When public engagement produces confusion or backlash, the failure is not civic participation — it is process design. Authority carries responsibility for clarity, especially while decisions are still forming.
Thank you, Dr. Sarah, for finding this statement and bringing it to our attention! I agree that confusion and backlash are the fault of poor civic communication. While Emery's intent was to lessen restrictions, his presentations have not made those intentions clear. Why did the public see these changes as gov't interference rather than more lenient?
@DeniseLapio — that’s exactly the issue. When changes are framed through new definitions and prohibitions instead of clear safety standards, they don’t read as leniency — they read as more control. Even if the intent is to loosen restrictions, the structure and language matter. Without plain explanations of what would be allowed and why, people understandably experience it as interference rather than flexibility.
Governance is evaluated by outcomes, not effort; but outcomes also depend on shared facts.
When public engagement produces confusion, the failure may be in process design... or, and hear me out, far more often in the information ecosystem shaping the public before they ever walk into the room. Process can always be improved, but misinformation can derail even the best‑designed process. This was never about poor civic communication.
@powdermonkey, I agree that shared facts matter — no process functions in a vacuum. But from a governance standpoint, that’s exactly why process design carries such a heavy burden.
Public institutions don’t get to assume a clean information environment. They have to anticipate noise, misinformation, and partial understanding — and design engagement, language, and records that withstand it. When confusion becomes widespread, the question isn’t whether misinformation exists (it always does), but whether the official process was resilient enough to counter it with clarity, timing, and plain explanation.
So yes, outcomes depend on shared facts — and creating the conditions for shared facts is part of the government’s job.
I think the communication is so truthful and broad in spectrum because of this blog. The commissioners do the legal minimum to keep the public in the loop. And I do mean minimum! Then call citizens names and indicate that we lack reading and comprehension skills.
Very nice! Only makes us feel the need to scrutinize a deeper layer and always have it recorded.
The commissioners did not answer yesterday's question about volunteer labor (like 4PA) becoming the backstop for bad policy. Here is today's email:
Dear Commissioners and Director Emery,
There are growing and increasingly frequent examples across county government where elected officials talk down to public participants, dismiss their concerns, or treat engagement as an inconvenience rather than a responsibility of public office.
Do all four of you recognize that this has become a pattern, and what specific steps will you take to change it?
Below is an example of how an individual commissioner can acknowledge systemic issues in the County Code, explain why public frustration keeps recurring, and outline a responsible path forward grounded in law, safety, and property rights.
Dear Constituent,
Thank you for raising this concern. I want to acknowledge the deeper issue it reveals.
The recurring frustration we are seeing is not just about tone or a single ordinance. It reflects a larger structural problem: years of layered amendments to the Clallam County Code without a comprehensive review of whether those provisions still serve their intended purpose. When regulations accumulate without periodic reassessment, public confusion and backlash are predictable outcomes — not public failures.
Washington law requires early and continuous public participation in comprehensive planning, not symbolic engagement after decisions have effectively hardened (Revised Code of Washington [RCW], § 36.70A.140). Guidance from the Municipal Research and Services Center makes clear that meaningful participation depends on clarity, proportionality, and transparency in how policies are framed and explained (Municipal Research and Services Center [MRSC], n.d.).
From a governance perspective, effort alone is not the standard. Public institutions are evaluated by outcomes — including whether policies are understandable, enforceable, and aligned with their stated goals (Government Accountability Office, 2015).
In my view, the core purpose of the County Code should be limited and clear:
1. Establish minimum, enforceable standards to protect people, neighboring properties, and the environment
2. Regulate demonstrable harm, not micromanage lawful property use
3. Preserve individual liberty and property rights outside of those guardrails
National and local planning guidance consistently recommends reviewing and modernizing outdated codes and using performance-based standards tied to safety, health, and environmental impact, rather than categorical prohibitions that freeze innovation and require continual patchwork fixes (American Planning Association, n.d.; International City/County Management Association, 2005).
As an individual commissioner, I am working toward the following approach:
1. Code review, not just amendments. Rather than continuing to stack ordinances on top of unresolved definitions, I support a deliberate review of the County Code in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan to identify what is required by state law, what is discretionary, and what may no longer be justified.
2. Clear roles and accountability. The Planning Commission’s role is advisory and public-facing; its responsibility is to help ensure planning language is clear, justified, and defensible before it becomes binding code. The Board of Commissioners is responsible for determining whether that work meets its obligations to the public.
3. Meaningful public participation. Public input should occur early enough to shape outcomes, supported by plain-language explanations and clear distinctions between state requirements and local policy choices — not after decisions have effectively hardened.
4. Measured enforcement. Where real harm exists, the code must provide enforceable mechanisms to correct it. Where no harm exists, regulation should be restrained. Enforcement should be proportional, transparent, and respectful of property rights.
As an individual commissioner, I will continue to ask whether the proposed code language:
1. Is required by state law or added locally
2. Addresses a real, evidence-based risk
3. Can be enforced fairly with minimal intrusion on property rights
Public participation is essential to identifying where the code no longer meets these standards. Engagement that reveals confusion or unintended consequences is not a problem to manage — it is feedback the system is obligated to address.
Sincerely,
Commissioner
Clallam County Board of Commissioners
References
American Planning Association. (n.d.). Reform local codes.
International City/County Management Association. (2005). Creating a regulatory blueprint for healthy community design: A local government guide to reforming zoning and land development codes [PDF].
Citation Note: All cited sources are publicly accessible, non-paywalled, and were verified for accuracy and link functionality to support independent public review.
What the RV ordinance would look like if the County used a better framework
Using the current RV ordinance draft as an example helps clarify what many residents are reacting to — and how this could be done better.
Right now, the draft ordinance starts by deciding what things are (RVs, park models, containers, mobile units) and then uses those definitions to determine what’s allowed or prohibited. That approach assumes the problem is the type of structure.
But if we step back and apply a clearer governance framework, the ordinance would start somewhere else entirely — with the actual harms the County is trying to prevent.
For example, instead of asking:
“Is this an RV or a dwelling?”
The ordinance would first ask:
1. Does this structure meet residential building and fire safety standards?
2. Is septic and wastewater capacity adequate?
3. Is there safe access and egress?
4. Is there environmental or public health risk?
5. Is there demonstrable harm to neighboring properties or shared infrastructure?
If the answer is no, the County already has authority to enforce and correct those issues.
If the answer is yes, then the structure’s origin (RV, container, park model, etc.) becomes largely irrelevant — because safety and environmental standards are what actually protect the public.
This is where the current draft runs into trouble. Even staff acknowledged that container homes and park models are allowed if they meet building code, yet the ordinance language still risks prohibiting them by definition. That contradiction is not a public misunderstanding — it’s a drafting problem.
Under a performance-based framework, the ordinance would:
1. Set clear minimum standards (health, safety, environmental protection)
2. Allow any structure to be used if it meets those standards
3. Trigger enforcement based on actual harm, not labels or appearance
4. Preserve future pathways as building codes evolve, instead of locking in permanent “no” lists
That approach doesn’t weaken regulation. It strengthens it — because it focuses enforcement where it matters and avoids micromanaging lawful property use where no harm exists.
This is why the RV ordinance debate matters beyond RVs. It shows what happens when the County keeps patching individual issues onto an old code structure instead of reviewing the system as a whole.
Call to action for readers:
If Clallam County wants fewer conflicts, clearer rules, and better outcomes, residents should ask the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Commission to apply this same framework — starting with real harm, performance standards, and clarity — to the entire County Code and the Comprehensive Plan, not just one ordinance at a time.
I appreciate that, @DeniseLapio. My hope is simply that voices from the community are welcomed early and meaningfully, and that the process is clear enough that people don’t need to fight to be understood.
Thank you, @SallyKincaid — I really appreciate that. My hope is to keep the conversation centered on practical fixes and better structure, so public energy goes toward outcomes that actually improve how the rules work for everyone.
IT’S A DOG-EAT-DOG COUNTY marked by ruthless self-interests. Are the Commissioners singing "Who, Who, Who Let the Dogs Out"?
Our Dogmatic Commissioners have the tendency to lay down principles as undeniably true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others.
The CCWATCHDOGERS want the principals of transparency and truth. It is happening, the Underdogs have birthed litters of Puppy Dogs learning to be --SNOOP DOGS—BULL DOGS—TRACKER DOGS -- SEEING EYE DOGS (We have all had our rabies shots, we aren’t rabid, but we are mad).
It is amazing to be part of and follow the evolution of CCWD. Thank you Dr Sarah, Jeff, Jake, Clallamity Jen, Strait Shooter and all the others in the pack. There is some real tail wagging going on now ; )
Thank you Jeff, Jake, Denise, Dr Sarah, and many others. If it wasn’t for Jeff starting CC Watchdog, we would have never know all of this. We aren’t Rapid, we have all now become engaged because of the secrecy. WE ARE THE TAXPAYERS PAYING YOUR SALARY!! We aren’t going to take it anymore, you have unleashed the hounds!
@ChrisClark — CC Watchdog has created a space where people can see what’s happening and engage together, and that shared visibility is exactly how accountability starts. Like @JeffTozzer always says, "this isn't a me thing, it's a WE thing."
They had everything all wrapped in a Nextdoor bow, and then Jeff came along and created a real community forum....instead of a communist and tribal driven one.
I don't think they are scared. I think they are embarrassed by the exposure of their flubber and magic bean policy positions. The legislature lets me keep my background screen and its fun and informative. The commissioners were so embarrassed one of their wives had to chase me down the hall.
Elected libtarded hypocrites do not like it when they get caught doing-saying bad things that violate their sworn oaths,so they turn on the people that have caught them.
John, you saw the need many years ago and was our forefather of watch doggers. You've been digging in Clallam County government's backyard (I'd like to say before I was born ; ) )
and many of your bones of contention are buried there!
I was lucky to grow up there with tribal members, a barbershop full of old Germans, tough cops like Bennie Piper and Johnnie Sweat and a dickhead Prosecutor named Bruneu. I had a clear bright line even a young European colonizer could see for a mile.
@BillB — elections are one of the legitimate accountability mechanisms available to the public, and it’s reasonable for people to factor conduct and judgment into their vote.
That said, if we want different outcomes, it also means being thoughtful about what we’re asking future candidates to be prepared to do. Running for office shouldn’t just be about opposition — it should be about understanding the County Code, the Comprehensive Plan, and the responsibility to govern with clarity, restraint, and respect for public participation.
If people are serious about change, that includes encouraging qualified candidates who are willing to do the hard, unglamorous work: reading the code, understanding state requirements, distinguishing safety standards from micromanagement, and engaging the public early enough to matter.
His office approved spending 187 million on fish culverts at 7-12 percent gardes that have zero chance of spawning and will have zero impact on salmon numbers. But hey..they got those aging bridges replaced....
I'd take it but I want Cheryl Bauman's job. The Jimmycomelately science means so much to everybody not just the tribes. The fisherman need it. The cities need it. The salmon need it. Our roads need it. Its the core part of planning in this region and the job has been abused for 14 years. The abuse started before Bruce was elected.
John — can you clarify which position you’re referring to when you say you want Cheryl Bauman’s job?
Are you talking about the county’s senior science-and-planning role? I’d be interested in what concrete changes you’d make in how technical science is developed, documented, and brought forward for public decision-making if you had that role?
After spending 190 million on worthless fish culverts to steep grades and ignoring the 3 percent grades, nobody employed by Clallam County deserves to be appointed to run NOPLE. Only someone committed to the Jimmycomelately model should be considered not someone earning big dough to get zero results.
The general public of Clallam County needs to be made fully aware of the underhanded shenanigans, insults, and abusive way that our public servants treat us. Words matter~! What "we" are witnessing is the tip of the iceberg in the way that these failed so-called "leaders" REALLY treat us, and we can definitely see that they have agendas that are completely contrary to the will of the majority of good folks in our community. Thanks to all of those who have been pushing back against these small-time tyrants and bullies, because God only knows what they would do if they had their way. Anyone can read the proposed land use changes in regulations that the county clown show intended, so Emery is clearly a liar and trying to manipulate the good words and intentions of the public that very clearly knew exactly what those words in the proposal meant~! These clowns treat the general public as ignorant fools and when they are discovered as the underhanded rats that they are, they resort to insults and anger because they didn't get their way~! HA! It is past time to remove these cowards and thieves who would rob us of our property, freedoms, and rights if they could~!
@MichaelHeath— I hear how frustrated you are, and I agree with you on one important thing: how public officials speak to the community matters. When people feel dismissed or talked down to, trust erodes quickly.
My focus is on making sure concerns like this lead to clearer language, better process, and accountability that actually improve outcomes. Keeping the conversation specific and grounded helps ensure the public is heard and that change sticks.
I certainly do support all of your good efforts, and everyone has their own path to follow! I also understand that my words could be construed as simply coming from a point of "frustration", which would in a small way be true, however I am VERY different than the vast majority of folks who are struggling to make sense out of what is really going on these days. I come from a "need-to-know" family where both of my parents were in professional positions at very high levels involving US Military Intelligence & government service and the highest level of the banking field, so you could say that I was shaken awake at a young age that few could possibly understand. By the time I was 9 years old I was already an American Constitutionalist, and I had by then quietly dedicated my life to professionally researching what was really going on in the government, who was really pulling the strings, and what the real agenda was. Long story short, a couple of University degrees after studying law since I was 9 years old, among a great many other things, and I was well on my way to infiltrating and analyzing an enormous number of those "closed door meetings" that baffle and confuse average folks. Ha! So now, after over 50 years of intensely brutal hard work and experiences that most would struggle to even comprehend, I am an accomplished analyst with a powerful background in History, Economics, and Law. For example, I have been a professional precious metals analyst for about 45 years now, so after many decades of warning folks to consider buying Gold and Silver, I trust that you have recently seen a small example of my abilities. This is just the beginning there ;-) I have also enjoyed every major category of professional real estate except working in title, escrow, and surveying. When folks ask what I am capable of analyzing, I always smile and say, "Just name it~!" Ha Ha Ha! So, yes, there is some value in attempting to work with the nefarious Individuals in government management, because those efforts have & do lay the groundwork for potential criminal prosecutions in the future, however true bad faith has the deepest of roots and we are very clearly NOT dealing with unintentional "miscommunications". "We" (American Patriots) have been working diligently on a FAR deeper level because the roots and scope of our REAL problems are well beyond what the vast majority of people ever dreamed. That said, what is really happening is that the original American Republic was unlawfully betrayed in 1871 (See; "The Act of 1871") when the federal government after the civil war was broke and devised a criminal plot (coup) with the International Banksters (The Illuminati) to incorporate "The Corporate US Government" to overtake control of the original American Republic and to transition America from a common law dynamic into a Maritime Law (Law of the sea, Admiralty Law) matrix. This is really why President Trump and "the white hats" have been so ruthlessly attacked since even before his first term started in 2016, because "The Swamp" is actually the oldest worldwide criminal cabal and they know that there has been a powerful force in opposition to their very old evil draconian control of America. I completely understand that this may all be new to you, as it is/will be for most, however I can easily prove every word if given enough time. That will not be necessary however, because "we" (the American Patriots) are actually winning this oldest of wars, as is actually evidenced by the recent historic Gold & Silver prices, so the truth is already on its way to the general public. A MASSIVE shift is already underway back to the original American Republic (common law matrix). This will also result in a new global Quantum Starlink based worldwide financial system with 100% asset backed currencies in the 209 countries that have already (quietly) signed the agreements. The evidence of all of this is literally everywhere for those who know what to look for~! Stay tuned ;-) Keep up the great work because as I have said, everyone is playing their role at this time in history, and it sure looks like the future of America, and in fact the world, will eventually be in a FAR superior matrix in the not-too-distant future. As for these local government employees, they will in time find that the environment has turned to be quite inhospitable for those who have violated their oaths to The American Constitution, not to mention the public trust, because they will also be ensnared by the greatest criminal sting operation that the world has ever experienced ;-) This is in fact the worst time EVER to be violating the public trust as public servants~! Have a great evening and I welcome you to ask any questions that you may have as things progress. As I am working with "others" I may not be able to discuss some matters, but I will do my best...
Yes, you are absolutely 100% correct that "public trust" is essential for Americans and America itself~! I have seen that "public trust" being eroded all my life, so today it really has become non-existent in the minds of most Americans. This deeply bothered me for many decades, however as an old student of History I understand that life (society) operates in cycles, so with any luck and hard work I am optimistic that "we" can rebuild a functional level of trust (but only when that trust is actually earned by those in government). Thankfully, there really are some who are in currently in government who are already working on rebuilding that trust... We here were on the front lines of the COVID assault upon humanity, so that completely fractured the trust in government and the medical industry for a tremendous number of Americans, many of whom will understandably NEVER trust the government or the medical community again. We are also fully engaged in the unfolding process of bringing forward the "new" medical system that will in fact be FAR superior and patient well-being first designed... That said, I believe that when earned & proven there will be a functional level of limited trust that can & will be regained by most Americans. Blind trust is suicidal and got us into this terrible mess as a country, however, to have a functional and hopefully safe & prosperous country (and world) we can all work upon achieving that elusive limited trust. We here are always "engaged" in this process because that is the sole function and purpose of American Constitutionalists, regardless of the challenge, threats or risks. You could say that is really why "we" are here right now at this point of history ;-) The pay sucks, we can be killed at any time, and it is an entirely thankless job, but it is what it is~! Ha~! Have a great day and enjoy this historic process that will continue to unfold~!
Thank you, Dr. Sara! I agree the public needs to be there and in their face all the time, yes, make them feel uncomfortable for the way they treat the community. They should be shamed. Only then will we see a change and we need to vote these clowns out of office.
@EvritaRomero — public engagement matters, and staying present is important; my hope is that it leads to clearer rules, better process, and accountability that actually improves outcomes.
These Ass hats seem to think we have no reason to be engaged and passionate about the properties we have worked so hard to attain and pay crazy taxes on. We want equality in this county so we can start to relax a bit. Absolutely not hat we've witnessed since Mark Ozias has been in office and spreading his ways amongst the other commissioners as the golden path to success. It has to change and we can't stop until we have true representation!
@GlenParker — I hear the frustration you’re naming, especially around property rights and the sense that people are being told their concerns shouldn’t matter.
For me, the key issue underneath all of this isn’t personalities — it’s process. When people who have invested their lives, savings, and labor into their properties feel blindsided by policy language, that’s a sign the system isn’t working as it should.
What I’m trying to push for here is something more durable than trading blame: a County Code that is clear, limited to real health and safety risks, and written so people understand the consequences before they show up angry at a hearing. If we get the structure right, the conflict level drops on its own — regardless of who’s in office.
Passion is understandable. The challenge now is turning it into a framework that actually protects property rights and produces better outcomes long-term.
Well, you have made it perfectly clear that all the wisdom and outlines for running a decent society exist... and have existed for millennia...we just need to clear the slate and install the template that works...overhauling this corrupted system piece by piece will never work and it will never work with the entitled arrogant, hubristic managers we currently have in power. Even if they 'change their tune', they can never be trusted with public power or the ability to lobby public power.
They have to go! Thank you for your intelligent, diligent and respectful contributions.
I'll borrow some of your faith while mine is 'less than'!😎
@RobertJames — I appreciate the thoughtful words, and I understand the level of frustration you’re naming.
Where I land a bit differently is this: durable change doesn’t come from trusting different people, it comes from building systems that don’t require trust to function. Clear laws, limited authority, transparent records, early public participation, and enforceable standards are what keep power in check — regardless of who occupies the seat.
History shows us that wisdom does endure, but it has to be translated into structure, not just intention. That’s why I focus on repairing the framework — the code, the process, the guardrails — so no one has to rely on personalities or promises.
That work is slower than a reset, but it’s the only kind that lasts.
How would you advise directing efforts to achieve that end? It feels like the charter review (where some of that kind of change is possible) became about personal pet projects. And the DCD is an iron wall of high barriers both to change and to compliance.
For example, current CCC for subdivision requires feasibility for running phone lines to each plot - something that isn't even available. When I've spoken to the folks behind the desk about subdivision requirements I've gotten 2 different answers, both of which overlap code in some places and miss portions in other. Just an example but a frustrating reality I know is not singular.
How do we actually clean up the code? And get continuity between what is required by the county vs. state. Vs. intl building code? And how do we launch such an effort without giving them more opportunity for further restrictions?
Something I've been pressing for is pre-approved/engineered home designs. That way, as a prospective builder, I can have a level of guarantee from the county so long as I follow the laid out steps. Instead of starting and hoping they stick with what any one person said on any given day (unlikely, given personal experience and anecdotes from just about everyone I know who has developed their land here).
It wouldn't solve the greater issue of the snarl that is CCC But at least it would create a path outside of it?
Open to suggestions and looking forward to dialogue, you sound very well Informed in this area - thanks for keeping an eye on these developments.
@ConcerningCitizens, This is a very real description of the problem, and you’re not wrong about any of it.
If I had to boil it down, the path forward isn’t a single reform—it’s a sequenced approach that separates clean-up from policy expansion, so the effort doesn’t become an excuse for more restrictions.
Here’s what that looks like in practice:
1. Start with a code audit, not new policy.
The first step isn’t rewriting rules—it’s inventorying them. That means identifying where the Clallam County Code exceeds state law, duplicates state or federal requirements, or references obsolete infrastructure (your phone-line example is a classic red flag). This can be done as a technical audit with clear scope: alignment and clarity only, no new restrictions added.
2. Create a clear hierarchy of authority.
One reason you’re getting different answers at the counter is that the code doesn’t clearly distinguish:
2.1. what’s required by state law (RCW),
2.2. what comes from the International Building Code,
2.3. and what is purely local discretion.
That hierarchy should be explicit in the code itself and in staff guidance, so compliance doesn’t depend on which person you talk to on which day.
3. Lock in a “no net new restrictions” rule for the cleanup phase.
This is critical to your concern about giving cover for more regulation. A formal resolution or scope statement should say plainly: this phase is about simplification, consistency, and alignment—not expanding authority or adding requirements.
4. Use safe pilot projects to prove reform can work.
Your idea about pre-approved or engineered home designs is a strong example of this. It doesn’t solve everything, but it creates:
4.1. predictability for builders,
4.2. consistency for staff,
4.3. and a compliance pathway that doesn’t rely on informal assurances.
Pilots like this let the county test improvement without reopening the entire code at once.
5. Separate structural reform from politics.
You’re right that the Charter Review drifted into pet projects. That’s why code cleanup works better as a technical governance task, with clear guardrails and public checkpoints, rather than a high-stakes political rewrite.
None of this requires trusting DCD or assuming good faith. It requires structure—clear scope, written standards, and a public record that makes it obvious when the county is enforcing state law versus local choices.
That’s how you clean up the code without making it tighter: clarity first, restraint built in, and pilots that create usable paths even before the larger snarl is fully untangled.
Your frustration is justified—and the fact that you’re asking how instead of just why is exactly the kind of engagement this process actually needs.
"None of this requires trusting DCD or assuming good faith. It requires structure." - This right here!!!
Thank you for taking the time to respond. I love your thoughtfulness on this issue. Can we expect a Director Sarah on the ticket when Emery's time is up (I believe this fall? Or is it next?)?
I appreciate the vote of confidence, but no — that’s not my lane. I’m not a community development expert, just a constituent willing to read the code, ask hard questions, and help draft clearer policy language.
If someone in this community has land-use or development expertise and wants to step up, that’s exactly who we should encourage. This work needs people who know the technical side and are willing to engage the public transparently.
I appreciate that. Well either way I'm glad that you have the skills to translate these issues for those of us who are wanting to engage but not knowing how to navigate focus.
I've been listening to the planning commission session recording today and it definitely seems like that is one of the sausage factories, so to speak. It has me very concerned about the GMA and rezoning being done this year as well. I'll be trying to keep a finger on that development, thank you for bringing it to our attention!
Totalitarianism is often distinguished from dictatorship, despotism, or tyranny by its supplanting of all political institutions with new ones and its sweeping away of all legal, social, and political traditions. The totalitarian state pursues some special goal, such as industrialization or conquest, to the exclusion of all others. All resources are directed toward its attainment, regardless of the cost. Whatever might further the goal is supported; whatever might foil the goal is rejected. This obsession spawns an ideology that explains everything in terms of the goal, rationalizing all obstacles that may arise and all forces that may contend with the state. The resulting popular support permits the state the widest latitude of action of any form of government. Any dissent is branded evil, and internal political differences are not permitted. Because pursuit of the goal is the only ideological foundation for the totalitarian state, achievement of the goal can never be acknowledged.
Thank you Dr. Sarah and Jeff for attending and reviewing all these meetings! You are truly there to protect us when we think its safe. Animals and human beings will fiercely protect their habitats and progeny. Obviously, property owners sensed dangerous predators, namely gov't bureaucrats, threatening their habitats, and showed up en masse to fight against that threat. Too many times have our elected leaders lied to us, tricked us, and abused us to the point that we can never trust anything they say. Words are no longer proof of good intentions. We need actions.
Thank you, Kenneth Reandeau, for mentioning early public engagement as being necessary for efficient and expedient outcomes for the code changes on ADU and RV. Discussions that affect property rights and private land use should be open, with the public being the driving force in final decisions, not an elected that deems the public to be rabid, as mongrel dogs. It appears the current Community Development Director (CDC) believes that public input is “chaos” created by misinformation. Is it perhaps that lack of transparency from the CDC is mainly responsible for the “chaos”? Calling the public names and intimating that we are somehow “puppets” being misinformed by a social forum is rather telling of the real intent of the organization’s adherence to public interest. Transparent like a two-way mirror?
Again, I insist: We are the BOSSES, they are the BOSS-EES. we employ the officials and they need to respect ALL of us as employers, not their serfs who live on their territory. Keep doing what you do best, inform, complain, educate, and hold accountable.
In some ways Emery is right - there were comments from people who maybe had not read the ordinance fully, or maybe had misunderstood the changes being proposed, or didn't know how restrictive current code already is. Who instead were concerned by what was pitched by all sides as a new "RV ordinance". I know when I hear those words I assume, further restrictions, more crackdown, more government involvement, higher costs...none of which is incorrect or misplaced.
What Mr. Emery doesn't seem willing or able to hear were the comments from people who DID read the ordinance, who had nuanced concerns, who had actual experience navigating park model/tiny home/RV placement under the current code. Instead of addressing those concerns he's focusing on the few people who maybe were uninformed about the proposed changes. And instead of meeting those people with compassion, (considering current code AND these new changes would in fact effect their literal homes and/or livelihoods) he labels and name calls. Instead of addressing the legitimate concerns brought up by the public, those get swept under the rug.
This is a perfect example of the disconnect between the people legislating and the people effected by that legislation.
Guess I'll be adding the planning commission meetings to my rotation 🤸
What would we do without you Jeff to keep the public informed and Dr. Sarah at your side to be our PE (private eye)? Thank you both so much. Imagine thinking we hired a person to watch out for us, the citizens, the taxpayers, only to know that is not the case at all.
The masters don’t have to wonder any longer why it is THEM against US, Mr. DCD made it perfectly clear so the slaves could see and hear. I’m so ashamed to have an elected official stoop so low to call those who probably elected him “rabid” and make other insulting statements about our community tax payers who pay, obviously too much, for his livelyhood.
Guilty as charged — my husband and I voted for Bruce Emery in good faith. If asking questions as new information comes to light makes us “rabid,” then that’s really a credit to platforms like CC Watchdog and Jeff Tozzer for creating a space where the public record is visible, and people can engage thoughtfully.
Here's a hard concept for people to understand in this nationally charged political environment.
Just because I read the CCWD and frequently comment doesn't mean that I agree with everything written here whether in the articles, or comments.
I've been reading comments for a while now. My opinion is that the true cause most want is an open and accountable government that attempts to balance representation of everyone.
I likely agree more with some of the rules Emery is pushing than others here do, based on comments. But balance for me is understanding that I won't always get it my way. I'm going to take my own medicine and understand that those voices need to be infused into policy.
As such ...
When enough individuals, whether they read the CCWD, FB, SG, PDN, or learn of information from a Commissioner, decide to show up at a meeting to voice their disapproval in incredible unison then Mr. Emery, do yourself a favor, and understand what the emotions are about and maybe the next time you speak and are frustrated you'll frame your reactions differently. Especially in light of the emotional issue that housing is because it's a basic human need.
@MK — this is an important comment, and I appreciate you naming this.
I agree with you that the core issue isn’t whether everyone agrees with every rule. In a functioning system, disagreement is expected. What keeps breaking down here is how those disagreements are handled and when they surface.
When people show up late, emotional, and in large numbers, that’s often treated as a behavioral problem. From a governance perspective, it’s more accurately a process signal — that the language, structure, or assumptions embedded in the code didn’t become clear until real impacts were visible.
That’s why I keep coming back to the County Code itself. If the rules are layered, unclear, or doing policy work through definitions and prohibitions instead of safety standards, we shouldn’t be surprised when people react strongly once the consequences hit home.
This isn’t about winning every argument or rejecting all regulation. It’s about:
1. Starting with real harm and risk
2. Writing rules people can understand before they’re enforced
3. Letting performance and safety standards do the work instead of labels
4. Creating space for disagreement before decisions harden
If we fix the structure, the temperature drops on its own.
If we don’t, we’ll keep replaying this cycle no matter who’s in the room.
Everybody should try sleeping in a blanket outside on a sidewalk in the rain when its 30deg. Then decide in your meetings if RVs etc., should be disallowed as habitat. Go ahead see if it changes your perspective. And see if you can learn from experience. Rules can be changed. Its just pen and paper.
Good Governance Proverb
Governance is evaluated by outcomes, not effort.
When public engagement produces confusion or backlash, the failure is not civic participation — it is process design. Authority carries responsibility for clarity, especially while decisions are still forming.
Thank you, Dr. Sarah, for finding this statement and bringing it to our attention! I agree that confusion and backlash are the fault of poor civic communication. While Emery's intent was to lessen restrictions, his presentations have not made those intentions clear. Why did the public see these changes as gov't interference rather than more lenient?
@DeniseLapio — that’s exactly the issue. When changes are framed through new definitions and prohibitions instead of clear safety standards, they don’t read as leniency — they read as more control. Even if the intent is to loosen restrictions, the structure and language matter. Without plain explanations of what would be allowed and why, people understandably experience it as interference rather than flexibility.
'They' don't like dissent...despots and tyrants don't like dissent! Or any feedback that varies from their narratives/agendas!
Despots and tyrants occupy or seize positions of power and ultimately destroy the societies they try to control.
Emery should be disturbed...the writing is on the wall.😎
'Round and 'round we go!
Governance is evaluated by outcomes, not effort; but outcomes also depend on shared facts.
When public engagement produces confusion, the failure may be in process design... or, and hear me out, far more often in the information ecosystem shaping the public before they ever walk into the room. Process can always be improved, but misinformation can derail even the best‑designed process. This was never about poor civic communication.
@powdermonkey, I agree that shared facts matter — no process functions in a vacuum. But from a governance standpoint, that’s exactly why process design carries such a heavy burden.
Public institutions don’t get to assume a clean information environment. They have to anticipate noise, misinformation, and partial understanding — and design engagement, language, and records that withstand it. When confusion becomes widespread, the question isn’t whether misinformation exists (it always does), but whether the official process was resilient enough to counter it with clarity, timing, and plain explanation.
So yes, outcomes depend on shared facts — and creating the conditions for shared facts is part of the government’s job.
@Jennifer, sorry I fed the monkey ;-)
I think the communication is so truthful and broad in spectrum because of this blog. The commissioners do the legal minimum to keep the public in the loop. And I do mean minimum! Then call citizens names and indicate that we lack reading and comprehension skills.
Very nice! Only makes us feel the need to scrutinize a deeper layer and always have it recorded.
WORDS MATTER
I love that, it says it all in two words.😬
@PW.
I was understanding your point until this, "This was never about poor civic communication."
What does that mean?
The commissioners did not answer yesterday's question about volunteer labor (like 4PA) becoming the backstop for bad policy. Here is today's email:
Dear Commissioners and Director Emery,
There are growing and increasingly frequent examples across county government where elected officials talk down to public participants, dismiss their concerns, or treat engagement as an inconvenience rather than a responsibility of public office.
Do all four of you recognize that this has become a pattern, and what specific steps will you take to change it?
All three commissioners can be reached by emailing the Clerk of the Board at loni.gores@clallamcountywa.gov. DCD Director Bruce Emery can be reached at Bruce.Emery@clallamcountywa.gov.
Below is an example of how an individual commissioner can acknowledge systemic issues in the County Code, explain why public frustration keeps recurring, and outline a responsible path forward grounded in law, safety, and property rights.
Dear Constituent,
Thank you for raising this concern. I want to acknowledge the deeper issue it reveals.
The recurring frustration we are seeing is not just about tone or a single ordinance. It reflects a larger structural problem: years of layered amendments to the Clallam County Code without a comprehensive review of whether those provisions still serve their intended purpose. When regulations accumulate without periodic reassessment, public confusion and backlash are predictable outcomes — not public failures.
Washington law requires early and continuous public participation in comprehensive planning, not symbolic engagement after decisions have effectively hardened (Revised Code of Washington [RCW], § 36.70A.140). Guidance from the Municipal Research and Services Center makes clear that meaningful participation depends on clarity, proportionality, and transparency in how policies are framed and explained (Municipal Research and Services Center [MRSC], n.d.).
From a governance perspective, effort alone is not the standard. Public institutions are evaluated by outcomes — including whether policies are understandable, enforceable, and aligned with their stated goals (Government Accountability Office, 2015).
In my view, the core purpose of the County Code should be limited and clear:
1. Establish minimum, enforceable standards to protect people, neighboring properties, and the environment
2. Regulate demonstrable harm, not micromanage lawful property use
3. Preserve individual liberty and property rights outside of those guardrails
National and local planning guidance consistently recommends reviewing and modernizing outdated codes and using performance-based standards tied to safety, health, and environmental impact, rather than categorical prohibitions that freeze innovation and require continual patchwork fixes (American Planning Association, n.d.; International City/County Management Association, 2005).
As an individual commissioner, I am working toward the following approach:
1. Code review, not just amendments. Rather than continuing to stack ordinances on top of unresolved definitions, I support a deliberate review of the County Code in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan to identify what is required by state law, what is discretionary, and what may no longer be justified.
2. Clear roles and accountability. The Planning Commission’s role is advisory and public-facing; its responsibility is to help ensure planning language is clear, justified, and defensible before it becomes binding code. The Board of Commissioners is responsible for determining whether that work meets its obligations to the public.
3. Meaningful public participation. Public input should occur early enough to shape outcomes, supported by plain-language explanations and clear distinctions between state requirements and local policy choices — not after decisions have effectively hardened.
4. Measured enforcement. Where real harm exists, the code must provide enforceable mechanisms to correct it. Where no harm exists, regulation should be restrained. Enforcement should be proportional, transparent, and respectful of property rights.
As an individual commissioner, I will continue to ask whether the proposed code language:
1. Is required by state law or added locally
2. Addresses a real, evidence-based risk
3. Can be enforced fairly with minimal intrusion on property rights
Public participation is essential to identifying where the code no longer meets these standards. Engagement that reveals confusion or unintended consequences is not a problem to manage — it is feedback the system is obligated to address.
Sincerely,
Commissioner
Clallam County Board of Commissioners
References
American Planning Association. (n.d.). Reform local codes.
https://www.planning.org/home/action/codes/
Government Accountability Office. (2015). Standards for internal control in the federal government (GAO-14-704G).
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-14-704g
International City/County Management Association. (2005). Creating a regulatory blueprint for healthy community design: A local government guide to reforming zoning and land development codes [PDF].
https://icma.org/sites/default/files/2810_.pdf
Municipal Research and Services Center. (n.d.). Growth Management Act: Contents and requirements.
https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/planning/gma/growth-management-act-contents
Revised Code of Washington § 36.70A.140. Growth Management Act—Public participation.
https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.70A.140
Citation Note: All cited sources are publicly accessible, non-paywalled, and were verified for accuracy and link functionality to support independent public review.
What the RV ordinance would look like if the County used a better framework
Using the current RV ordinance draft as an example helps clarify what many residents are reacting to — and how this could be done better.
Right now, the draft ordinance starts by deciding what things are (RVs, park models, containers, mobile units) and then uses those definitions to determine what’s allowed or prohibited. That approach assumes the problem is the type of structure.
But if we step back and apply a clearer governance framework, the ordinance would start somewhere else entirely — with the actual harms the County is trying to prevent.
For example, instead of asking:
“Is this an RV or a dwelling?”
The ordinance would first ask:
1. Does this structure meet residential building and fire safety standards?
2. Is septic and wastewater capacity adequate?
3. Is there safe access and egress?
4. Is there environmental or public health risk?
5. Is there demonstrable harm to neighboring properties or shared infrastructure?
If the answer is no, the County already has authority to enforce and correct those issues.
If the answer is yes, then the structure’s origin (RV, container, park model, etc.) becomes largely irrelevant — because safety and environmental standards are what actually protect the public.
This is where the current draft runs into trouble. Even staff acknowledged that container homes and park models are allowed if they meet building code, yet the ordinance language still risks prohibiting them by definition. That contradiction is not a public misunderstanding — it’s a drafting problem.
Under a performance-based framework, the ordinance would:
1. Set clear minimum standards (health, safety, environmental protection)
2. Allow any structure to be used if it meets those standards
3. Trigger enforcement based on actual harm, not labels or appearance
4. Preserve future pathways as building codes evolve, instead of locking in permanent “no” lists
That approach doesn’t weaken regulation. It strengthens it — because it focuses enforcement where it matters and avoids micromanaging lawful property use where no harm exists.
This is why the RV ordinance debate matters beyond RVs. It shows what happens when the County keeps patching individual issues onto an old code structure instead of reviewing the system as a whole.
Call to action for readers:
If Clallam County wants fewer conflicts, clearer rules, and better outcomes, residents should ask the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Commission to apply this same framework — starting with real harm, performance standards, and clarity — to the entire County Code and the Comprehensive Plan, not just one ordinance at a time.
This isn’t about deregulation.
It’s about writing rules that actually work.
The DCD needs to have you at their table!
I appreciate that, @DeniseLapio. My hope is simply that voices from the community are welcomed early and meaningfully, and that the process is clear enough that people don’t need to fight to be understood.
Thank you for posting solutions. It is refreshing to see more than just complaining.
Thank you, @SallyKincaid — I really appreciate that. My hope is to keep the conversation centered on practical fixes and better structure, so public energy goes toward outcomes that actually improve how the rules work for everyone.
😎
Sounds like some one or some bodies are not getting their way ?
What is their way ? Why wouldn’t they want the peoples way ? Why is my mouth foaming ?
Randy, I really laughed at "Why is my mouth foaming?" In fact I laughed just typing it. Loved it!
Randy, I'm still laughing everytime I think of your comment, it hit my funnybone!
IT’S A DOG-EAT-DOG COUNTY marked by ruthless self-interests. Are the Commissioners singing "Who, Who, Who Let the Dogs Out"?
Our Dogmatic Commissioners have the tendency to lay down principles as undeniably true, without consideration of evidence or the opinions of others.
The CCWATCHDOGERS want the principals of transparency and truth. It is happening, the Underdogs have birthed litters of Puppy Dogs learning to be --SNOOP DOGS—BULL DOGS—TRACKER DOGS -- SEEING EYE DOGS (We have all had our rabies shots, we aren’t rabid, but we are mad).
It is amazing to be part of and follow the evolution of CCWD. Thank you Dr Sarah, Jeff, Jake, Clallamity Jen, Strait Shooter and all the others in the pack. There is some real tail wagging going on now ; )
You're doggone welcome, Jennfer :)
Hot diggity, dog ziggity boom, what'cha do to me!
Me too. Lets do this right! And seal it up.
Arf, Arf Jean ; )
Jennifer i think you articulated it perfectly.
And thanks to all. It's super refreshing. I can't believe how in the dark we have been kept.
Thank you Jeff, Jake, Denise, Dr Sarah, and many others. If it wasn’t for Jeff starting CC Watchdog, we would have never know all of this. We aren’t Rapid, we have all now become engaged because of the secrecy. WE ARE THE TAXPAYERS PAYING YOUR SALARY!! We aren’t going to take it anymore, you have unleashed the hounds!
@ChrisClark — CC Watchdog has created a space where people can see what’s happening and engage together, and that shared visibility is exactly how accountability starts. Like @JeffTozzer always says, "this isn't a me thing, it's a WE thing."
They had everything all wrapped in a Nextdoor bow, and then Jeff came along and created a real community forum....instead of a communist and tribal driven one.
Exactly John, and you’re also such a big help. Very intelligent, you scare the commissioners 🤣 in my opinion. Keep up the good work
I don't think they are scared. I think they are embarrassed by the exposure of their flubber and magic bean policy positions. The legislature lets me keep my background screen and its fun and informative. The commissioners were so embarrassed one of their wives had to chase me down the hall.
Elected libtarded hypocrites do not like it when they get caught doing-saying bad things that violate their sworn oaths,so they turn on the people that have caught them.
We're afraid for good reason...now it's their turn!😎
John, you saw the need many years ago and was our forefather of watch doggers. You've been digging in Clallam County government's backyard (I'd like to say before I was born ; ) )
and many of your bones of contention are buried there!
I was lucky to grow up there with tribal members, a barbershop full of old Germans, tough cops like Bennie Piper and Johnnie Sweat and a dickhead Prosecutor named Bruneu. I had a clear bright line even a young European colonizer could see for a mile.
Do you remember when johnnie sweat got his el camino blown up in the parking lot.
I did not. That's funny.
Ah hah, another person with personal history of the area. Love it!
We BOSS, they BOSS-EES. YUP
The Hounds of the Baskervilles!!!!
Bruce Emery's comments at the referenced meeting were arrogant and politically STUPID.
Mr. Emery, don't count on my vote in November.
@BillB — elections are one of the legitimate accountability mechanisms available to the public, and it’s reasonable for people to factor conduct and judgment into their vote.
That said, if we want different outcomes, it also means being thoughtful about what we’re asking future candidates to be prepared to do. Running for office shouldn’t just be about opposition — it should be about understanding the County Code, the Comprehensive Plan, and the responsibility to govern with clarity, restraint, and respect for public participation.
If people are serious about change, that includes encouraging qualified candidates who are willing to do the hard, unglamorous work: reading the code, understanding state requirements, distinguishing safety standards from micromanagement, and engaging the public early enough to matter.
That’s how durable change actually happens.
His office approved spending 187 million on fish culverts at 7-12 percent gardes that have zero chance of spawning and will have zero impact on salmon numbers. But hey..they got those aging bridges replaced....
@JohnWorthington for DCD Director 2027!
I'd take it but I want Cheryl Bauman's job. The Jimmycomelately science means so much to everybody not just the tribes. The fisherman need it. The cities need it. The salmon need it. Our roads need it. Its the core part of planning in this region and the job has been abused for 14 years. The abuse started before Bruce was elected.
John — can you clarify which position you’re referring to when you say you want Cheryl Bauman’s job?
Are you talking about the county’s senior science-and-planning role? I’d be interested in what concrete changes you’d make in how technical science is developed, documented, and brought forward for public decision-making if you had that role?
NOPLE LEAD ENTITY. Hired by the Commissioners. The dudes ignoring my raised hand for two public forums in a row.
Bring on the EQ.
Hello,
After spending 190 million on worthless fish culverts to steep grades and ignoring the 3 percent grades, nobody employed by Clallam County deserves to be appointed to run NOPLE. Only someone committed to the Jimmycomelately model should be considered not someone earning big dough to get zero results.
Thanks
JW
Thank you Jeff Tozzer and Dr. Sarah~!
The general public of Clallam County needs to be made fully aware of the underhanded shenanigans, insults, and abusive way that our public servants treat us. Words matter~! What "we" are witnessing is the tip of the iceberg in the way that these failed so-called "leaders" REALLY treat us, and we can definitely see that they have agendas that are completely contrary to the will of the majority of good folks in our community. Thanks to all of those who have been pushing back against these small-time tyrants and bullies, because God only knows what they would do if they had their way. Anyone can read the proposed land use changes in regulations that the county clown show intended, so Emery is clearly a liar and trying to manipulate the good words and intentions of the public that very clearly knew exactly what those words in the proposal meant~! These clowns treat the general public as ignorant fools and when they are discovered as the underhanded rats that they are, they resort to insults and anger because they didn't get their way~! HA! It is past time to remove these cowards and thieves who would rob us of our property, freedoms, and rights if they could~!
Sincerely, Mike
@MichaelHeath— I hear how frustrated you are, and I agree with you on one important thing: how public officials speak to the community matters. When people feel dismissed or talked down to, trust erodes quickly.
My focus is on making sure concerns like this lead to clearer language, better process, and accountability that actually improve outcomes. Keeping the conversation specific and grounded helps ensure the public is heard and that change sticks.
Hello Dr. Sarah~!
I certainly do support all of your good efforts, and everyone has their own path to follow! I also understand that my words could be construed as simply coming from a point of "frustration", which would in a small way be true, however I am VERY different than the vast majority of folks who are struggling to make sense out of what is really going on these days. I come from a "need-to-know" family where both of my parents were in professional positions at very high levels involving US Military Intelligence & government service and the highest level of the banking field, so you could say that I was shaken awake at a young age that few could possibly understand. By the time I was 9 years old I was already an American Constitutionalist, and I had by then quietly dedicated my life to professionally researching what was really going on in the government, who was really pulling the strings, and what the real agenda was. Long story short, a couple of University degrees after studying law since I was 9 years old, among a great many other things, and I was well on my way to infiltrating and analyzing an enormous number of those "closed door meetings" that baffle and confuse average folks. Ha! So now, after over 50 years of intensely brutal hard work and experiences that most would struggle to even comprehend, I am an accomplished analyst with a powerful background in History, Economics, and Law. For example, I have been a professional precious metals analyst for about 45 years now, so after many decades of warning folks to consider buying Gold and Silver, I trust that you have recently seen a small example of my abilities. This is just the beginning there ;-) I have also enjoyed every major category of professional real estate except working in title, escrow, and surveying. When folks ask what I am capable of analyzing, I always smile and say, "Just name it~!" Ha Ha Ha! So, yes, there is some value in attempting to work with the nefarious Individuals in government management, because those efforts have & do lay the groundwork for potential criminal prosecutions in the future, however true bad faith has the deepest of roots and we are very clearly NOT dealing with unintentional "miscommunications". "We" (American Patriots) have been working diligently on a FAR deeper level because the roots and scope of our REAL problems are well beyond what the vast majority of people ever dreamed. That said, what is really happening is that the original American Republic was unlawfully betrayed in 1871 (See; "The Act of 1871") when the federal government after the civil war was broke and devised a criminal plot (coup) with the International Banksters (The Illuminati) to incorporate "The Corporate US Government" to overtake control of the original American Republic and to transition America from a common law dynamic into a Maritime Law (Law of the sea, Admiralty Law) matrix. This is really why President Trump and "the white hats" have been so ruthlessly attacked since even before his first term started in 2016, because "The Swamp" is actually the oldest worldwide criminal cabal and they know that there has been a powerful force in opposition to their very old evil draconian control of America. I completely understand that this may all be new to you, as it is/will be for most, however I can easily prove every word if given enough time. That will not be necessary however, because "we" (the American Patriots) are actually winning this oldest of wars, as is actually evidenced by the recent historic Gold & Silver prices, so the truth is already on its way to the general public. A MASSIVE shift is already underway back to the original American Republic (common law matrix). This will also result in a new global Quantum Starlink based worldwide financial system with 100% asset backed currencies in the 209 countries that have already (quietly) signed the agreements. The evidence of all of this is literally everywhere for those who know what to look for~! Stay tuned ;-) Keep up the great work because as I have said, everyone is playing their role at this time in history, and it sure looks like the future of America, and in fact the world, will eventually be in a FAR superior matrix in the not-too-distant future. As for these local government employees, they will in time find that the environment has turned to be quite inhospitable for those who have violated their oaths to The American Constitution, not to mention the public trust, because they will also be ensnared by the greatest criminal sting operation that the world has ever experienced ;-) This is in fact the worst time EVER to be violating the public trust as public servants~! Have a great evening and I welcome you to ask any questions that you may have as things progress. As I am working with "others" I may not be able to discuss some matters, but I will do my best...
Sincerely, Mike
Mike — public trust is essential, and I appreciate the willingness to stay engaged on accountability as things develop.
Yes, you are absolutely 100% correct that "public trust" is essential for Americans and America itself~! I have seen that "public trust" being eroded all my life, so today it really has become non-existent in the minds of most Americans. This deeply bothered me for many decades, however as an old student of History I understand that life (society) operates in cycles, so with any luck and hard work I am optimistic that "we" can rebuild a functional level of trust (but only when that trust is actually earned by those in government). Thankfully, there really are some who are in currently in government who are already working on rebuilding that trust... We here were on the front lines of the COVID assault upon humanity, so that completely fractured the trust in government and the medical industry for a tremendous number of Americans, many of whom will understandably NEVER trust the government or the medical community again. We are also fully engaged in the unfolding process of bringing forward the "new" medical system that will in fact be FAR superior and patient well-being first designed... That said, I believe that when earned & proven there will be a functional level of limited trust that can & will be regained by most Americans. Blind trust is suicidal and got us into this terrible mess as a country, however, to have a functional and hopefully safe & prosperous country (and world) we can all work upon achieving that elusive limited trust. We here are always "engaged" in this process because that is the sole function and purpose of American Constitutionalists, regardless of the challenge, threats or risks. You could say that is really why "we" are here right now at this point of history ;-) The pay sucks, we can be killed at any time, and it is an entirely thankless job, but it is what it is~! Ha~! Have a great day and enjoy this historic process that will continue to unfold~!
Sincerely, Mike
Thank you, Dr. Sara! I agree the public needs to be there and in their face all the time, yes, make them feel uncomfortable for the way they treat the community. They should be shamed. Only then will we see a change and we need to vote these clowns out of office.
@EvritaRomero — public engagement matters, and staying present is important; my hope is that it leads to clearer rules, better process, and accountability that actually improves outcomes.
Quickly before they get more power
Good morning Jeff and Dr Sarah,
Another one sails over the left center fence!
These Ass hats seem to think we have no reason to be engaged and passionate about the properties we have worked so hard to attain and pay crazy taxes on. We want equality in this county so we can start to relax a bit. Absolutely not hat we've witnessed since Mark Ozias has been in office and spreading his ways amongst the other commissioners as the golden path to success. It has to change and we can't stop until we have true representation!
Bruce deserves all that's heading his way!
Thank you Jeff and have a great day!
@GlenParker — I hear the frustration you’re naming, especially around property rights and the sense that people are being told their concerns shouldn’t matter.
For me, the key issue underneath all of this isn’t personalities — it’s process. When people who have invested their lives, savings, and labor into their properties feel blindsided by policy language, that’s a sign the system isn’t working as it should.
What I’m trying to push for here is something more durable than trading blame: a County Code that is clear, limited to real health and safety risks, and written so people understand the consequences before they show up angry at a hearing. If we get the structure right, the conflict level drops on its own — regardless of who’s in office.
Passion is understandable. The challenge now is turning it into a framework that actually protects property rights and produces better outcomes long-term.
Appreciate you engaging.
Spot on Dr. Sarah and exactly why I'll vote for you when the time is right.
Well, you have made it perfectly clear that all the wisdom and outlines for running a decent society exist... and have existed for millennia...we just need to clear the slate and install the template that works...overhauling this corrupted system piece by piece will never work and it will never work with the entitled arrogant, hubristic managers we currently have in power. Even if they 'change their tune', they can never be trusted with public power or the ability to lobby public power.
They have to go! Thank you for your intelligent, diligent and respectful contributions.
I'll borrow some of your faith while mine is 'less than'!😎
@RobertJames — I appreciate the thoughtful words, and I understand the level of frustration you’re naming.
Where I land a bit differently is this: durable change doesn’t come from trusting different people, it comes from building systems that don’t require trust to function. Clear laws, limited authority, transparent records, early public participation, and enforceable standards are what keep power in check — regardless of who occupies the seat.
History shows us that wisdom does endure, but it has to be translated into structure, not just intention. That’s why I focus on repairing the framework — the code, the process, the guardrails — so no one has to rely on personalities or promises.
That work is slower than a reset, but it’s the only kind that lasts.
Thank you for engaging with it seriously.
How would you advise directing efforts to achieve that end? It feels like the charter review (where some of that kind of change is possible) became about personal pet projects. And the DCD is an iron wall of high barriers both to change and to compliance.
For example, current CCC for subdivision requires feasibility for running phone lines to each plot - something that isn't even available. When I've spoken to the folks behind the desk about subdivision requirements I've gotten 2 different answers, both of which overlap code in some places and miss portions in other. Just an example but a frustrating reality I know is not singular.
How do we actually clean up the code? And get continuity between what is required by the county vs. state. Vs. intl building code? And how do we launch such an effort without giving them more opportunity for further restrictions?
Something I've been pressing for is pre-approved/engineered home designs. That way, as a prospective builder, I can have a level of guarantee from the county so long as I follow the laid out steps. Instead of starting and hoping they stick with what any one person said on any given day (unlikely, given personal experience and anecdotes from just about everyone I know who has developed their land here).
It wouldn't solve the greater issue of the snarl that is CCC But at least it would create a path outside of it?
Open to suggestions and looking forward to dialogue, you sound very well Informed in this area - thanks for keeping an eye on these developments.
@ConcerningCitizens, This is a very real description of the problem, and you’re not wrong about any of it.
If I had to boil it down, the path forward isn’t a single reform—it’s a sequenced approach that separates clean-up from policy expansion, so the effort doesn’t become an excuse for more restrictions.
Here’s what that looks like in practice:
1. Start with a code audit, not new policy.
The first step isn’t rewriting rules—it’s inventorying them. That means identifying where the Clallam County Code exceeds state law, duplicates state or federal requirements, or references obsolete infrastructure (your phone-line example is a classic red flag). This can be done as a technical audit with clear scope: alignment and clarity only, no new restrictions added.
2. Create a clear hierarchy of authority.
One reason you’re getting different answers at the counter is that the code doesn’t clearly distinguish:
2.1. what’s required by state law (RCW),
2.2. what comes from the International Building Code,
2.3. and what is purely local discretion.
That hierarchy should be explicit in the code itself and in staff guidance, so compliance doesn’t depend on which person you talk to on which day.
3. Lock in a “no net new restrictions” rule for the cleanup phase.
This is critical to your concern about giving cover for more regulation. A formal resolution or scope statement should say plainly: this phase is about simplification, consistency, and alignment—not expanding authority or adding requirements.
4. Use safe pilot projects to prove reform can work.
Your idea about pre-approved or engineered home designs is a strong example of this. It doesn’t solve everything, but it creates:
4.1. predictability for builders,
4.2. consistency for staff,
4.3. and a compliance pathway that doesn’t rely on informal assurances.
Pilots like this let the county test improvement without reopening the entire code at once.
5. Separate structural reform from politics.
You’re right that the Charter Review drifted into pet projects. That’s why code cleanup works better as a technical governance task, with clear guardrails and public checkpoints, rather than a high-stakes political rewrite.
None of this requires trusting DCD or assuming good faith. It requires structure—clear scope, written standards, and a public record that makes it obvious when the county is enforcing state law versus local choices.
That’s how you clean up the code without making it tighter: clarity first, restraint built in, and pilots that create usable paths even before the larger snarl is fully untangled.
Your frustration is justified—and the fact that you’re asking how instead of just why is exactly the kind of engagement this process actually needs.
"None of this requires trusting DCD or assuming good faith. It requires structure." - This right here!!!
Thank you for taking the time to respond. I love your thoughtfulness on this issue. Can we expect a Director Sarah on the ticket when Emery's time is up (I believe this fall? Or is it next?)?
I appreciate the vote of confidence, but no — that’s not my lane. I’m not a community development expert, just a constituent willing to read the code, ask hard questions, and help draft clearer policy language.
If someone in this community has land-use or development expertise and wants to step up, that’s exactly who we should encourage. This work needs people who know the technical side and are willing to engage the public transparently.
I appreciate that. Well either way I'm glad that you have the skills to translate these issues for those of us who are wanting to engage but not knowing how to navigate focus.
I've been listening to the planning commission session recording today and it definitely seems like that is one of the sausage factories, so to speak. It has me very concerned about the GMA and rezoning being done this year as well. I'll be trying to keep a finger on that development, thank you for bringing it to our attention!
Yea buddy!
Totalitarianism is often distinguished from dictatorship, despotism, or tyranny by its supplanting of all political institutions with new ones and its sweeping away of all legal, social, and political traditions. The totalitarian state pursues some special goal, such as industrialization or conquest, to the exclusion of all others. All resources are directed toward its attainment, regardless of the cost. Whatever might further the goal is supported; whatever might foil the goal is rejected. This obsession spawns an ideology that explains everything in terms of the goal, rationalizing all obstacles that may arise and all forces that may contend with the state. The resulting popular support permits the state the widest latitude of action of any form of government. Any dissent is branded evil, and internal political differences are not permitted. Because pursuit of the goal is the only ideological foundation for the totalitarian state, achievement of the goal can never be acknowledged.
Ideology...floating above reality, connected to nothing, destructive to all.😎
“Rabid” is their way of dismissing public comment so they can do whatever they planned to do in the first place. It’s a dogwhistle.
Thank you Dr. Sarah and Jeff for attending and reviewing all these meetings! You are truly there to protect us when we think its safe. Animals and human beings will fiercely protect their habitats and progeny. Obviously, property owners sensed dangerous predators, namely gov't bureaucrats, threatening their habitats, and showed up en masse to fight against that threat. Too many times have our elected leaders lied to us, tricked us, and abused us to the point that we can never trust anything they say. Words are no longer proof of good intentions. We need actions.
with the meetings recorded we call can be "at" all the meetings, and review them.
I don't think this gets enough attention. Instead of watching a tv show, or something else, why not queue up a public meeting?
Trust Is Hard-Earned, Easily Lost, Difficult To Reestablish
Thank you, Kenneth Reandeau, for mentioning early public engagement as being necessary for efficient and expedient outcomes for the code changes on ADU and RV. Discussions that affect property rights and private land use should be open, with the public being the driving force in final decisions, not an elected that deems the public to be rabid, as mongrel dogs. It appears the current Community Development Director (CDC) believes that public input is “chaos” created by misinformation. Is it perhaps that lack of transparency from the CDC is mainly responsible for the “chaos”? Calling the public names and intimating that we are somehow “puppets” being misinformed by a social forum is rather telling of the real intent of the organization’s adherence to public interest. Transparent like a two-way mirror?
Again, I insist: We are the BOSSES, they are the BOSS-EES. we employ the officials and they need to respect ALL of us as employers, not their serfs who live on their territory. Keep doing what you do best, inform, complain, educate, and hold accountable.
In some ways Emery is right - there were comments from people who maybe had not read the ordinance fully, or maybe had misunderstood the changes being proposed, or didn't know how restrictive current code already is. Who instead were concerned by what was pitched by all sides as a new "RV ordinance". I know when I hear those words I assume, further restrictions, more crackdown, more government involvement, higher costs...none of which is incorrect or misplaced.
What Mr. Emery doesn't seem willing or able to hear were the comments from people who DID read the ordinance, who had nuanced concerns, who had actual experience navigating park model/tiny home/RV placement under the current code. Instead of addressing those concerns he's focusing on the few people who maybe were uninformed about the proposed changes. And instead of meeting those people with compassion, (considering current code AND these new changes would in fact effect their literal homes and/or livelihoods) he labels and name calls. Instead of addressing the legitimate concerns brought up by the public, those get swept under the rug.
This is a perfect example of the disconnect between the people legislating and the people effected by that legislation.
Guess I'll be adding the planning commission meetings to my rotation 🤸
Please let me know what you hear in the meetings. Thank you!
What would we do without you Jeff to keep the public informed and Dr. Sarah at your side to be our PE (private eye)? Thank you both so much. Imagine thinking we hired a person to watch out for us, the citizens, the taxpayers, only to know that is not the case at all.
The masters don’t have to wonder any longer why it is THEM against US, Mr. DCD made it perfectly clear so the slaves could see and hear. I’m so ashamed to have an elected official stoop so low to call those who probably elected him “rabid” and make other insulting statements about our community tax payers who pay, obviously too much, for his livelyhood.
Guilty as charged — my husband and I voted for Bruce Emery in good faith. If asking questions as new information comes to light makes us “rabid,” then that’s really a credit to platforms like CC Watchdog and Jeff Tozzer for creating a space where the public record is visible, and people can engage thoughtfully.
Here's a hard concept for people to understand in this nationally charged political environment.
Just because I read the CCWD and frequently comment doesn't mean that I agree with everything written here whether in the articles, or comments.
I've been reading comments for a while now. My opinion is that the true cause most want is an open and accountable government that attempts to balance representation of everyone.
I likely agree more with some of the rules Emery is pushing than others here do, based on comments. But balance for me is understanding that I won't always get it my way. I'm going to take my own medicine and understand that those voices need to be infused into policy.
As such ...
When enough individuals, whether they read the CCWD, FB, SG, PDN, or learn of information from a Commissioner, decide to show up at a meeting to voice their disapproval in incredible unison then Mr. Emery, do yourself a favor, and understand what the emotions are about and maybe the next time you speak and are frustrated you'll frame your reactions differently. Especially in light of the emotional issue that housing is because it's a basic human need.
@MK — this is an important comment, and I appreciate you naming this.
I agree with you that the core issue isn’t whether everyone agrees with every rule. In a functioning system, disagreement is expected. What keeps breaking down here is how those disagreements are handled and when they surface.
When people show up late, emotional, and in large numbers, that’s often treated as a behavioral problem. From a governance perspective, it’s more accurately a process signal — that the language, structure, or assumptions embedded in the code didn’t become clear until real impacts were visible.
That’s why I keep coming back to the County Code itself. If the rules are layered, unclear, or doing policy work through definitions and prohibitions instead of safety standards, we shouldn’t be surprised when people react strongly once the consequences hit home.
This isn’t about winning every argument or rejecting all regulation. It’s about:
1. Starting with real harm and risk
2. Writing rules people can understand before they’re enforced
3. Letting performance and safety standards do the work instead of labels
4. Creating space for disagreement before decisions harden
If we fix the structure, the temperature drops on its own.
If we don’t, we’ll keep replaying this cycle no matter who’s in the room.
Thanks for articulating that balance so clearly.
Everybody should try sleeping in a blanket outside on a sidewalk in the rain when its 30deg. Then decide in your meetings if RVs etc., should be disallowed as habitat. Go ahead see if it changes your perspective. And see if you can learn from experience. Rules can be changed. Its just pen and paper.