Clallam County leaders encouraged residents to give generously this holiday season. What they did not disclose is that one commissioner publicly elevated a nonprofit he personally leads—in a county awash with hundreds of charities, millions in charitable dollars, and very little public visibility into how those funds move. When public office and nonprofit leadership overlap, transparency is not optional. It is essential.
And in today’s podcast: A recap of the final 2025 Charter Review Commission meeting—key moments and takeaways.
A moment of generosity — and a missing disclosure
It is the season of giving. Earlier this month, the Clallam County Board of Commissioners recognized Giving Tuesday, encouraging residents to look beyond consumer spending and support the nonprofits that shape our community.
On December 2, Commissioner Mark Ozias took a leading role in that recognition. He welcomed Jessica Elliott, executive director of Olympic View Community Foundation (OVCF), who spoke about rising community needs and the importance of generosity. Elliott thanked the commissioners for their partnership. Commissioner Ozias shook her hand and expressed appreciation for her work.
What went unmentioned—by Commissioner Ozias or anyone else on the dais—is that he is OVCF’s co-president and treasurer.
Out of the hundreds of nonprofits, charitable funds, and community organizations operating in Clallam County, the commissioner chose to publicly spotlight the one he helps lead.
That omission matters.
Why this is not a technicality
Clallam County has hundreds of registered nonprofits operating across housing, food security, education, arts, environment, and public health. When a sitting county commissioner uses the authority of public office to elevate one organization—particularly one he governs—it raises a basic question of fairness and transparency.
This is not about accusing wrongdoing. It is about acknowledging conflicts of interest, or at minimum the appearance of one, and managing them openly.
Commissioner Ozias does not serve on just one board. In addition to his role as a county commissioner, he leads organizations including the North Olympic Development Council, the Sequim Food Bank, and the Washington State Association of Counties—all of which receive county funding.
OVCF is yet another NGO in that portfolio—one that now manages substantial sums of money, with limited public disclosure about where those dollars ultimately go.
A look at the money — and the visibility problem
Based on publicly available Form 990 summaries, OVCF functions as a small community foundation and grantmaker, operating donor-advised funds (DAFs) and administering major pass-through programs like the Peninsula Home Fund.
Several financial patterns stand out.
A dramatic spike in 2023
OVCF reported approximately $793,530 in revenue in 2023.
Compare that to $64,916 in 2022.
Net assets rose from $314,481 to nearly $950,000 in 2023.
Over 80% of that revenue came from contributions.
Large one-year jumps are not inherently improper—but they raise questions.
“Other revenue” dominates 2024
In 2024, roughly 63% of reported revenue fell into the category of “Other revenue.” That category often includes reclassifications, pass-throughs, or restricted fund movements that require careful explanation. Again, that explanation is not easily accessible to the public.
Limited grantmaking relative to assets
Despite controlling close to $1 million in assets, public data suggests modest direct grant distributions in 2023. In response to CC Watchdog inquiries, OVCF confirmed only two community grants totaling $5,000 that year.
CCWD: I see on your website that the recipients of 2023 are still pending. Can I see the grant summary of 2023?
OVCF: Our Community Grant recipient for 2023 was Olympic Peninsula Humane Society for $4000.
OVCF: Correction, we also awarded Sequim Community Orchestra $1000. So just to confirm, in total we awarded two Community Grants in 2023.
That may be permissible. It is not transparent.
Donor-advised funds add complexity
OVCF openly reports operating donor-advised funds. DAFs are legal and common—but they are also one of the least transparent vehicles in philanthropy. Funds can sit for years before distribution, with donors recommending recipients behind closed doors.
When a sitting commissioner helps govern such a structure, disclosure standards should be higher, not lower.
The Peninsula Home Fund and political proximity
OVCF also administers the Peninsula Home Fund, a long-running charitable program founded by the Peninsula Daily News in 1989. The fund has raised nearly $5 million over its lifetime.
Among its longtime donors is W. Ron Allen, chair and CEO of the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe—Commissioner Ozias’ top campaign donor.
Again, donations from Allen or the Tribe are not improper. But when political donors, nonprofit leadership, and public office intersect, the need for transparency becomes unavoidable.
Who decides where the money goes?
How are grant recipients selected?
What guardrails prevent favoritism—real or perceived?
These are not hostile questions. They are governance questions.
Scholarship funds and unanswered emails
In 2023, OVCF took custody of a $600,000 scholarship endowment, created from the termination of a private trust and transferred to OVCF to be managed as a permanent fund “providing substantial assistance to a few carefully selected students each year.”
As of this writing:
OVCF’s website lists 2022 scholarship recipients, but not 2023 or 2024.
A request for updated recipient information went unanswered.
The public has not been shown how those funds are being distributed—or when.
When nonprofits steward six-figure sums in trust, silence is not an acceptable reporting strategy.
The core issue: role confusion, not malice
None of this requires assuming bad intent. But it does require acknowledging reality.
Commissioner Ozias wears many hats:
County commissioner
Nonprofit board officer
Fund steward
Political actor
Public advocate for charitable giving
Those roles can coexist—but only with clear boundaries, consistent disclosures, and voluntary restraint.
Highlighting a nonprofit you lead from the commissioner’s dais, without disclosure, is not restraint. It is a blind spot.
A constructive path forward
There’s a simple way forward that serves both the public and the nonprofits Commissioner Ozias is involved with.
When commissioners have leadership roles in nonprofits, those roles should be clearly stated on the public record, and they should avoid promoting those organizations from the dais. At the same time, nonprofits that benefit from public visibility or pass-through funds should be upfront about where the money goes, with clear grant summaries, fund balances, and recipient lists. If Commissioner Ozias wants to lead, he could help set better, county-wide expectations for nonprofit transparency—building trust and reminding everyone that public office is about representing constituents, not boosting favored organizations.
Giving season should be about generosity.
Governing season should be about clarity.
Clallam County deserves both.
There will be no CC Watchdog article tomorrow. Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas.
