When residents are told that taxes must rise, services must shrink, and “equity” must always come before fairness, it’s worth asking: who really benefits? These ten stories from around Clallam County shine a light on contradictions in government, nonprofits, and policy—where good intentions often mask costly outcomes.

Jamestown’s growing footprint

Olympic Cellars, the historic winery on Highway 101 between Sequim and Port Angeles, now appears to be “Under Contract” with a purchase and sale agreement. According to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribal Properties webmap, the likely buyer is the Tribe itself.

That interactive online map is a fascinating window into how the Tribe operates. It lists every category of ownership—land already in trust (and therefore tax-free), land pending trust, land in fee status, and land under contract. It includes links to the County Assessor’s page so you can see how much the Tribe is (or isn’t) paying in property taxes. Recent entries include parcels in Diamond Point, off River Road in Sequim, and even civic spaces like the Dungeness River Nature Center. Individually, these transactions look ordinary. Collectively, they paint the picture of a monopoly in the making.

Why does it matter? Because every parcel taken off the property tax rolls increases the tax burden on the rest of us. Every time the Tribe buys a competitor in hospitality, gaming, or even wine, they sidestep the taxes, fees, and regulations other businesses must shoulder. Competing against that is like entering a boxing match where one fighter has to wear weights on his wrists while the other floats free. The scoreboard isn’t fair, and everyone else in Clallam County is paying the price.

Theft rising, businesses closing

Six Fred Meyer stores in the Seattle area are shutting down—not because customers stopped shopping, but because theft and security costs devoured the profit margin. It’s a striking reminder that when crime is normalized, even major retailers can’t absorb the losses forever.

Port Angeles had its own recently when thieves used a stolen truck to yank an ATM out of a convenience store at First and Albert. The suspects ripped the back door off the building, dragged the ATM into the alley, and then abandoned both the truck and the machine. Police recovered the stolen property, but the thief escaped. The store, meanwhile, is left with tens of thousands in damage and repair bills.

Large retailers can sometimes cut their losses and move on, but for local businesses, that’s not an option. Every repair, every higher insurance premium, and every theft that isn’t covered must either be absorbed or passed onto customers. That means higher prices in an already struggling county. And if even Fred Meyer can’t keep its doors open in the face of theft, what chance does a family-owned store in Clallam County really have?

County policy adds insult to injury. By handing out free syringes, pipes, and “harm reduction kits,” taxpayers are effectively supplying the tools for illegal drug use—without ever addressing how the drugs themselves are purchased. It doesn’t take a criminologist to see the pattern: addiction drives theft, theft fuels addiction, and the cycle repeats. Compassion is not giving away the tools of destruction while ignoring the cost to victims.

Firefighters or felons? The Border Patrol arrest

At a recent county commissioners’ meeting, District 3 resident Ellen Menshew claimed that Border Patrol agents had “arrested firefighters” at the Bear Gulch fire near Lake Cushman, jeopardizing emergency efforts. The Peninsula Daily News had already reported that the detained individuals were not firefighters at all, but contractors cutting firewood near the fire line.

According to Seattle media, one of those contractors turned out to be a Mexican national with a conviction for methamphetamine distribution. Far from hindering firefighting, Border Patrol agents removed a convicted drug trafficker from the scene.

In a region where addiction is quietly tolerated and even subsidized under the banner of “harm reduction,” the drug supply chain is rarely discussed. But without distributors, there are no drugs. Without drugs, there are fewer overdoses, fewer thefts, and fewer ruined lives. The real interference isn’t law enforcement—it’s local leaders turning a blind eye to the system that keeps meth on our streets.

From Missouri to Clallam County

Clallam County’s jail roster is no stranger to repeat offenders, but the arrival of Nicholas Glen Drebenstedt raises the question of why the Peninsula seems to attract them. Drebenstedt, 33, was booked last weekend for unlawful imprisonment and fourth-degree domestic violence assault. But his record stretches far beyond Washington.

In 2022, Drebenstedt was charged in Missouri for stealing thousands of dollars in lottery tickets from his employer. Not only did he swipe the tickets, but he also cashed in nearly $1,600 in winnings from those stolen stubs. Court records reveal previous felony convictions for forgery and burglary.

Now, two years later, he’s here in Clallam County. Why here? Perhaps because, unlike other communities, Clallam has built a reputation as a place where “services” for repeat offenders are abundant. Free meals, free housing, free bus rides, free healthcare, and even programs that prioritize the chronically incarcerated. Local leaders sell it as compassion. In practice, it works more like a recruitment ad for criminals looking for a softer landing spot.

The Tempest still haunts Port Angeles

The Tempest Apartments were once hailed as a breakthrough in permanent homeless supportive housing. Two years later, they were shuttered in disgrace—plagued by police calls, fires, and even reports of residents defecating out of the windows. Today, the hulking building still looms over First Street, a boarded-up eyesore that drags down the entire downtown corridor.

A Facebook post circulating recently urged residents to act: file nuisance complaints with the City of Port Angeles until something is done. Residents are increasingly frustrated that a facility backed by taxpayer dollars could so quickly become a blight, with little accountability for those who ran it.

That operator was Serenity House, which continues to run shelters and services across the County. Reports of overdoses at its other facilities are not uncommon, raising questions about oversight, accountability, and whether millions of taxpayer dollars are buying solutions or just perpetuating chaos. Compassion without results is not compassion—it’s negligence. And the Tempest still stands as the physical monument to that failure.

The $5 fee that funds “Diversity”

The Clallam Conservation District’s $5 per-parcel fee has sparked a grassroots opposition campaign. Local resident Jake Seegers is leading a petition drive urging commissioners to reject the tax, which is scheduled for consideration later this month.

Supporters argue that the fee funds basic government services like soil testing, water management, and conservation projects. But the CCD’s own Long Range Plan tells a broader story. Among its stated goals: expanding recruitment from “underrepresented communities,” annual diversity and equity training for staff and board members, and building a workplace that “represents the full diversity of the community.”

There’s nothing wrong with diversity, but when basic services like clean water and air are sold as the justification, residents deserve to know where their money is actually going. Commissioners describe the CCD as a lifeline. Yet if the “lifeline” includes DEI workshops and staff expansion while taxpayers are told it’s about water quality, that’s more than a funding issue—it’s a credibility issue.

Important Update

The County Commissioners have pushed back their decision on the $5 parcel fee to Tuesday, September 23. That gives residents a little more time—and a little more responsibility—to make their voices heard.

* Petitions must now be postmarked by Thursday, September 18.

* A Sequim-area drive-through signing event is set for Saturday, September 20 (details coming soon).

You can help by downloading and printing the petition, circulating it among friends, family, and neighbors, and mailing completed copies to:

Jake Seegers69 S. Point RdPort Angeles, WA 98363

Four years later: Housing still unaffordable

In 2021, the state mandated that Clallam County increase recording fees by $100, promising the revenue would go toward affordable housing and ending homelessness. Four years later, housing is more expensive than ever, and local encampments are multiplying.

The logic was simple enough: tax real estate transactions, use the revenue for affordable housing, and homelessness will decline. The reality? The visible homeless population grew. In effect, the policy made it more expensive for working families to buy homes while failing to deliver results for those on the street.

It’s a cycle we’ve seen before: government imposes new fees or taxes in the name of solving a crisis, the crisis worsens, and the only solution offered is more money. Residents should ask whether the problem is a lack of funding—or a lack of accountability for how those funds are spent.

Open meetings—or closed doors?

Transparency in government isn’t just a slogan—it’s the law. Yet city council candidate James Rocklyn Taylor is raising concerns that the Port Angeles City Council may have violated the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) when filling a recent vacancy.

Taylor, who applied for the position, said he later heard from a sitting council member that they “decided not to vote” for him or fellow candidate Marolee Smith because both are currently running for council in November’s election. That admission suggests council members coordinated their decision outside of a public meeting. If true, that would be a textbook OPMA violation.

Governor Bob Ferguson once said, “Transparency in government is a cornerstone of democracy.” Residents of Port Angeles should ask: if council members are willing to skirt the rules when filling a vacancy, what other decisions might be happening behind closed doors? The November election gives voters the chance to choose transparency—or tolerate secrecy.

Subscribe to Taylor’s blog and buck that status quo.

Habitat and the equity question

Habitat for Humanity of Clallam County insists its new “Native American Housing Liaison” position isn’t designed to privilege one group over another. Yet the organization still refuses to release the job description. Transparency, in theory, should be easy—if the role is fair, prove it.

Meanwhile, Habitat for Humanity International loudly celebrated a $22 million federal grant, matched with $67 million in commitments, to promote racial equity through housing initiatives nationwide. The grant promises new jobs, DEI consultants, and “advancing racial equity” through 50 sub-grants.

The contradiction is hard to ignore. At the local level, residents are told the Liaison role isn’t about racial preferences. At the national level, the same organization openly ties its funding to racial equity initiatives. Both can’t be true. Residents who support Habitat’s mission of building homes deserve clarity on whether the priority is housing families—or advancing a political agenda.

Chamber clarifies

In an era when many organizations pick sides, the Sequim-Dungeness Valley Chamber of Commerce is taking a different approach: neutrality. After facing criticism from a recent CC Watchdog article for “promoting” political events, Executive Director Beth Pratt clarified that the Chamber’s event calendar is open to all community submissions—members and non-members alike.

Pratt explained:

“The Chamber's events calendar is a community calendar. One of our primary actions at the Chamber is to provide information, and I think of the events calendar as a key piece of this. We do not data enter the calendar ourselves but rather invite members and non-members alike to add their public facing events themselves. On the website, there is a little "+" at the top of the calendar page - clicking that gets you to the form to add your own event. By allowing events on our calendar from across the community, we do not consider ourselves promoters of those events. We instead consider that we are the hub for information about all that is happening across our region. The more events we can include, the more information our community can access.”

That commitment to open access may seem simple, but it’s increasingly rare. Government boards, nonprofits, and even local media outlets often act as gatekeepers—deciding which events or voices get attention and which do not. By standing as a neutral hub, the Chamber models fairness and transparency. In today’s climate, that’s something worth applauding.

“Independent journalism is our immune system. If it weakens, the truth dies.” —Margaret Sullivan (Media critic, former Washington Post columnist)

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

In an era when anyone can livestream from their phone, Olympic Medical Center refuses to record its own public meetings—making it harder for working families to follow what’s happening at the hospital they own. Recent revelations show why: a $248,000 consulting contract signed in secret, an interim CEO costing $50,000 a month, and board meetings that cut off public comment early. For a hospital that raised taxes under threat of service cuts and now teeters on insolvency, this secrecy isn’t just tone-deaf—it’s a betrayal of public trust.

It’s 2025. Toddlers can navigate iPads, anyone can livestream to the cloud from their pocket, and streaming entertainment options are endless. Yet somehow, Olympic Medical Center (OMC)—the largest employer in Clallam County—can’t manage to record and upload its own board meetings for the public it serves.

When pressed on Facebook, OMC admitted:

“Correct, we do not record our board meetings. We hold open public meetings twice monthly. Meetings are live-streamed, and people are encouraged to attend in person. We also make available board agendas and packets on our website. We are in compliance with Open Public Meeting Act Rules.”

Translation: we don’t have to, so we won’t.

Cutting off public comment

One resident recently discovered that even attending in person doesn’t guarantee your voice will be heard. OMC’s agenda scheduled public comment for 1:15 p.m.—yet the meeting ended at 1:10, shutting people out. When questioned, OMC brushed it off: the agenda times were “best guesses.”

But for taxpayers on a lunch break, those “guesses” meant losing their only chance to speak. It’s a pattern: decisions that should welcome public input instead close doors.

The $248,000 secret contract

Perhaps the real reason OMC prefers silence is what’s happening behind the scenes. At the September 3rd meeting that ended early, the board skipped discussion of a major agreement with Chartis, a private healthcare consulting firm. Yet internal emails reveal interim CEO Mark Gregson had already signed a $248,000, six-week contract with Chartis on August 26th—a week before the board meeting.

Gregson, who collects $50,000 a month as interim CEO (plus travel and lodging expenses), was hired to fix OMC. But in less than a week on the job, his “solution” was to sign off on a secret $248,000 consulting deal, essentially paying outsiders to do the very job taxpayers are already paying him to do.

And the timing? Conveniently, Chartis pushed CMS to extend OMC’s compliance deadline to October 10—three days after the Chartis six-week contract expires. Another extension would mean another expensive “re-up.”

The Chartis paradox

Chartis is no stranger to OMC. Just last year, the same firm declared OMC one of the nation’s “Top 100 Community Hospitals” for the ninth year in a row.

That recognition came a year after OMC nearly ran out of cash and amid allegations that an ER doctor sexually assaulted multiple patients.

Now, the firm that once praised OMC is being paid to save it. Chartis itself is owned by Blackstone, a private equity giant tied to fraud allegations and notorious for pushing hospitals toward for-profit models.

An affiliation with UW Medicine

Meanwhile, Gregson also announced OMC had signed a letter of intent with UW Medicine for a potential affiliation.

UW’s own land acknowledgment cites the Coast Salish peoples, but what Clallam County residents want acknowledged is whether their hospital will continue prioritizing patients over consultants and corporate deals.

“Trust, once lost, could not be easily found. Not in a year, perhaps not even in a lifetime.” – J.E.B. Spredemann

A hospital in crisis—but whose hospital?

Morale among OMC employees is collapsing. Internal emails call the Chartis deal “criminal” and leadership “incompetent,” with staff openly speculating whether the hospital is being positioned for a fire sale.

One staff member commented that, “It just speaks to the level of all around incompetence that OMC needs to spend who-knows-how-much (millions?) on consultants over the years to tell them how to do their jobs. What a waste. Has anybody been running the show?”

The most troubling fact is this: OMC is not a private corporation. It is a public hospital district—owned, funded, and governed by the very residents now being shut out of meetings and denied answers.

When the county’s largest employer hides multimillion-dollar decisions from taxpayers while raising property taxes and cutting services, the problem goes far beyond mismanagement—it is a full-blown crisis of transparency.

The State Auditor’s recent accountability audit drives that point home. OMC is in default on its 2018 general obligation bonds, failing to meet debt ratio requirements on $16 million of its $46.4 million outstanding debt—leaving lenders free to act at any time. The District also couldn’t pay off its 2013 bond, forcing a costly three-year extension at a higher interest rate.

This is a hospital already notorious for losing tens of millions, defaulting on bond obligations, and facing repeated threats of closure for Medicare violations. Regulators have conducted four site visits since February, yet critical deficiencies remain uncorrected. And through it all, OMC continues to lean on taxpayers for more money while keeping them in the dark about where it’s going.

The question now isn’t just whether OMC can survive—it’s whether the public who owns it will ever be allowed back into the room.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

County residents were told this week that a $5 parcel fee to fund the Clallam Conservation District (CCD) is nothing more than a modest investment in clean water and healthy land. But a closer look reveals something much bigger: Commissioner Mark Ozias is leaning on the Comprehensive Plan to justify the fee—while also presiding over the very NGO that shapes the plan behind closed doors. That’s not just a conflict of interest; it’s a policy pipeline where special interests dictate local land use, while the public is left in the dark.

Commissioner Ozias’ letter and polished defense

After Tuesday’s hearing on the proposed $5 parcel fee for the Clallam Conservation District (CCD), Commissioner Mark Ozias began circulating a form letter to residents (published in full at the bottom of this article). In it, he casts the CCD as indispensable, apologizing for the “length of the email” but insisting he owes the public a full explanation.

Commissioner Ozias’ argument boils down to this:

* The Clallam County Comprehensive Plan explicitly endorses the CCD’s role, citing Goal 7’s directive to “support the work of the Clallam Conservation District.”

* Without new funding, the CCD will be unable to carry out its vital mission—improving water quality, assisting farmers, protecting fish habitat, and maintaining soil health.

Note that our Comprehensive Plan says support the Conservation District, not fund it.

Commissioner Ozias’ defense of the CCD can be summed up like this: “We need them because they’re in our plans, and they’re in our plans because we need clean water and sustainable agriculture to survive.”

It’s circular logic — and it skirts the real issue. No one has demonstrated, or even tried to measure, whether the CCD’s activities — planting trees along streams, distributing pounds of cover crop, replacing septic systems, building manure sheds, or testing soil samples — actually produce the promised results of cleaner water and more secure food supplies.

Commissioner Ozias even concedes that Clallam residents are financially stretched, acknowledging that any new tax or fee is a burden. Yet he insists this “modest” $5 fee is the only path forward.

At first glance, his argument may sound reasonable. But scratch the surface, and a very different picture comes into focus.

The Comprehensive Plan: a self-made justification

Commissioner Ozias leans heavily on the Comprehensive Plan to defend the CCD fee. But here’s what he doesn’t say:

The North Olympic Development Council (NODC), a non-governmental organization (NGO), plays a major role in shaping that plan. And Commissioner Ozias just happens to be the President of the NODC.

That means when he cites the Comprehensive Plan as “proof” that the county must support the CCD, he’s pointing to a document he influenced through his own outside organization. It’s circular reasoning at best, and a conflict of interest at worst.

The NODC is not a neutral advisory body. It develops the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), a blueprint for regional growth, infrastructure, and environmental policies. That strategy feeds directly into county-level planning. Policies and influence flow from the NODC’s framework into the county’s official documents.

So when Commissioner Ozias says “the Comprehensive Plan requires this fee,” what he means is: the Comprehensive Plan that his NGO helped craft now justifies the policies he wants as commissioner.

That is a closed loop, not an open process.

NODC, SERN, and the policy pipeline

It gets more complicated.

NODC also serves as the fiscal and administrative coordinator for Strait ERN (SERN).

SERN’s fiscal agent is the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe—Commissioner Ozias’ top campaign donor.

According to its homepage, SERN is explicitly focused on “repairing relationships with the original people of these lands” due to colonization. Translation: a framework of reparations, funneled through land use, resource allocation, and county planning.

SERN, in turn, connects directly to the Puget Sound Partnership’s Ecosystem Coordination Board (ECB). SERN is an officially recognized Local Integrating Organizations (LIOs) under the umbrella of the Puget Sound Partnership (PSP). It seems complicated, but SERN works with the Puget Sound Partnership, helping carry out regional goals.

Note that Conservation Districts are tasked with coordinating the tasks/objectives of the Ecosystem Coordination Board.

The ECB advises on the state’s Action Agenda for Puget Sound recovery—and its scope is massive:

* Recommending changes to the Growth Management Act (GMA)

* Shaping Shoreline Master Programs (SMPs)

* Integrating salmon recovery and habitat goals into local land use plans

And who sits on the ECB roster? None other than Karen Affeld, Executive Director of the NODC led by President Mark Ozias.

So let’s connect the dots:

* NODC influences the county’s Comprehensive Plan.

* NODC coordinates SERN.

* SERN feeds into the Puget Soung Partnership’s Ecosystem Coordinating Board.

* The ECB recommends changes to the very land use laws the county must follow (tribal properties are exempt).

* Mark Ozias, as NODC President, uses those same Comprehensive Plan policies to justify new taxes and fees.

This is not a coincidence. It’s a pipeline.

From policy papers to flooded homes

These aren’t abstract connections—they have real impacts on people’s lives.

* Three Crabs Restoration: The Clallam Conservation District recommended reengineering Meadowbrook Creek and redesignating Golden Sands Slough as protected habitat in a 2009 report. The result? Severe flooding in the Three Crabs neighborhood, starting immediately after the ribbon-cutting. Now, the County is floating “relocation” of entire neighborhoods and removal of 3 Crabs Road, leaving 600 residents stranded.

* Lower Dungeness Floodplain Project: The CCD partnered in this project, which shut down Towne Road for two years and attempted to transfer the road to the Jamestown Tribe.

* Dungeness Off-Channel Reservoir: Another CCD-backed project, aligned with NODC’s water strategies, supports ditch piping that dries up private wells—all in the name of conserving irrigation water, backed by Commissioner Ozias’ top campaign donor.

Each time, the pattern repeats: policies shaped outside public view, justified as “climate resiliency” or “habitat restoration,” and resulting in land loss, displacement of local residents, or taxpayers forking out millions for special, private, and political interests.

Clean air and water without parcel fees

Commissioner Mike French, an enthusiastic supporter of the fee, claims the CCD is essential to keeping water clean. But let’s break down that argument:

* The premise is overstated. Environmental quality is shaped by multiple factors: land use, wastewater treatment, forest management, and existing state and federal regulations. The CCD is not the lone guardian of Clallam’s environment.

* Other counties prove it. Jefferson, Okanogan, and Lincoln Counties maintain strong environmental standards without parcel fees, using grants, general fund dollars, or tiered service models instead.

* The fee is a funding choice, not a necessity. To frame it as an environmental imperative is misleading.

* Transparency is lacking. If the CCD’s work is truly vital, the public deserves a clear breakdown of how funds will be used and a discussion of alternatives. Instead, they’re being told to accept the fee as the only option.

“In God we trust, all others must bring data.” – W. Edwards Deming

The dog and pony show

What’s most concerning isn’t the $5 itself—it’s the way decisions are made.

Public hearings are held, but they’re little more than theater. The key decisions are made long before, at NODC or SERN meetings, or through PSP’s ECB. By the time county commissioners vote, the outcome is already baked in.

The public’s role is reduced to commenting on a process they weren’t truly included in—their only role is to fund predetemined decisions. The most important documents and strategies—the very ones shaping policy—are not made prominent or accessible to ordinary citizens.

Clallam County is spending millions on a policy “process” that is really just a dog and pony show. The public sees the performance, but the real work happens offstage.

Much more than a $5 Fee

This is why the parcel fee matters. It’s not about $5. It’s about securing a dedicated funding stream for a political agenda advanced by NGOs, special interests, and commissioners with overlapping loyalties.

Commissioner Ozias wants residents to see it as a small price for clean water. But the record shows it’s part of a much larger project: reshaping land use, displacing communities, and consolidating power in the hands of a few connected organizations.

The residents who end up flooded out of their homes—or cut off from their property—are paying much more than $5.

A Trojan Horse for special interests

Commissioner Ozias presents the CCD fee as a practical solution. But in reality, it’s a Trojan Horse—an entry point for policies crafted outside the public eye, serving special interests rather than the community.

Clallam County residents deserve transparency. They deserve a real voice in how land use policies are written, not just a scripted role in a pre-decided play. And they deserve to know when a “modest fee” is really just the beginning of something much bigger.

The question isn’t whether $5 is affordable. The question is: what are we really buying, and who are we buying it for?

Last Sunday, Jake Seegers asked readers what most influences county commissioner decision-making. Out of 135 votes:

* 62% said, “Their own agendas / opinions”

* 21% said, “NGO affiliation”

* 16% said, “Political and social pressures”

* 1% said, “The will of the citizens”

Petition effort

Local resident Jake Seegers is leading a petition drive urging commissioners to reject the CCD’s proposed $5 parcel fee. You can help by downloading the petition, sharing it with friends and neighbors, and mailing completed copies to:

Jake Seegers69 S. Point RdPort Angeles, WA 98363

Be sure petitions are postmarked by September 11. An in-person signing event is also planned for next Saturday in the Sequim area—stay tuned for details.

Commissioner Ozias’ form letter

Thank you for writing to share your position on a parcel fee to support the Clallam Conservation District. I understand why you do not support this concept. After careful consideration, I have come to a different conclusion and I want to try to share my reasoning. I apologize in advance for the length of this email, but I owe you a thorough explanation – especially if you do not agree with my position.

Conservation Districts are neither businesses or non-profit organizations. In Washington, conservation districts are subdivisions of state government that were authorized by the Washington State Legislature under the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1939, which is codified as RCW 89.08. The act’s preamble starts by stating, “… the lands of the state of Washington are among the basic assets of the state and that the preservation of these lands is necessary to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of its people…” The Clallam Conservation District was formed in 1959.

Our own Clallam County Comprehensive Plan (the guidance document that has been created and amended through public process for more than twenty years, and the document on which we rely to help us understand the desired conditions we are attempting to achieve) echoes the primary importance of land conservation; not only is there language throughout the document highlighting the vital nature of healthy natural habitats and preserved natural resources to our population, but agricultural resource lands are the very first to be addressed, even before forest lands.

Several of the agricultural resource goals outlined in our Comprehensive Plan make specific mention of the Clallam Conservation District; others speak to activities that the Conservation District supports such as water quality improvement, preservation of local food security and educating and supporting local farmers. For example, Goal 7 states “Clallam County shall support the work of the Clallam Conservation District to assist agricultural land users with maintenance and improvement of water quality, conservation of irrigation water, protection and enhancement of fish and wildlife habitat and biological diversity consistent with commercial agriculture, and prevention of erosion of valuable agricultural soils.”

On the ground here in Clallam County, this is exactly what the Conservation District accomplishes. They work to improve water quality by working directly with farmers to amend practices to reduce or eliminate the potential for fecal contamination of nearby rivers and streams. They work to improve water quality by partnering with the Environmental Health team to provide technical and financial assistance to local homeowners with failing septic systems. They work to improve habitat through the promotion of native plants and through riparian planting projects to support local landowners. They work to help improve water availability and support fish habitat through partnerships with local irrigation districts. They work with farmers to improve soil health and tilth.

They are a vital partner to numerous landowners in our county, as well as to local and state government and the benefits they work to achieve – like improved water quality – impact all of us. For example, a failing septic system creates an immediate environmental health concern for any nearby resident, but it also leaches contaminants down through the water table. When enough of these contaminants accumulate we see things like large marine areas being closed to shellfish harvesting. This is just one example, but representative of most all of the work that the Conservation District accomplishes.

Even though Conservation Districts are a subdivision of state government, the Legislature has not identified a dedicated source to fund this work. The Clallam Conservation District is funded largely through a variety of grants, allocated through various state and sometimes federal agencies. These grants are typically competitive and are geared to supporting a certain activity; there are no grants available to cover non-programmatic expenses such as maintaining a website, responding to public records requests or managing District elections.

Due to the vital nature of the Clallam Conservation District, and in recognition of the constraints imposed by having no unrestricted resource to carry out basic required functions like the above, the County Commissioners have historically made an annual allocation of General Fund dollars to support this work.

Now, due to the significant budget constraints we and all counties are experiencing, we are no longer in the position of being able to allocate funds to support the Conservation District. Yet their work is more important than ever.

As we have looked outward to other counties and other Conservation Districts, we have learned that the most effective Districts operate with dedicated support from their community, either through a special assessment or through a per parcel and/or per acre fee.

The elected leaders of the Clallam Conservation District have done a thorough analysis of these options and are recommending a $5 per parcel fee, which is what we are currently considering. In conversation after Tuesday’s public hearing on this matter the Board favored moving forward with this $5 fee, but with some boundaries:

* Setting a ten year “sunset” of this fee so that a future Board of County Commissioners has the opportunity to review the effectiveness and impact of the parcel fee before determining whether to keep it, drop it or amend it.

* Adding language to clarify that the fee will remain at $5 for the entirety of the ten year period, with no CPI or other cost escalator.

* Requiring an annual report to the Commissioners and the public.

One of my foundational beliefs as an elected official is that once we have gone through a public process that establishes priorities and objectives – in other words, once we as a community have described what we wish to see – it is my job to work with my colleagues and the community to see that we are successful in addressing those priorities and meeting those objectives.

In this case, if we are to be successful in addressing some of our most important priorities and objectives, we need the existence and expertise of the Clallam Conservation District. Since the state has provided us with no dedicated funding but a variety of expected outcomes; we are moving forward with a strategy that will ensure this organization has the ability to meet both the needs of county residents and local governments alike.

I recognize that many in our community struggle to meet their financial needs and that any additional tax or fee is a burden. If we were able to continue to allocate general fund dollars, I would not favor this fee. If it wasn’t important to support the agricultural sector in our community, or if we lived in a county with few habitat concerns, I would not favor this fee. If our Comprehensive Plan did not speak both specifically to the importance of the Clallam Conservation District and to the work it supports and facilitates, I would not favor this fee. If I did not believe that this work results in broad community benefit and long-term cost savings, I would not favor this fee.

However, this is not the reality we face and therefore I support the recommendation of the elected leaders of the Clallam Conservation District to move forward with this modest fee, with the guardrails described above.

Sincerely,

Mark Ozias

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

From neglected dogs at drug houses to six-figure tribal tax liens, from new state sales taxes to “nonpartisan” groups pushing partisan agendas—Clallam County residents are being asked to pay more, trust more, and expect less. These ten short stories expose the double standards, misplaced priorities, and quiet power plays shaping our community.

Forgotten victims of our drug policies

In a county that hands out drug paraphernalia under the banner of “harm reduction,” the victims are easy to see: addicts slumped on sidewalks, businesses broken into, neighborhoods destabilized. But too often, we forget the silent victims—animals.

RISE Rescue Alliance recently shared a heartbreaking story. Deputies called them to a drug house where four dogs lived in dangerous conditions. Other dogs had already died there—one from a fentanyl overdose, another from a gunshot. Overcrowded shelters meant the dogs couldn’t all be saved at once. Two were taken immediately—one with a severe ear injury, another in heat. A week later, a male dog was rescued. Evidence suggests the dogs were bred for profit, with puppies sold on Craigslist to fuel the drug trade.

When you buy from backyard breeders or online listings, you might think you’re “rescuing” a dog—but you’re really funding the same cycle of suffering.

RISE rescue alliance could use your help. Learn more here.

Jamestown Tribe’s big payout to the IRS

The Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe runs a booming geoduck operation out of Point Whitney near Brinnon in Jefferson County—five boats, 13 divers, thousands of pounds harvested daily, much of it sold to Asia. It’s a highly profitable enterprise, which makes their recent tax record surprising.

A Notice of Federal Tax Lien filed in December showed unpaid taxes. The balance had been ballooning from $560 in 2021 to over $93,000. Last month, the Tribe paid off $190,184.46.

Meanwhile, local families are struggling to keep up with ever-higher property taxes. The county commissioners keep looking for new ways to tax residents—while one of the most powerful entities in the county was ignoring its own IRS bill.

If you eat or drink, you need the CCD?

At the Clallam Conservation District, a curious new sales pitch has emerged. Supervisor Christy Cox asked, “Do you eat food?” Then you need the CCD. Supervisor Maggie Bockart added, “Do you drink water?” Then you better support the $5 parcel fee.

The logic is reminiscent of Sequim’s Tim Wheeler—the Clallam County Democrat’s District One trustee. He is also a reporter who once wrote that “If you eat, you’re involved in agriculture.”

The article was featured in a publication Wheeler has been contributing to for over 43 years—Communist Party USA.

In the article, Wheeler manages to link rural America not to farming, but to the KKK, domestic terrorism, and bigotry.

So here’s our counter-argument: Do you have ears? Then you need to be listening to the Clallam County Watchdog podcast—which just passed 700,000 downloads.

Here comes more taxes

If you think your wallet is safe after covering the Clallam Conservation District fee, Fire District 3’s levy, OMC’s levy, the looming property tax hike vote this November, plus the Commissioners’ push for a Cultural Access Tax and even a Criminal Justice Tax next year—think again.

On October 1, Washington’s new sales tax expansion takes effect, according to the Center Square. Services like advertising, IT, custom software, and even “presentations” will now be taxed.

And that’s not all. The business & occupation (B&O) tax hike will strip another $5.6 billion from businesses statewide over four years. Some defend the hikes as “difficult decisions,” but for families already paying more for food, gas, and housing, it looks more like bad decisions.

Tribal land, no inspections required

Once property is placed into tribal trust, it’s exempt from property taxes, zoning, and even health inspections. County officials explained it plainly back in 2020: food establishments on trust land may be inspected “by invitation only.”

Recently, the Jamestown Tribe’s Salish Trails property (the old KOA campground) was cited for a minor violation. But that’s only because the land hasn’t yet been converted to trust status.

Something to remember next time you eat out.

Luxury standards, local struggles

Washington wants your feedback on its Evergreen Sustainable Development Standards (ESDS). These rules require state-funded projects—like Peninsula Behavioral Health’s (PBH) North View apartments or the new Sequim Library—to include EV chargers and solar panels, luxury appliances, and more (contrary to claims made by PBH and Commissioner Mike French, they do not require dishwashers).

What the Evergreen Standards really require are costs so high that projects become unaffordable in places like Clallam—where the median income is half that of King County, yet prevailing wages for construction are tied to the Puget Sound region. The result? Fewer housing units, higher rents, and taxpayers forced to subsidize ‘green luxury’ that most can’t afford themselves. Make your voice heard—take the six-question survey here.

Sheriff’s cuts, poet’s safe

With another historic deficit looming, county commissioners must choose what to cut. Public safety? Maybe. The poet laureate? Safe so far.

Sheriff King reported to the commissioners during a recent work session that Clallam County has 0.8 deputies per 1,000 residents, far below the national average of 2.4. Washington as a whole ranks dead last—51st out of 50 states plus D.C.

Attracting officers is already difficult. Now imagine being told by an elected official that “property destruction is not only fine, it’s usually the only way we’ve ever seen actual change happen.” Cuts plus contempt—what message does that send to those who risk their lives for public safety?

Water politics, round two

Next Wednesday, the Dungeness River Management Team (DRMT) will discuss a “Water Steward/Advisory Board Concept.” Sound familiar? It’s a follow-up to the Charter Review Commission’s attempt to create a new county water department—a proposal overwhelmingly rejected by the public.

The DRMT is chaired by the Jamestown Tribe’s Hansi Hals, with Commissioner Mark Ozias representing the county. Meetings are held at the Tribe’s nature center on sovereign land. The public may attend—but the Zoom link is only provided if you sign up for email invites here.

Transparency, anyone?

Who pushed the Water Steward idea?

The answer: the League of Women Voters of Clallam County. They’ve made water governance their mission, partnering with the Conservation District, Jamestown Tribe, North Olympic Land Trust, and others to produce a film, From Source to Sea.

The message? Water “ownership” must be clarified—translation: more layers of control, fewer rights for property owners.

Neutral? Not quite.

Clallam County’s website labels the League of Women Voters a “political party.” Yet Elections lists them as a “resource for unaffiliated voters”—alongside the Democrats and Republicans.

Look at recent Sequim protests and you’ll see LWV logos on signs, buttons, and banners.

Neutral? Hardly. But when county officials give them credibility as an unaffiliated nonpartisan resource, it’s another case of government picking favorites while pretending to stay above the fray.

“Those who claim to speak for everyone usually mean they speak for themselves.” — George Will

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

In 1971, Washington passed the Open Public Meetings Act to guarantee transparency in government, declaring that “the people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.” But this week, Clallam County residents were reminded just how far today’s county commissioners have strayed from that vision—choosing special interests and political convenience over the very public they are sworn to serve.

Flashback to 1971: Government belongs to the people

Washngton’s Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) was written to prevent decisions from being made in the shadows. Its principle is simple: government belongs to the people, not the other way around.

Yet on Tuesday, at a public hearing, the Board of County Commissioners backed a new $5 parcel fee for the Clallam Conservation District (CCD). The numbers told the story: 20 in-person and virtual public commenters opposed the fee, only one supported it (outside of CCD’s own representatives), and yet the commissioners pressed forward.

Commissioner Randy Johnson even admitted he had made up his mind the night before—before a single citizen spoke.

For residents who took the time to testify, the message was clear: your role is not to be heard, only to pay.

Mission failure in Clallam County – Houston, we have a solution

District 3 resident Jake Seegers sees Tuesday’s decision as commissioners abandoning their own stated values.

Jake notes that the Board of Clallam County Commissioners claims its vision is guided by four “Mission Objectives.” At the very top: “Putting the translated desires of our residents into action through effective communication.” Yet during the September 2, 2025, public hearing on the CCD parcel fee, the packed gallery witnessed complete mission failure.

Nearly 20 individuals spoke in opposition, offering well-researched, thoughtful arguments against the fee. Only Ellen Menshew, from District 3, voiced support (outside of CCD’s own representatives). Ms. Menshew argued that families “growing their own gardens and trying to find ways to tighten their belts…are not able to be here today to speak to this issue,” suggesting work obligations kept them away.

But those same families had the opportunity to attend CCD’s own parcel fee hearing on Friday, July 25, at 5 p.m.—after work hours. Not one showed up.

“As I sat in the boardroom gallery on Tuesday for three hours with my 3-year-old daughter and 9-year-old son, I felt proud of the citizens who sacrificed their time to speak up. That pride was quickly followed by a gut-punch realization: our commissioners never intended to consider our voices. Commissioner Johnson made it clear that his mind had been made up the night before.” — Jake Seegers

Jake was left wondering: how many dissenting voices must be raised before commissioners abandon personal preferences and honor the will of the people? Twenty weren’t enough. Would it take 100? 200? 500?

Jake wants us to find out together. At the end of this article is a petition urging the commissioners to vote against the Clallam Conservation District’s 2025 Rates and Charges Proposal. Please print it out and gather signatures from family and friends who would be affected by this fee.

Jake is optimistic: “Just maybe, if we band together, we’ll finally determine how many voices it takes for our commissioners to fulfill their mission—and put our desires into action.”

Flashback to 2023: Towne Road and the power of petitions

This is not the first time commissioners have ignored majority voices. In 2023, they faced two petitions:

* 98 signatures for permanently closing Towne Road

* 140 signatures for reopening it

Instead of siding with the majority, commissioners chose the smaller petition. The fallout was devastating:

* A tsunami evacuation route was closed.

* Dungeness lost it’s most direct route to Sequim.

* Taxpayers shouldered costs that could have been avoided.

* The fire department had to detour five miles when one family’s home was consumed by a fire that killed their dogs and left the family homeless.

County staff had warned that halting the project would jeopardize grant funding. The commissioners pressed on anyway, diverting money to the Jamestown Tribe—Commissioner Ozias’ top campaign donor—before later spending $1.5 million in county funds to finish what could have been completed without a dime of county money.

Remember that when, this November, the commissioners ask you to raise property taxes for “essential services” like a poet laureate.

Hypocrisy in action

In February 2023, Commissioner Ozias claimed “over 200 signatures” supported closing Towne Road. Public records proved otherwise: 98 for closure, 140 for reopening. When pressed, Commissioner Ozias admitted he hadn’t counted and said it wasn’t a “popularity contest,” but about “balancing factors.”

Yet in their campaigns, the commissioners promised something very different:

* Ozias: “Increased transparency.”

* French: “Robust public engagement.”

* Johnson: More welcoming meetings for citizens.

Commissioner Ozias himself once said, in August 2019:

“Local government only works when citizens participate. It troubles me greatly to think that so many feel they have been left out of the process.”

How does that square with Tuesday’s hearing—or Towne Road?

Rule by petition

If 98 signatures were enough to overturn a multi-million-dollar road project decades in the making, then petitions clearly matter. That’s why Jake Seegers has launched a new petition to reject the CCD fee. His goal: 99 signatures by September 16th, when commissioners vote.

A single-page petition form with 15 lines can be dowloaded (above) and mailed to: Jake Seegers, 69 S. Point Rd, Port Angeles, WA 98363 ( Please postmark by September 11th). Or, petitons can be dropped off at a drive-through signing event on Saturday, September 13th, north of Sequim (details to follow).

“The first duty of a government is to protect the people, not to rule over them.” — Thomas Jefferson

A rallying cry

The commissioners’ own “vision” statements promise effective communication, inclusiveness, and responsiveness. Their actions tell another story: decisions made before hearings, majority voices ignored, taxpayer funds wasted.

The OPMA was written to protect us from exactly this behavior. Democracy is not about campaign slogans—it is about listening to the people. Clallam County residents deserve nothing less.

Flashback Friday reminds us: transparency was promised in 1971. It’s up to us to demand it today.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

In Clallam County, the word nonpartisan has become one of the most overused—and misused—labels in local politics. Organizations across the County claim the mantle of neutrality, but their actions often tell a different story. This isn’t about picking sides—it’s about honesty. If a group has a partisan agenda, why not admit it? Pretending to be neutral while advancing ideological goals confuses voters, alienates independents, and undermines trust in our civic institutions.

The League of Women Voters: Neutral or not?

The League of Women Voters of Clallam County (LWV) describes itself as a “League for All.” Its mission statement emphasizes that it does not endorse or oppose political parties or candidates, and instead advocates on issues “based on the merits” after study and consensus.

In practice, the LWV’s role is complicated. Their candidate forums are widely respected—but the format limits spontaneous engagement, as citizens must submit questions in advance, which are then curated by League members. And while the League insists it is nonpartisan, Clallam County itself lists the LWV alongside the Democratic and Republican Parties on its official “Political Parties & Precinct Committee Officers” webpage.

That raises an obvious question: Can something be both a political party and nonpartisan? By definition, a political party seeks to advance a specific platform through elections, while nonpartisanship means neutrality in that very competition. The two roles are mutually exclusive.

The League’s record suggests it leans more toward partisanship than neutrality. It promoted an Indivisible Sequim “Workers over Billionaires Rally,” despite Indivisible’s open opposition to one president in particular.

The LWV has also paid for ads condemning the president—contradicting its claim that it never supports or opposes candidates.

At the local level, the League endorsed the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe’s Healing Campus project with a formal resolution, praising the Tribe’s leadership and partnerships.

While many support the project, taking an official organizational position goes beyond educating voters—it signals alignment with one side of a contentious issue.

The League’s Facebook activity also raises questions. Posts encouraging respect for Tribal Canoe Journeys may sound harmless, but they drift from the League’s core mission of educating voters and protecting democracy. When does community awareness become selective advocacy?

Even the League’s own policy positions raise eyebrows. On their website, the League of Women Voters of Clallam County states: “all County Elected officials should be non-partisan, except Commissioners.”

In other words, they advocate for positions like Auditor, Treasurer, Assessor, and Sheriff to be nonpartisan—but not Commissioners. Why carve out an exception for the very office that sets budgets and directs county policy? If nonpartisanship is so important for civic trust, shouldn’t it apply across the board?

The LWV’s stated values—on campaign finance reform, gun safety, immigration, climate change, and abortion access—are all issues with clear partisan divisions. Taken together, it is difficult to argue that the organization operates in a purely nonpartisan fashion.

Sequim Good Governance League: Selective transparency

The Sequim Good Governance League (SGGL) also calls itself nonpartisan. Yet internal meeting notes tell another story. The group openly strategized about “flipping City Hall,” advised candidates on campaign timing, and curated messaging to keep control over narratives.

SGGL’s actions helped elect a slate of city council members who aligned with its priorities. Within months, the Jamestown Tribe praised the group for its success—particularly in connection to projects like the Tribe’s Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) facility. Tribal donations to SGGL-backed candidates followed, further blurring the lines between independent civic advocacy and political maneuvering.

Even SGGL’s leadership conceded its base leaned left: “Most of those who are interested in good governance do lean towards the left.” That’s fine—but it isn’t nonpartisan.

At first, SGGL partnered with CC Watchdog in promoting transparency. But once Watchdog articles began scrutinizing decisions related to the Tribe and local spending, SGGL blocked posts and distanced itself, citing “negativity.” True transparency doesn’t stop at the point of discomfort.

Today, SGGL’s website is gone, and it’s unclear whether the group is still active. But its legacy illustrates the same contradiction: claiming neutrality while practicing partisanship.

Sequim Chamber of Commerce: The business community steps in

Even the Sequim-Dungeness Valley Chamber of Commerce, a business association, has dipped into this gray zone. On one hand, it stresses nonpartisanship, and its mission is to serve businesses. On the other hand, it has promoted events hosted by Indivisible Sequim—events that directly criticize national leadership and call for systemic political change.

According to the Sequim Gazette, the Chamber’s 2021 open letter urged “transparent nonpartisan governance,” yet its selective event promotion suggests otherwise. Advocating for local businesses is expected. Promoting partisan rallies muddies the waters.

Partisan perspectives within local leadership

Commissioner Mark Ozias lists the Sequim Chamber of Commerce among the many organizations he serves. His involvement may offer context for why some local groups have been perceived as taking political positions despite publicly stating their neutrality.

Commissioner Ozias has at times expressed strong ideological views on national politics, often framing entire groups of people—such as Republicans—as part of a broader problem, rather than evaluating issues or individuals on their own merits. In a Facebook post, he wrote:

“It is nearly impossible to come together to debate issues and policy as long as so many people believe the lies they are told. And we cannot come together until those responsible for telling these lies, and stoking this hate, and instigating this violence, and celebrating it, are held accountable for their actions. Please don't hesitate to reach out to your own federal representatives to share your thoughts. We all need to be engaged right now!”

While elected officials are entitled to personal opinions, a commissioner in a bellwether county that is often split down the middle has taken an oath to serve fairly and impartially. When civic leaders publicly lump entire political parties together, it can influence how community organizations operate and which initiatives they promote—potentially undermining the perception of neutrality in organizations that claim to be nonpartisan.

“We can’t afford to demonize each other. We can’t afford to grow so cynical that we lose faith in our ability to change. The system only works when we decide to make it better.” — Barack Obama

Why honesty matters

Clallam County Republicans are openly Republican. Clallam County Democrats are openly Democratic. Voters know where they stand. There’s no confusion.

But when groups call themselves nonpartisan while clearly engaging in partisan activities, trust erodes. Voters—especially independents—are left wondering who to believe. Civic groups risk becoming gatekeepers rather than facilitators, narrowing debate instead of broadening it.

True nonpartisanship is rare, and maybe that’s okay. What our community needs more than buzzwords is honesty. If an organization is partisan, it should say so proudly. Pretending otherwise only confuses the public and undermines confidence in local democracy.

Thank you

Teresa, this article wouldn’t have been possible without your diligent research and the contributions of other engaged Watchdoggers. Thank you for attending meetings, actively participating in the comments section, and always taking the time to dig deeper whenever something doesn’t quite pass the sniff test. 💥😊💪🏼🤓👍🏼

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

Clallam County’s new $5 property fee highlights a troubling pattern: residents pay, tribal and federal lands don’t, and the commissioners ignore overwhelming public opposition—revealing how decisions are made before the public ever has a say.

Clallam County property owners are about to see yet another charge added to their property tax bills: a $5 annual fee to fund the Clallam Conservation District (CCD). Over the next decade, that seemingly small fee will transfer nearly $2 million from county residents to a controversial conservation district that is already supported by grants but looking to expand.

The question is not just whether the fee is necessary. The deeper question is one of equity: who pays, and who doesn’t?

Who is exempt?

Federal lands are exempt from the new tax. That makes sense—federal land belongs to all Americans, and the public should not be asked to tax itself for land it already owns collectively.

But tribal trust lands are also exempt. And unlike federal lands, trust lands do not belong to the general public. They are held exclusively for the benefit of the tribes. Yet county residents will now be asked to subsidize programs that, by design, will not be paid for by those lands. This is a glaring equity issue: the costs are shifted onto ordinary property owners, while entire categories of land are left out.

In practice, this means the 122-acre Jamestown Tribe golf course won’t pay a dime toward the very agency tasked with promoting water conservation and overseeing the program that meters private wells.

Public testimony overwhelmingly opposed

At the hearing, 20 residents spoke against the fee. Only two spoke in favor.

The first, Ellen Menshew, Chair of the Clallam County Democrats, argued that “there are a lot of families in our community now who are growing their own gardens and trying to find ways to tighten their belts.” Her solution? Impose a new tax on those very families. The contradiction was striking: families are struggling, so let’s add to their tax bill in the name of “helping.”

The second was Maggie Bockart. She did not speak as an everyday resident but as an appointed CCD supervisor—the very agency that stands to benefit. She joined via Zoom, telling the room of citizens who drove to sit three hours in the courthouse:

“I’ve taken now two hours out of my work day to participate in something I’m very passionate about.”

Bockart framed the fee as a way to “pay your neighbors to help you stay healthy,” and posed the question:

“Do you want clean air and clean water?”

Her argument suggested that without this $5 fee, Clallam County residents could not expect safe air to breathe or clean water to drink—despite the fact that we already have the Department of Ecology, the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency, and numerous other state and federal entities tasked with those exact responsibilities.

The imbalance of testimony could not have been clearer. Citizens spoke overwhelmingly against the measure. Only insiders and political leaders spoke in favor.

Commissioners had already made up their minds

Despite the lopsided testimony, all three commissioners signaled their support. Commissioner Randy Johnson even admitted outright that his decision was already made before hearing from the public:

“I certainly thought about this again last night. Thought about all the activities you perform, and the more I thought about it and the more I thought about it, you know, I thought I need to support you.”

This echoed a troubling pattern seen earlier this year, when the Homelessness Task Force plan was marked as “approved” weeks before the commissioners even voted on it. Public hearings, it seems, are less about listening and more about manufacturing legitimacy.

Questionable justifications

Commissioners framed the CCD as the county’s lifeline. Commissioner Mark Ozias went so far as to say that the agency, which promotes rain barrels, has a demonstration garden, and offers soil testing, is offering services that are “basic functions of state government,” suggesting they should not be left to grants or charity. Commissioner Mike French echoed Bockart’s theme, claiming CCD ensures residents have “clean and available water”—though when asked for measurable proof, CCD admitted it does not track whether it improves water quality.

Meanwhile, CCD District Manager Kim Williams tried to dispel public concerns about her pay, saying her salary wasn’t “six figures.” But public records show otherwise: $49.59 an hour, full-time, equates to more than $103,000 annually.

An equity problem, not just a spending problem

Equity means fairness in who pays and who benefits. Yet this new fee fails that test on every level.

* Property owners pay — even those already struggling with rising housing costs, inflation, and other county tax increases.

* Federal lands are exempt — appropriately so, because they belong to all of us.

* Tribal trust lands are exempt — though they do not belong to the public, leaving taxpayers to subsidize programs that exempt whole categories of land and residents.

* Special interests benefit — while everyday families see another line on their tax bill.

The commissioners had a choice: act responsibly, or once again burden property owners in the name of programs that lack clear accountability. They chose the latter.

Equity vs. empty promises

According to the County Commissioners’ own website, their vision is to “maintain and comprehensively advance our quality of life through responsible and effective development of trust in local governmental operations.”

Their mission, they claim, includes:

* Putting the translated desires of our residents into action through effective communication

Yet the fee hearing showed the opposite. The “translated desires of residents” were crystal clear—20 spoke against, only 2 in favor. But those voices were ignored. Instead of building trust, commissioners signaled the outcome had been decided before the public had its say. Instead of equity, taxpayers are left footing the bill while exempt parcels, including a 122-acre golf course, contribute nothing.

This isn’t vision. It’s hypocrisy.

“Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.” – Frédéric Bastiat

Remember in November

The $5 fee may look small, but the inequity is not. Time and again, the commissioners have treated public hearings as theater, insiders as stakeholders, and taxpayers as a bottomless ATM—funding everything from pizza parties for addicts to a county poet laureate.

The message from citizens was loud and clear. But the commissioners just chose not to hear it.

Note: While the fee has not yet received formal approval, the commissioners have expressed strong support and are expected to pass it once a few remaining details in the resolution are finalized later this month.

Last Equitable Wednesday, readers were asked if tribal governments should be treated as public entities. Of 192 votes:

* 59% said, “No”

* 35% said, “Yes”

* 5% were unsure

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

Every week, decisions are made in Clallam County that affect taxpayers, homeowners, parents, and entire communities. Some happen in plain sight. Many do not. From NGOs quietly crafting policy, to elected officials praising organizations they lead, to local money flowing out of town—it’s all part of a pattern. These ten stories reveal contradictions, misplaced priorities, and the kind of behind-the-scenes maneuvering that deserves public scrutiny.

Shoreline “site visits” or backdoor relocation?

Clallam County residents living on the beach recently received invitations from the Northwest Straits Foundation for “free technical site visits and beach walks.” The goal? To provide recommendations on erosion, native vegetation, drainage, and “relocation of structures too close to the shoreline.”

This isn’t just neighborly advice. The Clallam Marine Resources Committee (MRC) is part of a regional network established under the Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative. Grants flow through the Northwest Straits Commission and Foundation—entities that help secure outside money but also shape what happens on private property.

In April, the Clallam MRC advised commissioners that the Three Crabs Road should be removed and residents relocated. Just four years ago, SERN (Strait Ecosystem Recovery Network)—with the Jamestown Tribe as its fiscal agent— floated the idea of moving homeowners out of “harm’s way.” They were quick to add that the landowners shouldn’t be paid full price for parcels.

Now, with NGOs knocking on doors, residents might ask: Is this community education—or the first step toward forced relocation?

Commissioner Ozias: Do NGOs make policy or not?

Back in July, Commissioner Mark Ozias told the Charter Review Commission that NGOs like the North Olympic Development Council (NODC) and SERN don’t establish or set policy.

Fast forward to last Tuesday. While discussing septic compliance, Commissioner Ozias explained that SERN is the Local Integrating Organization for the Puget Sound Partnership—and that this is an “example of funding being applied to help address a specific need.” He also explained that the NODC “impacts” policy.

So which is it? Do these NGOs set policy, or do they only “impact” it? Either way, the conflict is glaring. Mark Ozias is president of the NODC. SERN’s fiscal agent is the Jamestown Tribe, which is Commissioner Ozias’s top campaign donor. SERN’s fiscal sponsor is the NODC, led by President Mark Ozias. Policies shaped in closed NGO meetings come back to the county, where Commissioner Ozias votes on them.

This is exactly why residents are uneasy about elected leaders serving on NGO boards.

Broadband team… with an “F” rated partner

At Tuesday’s meeting, Commissioner Ozias praised the NODC (again, the NGO he leads) for pulling together a broadband action team to partner with the PUD and Astound Broadband. One problem: Astound has an “F” rating with the Better Business Bureau.

Is this really the partner Clallam County should be hitching its broadband future to?

Diapers vs. taxes

Last week’s Commissioners’ Forum was cut short, in part, to allow time for a proclamation recognizing National Diaper Need Awareness Week. The commissioners noted the high cost of diapers and the struggles of local families—but never mentioned why families are struggling.

Property taxes, sales tax hikes, and gas prices are all climbing. Instead, the commissioners praised the YMCA (where Commissioner Randy Johnson serves as president) and the Jamestown Healing Clinic (run by Commissioner Ozias’ top campaign donor).

It’s easy to sympathize with struggling parents. However, addressing the financial burdens that local governments impose on family budgets might be even more effective. Can we get a proclamation for that?

The dirty truth about diapers

The environmental impact of disposable diapers is staggering:

* 27 billion diapers are used in the U.S. each year, adding up to 3.5 million tons of landfill waste.

* Diapers take 450–550 years to decompose.

* They make up 2–4% of landfill waste and are the third-largest single consumer item.

* Decomposition produces methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

* Chemicals, microplastics, and pathogens pose ongoing risks.

Cloth diapers—when washed efficiently—still carry an environmental footprint but generally come out ahead. Promising new innovations like compostable and fungi-digestible diapers are being tested in 2025, but adoption remains slow.

Awareness proclamations are fine. But what about real solutions?

Harm reduction or harm expansion?

Much of Tuesday’s forum focused on the county’s harm reduction strategy—handing out drug paraphernalia to enable street drug use. Kevin LoPiccolo, Health and Human Services Director, invited residents to stop by his office with further questions. The problem? The parking lot of his office often doubles as a homeless encampment.

Photos from last weekend show a tent, tarps, belongings, and drug paraphernalia scattered around the Health and Human Services building itself.

If this is what harm reduction looks like, residents have every right to question whether the county is simply enabling the very crisis it claims to fight.

The dishwasher defense

Commissioner Mike French leapt to the defense of Peninsula Behavioral Health (PBH) over its $12.75 million luxury permanent homeless housing project during last Tuesday’s Commissioners’ Forum. The issue? Dishwashers.

PBH claimed they were required, when in fact they were optional. French argued dishwashers were installed to conserve water, saving PBH “millions” in sewer infrastructure upgrades. But if sewer capacity is that limited in that neighborhood, why build a 36-unit complex there in the first place? And why add a dog-washing sink if infrastructure can’t handle it?

When pressed, Commissioner French failed to provide evidence for his claim. A week later, he still hasn’t answered. Why is an elected official defending an NGO with guesses instead of considering the legitimate concerns of his constituents?

Aaron Fisher: New charges, old concerns

Aaron Fisher—already in jail for the alleged murder of Richard Madeo—now faces a new charge: Communicating with a Minor for Immoral Purposes.

CC Watchdog previously interviewed a young woman, “Bella,” who says she dated 36-year-old Fisher for nearly a year—starting when she was 13. She described Fisher smoking meth in enclosed spaces, making inappropriate comments about her younger sister, and trying to connect with other underage girls.

The new felony charge suggests Bella’s story was not an isolated incident. How many warnings were missed before tragedy struck?

Marolee Smith Dvorak: A voice for local talent

Months before CC Watchdog covered it, Port Angeles City Council candidate Marolee Smith Dvorak criticized the city’s reliance on outside consultants instead of local expertise. Her concerns ring true: since 2020, the city has paid $707,057 to Oregon-based Lulish Design for tourism marketing—even though the company isn’t properly registered to do business in Washington.

Meanwhile, local marketing professionals are overlooked. Marolee argues the city should invest in local talent rather than ship taxpayer money out of state.

This November, she’s running against Mayor Kate Dexter. For voters tired of the same old status quo, Dvorak offers an alternative. Read Marolee’s full article here.

Seabrook on the Strait: Boost or bust for Sequim?

With the 600-home Seabrook development on hold near John Wayne Marina, residents are left wondering: Will this help or hurt Sequim’s downtown?

In Seabrook, over half the homes are vacation rentals. The development boasts its own shops, taverns, spas, and boutiques. That raises the question: will tourists and residents spend their money downtown—or in a self-contained resort village?

Sequim’s legacy businesses have weathered many storms. This one could test whether growth means prosperity—or displacement.

“When we lose local businesses, we don’t just lose jobs—we lose neighbors, culture, and the very fabric of community.” – Unknown

🚨 URGENT: Public Hearing on Parcel Fee – TODAY

Tuesday, September 2, 2025 – 10:30 a.m.

The Board of Clallam County Commissioners will hold a hearing today that could lock taxpayers into a parcel fee that generates $200,000 for the Clallam Conservation District.

This is a big deal. Let’s pack the courthouse and make sure our voices are heard.

📍 Hearing Details

* Date: Tuesday, September 2, 2025

* Time: 10:30 a.m.

* Location: Clallam County Courthouse, Room 160223 East 4th Street, Port Angeles, WA

🖥 Participate via Zoom

Audio Only📞 Dial: 253-215-8782Meeting ID: 836 9266 4344Passcode: 12345(Press 9 to raise your hand)

Video Conference🔗 Join Zoom MeetingMeeting ID: 836 9266 4344Passcode: 12345

✍️ Submit Written Comments

Clerk of the Board: Loni Gores📧 Email: [email protected]📬 Mail: 223 East 4th Street, Suite 4, Port Angeles, WA 98362

⚖️ Every voice matters. Please attend in person if you can, speak up on Zoom if you can’t, or send your comments in writing.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

When the Hurricane Ridge Lodge burned down, Clallam County lost more than a building—it lost the heart of its tourism economy. Now, instead of fast-tracking a rebuild, Olympic National Park is cutting secretive deals with tribes to shape the new lodge’s story, exhibits, and even construction oversight. Public land is supposed to belong to all of us, but the question now is: will Hurricane Ridge remain America’s park—or become someone else’s domain?

Happy Labor Day! As thousands of visitors crowd into Olympic National Park this weekend, it’s worth remembering just how vital this place is—not only for recreation but also for our economy. The park draws over 3 million visitors annually, and Hurricane Ridge remains one of its crown jewels. When the lodge there burned down in May 2023, it wasn’t just a building that was lost—it was a cornerstone of Clallam County’s tourism economy.

More than two years later, the site still sits in rubble. The National Park Service (NPS) reportedly has yet to begin the design phase of a replacement.

What really happened to the lodge?

The official investigation could not determine the exact cause of the May 7, 2023 fire. Investigators narrowed it down to the northeast corner of the structure, but with the building under renovation and unoccupied, no clear ignition source was found.

What’s clearer, however, is the direction NPS seems to be heading with its rebuild plans. And it raises big questions about fairness, transparency, and who truly controls public lands.

The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)

Recently, NPS signed a Memorandum of Agreement with the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer and three tribes: the Port Gamble S’Klallam, Jamestown S’Klallam, and Lower Elwha Klallam.

The agreement states that two archaeological sites near the Ridge are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Because of this, the tribes will now have a direct role in monitoring construction, reviewing reports, shaping exhibits, and even influencing interpretation and education programs at the new lodge.

Let that sink in: A public lodge, built with federal funds, in a federal park, will now carry the imprint of one tribe’s cultural narrative.

NPS says “Attachment 1” of the agreement—which defines the precise area of archaeological significance—cannot be released for public review due to “sensitivity.” That means the public is left in the dark about what was actually found.

And it begs the question: why were “traditionally coastal” tribes suddenly claiming cultural sites nearly a mile high in the Olympic Mountains and 18 miles from salt water?

Selective history?

The MOA requires NPS to work with the tribes to “highlight indigenous use of the Hurricane Ridge landscape.” That sounds harmless—until you consider how history can be selectively told.

Will this interpretation discuss all aspects of tribal history, including the less flattering ones?

* That the Jamestown S’Klallam reportedly slaughtered 17 men, women, and children of the Tshiminan tribe.

* That the Makah kept Russian and Japanese shipwreck survivors as slaves.

* That the Klallam tribes allied with Chief Seattle in the extermination of the Chemakum people.

* Or that the Klallam Tribes displayed the heads of their enemies on poles.

Or will it be the kind of one-sided, guilt-driven curriculum that the Jamestown Tribe has already introduced into Sequim schools—where tribal victimhood is emphasized while uncomfortable truths are conveniently omitted?

History is complicated, and no group’s past is without stains. To present it otherwise in a federally owned lodge meant for all visitors would be misleading.

A Canadian warning

This issue isn’t unique to Washington. In British Columbia, the Lil’wat and N’Quatqua First Nations recently forced a one-month closure of Joffre Lakes Provincial Park so they could conduct cultural practices. They originally demanded two months, and already the province has cut visitation by half.

When protesters blocked the highway, a Conservative MP pointed out the obvious: public parks belong to all citizens, not just one group. Yet the precedent being set is one of gradual exclusion.

“This land is your land, this land is my land.” – Woody Guthrie

The hypocrisy

Here’s the hypocrisy: Olympic National Park belongs to every American taxpayer, but decision-making power is being carved out for a handful of special interests. While tribes argue for inclusion and recognition, they are also seeking exclusive authority over interpretation and access—sometimes at the expense of the broader public.

It’s not “anti-tribe” to ask for fairness. If NPS truly believes Hurricane Ridge belongs to all, then it must resist pressure to hand over control of the new lodge to any one group, no matter how politically influential.

Hurricane Ridge is too important to Clallam County—and too important to the millions of visitors who come here every year—to become a political bargaining chip. The lodge should be rebuilt quickly, transparently, and in a way that honors the shared history of all Americans.

Olympic National Park must never forget: this park belongs to the people. All of us.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com

When panhandler Kurt in El Paso asked CC Watchdog guest contributor Jake Seegers for change, at least he admitted it was a hustle. The Clallam Conservation District is far less honest. On September 2, County Commissioners will decide whether to impose a $5 parcel fee that bypasses the ballot box—locking taxpayers into $200,000 a year for fish-centric projects and rising staff pay. With a county deficit looming, the question is simple: will Clallam prioritize public needs, or cave to another handout?

By Jake Seegers, guest contributor

Confessions of a Panhandler

When I lived in El Paso, Texas, I met Kurt. He stopped me in the parking lot of Sprouts Farmers Market, hat in hand, pleading for bus fare to New Mexico. Family was waiting for him there, he claimed. After a long conversation and some shared laughs, he admitted the family didn’t exist.

Kurt was a professional panhandler. He opened for business at 10 a.m. sharp and treated it like a job. In his mind, he was helping people. Some paid for the glow of self-congratulation, others paid for a bit of penance. Kurt was well-compensated.

Some mornings, I would drop Kurt off at Sprouts. He would always grin and say, “See you after work!”

As we became friends, I tried to help Kurt find something more stable than the weekly-rate motel he called home. But every option clashed with his chosen way of life. In the end, he preferred living on handouts.

The $5 Hustle

The Clallam Conservation District (CCD), an entity that relies entirely on government handouts, wants the Board of Clallam County Commissioners to impose a $5 annual parcel fee on property owners. The fee would generate about $200,000 per year for the next decade—and any unpaid fees would become a lien against your property (RCW 89.08.405(6)).

Unlike a school, fire, or park levy, this fee can be approved directly by the commissioners without a public vote. On September 2, 2025, the commissioners will hold a public hearing on this proposal.

CCD insists its work justifies the fee. But, unlike Kurt, they will not be asking for it, hat in hand. They expect it.

After offering public comment at the July 25th Conservation District Parcel Fee Hearing, I spoke with several members to acknowledge their work, even where we disagreed. Supervisor Maggie Bockart surprised me with her reply: “Oh, I think we DO agree.” She, too, dislikes the parcel fee and contends that the district should be supported “by the 1%” and run by volunteers.

But, unlike Robin Hood, this band of biologists and self-proclaimed “soil advocates” has yet to determine a foolproof plan to pilfer the rich. Instead, they plan to fleece the taxpayer. And, if history is a guide, our county commissioners are poised to help them do it.

How We Got Here

Grant revenue is unpredictable. In fact, CCD’s most recent work plan allocates $60,000 to staff tasked with securing it.

Grants do not always cover all indirect costs, which is why CCD’s constant refrain is, “We need stable funding!” CCD claims that this “stable funding” is “critical to cover expenses that grants do not fund, such as grant-writing and presentations, our soil testing program, elections, and rising operational costs.”

Back in 2019, Joe Holtop, then executive director of CCD, emphasized this point during the April 8th BOCC Work Session.

According to Holtop, CCD received $26,000 annually from the county’s general fund from 2001 to 2018, rising to $45,000 in 2019. He argued that the district needed a more substantial safety net and proposed a $5 parcel fee to the county commissioners during the 2019 work session.

One day later, Peninsula Daily News reported on CCD’s Parcel Fee Plan:

“He (Holtrop) said the district still needs to conduct a rate study, but the charges would be a maximum of $5 per parcel and $3 per forest landowner, he said. He said the plan is to submit a proposal and hold a public hearing by Aug. 1.”

By CCD’s June 11th, 2019 Board Meeting, the district had already secured a deal with the commissioners: $125,000 per year for five years from the county’s general fund.

So what happened between April 8 and June 11? A few sticking points emerged with the proposed $5 parcel fee:

* District 3 Commissioner Bill Peach worried the timeline for approval would not allow adequate consultation with constituents. He was also reluctant to support a proposal that would raise taxes on Clallam parcel holders (May 20, 2019 Work Session).

* CCD hesitated to spend roughly $30,000 on legal and professional fees for a “rate study” without confidence in the commissioners’ support (April 8, 2019 Work Session).

“That [rates and charges] study could cost up to $30,000 and we don’t want to spend that money unless we know we’re getting some direction that, yes we’re going to, kind of, start drifting down that road…spending money we don’t have to further the cause is one thing. Spending money we don’t have to say, ‘goodbye’ is another.”

After attending a CCD board meeting, Commissioner Johnson, who described himself as “gungho” for CCD’s efforts, stepped in to save the day. During the May 20, 2019 commissioner work session, he proposed the five-year, $125,000-per-year plan to the other commissioners.

Commissioner Peach supported the plan because it did not impose a direct long-term burden on taxpayers and allowed the board to “pivot” if the expense could no longer be justified from the county’s general fund.

Commissioner Ozias was also on board.

CCD’s April 2021 Newsletter praised the commissioners: “Thanks to the Clallam County Board of Commissioners, and Commissioner Johnson in particular, we now can expect to receive $125,000 annually from the County for the next four years.”

That deal expired in 2024, and the commissioners will end support from the general fund altogether in 2026.

So why did the commissioners abandon direct county funding, and why are they currently revisiting a potential parcel fee approval? One explanation may lie in the numbers: in 2019, Clallam County enjoyed a $1.8 million surplus. Today, it projects a deficit of more than $8.2 million by 2028.

Growth With No Plan

CCD was given a five-year lifeline by Commissioner Johnson and the other commissioners. Instead of using this time to secure an alternative, non-taxpayer-funded safety net, the district focused on growth. While the county’s financial outlook worsened, CCD expanded staff by 42%, growing from three full-time equivalents to 4.25 today.

Now, instead of right-sizing, CCD plans to prolong and INCREASE the burden on taxpayers. If it successfully secures $200,000 annually from a $5 parcel fee, the district would net $75,000 more than its previous $125,000 deal with the commissioners.

During last month’s hearing, members were asked how the additional money would be used. District Manager Kim Williams suggested increasing water conservation efforts and growing the Firewise programs. Board Chair Christy Cox floated the idea of rainwater collection as another area of expansion.

But that isn’t the whole story. CCD plans to increase salaries and benefits by 22.7%—funded in part by your parcel fee. As of June 30, 2025, the district reported annual salaries and benefits of $441,513.63.

In 2026, that number is projected to jump to $541,778.23 — an increase of $100,264.60.

When asked for clarification, District Manager Williams confirmed by email that the increase reflects cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) and expanded staff hours. She also claimed that most of CCD’s salaries are funded by grants, but has yet to provide supporting details.

For now, CCD promises to keep the parcel fee flat at $5 for ten years. But, under Washington House Bill 1488, that fee could climb to $25 per parcel with commissioner approval.

CCD’s strategy is clear: expand operations, then demand more from taxpayers. Approving today’s $5 fee would surely chart the course toward a $25 fee and a $1 million annual slush fund.

Who Really Benefits?

The Conservation District insists its work provides “public benefits for all.”

But while CCD highlights services for farmers and water conservation, its funding and staff time appear overwhelmingly geared toward fish, not people.

Examining CCD’s 2024 grant funding confirms its fish-centric philosophy. A conservative calculation demonstrates that at least 87% of grant funding is tied directly to fish or fish habitat efforts.

In her August 8 update to the county commissioners, District Manager Kim Williams highlighted the intensive effort behind restoring just 2.92 miles of fish habitat over the past year. The work included planting 24,831 trees and shrubs across 19 sites spanning 158.6 acres, clearing invasive blackberry thickets, and committing to five years of ongoing buffer maintenance.

Fish passage projects are similarly resource-intensive.

When it comes to clean water for human consumption, the most compelling service that CCD offers is the “on-site septic cost-share program”.

But only a handful of septic systems are replaced annually, and this, too, is driven by salmon preservation. Ms. Williams elaborated, “Our [criteria for septic replacement] are very specific for the resource concern. They have to be close to salmon-bearing waterways or water that goes into a salmon-bearing stream.”

The few homeowners who do qualify for septic assistance are responsible for 25% of the cost. But, this can be covered by the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), another salmon-centric grant.

CCD farmer services, touted as “free of charge,” are largely confined to three categories: soil testing, cover cropping, and livestock containment/manure storage.

Yet, even these efforts closely mirror the “Salmon-Safe” certification promoted by the Cascadia Conservation District, CCD’s counterpart in Chelan County. Listed below are CCD services that promote the requirements placed upon Salmon-Safe certified farms.

While these services may offer farmers some gains in soil health and crop yields, they also neatly align with CCD’s fish-first agenda. And compared to riparian restoration, farmer support appears far less staff-intensive. Last year, CCD handed out 20,500 pounds of cover crop seed—just 410 fifty-pound bags—and farmers conducted the on-site sampling for 171 soil tests themselves. CCD’s role was simply to mail the samples and help interpret the results.

Since CCD does not actively promote traditional fertilization techniques, soil testing seems to function as a funnel for its cover-crop program, which supports salmon habitat.

To their credit, the Clallam Conservation District coordinates an annual native plant sale that is enjoyed by 375 county residents. The plant sale generated nearly $12,000 in income for the district last year.

While fish habitat restoration may be a worthy cause, our county doesn’t need another tax that prioritizes “wants” over “needs.” July budget meetings made one thing clear: Washington State legislative mandates are a significant source of Clallam’s budgetary bottlenecks. Compliance with these “wants” undercuts fiscal flexibility and has left our county facing a public safety deficit.

“Stable funding” for the Clallam Conservation District is a “want.” Fortunately, it is optional, giving commissioners flexibility to remove it from the county’s overburdened budget. Unfortunately, the commissioners have the power to turn this discretionary spending into a long-term taxpayer obligation.

But who should pay to back-stop this growing grant-fueled team? Since 2019, Clallam taxpayers have already provided CCD with $730,000 in “stable funding” through the county’s general fund. In return, what alternative, sustainable sources of funding—beyond the proposed parcel fee—has CCD explored during that time? To date, their most ambitious effort seems to be auctioning a 2012 Subaru with a minimum bid of $8,500 (thanks, Kärin)!

I asked CCD officials this question directly at the Fee Hearing. I suggested that farmers, septic owners, and native plant enthusiasts—who are the primary human beneficiaries of CCD services—could be asked to contribute more.

The response? “Do you like drinking water?” “Do you eat? Then you are a recipient of the benefits.” As if clean water and food are unattainable to over 76,000 Clallam County residents without CCD’s salmon-centric efforts.

This non-answer revealed CCD staff’s unwavering belief system: their ideology is irrefutable. If they ask, taxpayers must give.

I was reminded of a lesson with my oldest son, who asked to be paid for basic chores like cleaning his room and washing dishes. I explained that some tasks are part of life. To earn money, he must develop skills that are scarce and valuable. People will pay for services that save or make them money or provide otherwise unattainable benefits.

A local example is trash clean-up and temporary shelter non-profit, 4PA, which is also in the business of habitat restoration (human habitat, that is). Residents and businesses have supported 4PA’s efforts because it delivers tangible, innovative solutions to problems that have long eluded government.

In 2024, 4PA raised $340,000—all private donations, no grants.

CCD raised $25.

Apparently, fish don’t have pocketbooks.

Based on CCD’s Accomplishments Report, the district generated a 2024 SURPLUS of $169,487, NOT counting a $125,000 contribution from the county’s general fund. Projections indicate a similar surplus in 2025.

If CCD finds its budget surplus insufficient, it could reduce staff to 2019 levels or cut rent and utilities by working remotely.

If, instead, maintaining staff and growing payroll and services are priorities, CCD could pursue voluntary public support. After all, if “all of the public” truly benefits, there should be no difficulty matching 4PA’s success in raising contributions. A starting point might be the farmers, 375 native plant sale customers, and 104 volunteers who already engage with the district.

Instead, CCD is asking the commissioners to saddle taxpayers with a $200,000 annual obligation—and the district seems confident it will get it. Unlike their 2019 predecessors, current management invested in a consultant to craft their “rates and charges” proposal, viewing the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) as a “partner” based on past history.

But the county’s budget is fragile, and public funding is increasingly uncertain. Mandating taxpayer-backed support for discretionary, grant-funded projects sets a dangerous precedent and would deepen Clallam’s fiscal emergency. It is time to prioritize “needs” over “wants.”

It is fitting that County CFO Mark Lane will present a revised draft of the county’s 2026 budget at the very same September 2nd, 2025, Commissioner’s Board Meeting as CCD’s parcel fee hearing. With a multi-million-dollar shortfall looming, commissioners have claimed they are searching for expense reductions. They have already flagged discretionary funding to CCD as one of those cuts. But a vote for this parcel fee is not a reduction at all—it is an increase, a direct transfer of cost to the taxpayer, and a refutation of any commissioner's claim to fiscal responsibility. If commissioners approve this fee, they aren’t cutting expenses—they’re simply disguising them as a new tax.

Because the commissioners will decide the fate of CCD’s philanthropic demands, they need to hear public opinion. Citizens should convey the expectation that the commissioners vote in a manner that reflects the desires of the people, leaving personal opinions at the door. It’s time for this oversized fish to swim on its own.

“Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state lives at the expense of everyone.” – Frédéric Bastiat

What can you do?

The Board of Clallam County Commissioners will hold a hearing on:

🗓 Date: Tuesday, September 2, 2025⏰ Time: 10:30 a.m.📍 Location: Clallam County Courthouse, Room 160223 East 4th Street, Port Angeles, WA

This decision could lock taxpayers into a $200,000 annual parcel fee.Please show up in person and make your voice heard. Let’s pack the courthouse—this is a big deal.

🖥 Participate via Zoom

Audio Only📞 Dial: 253-215-8782Meeting ID: 836 9266 4344Passcode: 12345(*Press 9 to raise your hand)

Video Conference🔗 Join Zoom MeetingMeeting ID: 836 9266 4344Passcode: 12345

✍️ Submit Written Comments

Clerk of the Board: Loni Gores

📧 Email: [email protected]📬 Mail: 223 East 4th Street, Suite 4, Port Angeles, WA 98362

Last Sunday, Jake Seegers asked readers when it’s okay for our leaders to hire outside the county. Out of 218 votes:

* 80% said, “When there is no local option”

* 13% said, “Never”

* 7% said, “When it saves money”

* 0% said, “When it saves time”

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com