This proverb fits today’s article because the governance concern is not just what the City of Sequim was prepared to say, but how it was prepared to say it. If the article is accurate, that the proposed letter tracked outside language and was initially placed on the consent agenda, then the public was right to ask whether an interested party’s position was being advanced as if it were routine city business rather than an independently evaluated public judgment (Tozzer, 2026). That concern is grounded in Washington authority, not just opinion. The Open Public Meetings Act declares that the people do not yield their sovereignty to public agencies and must remain informed so they can retain control over the institutions they created (RCW 42.30.010). MRSC’s Washington local-government guidance explains that consent agendas are meant for routine, noncontroversial items, not contested policy endorsements requiring visible reasoning and scrutiny (Municipal Research and Services Center [MRSC], 2025a, 2025b). In other words, the proverb is valid because good governance requires the government to show its own work before it speaks in the people’s name.
For readers who want to trust and verify, these are the most useful sources to check directly:
Tozzer, J. (2026, March 25). Sequim’s “letter of support” wasn’t written by Sequim. CC Watchdog.
Use this source to verify the article’s factual claims about the draft letter, the outside authorship allegation, and the consent-agenda placement. It is the fact-specific source for today’s controversy. https://www.ccwatchdog.com/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Municipal Research and Services Center. (2025a, August 13). City council meeting agendas.
Washington Open Public Meetings Act, RCW 42.30.010.
This is the strongest legal statement of principle: the people remain sovereign, and public bodies are not entitled to decide unilaterally what the public should or should not know. It is the legal backbone for why open deliberation matters. https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=42.30.010&utm_source=chatgpt.com
Dr. Sarah, you seem to know about the bill being proposed. Is the Jamestown Land Transfer Act of 2026 a separate new bill just being formed? I ask because when I read the HR 2388 it only describes Elwha river lands. I'm confused.
Hi @Missy. For clarity: H.R. 2388 only addresses Lower Elwha Klallam project lands along the Elwha River. The “Jamestown Land Transfer Act of 2026” is a completely separate proposal involving the Dungeness and Protection Island refuges. That proposal is still in development and has not yet been formally introduced in Congress, which is why no bill number or text appears on Congress.gov.
The commissioners did not respond to yesterday's email asking what factors are used to determine when they pressure the prosecuting attorney to pursue charges and when criminals, like Tim Wheeler, get a free pass. Here is today's question:
Dear Commissioners,
Last August, you reached out to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe to request a conversation about property and lodging tax equity. The response you received—“we will let you know if/when we need further conversations”—was not a serious engagement, and seven months later there has been no follow-up.
Why hasn’t the Board followed up?
This is not a minor issue. Your constituents are required to pay property and lodging taxes without delay or negotiation. It would not be acceptable for a resident to say, “I’ll let you know if and when I decide to pay my taxes.” Why is that level of accountability not being applied here?
You are our elected leaders. It is your responsibility to initiate and insist on these conversations—not wait indefinitely for another party to decide if it’s convenient. Of course there is little incentive for the Tribe to engage on an issue that may not benefit them. That makes your role even more important.
Will the Board take proactive steps to re-engage and request a formal meeting on this issue? If so, when?
Below is a modeled good-governance response. It is not an actual Clallam County commissioner reply, but an example of what a clear, accountable, process-based response could sound like.
Dear Constituent,
Thank you for writing. You are asking a fair question, and I agree the public deserves a clearer answer than an open-ended “we will let you know if/when we need further conversations.” When an issue involves county revenue, tax equity, and intergovernmental relations, the Board should not allow the matter to drift without either follow-up or a public explanation of next steps. Washington county commissioners act through the board in open meetings, and the Open Public Meetings Act emphasizes that the people must remain informed so they can retain control over the institutions they created.
Speaking only for myself as an individual commissioner, I would support placing this issue on a regular Board agenda for a public briefing and discussion. That briefing should explain what tax questions are actually at issue, what communication has already occurred, what legal constraints apply, and what options the County has to re-engage government-to-government formally and respectfully. That is the proper governance step: not indefinite silence, but a traceable public process.
I would also want the public record to be careful and accurate. Tribal tax issues are not always identical to the obligations of an ordinary individual taxpayer. Washington Department of Revenue guidance explains that tax treatment can differ depending on whether land is held in trust or in fee status and on the nature and location of the activity at issue. So the Board should not reduce the matter to a slogan; it should clearly identify the legal framework, the fiscal impact on county residents, and the specific areas where discussion or agreement may be possible.
So, to answer your direct question: yes, I would support proactive re-engagement. I would favor asking the staff, the County Administrator, and the Prosecuting Attorney to prepare a public memo and a draft request for a formal meeting, then bring both back to the Board at the next available regular meeting for public discussion. If the other government declines, delays, or does not respond, that fact should also be reported publicly so residents understand what was attempted and what limits exist on County authority. Accountability does not always mean the County can compel another sovereign to meet on demand, but it does mean the County should show the public what it has done, what it plans to do next, and why.
I see a pattern of our governments-- at all levels in WA-- completely ignoring the will of the people. Whether it is Sequim, Clallam County, or Washington state-- the politicians do whatever they want, even in direct opposition to the will of the people-- the recent income tax by WA legislators being the most prominent example. Transferring our lands back to Tribal ownership just follows the patter, as does most everything they do.
NOI, It's called "top down government" If differs greatly from states like Florida where the government is "bottom up" i.e. the people ask, recommend, suggest, and the Government then responds. Worked pretty well when I was there.
Thank you, Jeff, for this alarming update! And thank you, Sequim and Clallam citizens for speaking up at the Council meeting! You fought back the presumptions of the ruling class and made them stop and pause. Rachel Anderson is not qualified to be mayor if she thinks her fellow council members and the taxpaying citizens don't mind her decisions to by-pass their input on very important issues pertaining to all the people. Either she is incompetent, very naive, or she is being directed to abjectly follow orders from her campaign donors. How insulting and degrading to the people of this city and county to be treated as if we don't matter and only her actions are the ones good enough for her subjects.
The emails back and forth from CC Commissioner Ozias to Ron Allen leaves a rather sour taste in my mouth and a queasy/greasy feeling of groveling at JKT’s feet.
EMAIL: From Mark Ozias to Ron Allen re: Commissioner meetings
...”You will find the agenda item summary and backround material attached to this email for your review... We would also welcome your attendance on the 19th should you be interested...so please don’t hesitate to reach out to me ...if I can be of service”
EMAIL; Response from Loni Greninger
...”We will let you know if/when we need further conversations” IF/WHEN?
GROVEL
verb
1. lie or crawl abjectly on the ground with one's face downwards
Oh really? The same Dale Jarvis who was essentially running the city telling former mayor Janisse how to handle an internal problem. The political incest wreaks.
Excellent recap and laying out to us that this matter has not been resolved. We will see how the chips fall at the April 13 meeting. Is the property held by the John Wayne family next in the sights? Is there another Judge Boldt on a bench?
I founded the SGGL. The true intention was to be non partisan. After the council was elected it became very partisan and so I publicly left. It is a total partisan group now and not at all what my initial vision was. It’s sad. Dale Jarvis is one of the worst now. Defending Jim Stoffer when he knows damn well what he did was wrong. No good deed…..
Perfect picture Jeff for today’s informative update article. I’ve attended many City council & Board of Clallam County meetings in the last 10 years & it is amazing how our government stands to attention to another nation who takes & makes with our money & resources. JST has enough given to them to support their tribe and others, perhaps they could support roadways, infrastructure, schools, etc., like the rest of us are required to do.
Doesn’t this City realize how “taxed out” our City, County, and State has become? We are #2 in the country of highest fuel costs alone. Where will the citizens be when you have given back to the local tribes properties, that they do not pay taxes on? We are sick and tired of the rising tax base because the so called return of lands reverts back on us when you lose the tax base on the land.The powers in government have pushed for a State Income Tax AGAIN! We cannot keep paying more for taxes on the properties the Tribe reverts back to State Trust. Especially, when our citizens , many are on limited or fixed incomes.
Hey Harmony Rutter, we don't care about your love for the tribe. You're there to work for us, not them. And why is it when the tribe doesn't want us to know something (as in shutting down their web pages) they cry "sovereign nation" but when they want something from us, all of the sudden we're all one big happy family?
I watched from home unaware of the three o'clock deadline to sign on, and thought I was watching a high school mock city council. Giggling Mayor, gum chewing and dumbfounded council members unaware of contents of letter of support for another land transfer, telling constituents to do the research. Can I borrow the forks for my ears too?
Aren’t these the same “No Kings” advocates? The Mayor, Rachel, and Harmony Rutter have no skin in the game, they are not property tax payers according to county records, yet they both hold office determining and recommending USA property land grab. The last Sequim City Manager who betrayed the people was able to resign instead of being fired after all the MAT damage was done. The totem pole out front of City Hall will forever be our reminder there is tribal priority over the people, USA citizens, and United States government. Where is the local news article regarding this take over of our precious national lands, crickets just like the Madeo murder. If SGGL wants transparency & all the word salad they stand for, why aren’t they screaming because there is a lot to scream about?
What would happen if I wrote a letter saying I should be given a National Park because I’ve been a good tax-payer for 60 years, have paid for all kinds of services including employment opportunities, training opportunities, financially supported business sector, military, you name it…..would my letter be on the agenda and acted upon like Ron Allen’s? The answer is NO, my letter would go in the round file with everyone else.
Mayor Rachel Anderson said she placed a proposed letter of support on the consent agenda because she “didn’t think that any council members would have any opposition.”
Assumption of Acceptance: The speaker presumed you would be okay with what they did.
Justification: It is often said when someone is defending an action that actually did bother you.
Good Governance Daily Proverb:
When the government speaks in another’s words without its own public reasoning, the people hear an echo, not deliberation.
This proverb fits today’s article because the governance concern is not just what the City of Sequim was prepared to say, but how it was prepared to say it. If the article is accurate, that the proposed letter tracked outside language and was initially placed on the consent agenda, then the public was right to ask whether an interested party’s position was being advanced as if it were routine city business rather than an independently evaluated public judgment (Tozzer, 2026). That concern is grounded in Washington authority, not just opinion. The Open Public Meetings Act declares that the people do not yield their sovereignty to public agencies and must remain informed so they can retain control over the institutions they created (RCW 42.30.010). MRSC’s Washington local-government guidance explains that consent agendas are meant for routine, noncontroversial items, not contested policy endorsements requiring visible reasoning and scrutiny (Municipal Research and Services Center [MRSC], 2025a, 2025b). In other words, the proverb is valid because good governance requires the government to show its own work before it speaks in the people’s name.
For readers who want to trust and verify, these are the most useful sources to check directly:
Tozzer, J. (2026, March 25). Sequim’s “letter of support” wasn’t written by Sequim. CC Watchdog.
Use this source to verify the article’s factual claims about the draft letter, the outside authorship allegation, and the consent-agenda placement. It is the fact-specific source for today’s controversy. https://www.ccwatchdog.com/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Municipal Research and Services Center. (2025a, August 13). City council meeting agendas.
This is one of the clearest Washington practice sources explaining that consent agendas are for routine, noncontroversial matters. That is why agenda placement is a real governance issue here. https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/public-meetings/procedures/agendas?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Municipal Research and Services Center. (2025b, September 22). Understanding the consent agenda in local government meetings.
This source reinforces that consent agendas are a streamlining tool and that supporting materials should demonstrate the information on which the governing body bases its decisions. It supports the “show your work” principle behind the proverb. https://mrsc.org/stay-informed/mrsc-insight/september-2025/consent-agenda?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Washington Open Public Meetings Act, RCW 42.30.010.
This is the strongest legal statement of principle: the people remain sovereign, and public bodies are not entitled to decide unilaterally what the public should or should not know. It is the legal backbone for why open deliberation matters. https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=42.30.010&utm_source=chatgpt.com
Dr. Sarah, you seem to know about the bill being proposed. Is the Jamestown Land Transfer Act of 2026 a separate new bill just being formed? I ask because when I read the HR 2388 it only describes Elwha river lands. I'm confused.
Hi @Missy. For clarity: H.R. 2388 only addresses Lower Elwha Klallam project lands along the Elwha River. The “Jamestown Land Transfer Act of 2026” is a completely separate proposal involving the Dungeness and Protection Island refuges. That proposal is still in development and has not yet been formally introduced in Congress, which is why no bill number or text appears on Congress.gov.
Thank you so much! I couldn't find wording anywhere talking about the Dungeness Spit!
The commissioners did not respond to yesterday's email asking what factors are used to determine when they pressure the prosecuting attorney to pursue charges and when criminals, like Tim Wheeler, get a free pass. Here is today's question:
Dear Commissioners,
Last August, you reached out to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe to request a conversation about property and lodging tax equity. The response you received—“we will let you know if/when we need further conversations”—was not a serious engagement, and seven months later there has been no follow-up.
Why hasn’t the Board followed up?
This is not a minor issue. Your constituents are required to pay property and lodging taxes without delay or negotiation. It would not be acceptable for a resident to say, “I’ll let you know if and when I decide to pay my taxes.” Why is that level of accountability not being applied here?
You are our elected leaders. It is your responsibility to initiate and insist on these conversations—not wait indefinitely for another party to decide if it’s convenient. Of course there is little incentive for the Tribe to engage on an issue that may not benefit them. That makes your role even more important.
Will the Board take proactive steps to re-engage and request a formal meeting on this issue? If so, when?
Below is a modeled good-governance response. It is not an actual Clallam County commissioner reply, but an example of what a clear, accountable, process-based response could sound like.
Dear Constituent,
Thank you for writing. You are asking a fair question, and I agree the public deserves a clearer answer than an open-ended “we will let you know if/when we need further conversations.” When an issue involves county revenue, tax equity, and intergovernmental relations, the Board should not allow the matter to drift without either follow-up or a public explanation of next steps. Washington county commissioners act through the board in open meetings, and the Open Public Meetings Act emphasizes that the people must remain informed so they can retain control over the institutions they created.
Speaking only for myself as an individual commissioner, I would support placing this issue on a regular Board agenda for a public briefing and discussion. That briefing should explain what tax questions are actually at issue, what communication has already occurred, what legal constraints apply, and what options the County has to re-engage government-to-government formally and respectfully. That is the proper governance step: not indefinite silence, but a traceable public process.
I would also want the public record to be careful and accurate. Tribal tax issues are not always identical to the obligations of an ordinary individual taxpayer. Washington Department of Revenue guidance explains that tax treatment can differ depending on whether land is held in trust or in fee status and on the nature and location of the activity at issue. So the Board should not reduce the matter to a slogan; it should clearly identify the legal framework, the fiscal impact on county residents, and the specific areas where discussion or agreement may be possible.
So, to answer your direct question: yes, I would support proactive re-engagement. I would favor asking the staff, the County Administrator, and the Prosecuting Attorney to prepare a public memo and a draft request for a formal meeting, then bring both back to the Board at the next available regular meeting for public discussion. If the other government declines, delays, or does not respond, that fact should also be reported publicly so residents understand what was attempted and what limits exist on County authority. Accountability does not always mean the County can compel another sovereign to meet on demand, but it does mean the County should show the public what it has done, what it plans to do next, and why.
Respectfully,
Commissioner
Clallam County Board of Commissioners
References
Municipal Research and Services Center. (2025, June 2). County commissioner roles and responsibilities. https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/officials/roles/county-commissioners?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Municipal Research and Services Center. (n.d.). Open Public Meetings Act basics. https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/public-meetings/opma/open-public-meetings-act-basics?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Washington Department of Revenue. (n.d.). Indian tax guide. https://dor.wa.gov/book/export/html/1112?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Washington Department of Revenue. (n.d.). Information for tribal members/citizens. https://dor.wa.gov/forms-publications/publications-subject/tax-topics/information-tribal-memberscitizens?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Washington Open Public Meetings Act, RCW 42.30.010. https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=42.30.010
Washington Open Public Meetings Act, RCW 42.30.020. https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=42.30.020&utm_source=chatgpt.com
Pretty sure we asked that very question at the board meeting yesterday.
Mark Ozias.
Smoke…..
it’s almost like we are ignorant folk? 💁🏻♀️🤪
others are… ignoring facts.
Good Grief, this town needs an enema!!
another one…
Keep writing Jeffrey.
You may win the Pulitzer!!🙏🏼💥❤️
The best line in the Batman movie (1989). Jack Nicholson: "This town needs an enema!"
I see a pattern of our governments-- at all levels in WA-- completely ignoring the will of the people. Whether it is Sequim, Clallam County, or Washington state-- the politicians do whatever they want, even in direct opposition to the will of the people-- the recent income tax by WA legislators being the most prominent example. Transferring our lands back to Tribal ownership just follows the patter, as does most everything they do.
NOI, It's called "top down government" If differs greatly from states like Florida where the government is "bottom up" i.e. the people ask, recommend, suggest, and the Government then responds. Worked pretty well when I was there.
I wish I could upload a photo that described what you say. Maybe Jeff will post it soon.
Administrative taking.
Thank you, Jeff, for this alarming update! And thank you, Sequim and Clallam citizens for speaking up at the Council meeting! You fought back the presumptions of the ruling class and made them stop and pause. Rachel Anderson is not qualified to be mayor if she thinks her fellow council members and the taxpaying citizens don't mind her decisions to by-pass their input on very important issues pertaining to all the people. Either she is incompetent, very naive, or she is being directed to abjectly follow orders from her campaign donors. How insulting and degrading to the people of this city and county to be treated as if we don't matter and only her actions are the ones good enough for her subjects.
Perfect response Denise , Bullseye 🎯
Mayor Anderson is an embarrassment to our City and it's citizens.
Excellent, Truthful, and to the Point Denise!!
The emails back and forth from CC Commissioner Ozias to Ron Allen leaves a rather sour taste in my mouth and a queasy/greasy feeling of groveling at JKT’s feet.
EMAIL: From Mark Ozias to Ron Allen re: Commissioner meetings
...”You will find the agenda item summary and backround material attached to this email for your review... We would also welcome your attendance on the 19th should you be interested...so please don’t hesitate to reach out to me ...if I can be of service”
EMAIL; Response from Loni Greninger
...”We will let you know if/when we need further conversations” IF/WHEN?
GROVEL
verb
1. lie or crawl abjectly on the ground with one's face downwards
I get that same feeling about Mayor Rachel
"If I can be of service, your Highness" LOL.
SGGL is not dormant . Unfortuntely Dale Jarvis just got appointed to the behavioral health board Tuesday.
Oh really? The same Dale Jarvis who was essentially running the city telling former mayor Janisse how to handle an internal problem. The political incest wreaks.
Yep, the same.
It was on the Work Session agenda and the Regular Meeting agenda. Dale Jarvis is in.
there could be 2 with same name, but I haven't heard of that
Don't go to Vegas, you're not good at reading the odds 😉
Susie.
Bingo.
Tentacles.
Excellent recap and laying out to us that this matter has not been resolved. We will see how the chips fall at the April 13 meeting. Is the property held by the John Wayne family next in the sights? Is there another Judge Boldt on a bench?
I founded the SGGL. The true intention was to be non partisan. After the council was elected it became very partisan and so I publicly left. It is a total partisan group now and not at all what my initial vision was. It’s sad. Dale Jarvis is one of the worst now. Defending Jim Stoffer when he knows damn well what he did was wrong. No good deed…..
He also suggested how to sweep sexual harassment allegations under the rug within the city under Mayor Janisse.
Shennaigans, when I see your comments pop up, so do my ears!
Mayor Rachel and SGGL can be declared an abuse of stupidity which should be a felony. As Ronald Reagan said so well:
"The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
Perfect picture Jeff for today’s informative update article. I’ve attended many City council & Board of Clallam County meetings in the last 10 years & it is amazing how our government stands to attention to another nation who takes & makes with our money & resources. JST has enough given to them to support their tribe and others, perhaps they could support roadways, infrastructure, schools, etc., like the rest of us are required to do.
Doesn’t this City realize how “taxed out” our City, County, and State has become? We are #2 in the country of highest fuel costs alone. Where will the citizens be when you have given back to the local tribes properties, that they do not pay taxes on? We are sick and tired of the rising tax base because the so called return of lands reverts back on us when you lose the tax base on the land.The powers in government have pushed for a State Income Tax AGAIN! We cannot keep paying more for taxes on the properties the Tribe reverts back to State Trust. Especially, when our citizens , many are on limited or fixed incomes.
Vote for Jake. See you at a campaign event and anyone else you can bring with you.
Thank you so much @Jeff Tozzer!
Hey Harmony Rutter, we don't care about your love for the tribe. You're there to work for us, not them. And why is it when the tribe doesn't want us to know something (as in shutting down their web pages) they cry "sovereign nation" but when they want something from us, all of the sudden we're all one big happy family?
Good morning Jeff and Doggers,
Thanks for enlightening us of the origin of the letter. The comments to the council so spot on, I'm a big Rose Marschall fan.
Raechel Anderson sounds to be the most incompetent mayor I've ever listened to.
Keep up the heat all!
Thank you all and have a great day!
When her juvenile mouth opens I want to shove forks in my ears to lessen the pain.
I watched from home unaware of the three o'clock deadline to sign on, and thought I was watching a high school mock city council. Giggling Mayor, gum chewing and dumbfounded council members unaware of contents of letter of support for another land transfer, telling constituents to do the research. Can I borrow the forks for my ears too?
Aren’t these the same “No Kings” advocates? The Mayor, Rachel, and Harmony Rutter have no skin in the game, they are not property tax payers according to county records, yet they both hold office determining and recommending USA property land grab. The last Sequim City Manager who betrayed the people was able to resign instead of being fired after all the MAT damage was done. The totem pole out front of City Hall will forever be our reminder there is tribal priority over the people, USA citizens, and United States government. Where is the local news article regarding this take over of our precious national lands, crickets just like the Madeo murder. If SGGL wants transparency & all the word salad they stand for, why aren’t they screaming because there is a lot to scream about?
What would happen if I wrote a letter saying I should be given a National Park because I’ve been a good tax-payer for 60 years, have paid for all kinds of services including employment opportunities, training opportunities, financially supported business sector, military, you name it…..would my letter be on the agenda and acted upon like Ron Allen’s? The answer is NO, my letter would go in the round file with everyone else.
Yeah, I thought there weren't supposed to be any Kings this side of the pond.
Mayor Rachel Anderson said she placed a proposed letter of support on the consent agenda because she “didn’t think that any council members would have any opposition.”
Assumption of Acceptance: The speaker presumed you would be okay with what they did.
Justification: It is often said when someone is defending an action that actually did bother you.
It was painful to listen to.
I read the room…
- perhaps a few City employees would agree with the overall context of this dialogue.
💡👍🏼
She didn't think so because they're all lockstep in thought. There's no diversity whatsoever in what that lopsided wheel does.