'rith event to recognize those who had fought against bigotry and racism, Bogert presented his good friend Rabbi Joseph Hurwitz with an award. Rabbi Hurwitz, the Rev. Jeff Rollins, and other leaders protested a planned KKK rally in Palm Springs. Because of the protests, the Klan cancelled its rally. Bogert spoke at the event, supporting those who protested and explained to the crowd how he personally used humor as a means to combat bigotry." As Mayor in the 1980s, he supported the following Black causes and programs: o He was a public proponent and supporter of the "Negro Academic Scholarship Fund"" o He worked with the City Council on plans to improve and redevelop Desert Highland Estates, a predominantly Black residential area. The redevelopment plans included: • "$2.2 million in building and housing improvements, $1 million in storm drainage construction and $1.1 million in street improvements."100 • The Rev. Jeff Rollins supported this plan, and Bogert was quoted as saying "We are a new council that wants to do something" about improving the conditions in the Highland area.101 He was instrumental in creating and helping start the Palm Springs Center for Employment Training, (GET) which primarily benefited Black residents. 102 "The Palm Springs center had its roots in a conversation Mayor Frank Bogert had with a Desert Highland resident about a jobs program ... The Rev. T.C. Wilder and The Rev. Jeff Rollins, two ministers active in the economically disadvantaged, predominately black Desert Highland area, were instrumental in drumming up students. "I got out and beat the bushes. I think it is an excellent program," Rollins said. o In 1987, Bogert proclaimed: "February as Black History Month in Palm Springs because the citizens have 'developed an outstanding month -long program to commemorate Black 96 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 170, February 20, 1962 97 Desert Sun, Volume 39, Number 161, February 9, 1966 98 Desert Sun, "Sunrise Chapter B'nai B'rith Honors Fight Against Bigotry," March 30, 1983 99 Desert Sun, Number 231, May 1, 1986 100 Desert Sun, Number 82, November 8, 1984 101 Desert Sun, Number 82, November 8, 1984 102 Desert Sun, Number 149, January 24, 1987 31 history' which 'affords the people an opportunity to become better acquainted with the names and lives of great Black Americans.""" o In 1987 as Mayor, Bogert rode in the city's first Black History parade since the mid- 1960s, when Bogert was also Mayor. He was quoted at the parade saying, "I am glad to see them reviving (the parade) ... I think anything you can do like this is a great idea. Whatever you are, you ought to be proud of being it." Under his leadership, the city provided funds to the Black community to hold the parade.104 o In 1985, Bogert supported his friend the Rev. Jeff Rollins in the opening of the Bishop College Extension Center, which was located in the predominantly Black neighborhood of High land-Gateway.105 (See photo of Bogert and Rollins at Bishop opening.) o In 1986, Bogert participated in a Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. commemoration at the United Methodist Church. Bogert also made proclamations relating to MLK at the event, which was attended by the Rev. Dr. William Hobbes, the Rev. T.C. Wilder, the Rev. Jeff Rollins, Rabbi Joseph Hurwitz, the Rev. Kenneth Whitney, and the Rev. Malachy McGinn."' Conclusion Speaking "The" Truth instead of Speakinq "Our" Truth The HRC concludes its Report by stating that it is "Speaking Our Truth." Unfortunately, the HRC's "Truth" is nothing more than a compilation of distorted facts and half-truths manipulatively crafted to fit a preconceived, false narrative about Bogert. The HRC's "Truth" is not an objective, factual depiction of Section 14 or of Bogert's character. Instead of Speaking Our Truth, the Rebuttal Speaks The Truth. And here is The Truth about the HRC's Report, Frank Bogert and Section 14: • The HRC's Report is ideologically and politically motivated, as confirmed by the HRC's Chairman himself, and is not an impartial assessment of Section 14 or Frank Bogert. • The HRC fails to provide any evidence that Bogert's motivations for clearing Section 14 were racially motivated. • The HRC's Report is a manipulative retelling of history that contains over 100 problematic issues including false claims, misleading statements, and quotes taken out of context. • The HRC intentionally left out a voluminous amount of information and evidence that would have directly refuted its premise to remove the statue. • The Report contains ideological language such as "white privilege," "unconscious manifestations of racial bias," and "anti -racist values." The HRC uses a set of ideological, polarizing standards by which to critique Bogert. Additionally, the HRC cites numerous political and ideological sources, such as the Journal for Critical Sociology. 103 Desert Sun, Number 156, February 2, 1987 104 Desert Sun, "Local blacks parade their spirit," March 2, 1987 105 Desert Sun, "Dallas college opens extension in north PS," June 1, 1985 106 Desert Sun, Number 137, January 11, 1986 K1ra • A significant portion of the HRC's Report is copied and pasted from a graduate student's essay. This essay, written as an opinion piece, is by far the most -cited source in the Report and was written nearly 40 years after Section 14 evictions took place. • The Report is plagiarized. Examples of plagiarism are found on 17 of the Report's 48 pages. • The Report was criticized by an HRC commissioner, who said that it "gave the appearance of character assassination tactics to achieve a political goal." • Bogert was never charged, tried, or found guilty of any wrongdoing in connection with Section 14 or his conservatorship. Relocations and evictions were done legally and complied with all city, state, and federal regulations. • Investigations by the state's Deputy AG and the Department of the Interior were both found to be highly problematic and were both strongly criticized and rebutted by numerous individuals with direct knowledge of Section 14 and the Conservator program. • The HRC ignored the human rights of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians in the Report. The Report is highly disrespectful to the Tribe's struggle for self -determinism and sovereignty throughout the events in question. The Tribe's decades -long fight to develop and monetize its lands in order to lift its members out of poverty is a core element of Section 14's history. The HRC purposely omitted this critical fact in its Report, as including it would negate its claim that evictions were motivated by "whiteness," "privilege," "unconscious bias," and racism. The HRC has angered prominent members of the Agua Caliente Tribe by taking quotes from deceased relatives out of context to support its false accusations against Bogert. The disingenuous use of Mr. Milanovich and Mr. Siva's names prompted the families of each to call the Report "disgusting, appalling, and slander(ous)." Both the Milanovich and Siva families publicly demanded that the HRC remove references to their respective family names from the Report. As of the submission of this Rebuttal, the HRC has ignored these demands. • The HRC misrepresented Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva. Mr. Siva's wife, Bernadine Siva, provided the true story of this conservatorship and the circumstances by which Bogert found himself involved in the program. Bogert and Siva would remain lifelong friends after Bogert became the first conservator to voluntarily relinquish his conservatorship duties. • Upon being elected Mayor, Bogert and the city inherited an unprecedented municipal crisis created by nearly a century of ill-conceived, discriminatory federal laws. Section 14 clearing was unavoidable and necessary when he took office. • Knowing Section 14 clearing was inevitable, Bogert went to great lengths to mitigate the effects of the relocations and evictions. This included delaying evictions, creating multiracial citizens committees to assist with relocations, securing housing certificates for the displaced, and applying for numerous federal aid programs, just to name a few. • Over the span of 10 years, Bogert worked "tirelessly" to secure low-cost housing for displaced residents and pushed for countless private and publicly funded projects. 33 • Bogert continued seeking low-cost housing after his mayoral term ended, even though he was under no obligation to do so. He partnered with the Rev. Jeff Rollins and the First Baptist Church, and lobbied in Washington, D.C., with Rollins to secure low-cost housing funds for Section 14 residents. • Bogert cared deeply about the welfare of Section 14 residents and was made numerous public statements about the need to find low-cost housing in conjunction with relocations. • Bogert directly hired the city's first Black employee, Charles Jordan. Jordan went on to become instrumental in the development of the city's first federally funded housing project. This project was prioritized for Section 14 residents. • Bogert was an ally of the Tribe. He responded to the Tribe's requests to address Section 14 and lobbied in Washington, D.C., on its behalf on multiple occasions. • As mayor, Bogert supported numerous Black causes and worked with leaders to advance the well-being of the Black community. • Bogert was close with or was supported by the city's Black community leaders, including Lawrence Crossley, the Rev. Jeff Rollins, and Cora Crawford. • Black members of the community and residents of Section 14, including Cora Crawford, supported Bogert in his bid for Mayor in 1982. • Bogert has an extensive documented history of fighting for and supporting the human rights and equal treatment of numerous minority groups. Quotes in this Rebuttal alone from individuals of the Black, gay, Latino, and Native American communities are a testament to the fact that Bogert was loved and respected by all minority groups and why allegations that he was racist are ludicrous, unfounded, and defamatory. The diversity of the 800 people who attended his funeral speaks volumes about his character and his equal treatment of all minority and marginalized groups. • To support its criticisms of Bogert, the HRC relies primarily on sources with second-hand knowledge of Section 14's history and who fail to grasp the complex series of events that led to the evictions. Alternatively, the Rebuttal relies mostly on community members with intimate knowledge of Section 14, who provide first-hand, reputable accounts of the city's history and of Bogert's character. • The Report was strongly criticized by an HRC commissioner who said that the Report "gave the appearance of character assassination tactics to achieve a political goal" • The HRC has done a great disservice to the community through its biased, factually inaccurate, and ideologically driven Report. It has violated its own stated goals by failing to educate the public with a factual account of Section 14 and has failed to positively bring community members together to discuss human rights. The Truth is the HRC and the city officials have not made a substantive argument to justify the removal of the Bogert statue. Efforts to defame Bogert and remove the statue are based solely on politics, ideology, and an untruthful account of Section 14. The HRC's Report cannot be allowed to stand in the public record, nor can its contents serve as the basis for any decisions related to the Bogert statue. 34 APPENDIX 35 Appendix A Photos of Frank Bogert and of relevant topics from the Rebuttal • Jit PHOTO #1107 Bogert with the all -female Agua Caliente Tribal Council in the late 1950s. Throughout his time as Mayor, Bogert would work with the Council on a variety of projects, including Section 14, purchasing Airport land, and the development of the Spa Hotel. Bogert traveled to Washington, D.C., with the Tribal Council to lobby Congress to pass the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts of 1959. From left to right: Eileen Miguel, Elizabeth Pete Monk, Laverne Saubel, Palm Springs Mayor Frank Bogert, Dora Joyce Prieto, and Priscilla Gonzales. (Go back to Rebuttal) 10I Palm Springs Life Magazine, The Self -Determined Sixties, July 8, 2020 36 A ale 4 to PHOTO PHOTO #2108 Bogert with the Rev. Jeff Rollins in Washington, D.C., in 1967. Bogert and Rollins went to Washington the year after Bogert left office to seek funds and approval from the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) to build low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. From the Desert Sun: Bogert "said the local delegation made the FHA officials aware of the Section 14 cleanup in which a large number of residents were forced to leave Palm Springs for Banning and Garnet and other nearby areas. `These residents,' Bogert said, `still work in Palm Springs and would prefer to live here."' (Go back to Rebuttal) 108 Desert Sun, pg 1, May 23, 1967 37 PHOTO #3109 Bogert displaying a housing certification to city officials that he and the city were able to secure for Section 14 residents. This certificate would provide Section 14 residents with 100% financing for relocation with only $200 down. The "Housing and Home Finance administrator proclaim(ed) that Palm Springs has qualified for Federal Aid in its Workable Program for community improvement." Go back to Rebuttal) 109 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 30, September 8, 1961 38 PHOTO #4110 Bogert, city officials and the Agua Caliente Tribal Council at a meeting in 1962 to discuss long-range zoning guidelines for Section 14. 1958-1966 was a period of tremendous cooperation and collaboration between the Tribe and the city. Eileen Miguel stated in 1986, "As Frank Bogert said, `We are two governments in this town."'"' Given the city's checkerboard layout and the significant amount of land the Tribe owned in Palm Springs, it was (and is) vital for the council and Tribe to work together for the good of the city. From left are Robson Chambers, city planning commission member; Vice Mayor Ted McKinney, committee chairman; Dick Coleman, planning director; Mrs. Vyola Olinger (Ortner), former Agua Caliente tribal council chairman; Ray Simpson, tribal attorney; Mayor Frank Bogert; Mrs. Dora Prieto, tribal secretary; Mrs. Eileen Miguel, tribal chairman; and Councilman Harry Paisley. (Go back to Rebuttal) 10 Desert Sun, Vol. 35, No. 287, July 6, 1962 httr)s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X-3TNYCxYO 0 PHOTO #512 Frank Bogert and Pete Siva at Bogert's victory party after being reelected Mayor in 1982. Siva and his wife, Bernadine, held Bogert's victory party at their home. Bogert reluctantly served as Siva's conservator from 1960-1963 as a favor to the Siva family. He was the first conservator to voluntarily release a Tribal member from conservatorship. Siva became Tribal Chairman and in 1966 sent a letter thanking the City Council for assisting the Tribe with clearing Section 14. Doing so allowed the Tribe to begin developing its land and lifting Tribal members out of dire financial conditions. Bogert and Siva would remain lifelong friends. Bernadine Siva, Pete Siva's widow, stated " I believe the statue should not be removed or destroyed. Frank Bogert was an Honorable and Honest man." The daughters of Pete Siva called the HRC's report "disgusting" and "slander(ous)" and demanded that the HRC stop using their father's name in regards to his relationship with Bogert. (Go back to Rebuttal) 12 Private collection 40 PHOTO #6113 Bogert with Tribal Chairman Vyola Ortner and Congressman D.S Saund in Washington, D.C., in the late 1950s. Bogert and Ortner worked with Congressman Saund to lobby Congress to pass the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts in 1959. (Go back to Rebuttal) 13 www.youcanteatdirt.com/gailery 41 to Frank SOgert PHOTO #7114 Agua Caliente Tribal Chairman Richard Milanovich speaking at Bogert's funeral (top right) in March 2009. "At Bogert's funeral in 2009, Milanovich said the cowboy mayor had been an inspiration to him growing up.1115 Bogert and Milanovich were close, lifelong friends and worked together on various projects while Bogert was Mayor and Milanovich was Tribal Chairman in the 1980s. Milanovich's daughter, Trista, said that the HRC's Report was "disgusting" and that the family was "appalled" that they would take her father's words out of context in order to defame Bogert. (Go back to Rebuttal) 14 Desert Sun, pg. 134, March 28, 2009 15 Desert Sun, "A lifetime of leadership," March 12, 2012 42 AGUA CALIENTE RESERVATION T.4 & S S.- R.4&SB.- S.B.B.M. RIVERSIDE CO, CALIF 1° I ---- - AGUA CALIENTE R>?SFRV4TION `'Y n r• `j �„trJ r�. � ,. � ,.� i' a ri - rr�:4r rr :. _,a � r. x rr x ri w » ` r• � tt n � x c 1—: — PHOTO #816 A diagram of the city's checkerboard layout enacted in the late 19th century. This ill- conceived layout created numerous problems for the city, the Tribe, and especially for Section 14 residents. Because the red squares were not conducive to development due to federal restrictions on long term leases, 1) the Tribe was unable to develop its land and generate income for its members, 2) the city's residential and commercial growth was constrained, and 3) Section 14 became a slum, at no fault of its residents. (Go back to Rebuttal) 16 www.youcanteatdirt.com/gallery 43 PHOTO #911' Bogert with the Rev. Jeff Rollins (holding shovel in middle) in 1963 when development of the First Baptist Church broke ground. Bogert would later partner with Rollins and the Church in 1967 to develop low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. (Go back to Rebuttal) "' Desert Sun, "First Baptist's Church Dedication to the Community," February 7, 2021 44 PHOTO #1018 Bogert (seated far right) with the Rev. Jeff Rollins (speaking) at the unveiling of the Bishop College Extension Center in Highland -Gateway. Bogert and Rollins would work together on numerous projects between the 1960s and 1980s, including 1) asking the Human Relations Committee to provide assistance to Section 14 residents, 2) lobbying in Washington, D.C., in 1967 for low-cost housing for Section 14 residents, 3) opening the Bishop Center, and 4) the creation of the Palm Springs Center for Employment Training, (GET). Rollins and Bogert were close friends and Rollins was one of the first to visit Bogert at his house to offer his condolences after the death of his first wife Janice in 1974. (Go back to Rebuttal) 18 Desert Sun, "Dallas college opens extension in north PS," June 1, 1985 45 PHOTO #1119 Bogert with Mayor Ron Oden at a tribute to Bogert in 2005 at the Agua Caliente Casino. Oden was the city's first Black and openly gay Mayor and also was the first Chairman of the Human Rights Commission, the same commission that authored the defamatory Report on Bogert. In 2009, Oden was quoted as saying: "He was my friend"... Bogert warned him that 'some rednecks' had made threats against (Oden). He let the men know he had Oden's back. `What he was saying was `I'm looking out for you ... And he did." (Go back to Rebuttal) 19 Desert Sun, "Cowboy to some, legend to Valley," May 4, 2005 46 PHOTO #12 Charles Jordan in 1976.120 Jordan, a former Section 14 resident, was hired by Bogert as the city's first Black employee. Jordan was instrumental in the development of Seminole Gardens, the first federally funded housing project that was prioritized for Section 14 residents. From Palm Springs, he went on to have an illustrious political career, serving as Portland's first Black city councilmember and city commissioner, running the Conservation Fund, and working with Bogert on Ronald Reagan's President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. He gave the commencement speech at Palm Springs High School in 1987 and thanked Bogert for taking a chance on him by giving him a job in 1961. (Go back to Rebuttal) 21 121 The Astorian, "Former Portland City Commissioner Charles Jordan Dies At Age 77," April 2, 2004 121 www.Portlandpf.com 47 BOGERT RETURNS Low Cost Housing Prospects 'Good' Possibility of getting 180 units Springs for Banning and Gar- federal money wuh 20 per cent of low-cost housing for Palm net and other nearby areas. in money or planning work prat Springs was described as good These residents, Bogert said, vided by the city. today by former mayor, Frank soil work in Palm Springs and Federal funds for the prolectj Bogen, after conferring with would prefer to live here would have to come from next) Federal Housing Adnvnistration ' The problem is that the pea• year's b u d g e t since current offich ls. pie who work here have to drive funds were used up Atay, John! Bogert and a group interested in every day," Bogert said Buggs, deputy dirertorin charge! in obtaining low-cost housing for The delegation also di,cussed of the model neighborhood pro - the city returned this week from the possibility of getting a model gram, told the Palm Springs is Washington w h e r e they met neighborhood program which group With "officials With "Bogert -was would include the low-cost hour• A full report (In the Washing - Dr. -Lee Swanson of Goodkin Ing tract, but, would encompass ton meetings was to be present- ir and Co., a research group mak- a larger area led to the Palm Springs City in ing a local housing survey; Joe This would he a model Council at a study smdon to- ol Balker, interested in building area, financed with go per cent day n_ the .housing development, and the Rev.,: Jett Rollins, pastor of e, the. First Baptist chureh. . Bogert said they. met Monday !n with Robert Jones, an assistant ie to the FHA commissioner, who ie is In Charge of low-cost housing, �e and John" Alstrup. , regional It it rector In charge of FHA's We. t- 1b ern" division it The former mayor said the it group was requesting a housing it development of 2M units s "While we're asking 250 un. its, we think there is a good In possibility of obtaining 160 un• 1i its," Bogert said g FIIA has recommended only c 80 units for the housing devel- opment whi(h would be erected ie adjacent to the Gateway Fstates Y The FHA's 80 • unit recom- Y- mendation, Bogert said, was Ie based on its survey of present Palm Springs residents requir- ir ing low-cost housing lie said the local delegation t made the FHA officlal aware 19 of the Section 14 cleanup in is which a large number of resi- t dents were foreed to leave Palm PHOTO #13122 A Desert Sun article from May 18,1967. Bogert continued seeking low-cost housing for Section 14 residents the year after leaving office in 1966. (Go back to Rebuttal) 122 Desert Sun, "Low-cost Housing Prospects Good," May 18, 1967 48 w.WW K•••� I.......Ip _,.. 19fir outt roo os.+rt t.ryur. 'TIME OUT' SE"'CTION 14' Clearing Action Gets 6-Month Housing Delay Y F,.tw 11 .x..riu iii. •ra. Ffs.. wt w w � .r e'.,r •: sw.y� :.a ..1;. H . Ki. W.iD.I M N�^'••' •. .. Y. ,9 . aN Yx q Sa '. sA.M•.1 �� i lyl� Ini. w '�tl'' ^e f.-irq pp �.�. � edn .•/m• . �r � L./ Ian b11. IYti-+ � rF »may �. MI..iM••wiY -.. r... ar t ail. . � BH!! FF �. him �y,•'r•u k Vwl'a.. � rr+.n...«a•'+u. 'i M F R.Y1Y nF 4•w��.:.. l wry rrrr�'w•-. �..r Ivry .e�. � / :a:•.�.rr a �. « .� wss.. Ir pw•. « . rn ,k r • wa nah .� . �.1 1V•_NV = b +� �tw w[ IFS. w .I.law .-.M'. M w•.... :fy N� .�1 T '_... � .M ..1 W 8s •.ry aaI w11 ..I DIY. h >. � � •.....i.e �s - • a d...0 «y per PHOTO #14123 Article from the Desert Sun on June 27, 1961. Bogert and the city issued a six-month moratorium on legal evictions to allow residents time to seek housing alternatives and to provide time for the city to explore both private and publicly funded low-cost housing projects. (Go back to Rebuttal) 121 Desert Sun, "Time-out Called on Section 14," June 27, 1961 49 I PHOTO #15124 Bogert (seated far right) with Tribal Chair Eileen Miguel (seated middle) in 1960 looking over an appraisal of land on Section 18 which would become the airport. To Miguel's right is Dora Joyce Prieto, who became Tribal Chair in mid-1966. Miguel and Bogert worked closely together on many projects including zoning ordinances for Section 14. In 1962 she said: "Our appreciation goes to: ...Mayor Frank Bogert of Palm Springs who has consistently demonstrated that he had both the interests of the Indian people and the City of Palm Springs at heart, and who has time and time again expended commendable effort in helping find a solution for some of our problems." (Go back to Rebuttal) 1LI Desert Sun, "New Airport Land Appraisal Announced at $2,979,000," July 27, 1960 50 Mah@ tt(44RR(.. IMIp. ,�n �.Y. S �� [I4hNCa I i (A �.a..� I Ia11TOh VR i1, 11f♦ It /Y Iwlw $2w5 MILLION *..:• yp.•a.. `fah I.Ii1a 411 11. 4M1 nIY RDA I..rt [� IS APARTMENT PROJECT SLATED FOR SECTION 14 FAMILIES Wolf •Newman To Construct $-Acre Project 1-� .. � k riMaeifaeiF�s ..{,Iflllly;l] _ : tiY Alp Vsk— �n . �rx AA-71 •..r:Y�Ir. _.r . PHOTO #16125 Desert Sun headline from August 18, 1961. The HRC claims this development was proposed in 1968 after Bogert was Mayor, when in reality it was Bogert himself who pushed for the development as Mayor in 1961. The article states, "The Mayor, working tirelessly for a low-cost housing project, had asked (the developer) some months ago if he couldn't come up with a solution to the ever increasing problem of homes for the scores of people who are residing in Section 14." (Go back to Rebuttal) 125 Desert Sun, "$2.5M Apartment Complex Slated for Section 14 Families," August 18, 1961 51 24 0Ihr Opurt #tnt Wadnaidal. Jane S. 1961 Point Spring•. California Example of 'Classic Disregard' Reading the report of Attorney General Investigator Loren Miller .Jr. on the Palm Springs Section 14 demolition and cleanup is somewhat like reading Alice in Wonderland Miller and his social team quite ap parently fell down a hole, hit head - and began to see things which were not there. That's the charitable in. terpretation of as biased and non- sensical a report as has come across our desk —ever. The facts on the cleanup of Sec- tion 14 were on the record, easy to find —and almost°completely ignored They are: .. 1. Section A houses and shacks were originally occupied b% Indians:,:owning the land indi- vidualty,'anil Rs a tribe They had Mnn`;-since moved out and the iietei3orating and dilapi- dated`,shacks were then occu- pied Iiy'4squatters. mostly Ne- groes and'in many cases non - rent opying. 2 These'shacks were bug infest- ed and'fire" hazards. In many cases several faiiibies jointly and simultaneously occupied one small shack. ,Fire and po- lice problems in the area were many and grave. 3. In 1962 the City: of Palm Springs was requested by the Tribal Council for assistance in cleaning up the area Talks went on for ,years, ineffectu. ally, the city pointing out that. It could not evict, but also of- fering to help in the cleanup 4 The Indian owners and the In- dian Bureau agreed to assume the burden of eviction and the city commenced the cleanup PHOTO #17126 in 1964. using private contrac- tors as well as city personnel. a The cleanup took some 18 months Those evicted in the later stages obviously had more than adequate notice of intent Those vacated initially were not only given adequate notice but the few pleas of hardship were met with com- plete compliance a ith the ten, ant's time requirements. These ranged from as little as 10 days to as long as 18 months Citv Manager Frank Aleshire and council members alike say not one of the few re- questing a moratorium was summarily evicted. 6 The city did not provide sub- stitute housing for the evict• ees, as stated in the report. But the report neglected to state that no city at that time provided housing for its mi- norities and few do now. it simply was not within the then scope of municipal responsi- bility From the Miller report ' you get the idea that the city acted in total and callous disregard of the plight of the underprivileged. Such words as "Cla"ic study in civic disregard for the rights and feelings of minori- ty citizens,'` are high-faluting and hound to provoke a prejudiced reac- tion We suJ gesl instead that Miller showed .a classic disregard for the facts in the case and an "end-lusti- fies-the-means" approach which is becoming Classic in many of our bureaucratic planners for the Great Society and the Beautiful, Effort- less Tomorrow. Editorial by the Desert Sun in 1966 lambasting the AG's report on Section 14. This was one of several articles by the newspaper criticizing the AG's findings. (Go back to Rebuttal) 126 Desert Sun, "Example of 'Classic Disregard,'" June 5, 1968 6% PHOTO #18127 Bogert with the Marmolejo family in the 1940s during "Mexican Night" at the Chi Chi. Bogert was extremely fond of Mexico and its culture. He called the country his second home and was beloved by its citizens and by residents of the city's Latino community. Several years after the death of his first wife, Janice, Bogert married Negie Romero, a Mexican citizen from San Miguel de Allende. He would lead "Cabalgata" horseback rides in Mexico to introduce Americans to the country and to Mexican culture. Pascal Quiroz, the first Mexican -American child born in Palm Springs, said, "Frank Bogert did a lot for Mexican people... When Mexicans had any kind of fiesta, he was always there. They invited him and he was the main speaker."128 Manuel Gonzales, a Mexican friend of Bogert's said, "He was a white man, but he understood my culture"121 Pictured from left to right: Rafaela Marmolejo, Cydronia Valdez, Frank Bogert, Omar Valdez. (Go back to Rebuttal) 121 Desert Sun, "History column: Mexican heritage deeply ingrained in the story of Palm Springs," July 20, 2020 128 Desert Sun, "Palm Springs History Marked By Early Segregation," August 21, 2011 129 Desert Sun, "Bogert Understood Mexican Culture," March 28, 2009 53 PHOTO #19130 Frank Bogert riding in a Palm Springs parade and wearing a traditional Mexican Charro outfit. "Charro" is a Spanish word used to describe a Mexican horseman. Bogert was given the Golden Spur award by the Mexican Charro Association — he was the first non -Mexican, Caucasian to ever receive the honor.131 In 1986, over 200 Charros attended Bogert's 76th birthday in Mexico City.132 (Go back to Rebuttal) "I Palm Springs Life Archives, "The Hay Days of Palm Springs," February 25, 2010 131 Desert Sun, "Lessons in history from and original," February 21, 2007 132 Desert Sun, "Bogert to celebrate birthday with Mexico pals," December 31, 1985 54 PHOTO #20133 Newspaper clipping from the Desert Sun on October 22, 1959, of President Dwight Eisenhower signing the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts. Vyola Ortner and the all -female Tribal council (with Bogert's help) lobbied extensively for these two bills to be passed. These long-term leases allowed the Tribe to finally develop its valuable land (specifically on Section 14) and to improve the dire financial conditions of its members. These laws were heralded as the "two most important pieces of legislation ever affecting Palm Springs."134 (Go back to Rebuttal) 133 httr)s://www.youcanteatdirt.com/gallery/ 134 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts, pg 35 55 Editorials -Opinion "I M W SUN 110MM" tO.1a MISIM it" land R Mad 140" c'm W. tkhaaa6 FABAW 12 W 1kgM &= kft %Jeeswn e. Ito �1/ h!a >i&aN pai&" The Indian Probe Incompetent As the bureau of Indian Affairs rMteltift to uivesugate the haadhrig of local k 4an estates by amserva. tors and guardians, tt become: more clear that the bureau dwell is Milcumpdent to take over the Jab. In foci she bureau Was lbovsn it Is not even campetent to mndurt the ins rstigattwi, AS more eaaaiples of MOM - art and lack of owEttvlly in she tnirstigathm come to tight, one has la quested the n bill of the im en tlgatnre, The tareslizathm he+ quesffaeed the amount of fees paid to conSrrva- Ims old attorneys for the eatatea 7Were may he come Jasufitatioa for questsaning elm fets, but it is strange that the fees always are rtpresird naly in selatlen to Inrome and ant tl terms of the value of rho total at. fate handied and the ter ites per. farmed. A tell of suspicion has been cod upon almost elery one of the per- sons mho have nerved the Bedlam in their e>sats moMm. The bureau box lifted that veil from emly one twi- servitnr. Cover Niehou, wlvi A roMmende0 ae having dear a COW Jab for his Indians The fallurr of the bureau to specthrally Near oth er trustees would .rem to suggest oil rein others have perforated Prop- erly. a premise we find im"11ble to Sec % The. desert San already has ills- rovered three ma)or errors in the insrstlgatbn's preliminary report submitted Sept !S 197: Item The report sunrdtd that 0lunicipal Court Judge Eapeae TWer- irau was derebet in adminimenn6 the estates d Jahn Joseph Patrliev and Frames Patencno because an that was obsvm to a repotter. Item: The report accessed a can servator, 'Staaley 51"Kelman, of ov. erstating the Starts at bit ward and ed maktng an oasutbomed purchaw of property. 7We overvtaSsmrat Sup. pa-etty in%Aved a Mon pares al property in Palm Sprtnpt wtkh the bureau thou& had been purchased for 114090 The Imautborfsed per, ChaseSupposedly was a 19.000 boost In BaenLM the bureau thtught had Ism purrhosedloy $1.]75 In an Infcrtaal eAurtranm discus 'Mel last Fir -day, SpIsViman es plained that tte $14,000 had put - rhaved a hall rinerent in the Palm Springs property d wbkb the ward already :ward the other ball miffrst A94til tl is curiaui that trained auditors had failed to find she prrv�. bar half interest is prevtoos sr. CnuestinKt. Spirgeimaa slab abased that Ito Banning Property had bred a gift to the Indian and was not an umauthor. toed purchase ilie payment brad by the Wean the to clear up hark mortgage payments A. in 71elrkap'0 case, Ibr bee - rail Jumped W a rmrluskn witharrt mnfMrtai; wilt the rmrservatar rlts maid tare cleared up any que0aaoo 760 repert elan reclaim aliarr arruiahass, :oar of which the bar eau has substaauated in far We art WA convow d that three errors are only a matter or rareieis. tress end di tot kasdve A vettaia amomil or prrMire Ilid the bureau to Into the lawdigatam welh a pre ennrnited Wion' I. n lrokiag a, sumpuono sad Jumping to n+sula atone thal lustily its pre do cvptani am orerlooking lasts and dnruoirats that do not Support do nsums' lei PHOTO #21135 Editorial by the Desert Sun on the Department of Interior's (via the BIA) investigation on the Indian Conservator program. Titled "The Indian Probe Incompetent," the editorial states, "it becomes more clear that the (BIA) itself is not competent to take over the job. In fact the (BIA) has shown it is not even competent to conduct the investigation. As more examples of carelessness and lack of objectivity in the investigation come to light, one has to question the motives of the investigators." (Go Back to Rebuttal) 135 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 134, January 9, 1968 I.7:1 Appendix B Bogert worked relentlessly to find housing for Section 14 residents and to minimize the effects of the legal evictions The timeline below is just one example of many in which the HRC purposely provides a one- sided, dishonest assessment of Bogert and Section 14. Inexplicably, the HRC falsely claims that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by these evictions"136 and makes similar statements on at least 15 separate occasions in the Report. In reality however, nothing could be further from the truth. Over a span of 10 years, both during and after his Mayoral term, Bogert worked "tirelessly" to find housing for evicted Section 14 residents. The timeline below confirms to what great lengths Bogert went to secure low-cost housing and to address the harms caused by the relocations and evictions. It must be stressed that several of these quotes came from the same articles and sources the HRC cited in its Report. In other words, the HRC saw these same exact quotes and facts but intentionally omitted this refuting information in order to support its false narrative that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by these evictions." January 1961137 o Bogert asks the city for an "Urban Redevelopment Program" on Section 14. o The Desert Sun notes: "Mayor Frank Bogert ... has sought to promote a minority housing development in the Palm Springs area" o Additionally, the Desert Sun claims, "since he was elected to the council almost three years ago, (Bogert) has been working steadily to get private money to build a low-cost rental unit project for (Section 14 residents), but the location of it has been the big problem." o "If it is too far from downtown, they can't get into town, and there just isn't any place they can go downtown," said the Mayor. • February 1961138 Bogert enacts a bond program for the purchase of land used for the airport. Part of the justification for purchasing the land is not just for the airport itself, but for the development of low-cost housing as well. Indeed, "The Mayor also mentioned that the purchase of the airport by the people of Palm Springs may solve many other problems which to date have plagued the resort community. One of these is the initiation of a low-cost housing project eyed for the north-east corner of the land. According to the Mayor, backers have approached the city seeking such a project." "I Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 46 137 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 136, January 6, 1961 138 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 161, February 4, 1961 57 • March 1961131 o "Bogert, in his official capacity as Mayor, has served a request to the FHA and HHFA to come to Palm Springs and discuss a federal housing program, especially in connection with their project 221, the replacement of displaced persons... Mayor Bogert said that the federal representatives have looked at a couple of parcels of land which could qualify under the requirements of FHA and HHFA." • May 19611411 o He later stated that, although the city was rushing the slum clearance of Section 14, the city council was not interested in persecuting anyone, emphasizing that "The biggest scandal is that people are forced to live in these conditions, because we haven't done anything about it." • June 1961 o Bogert announces a six-month moratorium on evictions and demolitions in order to buy time to find housing alternatives."' The BIA had previously issued a June 1961 deadline for Section 14 evictions, but Bogert issued this six-month moratorium given housing options weren't yet in place for Section 14 residents. Bogert enacted this moratorium after hearing directly from two residents in Section 14 who said they came back to find their homes in ashes."' o "A promise from Federal Housing Authority representatives to the City Council that action would be speeded to certify city eligibility for financing guarantees for low-cost housing, both private homes and rental property."143 o Additionally, the Desert Sun states: "Councilmen and members of the Planning Commission had been working more than a year in anticipation of a housing crisis in Section 14 when the June eviction deadline arrived, 'I'm pleased to learn this financing could be rushed through,' said Vice -Mayor Ken Kirk. 'It's shaping up into a definite program and it looks like no one will be actually displaced without getting a better home'... Kirk went on to credit Mayor Bogert and Councilman Ted McKinney with spearheading work on obtaining housing for families evicted from Section 14. "They've worked very hard on it." he said. "It's good to see things moving along."144 • July 19611" o Bogert creates a special committee, which he leads, to work on minority housing problems related to Section 14. Among those named to the committee is the Rev. Jeff Rollins, a Black community leader and a friend of Bogert's. 139 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 182, March 1, 1961 140 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan M. Kray.pg 108 141 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 283, 27 June 1961 142 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan M. Kray.pg 108 143 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 283, June 27, 1961 144 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 283, June 27, 1961 145 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 298, July 14 1961 58 o This committee had four functions: Inform the community of the substandard conditions in Section 14. Inform the community and those being relocated about the assistance they were eligible for under Section 221, which provided 100% financing for relocation with only $200 down. Assist relocated families in finding alternative housing within their price range. Communicate important updates and details to all related parties of Section 14. o The city submits a program for community improvement "made in support of the city's application for federal aid in relocation housing for persons to be moved from a portion of Section 14 marked a major step toward solving the problems of displacement, caused by area development" o The Desert Sun stated, "As Palm Springs builds for the future, it is working for adequate housing for its citizens." Mid -July 1961116 o Bogert endorses and pushes for the low-cost housing development plans of Lawrence Crossley, a Black city pioneer and close friend of Bogert's. These plans included 150 low-cost, two-story units in Section 20. o "Mayor Frank Bogert, long active in trying to solve the housing problems of the minority groups in Section 14 said he thought the Gould -Crossley project would be a good thing," o In fact, Bogert even pushed city council and officials to relax zoning ordinances to enable the Crossley development to proceed as quickly as possible: "I think we ought to stretch a point and let them have the zoning they want ... Due to the housing emergency at the present time, we have to lean over backwards." o Regardless of which low-cost housing projects the city approved, Bogert demanded that the new dwellings be suitable for the people of Section 14: "Nevertheless, Mayor Bogert emphasized, he wanted to be sure any dwellings built for rentals would be good housing. "I don't want to see another slum area. If someone is going to build a place for these people, it should be good." • August 1961"' o Federal Housing Association approves a $2.5 million housing development for families displaced by Section 14 evictions. o The development was spearheaded by N & W Development Corp., whom Bogert had pushed to help find a solution to the housing crisis. Indeed: "The Mayor, working tirelessly for a low-cost housing project, had asked (N & W Development) some months ago if (they) couldn't come up with a solution to the ever increasing problem of homes for the scores of people who are residing in Section 14 and who are presently on notice that they must move from their present homes to make way for a full-scale Indian Section clearance program." ,as Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, November 15,1968 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 12, August 18, 1961 -M Upon hearing that the FHA and FHAA had approved this $2.5 million plan, Bogert "was elated. It had brought to an end the months upon months of studying for a solution to a problem which was only worsening with time." Unfortunately, the N & W project ultimately failed as the developers went through a period of "tight money' brought upon by a recession that had hit the country. This recession "set back many major housing and building development projects everywhere," not just in Palm Springs. Additionally, the recession "was particularly harmful to the city's plans for the immediate solution to the problems of Section 14.11148 • September 1961149 o The city and Frank Bogert secure a certification from the "Housing and Home Finance administrator proclaiming that Palm Springs has qualified for Federal Aid in its Workable Program for community improvement' o "U.S. Housing administrator Robert C. Weaver has determined that this community's program meets Federal requirements....The certification means that Palm Springs can proceed with its program, under federal assistance, to utilize appropriate private and public resources to eliminate and prevent the development or spread of slums and urban blight: to encourage needed urban rehabilitation; to provide for the development of blighted, deteriorated or slum areas, or to undertake other activities as may be suitable employed to achieve the objective of such a program." • October 1961150 o Bogert and the city council "rezoned five acres of Section 20 for 120 low-cost housing units. Developer Robert Gould applied for a low -interest loan for the project and subsequently announced the city had qualified for it." • December 1961151 o Bogert and the city rezone seven and a half acres in Section 34 for 200 to 250 low-cost housing units. The developer for this project unfortunately died before the project could get underway and the development was cancelled. • 1961152 o As detailed earlier, Bogert hires Charles Jordan as the city's first Black employee. Jordan would go on to serve on a special citizens' committee created by Bogert to assist Section 14 families with relocation. He was instrumental in securing the city's first federally financed housing project in 1968. • Early 1962153 148 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, November 15, 1968 141 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 30, September 8, 1961 151) Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 151 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 152 http://takebackthetimes.blogspot.com/2006/10/memorable-50th-high-school-class.html 153 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan Kray, pg 113 "Certificates of eligibility for the Section 221 loan plan were distributed by the city's building inspector." These certificates were to provide financing for relocation for Section 14 residents. • August 1962154 o "The Palm Springs City Council last night ordered an administrative investigation and report on Section 14 burnings carried out under a Superior Court order last month. The council took the action after emphasizing that the city was not involved in the action, nor could it legally make payments for personal goods lost in answer to a plea by 72-year- old Mrs. Florence Fatheree for city payment for her house and household goods." • September 1962155 o City approves plans for low-cost homes in the southeast section of town. • Mid-1963 o "A judge struck down a proposed affordable housing project"156 January 1965 o When Indian agent Paul Hand stated that city sponsored public housing could be built on Indian reservations, Bogert asked "Where could you put this public housing?" asked the Mayor. There was no answer to his questions," 157 demonstrating the difficulty in finding land for relocated Section 14 residents. o The city council approves 20 acres to be rezoned in Section 20 for 300 low-cost housing units."' • September 1965159 When the city needed to enact a "workable program" in order to secure federal funds for low-cost housing and when inspections to comply were lagging, Bogert pushed to accelerate the completion of tasks needed to qualify for the federal program. "Mayor Frank Bogert however, pointed out that this would delay the program about 4 months and asked Aleshire to proceed as rapidly as possible with the inspection using present staff members...the proposed low-cost housing would be located in the lower half of Section 34. The city has also met most of its workable program requirements, including a master plan and zoning." • November 1965160 o Under Bogert's leadership, the city created a human relations commission. The commission was recommended, "partially because it is needed to fulfill provisions of a 154 Desert Sun, "Section 14 Probe Set," August 14, 1962 ,55 Desert Sun, Volume 36, Number 44, September 25, 1962 156 Desert Sun, "'It was beautiful for the white people:' 1960s still cast a shadow of distrust over Palm Springs," September 22, 2016 157 Desert Sun, Volume 38, Number 143, January 19, 1965 158 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 ,5s Desert Sun, Volume 39, Number 44, September 24, 1965 ,so Desert Sun, Volume 39, Number 97, November 25, 1965 61 "workable program" the city has submitted to the federal government for low-cost housing aid" Bogert, who was a member himself, appointed a multiracial committee, comprised of members representing various minority groups, including Rev. Rollins of the First Baptist Church, Eileen Miguel of the Agua Caliente Tribe, Rabbi Joe Hurwitz, and John Quinonez. • January 1966161 o Even up until his last months in office, Bogert was working furiously to secure low-cost housing: o Bogert helped create and conducted a meeting for the human relations commission to "alleviate problems of minority groups in Palm Springs." o Bogert "outlined some of the aims of the present committee. Among them, he said, would be its relationship with economic opportunity programs and with the city's workable program which would pave the way for federal aid in low-cost housing developments. In addition to his constant efforts seeking low-cost housing during his Mayoral term, Bogert even continued seeking affordable housing options after his term ended in early 1966. He did so by partnering with leaders of the Black community. May 5, 1967162 o "Backed by city council support, former Mayor Frank Bogert today prepared to go to Washington in an attempt to obtain federal aid in low-cost housing for Palm Springs. Bogert, who has been working on a program for low-cost housing for 10 years, received a consensus of approval from the council yesterday at a study session.... Bogert will seek a 250-unit housing complex adjacent to the Gateway Estates and will try to get federal subsidies for a 'Model Neighborhood Program' which would include the housing project." o "The former Mayor noted that the city has had a workable program for three years, an FHA requirement for aiding private developers in construction of low-cost housing. "There is a great demand for low-cost housing for the working force in the city," Bogert told the council. "Something must be done for them." o "Bogert pointed out that as a result of the Indian -owned Section 14 cleanup campaign many of the city's hotel workers and domestics were forced to move to Banning and to Beaumont. "There were a lot of fine people moved out of Section 14," he told the council." o "(Bogert) said he had conferred with FHA officials in San Francisco on a 250-unit housing development. But, he said, they recommended only 60 units. This is far from sufficient", he added. 161 Desert Sun, Volume 39, Number 131, January 5, 1966 "' Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 235, May 5, 1967 o "We're not trying to create a paradise to bring in people from Los Angeles," (Bogert) declared "but we do need enough to take care of our labor force. There is a terrific demand for housing for the working people." • May 18, 19671" o The "possibility of getting 180 units of low-cost housing for Palm Springs was described as good today by former Mayor, Frank Bogert, after conferring with Federal Housing Administration officials." o "Bogert and a group interested in obtaining low-cost housing for the city returned this week from Washington where they met with officials." o "With Bogert (on the trip to Washington) was ... Rev. Jeff Rollins, pastor of the First Baptist Church." o "He said the local delegation made the FHA officials aware of the Section 14 cleanup in which a large number of residents were forced to leave Palm Springs for Banning and Garnet and other nearby areas." These residents, Bogert said, still work in Palm Springs and would prefer to live here." August 1967164 o Rev. Rollins speaks before the city council urging them to pass emergency zoning laws in order to facilitate Bogert's proposed development project. o The First Baptist Church and the Los Angeles Psychological -Social Center are co- sponsors of Bogert's low-cost housing project. • September 1967165 o Bogert meets with school trustees to push for low-cost housing plans for displaced residents. o Bogert stresses to the trustees that "low-cost development is needed to house the city's hotel work force." o Furthermore, "Bogert said he...covered Palm Springs thoroughly to locate economically priced land for the low-cost development. The only place they could find, he said, was the proposed location." • November 1967116 o City Council all but kills Bogert's low-cost housing plans. o A council member "indicated the federal rent supplement program on which the development hinged, was untested "and there is no experience on which the city can rely. Federal Housing Administration regulations call for approval by the city council before funds will be allocated" but ultimately the city council disapproved of the rent supplemental program. o "Former Mayor Frank Bogert, who said he had worked for 10 years or more on getting low-cost housing for the area, said it was obvious the council wouldn't listen to the proposal. Rev. Jeff Rollins, pastor of the First Baptist Church which ,ss Desert Sun, Volume 40, Number 246, May 28, 1967 164 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 21, August 29, 1967 161 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 35, September 24, 1967 166 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 99, November 28, 1967 63 would have been sponsor of the development, termed the action short-sighted on the part of the council." (Go back to Rebuttal) Appendix C Examples of the 100+ problematic issues in the HRC's Report The Report untruthfully claimed, "A $56,182 real estate commission awarded by the Superior Court at Indio to a broker in an Indian land lease deal, was later divided with the Indian's conservator, former Palm Springs Mayor Frank Bogert. It was one of many reported cases of `fee -splitting. 111167 o This statement by the HRC is untruthful on multiple accounts: The $56,182 commission figure the HRC provides is grossly inaccurate. In fact, the HRC overstates this commission figure by a factor of almost 10x. The newspaper article that the Report cites provides the accurate commission figure ($6,182), and yet the HRC didn't get the figure right in its Report. It was not "one of many reported cases of fee -splitting." The Department of Interior could only point to a single instance of fee -splitting, and even that instance needs to be put into context given 1) the circumstances by which Bogert became a conservator and 2) the problematic nature and inaccuracies of the Interior's report. • The HRC falsely states that '7n 1968, a $2.5 million housing development by W & N Development slated for families displaced from Section 14 received approval by the Federal Housing Administration. Subject to certain government specifications the development would soon be under construction within a few feet of Palm Springs. 11168 o This proposed development occurred in August 1961 while Bogert was Mayor, not in 1968 when he was out of office as the HRC claims. o Not only did the HRC get the dates wrong, but two paragraphs later in the same article the HRC cites, it is stated that this housing project "was the upshot of a previous request, of several months standing, by Mayor Bogert of (W&N Development) to seek a solution to the problem of homes for the residents of Section U.s169 o To summarize, the HRC claims this housing project was proposed when Bogert was out of office in 1968, when in reality it was Bogert himself who pushed for this development when he was in office in 1961. This is one example of many in which the HRC 1) purposely conceals to what great lengths Bogert went to find low-cost housing and 2) cherry picks quotes to support their false claims, while intentionally omitting refuting statements from the same article/source. 167 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 19 168 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 19 169 Desert Sun, "The Section 14 Story III, Elation Over Housing Okay Fades as Recession Comes," November 15, 1966 64 • The Report provides a timeline that shamefully insinuates that Bogert left office early in January 1966 due to wrongdoing or to a potential investigation by the Attorney General.10 In reality, however, Bogert left office to take care of his wife, Janice, who had been diagnosed with breast cancer. Bogert took a PR job in the private sector to support his family and to pay for his wife's mounting medical bills. The Mayor's position at that time was unpaid. o "Bogert gave up the Mayor's office because he couldn't afford it""' • Another falsehood in the Report: "Having a substantial financial interest as a conservator created a conflict of interest for Bogert (while he was Mayor)."12 o This is false. Bogert voluntarily ended his conservatorship in 1963. City -coordinated evictions took place in 1964, and much of the city -sponsored clearing took place at the end of 1965 and in early 1966. Thus, there was no conflict of interest since he was not a conservator during city -coordinated evictions and clearing. Bogert did not profit off of the evictions or clearing of Section 14. o In fact, in instances where his position as Mayor possibly conflicted with his role as a conservator, Bogert recused himself from such votes and/or discussions.13 • The Report falsely claims that "While he was leading the Section 14 demolition, profiting as a conservator, and championing development in Palm Springs, there is an appearance of conflict of interest when as Mayor, he crafted a multi -million dollar real estate transaction with another Tribe" 14 o As stated above, Bogert signed off as a conservator prior to city -funded demolition, thus the first part of this claim is false. Also, the HRC fails to justify how this real estate deal created a conflict of interest. More importantly, the quote below explains that this real estate deal was immensely beneficial for the local Mojave tribe — this quote was pulled from the same article the HRC cites to support its false claim that there was a conflict of interest. - "And this lease will mean a better life for some 800 Mojave Indians. It will mean an end to their poverty, a creation of jobs and will turn their rich land from idleness to productive use. "15 This is one of many examples in which the HRC prioritizes the character assassination of Bogert over the human rights of various Indian Tribes. Instead of celebrating the fact that Bogert was advancing the human rights of a marginalized, poverty-stricken community, the Human Rights Commission chose instead to falsely accuse him of a conflict of interest. 10 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 17 "' The San Bernardino County Sun, April 20, 1975 12 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 19 13 Desert Sun, "Council in 'No' Vote On Trailers," March 13, 1962 14 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 19 15 The Needles Desert Star (Needles, California), "Mojaves Sign Land Lease," November 15, 1962 65 • The Report deceptively asserts, "Court -appointed guardians and conservators, or their attorney levied excessive fees against many Indian owners of 84 estates studied by the Interior Department investigators. The report said Municipal Judge Eugene E. Therieau and attorney James Hollowell collected a total of $485,000 in fees over seven-year period. Other persons including Mayor Frank Bogert also were criticized.""' o The HRC uses the deceptive tactic above throughout the Report, which works as follows: 1. The Report makes a statement about accusations or wrongdoings of other conservators, judges, and attorneys and then.... 2. Places Bogert's name in subsequent or nearby sentences to mislead the reader into thinking that he was accused of the same thing, when the truth was, he was not. • "While Frank Bogert was mayor of Palm Springs, he improperly benefited by serving as a conservator for individual Tribal Members for land they owned on Section 14. "1" o Bogert was only conservator for ONE tribal member, not multiple "Members." The circumstances by which he became a conservator and the flaws in the Interior's report are detailed throughout the Rebuttal. • The HRC claimed: "They neglected to say that many living on Section 14 had leases and their rights to due process protections were violated."18 o False. There would have been legal ramifications for the offender(s) had residents of Section 14 had their due process rights violated. Two separate investigations, the Deputy AG's and the Department of the Interior's, confirmed no due process rights were violated. • The HRC ignorantly asks the following rhetorical question; "Facing a human rights crisis, why didn't the Desert Sun or city leaders move to upgrade the shacks to improve dangerous or unhealthy living conditions for tax paying residents?"19 This was not a viable "solution" due to the following: o Merely "upgrading the shacks" would not have been the best use of Tribal lands, would not have attracted much needed investment capital to develop Section 14 allotments, and most importantly, would not have generated sufficient income to materially improve the dire economic conditions of the Agua Caliente People. o Accordingly, due to the issues above, upgrading shacks would almost certainly not have passed zoning guidelines with either the city or the Tribal Council. The 1960s (specifically from 1962-1965) were a period of much debate and negotiation between the Tribal and City Councils on zoning guidelines, rights and zoning authority. o The HRC doesn't explain how these upgrades and improvements could have been financed. At the time, Tribal members certainly didn't have the resources to fund these upgrades and this type of development wouldn't have attracted much investment interest. These upgrades weren't within the scope nor budget of the city to finance and 16 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 35 "' Human Rights Commission Report Pending Adoption pg 7 18 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 24 19 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 24 66 the Report provides no supporting information that state or federal funds could have been used for this purpose. o This solution would have still required relocations or evictions of Section 14 residents. The section's structures were in such bad shape and so haphazardly constructed that most likely a mere "upgrade" wouldn't have rectified the situation, nor would it have complied with municipal codes. Therefore, a complete teardown of the shacks and makeshift structures would have been needed, and residents would have still been required to vacate the area to allow for a comprehensive redevelopment. • In a desperate attempt to find some wrongdoing with Bogert's actions, the HRC states that the evictions were violations of the United Nations resolution on forced evictions, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Title VIII.180 Two separate investigations found no illegal activity had taken place during Section 14 evictions, thus the Civil Rights Act is not applicable to the events in question. With regards to the United Nations resolution and Title VIII, both are also not applicable to Section 14. Even if one were to grant that the evictions violated these laws/acts (which they did not), both were drafted and/or enacted after Section 14 evictions took place. The United Nations resolution was drafted in 1997 (from the Report's own citation) and Title VIII was passed in 1968 (two years after Bogert left office).18' Essentially, the HRC critiques the evictions by retroactively applying laws and Acts that weren't even in place when Bogert was Mayor. Examples of the HRC falsely accusing Bogert of not seeking low-cost housing and not caring for the welfare of Section 14 residents The Report whitewashes the crucial fact that Bogert went to great lengths to minimize the effects of the evictions (specifically by "tirelessly" working on low-cost housing) and also falsely claims that Bogert, "did not take adequate measures to address the needs of our most vulnerable people."162 Appendix B provides an overwhelming amount of evidence to refute all of the false and/or misleading claims below made by the HRC in its Report.: • "City decision makers focused their energy clearing Section 14 for development instead of addressing the core issue of housing for those displaced. -183 • "During this time, civic and business leaders were focused on commercial development and maintaining the resort image of Palm Springs without ensuring the residents they displaced had access to affordable housing or were provided just compensation. "184 180 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 7 181 https://www.hud.gov/program offices/fair housing egual oppffair housing and related law 18z Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 25-26 183 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report Pg 6 184 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 6 67 • "Regrettably, no low-cost or affordable housing plan was realized to care for Black, Indigenous, persons of color and other working class families displaced under city directed forced evictions. "1115 • "City decision makers focused their energy clearing Section 14 for development instead of addressing the core issue of housing for those displaced. "186 • "No city plan for relocation, coupled with racial covenants preventing African Americans from buying land in Palm Springs, displaced residents were forced to disperse to the north part of town. 11187 • "Prior administrations recognized access to housing for those evicted was a concern. The plans developed during Frank Bogert's term, for demolition and burning of homes, continued in Palm Springs during and less than two years past Bogert's mayoral term."188 • "The fact remains that people of color were banished from city limits and city leaders didn't intervene"189 • "No replacement housing was ever constructed. Rather, the residents were simply expelled through forced eviction and their homes destroyed. "190 • "Facing a human rights crisis, why didn't the Desert Sun or city leaders move to upgrade the shacks to improve dangerous or unhealthy living conditions for tax paying residents?"191 • "Our city leaders did not take adequate measures to address the needs of our most vulnerable people."19z • `Bogert's Positive Traits and Attributes Did Not Surface to Aid Those Being Evicted. 11193 • "History documents Bogert was more often found to disregard the values of ethical and moral principles. His decisions in planning and preparing the community for low-cost housing and to plan for financial support of the families the city displaced is a demonstration of behaviors opposite of the positive traits community members have shared at official city meetings"194 185 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 6 1ss Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 6 187 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 8 1es Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 17 1as Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 15 190 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 23 191 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 24 192 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 25-26 193 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 45 194 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 45 • "In our opinion, the reality of Bogert's decisions and judgement while serving his first term as mayor was mismatched between his actual behaviour and actions and a community's perception of the person he was. "195 "A society based on norms and values expects one with entrenched values would have acted in good faith and stepped up to stop the eviction process until low-cost housing alternatives and financial support was made available to the impacted families.11196 • "Bogert demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by these evictions. ,197 • "Low -Cost Housing Timeline"198 The most egregious example of the HRC concealing Bogert's efforts to secure low-cost housing occurs in a section titled "Low -Cost Housing Timeline," whereby the HRC provides a timeline relating to the city's efforts to seek low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. This timeline is further proof of the disingenuous and biased nature of the Report. Despite a voluminous amount of documentation (including in the same articles the HRC cites) that Bogert worked constantly to secure low-cost housing, never once is his name mentioned in the timeline. No mention of him pushing private developers to build low-cost housing. No mention of him securing housing certificates from the FHA for displaced residents. No mention of him pushing for and supporting the low-cost development projects of Lawrence Crossley. No mention of the multiracial citizen's committee he put together to study potential solutions to the housing crisis and to communicate with and hear the voices of minority residents. No mention of the numerous quotes of Bogert saying the city needed to find housing for the displaced. No mention of him partnering with his friend Reverend Rollins after he left office to secure low-cost housing. No mention of him lobbying in Washington with Rollins for low- cost housing funding. No mention of him searching for and applying for numerous federal assistance programs. No mention of him hiring Charles Jordan, the city's first ever Black employee, who was instrumental in securing the city's first federally funded housing project which was prioritized for Section 14 residents. (Go back to Rebuttal) 195 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 45 196 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 45 1s7 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 46 1sa Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 31-32 .• Appendix D Examples of Plagiarism The HRC plagiarizes parts of its Report. Below are examples in which the HRC copies and pastes source material without any citation or quotation marks. Example #1 Original Source — The Path to Paradise by Ryan Kray "Ostensibly enacted to protect Indians from greedy developers, the Equalization Act included a provision that authorized court appointed guardians and conservators legally to represent and control Indian lands in business dealings. Drafted and pushed through Congress by Palm Springs power brokers Floyd Odlum, Melvin Eaton, and Judge Hilton McCabe, this provision became an instrument by which local businessmen, realtors, and attorneys eventually dispossessed many Agua Calientes of their valuable land in Section 14 and much of their newfound wealth.""' From the HRC's Report "Ostensibly enacted to protect Indians from greedy developers, the Equalization Act included a provision that authorized court appointed guardians and conservators legally to represent and control Indian lands in business dealings. Drafted and pushed through Congress by Palm Springs power brokers Floyd Odlum, Melvin Eaton, and Judge Hilton McCabe, this provision became an instrument by which local businessmen, realtors, and attorneys eventually dispossessed many Agua Calientes of their valuable land in Section 14 and much of their newfound wealth."200 Example #2 Original Source — The Path to Paradise by Ryan Kray "Palm Springs boosters imagined an ideal community devoid of social conflict and political dissension, a homogeneous constituency free of the burdens of the indigent, a city whitened and brightened to illuminate its most worthy citizens. As city leaders circumscribed city building as an exclusive project, race and class claimed center stage in city politics and planning.'201 From the HRC's Report "Palm Springs boosters imagined an ideal community devoid of social conflict and political dissension, a homogeneous constituency free of the burdens of the indigent, a city whitened 199 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, p. 106, Ryan M. Kray. zoo Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 1 201 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, p. 86, Ryan M. Kray 70 and brightened to illuminate its most worthy citizens. As city leaders visioned city building as an exclusive project, race and class claimed center stage in city politics and planning. 11202 Example #3 Original Source — The Path to Paradise by Ryan Kray "By 1966 the 'city beautiful' clearance campaign was a triumphant success. Local elites realized their dream by eliminating downtown residential decay, securing racial homogeneity, and purging the city of its undesirables, thus voiding the city's obligation to construct low-cost housing. Although the city's people of color protested their exclusion and disenfranchisement, their voices were silenced by the city's bulldozer that razed their homes and broadcast their expulsion from the city. "201 From the HRC's Report "By 1966, with only a few months remaining in Mayor Bogert's term, the 'city beautiful' clearance campaign was a triumphant success. Local elites realized their dream by eliminating downtown residential decay, securing racial homogeneity, and purging the city of its undesirables, thus voiding the city's obligation to construct low-cost housing. Although the city's people of color protested their exclusion and disenfranchisement, their voices were silenced by the city's bulldozer that razed their homes and broadcast their expulsion from the city.11204 (Important to note that, in this example, the HRC merely inserts the bolded text above in between plagiarized source material, in an attempt to tie these false accusations to Bogert specifically) (Go back to Rebuttal) Appendix E Timeline of ill-conceived Federal laws The timeline below details 1) the federal policies that led to the substandard living conditions of Section 14205 and 2) the Tribe's decades -long struggle to pass the Equalization and Long-term Leasing Acts. (Unless otherwise cited, timeline material is sourced from Desert Sun, October 13, 1991): • 1876 — "President Ulysses Grant establishes the first Cahuilla reservation of Section 14 and part of Section 22. Land divisions are based on a checkerboard pattern of grants 202 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 11 203 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, p. 122, Ryan M. Kray 204 Palm Springs City Hall Monument Report pg 30 205 Desert Sun, "Indians Crafting a New Future," October 13, 1991 71 promised to railroads." This checkerboard pattern will lead to numerous development problems and create a bottleneck for the city's growth, as detailed earlier. • 1877 — "President Hayes extends the Cahuilla reservation to include all even -numbered sections in three townships, totaling 30,720 acres." • 1891 — "Mission Indian Relief Act gives further authorization for allotments to heads of families of up to 20 acres of farmland and 160-240 acres of grazing land." • 1910 —The government changes the allotments. "Each Indian would get no more than 40 acres of irrigable land, 80 of agricultural land, 160 of grazing land." o "`Federal Indian Policy' held that Indian land was subject to five-year lease term limits for commercial and residential property." These five-year leases were the catalyst that led to the substandard conditions of Section 14 since short lease lengths were not conducive to developing income producing properties. • 1917 — "Congress directs secretary of the Interior to make allotments" • 1923 — "Bureau of Indian Affairs agent Harry Wadsworth proposes 50 allotments. Only 2350 of the 31,520 acres are claimed. Wadsworth submits a new allotment schedule for 24 members who want allotments. Wadsworth tells these members that allotments will be approved shortly. Some members begin building. The allotments are never made." • 1938 — "First lawsuit filed to compel Secretary of Interior to make allotments" • 1940 — "Supreme Court refuses to hear one lawsuit because papers were filed one day late. Second lawsuit filed." • Late-1940s — "First allotments made according to the 1927 schedule. Lawsuit filed to require equalization." • 1948 — Secretary invalidates 1927 allotment schedule because of objections to allotments.20e • 1950 — "Tribal members filed a lawsuit, petitioning the federal government, yet again, to finalize their allotments, as well as to equalize them and sort out the myriad problems generated by new allotments11207 1950s — The onerous five-year lease laws from 1910 "had, for the most part, reduced Indian leaseholds to magnets for transient lessees, with no long-term vested interests and little ability to produce sufficient monthly/yearly income. The result was property that yielded nominal economic value."208 This was especially true for Section 14. • 1955 — General Leasing Act is passed. "In its final iteration, it transformed the draconian five-year lease term for residential and commercial Indian property into a 25-year lease term. Still, these term lengths were not long enough to allow for the proper development of Indian land. • 1956 — Third lawsuit by the Tribe requires BIA to equalize allotments. • 1958 — Vyola Ortner states "The Bureau of Indian Affairs has made a decision on equalization of allotments on the Palm Springs reservation that will destroy tribal identity completely." Because of this, "Tribal Council members promised to wage an all-out fight against the federal government's equalization program, claiming that it would 'liquidate' the local band." 210 206 "you Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 29 201 "you Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 27 208 "you Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 27 209 "you Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 27 210 "you Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 33 72 • 1958 — Bogert becomes Mayor • 1959 — Congress passes the Equalization Act which equalizes allotments and the Long - Term Leasing Act which establishes 99-year leases for Tribal lands. "President Eisenhower signed both bills into law in what was described as `two of the most important pieces of legislation ever affecting Palm Springs' Press coverage noted: "Combined, the two laws will encourage development and integration of all Indian lands."21 (Go back to Rebuttal) Appendix F Additional details on the Deputy AG's and The Department of the Interior's Investigations The Deputy AG's report was deeply flawed and incomplete City officials, individuals with first-hand knowledge of Section 14 and even the media strongly refuted the findings of the Deputy AG. In fact, the Deputy AG's report was thoroughly criticized and debunked in a series of articles by the Managing Editor of the Desert Sun in November of 1968. Those criticisms, among others, are as follows: 1. The breadth and depth of the AG's investigation were questioned: • The AG falsely claimed: "Perhaps the most conclusive evidence of the city's attitude is the fact that the City of Palm Springs kept no official records of the persons displaced and the residences destroyed in Section 14 and could offer no evidence of any attempt at determining that each homeowner and resident had been properly served with eviction notices." 212 o This statement was false and as the Desert Sun states, "It appears more that it was Miller (the AG) who did not make the attempt."213 o "In cases where the residents were not moving out, the owners or their spokesmen went to court, secured an eviction order which was served by deputies and eventually the people moved out. `There are detailed records of these actions,' the city manager maintains.11214 • Why wasn't the AG able to obtain official records and documentation relating to evictions which would have surely altered his findings? By his own admission, he had limited resources and time to conduct his investigation. 21 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 35 212 California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, May 31, 1968, Palm Springs Section 14 Demolition, Loren Miller, Jr., pg 9 213 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 100, November 28, 1968 214 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, November 27, 1968 73 o "The Miller Jr. report is dated May 31, 1968, which, by his own preamble, is nearly two years after he initiated his investigation on July 25, 1966. He explains that the delay resulted from extended unavailability of certain participants and workload problems within his unit.2ls • Because of limited resources and workload problems, the AG spent a limited amount of time onsite investigating the matter and failed to interview key individuals with first-hand involvement or knowledge of the evictions and clearing. o "The (city manager's) best recollection credits Miller with only a one -day visit here. Though, acknowledging the attorney general's investigator the benefit of the doubt. Miller could have spent three or four days here, but no city official can, in good faith, credit him with as much as a week.11216 o Palm Springs "Councilmen pointed out that they had never been contacted, either personally or by telephone, by the deputy Attorney General." As the Desert Sun stated when the report was released, "it's no wonder Miller's findings do not include some very pertinent public records in the city's files.1121 Accordingly, the fact that the AG 1) only spent a few days at most onsite at most investigating the matter and 2) failed to interview important figures and witnesses, speaks to the haphazard and incomplete nature of his findings. For a history as complex and nuanced as that of Section 14, an incomprehensive and expedient investigation would certainly not suffice to depict the true history of the events. Additionally, it is clear from the abundance of documentation and supporting evidence provided in the Congressional hearing of 1968 (the same year the AG issued his own report) that the AG's assertion that no records were kept is completely false. He didn't find any records primarily because he didn't spend nearly enough time onsite looking for or requesting them, and filed his report based on a limited understanding of the scope of the situation and the circumstances that led to the evictions. 2. The report contained numerous false assertions about the evictions and clearing: • The AG claimed that "The city paid little attention to the 30-day requirements set forth in the eviction notices and operated its own demolition plan solely based on receipt of the destruction permits executed by the conservators.11218 o But as the Desert Sun stated "those vacated initially were not only given adequate notice, but the few pleas of hardship were met with complete compliance with the tenant's time requirements. These ranged from as little as 10 days to as lonq as 18 months. City Manager Frank Aleshire and council members alike say not one of the few requesting a moratorium was summarily evicted. But the report neglected to state that no city at that time provided housing for its minorities and few do now. It simply was not within the scope of municipal responsibility. From the Miller report you get the idea that the city acted in total and callous disregard of the plight of the underprivileged. Such words as "Classic study in civic disregard for the rights and I" Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 94, November 22, 1968 216 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 100, November 28, 1968 21 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 98, November 26, 1968 211 California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, May 31, 1968, Palm Springs Section 14 Demolition, Loren Miller, Jr., pg 7 74 feelings of minority citizens," are high-falutin and bound to provoke a prejudiced reaction. "We suggest instead that Miller showed a classic disregard for the facts in the case and an `end justifies -the -means approach."'219 o Additionally, the Desert Sun said, "Apart from the 30-day clauses in what few leases there were, as well as the eviction notices, which Miller charges 'the city paid little attention to,' what about the city's actions which date from 1951? It appears that Miller regards a decade and a half as short notice? That is, if he's taken that long and detailed process into consideration at all.11220 • The AG also asserted, "The Indians who own the land are also disillusioned, since the land which once produced revenue for them now lies vacant,11221 o This is misleading at best and lacks context. First, it fails to acknowledge the Tribe's role in collaborating with the city to plan and execute the clearing and the importance Section 14 was to the Tribe's economic future. Second, the "revenue" the AG mentions as so meager and below market rates that it led to poverty and substandard living conditions for Tribal members. The "vacant" land was eventually developed and provided its allotted owners with significant income, thereby advancing the human rights of the Tribe. • Another false AG claim: "Homes were destroyed with no real concern on the part of the city that the families were properly notified of the pending destruction."222 o There is ample evidence refuting the claim that families were not notified of pending destruction. o Appendix B provides a timeline that directly refutes the AG's claim. o The AG also doesn't take into consideration that evictions took place 15 years earlier in 1951 and notifications and moratoriums were provided numerous times. 3. A June 4, 1968, article in the Desert Sun detailed additional issues with the AG's Report:223 • The AG's report "wantonly ignores the facts, city councilmen who served while the program was being conducted said today... Both current Mayor Howard Wiefels and City Manager Frank Aleshire characterized the report as 'biased and without knowledge of the facts."' • The clearing "program was evolved in cooperation with the Tribal Council. 'The Indians wanted help in cleaning their expensive land infested with shacks,' he said." • "Councilman Edgar McCoubrey, mayor at the time of the cleanup program, said, 'I do not agree with the reasoning of the report or the report itself. I never received a single complaint or phone call in connection with the program, and this all comes as a surprise to me.' He pointed out that the city's Human Relations Commission held hearings following completion of the program and received only general complaints, no specific ones, although it promised to investigate any specific complaints." 219 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 621, June 5, 1968 220 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 100, November 28, 1968 I" California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, May 31, 1968, Palm Springs Section 14 Demolition, Loren Miller, Jr., pg 7 222 California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, May 31, 1968, Palm Springs Section 14 Demolition, Loren Miller, Jr., pg 2 223 Desert Sun, "Report Biased, City Heads Say," June 4, 1968 75 • "George Beebe Jr., a former councilman, said the report'incites me more than anything else. Whoever wrote it doesn't know what he is talking about.' Beebe drew particular attention to the filthy conditions in which many of the Section 14 residents lived — so extreme, he pointed out, that they were the subject of a television expose. 'I resent the Attorney General, or anyone else, trying to tell us that this cleanup was not needed,' he said. `It was necessary for the health, safety and welfare of the community.' 'We're not just talking about the economy,' he said. 'We're talking about a blight, and the accord in this community shows that Miller doesn't know what he is talking about."' • "Former Councilman Matt Dragicevich pointed out that he consistently opposed the cleanup program, but he, too, was highly critical of the report and said he had expected a highly biased one. He labeled as unfair the portion of the report that said conservators had urged their Indians to evict tenants and clear the land to increase its value as commercial property, then watch the land stand idle and return no income. He pointed out that the development was caused directly by a number of unforeseeable factors, including tightening of the money market and a halt to building in the area and a souring of developers on Indian land lease deals." • "Wiefels and Aleshire pointed out that the report indicates that the City of Palm Springs has shown no interest in providing adequate housing for minorities. They answer that with the statement that while the criticism might at first appear justified, that at the time of the cleanup program, no city in the state was involved in the provision of housing." (Go back to Rebuttal) The conflict of interest associated with the Department of Interior's investigation The findings of the Department of Interior's Investigation were strongly refuted in Congressional testimony due primarily to a significant conflict of interest with the head of the investigation's task force, Mr. Robert Cox. This conflict of interest and its effect on the biased, incomplete findings of the investigation can be summarized as follows:224 1. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), which the Department of Interior oversees, was responsible for implementing and overseeing the Conservator program. The Conservator program was the main focal point of the investigation. 2. Prior to creating and overseeing the Conservator program, the BIA in conjunction with the Department of the Interior passed a series of laws (primarily restrictive leasing laws) which were detrimental to the Agua Caliente Tribe and directly caused countless problems and inequities for its members. As detailed throughout this Rebuttal, these laws directly led to the Section 14's slum -like conditions. 3. As a result of these laws as well as the conservator program that the BIA was responsible for overseeing, numerous Indians filed complaints with the BIA. 224 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pgs 90-258 76 4. The Department of the Interior, which oversaw the BIA, created a task force to investigate these complaints, and appointed Robert Cox (of the same Department of Interior) to head the investigation. 5. This of course posed a massive conflict of interest. The task force leader was tasked with investigating accusations both he and the department he worked under (the Department of the Interior) were responsible for. These accusations came as a result of ill-conceived policies and laws the Interior (through the BIA) had enacted. 6. As a result of this conflict of interest, "it was obvious that the investigation would not be an impartial one, but would attempt in some way to distort the facts and mislead Congress.s225 In fact, furthering the impartiality of the investigation, Mr. Cox in 1965 was appointed "Resources Trust Officer" for the Palm Springs Office of the BIA, and worked with the court in the administration of the very Conservator program he was now tasked with investigating.226 Essentially he would have to implicate himself (in addition to his own department) had he conducted a fair, objective investigation. 7. Accordingly, Mr. Cox chose not to focus his investigation on himself or his own department, but on individuals associated with the conservative program that his department was charged with overseeing. Focusing on the root cause of failed BIA policies undoubtedly would have brought much scrutiny and criticism to him and his superiors. Therefore, the findings of the investigation were highly biased, inaccurate, and misleading in order to deflect blame from the BIA and the Department of the Interior, and instead to condemn individual conservators. While some individual conservators were undeniably guilty of taking advantage of their Tribal wards, the investigation's findings omit the complicity of the BIA and Department of Interior in these injustices. Accordingly, the following statements were made under oath at the Congressional hearing. These statements detail this conflict of interest and the overall problems with the investigation: We resent having to explain erroneous statements made by investigators seeking to whitewash the agency by whom they are employed... This investigation should be made by an independent objective agency... The charge of conflict of interest demonstrates that the task force is biased and unqualified to perform its function. The investigators have deliberately ignored facts known to them that demonstrate the falsity of the charge. 11227 - Robert A. Schlesinger, attorney, Congressional Testimony May 1968. • "In a Report of this nature it is apparently the intent of the authors to vilify individuals in order to protect the inadequacies, improprieties and lack of concem on behalf of the Bureau.'Q28 225 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 172 226 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 209 227 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 133 228 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 213 77 - Henry V. Cleary, Attorney for the Association of Conservators, Guardians and Allottees of the Agua Caliente Indian Lands and Estates May, Congressional testimony May 1968. • "(The Bureau of Indian Affairs) always chose to look the other way until it was too late, then all of a sudden comes this big investigation. It happens time after time, only this time it was conducted in a most disgraceful manner by the Bureau of Indian Affairs officials. People, Indian, and non - Indian alike, have been unfairly accused publicly and without a chance to present any explanation or reason for action which they may have taken. The Bureau should know that nothing is resolved by making someone else look bad in an attempt to hide the egg on your own face.'119 - Vyola Ortner, former Agua Caliente Chairman, Congressional testimony May 1968. Ortner is explaining the flaws in the Department of Interior's Investigation. • The task force leader, "was quite frank in stating that he was serving in two capacities, one as an investigator and one as a trust officer, more or less, for the Bureau. 11230 (Go back to Rebuttal) Additional issues with the Interior's findings: In addition to the conflict of interest, Mr. Cox's analysis and findings indicated he was unqualified to investigate the technicalities of conservatorships and guardianships. • Claims and statements made by Mr. Cox in the report "indicates that the authors of the report are wholly unconversant with the nature and value of professional and fiduciary services.1123' • "The Report mis-quotes applicable facts and law.11232 • "The conclusion reached by the Task Force in connection with one incident is based upon a newspaper article and the conclusion reached in the other instance is based upon false assumption of California law."233 • The report falsely assesses "excessive fees" by using income as a benchmark when in reality that is faulty and inconsistent with how Fiduciaries actually operate under Probate Code, Sections 1500 and 1852, of the California Probate Code.234 229 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 117 230 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 195 231 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 210 232 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 210 233 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 214 234 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 216 78 • "It is apparent that the Task Force started out from the false premise that fees should be charged to income but not only that they should compute the costs of the total income to be earned during the life of the leases so that the true costs of the development of the Ward's property can be ascertained.11235 • Mr. Cox's lack of knowledge relating to fee calculations and how fiduciaries operate overall, resulted in him grossly miscalculating the percentage of fees conservators were actually receiving. o Mr. Cox asserted that conservators were collecting 44% in fees from their wards, when in reality that figure was closer to 5.2%23e o "Mr. Cox doesn't know what he is talking about." 237 (Go back to Rebuttal) The inequities caused by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Department of the Interior The quotes below demonstrate 1) the detriments that the BIA and Interior had on tribal members 2) the negative impact these Federal agencies had on tribal lands (Section 14). These quotes also demonstrate why, presumably, the task force leader omitted these facts from its investigation. Any objective investigation would have highlighted these injustices and implicated the very federal agency that was conducting the investigation. Therefore, the task force leader focused his findings on individual conservators instead of his own department (which was responsible for the Conservator program). "History has indicated that the Bureau of Indian Affairs has been a total failure in helping the members of the local Tribe.'Y238 - Attorney Henry Cleary, Congressional Testimony May 1968 "Unfortunately, the (BIA) at the time of the inception of our organization, was making no efforts whatsoever to actually promote the lands of the Agua Caliente Indians. As a matter of fact, the few efforts that were made before and after the inception of our association were inept in that the (BIA), through directives and policies in Washington, set such ridiculous standards for the leasing of Indian lands, that for a good period of time after the inception of the conservatorship program and the establishing of our association, the Indian lands were unleasable because of the impractical conditions placed thereon by the Bureau and the Secretary of the Interior. 11239 - Attorney James Hollowell, Congressional Testimony May 1968 "I Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 217 236 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 253 237 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 232 23e Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 146 239 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 158 79 • "The Bureau of Indian Affairs has operated in an unimaginative manner and has only nominally met its responsibilities. The object of the Bureau should be to best prepare the Indian to become a responsible citizen. In this it has sadly failed. 11240 - Vyola Ortner, Congressional Testimony May 1968 • "Ipersonally feel that the blame lies with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I feel if inequity and injustice are being practiced, they surely must be corrected... The Bureau of Indian Affairs does not represent the best interests of the Indians any longer" 241 - Vyola Ortner, Congressional Testimony May 1968 • "This slum area (in Section 14) had been encouraged by the Bureau of Indian Affairs through their lack of foresight, in granting 30-day permits and only authorizing 5-year leases on any Indian land.11242 - Mr. Hollowell, Congressional Testimony May 1968 • "The Bureau of Indian Affairs had not developed Indian land or allowed the Indians to develop their land to such an extent that they could support themselves."24s - Mr. Hollowell, Congressional Testimony May 1968 `In all frankness I must say that I am appalled that the state of affairs described in the report has not only existed under ostensible state and federal supervision; it has flourished ... a share of the responsibility for the present state of affairs in Palm Springs rests upon the shoulders of this Department.'1244 - Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior, essentially confirming his Department's role in the inequities of the Conservator program and the slum -like conditions of Tribal lands. "I want to say that I agree with one of your earlier conclusions very, very definitely, among others, when you speak about the lack of the Bureau of Indian Affairs initiative on the subject of leasing programs for Indian lands.'r245 - Congressman Ed Edmondson, Congressman from Oklahoma and Chairman of the Congressional Hearing (also a former lawyer, Navy Veteran, and FBI agent), May 1968 211 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 136 241 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 136 242 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 160 241 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 166 2" Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 166 245 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 172 E:11 As a grand gesture to recover some prestige with its Indians and the public, the Interior Department in 1949 requested and received consent of Congress to lease land on a five (5) year basis. What thoughtlessness and lack of planning went into this request is unknown ... Yet the Interior Department proudly declared this is progress, but nevertheless continued its practice of granting thirty (30) day permits thus encouraging and increasing the slum area theretofore developed by the Bureau on Section 14 in the heart of the City of Palm Springs."gas - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 • 'Again, at a great cost for the individual Indian, it was necessary for the Courts in the case of the United States vs Pierce, 235 F 2d 885, to declare the Bureau had been unequitable....The Interior Department could not explain it to them for had it done so it would have committed the unforgivable bureaucratic sin of confessing it did not know what to do or how to handle the Indian land Problem in Palm Springs.i247 - Mr. Cleary May 1968 "The Interior Department, not having studied matters and having always to learn the hard way, again had to acknowledge another grave error which again delayed the Indian from receiving his just due from his allotted land. "248 - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 • `After initiating the Conservatorship and Guardianship Program in the California Courts the Bureau has abandoned its responsibilities and has left the appointment of the Conservators and Guardians to the Courts."Z41 - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 "In the 1950's the Secretary was directed to get out of the Indian business. In order to enhance his opportunity of doing this the Equalization Act was adopted. The Bureau since that time and until the present Task Force intrusion refused to take any active steps to carry out the mandate of Congress."2so - Mr. Cleary, May 1968 (Go back to Rebuttal) gas Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 205 241 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 205 241 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 206 249 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 208 250 Hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs House of Representatives, May 31, 1968, pg 215 81 Appendix G Select quotes and passages Tribal member related quotes and passages • "Section 14 became a very bad slum because we didn't have leases.... It became very congested and not a good sight. 1251 - Vyola Ortner, 2011 • "We can see the day rapidly approaching when we're going to have to clear off this land to make it available for long-term leasing. We would like to see something done now in planning for housing for these people before they're faced with a crisis. We don't want to just move these people out in the street, but if it comes to a choice, the Indians are just going to have to be cold -hearted and take their property for better use.'1252 - Ray Jackson, Head of Bureau of Indian Affairs • "When city attorney Jerry Bunker brought up the issue of the NAACP when cleaning up Section 14, Eileen Miguel responded, 'Are you more worried about the NAACP, or cleaning up the city?"253 - Desert Sun, 1968 • "It also climaxed a petition by Tribal Council Chairman Mrs. Eileen Miguel who had urged the City Council to take reasonable action to speed solution to the three-year problem (of zoning for Section 14)1154 Desert Sun, 1968 • "The city has helped us at different times when we needed help with their legislators in Sacramento and Washington DC. So it became a good working relationship that continues to this day'1255 - Vyola Ortner in 2011 • "In a letter appearing in the 1962 progress report of the Agua Client Indian Tribal Council, Frank Bogert, praised 'the friendly negotiations' better the Palm Springs City Council and the Indian Tribal Council. 'The continued cooperation between the Indians and the townspeople is certain and will stimulate progress far beyond the dreams of most people,'... Vyola Ortner confirmed, "We had a real good relationship between the two councils at that time.11256 251 https://www.c-span.org/video/?313044-1/vou-eat-dirt 252 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 42 253 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 91, November 18, 1968 254 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 91, November 18, 1968 255 https://www.c-span.org/video/?313044-1/vou-eat-dirt 256 Desert Sun, "Ortner Talks on Role as New City Official," April 28, 1980 82 • February 25th, 1963:257 o The city and the tribe agree on new zoning plans for Section 14. These plans were "evolved by a special committee appointed last May by Bogert, comprising of three Indians, two councilmen and two planning board members." o The city council provides a welfare fund for Tribal members living in poverty while their land is unleased. • `By the 1950s, these onerous restrictions had, for the most part, reduced Indian leaseholds to magnets for transient lessees, with no long-term vested interests and little ability to produce sufficient month/yearly income. The result was property that yielded nominal economic value. With legal input from Simpson (a tribal attorney), Olinger and her fellow Tribal Council members went straight to work with the singular focus of redressing this untenable situation.'1258 "In July 1959, in one of my most memorable appearances before the U.S. Congress, I testified at a House Interior Subcommittee Hearing requesting the legislature to consider that `my tribe needs Vitamin M — Money.' In other words, we needed to finalize the land allotment process and implement long-term, ninety -nine-year leasing. Without long-term leasing, I argued, tribal land would continue to yield only modest gains. The 99-Year Leasing Act would allow tribal members to make theirland productive by entering into stable leasehold terms that would attract new business interests to our territories. "259 - Vyola Ortner Passages from "You Can't Eat Dirt" • In 1952, "The Tribal Council laid the groundwork for a master plan of the reservation, generally, and for Section 14, specifically, which had never been done before to this detailed and professional an extent. An outright rejection of poor, haphazard building practices, this document was a paean to city planning. It also commemorated the growing collaboration between the tribe and the city of Palm Springs, which was a marked difference in tone from prior Tribal Committees, whose relationships with the city fathers had been adversarial... The Tribe's 1952 progress report "argued that the changes they had made or were planning to make (with regards to Section 14) were vital to modernizing life in Palm Springs, for Indians and non -Indians alike. Beyond increasing the value of Indian land, the most important aspect of this new way of collegial thinking and operating was the aim of making the local Indians equal and valued citizens in Palm Springs. -260 • "Carrying out the land allotment process on the Agua Caliente Reservation took over seventy years, numerous lawsuits, and countless hours of congressional testimony before the Department of the Interior finally authorized any allotments. This bureaucratic nightmare 257 The Los Angeles Times, February 25, 1963 251 Palm Springs Life, "The Woman Leads," February 27, 2013 259 Palm Springs Life, "The Woman Leads," February 27, 2013 260 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 25 83 began in 1891, when Congress passed the Mission Indian Relief Act, specifically calling for individual allotments to be assigned on the reservation... Even though they were ordered, these allotments on the Agua Caliente Reservation were never officially realized, thus setting in motion a torturous pattern that would repeat itself well into the 1950's. The tactics of delay on the federal government's part grew from the widely acknowledged value of Indian land in Palm Springs. By keeping the situation in limbo, the authorities could prolong their control over these valuable assets and maneuver to their advantage "Zs' • "Having deteriorated over the years as a result, in part, of the distractions and uncertainties resulting from legal battles over the allotments on the reservation and the outdated leasing laws, (Section 14) was now generally characterized as a slum inhabited mostly by domestic help and workers employed by local hotels and restaurants throughout the city. It was also pointed out that "some are on the land as renters but many are squatters illegally housed." Gruen (the Tribe's master planner) understood that developing Section 14 would, unfortunately, require removing these existing inhabitants, which would be a "major dislocation " affecting several thousand people." He informed Olinger and the Tribal Council that this was not "technically, an Indian problem. " He also noted that the structures currently on Section 14 had been deemed "nonconforming" by the city, which, to him, meant that the tribe was within its legal rights to evict the present occupants without regard to their relocation.'Qs2 "What Gruen had learned through the planning process, though, was that Olinger and the Tribal Council did not support any form of abandonment. "Such is not their intent, " he wrote. "They wish to work with others toward a solution." Sources of the period verify this intention, saying of Olinger and the Tribal Council, they "fully realize that the Palm Springs economy depends a great deal on the people who are currently living on the reservation, and though they believe it is a problem that faces the entire city, they have promised complete cooperation to help the city and the people all they can." Acknowledging the central role that these working citizens played in the daily life and functioning of Palm Springs, Gruen maintained that "it must be remembered that the inhabitants of Section 14 are not charity cases. " However, he reminded his clients that, in its present form, this population on Section 14 was a hindrance to the growth of Palm Springs and to the economic development of the tribe.',2s3 • "A keen observer of the Section 14 dilemma, (Pulitzer Prize winning journalist George Ringwald), like Gruen, felt that a solution was not the responsibility of the tribe alone. "The problem of what to do with Section 14 - and at times it must seem insurmountable to even the most ardent optimists- is not that of the Indians alone, "he wrote. Because of Section 14's critical role in the future growth of Palm Springs, and because, after having been incorporated in 1938, the city had assumed certain limited jurisdiction over the Indian lands within its borders, Ringwald believed that the local government should take the 261 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 28 262 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 41 263 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 41 84 lead. Olinger, too, was vocal in her effort to encourage the city to take action for the interests of the Section 14 residents.'1264 In 1956, "Of all the Indian land within the city of Palm Springs, (the Tribe's master planner) said, Section 14 was the most desirable place to begin. It was the most prized Indian parcel -located near the central business district, capable of producing a high return on investment, and now, at long last, poised to reap the fruits of the new federal leasing law.'r265 "Section 14 would bring the most good to the local Cahuilla and would revitalize Palm Springs. The city had nowhere else to grow... Determined to coordinate their efforts with the city, (Tribal Members) held meetings with authorities from the zoning and planning departments. They also met with the city's planning consultant, Simon Eisner, who was working in parallel, preparing a master plan for the city, the first of its kind... The resulting master plan proposed a complete reinvention of Section 14, foreseeing the use of nearly the entire 640-acre parcel."216 (Go back to Rebuttal) Other quotes and passages • "The annals of Palm Springs' unique "checkerboard" parceling of Agua Caliente Indian lands and community properties are themselves brimful of controversy and litigations that date back more than a century and are also marked with long distance negotiations and lengthy delays brought into current focus through Congressional hearings here last May. "z6' - Desert Sun, 1968 • "Bogert explained that 47 percent of Palm Springs crime is traceable to this quarter section (in Section 14) and most recently Palm Springs police officer Gale Eldridge was shot and killed by a robbery suspect in the center of this district. 11268 • City Officials and a "congressional delegation inspected Section 14 in 1949 and promised that "the U.S. govemment will not forget those people- we have a moral obligation to them and well stand by them to improve conditions here." Nevertheless, federal officials failed to allocate funds to correct the slum conditions on the reservation. ,269 • "Meanwhile Mayor Frank Bogert testified before the House Indian Affairs subcommittee in support of the Indian -authored measure. Bogert pointed out to the subcommittee that `with 264 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 42 265 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 38 266 "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts pg 39-40 267 Desert Sun Volume 42, Number 87, November 13, 1968 266 Desert Sun, Volume 34, Number 159, February 2, 1961 269 University of California Press, Pacific Historical Review, Vol. 73, No. 1, February 2004, The Path to Paradise: Expropriation, Exodus, and Exclusion in the Making of Palm Springs, Ryan M. Kray.pg 100 85 distribution of some unallotted tribal acreage as provided in the legislation, agreements should be made possible for the development of Indian lands in the Palm Springs area.... "The future of Palm Springs depends largely on Indians lands", said Bogert who... went to the capitol to defend the equalization bill and testify on behalf of longer term leases for Indians lands170 • "Filipino, Indian, Mexican, black, they were all our classmates... It was so great in the little village of Palm Springs. There was no discrimination, everybody was equal, and it's just however hard you worked is where you went ... It was fun while it lasted ... But everyone knew — at least I would think they would know — that the land wasn't theirs, and someday it was going to be developed.'1271 - Vicki McDermott, former Section 14 resident 270 Desert Sun, "Equalization Talks Smooth," June 6, 1959 27 Desert Sun, "'It was beautiful for the white people:' 1960s still cast a shadow of distrust over Palm Springs," September 19, 2019 :. Appendix H April 27, 2021 To Whom It May Concern, Although I did not know Frank Bogert nor did I reside in PS during his tenure, I am aware of his leadership during the time Section 14 was razed. I am appalled and saddened by the circumstances surrounding that event and in no way suggest that they be minimized, discounted or disregarded. I am proud of the City's decision to issue a written apology to those affected by the actions of past leadership. It should have happened many years ago when the victims themselves could have benefitted. The matter of removing Mayor Bogert's statue has, for me, been overshadowed by the means being used to justify it. The accusatory language in the resolution, the presentation of anecdotal information as fact, and the weak sources of opinion used as reference... were unfair at best and at worst, gave the appearance of character assassination tactics to achieve a political goal. The substantiating report, which should have proceeded the resolution vote is, in my opinion, an embarrassing account of trial by media in spite of legal documentation to the contrary. Geoff Kors, in his remarks attempted to soften the proposal by saying the city should not celebrate one individual for the accomplishments of many. I agree. But it is equally unacceptable to defame one individual for the actions of many. Based on the report and the proposed resolution, I as a Human Rights Commissioner am being asked to issue an indictment where I have no authority. In reviewing the Municipal Code governing the HRC, I am struck by a citation which can be found at Chapter 2.45, item (c) (1). It speaks to powers and duties and advises that (we) conduct programs designed to bring groups together to close gaps resulting from past discriminatory practices and to address proactively current or ongoing intergroup tensions. Additionally, as I strive to understand my duties according to our mission, I must also point to the goal of developing community education programs, as stated in the Rules of Procedures of the Palm Springs HRC. I feel our impact would have been stronger and more representative of our charge had we partnered with unbiased organizations to educate, ameliorate and not persecute. I believe we missed an important opportunity in our haste toward an action. Respectfully submitted, Terrie Andrade Palm Springs Human Rights Commission PALBLA000010! To: Ron deHarte[rdeharte@gmail.com] From: TERRIE ANDRADE Sent: Thur 4/29/2021 2:51:52 AM Subject: Re: Comments re: Bogert Report Thank you for asking that I clarify my comments. The information provided in the report as factual reason to support a resolution, relies (per footnote citations) for the most part, on The Desert Sun, the LA Times, an independent historical review by Ryan M. Kray and various other cherry -picked references. I find those sources to be anecdotal and highly opinionated. The language in the State attorney general's report is the only official comment on the events surrounding Section 14... and it is absent any formal charges. Had the City kept accurate records, it may have resulted in a different outcome. Terms such as "dehumanization and devaluation of lives" persecution, terrorizing and the like ... found in the report and the proposed resolution, are not corroborated nor can they be solely attributable to Frank Bogert. From the outset, I have recognized and respected the City's authority to remove or retain the statue. That said, I would have hoped that our Commission would have used the opportunity to bridge differences with education and understanding instead of indicting one individual to appease another group. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 28, 2021, at 4:01 PM, Ron deHarte <rdeharte@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Terrie, I appreciate your comments on the report. I would like to trace the items you noted that are not based on fact so they can be removed or factual references identified. We certainly don't want opinion to be presented as fact. Two specific items it would be helpful to understand are: 1. What is the anecdotal information in the resolution you note is presented as fact? 2. What references do you feel are weak sources of opinion? Many thanks for your feedback. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Jay Virata <Jay.Virata@upalmspringsca•gov> Date: Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 5:52 PM Subject: FW: Comments re: Bogert Report To: Ron deHarte <rdeharte gmail.com> Hello Ron, PALBLA00001 1 G CITY MANAGER BAND OF MISSION INDIANS April 22, 1966 P Palm Springs City Council City Offices Palm Springs, California RE: City Clean -Up Campaign Program Gentlemen: When something is wrong it is not uncommon to hear many voices of protest, but when some constructive act is performed it is all too frequently followed by silence. The Tribal Council for the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians want you to know that they commend you for your recent Clean-up Campaign and they ask that you consider this letter as a note of their appreciation. Very truly yours, Edmund P. Siva Chairman INTERVIEWS OF FRANK BOGERT All Interviews: https://bmbc.ty/network cat/frank-bogert/ Negie Bogert — Frank Bogert's Widow - https://bmbc.ty/network/friends-of-fran k-bogert-negie-bogert- frank-bogerts-widow/ Tom Kieley III - https://bmbc.ty/network/informed-people-magazine-friends-of-frank-bogert-tom-kieley- iii Doni Hubbard - https://bmbc.ty/network/friends-of-frank-bogert-doni-hubbard/ Norm King - https://bmbc.ty/network/frank-bogert/ Carrie Allan - https://bmbc.ty/network/friends-of-frank-bogert-carrie-allan/ David Christian - https://bmbc.ty/network/friends-of-frank-bogert-david-christian/ Doug Evans - https://bmbc.ty/network/friends-of-frank-bogert-doug-evans/ Vera Wall and Barbara Eves — in the all interview link above Amado Salinas — in the all interview link above Begin forwarded message: From: Tr stan M anov ch <trtr staemma gfna .com> Subject: Frank Bogert statue Date: Apr 12, 2021 at 6:15:40 PM PDT To: -QS MaQag !&Da mspr ngsca,aov Cc: "c_ hr sty.ho stege&pa mspr nosca.gov" <chr stv.ho stege@pa mspr nQsca.gov>, "c ndv.ca rns(Ppa mspr ngsca.gov" <c ndy.ca rns@na mspr ngsca.aov>, % tyc erk@pa mspr ngsca.gov" <c tyc grk�a Da mspr nasca.aov>, "denn s.woods@pa mspr ngsca.gov" <denn smoods@pa mspr ngsca.goy>, "geoff.kors@pa mspr ngsca.goy" <geoff.korsRpa mspr ng cs a_ __gov>, "grace.garner0oa mspr ngsea.aov" <grace.aarner pa mspr ngsca,goy>, "g oh g (a ao .com" <s oh Q Oaa .com>, " sa.m dd eton(fta mspr ngsca.aov" < sa.m dd etonOpa mspr ngsca.gov> Dear Mayor and City Council Members, I understand you will be holding a vote shortly (if it hasn't already taken place) regarding the removal of the Frank Bogert statue. Please feel free to add my statement to the record. I wanted to reach out and beg you to reconsider the removal. Palm Springs would not be what it is had it not been for Frank. One person who knew that above most was my late father, Richard Milanovich, Chairman of The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians for nearly three decades. Frank and my father had a great friendship built on respect and admiration. My father understood the type of man Frank was, he knew his heart, and appreciated and loved Frank because of it_ They had a great rapport. Frank was not racist. I trust that you have done your research to know what is being said about his involvement in Section 14 is inaccurate. My father knew this as well. The fact that my father spoke at Frank's funeral and what he had to say about Frank was a true testament to their friendship. can say with complete confidence that my father would not agree with the removal of the statue. Please reconsider. Thank you for your time, Tristan Milanovich 71-istan Milanouich 9517512557 Photos of Frank Bogert and of relevant topics from the Rebuttal WE PHOTO #1 1 Bogert with the all -female Agua Caliente Tribal Council in the late 1950s. Throughout his time as Mayor, Bogert would work with the Council on a variety of projects, including Section 14, purchasing Airport land, and the development of the Spa Hotel. Bogert traveled to Washington, D.C., with the Tribal Council to lobby Congress to pass the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts of 1959. From left to right: Eileen Miguel, Elizabeth Pete Monk, Laverne Saubel, Palm Springs Mayor Frank Bogert, Dora Joyce Prieto, and Priscilla Gonzales. Palm Springs Life Magazine, The Self -Determined Sixties, July 8, 2020 1 N_ PHOTO #22 Bogert with the Rev. Jeff Rollins in Washington, D.C., in 1967. Bogert and Rollins went to Washington the year after Bogert left office to seek funds and approval from the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) to build low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. From the Desert Sun: Bogert "said the local delegation made the FHA officials aware of the Section 14 cleanup in which a large number of residents were forced to leave Palm Springs for Banning and Garnet and other nearby areas. 'These residents,' Bogert said, `still work in Palm Springs and would prefer to live here."' 2 Desert Sun, pg 1, May 23, 1967 2 I PHOTO #33 Bogert displaying a housing certification to city officials that he and the city were able to secure for Section 14 residents. This certificate would provide Section 14 residents with 100% financing for relocation with only $200 down. The "Housing and Home Finance administrator proclaim(ed) that Palm Springs has qualified for Federal Aid in its Workable Program for community improvement." 3 Desert Sun, Volume 35, Number 30, September 8, 1961 3 Ar PHOTO #44 Bogert, city officials and the Agua Caliente Tribal Council at a meeting in 1962 to discuss long-range zoning guidelines for Section 14. 1958-1966 was a period of tremendous cooperation and collaboration between the Tribe and the city. Eileen Miguel stated in 1986, "As Frank Bogert said, 'We are two governments in this town."5 Given the city's checkerboard layout and the significant amount of land the Tribe owned in Palm Springs, it was (and is) vital for the council and Tribe to work together for the good of the city. From left are Robson Chambers, city planning commission member; Vice Mayor Ted McKinney, committee chairman, Dick Coleman, planning director; Mrs. Vyola Olinger (Ortner), former Agua Caliente tribal council chairman; Ray Simpson, tribal attorney; Mayor Frank Bogert; Mrs. Dora Prieto, tribal secretary; Mrs. Eileen Miguel, tribal chairman; and Councilman Harry Paisley. 4 Desert Sun, Vol. 35, No. 287, July 6, 1962 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X-3TNYCxYO 4 PHOTO #56 Frank Bogert and Pete Siva at Bogert's victory party after being reelected Mayor in 1982. Siva and his wife, Bernadine, held Bogert's victory party at their home. Bogert reluctantly served as Siva's conservator from 1960-1963 as a favor to the Siva family. He was the first conservator to voluntarily release a Tribal member from conservatorship. Siva became Tribal Chairman and in 1966 sent a letter thanking the City Council for assisting the Tribe with clearing Section 14. Doing so allowed the Tribe to begin developing its land and lifting Tribal members out of dire financial conditions. Bogert and Siva would remain lifelong friends. Bernadine Siva, Pete Siva's widow, stated "I believe the statue should not be removed or destroyed. Frank Bogert was an Honorable and Honest man." The daughters of Pete Siva called the HRC's report "disgusting" and "slander(ous)" and demanded that the HRC stop using their father's name in regards to his relationship with Bogert. 6 Private collection I✓ PHOTO #67 Bogert with Tribal Chairman Vyola Ortner and Congressman D.S Saund in Washington, D.C., in the late 1950s. Bogert and Ortner worked with Congressman Saund to lobby Congress to pass the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts in 1959. www.youcanteatdirt.com/gallery (.1 Ridiard M. Milanovich, tribal chairman of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, pays tribute to Frank Bogert. PHOTO #78 Agua Caliente Tribal Chairman Richard Milanovich speaking at Bogert's funeral (top right) in March 2009. "At Bogert's funeral in 2009, Milanovich said the cowboy mayor had been an inspiration to him growing up."9 Bogert and Milanovich were close, lifelong friends and worked together on various projects while Bogert was Mayor and Milanovich was Tribal Chairman in the 1980s. Milanovich's daughter, Trista, said that the HRC's Report was "disgusting" and that the family was "appalled" that they would take her father's words out of context in order to defame Bogert. B Desert Sun, pg. B4, March 28, 2009 9 Desert Sun, "A lifetime of leadership," March 12, 2012 ri AGUA CALIENTE RESERVATION T.4 & S S.- R.4 & S£.- S.B.B.M, RIVERSIDE CO., CALIF. � - -�'�T----� _ u _..sn/\ l +„ J _ � /'` �\_ 1. \,� ` , •��'..��,r \mow- y •\ S 1 u Is i' µ u r _ \� Ls! u u`"=�,; u ,- , , / - • ` AGUA 6A !ENTE RESERVATIONlu } , / 11.f G'_ �. .4.-77—� •_.—J--�--T.K.—__. _ \ % t - /� - R ♦ n i ' 't@@ga,,, - as�•a PHOTO #810 A diagram of the city's checkerboard layout enacted in the late 19th century. This ill- conceived layout created numerous problems for the city, the Tribe, and especially for Section 14 residents. Because the red squares were not conducive to development due to federal restrictions on long term leases, 1) the Tribe was unable to develop its land and generate income for its members, 2) the city's residential and commercial growth was constrained, and 3) Section 14 became a slum, at no fault of its residents. 10 www.youcanteatdirt.com/gallery PHOTO #911 Bogert with the Rev. Jeff Rollins (holding shovel in middle) in 1963 when development of the First Baptist Church broke ground. Bogert would later partner with Rollins and the Church in 1967 to develop low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. " Desert Sun, "First Baptist's Church Dedication to the Community," February 7, 2021 0 PHOTO #1012 Bogert (seated far right) with the Rev. Jeff Rollins (speaking) at the unveiling of the Bishop College Extension Center in Highland -Gateway. Bogert and Rollins would work together on numerous projects between the 1960s and 1980s, including 1) asking the Human Relations Committee to provide assistance to Section 14 residents, 2) lobbying in Washington, D.C., in 1967 for low-cost housing for Section 14 residents, 3) opening the Bishop Center, and 4) the creation of the Palm Springs Center for Employment Training, (GET). Rollins and Bogert were close friends and Rollins was one of the first to visit Bogert at his house to offer his condolences after the death of his first wife Janice in 1974. 12 Desert Sun, "Dallas college opens extension in north PS," June 1, 1985 10 PHOTO #1113 Bogert with Mayor Ron Oden at a tribute to Bogert in 2005 at the Agua Caliente Casino. Oden was the city's first Black and openly gay Mayor and also was the first Chairman of the Human Rights Commission, the same commission that authored the defamatory Report on Bogert. In 2009, Oden was quoted as saying: "He was my friend"... Bogert warned him that 'some rednecks' had made threats against (Oden). He let the men know he had Oden's back. `What he was saying was `I'm looking out for you ... And he did." 13 Desert Sun, "Cowboy to some, legend to Valley," May 4, 2005 11 PHOTO #12 Charles Jordan in 1976.14 Jordan, a former Section 14 resident, was hired by Bogert as the city's first Black employee. Jordan was instrumental in the development of Seminole Gardens, the first federally funded housing project that was prioritized for Section 14 residents. From Palm Springs, he went on to have an illustrious political career, serving as Portland's first Black city councilmember and city commissioner, running the Conservation Fund, and working with Bogert on Ronald Reagan's President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. He gave the commencement speech at Palm Springs High School in 1987 and thanked Bogert for taking a chance on him by giving him a job in 1961. 5 14 The Astorian, "Former Portland City Commissioner Charles Jordan Dies At Age 77," April 2, 2004 15 www.Portlandpf.com 12 BOGERT RETURNS low Cost Housing Prospects ' Good ' Possibility of getting 180 units Springs for Banning and Gar- federal money with 20 per cent of low-cost housing for Palm net and other nearby areas, in money or planning work Pro. Springs was described as good These residents, Bogert said, vided by the city today by farmer mayor, Frank still work in Palm Springs and Federal funds for the projectl Bogert, after conferring with would prefer to live here. would have to come from next! Federal Housing Administration "The problem is that the pea year's b u d g e t since current officials. pie who work here have to drive funds were used up May, John Bogert and a group interested in every di)," Bogert said. Buggs, deputy direotor in charge in obtaining low-cost housing for The delegation also discussed of the model neighborhood pro - the city returned this week from the possibility of getting a model gram, told the Palm Springs is Washington w h e r e they met neighborhood program which group, with officials With Bogert was would include the low-cost hous- A full report on the Washing* ,$ Dr, Lee Swanson of Goodkin ing tract, but would encompass ton meetings was to be present- ir and Co, a research group mak- a larger area ed to the Palm Springs Pity In ing a local housing survey, Joe This would he a model Council at a study ses.ion to- ot Bolker, interested in building area, financed with 80 per cent day. m the housing development, and he Rev. Jeff Rollins, pastor of e- the First Baptist Church, Bogertt sold they met Monday en with Robert Jones, an assistant ie to the FHA commissioner, who ie is in charge of low-cost housing, T and John Alstrup, regional di - it rector in charge of FHA's west- 1b ern division. It The former mayor said the It group was requesting a housing it development of 250 units is "While we're asking 250 un- its, we think there is a good n possibility of obtaining 180 un- h its," Bogert said. g FHA has recommended only ;c 80 units for the housing devel- opment which would be erected ie adjacent to the Gateway Estates Y The FHA's 60 • unit recom- Y' mendation, Bogert said, was le based on its survey of present n, Palm Springs residents requir- ir ing low-cost housing lie said the local delegation i- made the FHA officials aware 19 of the Section 14 cleanup in !'((which a large number of rest - I., dents were forced to leave Palm PHOTO #1316 A Desert Sun article from May 18,1967. Bogert continued seeking low-cost housing for Section 14 residents the year after leaving office in 1966. 16 Desert Sun, "Low-cost Housing Prospects Good," May 18, 1967 13 wa w'�A"...wl.Mrr •** Dowt C-pim`a &&@ft9 Daf M—syrM1 v u"M203 10spa 'TIME OUT' CALLED ON SEI Clearing Gets 6-1 :r'w e.•m 51 �, . a Fw n� e�.,er.yn.w,1 .rsr i,• 4- 1 f NT' Y.f,..rb.ra 3w 11 rra�'sr;. 'i W�"w.w•A. -,.- aL�.�rr wvn>r Yp�! a ireenl S•S.T .e. a-.. flr� ,•ylrnr r,i.�,. �-, 11r vi br •ru. T •au .VfM�Yr... w em®. iw Yeg 4..A ♦w.Y � ee . M •e .7YJ' cdar vr.. F Iwy a q P� fifl� FI•ge, f/P.� F- Il.i 0 wlp. YR.`•�n .d �..` rrn L -�_ srR b r r pares• 4 .Y+ Y�r rµ WS -=r.qr. in BRII.F n.oy e.l Y.F. f>wr 1.rt .e fr. in►c a�Y* r a c.�. .s. rw • .,... t ..;p.wrel,'4 err r ... a... - r ....�. ivy e�w.•. wY • r�.•ahl►rwer tr i r ■ a. a = .iw w ✓ArV! 4 A tq,{ lA .. .r.rnr ti b 1.. a -4, ^ W r,. seA'r....rhr�ar, m wd.1 W:tr .dYw r.111. ■s...w ,wM...aw r.. �.'wev rn..«u � 1Ra.. �' v�r ►w � rr. r•s.aa n ty wrry a rrrne w - a.. mw :rr, .Z �!' er ti ...•ram -si . a. ++6w qa,. •M MM M►N �.f :l. IMMYa }ps. N:N..s r��Wrrr IIxIIY - <r>xl Y .nl •e Fs nrY+i r wry yy', .,iy,l ' �..r..l I1!Mlrrlr!Fr, Warr Y +Maw n\wli Y y�y PHOTO #14" Article from the Desert Sun on June 27, 1961. Bogert and the city issued a six-month moratorium on legal evictions to allow residents time to seek housing alternatives and to provide time for the city to explore both private and publicly funded low-cost housing projects. " Desert Sun, "Time-out Called on Section 14," June 27, 1961 14 PHOTO #1518 Bogert (seated far right) with Tribal Chair Eileen Miguel (seated middle) in 1960 looking over an appraisal of land on Section 18 which would become the airport. To Miguel's right is Dora Joyce Prieto, who became Tribal Chair in mid-1966. Miguel and Bogert worked closely together on many projects including zoning ordinances for Section 14. In 1962 she said: "Our appreciation goes to:... Mayor Frank Bogert of Palm Springs who has consistently demonstrated that he had both the interests of the Indian people and the City of Palm Springs at heart, and who has time and time again expended commendable effort in helping find a solution for some of our problems." 18 Desert Sun, "New Airport Land Appraisal Announced at $2,979,000," July 27, 1960 15 TAWN �.x wigh r Drop 1r__ rt Out ...,,. ,, rna oaw" tma!»'a tadtns Daffy R...r.n•• w. Y'Ol #,MQ M 121im $23 MILLION APARTMENT SLATED FOR SECTION 14 PHOTO #1619 Desert Sun headline from August 18, 1961. The HRC claims this development was proposed in 1968 after Bogert was Mayor, when in reality it was Bogert himself who pushed for the development as Mayor in 1961. The article states, "The Mayor, working tirelessly for a low-cost housing project, had asked (the developer) some months ago if he couldn't come up with a solution to the ever increasing problem of homes for the scores of people who are residing in Section U." 19 Desert Sun, "$2.5M Apartment Complex Slated for Section 14 Families," August 18, 1961 16 34 C, hp Dpsprf 1@6nn Wednesday. June S. 1960 Palm Springs. California Example of 'Classic Disregard' Reading the report of Attorney General Investigator Loren Miller Jr. on the Palm Springs Section 14 demolition and cleanup is somewhat like reading Alice in Wonderland. Miller and his social team quite ap- parently fell down a hole, hit heads and began to see things which were not there. That's the charitable in- terpretation of as biased and non- sensical a report as has come across our desk —ever. The facts on the cleanup of Sec- tion 14 were on the record, easy to find —and almost completely ignored. They are: I. Section 14 houses and shacks were originally occupied by Indians owning the land indi- vidually and as a tribe. They had long since moved out and the deteriorating and dilapi- dated shacks were then occu. pied by squatters, mostly Ne groes and in mangy cases non - rent paying 2. These shacks were bug infe,i- ed and fire hazards. In many cases several families jointly and simultaneously occupied one small shack. Fire and po- lice problems in the area were many and grave. 3. In 1962 the City of Palm Springs was requested by the Tribal Council for assistance in cleaning up the area Talks went on for years. ineffectu- ally, the city pointing out that it could not evict, but also of- fering to help in the cleanup. 4 The Indian owners and the In- dian Bureau agreed to assume the burden of eviction and the city commenced the cleanup PHOTO #1720 in 1.964. using private contrac- tors as «ell as city personnel 5. The cleanup took some 18 months Those evicted in the later stages obviously had more than adequate notice of intent. Those vacated initially were not onl3 given adequate notice, but the few pleas of hardship were met with com- plete compliance with the ten- ant's time requirements. These ranged from as little as 10 days to as long as 18 months. City Manager Frank Aleshire and council members alike say not one of the few re- questing a moratorium was summarily evicted. 6 The city did not provide sub- stitute housing for the evict- ees. as stated in the report. But the report neglected to state that no city at that time provided housing for its mi. norities and few do now. It simply was not. within the then scope of municipal responsi- bility. From the Miller report you get the idea that the city acted in total and callous disregard of the plight of the underprivileged. Such words as "Classic study in civic disregard for the rights and feelings of minori- ty citizens," are high-faluting and bound to provoke a prejudiced reac- tion. 'We suggest instead that Miller showed a classic disregard for the facts in the case and an "end -justi- fies -the -means" approach which is becoming classic in many of our bureaucratic planners for the Great Society and the Beautiful, Effort- less Tomorrow. Editorial by the Desert Sun in 1966 lambasting the AG's report on Section 14. This was one of several articles by the newspaper criticizing the AG's findings. 20 Desert Sun, "Example of 'Classic Disregard,"' June 5, 1968 17 PHOTO #1821 Bogert with the Marmolejo family in the 1940s during "Mexican Night" at the Chi Chi. Bogert was extremely fond of Mexico and its culture. He called the country his second home and was beloved by its citizens and by residents of the city's Latino community. Several years after the death of his first wife, Janice, Bogert married Negie Romero, a Mexican citizen from San Miguel de Allende. He would lead "Cabalgata" horseback rides in Mexico to introduce Americans to the country and to Mexican culture. Pascal Quiroz, the first Mexican -American child born in Palm Springs, said, "Frank Bogert did a lot for Mexican people... When Mexicans had any kind of fiesta, he was always there. They invited him and he was the main speaker.1122 Manuel Gonzales, a Mexican friend of Bogert's said, "He was a white man, but he understood my culture"23 Pictured from left to right: Rafaela Marmolejo, Cydronia Valdez, Frank Bogert, Omar Valdez. 21 Desert Sun, "History column: Mexican heritage deeply ingrained in the story of Palm Springs," July 20, 2020 22 Desert Sun, "Palm Springs History Marked By Early Segregation," August 21, 2011 23 Desert Sun, "Bogert Understood Mexican Culture," March 28, 2009 18 PHOTO #1924 Frank Bogert riding in a Palm Springs parade and wearing a traditional Mexican Charro outfit. " Charro" is a Spanish word used to describe a Mexican horseman. Bogert was given the Golden Spur award by the Mexican Charro Association — he was the first non -Mexican, Caucasian to ever receive the honor.25 In 1986, over 200 Charros attended Bogert's 76th birthday in Mexico City.26 24 Palm Springs Life Archives, 'The Hay Days of Palm Springs," February 25, 2010 25 Desert Sun, "Lessons in history from and original," February 21, 2007 26 Desert Sun, "Bogert to celebrate birthday with Mexico pals," December 31, 1985 19 PHOTO #2027 Newspaper clipping from the Desert Sun on October 22, 1959, of President Dwight Eisenhower signing the Equalization and Long -Term Leasing Acts. Vyola Ortner and the all -female Tribal council (with Bogert's help) lobbied extensively for these two bills to be passed. These long-term leases allowed the Tribe to finally develop its valuable land (specifically on Section 14) and to improve the dire financial conditions of its members. These laws were heralded as the "two most important pieces of legislation ever affecting Palm Springs.1128 27 hftps://www.youcanteatdirt.com/galle!y 2e "You Can't Eat Dirt" Excerpts, pg 35 20 Editorials -Opinion "I oiMY suit ►ult MIND M. I1STAt1f m tin UMW I. Rrmaac htsldaar C10111 W. S600111. tss Qhw 12 Rr Brorrt faun fills s 1p. C49. Me The Indian Probe Incompetent As the Bureau of Indian Affairs that was ob%-ms to a reporter continues to lnvebilgate the handling Item The report accused a coo- of local Indian estates by eanserva• servator, Stanley Spiegelman, of ov. tors avid guardians, it becomes more erbtating the assets of his ward and clear that the bureau Itself is not of making an uaautliorizod purchase competent to take over the job. of property. The overstatement sup- ln fact the bureau has shown 11 posediy Involved a IM000 pim of Is not even competent to conduct the propertv in Palm Springs which the Investigation bureau thnuot bad been purchased As more examples of careless- for $14000 The unauthorized put- it"-1 and lack of objectkity in the chase supposedly was a to 000 hour, fnvestigatloa come to I:& one has in Banning the bureau thought had to question the motives of the loves• been purchased for i2,17S tigators. In an Informal emrrtroom discus. The Investigation has questioned s70n last t1r dry,. Spiegelman es the amount of,fees paid to conserva• plained that ibe $14,OM had put tars and itto6eys for the estates chased a half interest Is the Palm There,igay be.eomo justification for Springs property of which the ward questioning thefees, but it is strange already awned ihe,other half Inter that the IMa Always are expressed eb1 Again it ts,eurious that tralmd only in relitio f to Income and not In auditors had filled to find the prcv . terms of.tbe value M the total es. OUP half interest in previous ac tate handied and the services per- counting& formed." Spicgelman Am showed that the A veil of susplelon has been cast Banning property had been a gill to upon Blink every one of the per- he Indian and fires not an tmaulhor s sons who have served the Indians in Ized purchase, The payment found their estate matters. The bureau bag by the bureau wiw to clear up back lifted that veil from only one con- mortgage payments. servitor, (Elver Nichols, mho A As In Therkiu's case, the but, commended as having dorm a good sou jumped to o'concluslbn withost job for his Indians The failure of mnferring with the conservator ufin the bureau to specifically elear oth -uld hove ckaiid up any questions er trustees would seem to suggest The repot also contains other that no others have performed pmp• accusations, eons of which the but. erly, a promise we find Impomible eau his subptonUited so far to accept. WO are AM convinced that these The Desert Sun already has dis• errors ere. only A matter of careless. covered three moor errors in The near slid Oki not .involve a certain tmestigailon's preliminary' report amoaru of prejudice Did the bureau submitted Sept. 26,1067: go Into The lavestigatian with a pre - Item: The report suggested that conceived notion, Is It making as• Alunlelpal Court Judge Eugene Ther- sumptions and jumping to emehi. r Ieau was derelict in administering sions that justify its preconceptbas I the estates of John Joseph Petetw + and owrlooking facts and documents i and Frances Patenelo because an that do not support its notions, In PHOTO #2129 Editorial by the Desert Sun on the Department of Interior's (via the BIA) investigation on the Indian Conservator program. Titled "The Indian Probe Incompetent," the editorial states, "it becomes more clear that the (BIA) itself is not competent to take over the job. In fact the (BIA) has shown it is not even competent to conduct the investigation. As more examples of carelessness and lack of objectivity in the investigation come to light, one has to question the motives of the investigators." 29 Desert Sun, Volume 41, Number 134, January 9, 1968 21 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE REBUTTAL TO THE HRC's REPORT • A thorough fact check of the Human Rights Commission's ("HRC") Report found over 100 falsehoods, misleading statements, quotes taken out of context, intentional omission of refuting evidence, and attempts to untruthfully associate Bogert with the wrongdoings of other individuals and/or institutions. (see examples on pgs 64-69) • Significant portions of the Report are plagiarized (see examples on pgs 70-71). The Report's most cited source is an essay written by a college graduate student. This graduate student's essay is written in a persuasive and opinionated prose, and would not pass as a objective journalistic piece. The HRC injects subjective, sensationalized sections of the essay verbatim into its own Report, and deceptively attempts to pass these sections off as objective, irrefutable facts. (pgs 4, 70-71) Efforts to remove the statue are politically and ideologically motivated as confirmed by Ron deHarte, the HRC's Chairman, who said: "Some may feel that the recommendation to move the monument is a political effort made to appease one other group. Well, they are indeed correct." (pg 5) The Report is rampant with ideological language such as "whiteness, white privilege, and anti -racist values". The HRC cites numerous radical and polarizing sources, including publications that promote Critical Race Theory. The Report is neither an impartial nor apolitical review of Bogert or Section 14 - instead the HRC retroactively critiques Bogert through the lens of a present day, polarizing ideology (pg 6). The contents of the Report and the process by which the Resolution to remove the statue was conducted, were strongly criticized by HRC commissioner Terrie Andrade. In a series of emails and letters, Ms. Andrade states that the Report "gave the appearance of character assassination tactics to achieve a political goal" and asserts that the vilification of Bogert is "an embarrassing account of trial by media in spite of legal documentation to the contrary". Additionally she criticizes the commission's approval process to remove the statue and asserts that the entire effort to remove the statue contradicts the Commission's own stated goals of unifying and educating the community. (pg 5) The HRC justifies its resolution to move the statue under the premise that Bogert "demonstrated no effort to address the harms caused by (Section 14) evictions." Not only is this premise completely false, but the HRC on numerous occasions intentionally omits evidence that would have directly refuted its very premise to remove the statue (pgs 4, 57-64) • The HRC ignored the human rights of Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians in its Report. Clearing and redeveloping Section 14 was critical to lifting Tribal members out of dire and impoverished conditions. The HRC disregards this crucial fact in order to vilify Bogert. (pgs 10-13) The Report was insulting to the Tribe and the HRC took quotes out of context from Tribal Elders who were close friends of Bogert's. This prompted prominent families of the Agua Caliente Tribe to call the Report "appalling, disgusting, and slanderous)". The families of Richard Milanovich and Pete Siva, both former Tribal Chairs, requested that the HRC remove their family names from the Report and in efforts to defame Bogert. Thus far the HRC has ignored these requests. (pgs 9-10) The HRC misrepresented Bogert's conservatorship of Pete Siva. Bernadine Siva, Mr. Siva's widow provided a lengthy statement setting the record straight and said, "I believe the statue should not be removed or destroyed. Frank Bogert was an Honorable and Honest man." Despite Chair deHarte's public assertions to the contrary, Bogert was never "found guilty" of any wrongdoing with regards to his Conservatorship of Mr Siva, nor was any corrective action ordered against him. (pgs 7-9) Both investigations cited throughout the Report were thoroughly refuted and discredited by numerous individuals and by the Desert Sun. A series of articles by the Managing Editor of the Desert Sun lambasted the Deputy AG's report (pg 14) and the Rebuttal highlights numerous other falsehoods in the AG's "findings" (pgs 73-76). The Department of Interior's Investigation was also discredited by numerous individuals who testified under oath at a Congressional hearing in 1968. (pgs 14-16, 76-81). Section 14 relocations and evictions were the inevitable consequence of nearly a century of ill-conceived federal laws which prohibited the Tribe from developing its valuable land. (see timeline on pgs 71-73). Upon taking office in 1958, Bogert and the city inherited an unprecedented and complex municipal housing crisis due to these federal laws. During his tenure as Mayor, a confluence of events outside of the city's control (and to no fault of Bogert's) had culminated to a point where clearing and redeveloping Section 14 was unavoidable, vital, and inevitable. (pgs 16-22) • The Desert Sun at the time described Bogert as working "tirelessly" to secure low-cost housing for Section 14 residents and to ameliorate the effects of the relocations and evictions. An extensive timeline on pages 57-64 details Bogert's and the city's efforts to help Section 14 residents. (pgs 22-23, 57-64) Bogert cared deeply about the welfare of Section 14 residents and made numerous public statements about the need to find housing for those who were relocated or evicted. (pgs 24-25) In 1967, the year after leaving office, Bogert partnered with leaders of the Black community to lobby in Washington DC for low-cost housing for Section 14 residents. (pgs 24) • Bogert directly hired the city's first ever Black employee, Charles Jordan, who was instrumental in helping the city secure its first federally funded housing project in 1968 - this housing project was prioritized for Section 14 residents. (pgs 25-26) • Numerous members of the Black community, including former Section 14 residents, supported Bogert for Mayor in 1982 (pgs 25-26) • The Rebuttal provides numerous examples of Bogert supporting and fighting for all minority groups, both as Mayor and when he was out of office. A substantial amount of evidence is provided to refute the baseless claims of racism or discriminatory actions. (pgs 28-32) • Numerous photos and exhibits from people or events mentioned in the Rebuttal are provided in Appendix (pgs 36-56) From: Andrew <zoxvirg@aol.com> Date: May 10, 2021 at 11:34:33 AM PDT To: Andrew <zoxvirg@aoi.com> Subject Cease and Desist Cease and Desist Human Rights Council and Palm Springs city Council : The family of Edmund Peter Siva (Deceased Cahuilla Eider) demand that you stop using his name in regards to his relationship with Frank Bogert. A relationship and life long friendship which you do Not know anything about. You're attempts to slander these men and use the name of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians as a pawn in your game, Is disgusting. Please remove our Father Edmund Peter Siva's name from the HRC resolution, and from PS city councils agenda. From the Daughters of Edmund Peter Siva THE SECTION 14 STORY THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Managing Editor Al Tostado prepared thirteen articles from November 131h— 281h 1968 The initial article's Editor Note reads: Editor's Note: The following article is the first of a series written by The Desert Sun's Managing Editor, AI Tostado, about the controversial clean-up campaign conducted by the City of Palm Springs on the Indian -owned parcel commonly known locally as Section 14. THE SECTION 14 STORY ARTICLE No. TITLE DATE I City's Critics Late, also Loud, Lame II Early'60's Bring Slum Clearance Hope II Elation Over Housing Okay Fades as Recession Comes IV Hotel, Apartment Plans Set Tempo of Future for Section V Discrimination Charges Mar Section 14 Clean -Up VI Forget Cost, Cleanup Needed VII Cleanup's Phase 1 Ends Successfully Vill Indian Bureau's Local Agent Recommends Cleanup Support IX Better Late Than Never? Apparently... X Indian Land Cleared, Empty XI 'Substantial Testimony —' Where Did It Go? XII Complete Report Compiled in Brief Visit! XIII Abundant Records Prove City Followed Legal Line in Cleanup CONCLUSION The Question Remains: Why Weren't The Critics Where the Action Was? 13 November 1968 14 November 1968 15 November 1968 16 November 1968 18 November 1968 19 November 1968 20 November 1968 21 November 1968 22 November 1968 23 November 1968 25 November 1968 26 November 1968 27 November 1968 28 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun Volume 42, Number 87,13 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY I City's Critics Late, also Loud, Lame (Editor's Note: The following article is the first of a series written by The Desert Sun's Managing Editor, Al Tostado, about the controversial clean-up campaign conducted by the City of Palm Springs on the Indian -owned parcel commonly known locally as Section 14). By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor The City of Palm Springs has been damned for something it did - namely, conducting a clean- up of a cancerous slum area - I but without doubt it would have been equally damned if it hadn't! And out of the myriad ramifications which have evolved throughout the nearly 20-year history of the controversy, there has emerged no less than a two -fold irony: One, that, in this day of wide -spread social and racial unrest and revolution, with all sectors of government and private endeavor seeking to rid the country of its ghettos, the city's action should be questioned at all; And two, that those uttering the most vociferous damnations can point to no record, even of their own, of any individual or collective positive contribution for resolving the problems and the issues -neither at the time, or before, let alone since! Instead, the critics of the city have chosen to remain negative. It might just be that the city's clean-up campaign simply turned out to be too successful for them, since, at best, the damning finger -pointing has and is being done from the sanctuary of long distance. And after a long interval. They have elected to bask in a piety from having "blown the whistle" even though, after having summoned the arbiter, have produced no more than aid incomplete summary of the facts. Distorted? Perhaps. Slanted? Decidedly so. The annals of Palm Springs' unique "checkerboard" parceling of Agua Caliente Indian lands and community properties are themselves brimful of controversy and litigations that date back more than a century, and are also marked with long distance negotiations and lengthy delays brought into current focus through Congressional hearings here last May. It is generally agreed, and most times conceded on all sides, that this "checkerboarding" poses a multitude of civic and governmental problems for both the community and the Tribe THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 1 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY and Section 14 is not the least of the problems. Records show both sectors have often sought avenues for resolving the issue of Section 14, but the critics of the city have seemingly studiously avoided presenting an objective suggestion or recommendation whereby an equitable solution may be derived. They can find faults, but they can't help find constructive answers. Section 14 first became the target for a clean-up effort early in 1961, though experiencing some initial opposition to a city survey of the slum area and its conditions which had been ordered by the Federal Government Housing Agency. However. its history dates to at least ten years before. "The children of Section 14 are attending a $5 million school and living in shacks. Would you be ashamed to leave a $5 million school and go home to live in a shack?" Accounts of the time credited this statement to Joseph M. Jackson, an Anchorage. Alaska Realtor and Riverside businessman, who switched his support to the survey after previously opposing it. However, those 1961 attempts for the clean-up were short-lived, though subsequently there were some evictions, demolitions and burnings of "Tobacco Road" type structures. There were other overtures for clean-up of Section 14 at sporadic intervals during the succeeding years, but the major concerted effort, from which the latest damnation of the city stems occurred during an 18-month period in 1964 and 1965. At that, it has taken the critics more than two years to get around being critical. From the outset, the issue of Section 14 has been purported to be racial and the city has been charged with moral irresponsibility toward the minority faction which had made residence there. Its inhabitants were predominantly Negro. There is no chance for the critics to charge legal irresponsibility for even their own advocate grudgingly concedes the city acted well within its judicial bounds. Thus, the moral aspect is the lone remaining tack the critic may take -though a thorough an examination of all of the documented evidence proves even that position is untenable. (To Be Continued) THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 2 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY hOttps://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681113.2.10&srpos=4&e=-11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-txlN-the+SECTION+14+story -----1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 3 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 88, 14 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY II Early'60's Bring Slum Clearance Hope By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor On May 11, 1961 it appeared that the City of Palm Springs' attempt to solve its problem of relocating the scores of people who were to be evicted from their ramshackle dwellings on Section 14 was taking a step forward. Joseph M. Jackson, Riverside businessman and Alaska Realtor, told the City Council he was calling for the residents to cooperate with municipal personnel in the survey of the area which had been ordered by the Federal Housing Agency. Jackson disclosed he had previously advised residents not to sign any questionnaires, and the move had temporarily halted the survey of the southwest quarter of the section, which had been scheduled for completion the day before. Jackson said he had not completely understood the necessity for the survey, but after a long discussion with Planning Director Jack Bearpaw, was pledging full cooperation. Jackson told The Desert Sun he was "not just representing the Negro population of the section, but all the people on the reservation" and took exception to the fact that the council thought he was. "But the council was right in taking its stand because the only area of Section 14 being surveyed is the southwest quarter section, residents of which are predominantly Negro. "In a manner of speaking these people have already been served notice that they must vacate this area, which is the desert's worst slum section." Jackson also revealed he was attempting to start immediate construction of a new housing development in Section 10, near Garnet, where he had purchased 105 acres of land and was planning for both purchase and rental homes. And on June 27, 1961, The Desert Sun reported that more than 430 families facing eviction from homes in Section 14 had aid coming from two directions: - A six-month moratorium on evictions announced by Mayor Frank Bogert; THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 4 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY - A promise from Federal Housing Authority representatives to the City Council that action would be speeded to certify city eligibility for financing guarantees for low- cost housing, both private homes and rental property. Section 14 residents had been under a June eviction deadline fron the Bureau of Indian Affairs that had already brought demolitions and burning of homes in the area. Richard G, Mitchell, special assistant for the Housing and Home Finance Agency of the Federal Housing Administration in San Francisco, and William Temple. FHA specialist from Los Angeles, reported Palm Springs could be certified for special housing finance guarantees within 30 to 45 days and funds could be cleared for the start of new housing construction shortly thereafter. Jackson, Riverside member of the Section 14 Housing committee told the council the Bank of America, one of the Indian property conservators, was willing to go along on early financing for low-cost housing he was planning north of the city. Spokesmen for nearly 50 Section 14 residents feared red tape would delay completion beyond the six-month eviction moratorium, but conceded the outlook was more hopeful than at any time in many months. Jackson further disclosed he was then building 85 units a half -mile north of Garnet on Indian land and was prepared to construct some 500, selling at $8,500 for two bedrooms and $9,500 for three, at $50 down and $70 per month. At this rate, a city survey showed, 55 per cent of the families in the area would be able to afford the houses, based on an estimate that persons earning $400 per month would be able to afford to buy the dwellings. It was noted these people were paying $70 to $80 per month for their housing on Section 14. And for the 45 per cent who could not afford to buy these homes, the city was working on rentals, and was also trying to assure more facile financing with no down payments and 40- year loans through the FHA. On July 8. 1961 Palm Springs financiers disclosed they were negotiating for purchase of land at the north edge of the city as a site for low-cost FHA housing facilities for the families being evicted from Section 14. Attorney Thurman Arnold announced the contemplated plan but withheld the identity of the principals in the negotiations, saying, "Nothing has jelled yet. But this is the obvious thing to do. Many people here are moving in this direction." THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 5 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY He said his group was not connected with the Jackson effort, the only other known low-cost housing movement, adding the main problem his group faced was getting the land at a low enough price to make it financially feasible. Arnold said the negotiators would probably not be able to afford more than $3,000 per acre. "Most of the land is so high around here, but low-cost rentals are the only solution to the eviction problem I know of." (To Be Continued) L https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681114.2.S&srpos=3&e=-11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-txlN-SECTION+14 -----1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 6 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 89, 15 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY III Elation Over Housing Okay Fades as Recession Comes By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor Within a week, on July 11, 1961, a dispute loomed over the low-cost rental housing for the Section 14 families when developers Robert Gould and Lawrence Crossley charged the Joseph M. Jackson effort with not even considering rentals. Gould -Crossley were then building 23 three -bedroom houses for sale at $12,000 each just outside the city limits and east of the Municipal Golf Course. They maintained they were best suited to provide the housing but had been prevented by the City Planning Commission, charging the commission had done everything it could to hamstring their efforts to build low-cost, two-story rentals in Section 20. City Planning Director Richard Coleman confirmed that the commission had twice refused a Gould -Crossley request for rezoning a five -acre plot so that 150 two-story multiple dwellings could be erected. However, Coleman pointed out that on neither occasion had the developers appealed the commission's decision to the City Council as they were entitled to do. Commission minutes showed the requests for the R-3 zoning were turned down because of not being compatible with the current plans for development in the surrounding area. Gould -Crossley argued single story dwellings, for which the area was zoned, were not financially feasible as low-cost rentals saying that only two-story multiple structures would fit the bill. Coleman countered that an 5 FHA representative, testifying before the planning commission, - disagreed, saying his agency believed single -story dwellings - would be financially feasible as t low-cost rentals. Mayor Frank Bogert, long active in trying to solve the housing problems of the minority groups in Section 14 said he thought the Gould -Crossley project would be a good thing. "I think we ought to stretch a point and let them have the zoning they want," he said. ' Due to the housing emergency at the present time, we have to lean, over backwards." THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 7 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Nevertheless, Mayor Bogert emphasized, he wanted to be sure any dwellings built for rentals would be good housing. "I don't want to see another slum area. If someone is going to build a place for these people, it should be good." The mayor doubted that the group of unidentified financiers, then negotiating for land for low cost rentals on the north edge of the city, would find land inexpensively priced enough to purchase. Bogert said land in that section was selling for $7,500 per acre. Thurman Arnold had said his group probably couldn't pay over $3,000 per acre. "A $2.5 million housing development which will be used for families displaced from Section 14 has been given approval by the Federal Housing Administration, subject to certain government specifications, and will soon be under construction within even a few feet of Palm Springs. "Eight acres of land has been purchased by the N & W Development Corp., as the site for the multi -million -dollar project and as the green light was given from Washington, the developers were already completing their plans for the apartments." This was the blockbuster news announced on August 18, 1961 by local contractor Leonard Wolf Jr. and financier Herman C. Newman and was the upshot of a previous request, of several months standing, by Mayor Bogert of Wolf to seek a solution to the problem of homes for the residents of Section 14. Purchase of the land near the north city limits had gone into escrow July 5 and the Wolf Newman applications to FHA and FHHA were processed and approved on a rush emergency order in some three weeks. Construction was scheduled to get under way shortly of 150 to 200 one, two and three bedroom, apartment homes along with two swimming pools, recreation rooms and landscaping. On hearing about the plans for the project, Mayor Bogert was elated. It had brought to an end the months upon months of studying for a solution to a problem which was only worsening with time. Burt as history now records, the W & N Development Project was not to toe, for financier Newman subsequently succumbed, and that was followed by the' period of "tight money" when, for several years, the entire country was enveloped in a recession which set back many major housing and building development projects everywhere. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 8 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY And the period was particularly harmful to the city's plans for the immediate solution to the problems of Section 14. (To Be Continued) httos:l/cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681115221&srpos=7&e=11-1968-12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-bdN-the+SEQU0N+I4+story------1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 9 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 90,16 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY IV Hotel, Apartment Plans Set Tempo of Future for Section By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor Tuesday, Feb. 13 set the tempo, somewhat, for much of the activity in 1962 when a public hearing was set for an application by Tahquitz Development Enterprises, Inc„ for a change of zone to R-3 hotel and apartment for five acres of land on Section 14, bounded by Avenida Caballeros and Calle Alvarado extension. Twenty acres originally were applied for, but were reduced on planning commission recommendation to permit construction of de luxe cooperative apartments on the site. "The Agua Caliente Tribal Council certainly has no objection to this request - in fact, we have supported it," Ray Jackson, head of the Bureau of Indian Affairs office here, said. The second in a series of long-range Section 14 zoning plans began on June 7, 1962 in City Hall between representatives of the Agua Caliente Indian Tribal Council and municipal officials. Zones under study included a restrictive commercial zone for spacious business development along Tahquitz-McCallum Way and a high-rise hotel and apartment zone formula. The Indians, and Tribal Attorney Ray Simpson, indicated probable cooperation by tribal members for the long-range plan. Top officials of the Agua Caliente Indian Tribal Council met with Palm Springs city representatives July 5, 1962 to polish proposals for long-range Section 14 zoning. Tribal Chairman Mrs. Eileen Miquel, Tribal Secretary Mrs. Dora Joyce Prieto, former chairman Mrs. Vyola Olinger and Tribal Attorney Simpson met with Vice Mayor Ted McKinney, Councilman Harry Paisley, Planning Commissioner Robson Chambers and City Planning Director Richard Coleman. The zone plan, with City Council approval and Tribal Council endorsement, was seen as the end of a two-year struggle over zoning for the strategic mid -town section. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 10 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Upgraded zoning of strategic Indian -owned Section 14 in midtown Palm Springs cleared a major hurdle Nov. 15, 1962 when the City Planning Commission approved a zoning plan evolved by Indian owners and city officials. The plan - a compromise between some planning commission proposals and suggested plans by Palm Springs architects and Indian landowners - ended three years of discussions which brought some sharp exchanges between the Agua Caliente Tribal Council and the Palm Springs City Council. It also climaxed a petition by Tribal Council Chairman Mrs. Eileen Miguel who had urged the City Council to take reasonable action to speed solution to the three-year problem. The plan called for some new commercial and hotel zoning standards, elimination of single- family residence zoning from the section which had developed blight sectors. New zones included R-4 for large scale hotel and apartment house developments; RGA, garden apartment multiple family residential zone; and C-IAA. large-scale retail commercial zone. Tribal Attorney Simpson held that zoning for single family residence on leases would not be practical. The chief assessor for the division of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which controls policy on lease approvals for the bureau, ruled long-term residential leases were not the highest and best use of the land. Some appraised values on Section 14 held in two and 2.5 acre parcels, "are higher than the market permits," Simpson declared. "In addition, zoning has slowed development, but a program of not renewing of 'slum house leases' has upgraded the section." On the heels of the Section 14 zoning plan approval came the Nov. 16, 1962 disclosure by Tribal Attorney Simpson that the site was being considered for a Hilton Hotel. He revealed Hilton was one of the leads contacted during the survey of Section 14 and "Hilton wrote us he would be glad to have a hotel on Section 14 with a 99-year lease." Long-term leases were initiated with a special Congressional act which permitted the Palm Springs Spa development at Indian Avenue and Tahquitz-Mc-Callum Way, the first of the new developments on major Section 14 intersections since 1959. (To Be Continued) THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 11 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY httr)s:Hcdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS 19681116.2.28&srr)os=l &e= I 1-1968--12-1968—en--20-DS-1—txt-bdN-the+SECTION+14+story------1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 12 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 91, 18 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY V Discrimination Charges Mar Section 14 Clean -Up By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor Charges of racial discrimination were renewed on Jan. 26, 1963 in connection with a City Council study of controlled debris burning on Section 14. Three opposing views were presented to the City Council while it was approving application of tighter safety controls and explaining the burning was permitted under city ordinance. Mose Clinton, vice president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, told the meeting the council had promised a year previous not to permit burning on the Indian -owned section. Ray E. Hiller, chairman of the NAACP chapter's legal committee, said burning of small piles of debris would be acceptable. I. S. Eisen, "public relations advisor' to the group, charged that the debris problem was "a racial issue." The application was for burning debris from demolished buildings and clean-up of other trash. Walter Melrose, conservator for Indian land, owner Eugene Segundo, sought the permit under city ordinance. A suggestion that the trash be hauled away was opposed on grounds costs would be prohibitive and that controlled burning throughout the city is provided by ordinance. Councilman Harry Paisley declared the city is being whipped and the city is entirely innocent." He pointed out that either the permit should be granted, or the ordinance changed. Council pointed out the city had ordered clean-up in other sections. "In some cases, we've cleaned lots and sent the bill to the owners," Paisley said. Council granted the permit on motion by Mrs. Mary Carlin, with stipulation no piles would be larger than 20 feet at the base and at least 200 feet from an occupied structure. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 13 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Architectural approval of plans for a restaurant, shops and a 47-unit apartment building on Section 14 at Alejo Road and Indian Avenue was given June 27, 1963 by the City Planning Commission. Included in the plan for the 3.6-acre site, leased by Mrs. Eileen Miguel, Tribal Council chairman, was an underground parking facility for 80 autos, and an additional 63 parking spaces were provided on the Calle Encelia side of the project. Architectural approval also was granted for a 66-unit apartment project of the Fuller Development Co. for the northeast corner of Francis Drive and Sunrise Way, to be constructed to two stories on 29 per cent of the site. The same day public hearings on proposed new city zoning ordinances were continued to Sept. 11 at the request of Indian land owners and conservators. Simpson sought the continuance to permit further study of a detailed critique of proposed zoning ordinances. He reported gaining strong federal administrative and legislative backing for the Indians' stand against city proposed taxation of Indian improved lands. The legal counselor had previously reported that city zoning rights on the Indian lands held in trust by the federal government were subject to adjudication. Simpson's objections to industrial zoning for portions of the city airport were withdrawn when the planning commission outlined the restrictions on the zoning. "A complete and total cleanup of Section 14, described as "just trash" was urged by both the City Council and the Indian Tribal Council." This was the January, 1965 harbinger for the events leading up to the damnation of the City of Palm Springs which was culminated with the belated arrival here Tuesday, June 4, 1968, of the report of the July, 1966 investigation conducted by Loren Miller Jr., of the State Attorney General's office. The Section 14 issue was the main subject of a study session between the City Council and the Agua Caliente Tribal Council that January 1965. Mayor Bogert and Councilman Ed McCoubrey were the city voices while Mrs. Miguel, Mrs. Virginia Sanchez and Simpson were spokesmen for the Tribal Council. Bogert said Indian owners had been asked to clean up the area, some 40 acres. The Tribal Council owns some 13 acres, the rest is owned by individuals. Some of the shacks and make - THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 14 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY shift -homes were rented for $20 to $40 per month. McCoubrey advocated city clean-up even if it meant spending municipal funds. "I knew there would be objections to this, of course, but this Section 14 is a pressing problem," he said. City Attorney Jerry Bunker reminded that about three years previous a clean-up campaign was started there "but the NAACP crawled down our necks." "Are you more worried about the NAACP, or cleaning up the city?" asked Mrs. Miguel. (To Be Continued) https:llcdrec. ucr.edu/?a=tl&d=DS 19681118.2.39&sraos=-6&e--11-1968-12-1968--cn-20-DS-1--txt-bdN-the+SECnON+ 14+story------ THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 15 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 92,19 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY VI Forget Cost, Cleanup Needed By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor Councilman Ed McCoubrey was emphatically for the cleanup of Section 14,"... even if we have to spend X number of dollars to do It. It would be well for the city to spend the money. "The City Council should seriously consider financing the money for this cleanup. It would be a good investment. I know there would be some objections to this, of course, but this Section 14 is a pressing problem." Indian Agent Paul Hand wanted to know how the city felt about responsibility toward the people who might be displaced in a cleanup program. "They (allottees) are letting the places for flat-out moochers," said Mayor Bogert. "These people (residents) are not interested in improving themselves," McCoubrey added. Hand said city -sponsored public housing projects were being developed in a great number of Indian reservations. "Where could you put this public housing?" asked the mayor. There was no answer to his question. Mayor Bogert said it was as important to the Indians as it was to the city to clean up Section 14. "However, the most important aspect is that the city must cooperate with the Indians. We don't get any money from these lands at all. Forty per cent of the remaining land here is Indian land. We will have a more stabilized tax base in Palm Springs when we have cleaned up Section 14 and more of the land is leased. McCoubrey said the allottees of the land "must be assured that a cleanup is for their benefit ... The Indians have special privileges, which we recognize, but we cannot stay here and have their beautiful piece of land in the condition it is in now right in our own backyard and not do anything about it." THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 16 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY On March 3, 1965, Section 14 came under heavy fire again when city planners and the Indians found themselves still at cross purposes over how some areas should be zoned despite many months of planning that had gone into a new zoning ordinance. The planning department recommended zoning remain a composite of four zones - residential garden apartments, a high -density apartment district, a commercial district and a heavier - use commercial district. The Indians sought a higher density rate in the hotel and apartment zone and also discussed revision of parking lot standards. "We should stick to our guns," McCoubrey declared, "and go with what is best for the city, what is the best zoning for the area. The Indians are privileged people, whether we like it or not. But if we do have to make some concessions to get this placed cleaned up, I'm all for it." Planning Commissioner Dinty Moore commented: "I think you have to get the Indian Agent (Paul Hand) to get his sights down on the property values before you can make progress." Vice Mayor George Beebe Jr., said the property values had doubled in recent years. "I don't know how they (the Indians) can sit there on land worth $80,000 an acre and get $30 a month rent and have deplorable conditions. "I don't know what concessions we can give them. I would not want to waive one standard there. I think the zoning we have given them is good and the standards are good. Visible evidence that steps were being taken on the Section 14 cleanup was recorded October 19, 1965 when abandoned structures, rubbish and trash were bulldozed into piles and burned under controlled conditions by the city fire department. At least 13 old buildings were scheduled to be fired during the operation with the fire department to mount a night standby, City Manager Frank Aleshire reported to the City Council. Mayor Bogert and Councilmen Beebe and McCoubrey agreed that in some instances the city cleanup operations were lagging and asked for a speedup "particularly in the Indian -owned land of Section 14." City Manager Frank Aleshire said meetings had been held with departments responsible for keeping the city clean, "but it just takes time to accomplish." He said charred debris would also be unsightly, but steps would be taken to eliminate it. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 17 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681119.2.46&sMgs--9&c=-11-1968--12-1968--en--20-D-1--W-txlN-SECTION+14+-.....- 1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 18 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 93, 20 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY VII Cleanup's Phase 1 Ends Successfully By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor Phase One of the Section 14 clean-up campaign was reported completed on Nov 17, 1965 and Fire Marshal James E. Harris presented a progress account to the city. Harris, also chief of the city's Fire Prevention Bureau, said the abatement program on the section had a June 1966, deadline, and the City Council had voted an additional $10,000 to the original $5,000 budgeted for the project. "We have a peculiar task in regard to nuisance abatement. The appearance of our community is of special importance because of the resort nature of Palm Springs," City Manager Frank Aleshire said. Although the main functions of the Fire Prevention Bureau are inspections of occupancies and enforcement of fire codes, it undertook abatement as a special project for the city. Don Abercrombie had recently joined the bureau's staff as the new cleanup coordinator and was making surveys of the areas being abated and working with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Harris pointed out that while abatement was not confined to Section 14, main efforts were being exerted in this area since lit was the most adverse condition then existing in the city. He disclosed his bureau was maintaining a two -man crew, working through the Public Works Department, which was continually canvassing the entire community and cleaning up various areas throughout the city as the need arose. Preparations for the abatement of Section 14 - bordered by Indian Avenue. Ramon Road, Sunrise Way and Alejo Road had been in progress for the past six months. Phase One included four blocks near Calle Encilia and Arenas Road and was begun Oct. 18. Phase Two, a 20-block area, was then under way. The Fire Prevention Bureau anticipated the overall project would require possibly 10 phases. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 19 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Harris reported that before abatement was begun, the department studied and photographed all abandoned structures in the area. Actual demolition was handled by the Suppression Bureau of the Fire Department, as well as by some independent firms. These firms carried out various stages of the operation which the department was not equipped to handle. He disclosed only $616 had been expended up to that point for help from independent firms in abating Phase One. Suppression Bureau man hours had totaled 124, with equipment on standby for 80 hours. The prevention bureau spent 130-man hours on the project. "Although clean-up activity on Section 14 is not new," Harris declared, "this is the first time a concentrated phase -by -phase effort has been spearheaded by the city. "The project has met overwhelming acceptance. "The Bureau of Indian Affairs has recognized the value of the program, and thus, has I encouraged the Indians, their conservators and their guardians to cooperate fully." The Bureau of Fire Prevention for the City of Palm Springs has in its files a letter if received Nov. 18, 1965 from Paul Hand, director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs office here, in which the city was advised of the latter bureau's actions regarding the abatement of Section 14. Hand's communique to five Indian land owners, through their conservators or guardians, informed them of the city's offer to collect, pile and burn all rubbish, trash, litter and waste in the area and he enclosed maps. He informed them this program had already been carried out in some blocks south of The Springs Apartments and was now being organized in the area bounded generally by the Baristo Canal on the south. Hand noted two of the areas were under lease, and in these instances, suggested the land owner get the consent of the lessee endorsed on the "Permit to Burn Debris." "The city is most anxious to proceed in this program. Let's show our appreciation of city assistance by moving on this program with all possible speed." Hand concluded. (To Be Continued) THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 20 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY httr)s://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681120.2.48&sroos=l3&e= 11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-txlN-SECTION+14+ -----1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 21 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 94, 21 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY VIII Indian Bureau's Local Agent Recommends Cleanup Support By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor March 7, 1966 saw the Bureau of Fire Prevention file a progress report with the City of Palm Springs on the Section 14 abatement program. From Oct. 18, 1966 to Feb 24, 1966 the bureau conducted 410 inspections and re -inspections of structures and the area; 152 notifications had been sent to either conservators, guardians, allotees or occupants. Demolitions of structures totaled 155, including 43 which had been abandoned and 112 which had been vacated; and the same number, 155 of controlled burnings of structures, trash, litter and rubbish had been conducted. April 25, 1966 saw Leonard M. Hill, director of the Sacramento office for the Bureau of Indian Affairs receive a request from the Washington, D.C. office for more information "as soon as possible as to the implications of this proposed demolition grant and what bearing it has on the trust responsibilities of the Bureau." Hill was advised of the Acting Urban Renewal Commissioner's request to the Washington office whether or not, the notice issued by the Secretary of the Interior, published June 25, 1965 was broad enough to cover the activities contemplated by the City of Palm Springs under a pending application for a demolition gram under Section 116 of the Housing Act of 1949 as amended. "The City proposes to carry out a demolition program on the Agua Caliente Indian Reservation. Under the Demolition Grant Program, federal grants are made to cities and other municipalities to assist in financing the cost of demolishing structures which under state or local law, have been determined to be structurally unsound or unfit for human habitation. The local public agency acquires no interest in the properties but relies on the police power for its authority." The city's Bureau of Fire Prevention marked May 12, 1966 as the date of receipt of a copy of this letter. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 22 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY May 11, I966 saw Paul Hand, of the Palm Springs' Indian Affairs office, forward an informational communique to Hill in response to the latter's request, stemming from the April 25, 1966 letter he'd received from Washington. Hand wrote: "The efforts of the City of Palm Springs, the Probate Court, the Bureau, various conservators and guardians, the Tribal Council and Indian land owners to secure removal of sub -standard dwellings on various Indian lands, but particularly in downtown Section 14 have extended over the past six years." "The City first attempted to get the clean-up program carried out on a voluntary basis with the landowners to stand all costs. This program was partially successful and resulted in a substantial number of dwellings being destroyed. "Under this program the job was not completed, however, and the City renewed its efforts for a voluntary program in 1964. We enclose a copy of a resolution of the City dated September 21. 1964, setting forth the City's position. "The City's resolution met with little response, primarily for the reason that Indians were enjoying some income from occupants of the sub -standard dwellings and for the further reason that many of the Indian estates did not have sufficient funds available to finance the cost, of further clean-up. "The City, subsequent to its effort of September1964, then investigated the legal possibilities of declaring such improvements legally nuisances but abandoned this approach when it concluded that the City had to legal means to put enforceable liens on Indian lands to defray City costs of abatement, i.e. removal. "In the latter part of 1965, he City appropriated funds and established the office of coordinator, to which office was assigned the responsibility of negotiating the procurement of permits to bum debris from various Indian land owners. A copy of the permit, form is attached. The coordinator contacted this office and asked for our participation, to which request we responded. Enclosed us a sample communication which we sent to a number of Indians or conservators or guardians on whose lands some of these shacks were located. "It will be noted that our letter states that the City did not have funds available to complete the removal of debris and that the City hoped to have available funds at a later date for financing the clean-up operation The coordinator initiated, also, a program at City expense to remove remnants of motor vehicles. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 23 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY "As a result of the City's decision to finance the removal of unclaimed vehicles and the burning of sub -standard dwellings, the City has to date removed 182 dwellings, the burning being done under a program supervised by the City Fire Department. "Currently there remains a substantial number of sub -standard dwellings and other buildings on Indian lands. We are informed by the city coordinator that his survey shows approximately 35 such units. "Many of these are located in Section 14 but there are some on other Indian trust lands within the City limits. In addition to the remaining sub -standard buildings there is debris remaining from the various supervised burnings which desirably should be trucked to the local dump. "The City's current program has met with a high degree of acceptance by the Conservators, Guardians, Tribal Council and the various Indian land owners. "It is my recommendation that any effort initiated by the City to procure additional funds for furthering the City's cleanup program on Indian lands located within the City be fully supported by the Bureau of Indian Affairs." (To Be Continued) hUs:Hcdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681121.2.82&s!Ws=l5&e=11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-bdN-SECTION+14+------ 1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 24 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 94, 22 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY IX Better Late Than Never? Apparently... By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor In a memorandum to the press, marked for release at 11 a.m., Tuesday, June 4, 1968 came the announcement by the State Attorney General's office that "the city of Palm Springs was charged today with a 'classic study in civic disregard for the rights of minority citizens.' "This charge highlighted a report on Palm Springs' demolition of its Negro ghetto, The report was released by Chief Deputy Attorney General Charles A. O'Brien in Los Angeles. Deputy Attorney General Loren Miller Jr., chief of the Attorney General's Constitutional Rights Unit, prepared the report." The Miller Jr., report is dated May 31, 1968, which, by his own preamble, is nearly two years after he initiated his investigation on July 25, 1966. He explains that the delay resulted from extended unavailability of certain participants and work load problems within his unit. Now, just to keep the chronological order of things straight, it should be interjected here that the first accounts of the state's probe of the city's 'slum' plan appeared on April 2-3, 1967, again nearly a year after Miller launched his quest for the facts. But, we'll get to these a little later. Miller reported to O'Brien that the Attorney General's office was requested on July 22. 1966, by the Fair Employment Practices Commission to contact Mr. Ernest Moore of the Office of Economic Opportunity in Palm Springs, concerning the removal of several hundred residents from an area of that city known as Section 14. The FEPC request to the Attorney General's office which Mr. Moore had written to Governor Edmund G. Brown. Miller reports coming to Palm Springs and conferring with Moore, who told him the city had burned down the homes of Negro residents of Section 14 — "destroying their personal belongings, as well as the buildings, without giving the residents sufficient notice of the planned destruction." He continues that following this initial meeting, on July 25, 1966, extensive interviews were conducted by Miller and a special agent of the Department of Justice. The interviews included city officials, contractors involved in the property destruction, conservators for the Indians, and residents of Section 14. Most of the demolition occurred in late 1965 and in 1966. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 25 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Miller offers his explanation for the delay in filing his report, then concludes his prefacing remarks with, "Every statement in this report is based on substantial testimony by knowledgeable witnesses and participant." There is no evidence that any crimes were committed in the removal of the residents of Section 14 and the destruction of their home. "Yet the incident displayed a unique insensitivity on the part of the City of Palm Springs to the problem of adequate minority housing, in particular, and to minority -community relations in general." This is Miller's opening comment in the conclusion portion of his report. He goes on to say: "The manner in which the demolition of Section 14 was accomplished makes it a classic study in civic disregard for the rights and feelings of minority citizens. "Homes were destroyed with no real concern on the part of the city that the families were properly notified of the impending destruction. Accompanying the imperious destruction of the Negro homes in Section 14 is the city's continuing disconcern for relocation of these citizens. This has resulted in many minority citizens being forced to live in Beaumont or Banning - 25 or 30 miles from their working places in Palm Springs. Other former residents of Section 14 moved into a formerly defunct housing tract in a desolate, windswept area of north Palm Springs, where they live two and three families to a house." Miller acknowledges Palm Springs is a relatively small city, and the number of persons involved was only 1,000 then contends "this does not excuse the city's action, nor does it diminish the antagonism of the persons involved in the eviction and destruction. ' "In terms of proportionate population. Palm Springs' action is equivalent to the arbitrary removal of 200,000 persons from their homes in Los Angeles. "When a natural holocaust devastated sections of the wealthy Los Angeles suburb called Bel Air, it was declared a disaster area and received special federal benefits. The minority residents of Section 14 did not receive such aid when their homes were destroyed by a city engineered holocaust. Such inequities give rise to antagonisms." (To Be Continued) THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 26 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY https://cdnc. ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681122.2.78&srnos=5&e=-11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-txl N-SECTION+14------1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 27 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 96,23 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY X Indian Land Cleared, Empty By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor Attorney General Loren Miller Jr. backgrounded his report on Section 14 with the comments that "for about 35 years, the main available living area for working people of Palm Springs was Indian land adjacent. to the downtown business area of the city ... known as Section 14 of the Indian reservation. "During the past three decades, this area became the primary residential area for the Negro and Mexican -American population of Palm Springs. This resulted from two main factors: "- The average minority person could not afford to live in any other area of Palm Springs; De facto racial segregation was prevalent in Palm Springs, as in other parts of California." He continued that when these tenancies first were created and for many years after, the leases of the land from the Indians were limited to a five-year duration by federal law. "Under the tenancy created on the reservation land and approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the tenant leased the land from the Bureau for a stated price and was then permitted to build or relocate a dwelling place upon that piece of land. The lease further provided that the tenant owned the dwelling place in which he resided and was free at any time to remove the dwelling place from the land. "Homes on the Indian land were equipped with utilities and the majority were built under permits issued by the City Building Department. City Building Inspectors passed on the buildings while they were under construction. "Homeowners also paid taxes to Riverside County, based on the value of their residences. House values ranged from $1,000 to $8,000." Miller points that in 1959 a new federal law distributed the Indian -held land in Palm Springs to individual members of the Agua Caliente tribe, and also provided for 99-year leases on Indian property, rather than the traditional short-term leases. "When the new 99-year leases became available, the City of Palm Springs and various real estate developers became interested in the commercial development of Section 14. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 28 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY He continues that originally, the city planned to use abatement laws to clear Section 14, but conflicting jurisdiction between the city and the Bureau of Indian Affairs "frustrated this scheme. "Conflicts between the city and the Indians over proposed zoning for this area also arose, following 1959, he reports. "Complaints were received by this office, during this period, concerning city development plans for Section 14. These initially vague complaints concerned possible conflicts of interest and questionable actions of Indian conservators. "They also charged overriding city interest in commercial development of the land, without regard to the interests of the current tenants." Miller went on to point out that the same 1959 law for long-term leases and individual distribution of the Indian land also provided for conservators to protect the individual Indians' interests. "In 1964, the City of Palm Springs approached the conservators with a plan to raze Section 14. The city proposed that the Indians - through their conservators - terminate the leases or rentals of the lands. The city would then clear the land, using city funds." Looking into the legal method, Miller reported: "The city - to protect itself against any legal action - asked the conservators to serve notice upon the tenants that tenancy would be terminated within the statutory period of thirty days. "The conservators were also to inform the tenants that permits to clear the land would be issued to the city after the tenants were served with the notices." The Attorney General's investigator contends that "testimony was received that the conservators in many instances did not actually consult with the Indian owners of the land concerning the termination of the leases in Section 14. "Testimony from several sources indicated that the conservators, in many instances, executed the eviction notices without making a full disclosure to their Indian wards, who were leasing the land. "Further testimony indicated that many of the Indians were induced to execute various documents by statements of the conservators that they could lease the land at higher rentals to commercial enterprises." To date, the land cleared in Section 14 has not been leased and stands vacant." THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 29 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Earlier in his report, Miller maintained the Indians who own the land are disillusioned, since the land which once produced revenue for them now lies vacant. (To Be Continued) https://cdnc. ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681123.2.46&srpos=6&e=-11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-txl N-SECTION+14------1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 30 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 97, 25 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY XI 'Substantial Testimony -'Where Did It Go? By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor "Every statement in this report is based on substantial testimony by knowledgeable witnesses and participants." This was the closing comment submitted by Deputy Attorney General Leon Miller Jr., chief of the Attorney General's Constitutional Rights Unit, to his superior, Charles A. O'Brien, Chief Deputy Attorney General in Los Angeles. And Miller went on to cite: "Joe Leonard, of Leonard Construction Co., indicates that a dwelling which he owned on the reservation land was demolished without notice and that his property inside the dwelling was destroyed and burned. "It should be noted that Lewis Hunt, who was employed by the Valley Equipment and Sales Co., stated that he was threatened with a gun by a Section 14 homeowner when he attempted a demolition. "This story was confirmed by Chief of Police Orest Johnson and also by Captain White of the Palm Springs Police Department. This corroborates to some degree the stories of the former tenants of the area that the city was demolishing homes which were occupied and had personal possessions in them. "While the city maintains that all persons living on the land, or known owners of dwellings, received notices that the dwellings would be demolished, the former tenants disagree. A majority of tenants claim that they did not receive 30-day notices, nor three-day notices, nor any notices. "Many tenants discovered the demolition after the dwellings had been knocked down and their belongings were missing. Among the possessions lost or destroyed were such items as air conditioners, stoves, refrigerators and clothing. The tenants steadfastly maintain that few of them ever received a notice to vacate their land. "For example: Homer Manning, a member of the City Human Relations Council, was informed by his tenant that his building - valued at $8,000 - was about to be demolished. He was told THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 31 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY that a bulldozer was ready to knock down the building. He was able to retrieve some, but not all of his property. "Mr. Moses Clinton said that his house - occupied by his son. Hari —was destroyed without his knowledge while his son was at work. Hari Clinton's personal belongings, along with a stove, refrigerator, furniture and an air conditioner, were either destroyed or taken from the house. "Mr. James Goree said that his house - valued at $3,400 and occupied by his sister - was destroyed without notice. Similarly destroyed was the house of an elderly neighbor, a Mrs. Spilletti, who died following her eviction." The Miller report fails to substantiate the inference the woman's death was the result of the eviction. "Mr. R. L. Lucas, a 77 year old man, received a notice to vacate several dwellings he owned. He did not believe the notices. The City destroyed five dwellings owned by Mr. Lucas and valued at $5,100. Mr. Lucas also states that he lost six water tanks, four stoves, four refrigerators, six air conditioners, 15 beds and 15 mattresses. Mr. Lucas depended on a total rental of $460 per month from these units for his support. "Mrs. Van Williams received an eviction notice but disregarded it and took a trip to Los Angeles. When she returned, her house -valued at $7,500 and all her personal possessions had been destroyed. She had built the home in 1964 and had been a resident of Palm Springs since 1933. F Miller further reported: "Perhaps the most conclusive evidence of the city's attitude is the fact that the City of Palm Springs kept no official record of the persons displaced and the residences destroyed in Section 14, and could offer no evidence of any attempt at determining that each homeowner and resident had been properly served with eviction notices. "The City of Palm Springs not only disregarded the residents of Section 14 as property owners, taxpayers and voters; Palm Springs ignored that the residents of Section 14 were human beings." This was how Loren Miller Jr., concluded his ten -page report - and it is curious how the "substantial testimony" by other "knowledgeable witnesses and participants" could have been completely omitted from it. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 32 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681125.2.115&sraos=14&e= 11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-txIN-SECTI0N+14+-----1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 33 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 98,26 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY XII Complete Report Compiled in Brief Visit! By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor It is now November 1968, nearly six months since May 31 when Loren Miller Jr. submitted his report to Charles A. O'Brien, Chief Deputy Attorney General, and since June 4, 1968, when the contents of that report were released to the press. We point with emphasis to the span of six months because it has taken that long for City Manager Frank Aleshire and the various municipal department heads to search their files for the documented history of the question - Section 14! And they're still searching! Six months plus is marked contrast to the length of time Miller spent gathering the material upon which he based his report. Aleshire's best recollection credits Miller with only a one -day visit here. Though, acknowledging the attorney general's investigator the benefit of the doubt. Miller could have spent three or four days here, but no city official can, in good faith, credit him with as much as a week. So, it's no wonder Miller's findings do not include some very pertinent public records in the city's files. Even the briefest and barest of chronologies, one would think, should include that in April, 1951, the City of Palm Springs, was instructed by the California Housing Authority and the county Department of Health that the dwelling units in Section 14 were sub -standard and should be abated. That same year, eviction notices were issued to Section 14 residents of dwellings which had been built originally for Indians prior to 1951. The records read like a diary: June 6, 1951 - The City adopted Resolution 3172 instructing the city manager to arrange meetings and to try to solve the problem of housing for colored people on Section 14. Dec. 19, 1951 - Resolution 3307 instructed the city manager to secure deferments of eviction notices which had been issued to May 1952. In some cases, the deferments ranged six months or more. Jan. 9, 1952 - Resolution 3338 saw the City Council appoint a five -man committee to work on the housing problems. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 34 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY - June 30, 1953 - Resolution 3808 declared a moratorium on the enforcement of City Housing Code regulations, giving the people on Section 14 six months to bring their properties up to standard. - Sept. 1953 - the City Council extended this moratorium to - June 1, 1964. - Oct. 6, 1953 - Resolution 3900 called for the council to appoint a three-man board to conduct abatement hearings. There were a number of hearings held well into the latter part of 1955. - March 1961, Resolution 6213 requested the Federal Housing Administration to issue certificates which would make the people of Section 14 eligible for relocation assistance under Section 221 of the Housing Code. - April 1961, Resolution 6291 shows the City Council directing city administrations to make back surveys of Section 14 to support the requests for assistance as required by the federal agency. Two weeks later, on April 17, the Building Department reported there were 271 occupied dwellings and 20 vacant houses in the southwest quarter of Section 14. - June 12, 1961 - Resolution 6419 ordered the appointment of a seven -member Citizens' Committee for Section 14 to work on the housing problems. One of the members was Rev. Jeff Rollins. Later that month, Richard Mitchell, special assistant to the Regional Administrator of the Housing and Home Financing Administration of the federal government, appeared before the City Council to explain what had to be done by the city in order to qualify the 221 housing assistance program. - July 10, 1961 - Resolution 6454 saw the council approve a program for community improvement, which was one of the requirements of the HHFA. - February 19, 1962 - Resolution 6781 had the council requesting the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Conservators -Guardians to formulate a program to remove debris from Section 14. - Sept. 21, 1964 - Resolution 8168 was a council request to the Agua Caliente Indian Tribal Council, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian allottees and the Conservators -Guardians to aid the city in cleaning up Section 14. - Feb. 8, 1965 - the City Council requested the City Manager to study all feasible means for cleaning up Section 14. - Oct. 4, 1965 - the City Council declared Section 14 a public nuisance and authorized the Fire Department to burn debris. (To Be Continued) THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 35 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY httos://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a-d&d=DS19691126.2.70&srpos=2&e=-09-1968--01-1969-en-20-DS-1-txt-txlN-SECTION+14----- 1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 36 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 99, 27 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY XIII Abundant Records Prove City Followed Legal Line in Cleanup By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor The chronology of municipal documents regarding the Section 14 clean-up continues with an Oct. 25, 1965, action in which the city council appropriated $10,000 to the fire department for expenses stemming from the project. On April 25, 1966, the City of Palm Springs received a letter from Pete Siva, chairman of the tribal council, thanking the city for cleaning up Section 14. February 27, 1967 - Resolution 8872 authorized the city manager to accept $45,000 from the Bureau of Indian Affairs for the demolition and burning work on Section 14. Additionally, city records show that during a period from 1961 to 1963, 108 structures on Section 14 were demolished as a result of actions by private citizens in connection with new building construction such as the Spa and Dunes Hotels, Plaza Motors, Welmas Springs Apartments and Villa Alejo Apartments. A period from 1959 to 1965 saw the city eliminate 21 structures as part of the Fire Department's cooperative program with the owners. And during the same period, 79 additional structures were removed by owners without city cooperation or assistance. After Oct. 30, 1965, the city removed 230 structures where owners gave permission to burn after the owners had evicted the tenants. The city demolished only vacant structures such as ramshackle trailer and outhouse and garage -type dwelling units. A 1961 report from the planning and police departments held there were some 2,000 persons among the approximately 173 families of two or more persons to be displaced. It also held there were 321 white families and 115 non -white families residing in the section in question. On Oct. 10, 1961, the city council rezoned five acres of Section 20 for 120 low cost housing units. Developer Robert Gould applied for a low interest loan for the project and subsequently announced the city had qualified for it. In Dec. 1961, seven and a half acres were rezoned in Section 34 on the north end of town for a development of from 200 to 250 units. However, developer William Newman died before he could gel the proposed project under way. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 37 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY In Jan. 1965, 20 acres of Section 20 were rezoned for a 300-unit low-cost housing project proposed by developer Paul King. In Nov. 1967, the city council disapproved a proposed federal rent supplement program for an eight -acre parcel in Section 34 on grounds that it didn't feel such a program was appropriate for Palm Springs. In July of this year (1968), the city issued a permit to Baron Construction Company for 60 units of low-cost housing at Cherokee and East Palm Canyon and that effort is now going ahead. Various utility companies' records show that in 1965 there were 372 gas hook-ups in Section 14, while this year there are only 303 in all of Section 14, including all new as well as old buildings. The electric company reports 268 resident meters were in operation in 1963 in Section 14, and there are 118 in 1968. The water company pulled out a total of 138 water meters between 1964 and 1965 and lists 93 meters in the section in 1965. Fire department records show it abated 235 structures in Section 14 between 1965 and 1967, of which 92 were abandoned and the remaining 143 were evictions by Indian owners. To date, no one has come forth with legal action to support the charge that the abated structures belonged to the people living in them and that the city destroyed their property illegally. "In all cases," Aleshire avers, the Indian owners either had no leases at all with the residents, or bad leases that contained a 30-day cancellation clause. "Evictions were handled by the Indian owners of their conservators or guardians who, under the terms of their leases, gave 30 days' notice. "In cases where the residents were not moving out, the owners or their spokesmen went to court, secured an eviction order which was served by deputies and eventually the people moved out. There are detailed records of these actions," the city manager maintains. Only one lawsuit has been filed as a result of the abatements - by Joe Leonard, claiming the building he owned was worth $2,000. He sued the city for that amount, in Superior Court at Indio. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 38 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY "It is true that the city destroyed a residence owned by the plaintiff. It is true that the city secured a permit for demolition from land owner Dora Joyce Prieto. "It is not true that the plaintiff was damaged in any amount. It is not true that plaintiff had any property rights whatsoever, and it is not true that the city wrongfully destroyed the plaintiff's property." So ruled Judge Merrill! Brown. (To Be Concluded) MEW tot https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681127.2.38&sroos=4&e=-11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-txlN-SECTION+14+----- 1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 39 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 100, 28 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY Conclusion The Question Remains: Why Weren't The Critics Where the Action Was? By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor Despite the record, Deputy Attorney General Loren Miller Jr. was still able to charge Palm Springs with "a classic study in civic disregard for the rights of minority citizens" in his report to his superiors - report he admitted was two years late. Miller, chief of the state Attorney General's Constitutional Rights Unit, linked the ghetto destruction to federal accusations of misconduct by conservators for the Agua Caliente Indians. "Homeowners who leased lots in Section 14 saw their homes destroyed without notice and their personal property burned," Miller wrote. Apart from the 30-day clauses in what few leases there were, as well as the eviction notices, which Miller charges "the city paid little attention to," what about the city's actions which date from 1951? It appears that Miller regards a decade and a half as short notice? That is, if he's taken that long and detailed process into consideration at all. As for the burning of personal property, is there anyone, let alone city and fire department officers, so ignorant that he would put to the torch someone else's belongings while aware of the legal repercussions that no doubt would ensue? And then Miller wrote: "Perhaps the most conclusive evidence of the city's attitude is the fact that the City of Palm Springs kept no official records of the persons displaced and the residences destroyed in Section 14, and could offer no evidence of any attempt at determining that each homeowner and resident had been properly served with eviction notices." It appears more that it was Miller who did not make the attempt. And what about Ernest Moore, who was then with the Office of Economic Opportunity in Palm Springs? Miller credits Moore with the writing of a letter to Gov. Edmund G. Brown, disclosing the removal of the residents of Section 14 and initiating the Miller investigation. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 40 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY Moore appears as little more than a walk-on in the piece, but it seems that with his zeal in letter writing and his concern for the minority people in question, he could have projected himself into a greater role. There are some 400 funding programs administered by more than 100 federal agencies whereby communities may secure financial aid for whatever their municipal problems might be. Thus, it would seem that through his post in the Office of Economic Opportunity, by direct or indirect contact, Moore could have provided Palm Springs with guidelines at least to alleviate the plights of both the city and the residents of Section 14. But he didn't. At last word, Moore was still nearby - in the Riverside Office of Economic Opportunity though he hasn't been heard from here recently. But, maybe better late than never. Finally, Miller wrote: "We would recommend that the City of Palm Springs undertake special efforts to correct the problems of inadequate minority housing and the general low level of relations between the city government and the minority residents of Palm Springs." He asks for special efforts, but he doesn't suggest even one. "The Indians who own the land also are disillusioned, since the land which once produced revenue for them now lies vacant. "This disillusionment is closely connected with the federal government's investigation of the administration of Indian guardianships and conservatorships in Palm Springs. "There is evidence of unusual cooperation between developers, the Indian conservators, and the City of Palm Springs in the demolition of Section 14. "The Section 14 situation reinforces the question of Indian conservator conduct which was initially raised by the Department of Interior." Well, the Department of Interior has yet to make formal charges stemming from its investigation of conservator conduct, and recent legislation in the congress will give its Bureau of Indian Affairs the chance to erase the Indians' disillusionment and bring forth occupants, and revenue, for the lands now lying vacant. THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 41 of 42 THE SECTION 14 STORY https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DS19681128.2.44&sroos=8&e=-11-1968--12-1968--en--20-DS-1--txt-txlN-SECTION+14+----- 1 THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 42 of 42