The commissioners did not answer yesterday's question about the unintended consequences of harm reduction. Here is today's email:
Dear Commissioners,
You’ve talked about helping to build a larger tribal land base here. What does that actually mean for the rest of us in practical terms — especially when it comes to taxes and local control? Is expanding the land base of a sovereign nation something you campaigned on? And when the Bureau of Indian Affairs asks how taking land into trust affects our already struggling local economy, why hasn’t the county weighed in?
Layered Sovereignty and County Responsibility: A Good Governance Explainer
Dear Readership,
When constituents ask, “What does building a larger tribal land base mean for taxes and local control?” what is really being asked is about sovereignty. In Washington State, sovereignty is layered.
The Sovereignty Structure: In Clallam County, authority exists in parallel layers:
1. Federal Government — Congress governs Indian affairs under the Indian Commerce Clause (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3).
2. Tribal Governments — Tribes are inherent sovereign nations recognized under federal law (Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515, 1832).
3. State Government — Authority derives from the Washington State Constitution (Wash. Const.).
4. County Government — Counties derive their authority from the State Legislature (Wash. Const. art. XI).
These are not levels in a chain of command; they are overlapping jurisdictions operating within a constitutional framework.
When land is taken into federal trust through the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), pursuant to 25 C.F.R. Part 151:
1. It generally leaves the county property tax roll.
2. County land-use authority typically no longer applies.
3. Jurisdiction shifts to federal and tribal governance.
Counties do not approve or deny trust decisions. However, federal regulations require the BIA to notify and solicit comment from state and local governments regarding jurisdictional conflicts and potential impacts on the tax base and local services (25 C.F.R. § 151.10). That is where county responsibility begins.
Why This Feels Divisive: Three legitimate governance concerns intersect:
1. Fiscal Stewardship — “How does this affect our tax base and services?”
2. Sovereignty and Treaty Respect — “Are we honoring tribal self-governance?”
3. Public Process and Transparency — “Was there analysis? Did the County formally weigh in?”
Different residents prioritize different concerns, which can create the perception that one position must be “right.” However, this is not a binary issue. It is a structural one.
What Good Governance Requires: Regardless of viewpoint, responsible county leadership should:
1. Respect parallel sovereign authority.
2. Conduct documented fiscal impact analysis.
3. Hold public discussion consistent with open government principles (RCW 42.30).
4. Submit formal comment when requested by federal authorities.
Counties cannot control federal trust decisions. They can control whether impacts are analyzed, communicated, and documented transparently.
Three Modeled Commissioner Replies: Same Issue — Different Civic Lenses
Each modeled reply below addresses the same constituent question: “What does building a larger tribal land base mean for taxes and local control? Did you campaign on this? Why hasn’t the County weighed in?”
When land is taken into federal trust through the Bureau of Indian Affairs under 25 C.F.R. Part 151, it typically leaves the county property tax roll and falls under federal and tribal jurisdiction. The County does not approve or deny those applications; they are federal determinations.
However, the County has a responsibility to analyze fiscal impact. If a trust application affects Clallam County’s tax base, I believe we should:
1. Conduct a documented fiscal impact analysis;
2. Hold a public discussion regarding service implications;
3. Submit formal comment to the BIA pursuant to 25 C.F.R. § 151.10.
Respect for tribal sovereignty does not eliminate our obligation to ensure fiscal sustainability for county residents. My campaign commitments focused on transparency and fiscal responsibility. Residents deserve clarity regarding impacts to fire protection, law enforcement, roads, and long-term revenue stability.
Author’s Note: Dr. Sarah holds an EdD in Educational Leadership with concentrations in equity, ethics, social justice, and systems governance, and an MBA in Rural Healthcare Administration. Her perspective reflects a formal study of constitutional structure, intergovernmental systems, and fiscal sustainability in rural public institutions.
Additional Legal Context: Tribal–State–County Jurisdiction: Understanding land-into-trust impacts requires clarity regarding jurisdictional authority. Federal Indian law and Washington case law establish the governing framework.
Inherent Tribal Sovereignty and Federal Primacy: Tribal nations are distinct sovereign political communities whose authority predates the Constitution (Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515, 1832). Congress retains plenary authority over Indian affairs under the Indian Commerce Clause (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3).
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly limited state authority in Indian country absent express congressional authorization:
1. State taxation is generally preempted (McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission, 411 U.S. 164, 1973).
2. State regulation is preempted where federal and tribal interests outweigh state interests (White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 1980).
Limits on Tribal Civil Authority Over Nonmembers: While tribes possess inherent sovereignty, their civil regulatory authority over nonmembers on non-Indian fee lands is limited, subject to two exceptions (Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544, 1981). Fee-to-trust conversions may alter this jurisdictional analysis because trust land qualifies as “Indian country.”
Reservation Boundaries and Indian Country: Trust land is classified as Indian country under 18 U.S.C. § 1151. The Supreme Court’s framework for determining reservation boundaries and diminishment is articulated in Solem v. Bartlett (465 U.S. 463, 1984). Washington courts apply these federal standards in cases involving treaty rights and jurisdictional boundaries (e.g., State v. Buchanan, 138 Wn.2d 186, 1999).
State–Tribal Taxation in Washington: Washington’s taxation authority within Indian country is limited and frequently governed by compact (e.g., RCW 43.06.523). Federal courts have reaffirmed preemption principles in Washington-specific cases (Tulalip Tribes v. Washington, 783 F.3d 1151, 9th Cir. 2015).
Implications for Counties: When land is taken into trust pursuant to 25 C.F.R. Part 151:
1. The parcel generally leaves the county property tax roll.
2. County land-use authority typically no longer applies.
3. Jurisdiction shifts to federal and tribal governance.
Counties do not approve or deny trust applications. However, federal regulations require the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to solicit comment from affected local governments regarding tax base and service impacts (25 C.F.R. § 151.10).
County responsibility lies in documented analysis and transparent participation.
Lens 3: Civic Process and Transparency, Primary concern: procedural clarity and public trust
Dear Constituent,
Land-into-trust applications are federal actions under 25 C.F.R. Part 151. Federal regulations require that local governments be notified and allowed to comment regarding fiscal and jurisdictional impacts.
If the Bureau of Indian Affairs requests comment affecting Clallam County, good governance practice should include:
1. A public work session briefing;
2. A fiscal impact summary;
3. A formal written response placed in the public record consistent with Washington’s Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30).
Regardless of personal positions, residents deserve transparent analysis.
My campaign commitments centered on open governance and documented decision-making. That includes ensuring that jurisdictional shifts are discussed publicly and recorded clearly.
Lens 2: Sovereignty and Intergovernmental Respect, Primary concern: honoring tribal sovereignty and lawful federal authority
Dear Constituent,
Tribal governments are inherent sovereign nations recognized under federal law (Worcester v. Georgia, 1832). Land-into-trust decisions are federal actions governed by Congress under the Indian Commerce Clause and administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Counties do not control those decisions.
My responsibility is to ensure Clallam County maintains respectful intergovernmental relationships while communicating clearly with residents about jurisdictional shifts. Expanding a tribal land base through federal processes is not something a county campaigns on or votes on; it is part of the federal-tribal trust framework.
Where consultation is requested, the County should participate constructively — focusing on coordination of services rather than confrontation.
Strong counties and strong tribes are not mutually exclusive.
Fiscal Modeling Framework for Clallam County: To move from rhetoric to measurable governance, Clallam County should apply a standardized fiscal impact model when notified of a trust application under 25 C.F.R. § 151.10.
Step 1: Baseline Valuation
1. Identify assessed value (AV) of the parcel(s).
2. Calculate current annual county property tax attributable to the parcel(s):
County levy rate × AV = County property tax share. Include junior taxing districts where applicable.
Illustrative example:
If AV = $2,000,000 and county levy rate = $1.00 per $1,000 AV:
$2,000,000 × 0.001 = $2,000 annual county levy impact (excluding other districts).
Step 2: Service Cost Analysis, Estimate current annual service costs:
1. Sheriff patrol allocation
2. Road maintenance
3. Fire or EMS contributions
4. Environmental health oversight
Trust conversion may reduce some obligations (e.g., tribal policing), or service agreements may maintain costs.
Step 3: Secondary Revenue Effects, Evaluate:
1. Sales tax implications (RCW 82.14)
2. Lodging tax implications, if commercial
3. Employment and economic multiplier effects
Commercial trust development may increase sales tax collections even if property tax declines.
Step 4: Intergovernmental Agreements, Assess:
1. Cross-deputization agreements
2. Revenue-sharing arrangements
3. Service contracts offsetting costs
Many Washington jurisdictions mitigate fiscal shifts through cooperative agreements.
*Below is a modeled intergovernmental cooperative agreement framework written to maximize accountability within the limits of federal Indian law.
Step 5: Net Fiscal Position, Net Fiscal Impact =
(Lost Property Tax + Service Cost Changes) − (New Revenue + Cost Savings + Agreements)
This analysis should be:
1. Documented
2. Presented publicly pursuant to the Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30)
3. Formally submitted to the BIA under 25 C.F.R. § 151.10
Why This Matters for Clallam County: Clallam County contains four federally recognized tribes. Each trust acquisition must be evaluated case by case rather than ideologically. A small residential parcel and a large commercial acquisition carry materially different fiscal implications.
The modeling process demonstrates:
1. Respect for sovereignty
2. Respect for taxpayers
3. Respect for institutional transparency
Good governance does not assume harm. It measures impact.
References
18 U.S.C. § 1151.
25 C.F.R. Part 151.
25 C.F.R. § 151.10.
McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission, 411 U.S. 164 (1973).
Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981).
RCW 42.30 (Open Public Meetings Act).
RCW 43.06.523.
RCW 82.14.
Solem v. Bartlett, 465 U.S. 463 (1984).
State v. Buchanan, 138 Wn.2d 186 (1999).
Tulalip Tribes v. Washington, 783 F.3d 1151 (9th Cir. 2015).
U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3.
Washington Constitution art. XI.
White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136 (1980).
Modeled Intergovernmental Cooperative Agreement Clallam County – [Tribal Government Name]
Article I – Government-to-Government Recognition
I.1. Purpose: This Agreement is entered into between Clallam County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, and the [Tribal Government], a federally recognized sovereign nation.
The Parties acknowledge their respective sovereign status and enter into this Agreement on a government-to-government basis.
I.2. Sovereign Immunity: Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity by either Party except as expressly and unequivocally stated herein.
Why this matters:
In the absence of explicit language, disputes over immunity and jurisdiction may undermine enforceability.
Article II – Scope of Services and Jurisdictional Clarity
The Agreement shall clearly define service responsibilities and jurisdictional boundaries, including:
II.1. Law enforcement authority, including cross-deputization terms
II.2. Fire and emergency medical response obligations
II.3. Road maintenance responsibilities
II.4. Environmental health authority, if applicable
II.5. Utility and infrastructure service boundaries
Governance risk if omitted:
Ambiguity may result in cost-shifting, service gaps, or jurisdictional disputes.
Article III – Fiscal Impact and Cost Allocation
The Agreement shall specify:
III.1. Annual service cost estimates
III.2. Cost-sharing methodology
III.3. Payment schedules, if applicable
III.4. Revenue-sharing terms, if applicable
III.5. Reimbursement procedures
III.6. Periodic fiscal review (recommended every 3–5 years)
The Agreement should also include a statement that no unfunded service obligation is created unless expressly provided.
Governance risk if omitted:
The County may absorb unanticipated fiscal exposure without compensation or adjustment.
Article IV – Data Transparency and Reporting
The Agreement shall require:
IV.1. Annual service usage reporting
IV.2. Incident response data sharing
IV.3. Infrastructure usage metrics
IV.4. Fiscal reconciliation reporting
Governance risk if omitted:
The County cannot measure impact, justify expenditures, or defend budget allocations publicly.
Article V – Term, Review, and Renegotiation
The Agreement shall:
V.1. Include a defined term (e.g., five years)
V.2. Require formal review prior to renewal
V.3. Include renegotiation triggers upon material change in service demand, land use, or fiscal impact
Governance risk if omitted:
Agreements may become indefinite and misaligned with changing fiscal realities.
Article VI – Dispute Resolution and Limited Waiver
This Article is essential to enforceability.
VI.1. Good-Faith Negotiation. The Parties shall first attempt to resolve disputes through direct government-to-government negotiation.
VI.2. Mediation. If negotiation fails, the Parties shall participate in non-binding mediation with a mutually agreed neutral mediator.
VI.3 Limited Waiver of Sovereign Immunity. For the sole purpose of enforcing the terms of this Agreement, and only to the extent expressly provided herein, the [Tribal Government] expressly and unequivocally waives sovereign immunity for claims arising solely under this Agreement.
This waiver shall be strictly limited to the remedies and forum identified below and shall not constitute a general waiver of immunity.
VI.4 Forum. Any enforcement action shall be brought exclusively in [specified forum], and the Parties consent to jurisdiction in that forum solely for purposes of enforcing this Agreement.
VI.5 Remedies. Available remedies shall be limited to those expressly stated herein, which may include:
VI.5.i Monetary damages capped at a specified amount
VI.5.ii. Declaratory relief
VI.5.iii. Specific performance
No remedy shall extend beyond the scope of this Agreement.
VI.6 Authorization. This limited waiver has been duly authorized by Resolution No. ___ of the [Tribal Council].
Governance risk if omitted:
Without an explicit, authorized limited waiver or structured enforcement mechanism, the County may lack judicial recourse in the event of breach.
Article VII – Non-Precedent and No Expansion
This Agreement does not expand jurisdiction beyond that expressly provided herein and shall not serve as precedent for unrelated matters.
Governance risk if omitted:
Provisions may be cited beyond intended scope in future negotiations.
Dr. Sarah, thank you for giving us so much information to read and reference. I won't be able to process all of this info one sitting, but at least I have the above as resources.
A friend once told me, I don't live on "stolen Land," I live on "conquered land." As does every living human being on earth. This is just another leg on the stool of demanding reparations for slavery, or being conquered, or something else that happened generations ago that may have been culturally acceptable at the time. Just one more reason to work hard to replace today's left-leaning politicians from positions of authority in our state and local governments.
Thanks for the important reminder. I can't attend today but hope when I listen to the recording someone will question their "evidence" that "harm reduction works." The pre fentanyl studies Dr Berry typically says are proof are usually based on just syringe exchanges and narcan, and do not include all the other offerings of current HRHC practices. Most of the data the HRHC states is proof is pre -fentanyl and pre-tranq. I have yet to see a controlled study that "proves" it works. Surely the health dept. staff knows the difference between corelation and causation, yet they often try to sell one as the other to the public.
The Clallam County Courthouse was built in 1914 and located in Port Angeles, Washington.
Clallam County provides services as required by law or mandated by the public. Through effective management of personnel and other resources, the County strives to provide the basic facilities and programs, which promote health, safety, and quality of life for its citizens. Another lie?
Renaming the courthouse to honor one individual would be an affront to the citizens of Clallam County. Three TEMPORARY commissioners should not assume the providence of renaming the courthouse that has been here since 1914. How would they determine what one individual should be enshrined as the noteworthiest. Leave it alone.
My recollection from reading the Boldt Decision is that Boldt was impressed with how the tribes were totally into protecting fishing rights. Contrast that with negotiations over land. Meh! Who needs it! A red hot real estate market? Nope. A thriving timber industry? Say, what?
But hindsight is great, and false narratives are fun, profitable, and invidious when you covet and lack honor.
Ancestral lands. This is starting to resemble Putin’s war against Ukraine. His desire to restore Russia’s power status, imperial expansionism and his refusal to recognize the Ukraine as a sovereign nation. Bully. Land back on display, 7000 miles away. With real consequences.
I cringe every time I hear or see “sovereign” or “nation” or “sovereign nation” applied to a tribe.
Bull! Words really don’t mean anything anymore, do they? Pardon me! They mean what any progressive, liberal, leftist miscreant wants them to mean, and we better get on board.
Were our local tribes nations or sovereign before the Point No Point Treaty? What made them so? How about afterwards?
Being told you can’t trade with Canada, is that sovereignty? Having terms that state The President can combine your reservation with another, is that sovereignty? How about close it altogether?
If a sovereign nation doesn’t want alcohol within its borders, does it just prohibit it, or ask someone else?
They have been spreading it on thick in the last 14 years of these Oppression Olympics. I will be attending the Olympia Oppression Olympics tomorrow.
They have signed an agreement and a federal agency has been assigned to hold up that agreement. BIA.
We local citizens are due reparations from those BIA allotments because the tribes intercepted federal grant funds at NODC and SERN to spend on retribution for a bad (relationship) contract they pretended to uphold enough to acquire BIA funds.
So wouldn't this include the folks of the league of women voters. So shouldn't they lead by example by giving up their properties and homes back to the tribes LOUD AND PROUD?
This is another outstanding article from Jeff Tozzer and The Watchdog~!
As someone who has been a lifelong advocate for the Investment of real estate for many decades, I applaud folks who are paying attention to the potential changes that could affect real estate ownership, which is by far the most important Investment that the majority of Americans ever make in their lives. Of course, as Jeff Tozzer well reveals, like every other critical aspect of life for Americans their real estate Investments are defined and dependent FIRST upon the government to defend or the field of real estate AND in fact society will collapse~! Are "we" having enough "creeping socialism" yet? HA~! Well, the fact is that the vast majority of Americans faired FAR better going through the initial years of the still ongoing COVID mass murder assault that is STILL being conducted by government and the criminals in the pharmaceutical & medical industries, for just one specific reason. "We" (Americans) were not spared the criminally atrocious extremes of the COVID democide that many other countries experienced because the government "saved us", nor were we saved by anyone in the pharmaceutical industry or medical profession. We saved ourselves, but ONLY because over 200 million Americans own well over 400 million guns and a great many of those wonderful normally peaceful and law-abiding Americans will use their guns if they are attacked or if their homes and property is being threatened~! Had it not been for the good American Patriots who own those guns, and their willingness to use their guns to defend themselves, America would have fallen into the hands of the very despots in and outside of government who have very clearly been trying to slaughter them for years now. Had America fallen, that would have spelled the end of the entire world as it has existed. I know that the fanatical hysterical ignorant and ill-informed "anti-gun" crowd in the US will attempt to defend their COMPLETELY indefensible position against the 2nd Amendment in any way that they possibly can, because they will NEVER admit that they were played for fools and in fact put themselves, ALL Americans, America, and the entire world at extreme risk. Many of these same fools (who are universally known as "useful idiots" by the very criminals who control them), in their usual thoughtless emotional panic, hysterically rushed to fall for the criminal COVID mass murder democide. This resulted in the slaughter of over 20 million Americans (a now old, estimated number from the REAL scientists which is almost certainly low), and an untold number of injuries due to the COVID vaccines (not COVID). The criminals of humanity, that are now endangering Americans right to enjoy their own real estate (properties) which is the very backbone of the American economy & society, would be unable to conduct ANY of their evil plans, if it were not for the grossly ignorant and ill-informed hysterical fools who always blindly underestimate the risks as well as their own propensity to get folks injured and killed~! We have ALL made mistakes and bad choices in our lives, so now is the time to quit fighting between ourselves so that we together can defend our freedoms and rights or we shall soon have neither freedom nor any rights~! The term that is now being used to describe the currently grossly ignorant and clueless people is "The Normies" because they have absolutely no understanding about what is really going on in their own world. I feel it a great privilege to be here in "The Watchdog" community because by definition "we" are not simple-minded slaves to the system of enslavers, who have absolutely NO good intentions towards the local folks of Clallam County, Americans, or anyone but themselves. Everyone here on The Watchdog platform, just by being here, demonstrates American Patriotism at the highest level, because they care not only for themselves but for all Americans and by extension all good folks all over the world~! Unfortunately, we are not currently living in the America that once dreamed of a land of freedoms and rights of sovereign Individuals, however we must protect each other and reject the evil dictates of the criminals of humanity here in our local community and everywhere that they exist~! NO, no one is going to take my property or anyone else's property as long as I am here~! The filthy lies of the government and Jamestown "corporation" about a 5-foot sea level rise within the next 75 years or so is absolutely hilarious to the point that it reveals ALL who are pushing that insane nonsense for the criminals of humanity that they really are~! EVERYONE who is pushing that clearly "fake science" will in due time find that they have been digging their own graves, and they will NOT be afforded the excuse that they were deceived because we know that they themselves paid to corrupt the science that they have been weaponizing against everyone~! The criminals' evil underhanded game is over and some of us do see the fate that is headed their way ;-) Keep up the great work pushing back on these criminals, because every day their demise grows closer and more certain~!
Changes of the physical characteristics of the earth have been a constant longer than most of us can comprehend. Global warming, global cooling, volcanoes, solar flares, asteroids, meteorites, erosion, flooding and more shaped and reshaped land and water masses long before human influence. The JST is predicting a five foot rise in sea level in the next roughly 75 years. I predict a one foot fall in that same period. Which crystal ball should we use to evict people from land that they bought and pay taxes upon ? The JST has a legal blood quantum population of roughly 200. By the logic of allowing those 200 enough land for their prosperity they already have too much land and must surrender their surplus back to the area legal resident population. This land back thinking is clearly backwards. The humans for whom land back is intended are all dead. Who walked this area before the JST ? So we give land to the JST and they give that land to their predecessors, etc. ? Did the JST war with other people over this land ? Evidently they did and they prevailed. Should the JST then not give their land to those who lost the competition for this land ? To the loser the spoils. You give your land to whomever you like and I will do the same, but I am not surrendering my land to dead people.
Fine. Take back the land. But pay back to the government all of the money, benefits, sponsorshitps, grants, and the value of ALL of the tax exemptions. That should work! Compensate the loss of the land for the individual by relocation in a similar setting, tax exemption...
This is just ridiculous.
So, what now? Are we going back to something that looks like a Robert Griffing paining? Slinging guns and riding horses? It's just so nuts.
I am so tired of this whose land this is. Who gave us this property was not Tribes. The Earth was created by God and he owns it. Who lives on it now is his preference not a liberal idiot.
Did the Tribes make fish,trees,water,and wildlife that they say they own? Hell no! The Tribes should pay the cost of all the improvements and pattens on the things that have increased the lands worth on the sovereign land they claim.Nobody owns something until they have it and then do not. Get over it Tribes and get back on the bus and be happy you have acquired what you have. For all of you Atheists Sorry! I believe differently than you.
Tribal consultation is required by the National Park Service (NPS) when federal actions, policies, or projects (undertakings) may impact federally recognized Indian Tribes, their lands, or resources of religious/cultural significance. Consultations are mandatory under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) for affecting historic properties, and via Executive Order 13175 for policies with tribal implications.
Tribal consultations focus on tribal sovereignty, integrating traditional ecological knowledge, and, when applicable, facilitating co-stewardship of federal lands.
NPS tribal consultations are not open to the general public, as they are considered government-to-government, nation-to-nation dialogues intended for tribal leaders and authorized representatives.
Olympic National Park projects that are or have been in tribal consultation include the Hurricane Ridge water system rehabilitation , US 101 Elwha Bridge replacement mitigation, Elwha Valley revegetation, Hoh Road Rehabilitation,
Future Hurricane Ridge Day Lodge Design, and the Olympic Hot Springs Road rebuild.
The Olympic Hot Springs Road rebuild up the Elwha Valley project was kiboshed during the private NPS tribal consultation phase of the otherwise public environmental review of that project and nature has taken over.
The commissioners did not answer yesterday's question about the unintended consequences of harm reduction. Here is today's email:
Dear Commissioners,
You’ve talked about helping to build a larger tribal land base here. What does that actually mean for the rest of us in practical terms — especially when it comes to taxes and local control? Is expanding the land base of a sovereign nation something you campaigned on? And when the Bureau of Indian Affairs asks how taking land into trust affects our already struggling local economy, why hasn’t the county weighed in?
All three county commissioners can be reached by contacting the Clerk of the Board at loni.gores@clallamcountywa.gov
Layered Sovereignty and County Responsibility: A Good Governance Explainer
Dear Readership,
When constituents ask, “What does building a larger tribal land base mean for taxes and local control?” what is really being asked is about sovereignty. In Washington State, sovereignty is layered.
The Sovereignty Structure: In Clallam County, authority exists in parallel layers:
1. Federal Government — Congress governs Indian affairs under the Indian Commerce Clause (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3).
2. Tribal Governments — Tribes are inherent sovereign nations recognized under federal law (Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515, 1832).
3. State Government — Authority derives from the Washington State Constitution (Wash. Const.).
4. County Government — Counties derive their authority from the State Legislature (Wash. Const. art. XI).
These are not levels in a chain of command; they are overlapping jurisdictions operating within a constitutional framework.
When land is taken into federal trust through the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), pursuant to 25 C.F.R. Part 151:
1. It generally leaves the county property tax roll.
2. County land-use authority typically no longer applies.
3. Jurisdiction shifts to federal and tribal governance.
Counties do not approve or deny trust decisions. However, federal regulations require the BIA to notify and solicit comment from state and local governments regarding jurisdictional conflicts and potential impacts on the tax base and local services (25 C.F.R. § 151.10). That is where county responsibility begins.
Why This Feels Divisive: Three legitimate governance concerns intersect:
1. Fiscal Stewardship — “How does this affect our tax base and services?”
2. Sovereignty and Treaty Respect — “Are we honoring tribal self-governance?”
3. Public Process and Transparency — “Was there analysis? Did the County formally weigh in?”
Different residents prioritize different concerns, which can create the perception that one position must be “right.” However, this is not a binary issue. It is a structural one.
What Good Governance Requires: Regardless of viewpoint, responsible county leadership should:
1. Respect parallel sovereign authority.
2. Conduct documented fiscal impact analysis.
3. Hold public discussion consistent with open government principles (RCW 42.30).
4. Submit formal comment when requested by federal authorities.
Counties cannot control federal trust decisions. They can control whether impacts are analyzed, communicated, and documented transparently.
Three Modeled Commissioner Replies: Same Issue — Different Civic Lenses
Each modeled reply below addresses the same constituent question: “What does building a larger tribal land base mean for taxes and local control? Did you campaign on this? Why hasn’t the County weighed in?”
Lens 1: Fiscal Stewardship, Primary concern: tax base, service delivery, economic stability
Dear Constituent,
When land is taken into federal trust through the Bureau of Indian Affairs under 25 C.F.R. Part 151, it typically leaves the county property tax roll and falls under federal and tribal jurisdiction. The County does not approve or deny those applications; they are federal determinations.
However, the County has a responsibility to analyze fiscal impact. If a trust application affects Clallam County’s tax base, I believe we should:
1. Conduct a documented fiscal impact analysis;
2. Hold a public discussion regarding service implications;
3. Submit formal comment to the BIA pursuant to 25 C.F.R. § 151.10.
Respect for tribal sovereignty does not eliminate our obligation to ensure fiscal sustainability for county residents. My campaign commitments focused on transparency and fiscal responsibility. Residents deserve clarity regarding impacts to fire protection, law enforcement, roads, and long-term revenue stability.
Respectfully,
Commissioner
Clallam County Board of Commissioners
Author’s Note: Dr. Sarah holds an EdD in Educational Leadership with concentrations in equity, ethics, social justice, and systems governance, and an MBA in Rural Healthcare Administration. Her perspective reflects a formal study of constitutional structure, intergovernmental systems, and fiscal sustainability in rural public institutions.
Additional Legal Context: Tribal–State–County Jurisdiction: Understanding land-into-trust impacts requires clarity regarding jurisdictional authority. Federal Indian law and Washington case law establish the governing framework.
Inherent Tribal Sovereignty and Federal Primacy: Tribal nations are distinct sovereign political communities whose authority predates the Constitution (Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515, 1832). Congress retains plenary authority over Indian affairs under the Indian Commerce Clause (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3).
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly limited state authority in Indian country absent express congressional authorization:
1. State taxation is generally preempted (McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission, 411 U.S. 164, 1973).
2. State regulation is preempted where federal and tribal interests outweigh state interests (White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 1980).
Limits on Tribal Civil Authority Over Nonmembers: While tribes possess inherent sovereignty, their civil regulatory authority over nonmembers on non-Indian fee lands is limited, subject to two exceptions (Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544, 1981). Fee-to-trust conversions may alter this jurisdictional analysis because trust land qualifies as “Indian country.”
Reservation Boundaries and Indian Country: Trust land is classified as Indian country under 18 U.S.C. § 1151. The Supreme Court’s framework for determining reservation boundaries and diminishment is articulated in Solem v. Bartlett (465 U.S. 463, 1984). Washington courts apply these federal standards in cases involving treaty rights and jurisdictional boundaries (e.g., State v. Buchanan, 138 Wn.2d 186, 1999).
State–Tribal Taxation in Washington: Washington’s taxation authority within Indian country is limited and frequently governed by compact (e.g., RCW 43.06.523). Federal courts have reaffirmed preemption principles in Washington-specific cases (Tulalip Tribes v. Washington, 783 F.3d 1151, 9th Cir. 2015).
Implications for Counties: When land is taken into trust pursuant to 25 C.F.R. Part 151:
1. The parcel generally leaves the county property tax roll.
2. County land-use authority typically no longer applies.
3. Jurisdiction shifts to federal and tribal governance.
Counties do not approve or deny trust applications. However, federal regulations require the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to solicit comment from affected local governments regarding tax base and service impacts (25 C.F.R. § 151.10).
County responsibility lies in documented analysis and transparent participation.
Lens 3: Civic Process and Transparency, Primary concern: procedural clarity and public trust
Dear Constituent,
Land-into-trust applications are federal actions under 25 C.F.R. Part 151. Federal regulations require that local governments be notified and allowed to comment regarding fiscal and jurisdictional impacts.
If the Bureau of Indian Affairs requests comment affecting Clallam County, good governance practice should include:
1. A public work session briefing;
2. A fiscal impact summary;
3. A formal written response placed in the public record consistent with Washington’s Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30).
Regardless of personal positions, residents deserve transparent analysis.
My campaign commitments centered on open governance and documented decision-making. That includes ensuring that jurisdictional shifts are discussed publicly and recorded clearly.
Respectfully,
Commissioner
Clallam County Board of Commissioners
Lens 2: Sovereignty and Intergovernmental Respect, Primary concern: honoring tribal sovereignty and lawful federal authority
Dear Constituent,
Tribal governments are inherent sovereign nations recognized under federal law (Worcester v. Georgia, 1832). Land-into-trust decisions are federal actions governed by Congress under the Indian Commerce Clause and administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Counties do not control those decisions.
My responsibility is to ensure Clallam County maintains respectful intergovernmental relationships while communicating clearly with residents about jurisdictional shifts. Expanding a tribal land base through federal processes is not something a county campaigns on or votes on; it is part of the federal-tribal trust framework.
Where consultation is requested, the County should participate constructively — focusing on coordination of services rather than confrontation.
Strong counties and strong tribes are not mutually exclusive.
Respectfully,
Commissioner
Clallam County Board of Commissioners
Fiscal Modeling Framework for Clallam County: To move from rhetoric to measurable governance, Clallam County should apply a standardized fiscal impact model when notified of a trust application under 25 C.F.R. § 151.10.
Step 1: Baseline Valuation
1. Identify assessed value (AV) of the parcel(s).
2. Calculate current annual county property tax attributable to the parcel(s):
County levy rate × AV = County property tax share. Include junior taxing districts where applicable.
Illustrative example:
If AV = $2,000,000 and county levy rate = $1.00 per $1,000 AV:
$2,000,000 × 0.001 = $2,000 annual county levy impact (excluding other districts).
Step 2: Service Cost Analysis, Estimate current annual service costs:
1. Sheriff patrol allocation
2. Road maintenance
3. Fire or EMS contributions
4. Environmental health oversight
Trust conversion may reduce some obligations (e.g., tribal policing), or service agreements may maintain costs.
Step 3: Secondary Revenue Effects, Evaluate:
1. Sales tax implications (RCW 82.14)
2. Lodging tax implications, if commercial
3. Employment and economic multiplier effects
Commercial trust development may increase sales tax collections even if property tax declines.
Step 4: Intergovernmental Agreements, Assess:
1. Cross-deputization agreements
2. Revenue-sharing arrangements
3. Service contracts offsetting costs
Many Washington jurisdictions mitigate fiscal shifts through cooperative agreements.
*Below is a modeled intergovernmental cooperative agreement framework written to maximize accountability within the limits of federal Indian law.
Step 5: Net Fiscal Position, Net Fiscal Impact =
(Lost Property Tax + Service Cost Changes) − (New Revenue + Cost Savings + Agreements)
This analysis should be:
1. Documented
2. Presented publicly pursuant to the Open Public Meetings Act (RCW 42.30)
3. Formally submitted to the BIA under 25 C.F.R. § 151.10
Why This Matters for Clallam County: Clallam County contains four federally recognized tribes. Each trust acquisition must be evaluated case by case rather than ideologically. A small residential parcel and a large commercial acquisition carry materially different fiscal implications.
The modeling process demonstrates:
1. Respect for sovereignty
2. Respect for taxpayers
3. Respect for institutional transparency
Good governance does not assume harm. It measures impact.
References
18 U.S.C. § 1151.
25 C.F.R. Part 151.
25 C.F.R. § 151.10.
McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission, 411 U.S. 164 (1973).
Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981).
RCW 42.30 (Open Public Meetings Act).
RCW 43.06.523.
RCW 82.14.
Solem v. Bartlett, 465 U.S. 463 (1984).
State v. Buchanan, 138 Wn.2d 186 (1999).
Tulalip Tribes v. Washington, 783 F.3d 1151 (9th Cir. 2015).
U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3.
Washington Constitution art. XI.
White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136 (1980).
Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1832).
Modeled Intergovernmental Cooperative Agreement Clallam County – [Tribal Government Name]
Article I – Government-to-Government Recognition
I.1. Purpose: This Agreement is entered into between Clallam County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, and the [Tribal Government], a federally recognized sovereign nation.
The Parties acknowledge their respective sovereign status and enter into this Agreement on a government-to-government basis.
I.2. Sovereign Immunity: Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity by either Party except as expressly and unequivocally stated herein.
Why this matters:
In the absence of explicit language, disputes over immunity and jurisdiction may undermine enforceability.
Article II – Scope of Services and Jurisdictional Clarity
The Agreement shall clearly define service responsibilities and jurisdictional boundaries, including:
II.1. Law enforcement authority, including cross-deputization terms
II.2. Fire and emergency medical response obligations
II.3. Road maintenance responsibilities
II.4. Environmental health authority, if applicable
II.5. Utility and infrastructure service boundaries
Governance risk if omitted:
Ambiguity may result in cost-shifting, service gaps, or jurisdictional disputes.
Article III – Fiscal Impact and Cost Allocation
The Agreement shall specify:
III.1. Annual service cost estimates
III.2. Cost-sharing methodology
III.3. Payment schedules, if applicable
III.4. Revenue-sharing terms, if applicable
III.5. Reimbursement procedures
III.6. Periodic fiscal review (recommended every 3–5 years)
The Agreement should also include a statement that no unfunded service obligation is created unless expressly provided.
Governance risk if omitted:
The County may absorb unanticipated fiscal exposure without compensation or adjustment.
Article IV – Data Transparency and Reporting
The Agreement shall require:
IV.1. Annual service usage reporting
IV.2. Incident response data sharing
IV.3. Infrastructure usage metrics
IV.4. Fiscal reconciliation reporting
Governance risk if omitted:
The County cannot measure impact, justify expenditures, or defend budget allocations publicly.
Article V – Term, Review, and Renegotiation
The Agreement shall:
V.1. Include a defined term (e.g., five years)
V.2. Require formal review prior to renewal
V.3. Include renegotiation triggers upon material change in service demand, land use, or fiscal impact
Governance risk if omitted:
Agreements may become indefinite and misaligned with changing fiscal realities.
Article VI – Dispute Resolution and Limited Waiver
This Article is essential to enforceability.
VI.1. Good-Faith Negotiation. The Parties shall first attempt to resolve disputes through direct government-to-government negotiation.
VI.2. Mediation. If negotiation fails, the Parties shall participate in non-binding mediation with a mutually agreed neutral mediator.
VI.3 Limited Waiver of Sovereign Immunity. For the sole purpose of enforcing the terms of this Agreement, and only to the extent expressly provided herein, the [Tribal Government] expressly and unequivocally waives sovereign immunity for claims arising solely under this Agreement.
This waiver shall be strictly limited to the remedies and forum identified below and shall not constitute a general waiver of immunity.
VI.4 Forum. Any enforcement action shall be brought exclusively in [specified forum], and the Parties consent to jurisdiction in that forum solely for purposes of enforcing this Agreement.
VI.5 Remedies. Available remedies shall be limited to those expressly stated herein, which may include:
VI.5.i Monetary damages capped at a specified amount
VI.5.ii. Declaratory relief
VI.5.iii. Specific performance
No remedy shall extend beyond the scope of this Agreement.
VI.6 Authorization. This limited waiver has been duly authorized by Resolution No. ___ of the [Tribal Council].
Governance risk if omitted:
Without an explicit, authorized limited waiver or structured enforcement mechanism, the County may lack judicial recourse in the event of breach.
Article VII – Non-Precedent and No Expansion
This Agreement does not expand jurisdiction beyond that expressly provided herein and shall not serve as precedent for unrelated matters.
Governance risk if omitted:
Provisions may be cited beyond intended scope in future negotiations.
Has Danny Stieger hacked Dr Sarah’s account?
Is there possibility a link or tl;dr version?
Good Governance Daily Proverb:
Sovereignty defines authority. Governance defines responsibility. When jurisdictions shift, transparency must not.
Dr. Sarah, thank you for giving us so much information to read and reference. I won't be able to process all of this info one sitting, but at least I have the above as resources.
A friend once told me, I don't live on "stolen Land," I live on "conquered land." As does every living human being on earth. This is just another leg on the stool of demanding reparations for slavery, or being conquered, or something else that happened generations ago that may have been culturally acceptable at the time. Just one more reason to work hard to replace today's left-leaning politicians from positions of authority in our state and local governments.
Good morning Jeff,
I hope the Commissioners get the letter out to the BIA. Nobody will be able to afford living in this county!
Treason from within our own electives... it's time to get them out.
Please everyone get the word out ...Jake Seegers 2026!
TODAY FYI: Please attend the Board of Health Meeting on February 17, 2026, @ 1:30 pm. Here is the link to the agenda with the link to attend virtually: https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/289/files/agenda/4746
Thanks for the important reminder. I can't attend today but hope when I listen to the recording someone will question their "evidence" that "harm reduction works." The pre fentanyl studies Dr Berry typically says are proof are usually based on just syringe exchanges and narcan, and do not include all the other offerings of current HRHC practices. Most of the data the HRHC states is proof is pre -fentanyl and pre-tranq. I have yet to see a controlled study that "proves" it works. Surely the health dept. staff knows the difference between corelation and causation, yet they often try to sell one as the other to the public.
Sent today
The Clallam County Courthouse was built in 1914 and located in Port Angeles, Washington.
Clallam County provides services as required by law or mandated by the public. Through effective management of personnel and other resources, the County strives to provide the basic facilities and programs, which promote health, safety, and quality of life for its citizens. Another lie?
Renaming the courthouse to honor one individual would be an affront to the citizens of Clallam County. Three TEMPORARY commissioners should not assume the providence of renaming the courthouse that has been here since 1914. How would they determine what one individual should be enshrined as the noteworthiest. Leave it alone.
I love your emphasis on TEMPORARY, Eric. I was happy to hear you read it at today's BoCC meeting. Very sobering.
My recollection from reading the Boldt Decision is that Boldt was impressed with how the tribes were totally into protecting fishing rights. Contrast that with negotiations over land. Meh! Who needs it! A red hot real estate market? Nope. A thriving timber industry? Say, what?
But hindsight is great, and false narratives are fun, profitable, and invidious when you covet and lack honor.
Ancestral lands. This is starting to resemble Putin’s war against Ukraine. His desire to restore Russia’s power status, imperial expansionism and his refusal to recognize the Ukraine as a sovereign nation. Bully. Land back on display, 7000 miles away. With real consequences.
I cringe every time I hear or see “sovereign” or “nation” or “sovereign nation” applied to a tribe.
Bull! Words really don’t mean anything anymore, do they? Pardon me! They mean what any progressive, liberal, leftist miscreant wants them to mean, and we better get on board.
Were our local tribes nations or sovereign before the Point No Point Treaty? What made them so? How about afterwards?
Being told you can’t trade with Canada, is that sovereignty? Having terms that state The President can combine your reservation with another, is that sovereignty? How about close it altogether?
If a sovereign nation doesn’t want alcohol within its borders, does it just prohibit it, or ask someone else?
"...one nation..."
"It takes a Village"...
They have been spreading it on thick in the last 14 years of these Oppression Olympics. I will be attending the Olympia Oppression Olympics tomorrow.
They have signed an agreement and a federal agency has been assigned to hold up that agreement. BIA.
We local citizens are due reparations from those BIA allotments because the tribes intercepted federal grant funds at NODC and SERN to spend on retribution for a bad (relationship) contract they pretended to uphold enough to acquire BIA funds.
Whoo! Go get 'em, John!
So wouldn't this include the folks of the league of women voters. So shouldn't they lead by example by giving up their properties and homes back to the tribes LOUD AND PROUD?
This is another outstanding article from Jeff Tozzer and The Watchdog~!
As someone who has been a lifelong advocate for the Investment of real estate for many decades, I applaud folks who are paying attention to the potential changes that could affect real estate ownership, which is by far the most important Investment that the majority of Americans ever make in their lives. Of course, as Jeff Tozzer well reveals, like every other critical aspect of life for Americans their real estate Investments are defined and dependent FIRST upon the government to defend or the field of real estate AND in fact society will collapse~! Are "we" having enough "creeping socialism" yet? HA~! Well, the fact is that the vast majority of Americans faired FAR better going through the initial years of the still ongoing COVID mass murder assault that is STILL being conducted by government and the criminals in the pharmaceutical & medical industries, for just one specific reason. "We" (Americans) were not spared the criminally atrocious extremes of the COVID democide that many other countries experienced because the government "saved us", nor were we saved by anyone in the pharmaceutical industry or medical profession. We saved ourselves, but ONLY because over 200 million Americans own well over 400 million guns and a great many of those wonderful normally peaceful and law-abiding Americans will use their guns if they are attacked or if their homes and property is being threatened~! Had it not been for the good American Patriots who own those guns, and their willingness to use their guns to defend themselves, America would have fallen into the hands of the very despots in and outside of government who have very clearly been trying to slaughter them for years now. Had America fallen, that would have spelled the end of the entire world as it has existed. I know that the fanatical hysterical ignorant and ill-informed "anti-gun" crowd in the US will attempt to defend their COMPLETELY indefensible position against the 2nd Amendment in any way that they possibly can, because they will NEVER admit that they were played for fools and in fact put themselves, ALL Americans, America, and the entire world at extreme risk. Many of these same fools (who are universally known as "useful idiots" by the very criminals who control them), in their usual thoughtless emotional panic, hysterically rushed to fall for the criminal COVID mass murder democide. This resulted in the slaughter of over 20 million Americans (a now old, estimated number from the REAL scientists which is almost certainly low), and an untold number of injuries due to the COVID vaccines (not COVID). The criminals of humanity, that are now endangering Americans right to enjoy their own real estate (properties) which is the very backbone of the American economy & society, would be unable to conduct ANY of their evil plans, if it were not for the grossly ignorant and ill-informed hysterical fools who always blindly underestimate the risks as well as their own propensity to get folks injured and killed~! We have ALL made mistakes and bad choices in our lives, so now is the time to quit fighting between ourselves so that we together can defend our freedoms and rights or we shall soon have neither freedom nor any rights~! The term that is now being used to describe the currently grossly ignorant and clueless people is "The Normies" because they have absolutely no understanding about what is really going on in their own world. I feel it a great privilege to be here in "The Watchdog" community because by definition "we" are not simple-minded slaves to the system of enslavers, who have absolutely NO good intentions towards the local folks of Clallam County, Americans, or anyone but themselves. Everyone here on The Watchdog platform, just by being here, demonstrates American Patriotism at the highest level, because they care not only for themselves but for all Americans and by extension all good folks all over the world~! Unfortunately, we are not currently living in the America that once dreamed of a land of freedoms and rights of sovereign Individuals, however we must protect each other and reject the evil dictates of the criminals of humanity here in our local community and everywhere that they exist~! NO, no one is going to take my property or anyone else's property as long as I am here~! The filthy lies of the government and Jamestown "corporation" about a 5-foot sea level rise within the next 75 years or so is absolutely hilarious to the point that it reveals ALL who are pushing that insane nonsense for the criminals of humanity that they really are~! EVERYONE who is pushing that clearly "fake science" will in due time find that they have been digging their own graves, and they will NOT be afforded the excuse that they were deceived because we know that they themselves paid to corrupt the science that they have been weaponizing against everyone~! The criminals' evil underhanded game is over and some of us do see the fate that is headed their way ;-) Keep up the great work pushing back on these criminals, because every day their demise grows closer and more certain~!
Sincerely, Mike
Changes of the physical characteristics of the earth have been a constant longer than most of us can comprehend. Global warming, global cooling, volcanoes, solar flares, asteroids, meteorites, erosion, flooding and more shaped and reshaped land and water masses long before human influence. The JST is predicting a five foot rise in sea level in the next roughly 75 years. I predict a one foot fall in that same period. Which crystal ball should we use to evict people from land that they bought and pay taxes upon ? The JST has a legal blood quantum population of roughly 200. By the logic of allowing those 200 enough land for their prosperity they already have too much land and must surrender their surplus back to the area legal resident population. This land back thinking is clearly backwards. The humans for whom land back is intended are all dead. Who walked this area before the JST ? So we give land to the JST and they give that land to their predecessors, etc. ? Did the JST war with other people over this land ? Evidently they did and they prevailed. Should the JST then not give their land to those who lost the competition for this land ? To the loser the spoils. You give your land to whomever you like and I will do the same, but I am not surrendering my land to dead people.
Fine. Take back the land. But pay back to the government all of the money, benefits, sponsorshitps, grants, and the value of ALL of the tax exemptions. That should work! Compensate the loss of the land for the individual by relocation in a similar setting, tax exemption...
This is just ridiculous.
So, what now? Are we going back to something that looks like a Robert Griffing paining? Slinging guns and riding horses? It's just so nuts.
I am so tired of this whose land this is. Who gave us this property was not Tribes. The Earth was created by God and he owns it. Who lives on it now is his preference not a liberal idiot.
Did the Tribes make fish,trees,water,and wildlife that they say they own? Hell no! The Tribes should pay the cost of all the improvements and pattens on the things that have increased the lands worth on the sovereign land they claim.Nobody owns something until they have it and then do not. Get over it Tribes and get back on the bus and be happy you have acquired what you have. For all of you Atheists Sorry! I believe differently than you.
Tribal consultation is required by the National Park Service (NPS) when federal actions, policies, or projects (undertakings) may impact federally recognized Indian Tribes, their lands, or resources of religious/cultural significance. Consultations are mandatory under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) for affecting historic properties, and via Executive Order 13175 for policies with tribal implications.
Tribal consultations focus on tribal sovereignty, integrating traditional ecological knowledge, and, when applicable, facilitating co-stewardship of federal lands.
NPS tribal consultations are not open to the general public, as they are considered government-to-government, nation-to-nation dialogues intended for tribal leaders and authorized representatives.
Olympic National Park projects that are or have been in tribal consultation include the Hurricane Ridge water system rehabilitation , US 101 Elwha Bridge replacement mitigation, Elwha Valley revegetation, Hoh Road Rehabilitation,
Future Hurricane Ridge Day Lodge Design, and the Olympic Hot Springs Road rebuild.
The Olympic Hot Springs Road rebuild up the Elwha Valley project was kiboshed during the private NPS tribal consultation phase of the otherwise public environmental review of that project and nature has taken over.