MIAMI – Yesterday, April 4, the City of Miami Historic and Environmental Preservation Council held a meeting to consider moving forward with the process of designating a ancestral site found during the construction of a luxury hotel in Brickell. All seats were taken at City Hall, so neighbors also crowded in front of the outdoor TV in the Miami heat to watch the direct.
In a meeting that lasted more than five hours until dark, the council heard from Related Group, the developer behind the controversial project, as well as local residents, Native American activists, teachers, academics, children and young people, grandparents and archaeologists. Residents have expressed concerns about the future of the site, which dates back to the Tequesta civilization, Florida’s first people. Even though the CEO of Related – Jorge Pérez, namesake of the Pérez Art Museum in Miami – has promised to respect private property findings and follow all orders, questions remain: Will he keep his promise? What is the importance of the objects and vestiges discovered? Does Miami even need another luxury skyscraper? And will Indigenous activists who consider this site a sacred burial ground be heard?
The site consists of two lots; one, located at 77 SE 5th Street, has already been unearthed following orders. Last night’s meeting ended with a vote to withdraw the advancement of a naming proposal for the lot as long as the proponents come up with a concrete action plan regarding what will happen to the conclusions of the next meeting. In a vote of 8 to 0, members of council approved the proposed eventual designation of the lot at 444 Brickell Avenue, which has yet to be excavated, as a protected archaeological monument.
William Pestle, a professor at the University of Miami (UM), one of the independent archaeologists who attended the meeting, said Hyperallergic that he was satisfied with the decision on the second batch. “Perhaps with more time, archaeologists and indigenous communities working together can ensure that the vast majority of this site is undisturbed,” he said.
Pestle presented a nomination proposal with UM’s Traci Ardren; Sara Ayers-Rigsby and Malachi Fenn of the Florida Public Archeology Network; and city preservation planner Adrian Espinosa and preservation officer Anna Pernas. They explained the importance of the site and included ideas for creative mitigation using examples such as Syntagma SquareAthens’ first metro and the largest archaeological dig in the city’s history, where archaeologists worked alongside engineers to allow parts of the site to remain ‘in situ’.
“For the other plot, I was very disappointed that the council departed from the prescribed designation procedure and went with this vague promise of an ‘action plan’,” Pestle continued. “Unless there is legal enforceability for the big projects that Pérez has been talking about, I’m afraid all those promises won’t translate into anything in the long run.
The next steps include a preliminary assessment and, finally, a vote to designate the site as a historic monument. For activists and independent archaeologists, it’s a step in the right direction to protect Miami’s history and the legacy of their ancestors. If the site is designated, it may be listed on the National Register of Historic Places and would receive increased protection under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA).
But Robert Rosa, who represents seniors in the American Indian Movement, was frustrated with the way the meeting went. “I attended a lot of these meetings,” Rosa said. Hyperallergic. “Usually the public comments come after the presentations. Yet in this case, it came before, preventing Native American activists and the community from responding to what was said and dispelling any misinformation. He didn’t think the vote was a victory.
“Once again they have silenced our voices,” Rosa lamented.
During the first two hours of the meeting, all residents who wished to speak gave their public comments. Some waited outside to enter, because the room was full.
Munir Ingram, a local resident, expressed his support for the historic designation of the site. “We need to understand the history of Miami before the developers come in. The indigenous peoples, the Tequesta and the Seminoles, fought the Spaniards, the British and the Americans for their right to live freely on their lands,” Ingram said. “Now there is evidence that Indigenous peoples developed settlements along the Miami River. They built civilizations before you arrived with your gunpowder and steel. Do not desecrate this site.
There were also people who opposed the proposed historic designation and defended the developer’s position. “The benefits to citizens are not just additional housing, but the jobs this development will create and economic growth,” said Daniel Guerra, a Miami resident and real estate agent. “I’m sure this council can find a way to work with the developer to preserve the artifacts without impeding the progress of our city.”
A presentation shared by the Related argued that the group is taking all necessary steps to work with archaeologists and tribes to respect finds and follow orders. For the developer, a decision to designate the site would slow construction, while it ostensibly complies with all ordinances and has spent millions of dollars on archaeological digs. Related added in its presentation that the Seminole and Miccosukee tribes were consulted in the process. But Betty Osceola, member of the Miccosukee Tribe of Florida Indians of the Panther Clan, confirmed at the meeting that Related had not consulted with any tribal officers from the Miccosukee Tribe and that the consultation process had been misinterpreted.
One of the members of the Historic and Environmental Preservation Council, Denise Galvez Turros, also questioned this process. When Turros asked Related if she could see any letters from tribal officials approving the movement of human remains, she was told the issue was “very private” because it involved a cemetery.
The Seminole tribe tribal leaders who consult Related did not attend the meeting, and when Hyperallergic contacted them for an interview last month, they declined to comment
Discussions about the age of the site have also met with disagreement. Related consultant archaeologist Robert Carr argued during his assessment that the finds are not “older than the pyramids” and date back to 500 BCE, around 2,500 years ago, although it pointed out that if the natives say it is a sacred site, then that must be respected. William Pestle disagrees with Carr on the age of the finds and says they date back to the Archaic period, but further study, as well as a concrete plan and funding to do so, is needed.
Native American activists still don’t feel included in the conversation. While board members, archaeologists and developers insist that museums are the “best” places to display these finds, Native Americans continue to explain why this is a problem.
“If you have any questions about us, we are alive today. You can ask us,” Betty Osceola said. “You don’t have to go digging in our graves and studying what we ate and how we lived. Ask us, and we can tell you.
Sheridan Murphy, state executive director of the American Indian Movement of Florida, expressed similar frustration about the future resting place of these finds.
“I’m asking everyone on this board if you would like what they found that was lovingly put in the ground to be called an artifact,” Murphy said. “These human remains will end up in a box. How many Native people are sitting in a box collecting dust right now? The time has come. Give respect, or we’ll take it.
