WHY GETTING THE FACTS RIGHT ABOUT SECTION 14 IS IMPORTANT

Remarks of Norm King, Bobby Gray and Doug Evans at the Palm Springs City Council Meeting
March 28, 2024

I am Norm King, a member of Friends of Frank Bogert, a group committed to restoring the reputation of former Mayor Frank Bogert; a reputation which has been falsely slandered by some recent and present members of the city council.

I will begin, to be followed by Bobby Gray and Doug Evans.

Last April the city council admitted that it did not have consensus about the facts surrounding the actions of the City and Mayor Frank Bogert concerning Section 14.

The council voted to employ an independent contractor to clarify the facts and a majority of the council specifically stated that the facts should be clarified before further discussion of reparations.

The council has broken this promise.  Tonight will be the 9th time you have met in secret session about reparations since you took action to “find the facts.”  And you have not set in motion any process to “find the facts.”

When you do make an honest attempt to find the facts here is what you will find:

1. That neither the city nor Frank Bogert evicted any resident. All evictions were initiated by the BIA, the rightful Indian owners or their representatives and were executed for the purpose of eliminating Section 14 sub-standard conditions and to enable the Indian owners to benefit from the value of their land.

2. That contrary to the city’s apology resolution which states, “By 1964 the city of Palm Springs began executing a plan to demolish all existing property on Section 14,” that in 1961 Ray W. Jackson, director of the Palm Springs office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs “explained that the individual Indian allottees, court appointed guardians and conservators, in concert with the Bureau, had determined that all residential buildings must be removed   . . . . . . to permit redevelopment for its highest and best use.” (Quote from the Desert Sun July 14, 1961)

3. That, in the spring of 1961 the BIA issued eviction notices to all remaining 430 homes and that  Ray W. Jackson stated that “the tentative date for completion of this removal project is June 30, 1961; consequently time is of the essence.”  (Quote from the Desert Sun (July 14, 1961)

4. That the city was not informed that these notices had been sent. Thereafter, Mayor Frank Bogert brokered a six month eviction moratorium with the BIA (which for most homes became a four year moratorium). Therefore all residents still living in Section 14 in 1965 had at least four more years to relocate after the first 1961 eviction notices.  In other words the eviction notices issued by the land owners in 1965-66 were the “second” eviction notices given to the 112 remaining occupied homes.

5. That the fact-finding consultant will also document that in 1961 Frank Bogert led the Citizens Committee, which included the NAACP local chapter head and which was established to work with the Section 14 residents.  In 1965 he helped create the Human Relations Committee—this committee received no complaints of a home being demolished without proper notice during 1965 -1966.

6. That the Assistant Attorney General, who wrote the often-cited 1968 memorandum, was untruthful. He 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 evictions notices.” 

This statement was disputed at the time by city officials who, as quoted in contemporary Desert Sun articles, describe a detailed city record-keeping and inspections process after the Indian owners had issued the evictions.

Last year the City uncovered records from this period. These records prove that the eviction notices were issued by Indian owners or their legal representatives and that the city followed a careful process of making sure the home was abandoned before any structure was demolished.  The Assistant Attorney General’s allegations, flawed to start with, crumble altogether as his “the most conclusive evidence” is proven false.

In his memorandum the Assistant Attorney General cited allegations of only eight people in regard to the 1965-66 evictions. None of the allegations made by these eight individuals occurred in 1965 and 1966 or turned out to be legitimate complaints. For instance two complainants stated they received but disregarded the eviction notice. Another lost in court.

7. That the Assistant Attorney General claimed the city’s actions were a “city-engineered holocaust” – but also states that the city broke no law. How can any rational person reconcile those statements?

8. That the city’s so-called “apology” resolution is riddled with misinformation and false hoods such as:

• That “1000 residents” were displaced by the city.
• At most there were 112 occupied homes in 1965.
• That the city often ignored required notice provisions and that the city “kept no official records.”
• Last year’s discovery of records at city hall proves that records were kept.
• That the city used “public funds” to clear the land.
• The “public funds” referred in the apology resolution were federal funds obtained with the assistance of the BIA – which reimbursed the city for its assistance with the demolition.
• That “By 1964 the city of Palm Springs began executing a plan to demolish all existing property on Section 14,”
• As noted above in 1961 the BIA evicted all residents of Section 14 and Frank Bogert stepped in to negotiate a moratorium. 

9. That the “apology resolution” also ignores the documentation that living conditions in Section 14 were sub-standard and worse and that from the early 1950’s on all agencies – the Tribe, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the State of California, the County of Riverside and the City – desired the cleanup of Section 14.

10. That the allegations leading to the city council’s removal of Bogert statue was an orchestrated character-assassination directed by former Council member Ginny Foat and then Mayor Geoff Kors are based on false information. 

Conclusion:
You have wasted a year. You are in the same situation you found yourself last April – no consensus about the facts – yet you continue to discuss reparations behind closed doors – something you said you would not do until you got the facts. 

Tell us what is not true about what we have said.

We know you can’t – because there are no facts which will contradict the truth of what we have said.