The Quechan Tribe wants a bridge timeline. Imperial County's latest report says Picacho likely can't be repaired.

Developing story. This report is based on the Quechan Tribal Council's signed statement and Imperial County Public Works reports from Oct. 20. We'll update it when the county, Supervisor John Hawk or the Tribal Council make new information public, and when the county releases its final engineering findings.

Updated Oct. 22, 2026: Added context from a September 2025 Board of Supervisors meeting and an open question about the county's repair-versus-replace decision.

The Quechan Tribal Council wants two things from Imperial County: an apology, and a date.

The apology is for something Supervisor John Hawk said about a room full of Quechan community members who had come to talk about a closed bridge. It's first on the list in the Tribe's signed statement, which calls the remarks "egregious." That's where most of the attention has gone, and it belongs in the story.

The rest of the list is about the bridges themselves. Four of the Tribe's five requests ask the county to get them fixed, funded and on a schedule, in writing.

Two bridges, one way in

The Picacho Road Bridge crosses the Yuma Main Canal in Winterhaven, just across the Colorado River from Yuma. It's been closed since March 3, 2025, according to the county. Traffic that used to cross it now detours over the Arnold Road Bridge, and in May, the Board of Supervisors declared an emergency over that one too, because of erosion around its foundations.

So one bridge is closed, and the bridge carrying the detour has its own emergency declaration.

"Families, elders, school buses, patients reaching the Fort Yuma Health Care Center, and emergency responders depend on these routes every day," the Tribal Council wrote. "Our citizens deserved a serious answer."

This isn't a new complaint. At a Board of Supervisors meeting in September 2025, Tribal Councilmember Faron Owl called the Picacho bridge “the main artery that provides access to our reservation,” The Desert Review reported. Councilmember Dr. Jeanette Peterson told the board, “The front end and tires cost in excess of $20,000 per bus,” adding that potholes made bus maintenance expensive for the district. The board took no immediate action after the presentation.

The statement even borrows the supervisor's own words. Hawk said earlier this year, about Arnold Road, that "if we lose that bridge, that is a major problem." The Tribe's response: "We agree."

What the Tribe is asking for

The statement, signed by Tribal President Koteen and posted to the Tribe's website Oct. 21, lists five requests:

1. A public apology from Hawk, delivered in person to the Tribal Council and stated on the record at a regular Board of Supervisors meeting.
2. A written timeline within 30 days for replacing the Picacho Road Bridge and repairing the Arnold Road Bridge. The Tribe wants it to include funding already secured, construction start dates, and completion or reopening dates. It also asks the county to identify funding gaps, other possible funding sources, and chances for the Quechan Nation to apply for that money alongside the county.
3. An emergency-access plan, developed with Quechan Tribal Police, Fire and Health, in case the Arnold Road Bridge fails.
4. Regular public updates in Winterhaven until both bridges are fully restored.
5. A government-to-government meeting with the Tribal Council on the bridges and on other matters affecting the Tribe's homelands, including what it calls its work to Protect Kw'tsán.

The statement doesn't say when the 30 days start.

It also goes out of its way to say this isn't about the Nov. 3 election, in which Hawk is running for re-election. "Our Nation does not endorse or oppose candidates," it says. "It is about the conduct of a sitting official toward the people he was elected to serve."

What the county's own report says

The day before the Tribe posted its statement, both bridges were on the Imperial County Board of Supervisors' Oct. 20 agenda, as requests to extend their emergency declarations. The Public Works reports attached to those items are the most current public account of where things stand. (We haven't confirmed how the board voted.)

On Picacho, the news isn't good. The county spent much of this year preparing to partially demolish the bridge and repair it. That work started July 22. Once crews peeled off the asphalt, they found "several cracks and spalling areas" in the concrete deck underneath. On Sept. 30, the design engineer made what the report calls a final review of the bridge.

The report's conclusion: "Current data indicates bridge will not be repairable and can only be replaced."

That comes with a real qualification. The same sentence says final certification of the bridge's condition was still being completed, and analysis for full demolition won't start until it is. So this isn't a signed engineering verdict yet. But it's the county's own engineers pointing at replacement.

What the report doesn't include is a replacement date, a cost, or a funding plan.

On Arnold Road, the county says the bridge stays open. Its report describes "significant scour/erosion" of the embankments at the bridge's abutments, and a plan to rebuild them with compacted soil, slurry and rip-rap. The bridge "is to remain open during repair work as it is the only route for the detour," and weekly inspections continue. The county sent out a request for construction proposals Sept. 28, with bids due Oct. 12.

The report doesn't say whether anyone bid, who got the job, or when work starts.

The remark, and the apology

The Tribe's statement says it saw "public footage" of Hawk responding to about 75 community members who had come to raise concerns about the bridge closures. It doesn't quote him. KAWC reported that during a transportation commission meeting, Hawk described the exchange as "brutal" and said he felt he was being "scalped." Yuma Informed hasn't yet identified the exact meeting or reviewed the original recording.

At a later Board of Supervisors meeting, according to KAWC, Michael Jack of the Fort Yuma Quechan Indian Tribe told the board the point of the earlier meeting "was not to make him feel scalped; the point of the conversation was to get the Imperial County Board of Supervisors to back and support the reconstruction of the Picacho Road Bridge."

Hawk apologized at that meeting. KAWC quotes him this way: "I apologize for my comments, which were insensitive, but I've spent no fewer than ten trips to the tribal areas. I've met with different people there, met with the council three times, and made numerous calls to Jonathan, your tribal president. If an advisory council is something you guys would like to be a part of, then I'd be more than happy to work with you."

The Tribe's statement calls the remarks "egregious" and says they "rely on racial stereotypes about Native people." It closes: "We hope to see words matched by action."

Whether the apology Hawk has given is enough is a question for the Tribal Council and for the voters of District 5. You can read both sides' words and decide what you make of them.

What we still don't know

• Whether the county has responded to the Tribe's statement. We found no public response on the county's news page as of Oct. 22.
• When final engineering certification on Picacho will be done, and whether it confirms replacement.
• Why the county spent 2026 trying to repair Picacho after its Planning Commission approved the environmental findings for replacing it in November 2025.
• What a replacement would cost, how much money is secured, and when construction could start.
• Who, if anyone, bid on the Arnold Road repairs, and when that work begins.
• Whether any emergency-access plan exists for the case the Tribe is worried about, Arnold Road failing.
• When, exactly, the Tribe's 30 days are meant to run out.

That's a lot of open questions. Most of them are the same ones the Tribe asked. If a written timeline comes, it'll answer the majority of them in one document. We'll be watching for it.