Clallam County review panel seeks legal opinion on tribal trust land transfers, considers charter amendment

The Clallam County Charter Review Commission on an August meeting discussed whether to seek a formal legal opinion about tribal trust land acquisitions and whether the commission should propose a charter amendment that would direct county planning responses to Bureau of Indian Affairs trust transfers.

Commissioners and participants focused on legal foundations for placing acquired land into trust, including the Treaty of Point No Point (1855) and the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, and agreed to ask the county prosecutor (referred to in the meeting as "Dee") for counsel and for the executive committee to authorize that request.

Why it matters: trust land acquisitions can remove parcels from county land-use regulation and local taxation if accepted into federal trust, and the commission said it wants clearer guidance on what the county may properly tell the BIA when asked about impacts to county tax base and land-use authority.

Discussion and steps agreed
Commissioners raised two legal sources repeatedly in the meeting: (1) the Treaty of Point No Point, discussed by Commissioner Kathy, who read treaty language including Article 3 language securing hunting, fishing and gathering rights; and (2) the federal statutory framework stemming from the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) procedures for taking land into trust. Commissioner Richards said, "I think it absolutely belongs in a charter amendment," arguing that a charter provision would give the issue formal recognition after years of inaction.

Panel members agreed that legal counsel should clarify which aspects are treaty-based versus statutory, and whether federal law or constitutional provisions affect the county's ability to comment or restrict trust acquisitions. The commission asked that proposed legal questions be circulated to committee members before an attorney meeting so the prosecutor's responses can be framed to the commission's actual concerns.

Public comment and administrative-review reminders
Resident Kenneth Reando of Port Angeles urged the commission to avoid "artificial barriers" and to continue constructive dialogue, noting he favors "willing seller, willing buyer" principles. John Worthington, a commenter who said he has filed Administrative Procedure Act objections and cited the Code of Federal Regulations, told the commission he had submitted paperwork contesting some trust acquisitions and asserted the county has not pursued administrative challenges in prior years. Worthington said tribal properties cover "22 square miles" in checkerboard patterns and referenced an August 17 deadline for an action he had submitted to the Department of the Interior.

What the commission will do next
The commission directed several follow-up steps: seek permission from the executive committee to consult the county prosecutor for legal framing of questions; collect and circulate maps of current trust land in Clallam County (members said Lonnie and others would share existing maps); ask Commissioner Richards and other committee members to draft the specific questions for legal review; and consider forwarding a resolution or charter amendment language to the Board of County Commissioners after legal review. Commissioners agreed to place approval of minutes on the next agenda.

Procedural items and scheduling
Members settled on a next meeting date of August 26 at 1 p.m. to continue the work and review maps and the prosecutor's input. The meeting closed on a motion to adjourn that passed by voice vote.

Ending
The commission's next steps are procedural: produce a clear list of legal questions for the county prosecutor, circulate existing trust-land maps to the committee, and decide whether to recommend a charter amendment or a resolution to the Board of County Commissioners once the prosecutor's guidance is received.