Thank you Jeff for another great article highlighting the Ethical challenges this county faces. Of special interest to me was listening to the video link of the District 1 Charter Review Commission candidates. It was foretelling how they would likely address this challenge for the county. Of course you and Tom Ash get it, the attorney likely does but likely hasn't actually read/seen the problem, and the other two frankly seemed to give it a pass. I think it's because they just can't see the problem, and see the solution as onerous. They are not only wrong, but when they talk about putting up controls for the DCD position they are unwittingly admitting to a similar need for a robust Ethics code.
I took notes as I listened to statements those who showed lackluster concern for the County's Ethics code, and as I have suspected will be the response even the Commissioners would use to rebuff efforts. There are actual laws that control this, etc. Well, that's a partially correct answer, but it still doesn't answer why we even have an Ethics code for elected officials, with no enforcement mechanisms. A quality Ethics program doesn't hinder how an entity works, it enhances it and mitigates cost and liabilities. We have work to do.
I would encourage every reader here to take an hour or so and listen to the responses of the candidates yourselves. Don't take my word for it, hear it, then decide. With that said here are some of the key words I heard being tossed around:
- "County officials are obligated to follow county policies...there has to be an ultimate authority." and "Elected officials are obligated to follow County Code, which is essentially law." On the surface that sounds right, but our County's Ethics code makes no obligation to follow the policy. What about that?
- "Ethics board could be influenced by special interests." Maybe they could, if they were written like the County's Ethics Code. Write them in a smart way and that concern is mitigated.
- "The cost of recall is expensive and rarely works." So why not have a strong Ethics code that mitigates the chances of recall by addressing potential problems before they occur?
See me as Arnold Horshack on Welcome Back Kotter with his hand wildly flailing about in the air to volunteer when it comes to standing up a commission to build a better Ethics program for the county, one that isn't beholden to special interest groups or political affiliation.
An Ethics program not only needs to contain enforcement language (which ours hasn't since it was removed by previous Commissioners, I wonder why?) but it also needs to provide mechanisms that reduce the chances of violating it and that is where it is non-partisan, special interest. Mind you one of these previous Commissioners is running again to retain their 24th LD position (the other is running as well but was absent when the County Commissioners Ethics re-write vote was taken but let's be real I doubt he would have stood in the way). I suggest readers go to WASHCOG.ORG and read about their fight to prevent misuse of the 'legislative privilege' around disclosing records request pursuant to the PRA (Public Records Act). What's the position of our two current representatives? Is it consistent with not having an enforceable County Ethics program because that would hold elected officials accountable to the people?
Think of each time a project starts, money is to be spent, etc, that an elected official is obligated to disclose personal interests or conflicts so that they don't become a problem later. They would mitigate their own potential violation of the County's Ethics code, but also minimize legal liability to the county. Identified conflicts would get a board approved work-around so that everyone knows what's going on. Apply these guidelines to the Recompete money the County was awarded and is doling out and would we see the same result? And lastly, a strong Ethics programs instills trust in the voters. Isn't that the highest calling?
Edit: Don't get me started on NGOs being exempt from public records requests when actions they take are at the behest of the government entity that gave them taxpayer money. I can't believe that to date there has been no legal challenge to a quasi agent of the government relationship that requires any taxpayer money that goes to another organization not to have to explain how it is being used.
WOW! Yet another excellent exposé, Jeff! You rock!
Like cancers, these NGOs with superficially-good-sounding names, infiltrate our community and government and spread their corruption, right under our noses, and all under the watchful eyes of our disingenuous elected leaders, who buy their votes using our tax money, instead of earning them by truly representing the community.
The days when angry people with pitchforks and nooses would make things right seem appealing to the duplicitous governmental manipulations and hand-tying we now face. Even in modern times we could "vote the rascals out", but these rascals have managed to infiltrate our election systems wholesale, preventing even that.
It’s a true shame that your exposé is not front-page news in the PDN, Gazette, and local television channels.
You're welcome, N.O.I. The hits just keep coming, don't they? I've talked to the Gazette, written to the PDN, and emailed several Seattle outlets... they sadly just aren't interested.
It goes to remind us where the media's interests lie.
Have you considered OAN, Newsmax, Bongino, Tucker, Epoch Times, James O'Keefe? Although this is impacting our tiny community, I can't help but assume this corruption is widespread and may be overdue for a bright light to be shone on it.
It is in every county in our state. Nonprofit organizations have land grabbed using the climate change conspiracy, paid for by tax payers and handed out by our fearless leader, Joe Biden. He signed the 30 by 30 bill, his first week in office, also signed back into the UN treaty that Trump saved us from… that’s another story… the 30 by 30 bill is a land grab to take back 30% of Washington, and the rest of our nation, by 2030, using conservation companies that are all linked to Jefferson County land trust. Land that is off limits to humans for 100 years. Some money is used from concerned citizens for future generations, that’s the one on our property tax bills. WE ARE PAYING FOR OUR LAND TO BE TAKEN AWAY. Why wouldn’t every citizen be concerned about this going on? Time to let it out and do something
This is just an observation, but about 10-12 years ago I learned of a childhood friend (now in her 60s) who was persuing a PhD in teaching people how to organize, and set up NGOs in the state of Oregon. It sounded like an unusual PhD category.
Looking back now, NGO’s originally looked like organizations formed to support worthy causes. They now seem to be just another way to grab money and power through the back door of our government.
Thank you, Jeff, for continuing to shed light into the dark corners of our no longer transparent government.
We are so lucky you live in Clallam County, Jeff, and that you're a seeker of truth and a warrior for the underdog (aka taxpayers). Thank you for all you do.
We have a wonderful group of gadfly's in Clallam County that I am fortunate to be able to call friends. Even the guy from Macdonald Creek has intelligent words to impart upon the Commissioners. In honor of you all I write.
The NODC is an internationally created organization. They set out a format that was required to be followed to qualify as an ICLEI NGO. They put it in writing here.
"The scope of municipal planning and management is traditionally constrained by a variety of factors, including: political jurisdiction; limits in legislative or constitutional authority; the professional standards of key management disciplines; technology; and financial resources. While these constraints focus the municipal planning task, they also prevent methodical and routine consideration of many social, economic, and environmental developments that are outside the municipal purview (e.g., national infrastructure projects, land markets, labor legislation, terms of trade). As the impacts of these developments increase (e.g., population migration, depletion of water resources, loss of industries, youth unemployment), the lack of methodical consideration of such impacts in municipal planning can severely undermine the performance of municipal service systems and related infrastructure."
Dungeness water, climate migrants..
In this "planning guide" they had to create an "action plan." Then a mechanism had to be created to make sure the action plan is carried out.
"While the municipality institutes internal reforms to support partnership approaches, external projects and/or service partnerships must be formalized. Agreements that outline the responsibilities and investments of each partner are required, including specific work schedules and methods for ongoing monitoring of work. "The Stakeholder Group or municipality may consider it necessary to establish a new organization or institution to coordinate the implementation of certain aspects of an Action Plan."
"Partners are not ad hoc participants who occasionally share their opinions. On the contrary, they are expected to share responsibility for the planning process and its outcomes. Their involvement needs to be facilitated through an organizational mechanism. In the cases provided with this chapter, each municipality established special organizational structures to oversee the partnership planning process. For some, this coordinating mechanism was external to the municipality."
"The process of building partnerships must be facilitated by some institution that is seen by diverse community interests to be legitimate."
"***Plans requires adjustments in standard operating procedures and, oftentimes, some institutional reorganization. Pre-existing administrative procedures, "
Hey you, my fellow gadfly, they did some reorganization on "pre-existing administrative procedures," because that was the only thing that would stop them.
That is the NGO we know as NODC. Operating externally out from under the Administrative Procedures Act. Operating where..they don't have to listen and where the gadfly's cant stop them.
This is us now. Gadfly's tilting our windmills at the international sustainable development fraud operating out of our reach.
Under the APA, when we show up and make comments, we get what is called "participational standing." Not only that, they have to address and account for our comments. If they do not we get redressability based upon the agency record showing they did not account for and address concerns that were raised. Its a low threshold to prevent money..and power from log rolling bad policy unopposed.
They despise the gadfly's here in Washington. Especially me. Jeff got an email from one of them talking about me, never once addressing my specific concerns just lamenting about me having the nerve to raise them. That email demonstrates how they feel and treat gadfly's here.
Everything the NODC, aka the Two County Squares does, is all decided by a foreign government. Every bit of it. In fact the entire state and local government is all decided by an international government.
Every bit of what they are doing is supposed to be illegal unless they have registered as foreign agents, but none of them have. The democratic party runs the federal FARA Unit, so that statute is only for Republicans. Its a $250,000 fine and or 5 years in prison to agree to "build and serve" a foreign nation, without registering as a foreign agent.
Their biggest mistake is funding the NODC directly. The last time our Supreme Court decided a case regarding an NGO, they were termed "volunteers" because none of them were getting paid or were using public funds. They just leveraged policy with outside money. That was:
There was no evidence on the record in that case that money came directly from a government to the NGO. At that time it was a leveraging situation. They gave money to the NGO and the NGO would say if you want this money you have to do adopt this policy. That is the formula the ruling was based on.
It was only a matter of time before money started going via grants to the NGO.
Re-compete is not the first. It started with the Cares Act, and the gift just keeps on giving..our money. They are not volunteers anymore, they are unregistered foreign agents, implementing and directly funding a foreign public policy.
They do not enjoy firm footing against the gadfly's right now.
I'm guessing when our politicians hand out money to NGOs there are no requirements to submit a business case for the funds, nor performance measures that drive future decisions whether said NGO has delivered on their request for funds.
I'm guessing you are right. When French gave a presentation months ago, during the grant application phase, other recipients provided numbers and accounting but nothing from the NODC.
That's how they hide the civil rights violations. They hand out money based on race, and avoid the civil rights language in the statement of assurances to get the money. It allows them to sign a grant agreeing not to commit civil rights violations, and then they give money to a non-profit to commit civil rights violations that the county agreed not to commit. There is also a conflict of interest section in the statement of assurances. Reparations for colonization and the rest of the equity stuff is a major conflict of interest, that should have been disclosed, before getting the money.
If they send a county matching portion of funds over to NODC, the Supreme Court considers that a form of leveraging, and is not cause to be subject to the APA and public access laws. The Cares Act, Climate Commitment Act, Re-compete, and direct public money changes the formula and opens the door for lawsuits challenging the funding. Many of us gadfly's have participational standing to challenge the re-compete money. The best way is to present the civil rights violations to the granting federal agency and then sue them when they don't act.. The state court system will just give them what they want. Right now the feds can say we did not know the grantee was going to dole out money based on race and then hide it.
That would be too egregious and Larry King would talk about that if he were alive.
How it works is that the people getting the $2,000 per tribal citizen, are getting that because they are allegedly overburdened and underserved.
The overburdening allegedly comes from local industry polluting sources. The underserved comes from the Bureau of Indian Affairs ( BIA) and Department of Interior (DOI).
They feds underserve them because they want the military industrial complex to get the tribal portions. Its not my state or local governments job to serve them. They do so to get campaign contributions and so the party can reap from the kickback machine.
The World Economy and the shipping pollution is everyone's biggest polluting source by far and all the tribes have done since 2010 is aid the world economy to create more pollution for us all.
The fact is proportionately non-natives are over burdened and underserved. Jeff's math does not include revenue from a 40 year fishing and harvesting commercial monopoly. Its so uneven it is sickening now.
They just hammered us for a gas tax that funds tribal communities all over the state if the initiative doesn't take it out, based on the same rubbish.
The disparity they had during my parents time is no more. I see the faces of tribal members making so much money the last 40 years, they have all these ex wives, rehab stints at Oxford house. They brag about making 2 million bucks 4x4 trucks, tax free commercial fishing operations. Even the lazy ones make a million with no problem. If they have not passed away prematurely/
My brain is on fire! Thank you Jeff. I shared your column with an acquaintance. His comment to me was “I didn’t think I’d have to worry about my home town!”
That's so sweet of your friend, Paula. I will shine a light on this County no matter what, I'll never be compromised... unless someone makes me a deal where I can meet singing legend and acting icon Cher. I would sell this County and everyone in it for a chance to meet Cher. Other than that though, I'm committed.
None of this would pass if they were federal government contractors the mere appearance is cause for investigation. But CC has some cases of intent to deceive. Realtor attempted to sell property with no conduit wire electrical to property after claiming there was, only an empty tube. Seller produced a bid for road, never built. Classic Intent to Deceive tactics. Bellevue Exprosecutor, attorney raised his brows looking over these shady practices committed by CC associates. I wouldn’t be surprised if one day these tactics catch up with CC.
This is also " deep." And conservation futures show up on every parcel of our original farm,yet, not on any clallam county records search.I used to watch a cable television program on HBO with my parents ,in Port Angeles.The series was titled" Big Love" and it was about a polygamous mormon business man and his 3 wives , and his mom,dad other family who lived on the" compound." Bruce Dern played his father, and the rest of the cast were extremely talented as well.Part of the series ,which,is completely fictional of course, is about the Main character, ( played by Bill Paxton,) and his ,and the LDS's relationshio with the Casino gaming Industry, the ones owned by Native American Tribes.
Thank you Jeff for another great article highlighting the Ethical challenges this county faces. Of special interest to me was listening to the video link of the District 1 Charter Review Commission candidates. It was foretelling how they would likely address this challenge for the county. Of course you and Tom Ash get it, the attorney likely does but likely hasn't actually read/seen the problem, and the other two frankly seemed to give it a pass. I think it's because they just can't see the problem, and see the solution as onerous. They are not only wrong, but when they talk about putting up controls for the DCD position they are unwittingly admitting to a similar need for a robust Ethics code.
I took notes as I listened to statements those who showed lackluster concern for the County's Ethics code, and as I have suspected will be the response even the Commissioners would use to rebuff efforts. There are actual laws that control this, etc. Well, that's a partially correct answer, but it still doesn't answer why we even have an Ethics code for elected officials, with no enforcement mechanisms. A quality Ethics program doesn't hinder how an entity works, it enhances it and mitigates cost and liabilities. We have work to do.
I would encourage every reader here to take an hour or so and listen to the responses of the candidates yourselves. Don't take my word for it, hear it, then decide. With that said here are some of the key words I heard being tossed around:
- "County officials are obligated to follow county policies...there has to be an ultimate authority." and "Elected officials are obligated to follow County Code, which is essentially law." On the surface that sounds right, but our County's Ethics code makes no obligation to follow the policy. What about that?
- "Ethics board could be influenced by special interests." Maybe they could, if they were written like the County's Ethics Code. Write them in a smart way and that concern is mitigated.
- "The cost of recall is expensive and rarely works." So why not have a strong Ethics code that mitigates the chances of recall by addressing potential problems before they occur?
See me as Arnold Horshack on Welcome Back Kotter with his hand wildly flailing about in the air to volunteer when it comes to standing up a commission to build a better Ethics program for the county, one that isn't beholden to special interest groups or political affiliation.
An Ethics program not only needs to contain enforcement language (which ours hasn't since it was removed by previous Commissioners, I wonder why?) but it also needs to provide mechanisms that reduce the chances of violating it and that is where it is non-partisan, special interest. Mind you one of these previous Commissioners is running again to retain their 24th LD position (the other is running as well but was absent when the County Commissioners Ethics re-write vote was taken but let's be real I doubt he would have stood in the way). I suggest readers go to WASHCOG.ORG and read about their fight to prevent misuse of the 'legislative privilege' around disclosing records request pursuant to the PRA (Public Records Act). What's the position of our two current representatives? Is it consistent with not having an enforceable County Ethics program because that would hold elected officials accountable to the people?
Think of each time a project starts, money is to be spent, etc, that an elected official is obligated to disclose personal interests or conflicts so that they don't become a problem later. They would mitigate their own potential violation of the County's Ethics code, but also minimize legal liability to the county. Identified conflicts would get a board approved work-around so that everyone knows what's going on. Apply these guidelines to the Recompete money the County was awarded and is doling out and would we see the same result? And lastly, a strong Ethics programs instills trust in the voters. Isn't that the highest calling?
Edit: Don't get me started on NGOs being exempt from public records requests when actions they take are at the behest of the government entity that gave them taxpayer money. I can't believe that to date there has been no legal challenge to a quasi agent of the government relationship that requires any taxpayer money that goes to another organization not to have to explain how it is being used.
Terrific breakdown of the forum, thank you for listening to it and summarizing the highlights.
Our county assessor was an employee at the klallam Jamestown casino, for many years, Pam Ruston. I wonder how she got elected?
WOW! Yet another excellent exposé, Jeff! You rock!
Like cancers, these NGOs with superficially-good-sounding names, infiltrate our community and government and spread their corruption, right under our noses, and all under the watchful eyes of our disingenuous elected leaders, who buy their votes using our tax money, instead of earning them by truly representing the community.
The days when angry people with pitchforks and nooses would make things right seem appealing to the duplicitous governmental manipulations and hand-tying we now face. Even in modern times we could "vote the rascals out", but these rascals have managed to infiltrate our election systems wholesale, preventing even that.
It’s a true shame that your exposé is not front-page news in the PDN, Gazette, and local television channels.
You're welcome, N.O.I. The hits just keep coming, don't they? I've talked to the Gazette, written to the PDN, and emailed several Seattle outlets... they sadly just aren't interested.
It goes to remind us where the media's interests lie.
Have you considered OAN, Newsmax, Bongino, Tucker, Epoch Times, James O'Keefe? Although this is impacting our tiny community, I can't help but assume this corruption is widespread and may be overdue for a bright light to be shone on it.
It is in every county in our state. Nonprofit organizations have land grabbed using the climate change conspiracy, paid for by tax payers and handed out by our fearless leader, Joe Biden. He signed the 30 by 30 bill, his first week in office, also signed back into the UN treaty that Trump saved us from… that’s another story… the 30 by 30 bill is a land grab to take back 30% of Washington, and the rest of our nation, by 2030, using conservation companies that are all linked to Jefferson County land trust. Land that is off limits to humans for 100 years. Some money is used from concerned citizens for future generations, that’s the one on our property tax bills. WE ARE PAYING FOR OUR LAND TO BE TAKEN AWAY. Why wouldn’t every citizen be concerned about this going on? Time to let it out and do something
Thankyou.
You're welcome Brenda!
Email Lars Larson. Seriously he answers all emails.
He didn't answer mine :(
This is just an observation, but about 10-12 years ago I learned of a childhood friend (now in her 60s) who was persuing a PhD in teaching people how to organize, and set up NGOs in the state of Oregon. It sounded like an unusual PhD category.
Looking back now, NGO’s originally looked like organizations formed to support worthy causes. They now seem to be just another way to grab money and power through the back door of our government.
Thank you, Jeff, for continuing to shed light into the dark corners of our no longer transparent government.
You're welcome, Sally. When 6% goes to administrative fees, getting grants for NGOs can be a very lucrative career path.
Thanks Jeff. So glad your going down this road.
We are so lucky you live in Clallam County, Jeff, and that you're a seeker of truth and a warrior for the underdog (aka taxpayers). Thank you for all you do.
*blushing*
Awesome work. I can't stop reading this.
I hope the tribe and Commissioners read this and see just how much we are watching and what is being said about the situation publicly.
Gosh I wish some of this money would go to our dog crisis right now!
That might be possible if our elected officials judiciously spend tax payer dollars.
Or if they used business
We have a wonderful group of gadfly's in Clallam County that I am fortunate to be able to call friends. Even the guy from Macdonald Creek has intelligent words to impart upon the Commissioners. In honor of you all I write.
The NODC is an internationally created organization. They set out a format that was required to be followed to qualify as an ICLEI NGO. They put it in writing here.
https://idrc-crdi.ca/sites/default/files/openebooks/448-2/index.html.
Sustainable planning they say:
"The scope of municipal planning and management is traditionally constrained by a variety of factors, including: political jurisdiction; limits in legislative or constitutional authority; the professional standards of key management disciplines; technology; and financial resources. While these constraints focus the municipal planning task, they also prevent methodical and routine consideration of many social, economic, and environmental developments that are outside the municipal purview (e.g., national infrastructure projects, land markets, labor legislation, terms of trade). As the impacts of these developments increase (e.g., population migration, depletion of water resources, loss of industries, youth unemployment), the lack of methodical consideration of such impacts in municipal planning can severely undermine the performance of municipal service systems and related infrastructure."
Dungeness water, climate migrants..
In this "planning guide" they had to create an "action plan." Then a mechanism had to be created to make sure the action plan is carried out.
"While the municipality institutes internal reforms to support partnership approaches, external projects and/or service partnerships must be formalized. Agreements that outline the responsibilities and investments of each partner are required, including specific work schedules and methods for ongoing monitoring of work. "The Stakeholder Group or municipality may consider it necessary to establish a new organization or institution to coordinate the implementation of certain aspects of an Action Plan."
"Partners are not ad hoc participants who occasionally share their opinions. On the contrary, they are expected to share responsibility for the planning process and its outcomes. Their involvement needs to be facilitated through an organizational mechanism. In the cases provided with this chapter, each municipality established special organizational structures to oversee the partnership planning process. For some, this coordinating mechanism was external to the municipality."
"The process of building partnerships must be facilitated by some institution that is seen by diverse community interests to be legitimate."
"***Plans requires adjustments in standard operating procedures and, oftentimes, some institutional reorganization. Pre-existing administrative procedures, "
Hey you, my fellow gadfly, they did some reorganization on "pre-existing administrative procedures," because that was the only thing that would stop them.
That is the NGO we know as NODC. Operating externally out from under the Administrative Procedures Act. Operating where..they don't have to listen and where the gadfly's cant stop them.
This is us now. Gadfly's tilting our windmills at the international sustainable development fraud operating out of our reach.
Under the APA, when we show up and make comments, we get what is called "participational standing." Not only that, they have to address and account for our comments. If they do not we get redressability based upon the agency record showing they did not account for and address concerns that were raised. Its a low threshold to prevent money..and power from log rolling bad policy unopposed.
They despise the gadfly's here in Washington. Especially me. Jeff got an email from one of them talking about me, never once addressing my specific concerns just lamenting about me having the nerve to raise them. That email demonstrates how they feel and treat gadfly's here.
Everything the NODC, aka the Two County Squares does, is all decided by a foreign government. Every bit of it. In fact the entire state and local government is all decided by an international government.
Every bit of what they are doing is supposed to be illegal unless they have registered as foreign agents, but none of them have. The democratic party runs the federal FARA Unit, so that statute is only for Republicans. Its a $250,000 fine and or 5 years in prison to agree to "build and serve" a foreign nation, without registering as a foreign agent.
Their biggest mistake is funding the NODC directly. The last time our Supreme Court decided a case regarding an NGO, they were termed "volunteers" because none of them were getting paid or were using public funds. They just leveraged policy with outside money. That was:
Cascade Bicycle Club,et Al. v. Puget Sound Regional Council, 67549-4 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013)
There was no evidence on the record in that case that money came directly from a government to the NGO. At that time it was a leveraging situation. They gave money to the NGO and the NGO would say if you want this money you have to do adopt this policy. That is the formula the ruling was based on.
It was only a matter of time before money started going via grants to the NGO.
Re-compete is not the first. It started with the Cares Act, and the gift just keeps on giving..our money. They are not volunteers anymore, they are unregistered foreign agents, implementing and directly funding a foreign public policy.
They do not enjoy firm footing against the gadfly's right now.
I'm guessing when our politicians hand out money to NGOs there are no requirements to submit a business case for the funds, nor performance measures that drive future decisions whether said NGO has delivered on their request for funds.
I'm guessing you are right. When French gave a presentation months ago, during the grant application phase, other recipients provided numbers and accounting but nothing from the NODC.
That's how they hide the civil rights violations. They hand out money based on race, and avoid the civil rights language in the statement of assurances to get the money. It allows them to sign a grant agreeing not to commit civil rights violations, and then they give money to a non-profit to commit civil rights violations that the county agreed not to commit. There is also a conflict of interest section in the statement of assurances. Reparations for colonization and the rest of the equity stuff is a major conflict of interest, that should have been disclosed, before getting the money.
If they send a county matching portion of funds over to NODC, the Supreme Court considers that a form of leveraging, and is not cause to be subject to the APA and public access laws. The Cares Act, Climate Commitment Act, Re-compete, and direct public money changes the formula and opens the door for lawsuits challenging the funding. Many of us gadfly's have participational standing to challenge the re-compete money. The best way is to present the civil rights violations to the granting federal agency and then sue them when they don't act.. The state court system will just give them what they want. Right now the feds can say we did not know the grantee was going to dole out money based on race and then hide it.
By that logic, I could hire a hit man to kill someone and be personally free of crime. Is THAT how it works?
That would be too egregious and Larry King would talk about that if he were alive.
How it works is that the people getting the $2,000 per tribal citizen, are getting that because they are allegedly overburdened and underserved.
The overburdening allegedly comes from local industry polluting sources. The underserved comes from the Bureau of Indian Affairs ( BIA) and Department of Interior (DOI).
They feds underserve them because they want the military industrial complex to get the tribal portions. Its not my state or local governments job to serve them. They do so to get campaign contributions and so the party can reap from the kickback machine.
The World Economy and the shipping pollution is everyone's biggest polluting source by far and all the tribes have done since 2010 is aid the world economy to create more pollution for us all.
The fact is proportionately non-natives are over burdened and underserved. Jeff's math does not include revenue from a 40 year fishing and harvesting commercial monopoly. Its so uneven it is sickening now.
They just hammered us for a gas tax that funds tribal communities all over the state if the initiative doesn't take it out, based on the same rubbish.
The disparity they had during my parents time is no more. I see the faces of tribal members making so much money the last 40 years, they have all these ex wives, rehab stints at Oxford house. They brag about making 2 million bucks 4x4 trucks, tax free commercial fishing operations. Even the lazy ones make a million with no problem. If they have not passed away prematurely/
My brain is on fire! Thank you Jeff. I shared your column with an acquaintance. His comment to me was “I didn’t think I’d have to worry about my home town!”
We love you Jeff!!!
That's so sweet of your friend, Paula. I will shine a light on this County no matter what, I'll never be compromised... unless someone makes me a deal where I can meet singing legend and acting icon Cher. I would sell this County and everyone in it for a chance to meet Cher. Other than that though, I'm committed.
I might have to start calling you "The great Mutato"
Looks like the best way to build a multi-million-dollar non-profit is to be a County Commissioner politician endorsing your own grant!
I wonder who these groups vote for???
None of this would pass if they were federal government contractors the mere appearance is cause for investigation. But CC has some cases of intent to deceive. Realtor attempted to sell property with no conduit wire electrical to property after claiming there was, only an empty tube. Seller produced a bid for road, never built. Classic Intent to Deceive tactics. Bellevue Exprosecutor, attorney raised his brows looking over these shady practices committed by CC associates. I wouldn’t be surprised if one day these tactics catch up with CC.
Ozias/Clallam County..........Ozias/NODC...........Eberle/DLTA
This is also " deep." And conservation futures show up on every parcel of our original farm,yet, not on any clallam county records search.I used to watch a cable television program on HBO with my parents ,in Port Angeles.The series was titled" Big Love" and it was about a polygamous mormon business man and his 3 wives , and his mom,dad other family who lived on the" compound." Bruce Dern played his father, and the rest of the cast were extremely talented as well.Part of the series ,which,is completely fictional of course, is about the Main character, ( played by Bill Paxton,) and his ,and the LDS's relationshio with the Casino gaming Industry, the ones owned by Native American Tribes.