Clallam County Watchdog

Faithfully and Impartially?

47 min · 17. kesä 2026
jakson Faithfully and Impartially? kansikuva

Kuvaus

When residents of Three Crabs ask for help with flooding, when citizens request answers about public safety, or when constituents seek meetings with county officials, they often report silence. Yet public records show Commissioner Mark Ozias regularly making time for private meetings, research discussions, and information-sharing with a network of environmental activists working on timber and trust land issues. The records raise a larger question: are Clallam County commissioners serving all residents equally, or have certain activist and special-interest groups become the county’s preferred stakeholders? Who Gets a Seat at the Table? The oath of office taken by elected officials is simple. They swear to faithfully and impartially serve the public. “I, Mark Ozias, do solemnly swear or affirm, that I am a citizen of the United States and the State of Washington, and that I am legally qualified to assume the office of Clallam County Commissioner District 1, that I will support the constitution and the laws of the United States and the State of Washington, and the charter and ordinances of Clallam County, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of this office to the best of my ability.” – Commissioner Mark Ozias, December 29th, 2015 But in Clallam County, many residents are beginning to wonder whether some voices carry more weight than others. A pair of recent Washington State Standard articles published in the Peninsula Daily News highlighted the growing influence of environmental activist networks working to reshape the future of state-managed forests on the Olympic Peninsula. One article detailed [https://washingtonstatestandard.com/briefs/fundraising-effort-saves-patch-of-state-managed-forest-in-western-wa-from-logging/] how the Elwha Legacy Forests Coalition raised $32,000 in just four days to halt logging around the Sadie Creek Campground. Another reported on litigation [https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2026/06/05/environmental-groups-sue-to-stop-400-acres-of-logging-in-was-elwha-watershed/] seeking to stop nearly 400 acres of logging in the Elwha Watershed. Among the most visible advocates quoted in the coverage is WendyRae Johnson, a member of the Elwha Legacy Forests Coalition and the recently reelected Chair of the Clallam Conservation District. There is nothing improper about advocacy. Citizens have every right to organize, lobby government, and pursue policy goals they believe benefit the community. The question is whether everyone enjoys the same access. The Activist Network Public records obtained by Clallam County Watchdog show Johnson communicating directly with Commissioner Mark Ozias regarding trust land issues, timber revenues, and meetings concerning what emails describe as their “findings on a unitary trust.” The records also show the involvement of Ed Chadd, a local political organizer and activist who has helped organize Indivisible demonstrations attended by Commissioner Mark Ozias. Chadd was included in discussions alongside Johnson and Mary Jean Ryan regarding timber revenue data and trust land issues. On March 9, Ozias obtained county financial information regarding timber revenues and forwarded it directly to Johnson, Ryan, and Chadd after locating data they had discussed. He described the information as containing “exactly the data we were discussing.” A month later, Johnson requested a follow-up meeting with Ozias regarding the group’s research. Ozias worked around scheduling conflicts, proposed multiple dates, and ultimately arranged a dedicated Zoom meeting involving Johnson, Ryan, and Chadd. The meeting wasn’t squeezed into a crowded public comment period. It wasn’t limited to a three-minute statement before the board. It wasn’t a request submitted through a county website. It was a private hour-long Zoom meeting scheduled directly with a county commissioner. The meeting appeared on Ozias’ calendar for April 22, 2026. A Concierge Service? Again, none of this is illegal. Commissioners routinely meet with constituents. They should. What stands out is the level of assistance being provided. The emails show Ozias gathering county data on behalf of the group, forwarding outside reports related to trust lands, coordinating schedules, and maintaining an ongoing dialogue about issues they were actively researching. For activists seeking information about timber revenues and trust land management, the county commissioner appears highly responsive. Many other residents would likely welcome similar treatment. Meanwhile, Other Residents Wait Residents in Three Crabs have spent years raising concerns [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/flooded-out?utm_source=publication-search] about flooding following restoration projects and dike removal in the area. Some report recurring seasonal flooding, property impacts, and difficulty getting meaningful responses from decision makers. Citizens concerned about public safety, homelessness, drug use, and county policies frequently report unanswered emails and unreturned requests for comment. Commissioner Ozias has also declined invitations to several community forums and public discussions where residents hoped to ask questions directly. The contrast is difficult to ignore. One group receives direct access, research support, scheduling accommodations, and ongoing conversations with elected officials. Others struggle simply to get a response. The Bigger Question The issue isn’t WendyRae Johnson.The issue isn’t Ed Chadd.The issue isn’t environmental advocacy. The issue is whether access to elected officials is being distributed fairly. Every resident of Clallam County pays for county government. Every resident helps fund the salaries, staff, and resources that support elected officials. Every resident deserves to know that their concerns will receive the same attention regardless of whether they belong to a well-connected activist network, a political organization, a tribe, a nonprofit, a business association, or simply happen to be an individual citizen. Commissioners are not elected to represent the people who already agree with them. They are elected to represent everyone. When public records repeatedly show special access for organized interests while ordinary residents struggle to be heard, it raises an uncomfortable question: Is county government serving the public equally—or has access itself become a privilege reserved for those who already have a seat at the table? Editor’s Note: Public records reviewed for this article show communications between Commissioner Mark Ozias, Clallam Conservation District Chair WendyRae Johnson, Mary Jean Ryan, and Ed Chadd concerning trust land issues, timber revenues, and related meetings. The records do not establish that Commissioner Ozias coordinated litigation or advocacy efforts, only that he provided information and participated in discussions regarding those issues. “For friends, everything; for enemies, the law.” — Attributed to several political figures Today’s Tidbit: School Board to Consider Censure of Director Nancy Hamilton The Port Angeles School District Board of Directors is scheduled to consider a resolution [https://go.boarddocs.com/wa/pasd/Board.nsf/files/DV4243004C22/$file/Resolution%202526-18%20Censure_Nancy_Hamilton.pdf] on June 18 that would formally censure board member Nancy Hamilton. The item appears on the board’s agenda as “Approval of Resolution 2526-18 – Censure of Board Director, Nancy Hamilton,” with administration recommending approval. A censure is a formal statement of disapproval by a governing body. It does not remove an elected official from office, but it serves as an official reprimand and can limit certain board privileges. According to the proposed resolution, the board alleges Hamilton violated board policies and standards of conduct through a pattern of actions that the resolution says undermined board governance and district operations. Hamilton was elected to the board in November 2025 and was sworn into office in December. In recent months, she has frequently asked questions about district finances, staffing reductions, and decision-making processes. She cast the lone vote against a recent reduction-in-force resolution, stating she did not have enough information about how staffing priorities had been determined. The meeting is scheduled for Thursday, June 18 at 5pm, and is expected to draw significant public interest. Whether residents support the censure or oppose it, this may be an important opportunity to hear the board’s rationale, Hamilton’s response, and public comment on the matter. As always, readers are encouraged to review the resolution themselves and attend the meeting if they wish to see the discussion firsthand. Commissioner Randy Johnson Agrees to Participate in This Week’s Town Hall This Weekend 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 [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

Kommentit

0

Ole ensimmäinen kommentoija

Rekisteröidy nyt ja liity Clallam County Watchdog-yhteisöön!

Aloita maksutta

14 vrk ilmainen kokeilu

Kokeilun jälkeen 7,99 € / kuukausi. · Peru milloin tahansa.

  • Podimon podcastit
  • 20 kuunteluaikaa / kuukausi
  • Lataa offline-käyttöön

Kaikki jaksot

323 jaksot

jakson Faithfully and Impartially? kansikuva

Faithfully and Impartially?

When residents of Three Crabs ask for help with flooding, when citizens request answers about public safety, or when constituents seek meetings with county officials, they often report silence. Yet public records show Commissioner Mark Ozias regularly making time for private meetings, research discussions, and information-sharing with a network of environmental activists working on timber and trust land issues. The records raise a larger question: are Clallam County commissioners serving all residents equally, or have certain activist and special-interest groups become the county’s preferred stakeholders? Who Gets a Seat at the Table? The oath of office taken by elected officials is simple. They swear to faithfully and impartially serve the public. “I, Mark Ozias, do solemnly swear or affirm, that I am a citizen of the United States and the State of Washington, and that I am legally qualified to assume the office of Clallam County Commissioner District 1, that I will support the constitution and the laws of the United States and the State of Washington, and the charter and ordinances of Clallam County, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of this office to the best of my ability.” – Commissioner Mark Ozias, December 29th, 2015 But in Clallam County, many residents are beginning to wonder whether some voices carry more weight than others. A pair of recent Washington State Standard articles published in the Peninsula Daily News highlighted the growing influence of environmental activist networks working to reshape the future of state-managed forests on the Olympic Peninsula. One article detailed [https://washingtonstatestandard.com/briefs/fundraising-effort-saves-patch-of-state-managed-forest-in-western-wa-from-logging/] how the Elwha Legacy Forests Coalition raised $32,000 in just four days to halt logging around the Sadie Creek Campground. Another reported on litigation [https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2026/06/05/environmental-groups-sue-to-stop-400-acres-of-logging-in-was-elwha-watershed/] seeking to stop nearly 400 acres of logging in the Elwha Watershed. Among the most visible advocates quoted in the coverage is WendyRae Johnson, a member of the Elwha Legacy Forests Coalition and the recently reelected Chair of the Clallam Conservation District. There is nothing improper about advocacy. Citizens have every right to organize, lobby government, and pursue policy goals they believe benefit the community. The question is whether everyone enjoys the same access. The Activist Network Public records obtained by Clallam County Watchdog show Johnson communicating directly with Commissioner Mark Ozias regarding trust land issues, timber revenues, and meetings concerning what emails describe as their “findings on a unitary trust.” The records also show the involvement of Ed Chadd, a local political organizer and activist who has helped organize Indivisible demonstrations attended by Commissioner Mark Ozias. Chadd was included in discussions alongside Johnson and Mary Jean Ryan regarding timber revenue data and trust land issues. On March 9, Ozias obtained county financial information regarding timber revenues and forwarded it directly to Johnson, Ryan, and Chadd after locating data they had discussed. He described the information as containing “exactly the data we were discussing.” A month later, Johnson requested a follow-up meeting with Ozias regarding the group’s research. Ozias worked around scheduling conflicts, proposed multiple dates, and ultimately arranged a dedicated Zoom meeting involving Johnson, Ryan, and Chadd. The meeting wasn’t squeezed into a crowded public comment period. It wasn’t limited to a three-minute statement before the board. It wasn’t a request submitted through a county website. It was a private hour-long Zoom meeting scheduled directly with a county commissioner. The meeting appeared on Ozias’ calendar for April 22, 2026. A Concierge Service? Again, none of this is illegal. Commissioners routinely meet with constituents. They should. What stands out is the level of assistance being provided. The emails show Ozias gathering county data on behalf of the group, forwarding outside reports related to trust lands, coordinating schedules, and maintaining an ongoing dialogue about issues they were actively researching. For activists seeking information about timber revenues and trust land management, the county commissioner appears highly responsive. Many other residents would likely welcome similar treatment. Meanwhile, Other Residents Wait Residents in Three Crabs have spent years raising concerns [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/flooded-out?utm_source=publication-search] about flooding following restoration projects and dike removal in the area. Some report recurring seasonal flooding, property impacts, and difficulty getting meaningful responses from decision makers. Citizens concerned about public safety, homelessness, drug use, and county policies frequently report unanswered emails and unreturned requests for comment. Commissioner Ozias has also declined invitations to several community forums and public discussions where residents hoped to ask questions directly. The contrast is difficult to ignore. One group receives direct access, research support, scheduling accommodations, and ongoing conversations with elected officials. Others struggle simply to get a response. The Bigger Question The issue isn’t WendyRae Johnson.The issue isn’t Ed Chadd.The issue isn’t environmental advocacy. The issue is whether access to elected officials is being distributed fairly. Every resident of Clallam County pays for county government. Every resident helps fund the salaries, staff, and resources that support elected officials. Every resident deserves to know that their concerns will receive the same attention regardless of whether they belong to a well-connected activist network, a political organization, a tribe, a nonprofit, a business association, or simply happen to be an individual citizen. Commissioners are not elected to represent the people who already agree with them. They are elected to represent everyone. When public records repeatedly show special access for organized interests while ordinary residents struggle to be heard, it raises an uncomfortable question: Is county government serving the public equally—or has access itself become a privilege reserved for those who already have a seat at the table? Editor’s Note: Public records reviewed for this article show communications between Commissioner Mark Ozias, Clallam Conservation District Chair WendyRae Johnson, Mary Jean Ryan, and Ed Chadd concerning trust land issues, timber revenues, and related meetings. The records do not establish that Commissioner Ozias coordinated litigation or advocacy efforts, only that he provided information and participated in discussions regarding those issues. “For friends, everything; for enemies, the law.” — Attributed to several political figures Today’s Tidbit: School Board to Consider Censure of Director Nancy Hamilton The Port Angeles School District Board of Directors is scheduled to consider a resolution [https://go.boarddocs.com/wa/pasd/Board.nsf/files/DV4243004C22/$file/Resolution%202526-18%20Censure_Nancy_Hamilton.pdf] on June 18 that would formally censure board member Nancy Hamilton. The item appears on the board’s agenda as “Approval of Resolution 2526-18 – Censure of Board Director, Nancy Hamilton,” with administration recommending approval. A censure is a formal statement of disapproval by a governing body. It does not remove an elected official from office, but it serves as an official reprimand and can limit certain board privileges. According to the proposed resolution, the board alleges Hamilton violated board policies and standards of conduct through a pattern of actions that the resolution says undermined board governance and district operations. Hamilton was elected to the board in November 2025 and was sworn into office in December. In recent months, she has frequently asked questions about district finances, staffing reductions, and decision-making processes. She cast the lone vote against a recent reduction-in-force resolution, stating she did not have enough information about how staffing priorities had been determined. The meeting is scheduled for Thursday, June 18 at 5pm, and is expected to draw significant public interest. Whether residents support the censure or oppose it, this may be an important opportunity to hear the board’s rationale, Hamilton’s response, and public comment on the matter. As always, readers are encouraged to review the resolution themselves and attend the meeting if they wish to see the discussion firsthand. Commissioner Randy Johnson Agrees to Participate in This Week’s Town Hall This Weekend 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 [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

17. kesä 202647 min
jakson Dr. Berry's Response Challenges Recovery Advocate's Information Sources kansikuva

Dr. Berry's Response Challenges Recovery Advocate's Information Sources

A Port Angeles resident in recovery is urging Clallam County to shift its focus from drug-use supplies to treatment and accountability. In response, Health Officer Dr. Allison Berry defended the county’s harm reduction efforts, cited declining overdose rates, and accused Clallam County Watchdog and County Commissioner candidate Jake Seegers of misrepresenting her work. The exchange highlights a growing divide between public health officials and residents—including people in recovery—over whether current policies are producing the results taxpayers were promised. The full correspondence is published below. A Letter to a Leader For years, Clallam County has expanded its harm reduction efforts in an attempt to reduce overdose deaths, prevent the spread of infectious disease, and connect people struggling with addiction to services. Supporters argue the strategy saves lives. Critics argue the county has become increasingly focused on making addiction safer rather than helping people escape it. That debate took center stage yesterday in an exchange between Port Angeles resident David Rogers [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/from-addiction-to-community-builder?utm_source=publication-search] and Clallam County Health Officer Dr. Allison Berry. Rogers, who says he is in long-term recovery from addiction and has lost both his sister and numerous friends to overdose, wrote to county officials urging them to reconsider the county’s current approach. Dear Clallam County Health and Human Services Leadership, I am writing as a Clallam County resident, someone in long term recovery from addiction, and someone who regularly spends time talking with people who are currently struggling with substance use disorder on our streets. I understand that the goal of your department is to reduce overdose deaths and improve public health. I believe those are goals we all share. Unfortunately, I also believe it is time to honestly acknowledge that the current approach is not producing the results our community was promised. Despite the continued expansion of harm reduction services and the distribution of drug use supplies, Clallam County continues to experience overdose rates that exceed state and national averages. At the same time, families, business owners, and residents are watching open drug use, drug dealing, and public disorder become increasingly common. Many people in our community feel like there is little accountability and that these programs are unintentionally making it easier to remain in active addiction. I respectfully ask that Clallam County discontinue the distribution of all drug use supplies except for a one for one syringe exchange. Exchanging used syringes for clean ones helps reduce discarded needles in our community while still addressing the risk of disease transmission. Beyond that, I believe the county should stop handing out supplies that support continued drug use without also moving people toward treatment and recovery. Compassion and accountability are not opposites. In my experience, they work best together. Nearly every successful recovery program includes accountability because real recovery often requires someone to be challenged to make a different choice. We should absolutely meet people where they are, but we should also be helping them move forward rather than making it easier to stay exactly where they are. As someone who has lived through addiction, I can honestly say that what changed my life was accountability combined with access to treatment. It was not having my addiction made easier. I have now spent years talking with others in recovery, and I continue to hear that same story over and over again. I would much rather see our resources invested in treatment, recovery support, transportation to treatment, case management, and housing that encourages recovery. Every dollar we spend should move someone one step closer to getting their life back. I also ask that Health and Human Services publicly report measurable outcomes for each of its harm reduction programs. If we are investing taxpayer dollars into these services, the public deserves to know what results they are producing. If a program is reducing overdose deaths, increasing treatment participation, or improving long term recovery, that should be demonstrated with clear data. If it is not, then we have a responsibility to reconsider how those resources are being used. Finally, I want to address something that has become increasingly frustrating for many of us in the community. My sister died from an overdose. I have also lost countless friends to addiction. When Dr. Alison Berry suggests that those of us advocating for changes to the county’s current approach lack compassion or somehow want to see people die or contract HIV, it is deeply hurtful and disrespectful. Nothing could be further from the truth. Those of us asking for change are often the very people who have buried loved ones, lived through addiction ourselves, or both. We are speaking because we are tired of watching people die. We simply disagree on what the most effective path forward is. There is room for honest disagreement about public policy without questioning each other’s compassion or motives. Suggesting that anyone who advocates for greater accountability is somehow indifferent to human suffering only divides our community and shuts down meaningful conversation. I respectfully ask that Health and Human Services engage with those of us who have lived experience, even when we disagree. Recovery is possible. Our voices deserve to be heard, and they deserve to be treated with the same respect afforded to any other stakeholder in this conversation. We all want the same outcome: fewer overdose deaths, healthier families, and more people finding lasting recovery. We will get there faster by listening to one another instead of dismissing those whose experiences lead them to different conclusions. Sincerely David RogersPort Angeles, Washington His letter is notable because it comes not from a politician or activist, but from someone who says he has personally experienced addiction and recovery. “Compassion and accountability are not opposites,” Rogers wrote. “In my experience, they work best together.” Rogers argued that the county should discontinue distributing drug-use supplies beyond a one-for-one syringe exchange program and instead direct more resources toward treatment, recovery support, transportation, case management, and housing programs that encourage recovery. He also called on county officials to publicly report measurable outcomes demonstrating whether harm reduction programs are producing the results taxpayers are funding. Perhaps most significantly, Rogers challenged what many residents have increasingly described as a dismissive attitude toward those who question the county’s approach. “My sister died from an overdose,” Rogers wrote. “I have also lost countless friends to addiction.” “Those of us asking for change are often the very people who have buried loved ones, lived through addiction ourselves, or both.” Berry Responds Dr. Allison Berry responded an hour later. Hi Mr. Rogers, Thank you for reaching out. First of all, I want to say congratulations on your recovery. That is such hard work and I am so happy for you. Secondly, I want to say I am so very sorry to hear about the loss of your sister. I’m sending you peace as you grapple with that incredible loss. Preventing overdose deaths like her own is a major motivator for the work that we do. Given the timing of your email and some of the references in it, I suspect that you are getting your information about me and my work on Clallam County Watchdog. It has been a challenge these last few months to have Mr. Tozzer and Mr. Seegers so dedicated to misrepresenting me, my work, and my words. Luckily, every meeting they draw their material from is recorded and publicly available. Before you get angry at something you’ve been told I said, I strongly encourage you to go listen to the original tape. You can find them on the Clallam County website under the board of health here: https://www.clallamcountywa.gov/677/Board-of-Health [https://www.clallamcountywa.gov/677/Board-of-Health] For an example - one of the misquotes that you share upset you, the one where I reportedly equate accountability with wanting people to get HIV and die. I actually said the exact opposite - that I don’t think that is what people mean when they ask for accountability. As a drug treatment professional, I agree with you - accountability is an incredibly important part of long term recovery. I was making the point that nothing we do gets in the way of that. We just prevent infectious diseases. I shared the example of if a person commits violence while using drugs, nothing we do will prevent them from facing the consequences of that - nor frankly do I wish to. You can find that specific meeting here:https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/292/files/agenda/6053 [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/292/files/agenda/6053] Similarly, on the subject of metrics, we have shared many and continue to. I gave a 50 minute presentation on why we practice harm reduction and shared quite a few metrics there. You can find that in our BOH recordings too: https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/289/files/agenda/4746 [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/289/files/agenda/4746]. When reporting on that presentation, unfortunately Mr. Tozzer didn’t share any of those data, instead focusing on falsely claiming that I said 4PA steals. We also have numerous publicly available reports on our website. One metric I can share with you here - when I took this job in 2018, we were leading the state in opiate overdoses. Now, we are ranked 16th. We’ve made substantial progress, faster than other counties in the state and the nation. That has been the result of focused and coordinated effort - to expand treatment, to expand harm reduction services and naloxone availability, to improve connections to care, and social supports for people who use drugs, to facilitate treatment in jail and connections to care afterwards. We have a long way to go, but I am hopeful that as a community, we can continue this progress. I appreciate your engagement in this work. I encourage you, as you move forward, to vet your source, listen to the original recordings, and expand the sources of information you are drawing from. Mr. Tozzer and Mr. Seegers have a particular political goal in mind with their content and have unfortunately demonstrated a willingness to manipulate and misrepresent reality to get it. Hang in there, Allison Berry, MD, MPHHealth Officer for Clallam County and Jefferson County She began by congratulating Rogers on his recovery and expressing condolences for the loss of his sister. Berry then suggested Rogers may have been receiving information about her work through Clallam County Watchdog. “It has been a challenge these last few months to have Mr. Tozzer and Mr. Seegers so dedicated to misrepresenting me, my work, and my words,” Berry wrote. Berry encouraged Rogers to review original Board of Health recordings and public records rather than relying on secondhand reporting. She specifically challenged criticism surrounding comments she previously made regarding accountability and infectious disease prevention. According to Berry, critics have mischaracterized her remarks. However, readers can review her exact words for themselves. During a Board of Health discussion, Berry stated: “I’ve heard a lot of this conversation about this idea that we need, like, more accountability for folks and — what’s the phrase? — compassion without accountability, and it’s strange that we’ve gotten wrapped into that in some way, because all that we do is help people not get AIDS and make them less likely to die.” She then added: “I hope that when people are asking for accountability, they’re not saying that people who use drugs deserve to get AIDS and die.” Many residents interpreted those comments as suggesting that criticism of harm reduction programs is closely associated with a desire to deny services to people suffering from addiction. Berry maintains that the interpretation is incorrect. Rogers Pushes Back Rogers replied shortly after receiving Berry’s response, challenging her assumption that his concerns originated with Clallam County Watchdog or any single political figure. Hi, Thank you for your response. I’ll get back to everything you raised, but I wanted to quickly address your assumption that my information comes from Mr. Tozzer. My perspective comes from being an engaged citizen. I attend City Council meetings, County Commissioner meetings, and Public Health hearings, and I’m adjusting my schedule so I can attend even more of them in person. I’ve also spent time walking and talking with leaders like Mike French, Mark Hodgson, Amy Miller, and Drew Schwab. Together we’ve walked Veterans Park, Tumwater Creek, and other troubled areas, speaking directly with people who are struggling with substance use and homelessness. To immediately dismiss my perspective as simply repeating one other person’s opinions is exactly the kind of behavior many people in our county are growing frustrated with. These concerns are not coming from one individual or one political group. They come from citizens, business owners, first responders, elected officials, and people with lived experience who are all seeing the same problems firsthand. If we aren’t willing to take an honest look at what’s happening, we won’t move forward. One statement Commissioner Mike French made during one of our walks has stuck with me: often the strongest criticism of our current approach comes from people who have successfully changed their lives and recovered from substance use disorder. I think that should speak volumes. Those of us who have lived through addiction are often the very people questioning policies that, from our perspective, make it easier to remain in active addiction rather than move toward recovery. I’ll review the links you sent and respond in more detail as soon as I can. Thank you, David Rogers “My perspective comes from being an engaged citizen,” Rogers wrote. He described regularly attending City Council meetings, County Commissioner meetings, and public health hearings. He also said he has spent time walking through areas such as Veterans Park and Tumwater Creek with community leaders including County Commissioner Mike French, Mark Hodgson, Amy Miller, and Drew Schwab, speaking directly with people experiencing addiction and homelessness. “To immediately dismiss my perspective as simply repeating one other person’s opinions is exactly the kind of behavior many people in our county are growing frustrated with,” Rogers wrote. He argued that concerns about the county’s current approach are not coming from a single individual or political group, but from residents, business owners, first responders, elected officials, and people with lived experience who are observing the same issues firsthand. “If we aren’t willing to take an honest look at what’s happening, we won’t move forward,” he wrote. Rogers also referenced a comment he said was made by Commissioner French during one of their discussions: “Often the strongest criticism of our current approach comes from people who have successfully changed their lives and recovered from substance use disorder.” “I think that should speak volumes,” Rogers added. “Those of us who have lived through addiction are often the very people questioning policies that, from our perspective, make it easier to remain in active addiction rather than move toward recovery.” The “Theft” Controversy Berry also accused County Commissioner candidate Jake Seegers of falsely claiming [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/tumwater-tour?utm_source=publication-search] that she said the volunteer group 4PA steals supplies from homeless encampments. Here again, readers can evaluate the original statement for themselves. During a Board of Health meeting, Berry stated: “I live here. Have kids in PA. I don’t want needles on the ground, so we work hard to get them back. I think it’s important to acknowledge that some of our supplies that are turned in by people who find them are folks who are cleaning up encampments that people still live in. So, that cleaning up is actually theft. It’s taking supplies that someone is still using.” Whether that statement was directed at 4PA specifically remains a matter of interpretation, but it is the statement that generated the controversy. The Data Debate Berry pointed to what she describes as measurable success. “When I took this job in 2018, we were leading the state in opiate overdoses. Now, we are ranked 16th,” she wrote. That claim is important context. But it is also true that Clallam County continues to experience overdose rates above both state and national averages. The debate is no longer whether overdose deaths matter. Everyone agrees they do. The debate is whether current policies deserve credit for improvements that have occurred and whether different approaches could achieve better results. One program frequently cited by recovery advocates is Operation Shielding Hope [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/harm-reduction-hijack?utm_source=publication-search]. Unlike traditional harm reduction efforts focused primarily on distributing supplies, Operation Shielding Hope connects overdose survivors with paramedics and peer recovery specialists immediately after an overdose event. The goal is to move people into treatment and recovery services while they are most receptive to help. County data previously reviewed by Jake Seegers showed dramatically higher engagement rates among individuals contacted through Operation Shielding Hope than among those who were not. Supporters argue that the program demonstrates that treatment-focused intervention can achieve measurable results without relying primarily on distributing drug-use supplies. Critics of the county’s broader harm reduction strategy argue officials have been too quick to credit improvements to programs that distribute meth pipes, crack pipe cleaning kits, foil, and other drug-use supplies while giving insufficient attention to treatment-centered programs producing measurable outcomes. Questions That Remain Berry’s email also raises a broader question. If Clallam County Watchdog is repeatedly misrepresenting her statements, why has the Health Officer declined multiple requests for clarification and follow-up questions? Public officials certainly have no obligation to answer. However, when they choose not to engage, citizens are left to rely on public meetings, public records, official presentations, and direct quotations. Meanwhile, Rogers’ central question remains unanswered: How much of the county’s addiction-response budget should be devoted to making drug use safer, and how much should be devoted to helping people stop using drugs altogether? As overdose deaths, homelessness, and public disorder continue to dominate local conversations, it’s going to become harder for local leadership to dodge that question. What Can You Do? The future direction of harm reduction in Clallam County will ultimately be determined by elected officials and public health leaders—but they need to hear from the people they serve. If you have thoughts about the county’s approach to harm reduction, drug testing, overdose prevention, or the use of taxpayer resources, consider sharing them with the Board of County Commissioners and Health Officer Dr. Allison Berry. All three county commissioners can be reached through the Clerk of the Board at loni.gores@clallamcountywa.gov. Dr. Berry can be reached directly at allison.berry@clallamcountywa.gov. You can also make your voice heard during public comment at the next Board of Health meeting today, Tuesday, June 16, at 1:30 p.m. [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/293/files/agenda/6198] in the Commissioners Boardroom at the Clallam County Courthouse in Port Angeles. Public comment is available both in person and via Zoom [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/293/files/agenda/6198]. Whether you support the county’s current approach, oppose it, or believe changes are needed, local government works best when citizens participate. Make your voice part of the conversation. “I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgment, but never with a view to injury and wrongdoing.” — The Hippocratic Oath Today’s Tidbit: A Look Back The debate over public health and misinformation is not new in Clallam County. In September 2021, the Board of Health unanimously passed a resolution praising Dr. Allison Berry's leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic, describing her as a patient, compassionate, science-based voice during a difficult time. Board members also warned that misinformation was undermining public health efforts and condemned threats and intimidation directed at county staff. Five years later, many of the same questions about expertise, public trust, and dissent remain at the center of public debate. 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 [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

Eilen1 h 22 min
jakson On the Eve of the Debate, Clallam Democrats Call Jake Seegers “Fake Jake” kansikuva

On the Eve of the Debate, Clallam Democrats Call Jake Seegers “Fake Jake”

Tonight’s first debate between Mike French and Jake Seegers comes amid controversy after the official Clallam County Democrats Facebook page referred to Seegers as “Fake Jake.” As local politics grows increasingly personal, some voters may be wondering whether civility has become the first casualty of campaign season. Tonight’s Debate Tonight marks the first public debate between incumbent County Commissioner Mike French and challenger Jake Seegers. Hosted by the Clallam County Democrats, the forum begins at 6:00 p.m. at Democratic Headquarters in Port Angeles and will also be available via Zoom and livestream. 📅 Monday, June 15🕕 6:00 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.📍 Clallam County Democratic Headquarters124 W. First StreetPort Angeles 💻 Zoomhttps://us06web.zoom.us/j/87528120754?pwd=ARhC4vRSKdiaNX8v6b444afOFXA8fI.1 [https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87528120754?pwd=ARhC4vRSKdiaNX8v6b444afOFXA8fI.1] Meeting ID: 875 2812 0754Passcode: 597621 According to the forum rules, each candidate will receive opening statements, rebuttal opportunities, audience questions, and closing remarks. Questions may come from those attending in person, Zoom participants, or individuals who submitted them in advance. The Comment That Started It As election season heats up, the Clallam County Democrats have also been encouraging voters to read Paul Pickett’s profile of Mike French [https://www.clallamdems.org/blog/profile-in-leadership-mike-french-a-local-guy-doing-good-things-for-us?fbclid=IwY2xjawSb6EtleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETF3ZUcxbU1xeVVTa2tJemtXc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHhfrsUb06vaf3WLQ-pTCzhjNjdKwPxEe0xhc11Qn6pQKXAmeohq7IRgwKZlI_aem_Db07YiM1fY4mbcGfo2k4eg]. One exchange on the party’s official Facebook page caught people’s attention over the weekend. A commenter remarked that he thought Mike French was an independent. The official response from the Clallam County Democrats was: “You’re thinking of Fake Jake, the fake independent.” It’s a curious response coming from the organization hosting tonight’s debate. Whether you support French, Seegers, or neither, publicly mocking one of the candidates days before welcoming him onto your stage is not exactly a gesture of neutrality or goodwill. Imagine if a moderator opened a forum by giving one participant a nickname. Most people would find it unprofessional. When Politics Becomes Personal Unfortunately, it also feels emblematic of the broader direction of local politics. Over the past several years, political disagreements in Clallam County have increasingly become personal. Rather than debating ideas, budgets, policies, or priorities, the conversation often devolves into accusations about motives, character, and identity. Name-calling has become routine. Activist groups encourage opposition to candidates based on personal beliefs. Complaints are filed over technicalities [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/signgate-2026?utm_source=publication-search]. Political opponents are treated less as neighbors with different views and more as enemies to be defeated. A New Substack Takes Aim at the Watchdog Local resident Marcos Osorio expressed support for Mike French and wrote that he hoped French could “shut Jeff Tozzer’s big mouth.” He then linked readers to a newly created Substack publication [https://substack.com/home/post/p-201851370] that was launched earlier that day. The article, titled The Watchdog That Doesn’t Watch Itself, levels a long list of accusations against Clallam County Watchdog and its author, me. According to the author “Salsa Picante”, CC Watchdog promotes hatred toward tribes, transgender individuals, immigrants, schools, libraries, firefighters, and numerous other groups. The problem is that the article largely skips over the part where evidence is supposed to be presented. Readers are told these things are true, but are given few specific examples. There are no lengthy quotations. No documented patterns. No links to offensive articles. No serious effort to demonstrate the claims being made. That’s a problem because accusations are easy. Proof is harder. Questions Are Not Attacks The irony is that democracy depends on people asking difficult questions, and that’s what CC Watchdog has been doing since 2023. Mike French will be asked questions tonight. Jake Seegers will be asked questions tonight. The audience will ask questions. The moderators will ask questions. No reasonable person would interpret every question as an attack. Questions are how voters evaluate candidates, how citizens hold government accountable, and how communities learn. Yet increasingly, simply asking questions about public policy is treated as evidence of hostility. Part of the problem may be that we’ve become less accustomed to seeing those questions asked in the first place. For generations, journalists attended meetings, reviewed records, challenged official statements, and asked questions on behalf of the public. Politicians expected scrutiny. Government agencies expected scrutiny. Public institutions expected scrutiny. It wasn’t controversial—it was the job. Today, much of local media has shifted away from that role. Newspapers increasingly publish press releases and guest columns from elected officials. Feel-good stories promoting the work of government agencies and nonprofit organizations, written by the NGOs themselves, are now commonplace. Those stories have value, but they are not a substitute for accountability journalism. When people spend years consuming coverage that rarely challenges those in power, an article that asks difficult questions can start to feel unusual—even threatening. But asking questions is not hostility. It is the foundation of both journalism and self-government. Pick up a local newspaper from fifteen or twenty years ago, and you’ll find reporters routinely pressing public officials, digging into controversies, and following uncomfortable facts wherever they led. Nobody considered that behavior extreme. It was simply expected. Perhaps that’s why an independent voice asking questions can seem so foreign today. Not because the questions are inappropriate, but because genuine scrutiny has become increasingly rare. Where Is The Evidence? CC Watchdog has published nearly 700 articles and produced hundreds of podcasts covering local government, elections, taxation, tribal affairs, public safety, schools, libraries, healthcare, homelessness, and countless other topics. If someone wishes to argue that those articles contain hatred or bigotry, they should be able to point to specific examples and allow readers to judge for themselves. Instead, criticism often becomes conflated with hate.Questioning government spending is hate.Questioning public policy is hate.Questioning a public institution is hate.Questioning elected officials is hate. So, is questioning a gay blogger homophobia? At some point, these words lose their meaning. Criticism is not hatred. A criticism of a library policy is not an attack on libraries.A criticism of a government action is not an attack on government employees.A question about tribal land acquisitions is not hatred of tribal members.A question about immigration policy is not hatred of immigrants. A democracy cannot function if every disagreement is automatically assigned a malicious motive. What Are We Teaching People? There is a growing contrast between what local institutions often claim to value and what we increasingly see in practice. We hear a great deal about inclusion, belonging, diversity, and creating welcoming spaces. Yet public discussions frequently devolve into labeling, shaming, and dismissing people who hold different views. We celebrate dialogue while becoming less willing to engage in it. What if we spent less time teaching people how to be offended and more time teaching them how to think critically? What if schools, libraries, political organizations, and local governments devoted more energy to fostering respectful disagreement and mature civic discourse? What if asking a question wasn’t automatically interpreted as an attack? Those are questions worth considering before tonight’s debate begins. A Final Thought When I saw the official Democratic Party page referring to one of the candidates as “Fake Jake” just days before hosting him, I found myself thinking about something I’d wondered just last week: would my mother still recognize today’s Democratic Party as the one she once supported? After seeing the Clallam County Democrat’s post remain online, I think I know my answer. “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.” — Bertrand Russell Today’s Tidbit: A Call for a Citizen Journalist The Clallam Conservation District is a public agency funded in part by taxpayers, including the recently approved $5 parcel fee. Its board meetings are open to the public and include a virtual attendance option, yet the meetings are not recorded and posted online for residents who cannot attend. Several attendees have told CC Watchdog that important discussions often receive only brief treatment in the official minutes [https://www.clallamcd.org/board-meetings], leaving the public with little opportunity to see the full context of what was said. Whether or not you agree with those concerns, greater transparency benefits everyone. That’s why we’re looking for a civically engaged volunteer willing to attend and record the Clallam Conservation District’s monthly board meetings, held on the second Tuesday of each month at 4:00 p.m. in Port Angeles. In many cases, this could be as simple as setting up a phone or tablet and letting it run for the duration of the meeting. Another option may be capturing the meeting while attending virtually, subject to any applicable rules and legal requirements. If you’ve been looking for a meaningful way to get involved in local government, this is one. Public meetings belong to the public, and informed citizens are essential to accountable government. If you’re interested, leave a comment or send a message to CC Watchdog. We’d love to hear from you. The next meeting is Tuesday, July 14, at 4:00 PM. Details here [https://www.clallamcd.org/board-meetings]. 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 [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

15. kesä 202647 min
jakson How Close Clallam County Came to Testing Illegal Drugs for Users kansikuva

How Close Clallam County Came to Testing Illegal Drugs for Users

In this Sundays With Seegers, County Commissioner candidate Jake Seegers examines public records showing Clallam County nearly launched a program that would have tested illegal drugs and returned them to participants for use. Despite warnings of significant legal and financial liability, commissioners unanimously approved the effort. The program was ultimately stopped after a county risk manager intervened. The records raise a fundamental question: when does harm reduction become government-facilitated drug use? Harm Reduction Almost Broke Clallam County When Health Officer Allison Berry was appointed in 2018, Clallam County’s harm reduction program was relatively simple: participants exchanged used syringes for clean needles on a one-for-one basis [https://www.peninsuladailynews.com/2016/01/15/clallam-needle-exchange-clients-increase-but-number-of-syringes-lent-out-falls/#google_vignette]. The stated goal was straightforward: reduce the spread of HIV, hepatitis, and other bloodborne diseases among people who were already injecting drugs. Over the next eight years, however, Health Officer Berry and the Clallam County commissioners steadily expanded harm reduction far beyond its original scope. What began as a syringe exchange evolved into a comprehensive Harm Reduction Health Center that distributes supplies for virtually every method of drug consumption. Today, participants receive syringes, smoking supplies, foil, naloxone, boofing kits, and other drug-use supplies. “How-to” literature not only explains alternative methods of consumption, but details how to achieve the most effective high. The transformation of a simple disease-prevention strategy into a distribution center for drug-use supplies and resources did not happen by accident. It was the result of a deliberate and sustained effort to expand harm reduction at nearly every opportunity. Health Officer Berry and the commissioners frequently justified each expansion as a necessary response to the worsening overdose crisis. Yet at every stage, the same question received little discussion: At what point does reducing the harms of drug use become facilitating drug use itself? For the Health Officer and the sitting commissioners, there appears to be no limit to their commitment to expanding harm reduction. That commitment reached a new level in 2023 when Clallam County joined the University of Washington’s ADAI (Additction, Drugs, and Alcohol Institute) Drug Checking Project. Commissioners Randy Johnson, Mark Ozias, and Mike French unanimously approved the grant-funded program that could have exposed county taxpayers to millions of dollars in liability. Take a Ride in My Drug-Testing Machine In late 2022, Health Officer Berry began advocating for a grant-funded portable drug-testing machine, also known as a mass spectrometer. During a December commissioner work session [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/910/media], she stated that the purpose was to better inform response efforts. Berry’s statements, along with her emails, indicated that the county prosecutor, Sheriff’s Office, Port Angeles Police Department, and others had signed off on the program. The problem with these claims was twofold. First, the Sheriff’s Office, Port Angeles Police Department, and Coroner’s Office would not have access to the machine. The spectrometer was intended exclusively for the Harm Reduction Health Center. If the primary goal was data collection, why exclude the very agencies that routinely encounter illegal drugs through investigations, arrests, and overdose deaths? Second, an email from then-County Administrator Rich Sill indicates that the Sheriff had raised concerns that returning drugs to participants after testing could be unlawful under Washington law. An individual who delivers an illegal substance to someone who later dies from using it may be charged with controlled substances homicide under RCW 69.50.415. While ESSB 5536 [https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bill%20Reports/House/5536-S2.E%20HBR%20APP%2023.htm?utm] would later take effect in August 2023, providing protections for public-health employees involved in distributing harm-reduction supplies and testing illegal substances, it did not explicitly provide protections for returning drugs to participants after testing. The drug-checking program was scheduled to begin before those protections took effect. It also would have launched during the worst overdose period in Clallam County’s history. According to the Coroner’s Office, trailing-twelve-month (TTM) overdose deaths peaked between April 2023 and March 2024, with 51 deaths during that period. That equates to nearly one overdose death every week. What were the chances that one of those individuals would have used the drug-checking program? If a participant received a contaminant-free result and later died, could county employees face legal exposure under RCW 69.50.415? The potential legal and financial liability was significant. Yet liability concerns appeared to carry little weight. In fact, nearly a year before ESSB 5536 took effect, the county had already begun distributing drug-use supplies beyond syringes as part of its ongoing expansion of harm reduction. The Process When the drug-checking program was presented to commissioners during a January 30, 2023 work session [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/1726/media], Commissioner Johnson asked the obvious question: “That’s great, but where are they [illegal drugs] coming from, the Sheriff’s office?” Karissa McLane, then Public Health Nurse Supervisor for Clallam County Health and Human Services (HHS), explained that participants in the county’s harm reduction program would bring their own drugs in for testing. A month earlier, during a December 12, 2022 work session [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/910/media], then-Commissioner Bill Peach asked: “If it turns out that it is illegal drugs, can they get arrested?” McLane responded: “That’s a good question. Yes. People can bring their drugs in to get tested. We’ve consulted with our prosecuting attorney’s office and discussed with our sheriff’s office and have determined that people will not be arrested for bringing drugs in to get tested from us.” The proposed process was straightforward: * An individual acquires illegal drugs — possibly from any of several open-air drug markets in Port Angeles, like Safeway or the Veterans Bell. * They bring those drugs to the Harm Reduction Health Center. * A county health employee tests them using the mass spectrometer. * The results are shared with the participant. * The drugs are returned to the participant for use. The problem is that sophisticated testing by a trusted county health professional can create a false sense of safety when contaminants are not detected. Liability disclosures attempted to address this by explaining that a test result “doesn’t always mean a drug is safe to use.” But common sense would suggest a simpler message: “Drugs are never safe to use.”“Fentanyl will kill you. Don’t use it.” Yet participants were unlikely to hear such unequivocal language. “Harm Reduction Messaging” guidelines attached to emails obtained through a public records request cautioned: “When discussing harm reduction, it is important to choose your language carefully to ensure that you are not coming across as paternal, shaming or denigrating.” When a participant hands illegal drugs to a trusted county health professional, receives a contaminant-free result, and leaves with those drugs—along with a pipe, syringe, or boofing kit—the message received is clear: Go ahead and use it. It’s been checked. Blinders But what would have happened if a county health employee deemed a drug contaminant-free and the participant later died from an overdose? The answer could have been millions of dollars in liability, litigation costs, settlements, and judgments ultimately borne by taxpayers. The potential exposure extended beyond Clallam County. During a January 2023 commissioner work session, Karissa McLane explained that the drug-testing machine would eventually be integrated into harm reduction’s planned mobile van. In partnership with Jefferson County, the mobile unit would provide drug testing and distribute supplies throughout both counties. After the presentation, Commissioner Ozias asked: “Commissioners, any other questions?” The audience could have heard a pin drop. On February 7, 2023 [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/1706/media], Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the program; Commissioner French seconded, and the board unanimously approved it without further discussion. Following the vote, Commissioner Ozias enthusiastically remarked: “[This] is really exciting! It’s really exciting to see the University [of Washington] being engaged so broadly and directly in communities like our county. I really appreciate that. So, thanks to our public health team for facilitating this.” Just a Matter of Time Despite the liability risks, Health Officer Berry and HHS appeared to downplay the importance of having a qualified technician operate the drug-testing machine. While discussing the grant, Berry wrote: “I am less interested in hiring our own tech.” Lisa Al-Hakim, then-Prevention Specialist/SSP Coordinator for Clallam County Public Health, proposed an alternative. The Hepatitis Education Project [https://www.hep.org/our-story] (HEP), a Seattle nonprofit and fellow ADAI Drug Checking Grant recipient, had hired an “OD Prevention Coordinator” instead of a dedicated technician. The decision appears to have been driven by cost and long-term harm reduction sustainability. Al-Hakim wrote: “So it looks like HEP hired a OD prevention specialist and rolled their drug-checking tech work into that, which isn’t a bad idea thinking along the lines of sustainability for the harm reduction health program.” Clallam County followed HEP’s lead. The problem is that the Drug Checking Network grant specifically required a Drug Technician. And, Clallam County’s scope of work committed to hiring one. Instead, the OD Prevention Coordinator position emphasized lived experience and social-service work rather than technical qualifications. But technical expertise was critical to interpreting the spectrometer's results. Before a training session led by Yarelix Estrada of the New York City Department of Health, internal emails acknowledged that interpreting the machine’s spectra readings required experience. The training materials warned: “We do not trust machines. Do not take the first match and assume it to be true. The art of drug-checking is in the technician’s ability to think critically about the sample and OPUS is only a tool.” Drug checking was not simply a matter of pushing a button. It required the judgment and critical analysis of a trained technician. Instead of prioritizing technical expertise, the county specifically encouraged individuals with personal histories of substance use to apply. Additionally, the position description stated that candidates “must be comfortable handling drug samples and potentially being exposed to substances.” Encouraging individuals in recovery to apply for a position that requires handling the very drugs they were attempting to avoid does not seem like harm reduction. The drug-testing machine would have become part of the county’s mobile harm reduction van, with complex analyses potentially conducted not by a Drug Technician, as discussed in the grant, but by an outreach coordinator—possibly someone in recovery—who would handle a constant flow of illegal drugs. That employee would have been responsible for interpreting results, giving drugs to participants, and communicating whether or not contaminants had been detected. It is difficult to imagine a scenario carrying greater potential for error—or greater liability for Clallam County taxpayers. A Voice in the Desert While county officials pressed forward with expanding harm reduction despite significant liability concerns, one employee stepped forward to protect the county from itself. When Tom Reyes, Deputy Director of Human Resources and Risk Management, learned of the drug-checking program, he immediately recognized the risks and voiced his concerns: “I believe it is only a matter of time before a lawsuit is filed on someone, or some agency, providing testing. I hope Clallam County is not that first!” Also of concern, most of the other participants in the ADAI drug-checking program were NGO’s, not government departments. In the same email, Reyes noted: “An internet search indicates they are a 501(c) (3), not a County entity. Clearly, they would not have the same level of risk exposure.” A former detective with the Clallam County Sheriff’s Office, Reyes acted quickly despite apparent internal pressure to dismiss the liability concerns. He contacted Derek Bryan of the Washington Counties Risk Pool, the insurer that provides coverage for Clallam County. Less than a week later, a response from Ken Kollmann effectively stopped the program in its tracks. The county dodged a bullet—one that its Health Officer and commissioners had been willing to put the county in front of. Common Sense Prevails The drug-checking machine was never the real story. The story is how far county leadership was willing to go in its effort to expand harm reduction. Public records show that pursuit of the ADAI Drug Checking Grant was part of a broader, coordinated effort to grow harm reduction services in Clallam County. The Harm Reduction Health Center had already taken possession of the machine and was actively promoting the program months before final approval was granted. When the program encountered resistance, Health Officer Berry attempted to salvage it by appealing to the pity of Tom Reyes: “Our staff are already incredibly overstretched and watching this position go unfilled and the money sit wasted has been deeply demoralizing to them. We cannot afford to lose any more staff to burnout this year.” But Reyes understood what others seemed unwilling to acknowledge. As Deputy Director of Human Resources and Risk Management and a former Sheriff’s Office detective, he recognized the extraordinary liability being created by a county-operated drug-checking program. While commissioners and public health officials focused on expanding harm reduction, Reyes focused on legality, liability, and common sense. He elevated his concerns to the Washington Counties Risk Pool, and within days, the program was effectively dead. Although Clallam County had already acquired the machine, it was ultimately returned to the University of Washington. The county dodged a potentially catastrophic mistake because one employee was willing to ask the questions that elected officials and public health leadership would not. Yet losing the drug-checking program did not slow the expansion of harm reduction. In 2018, the county’s syringe exchange had no dedicated employees and a modest budget of just over $60,000. Various employees, including Dr. Berry (Unthank), pitched in to run the program, totaling 0.51 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees for the entire year. By 2025, the Harm Reduction Health Center employed four full-time staff and operated on a budget of $531,010 per year—roughly equivalent to the cost of four Sheriff’s deputies. At a time when residents are demanding greater public safety, that’s a significant allocation of resources toward a program that seems to expand harm. Monthly participant encounters increased nearly fivefold, from 212 in 2023 to 975 in 2025. Meanwhile, overdose deaths in Clallam County have more than tripled since 2018—far outpacing increases nationally, statewide, and in other states that resisted the aggressive expansion of harm reduction policies. The pattern is difficult to ignore. When legal concerns emerged, county leadership pressed forward.When liability concerns emerged, county leadership pressed forward.When common-sense objections emerged, county leadership pressed forward. The drug-checking machine was simply the most extreme example. In the end, Clallam County was protected not by its commissioners, not by its Health Officer, and not by the advocates determined to expand harm reduction at every opportunity. It was protected by a lone voice willing to challenge the prevailing narrative and insist on accountability. Clallam County needs more leaders willing to do the same. Because when government becomes so committed to an ideology that it is willing to expose taxpayers to extraordinary risk in pursuit of it, common sense is no longer optional—it is essential. “However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.” — Winston Churchill What can you do? The future direction of harm reduction in Clallam County will ultimately be determined by elected officials and public health leaders—but they need to hear from the people they serve. If you have thoughts about the county’s approach to harm reduction, drug testing, overdose prevention, or the use of taxpayer resources, consider sharing them with the Board of County Commissioners and Health Officer Dr. Allison Berry. All three commissioners can be reached through the Clerk of the Board at loni.gores@clallamcountywa.gov. Dr. Berry can be reached directly at allison.berry@clallamcountywa.gov. You can also make your voice heard during public comment at the next Clallam County Board of Health meeting [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/293/files/agenda/6198] on Tuesday, June 16, at 1:30 p.m. in the Commissioners Boardroom at the Clallam County Courthouse in Port Angeles. Public comment is available both in person and via Zoom. Whether you support the county’s current approach, oppose it, or believe changes are needed, local government works best when citizens participate. Make your voice part of the conversation. Today’s Tidbit: First Commissioner Debate Set for Tomorrow Clallam County voters will get their first chance to see incumbent Commissioner Mike French and challenger Jake Seegers face off tomorrow night in a candidate forum hosted by the Clallam County Democrats. The debate begins at 6:00 p.m. Monday, June 15, at Democratic Headquarters, 124 W. First Street in Port Angeles, with a Zoom option available for those unable to attend in person. The format includes opening statements, audience questions, Zoom questions, rebuttals, and closing remarks. Organizers say anyone may ask questions, though comments will be limited to 30 seconds, and audience members are expected to remain respectful. Whether you’re supporting French, Seegers, or are still undecided, this is the first direct, live comparison of the candidates’ positions before the August primary. Candidate forums will be recorded and posted online for those unable to watch live. For more details, including virtual attendance instructions, click here [https://www.clallamdems.org/calendar.html] and select the event on Monday, June 15. PDC Complaint Update The Jake Seegers campaign is currently working with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission regarding a complaint filed by Paul Pickett. As part of that process, PDC staff have advised that certain Clallam County Watchdog articles and podcast segments discussing Jake Seegers may require campaign sponsor identification (“Sponsored by Jake Seegers for Commissioner, 131 E. First St, Port Angeles, WA, 98362”). The campaign has raised concerns regarding the proposed disclosure language because no campaign funds have been paid to Clallam County Watchdog, and no compensation has been exchanged for the publication of these articles or podcast segments. In addition, Clallam County Watchdog frequently includes independent commentary and analysis that may not be reviewed, approved, or endorsed by Jake Seegers or his campaign. Podcast episodes and articles containing commentary reflect the views of Clallam County Watchdog and are not reviewed by the campaign prior to publication. The campaign and PDC staff continue to discuss these issues and work toward compliance with Washington’s campaign finance laws. 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 [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

14. kesä 202656 min
jakson Severing the Gordian Knot - Part II kansikuva

Severing the Gordian Knot - Part II

Can voters truly verify how their ballots are counted, or are they being asked to trust a system they cannot see? In this guest column, Clallam County Auditor candidate Virginia Shogren argues that elections have become increasingly dependent on proprietary software, private vendors, and technology that operates beyond public scrutiny. She questions whether transparency has been replaced by trust in electronic systems and warns that citizens are being pushed further from the election process. Shogren contends that restoring confidence in elections will require returning greater oversight and control to the public. A Gordian knot is a metaphor for an extremely complicated problem that seems impossible to solve. The phrase comes from an ancient legend in which a king named Gordius tied an intricate knot that no one could untangle. A prophecy said whoever untied it would rule Asia. When Alexander the Great encountered the knot, he didn’t try to untie it—instead, he cut through it with his sword. On May 18, 2026, Clallam County Auditor Shoona Riggs participated in a work session with our County Commissioners. She was questioned about salaries for two new hires, one of whom will fill the vacant position of certified elections manager. During the work session, Ms. Riggs made two personal observations: * That “a lot of the public is nervous about working in elections just because of scrutiny”; and * She expressed her “love” for elections because they are akin to “project management” and “just that whole excitement of being able to create that.” I found these observations interesting. First, why would a member of the public be nervous about working in Clallam County elections? Is there something we don’t know? Is the “pressure” that Auditor Riggs referred to something more than usual hard work that demands attention to detail? Second, why would an election be akin to a “project” that an Auditor is excited to “create”? Creativity in elections is not a normal motivation. The motivation should properly be to conduct an election consistent with the will of the people. And therein lies the challenge. Currently, Clallam County taxpayers have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to turn election integrity over to programmable electronic systems and robots. Starting in roughly 2022, our signature verification was done not by human eyes but by a programmable Runbeck robot called “Agilis”: Our ballots are then scanned using software that creates an ‘image’ of our votes. That ‘image’ is then ‘read’ electronically using proprietary software kept secret for at least 25 years. [RCW 42.56.425(1)(b),(d)]. Lastly, the paper ballots themselves — despite the fact that they are anonymous public records — are now exempt from public review under the Public Records Act. [RCW 42.56.425(1)(e)]. As of 2026, our election system is entirely reliant upon hardware and software owned and operated by third-party commercial vendors. The electronics comprise vulnerable components largely produced in China. Our elections are not run by Clallam County, and are definitely not conducted by the people. Our votes are not tabulated in public. No one may observe the actions of an electronic tabulation. A ‘black box’ counts the votes. A ‘black box’ spits out the results. If you dare to ask even a single question, you are labelled an ‘election denier’ (or worse). Many states require that a complete copy of the software used to count votes be kept in “escrow”. Software escrow (or source code escrow) is generally a legal and operational agreement whereby a neutral third-party agent securely stores a software developer’s source code. If a predetermined “trigger event” occurs, the code is released to the client to ensure business continuity. I checked with our Secretary of State: Washington no longer has an escrow requirement for the software used to run Washington state elections. The auditors are not allowed to see the software code. The Secretary of State is not allowed to see the software code. No one in Washington State government has a copy in escrow or any access to the source code used to manage our elections. The source code used to ‘spit out’ the results is available only to the private vendors themselves. Members of the public, myself included, have brought these issues to the attention of the Clallam County Canvassing Board and the Board of Commissioners on many occasions over the span of several years. The written record is extensive [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KwB8Y6ir_5jdM06grkchHv3MqcVbi-Ou/view] and contains sworn testimony from multiple lawsuits. Yet not a single requested change has been made. It has been strictly business as usual. If any trend could be identified, it would be a trend to remove the public even further from the election process. Auditor Riggs has gotten progressively more restrictive on election observation. Observers are now subject to “Rules & Standards of Conduct” and an “Oath of Observers”; phone use is restricted; observers are required to be personally escorted to the election room. The message is clear: the public is considered ‘dangerous’ and a ‘threat’ to what are essentially government-run private elections using proprietary electronics and software paid for by us. This is all, in my opinion, by design. History will not look kindly as to how we got here. Both political parties are likely deeply involved, as are elected officials, judges, government employees, NGOs, and grant recipients who benefit from the system just the way it is. But the cracks are there. From the grassroots public comment all the way to the halls of Congress and the active debates over the SAVE Act, the people have awoken to the dangers of turning ultimate power of our elections over to technology. In order to remain a self-determining people, we must wrest back control of our elections and return it to where it belongs. We have been lulled into a sense of complacency. Casting a ballot in our slippers from our kitchen table seemed so innocent. So comfortable. So safe. But the truth is that there are nefarious people and nations that seek to destroy us from within. The only way to save ourselves is to save ourselves. No one will do it for us. In Part III, I will lay out exactly how we do it. Virginia ShogrenCandidate for Clallam County Auditor961 W. Oak Court, Sequim, WA 98382 Virginia Shogren is running for Clallam County Auditor to restore trust in our elections and to make sure our tax dollars are spent wisely. Virginia believes in simple, honest government that works for the people—not special interests. She seeks accountability, lower costs, and real oversight of our elections and our money. “Technology is a useful servant, but a dangerous master.” — Christian Lous Lange 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 [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

11. kesä 202639 min