The commissioners did not answer yesterday's email. Today's question is:
Dear Commissioners,
When a commissioner promotes a nonprofit from the dais, should the public expect that any leadership or board role they hold in that organization will be disclosed on the record?
The response below is a modeled example of a lawful, good-governance reply that an individual county commissioner could provide to a public question like the one posed here.
It is intentionally written to show:
1. How a commissioner can acknowledge a public concern without speaking for the full Commission
2. How individual commissioners may express their own views and propose specific solutions
3. How those ideas must then be brought forward through an open public meeting before any decision is made
4. How transparency and ethics issues can be addressed without avoidance or overreach
The goal is to model accountable leadership, clear process, and public-facing transparency in local government.
Subject: Re: Disclosure When Promoting Nonprofits from the Dais
Dear Mr. Tozzer,
Thank you for your question regarding disclosure when a county commissioner promotes or highlights a nonprofit organization during an official meeting.
I want to be clear at the outset that no single commissioner can make decisions or establish policy on behalf of the Board outside of an open public meeting. Under Clallam County Code, each commissioner is an independently elected official and may express individual views, but actions of the Board must occur collectively and in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act (Clallam County Code [CCC] § 3.01.030).
Speaking only for myself, I believe the public should reasonably expect transparency when a commissioner promotes or endorses a nonprofit organization from the dais. Specifically, I believe any leadership, board, or fiduciary role a commissioner holds with that organization should be disclosed on the record. Even when a relationship does not rise to the level of a statutory conflict of interest, disclosure helps avoid the appearance of impropriety and supports public trust in local government (Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington [MRSC], n.d.-a).
As an individual commissioner, I intend to bring forward the following proposed governance practices for discussion by the full Commission in an open public meeting:
On-the-Record Disclosure
When a commissioner references or promotes a nonprofit organization in an official capacity, that commissioner should disclose any leadership or board role they hold with that organization at the time of the comment.
Annual Public Disclosure
Commissioners should maintain a publicly accessible list of nonprofit boards or leadership roles they serve in, updated annually, consistent with best practices for ethics and transparency (MRSC, n.d.-b).
Clear Recusal Expectations
When matters before the Commission directly affect a nonprofit with which a commissioner has a leadership or fiduciary role, that relationship should be disclosed, and recusal should occur where appropriate. MRSC guidance emphasizes that abstention alone may not fully address public perception concerns; proactive disclosure is a critical component of ethical governance (Doar, 2022).
These proposed practices are consistent with Washington State ethics law and MRSC guidance, which emphasize that transparency and disclosure are essential not only to prevent actual conflicts of interest, but also to maintain public confidence in governmental decision-making (MRSC, n.d.-a; MRSC, n.d.-c).
I welcome public input on these ideas and encourage community members to share their perspectives when this topic is brought forward for public discussion. Governance functions best when expectations are clearly stated, openly debated, and shaped through public participation.
Thank you for raising this issue and for your continued engagement in civic oversight.
Sincerely,
[Commissioner Name]
Clallam County Commissioner
(Individual opinion; not a statement of Board policy)
References (APA 7)
Clallam County Code. (n.d.). CCC 3.01.030 — Board of county commissioners: Authority and duties.
Thank you, Jeff, for digging into this. I felt uncomfortable at that meeting. Watching the promotion of Giving Tuesday made me ask myself: Why and how is this government business? You answered my question: It's all about Ozias. Doesn't he realize that this is shamefully biased and inappropriate? Taxpaying citizens don't get a seat at the table, but certain people with certain titles get access to the public podium. This is why, for years now, I don't give money to any charities anymore. Too much corruption. I prefer to help out in other ways. Besides, it's looking like my taxes are funding charitable NGOs and non-profits more than the basic necessary services. Despite all the news, MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!
I really don’t understand why we have so many NGO’s in this county. I’ve talked to many of my friends who work in government all around our state and they can’t believe for such a small county why we have so many.
It reminds me of money laundering
Years ago many of the churches took care of much of this. Why does the county spend so much of our tax payer money to these organizations? There’s many people who donate to organizations including me after I examine where the money goes.
I feel our county needs to tighten their belts and give relief to the tax payer. Don’t get me wrong our county needs help but not by making more people homeless, no job, etc, why does you think you people don’t move here and so many are leaving this county and state
Chris, my reaction was identical.I had no idea it has become what appears to be a substantial industry (for lack of a better term) in our county. I am sure the majority of residents have no idea how intertwined the governance of these NGOs are. Everyone can choose to do whatever they want with their funds. However supporting local businesses which grow and pay TAXES would be a better choice. To early to compose this properly.
Some people simply volunteer to put their emotions into action, others see an opportunity to make money because of their emotions. The two are not the same.
We obviously have been targeted by the NWO for decades because they want to social-engineer us off the land and control all access and resources...they have targeted the entire West Coast and Hawaii, especially, because the wild and natural beauty and diversity are 'precious' and 'need' to be preserved...and we are 'incapable' of 'governing' ourselves in the manner that the NWO needs us to. Or something VERY close to that!🤪
The NGO's-NPO's are the thin, silent wedges they drive into society and secretly, quietly TAKE OVER by usurping and taking over governance while appearing to 'do good'!
All these NGO's designed for liberal support that require mass tax $$$ that build radical liberal parties.Board commissioners are making sure their support groups get plenty of tax $$$ to hire more support for voting purposes to hopefully keep the taxaholic liberal parties in power.These taxaholic home wreckers are making clallam co unaffordable and will get more expensive because of their constant tax hikes.Liberal ignorants have property owners in their constant sight for as much $$$ as they can squeeze out. There is only one way to cure these home wreckers and like trump when you have bad elected & players get rid of them asap.
No tax money should EVER go to any NGO! Period. That isn't to say that some NGOs aren't good, honest, and useful, it's just that tax money should not go to them. If it's something the government SHOULD do, then keep it in government. If it's not, let only private funding go to the NGOs.
Guessing this is how Commissioner Ozias gets to operate. Mind you the language added was in 2025 from state legislation. Another fine example of how the state is controlled by circular power. The sickness in Clallam County is largely because of the Democratically controlled legislature.
(2) No state officer or state employee may participate in a transaction involving the state in his or her official capacity with a person of which the officer or employee is an officer, agent, employee, or member, or in which the officer or employee owns a beneficial interest, except that an officer or employee of an institution of higher education may serve as an officer, agent, employee, or member, or on the board of directors, board of trustees, advisory board, or committee or review panel for any nonprofit institute, foundation, or fund-raising entity; and may serve as a member of an advisory board, committee, or review panel for a governmental or other nonprofit entity.
Written with legalese with INTENTION so the NOziases of the world can LEGALLY, but not LAWFULLY, infiltrate, manipulate, obfuscate, lie, cheat and steal! It's on purpose.😈
There are goals to change the racial make up of a community. They used FEMA funds for climate migrants. It does not surprise me there is a non-profit push to make sure minorities get home loans..Its all about DEI these days. Hopefully its just another money laundering scheme for their Dean Witter portfolio....
I find the term non-profit to be meaningless. All organizations have expenses. If an organization is large enough, it has salaried employees and/or board members. If a non-profit has or shows a profit, it can simply bonus it's employees, expand or create more expenses.
"Nonprofit" is a designation of purpose and a tax classification. A nonprofit's purpose is serving the public good or a charitable cause. It's purpose is not to generate profit for owners, and surplus income must be reinvested to further its mission to keep it's nonprofit status. The IRS recognizes many types of nonprofits including religious organizations, veterans' organizations, charities, and educational institutions. Not every nonprofit classification receives the same tax benefits.
It is important to separate out "NGO" from "nonprofit." NGOs are nonprofits independent of the government, and whose purpose is to address a social or political issue. All NGOs are nonprofits, but not all nonprofits are NGOs.
Your definition is appreciated though it seems to support the definition of meaningless. When our Government gives money to NGOs how are they non-Government ? I appreciate the altruism in non-profits, but they too are subject to human weakness. As example, administrators within the BLM movement, a 501 (c) (3) public charity, took large sums for personal gain.
Funding does not equal control. An NGO is non government because it is not run by the government. It sets its own leadership and mission even if it accepts public grants or contracts. Governments use NGOs because they can be faster, more flexible, and have specialized expertise, and because this allows services to be delivered without creating new departments or permanent staff. That said, the criticism is fair. Heavy government funding can create dependence, blur accountability, and in some cases make NGOs act like de facto government proxies.
You're right about human weakness. Any system involving people will have bad actors, whether it's nonprofits, corporations, or government itself. In the BLM case, misuse of funds led to leadership resignations, investigations, and a collapse of donor trust, and the money taken clearly did not advance the mission it was meant to support. The failure there was not that it was a nonprofit, but that accountability broke down. The right lesson is better accountability, not assuming nonprofits or government programs are corrupt by default.
Generally, a donor advised fund is a separately identified fund or account that is maintained and operated by a section 501(c)(3) organization, which is called a sponsoring organization. Each account is composed of contributions made by individual donors. Once the donor makes the contribution, the organization has legal control over it. However, the donor, or the donor's representative, retains advisory privileges with respect to the distribution of funds and the investment of assets in the account.
The IRS is aware of a number of organizations that appeared to have abused the basic concepts underlying donor-advised funds. These organizations, promoted as donor-advised funds, appear to be established for the purpose of generating questionable charitable deductions, and providing impermissible economic benefits to donors and their families (including tax-sheltered investment income for the donors) and management fees for promoters.
Examinations of these arrangements may result in the following Service actions in appropriate cases:
disallow deductions for charitable contributions under Internal Revenue Code section 170 for payments to the fund;
impose section 4966 excise taxes on sponsoring organizations and managers of donor-advised funds;
impose section 4958 excise taxes on donors or managers of donor advised funds; and/or (d) deny or revoke the charity's 501(c)(3) exemption.
The commissioners did not answer yesterday's email. Today's question is:
Dear Commissioners,
When a commissioner promotes a nonprofit from the dais, should the public expect that any leadership or board role they hold in that organization will be disclosed on the record?
All three commissioners can be reached by emailing the Clerk of the Board at loni.gores@clallamcountywa.gov
Reader Note: Why This Mock Reply Is Being Shared
The response below is a modeled example of a lawful, good-governance reply that an individual county commissioner could provide to a public question like the one posed here.
It is intentionally written to show:
1. How a commissioner can acknowledge a public concern without speaking for the full Commission
2. How individual commissioners may express their own views and propose specific solutions
3. How those ideas must then be brought forward through an open public meeting before any decision is made
4. How transparency and ethics issues can be addressed without avoidance or overreach
The goal is to model accountable leadership, clear process, and public-facing transparency in local government.
Subject: Re: Disclosure When Promoting Nonprofits from the Dais
Dear Mr. Tozzer,
Thank you for your question regarding disclosure when a county commissioner promotes or highlights a nonprofit organization during an official meeting.
I want to be clear at the outset that no single commissioner can make decisions or establish policy on behalf of the Board outside of an open public meeting. Under Clallam County Code, each commissioner is an independently elected official and may express individual views, but actions of the Board must occur collectively and in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act (Clallam County Code [CCC] § 3.01.030).
Speaking only for myself, I believe the public should reasonably expect transparency when a commissioner promotes or endorses a nonprofit organization from the dais. Specifically, I believe any leadership, board, or fiduciary role a commissioner holds with that organization should be disclosed on the record. Even when a relationship does not rise to the level of a statutory conflict of interest, disclosure helps avoid the appearance of impropriety and supports public trust in local government (Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington [MRSC], n.d.-a).
As an individual commissioner, I intend to bring forward the following proposed governance practices for discussion by the full Commission in an open public meeting:
On-the-Record Disclosure
When a commissioner references or promotes a nonprofit organization in an official capacity, that commissioner should disclose any leadership or board role they hold with that organization at the time of the comment.
Annual Public Disclosure
Commissioners should maintain a publicly accessible list of nonprofit boards or leadership roles they serve in, updated annually, consistent with best practices for ethics and transparency (MRSC, n.d.-b).
Clear Recusal Expectations
When matters before the Commission directly affect a nonprofit with which a commissioner has a leadership or fiduciary role, that relationship should be disclosed, and recusal should occur where appropriate. MRSC guidance emphasizes that abstention alone may not fully address public perception concerns; proactive disclosure is a critical component of ethical governance (Doar, 2022).
These proposed practices are consistent with Washington State ethics law and MRSC guidance, which emphasize that transparency and disclosure are essential not only to prevent actual conflicts of interest, but also to maintain public confidence in governmental decision-making (MRSC, n.d.-a; MRSC, n.d.-c).
I welcome public input on these ideas and encourage community members to share their perspectives when this topic is brought forward for public discussion. Governance functions best when expectations are clearly stated, openly debated, and shaped through public participation.
Thank you for raising this issue and for your continued engagement in civic oversight.
Sincerely,
[Commissioner Name]
Clallam County Commissioner
(Individual opinion; not a statement of Board policy)
References (APA 7)
Clallam County Code. (n.d.). CCC 3.01.030 — Board of county commissioners: Authority and duties.
https://clallam.county.codes/CCC/3.01.030
Doar, S. (2022, February 22). Resolving financial conflicts of interest: Is abstaining from voting enough?
Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington.
https://mrsc.org/stay-informed/mrsc-insight/february-2022/resolving-financial-conflicts-of-interest
Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington. (n.d.-a). Ethics and conflicts of interest — Officials.
https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/officials/ethics/conflicts-of-interest
Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington. (n.d.-b). Local codes of ethics.
https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/personnel/ethics/codes-of-ethics
Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington. (n.d.-c). Conflicts of interest: Court decisions and AG opinions.
https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/decisions-agos/topics/conflicts-of-interest-court-decisions-and-agos
Thank you, Jeff, for digging into this. I felt uncomfortable at that meeting. Watching the promotion of Giving Tuesday made me ask myself: Why and how is this government business? You answered my question: It's all about Ozias. Doesn't he realize that this is shamefully biased and inappropriate? Taxpaying citizens don't get a seat at the table, but certain people with certain titles get access to the public podium. This is why, for years now, I don't give money to any charities anymore. Too much corruption. I prefer to help out in other ways. Besides, it's looking like my taxes are funding charitable NGOs and non-profits more than the basic necessary services. Despite all the news, MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!
He seems to share attributes with other idealogues we're familiar with. Occupy a position of public trust to further various agenda.
I really don’t understand why we have so many NGO’s in this county. I’ve talked to many of my friends who work in government all around our state and they can’t believe for such a small county why we have so many.
It reminds me of money laundering
Years ago many of the churches took care of much of this. Why does the county spend so much of our tax payer money to these organizations? There’s many people who donate to organizations including me after I examine where the money goes.
I feel our county needs to tighten their belts and give relief to the tax payer. Don’t get me wrong our county needs help but not by making more people homeless, no job, etc, why does you think you people don’t move here and so many are leaving this county and state
Chris, my reaction was identical.I had no idea it has become what appears to be a substantial industry (for lack of a better term) in our county. I am sure the majority of residents have no idea how intertwined the governance of these NGOs are. Everyone can choose to do whatever they want with their funds. However supporting local businesses which grow and pay TAXES would be a better choice. To early to compose this properly.
Exactly, why is government so entangled with this? If we dig into all the money that the county has given, I bet we’d all be surprised and frustrated.
Yes, but more like. Pissed off....
while being pissed on, by the Kommissars!😈
I'm thinking we would not be surprised. Its a scam, and a few are making a lot of money
Wasn't there an NGO map published about a year go, showing how intertwined they all are?
I bet the incestuous nature of it all would break the best link analysis tool out there.
https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1878601175052046460?referrer=grok.com
https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1886647920566636637?referrer=grok.com
https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1888438050231103559?referrer=grok.com
I have no doubt that the local NGOs' donor/donee graphs look similar
Some people simply volunteer to put their emotions into action, others see an opportunity to make money because of their emotions. The two are not the same.
And the real do-gooders are often completely naive.😊
We obviously have been targeted by the NWO for decades because they want to social-engineer us off the land and control all access and resources...they have targeted the entire West Coast and Hawaii, especially, because the wild and natural beauty and diversity are 'precious' and 'need' to be preserved...and we are 'incapable' of 'governing' ourselves in the manner that the NWO needs us to. Or something VERY close to that!🤪
The NGO's-NPO's are the thin, silent wedges they drive into society and secretly, quietly TAKE OVER by usurping and taking over governance while appearing to 'do good'!
Pretty effective, isn't it?😱
BINGO!
DOGE?
funny, I had a nice conversation about the commissioners with one of their supporters, she said Mark had lost his way in recent years!
I've not known of him longer to have witnessed his current corrupt condition.
That aside,
Merry Christmas to you and loved ones!
Merry Christmas to you and your friends & family Jeff Tozzer~!
Merry Christmas to all of the good folks on The Clallam County Watchdog who play such a positive role to help our community~!
Sincerely, Mike
Thank you Jeff for starting CCWD and all your tireless effort. Thanks to all who are supporting you in everyway.
Merry Christmas to all and a less taxing new Year.
All these NGO's designed for liberal support that require mass tax $$$ that build radical liberal parties.Board commissioners are making sure their support groups get plenty of tax $$$ to hire more support for voting purposes to hopefully keep the taxaholic liberal parties in power.These taxaholic home wreckers are making clallam co unaffordable and will get more expensive because of their constant tax hikes.Liberal ignorants have property owners in their constant sight for as much $$$ as they can squeeze out. There is only one way to cure these home wreckers and like trump when you have bad elected & players get rid of them asap.
No tax money should EVER go to any NGO! Period. That isn't to say that some NGOs aren't good, honest, and useful, it's just that tax money should not go to them. If it's something the government SHOULD do, then keep it in government. If it's not, let only private funding go to the NGOs.
So much blatant corruption and so many conflicts of interests.
Disgusting and evil actions by entitled 'shoe-ins'.
Very disturbing.😳
Thanks for the Christmas wish Jeff!
Guessing this is how Commissioner Ozias gets to operate. Mind you the language added was in 2025 from state legislation. Another fine example of how the state is controlled by circular power. The sickness in Clallam County is largely because of the Democratically controlled legislature.
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2025-26/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Laws/Senate/5143-S.SL.pdf?cite=2025%20c%20377%20s%203
https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=42.52&full=true#42.52.030
(2) No state officer or state employee may participate in a transaction involving the state in his or her official capacity with a person of which the officer or employee is an officer, agent, employee, or member, or in which the officer or employee owns a beneficial interest, except that an officer or employee of an institution of higher education may serve as an officer, agent, employee, or member, or on the board of directors, board of trustees, advisory board, or committee or review panel for any nonprofit institute, foundation, or fund-raising entity; and may serve as a member of an advisory board, committee, or review panel for a governmental or other nonprofit entity.
Written with legalese with INTENTION so the NOziases of the world can LEGALLY, but not LAWFULLY, infiltrate, manipulate, obfuscate, lie, cheat and steal! It's on purpose.😈
Just because it is legal does not make it ethical ...
The radical's playbook, just change the definition.
Thank you Robert...I would have hit "like" but it's hard to like that kind of corruption!
There are goals to change the racial make up of a community. They used FEMA funds for climate migrants. It does not surprise me there is a non-profit push to make sure minorities get home loans..Its all about DEI these days. Hopefully its just another money laundering scheme for their Dean Witter portfolio....
The truth hurts
I'm taking up donations to buy a lump of coal for Commissioner Ozias 😆
How about four bags of coal for those on the pedestal .
I find the term non-profit to be meaningless. All organizations have expenses. If an organization is large enough, it has salaried employees and/or board members. If a non-profit has or shows a profit, it can simply bonus it's employees, expand or create more expenses.
"Nonprofit" is a designation of purpose and a tax classification. A nonprofit's purpose is serving the public good or a charitable cause. It's purpose is not to generate profit for owners, and surplus income must be reinvested to further its mission to keep it's nonprofit status. The IRS recognizes many types of nonprofits including religious organizations, veterans' organizations, charities, and educational institutions. Not every nonprofit classification receives the same tax benefits.
It is important to separate out "NGO" from "nonprofit." NGOs are nonprofits independent of the government, and whose purpose is to address a social or political issue. All NGOs are nonprofits, but not all nonprofits are NGOs.
Your definition is appreciated though it seems to support the definition of meaningless. When our Government gives money to NGOs how are they non-Government ? I appreciate the altruism in non-profits, but they too are subject to human weakness. As example, administrators within the BLM movement, a 501 (c) (3) public charity, took large sums for personal gain.
Funding does not equal control. An NGO is non government because it is not run by the government. It sets its own leadership and mission even if it accepts public grants or contracts. Governments use NGOs because they can be faster, more flexible, and have specialized expertise, and because this allows services to be delivered without creating new departments or permanent staff. That said, the criticism is fair. Heavy government funding can create dependence, blur accountability, and in some cases make NGOs act like de facto government proxies.
You're right about human weakness. Any system involving people will have bad actors, whether it's nonprofits, corporations, or government itself. In the BLM case, misuse of funds led to leadership resignations, investigations, and a collapse of donor trust, and the money taken clearly did not advance the mission it was meant to support. The failure there was not that it was a nonprofit, but that accountability broke down. The right lesson is better accountability, not assuming nonprofits or government programs are corrupt by default.
Thank you, agree and assume most non-profits are worthy and beneficial.
Generally, a donor advised fund is a separately identified fund or account that is maintained and operated by a section 501(c)(3) organization, which is called a sponsoring organization. Each account is composed of contributions made by individual donors. Once the donor makes the contribution, the organization has legal control over it. However, the donor, or the donor's representative, retains advisory privileges with respect to the distribution of funds and the investment of assets in the account.
The IRS is aware of a number of organizations that appeared to have abused the basic concepts underlying donor-advised funds. These organizations, promoted as donor-advised funds, appear to be established for the purpose of generating questionable charitable deductions, and providing impermissible economic benefits to donors and their families (including tax-sheltered investment income for the donors) and management fees for promoters.
Examinations of these arrangements may result in the following Service actions in appropriate cases:
disallow deductions for charitable contributions under Internal Revenue Code section 170 for payments to the fund;
impose section 4966 excise taxes on sponsoring organizations and managers of donor-advised funds;
impose section 4958 excise taxes on donors or managers of donor advised funds; and/or (d) deny or revoke the charity's 501(c)(3) exemption.