82 Comments
User's avatar
John Worthington's avatar

Hello Secretary Burgum,

We are writing to you pursuant to CFR 25 § 151.9 B (5), CFR 25 § 151.9 C, CFR 25 § 151.11, and CFR 25 § 151.13 to formally dispute the transfer of parcel #032912110010 to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe.

Our dispute is rooted in CFR 25 § 151.13 (d)(II)(A), as we believe the Clallam County Commissioners have failed in their duty to safeguard the interests of the Olympic Peninsula against unchecked tribal land acquisition. Over recent years, the Commissioners have permitted the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe to acquire properties across Clallam County, resulting in a significant reduction of our local tax base and placing a heavy financial burden on our community and taxpayers.

The piecemeal division and transfer of land for tribal checkering threaten the stability and integrity of our community’s land use. We respectfully urge you to uphold the rights granted under the 1855 Point No Point Treaty and to deny application 62958.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

[Your Position/Organization]

[Contact Information]

Expand full comment
Chris Clark's avatar

John just let me know what your plans/suggestions are on this, you have my support when needed

Expand full comment
Lloyd's avatar

So, if I were to somehow copy your letter. (Nice wording by the way) and send it to.

United States Department of the Interior

Olympic Peninsula Agency

2707 COLBY AVENUE

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

SUITE 1101

Everett WA 98201.

With my name and info of course. Would it possibly make a dfference? Or should I send it to DC?

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

Please give us a chance to do a group effort. If Jeff does not want to use CCW, we can quickly decide to do another group this Friday at the Doge meeting.

It will be more effective.

If that fails, then mail it to

August 10, 2025

Doug Burgum

Department of the Interior

1849 C Street, N.W.

Washington DC 20240

Expand full comment
Lloyd's avatar

What ever will work best. Maybe 500 certified letters would get their attention? Deffinately, something has to be done. I have no animosity towards the tribes. They are just doing whats best for themselves. With the help of lawyers probably funded at least in part by the rest of us. And a bunch of self serving socialist using our money to by the indian vote. But the pendulum has swung way to far to the left. And at the rate its moving, there wont be an America soon.

Expand full comment
Diane Maikui's avatar

Please let us know! I'm on board with whatever the majority does.

Expand full comment
Lloyd's avatar

3 likes.....

Expand full comment
Denise Lapio's avatar

At least Commissioner Ron Richards has stepped up for CC. He has been spending a lot of time and effort to get this just right. Hopefully he will be successful and the BoCC will comply. Whenever people use "racist" or any other similar term as a point to their argument, you know they have no point to their argument. Taxation is a mess. It needs to be revised for fairness and simplified for efficiency. Thank you, Jeff, for enlightening us with this opportunity to make make a difference in CC.

Expand full comment
MK's avatar

A mandate for the BOCCC to respond doesn't mean that the BIA will agree and decline a tribe's request. This has been skewed to suggest that a tribe's request will never ever be granted again. So many of the comments against this are filled with the "chicken little" complex and have no basis or evidence to suggest that it's somehow oppressive to a tribe.

Expand full comment
Diane Maikui's avatar

It doesn't matter how the taxpayers, or property owners feels or says. Nothing will sway French and Ozias. They can care less how unfair their liberal ideology affects normal taxpayers. The only way they can be stopped robbing us, is by voting them out. Property tax increases should only be voted on by the folks who actually pay the tax. Many people who live off handouts will never vote for the funds to dry up. We could have 1,000 people show up at a meeting to voice decent, it wouldn't matter! They scream housing but what about our housing? Are the natives going to purchase every home when people are taxed out? It's total bullshit!

Expand full comment
Brooke's avatar

Hallelujah!! Thank you Jeff for bringing us the watchdog! I am so happy to hear the people of Clallam County turned out and the water stewardship is “dead in the water”, so to speak! Happy for a WIN!!!!

Expand full comment
Sarah Kincaid's avatar

It will be sent to our County Commissioners as a "recommendation". The fight is not over.

Expand full comment
Geoff Fox's avatar

Thank you for that Victory! But If I understand correctly, the $5 water charge is still in the wings and could come down on us!?

Expand full comment
Jeff Tozzer's avatar

That's true. The $5 is purely up to the three County Commissioners.

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

We should make a word document and then put as many individual signatures on it as we can, make a PDF and sent it out before August 10, 2025.

Expand full comment
No One Important's avatar

Count me in.

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

Its Jeff’s call.

Expand full comment
Mimi Smith-Dvorak's avatar

In my experience, individual letters --- boxes full -- make a substantial impact. One letter can be ignored, many can't be. And, if there is an email option, that would be good to spam, as well.

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

Letters are letters. They do sometimes work. My letter is informing the agency of an administrative dispute of an agency action. Its going to require a lawyer to get into the end zone.

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

We or somebody has to step in after the Commissioners whiff, to instigate an administrative process. We can do it in one group and together individually.

If you do send a letter like mine citing the CFR, you can file a judicial review as long as you live in Clallam County.

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

Once a letter comes in under CFR 25. 151, it goes into an administrative file where if they don't look at it and respond, they do so at their own peril.

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

Letters for letters sake can be like letters to Santa or the tooth ferry. Administrative letters have to be responded to and acted upon.

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

"A subcommittee of the Charter Review Commission—led by Commissioner Ron Richards—is currently working on a proposal to require county officials to respond to BIA requests for information. Not to oppose tribal land conversion. Not to undermine tribal sovereignty. Simply to provide honest data."

Thank you Ron Richards, you are more in touch with the citizens interest than shown by other county leaders or officials. You have stepped up (on this substack) and answered my questions. I wish more of our county leaders would get down to the citizen's level and listen.

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

What is Trust Land?

“Trust land” is land to which the title is held in trust by the United States on behalf of an individual American Indian or Tribe. Today there are over 56 million acres of land held in trust by the United States for the benefit of Tribal communities.

Trust land is a legal status that grants certain benefits, protections, and limitations, including but not limited to:

Many programs and services offered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are available on trust land.

Trust land is not subject to state or local taxes. However, Tribes may assess taxes on trust land for services they provide.

Trust land cannot be alienated or encumbered (for example, sold, gifted, leased, etc.) without approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

Placing land into trust is one of the most important functions of the BIA. Trust lands establish Tribal jurisdiction and strengthen Tribal sovereignty.

Expand full comment
Mimi Smith-Dvorak's avatar

Seems that a small change of this "trust" maneuver, would be to make a requirement that the new parcel be adjacent to existing tribal lands.

Expand full comment
Geoff Fox's avatar

Seems to me that the State of Washington is most reluctant to respond, period, to any questions from Washington DC. This attitude has drizzled down to the county level. Yet the county and state stand with "hat in hand" and an attitude. So a thank you for those stepping up to the plate to rectify the situation.

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

What is Trust Land?

“Trust land” is land to which the title is held in trust by the United States on behalf of an individual American Indian or Tribe. Today there are over 56 million acres of land held in trust by the United States for the benefit of Tribal communities.

Trust land is a legal status that grants certain benefits, protections, and limitations, including but not limited to:

Many programs and services offered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are available on trust land.

Trust land is not subject to state or local taxes. However, Tribes may assess taxes on trust land for services they provide.

Trust land cannot be alienated or encumbered (for example, sold, gifted, leased, etc.) without approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

Placing land into trust is one of the most important functions of the BIA. Trust lands establish Tribal jurisdiction and strengthen Tribal sovereignty.

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

"Trust land is not subject to state or local taxes. However, Tribes may assess taxes on trust land for services they provide."

Double dipping? Win Win for any businesses on trust land.

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

"Many programs and services offered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are available on trust land."

Double dipping? Turn the land into trust and reap even for programs and services!

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

"Trust lands establish Tribal jurisdiction and strengthen Tribal sovereignty."

Double dipping? Turn the land into trust and keep adding to a powerful monopoly.

Expand full comment
MK's avatar

Very much appreciate your expertise here, hopefully you have submitted a formal letter to the CRC or had a chance to give comment.

Have you seen/heard/read that there's any evidence that a county that responds to the BIA against a tribe's request is honored by the BIA and results in a decline to a tribe in any significant way?

My belief is that it is rare, but that's strictly a guess.

Expand full comment
Garry Blankenship's avatar

Whatever the price of a National guilty conscience might be IT IS PAID. This insanity of paying dead people through their progeny must end. I welcome any and all indigenous progeny of today as "equal" friends and neighbors. No more, no less and particularly no more both and. How do we precisely determine who is entitled to special rights and privileges over all other citizens of this land ? In the roughly 300,000 years of human existence where are the exact chronological and genealogical marker points that discriminates a JKT member from his non-tribal member across the street ? Were there human occupants of JKT lands prior to the JKT ? If so, how much should we be paying to their progeny ? Much like the recently renegotiated unfair trade deals with U.S.A. trade partners all treaties within the U.S.A. must be either renegotiated or the sovereign must be treated equal to all other sovereign nations with comparable travel restrictions, taxes and tariffs. The day of the proud brave with buckskin wrap and eagle feathers in his hair is gone, unless he dresses that way and takes a selfie to load onto his computer and share it with friends.

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

To get organizational standing, we should consider using CCW.

Expand full comment
Lloyd's avatar

We need to close the tribal laundromat. How do we get this going?

Expand full comment
jeff swegle's avatar

Boycott all jkt businesses.

Expand full comment
No One Important's avatar

Concealed Carry Warrant?

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

Watchdog..

Expand full comment
No One Important's avatar

:-)

Expand full comment
Geoff Fox's avatar

Sorry I am not tech savvy. You wrote to me yesterday about the school district. I stand corrected. Many thanks, Is this position (Superintendent)

is this "Emphasis Through Redundancy" to have this as a local position as well as a state position! And to pay the local person 50,000 more than the state official! With AI coming at the speed of light too bad Sequim can't move ahead with the $1 million dollar gift to create a school that deems worthiness in the TRADES. AI can't frame or plumb or electrify a home in Sequim!

So many issues confronting us on a daily basis! Thank you Jeff and to all. You keep me learning.

Expand full comment
Mimi Smith-Dvorak's avatar

nice... in this case it's Clallam County Watchdog... but I like your version, too.

Expand full comment
Mark Swanson's avatar

I was just reading through the Recompete nonsense, which wants to support new well-paying construction jobs. They must be talking about JKT construction because they certainly aren’t building any hotel in downtown PA or new housing in Sequim.

Expand full comment
Geoff Fox's avatar

Is this why the Sequim City Council voted for the Moratorium on the marina development? Is Olympia lending a friendly ear?

Expand full comment
Mark Swanson's avatar

Recompete was a federal grant to be paid over 5 years.

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

Anytime you present an administrative challenge with a bunch of signatures, it has way more impact than a cry in the wilderness. You might as well throw a brick at a T80 tank...in Yugoslavia...or Tiananmen,

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

I have thrown enough bricks at Yugoslavia...or Tiananmen..:)

Expand full comment
Joseph Poole's avatar

This turnip has no more blood

Expand full comment
Geoff Fox's avatar

Yet on the 5th of August we have a levy request before us! and if I understand correctly the $5 fee on water is not a dead issue? so when might this become a ballot issue. And what does it cost us as a taxpayer to pay for each separate levy request. I have deep pockets but my arms are very short!

Expand full comment
Pat McCauley's avatar

Would love for you to discuss the tax loss of all the church properties. Some of whom are sitting on 5 acres of land and only have 20 or 30 members.

Expand full comment
Mimi Smith-Dvorak's avatar

And all of the "land trusts" that set land aside for ???

Expand full comment
MK's avatar

The difference, as I understand it is that the church exemption is rooted in WA codes passed by the legislature. Absent then changing that it's what it is. It's also completely different from this proposal wrt the BIA.

Expand full comment
Philip Bates's avatar

Clallam County is facing a growing equity crisis as land is increasingly removed from the tax rolls through federal trust land conversions, while local property taxes escalate for residents. We know that the > 35% of the property owners over 60 years old on fixed income suffer disproportionately. The lack of response to Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) notifications regarding these transfers represents a serious governance failure. This silence undermines transparency, shifts the tax burden onto vulnerable populations, and erodes public trust.

Failing to respond to federal trust land conversions is not neutrality—it is abdication. Clallam County’s elected leaders must reclaim their role as fiscal stewards for the public good. By implementing policies grounded in transparency, fairness, and fiscal reality, the county can rebuild trust and ensure that no resident is silenced.

Expand full comment
No One Important's avatar

This is highly related to many of Jeff's essays, beyond just ths one, so this is a must-read for those of us here. It discusses the dual-loyalty that Commissioners have if they also serve on NGO boards. This HAD TO BE written with Oziass [sic] in mind.

https://substack.com/inbox/post/169616760

Expand full comment
Lawrence Martin's avatar

Please click on the link. Its a great read.

Expand full comment
Mimi Smith-Dvorak's avatar

Gee, thanks.

Expand full comment
Denise Lapio's avatar

Great thoughts and points, Mimi!

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

An organization has standing to sue if it meets U.S. Const. art. III’s standing requirements. An organization can establish standing to bring suit under two theories. The first is an organizational theory which enables an organization to bring suit on its own behalf. The second is a representational theory which allows an organization to sue on behalf of its members.[i]

Expand full comment
John Worthington's avatar

What's this we shit white man..

Expand full comment