+menu-


  • Category Archives I’ve Got a Website
  • Obamas Classified Australian Immigration Deal

    Some American citizens were aware that President Obama and his administrations had brokered an immigration deal with Australia.

    WHAT WE DIDN’T KNOW IS THAT THE DEAL WAS CLASSIFIED

    The deal, which was announced in Novemberless than a week after Trump won the US election on Nov 8, 2016

    Charles E. Grassley, “Grassley Renews Call for Declassification of Covert Australia Refugee Deal”, Chuck Grassley website, February 2, 2017.

    June 10, 2017  Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has repeatedly and unsuccessfully called for the secret refugee deal with Australia to be declassified.53

    June 10, 2017  Elements remain classified, although the State Department is considering an application from the Senate Judiciary Committee to declassify the documents in the public interest.

    ———————————————————————

    Another Chapter in the Book of Revelations by Pearl Revere

    —————————————————————–

    The Covert became Classified both to American and Australian Citizens.

    How would American and Australian Citizens have reacted to the CLASSIFIED document if it had been DECLASSIFIED before the U.S. Election?

    Maybe we’re missing something, what was the Obama administration  getting  out of that classified deal ?— beyond Australia’s acceptance of the 50 “refugees” from Costa Rica — that is being kept secret from us?

    See Nayla Rush, “Expanded Central American ‘Refugee’ Program: Bring the Whole Family!” , Center for Immigration Studies blog, August 28, 2016.

    See Nayla Rush, “Autralia’s Unwanted Asylum Seekers (Mostly Iranians) to Be Resettled in the US”, Center for Immigration Studies, February 2017.

    Zoe Daniel and Stephanie March, “US refugee deal: Architect of deal says arrangement loosely based on Australia ‘doing more'”, ABC News, March 21, 2017.

    ————————————————————–

    Under President Trump’s Immigration Deals. (sworn in Jan 20, 2017)

    President Trump signed three executive orders the week of January 23, 2017

    On January 25 at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Trump signed executive orders on border security and interior enforcement. On January 27, he signed an executive order at the Pentagon on refugees and visa holders from designated nations.

    Why would President Trump be upset, eight days after he was sworn into office?

    ———————————————————-

    THE REST OF  THE STORY BY PEARL HARVEY

    ————————————————————–

    U.S.-Australia Refugee Resettlement Deal Is Underway | Center for …

    https://cis.org/USAustralia-Refugee-Resettlement-Deal-Underway

    Jun 10, 2017 – Soon after taking office, (JAN 28, 2017)  President Trump promised to study the “dumb deal“: “Do you believe it? The Obama administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal!” he tweeted……

    —————————————————————

    APRIL 2016 Who Are Australia’s 1,241 Unwanted Asylum Seekers?

    Most (1,147) are men.

    According to recent Australian detention statistics, there are 1,241 people in detention on Nauru and Manus Island (PNG): 380 on Nauru and 861 on Manus Island. Most (1,147) are men.25 Of the 380 in Nauru, 286 are men, 49 are women, and 45 are children. All 861 detained on Manus Island are men.

    ————————————————————–

    APRIL 2016  Australia’s 1,241 Unwanted Asylum Seekers

    Friction between asylum seekers and locals intensified (Riots, Mental Illness, Sexual Assault Allegations) after detention at the Manus camp was deemed unconstitutional by the Papua New Guinea Supreme Court in April 2016.

    Detainees (now called “residents”) were since allowed outside the camp.

    During UNHCR’s April 2016 visit to Manus Island

    United Nations experts concluded that the level of mental illness on both islands was alarming

    Experts concluded that “[t]he prevalence and severity of mental disorders presented by the asylum-seeker and refugee population on Manus Island is extreme.”

    Furthermore, a number of very severe psychiatric disorders were identified, including gross psychopathology consistent with psychosis as well as psychotic dissociation.

    ——————————————————-

    Riots, Mental Illness, Sexual Assault Allegations

    Following an inspection of the Manus and Nauru detention camps, United Nations experts concluded that the level of mental illness on both islands was alarming.36 During UNHCR’s April 2016 visit to Manus Island, medical experts found that 88 percent of asylum seekers and refugees surveyed “were suffering from a depressive or anxiety disorder and/or post-traumatic stress disorder. … Furthermore, a number of very severe psychiatric disorders were identified, including gross psychopathology consistent with psychosis as well as psychotic dissociation.” Experts concluded that “[t]he prevalence and severity of mental disorders presented by the asylum-seeker and refugee population on Manus Island is extreme.” Eighty-three percent of asylum seekers and refugees surveyed on Nauru “suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and/or depression.”

    Riots, fights with security guards and local residents, incidents of self-harm, and suicide attempts (including swallowing poison and self-immolation) were on the rise.

    The latest violent incident took place on Manus Island detention center in April. Dutton, the immigration minister, said the incident was the result of allegations of sexual assault against a five-year-old local boy who was led into the center.37 Manus Island locals got angry and violence broke out between them, camp security guards, and the detainees. Shots were fired inside the camp, but no one was hurt. Detainees refuted these allegations, claiming the fight was the result of a football field dispute. They said that the boy was led inside the camp a few days before the incident because he was asking for food.38

    Friction between asylum seekers and locals intensified after detention at the Manus camp was deemed unconstitutional by the Papua New Guinea Supreme Court in April 2016. Detainees (now called “residents”) were since allowed outside the camp.

    David Yapu, Manus Province commander, spoke to Fairfax Media:

    We have been warning the refugees to respect the laws of the locals, of Papua New Guinea. … You are free to walk around, but please make sure that you respect the locals. If you come in conflict with the law, police will not hesitate to deal with you. I want the message to be delivered to them. The bulk of them are okay but there are a few [troublemakers]. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.39

    In January, an asylum seeker was charged with raping a young local woman on Manus Island. This incident raises, according to the victim’s aunt, a serious problem as to how detainees are relating to local people on the island: “They don’t know our cultures and they don’t respect the women here, they do anything they want. … They are roaming here, looking for women and getting these small girls [young women] to have sex is not something the people of Manus would like to see.”40

    Another asylum seeker was arrested and charged with the rape of a 10-year-old girl. As reported in January 2017: “Police on the island said at least seven men had been arrested in recent weeks for offences such as public drunkenness and possession of drugs.”41

    Incidents like these have led to increased tension between the asylum seekers and the local people. Asylum seekers have been attacked outside the center and two Iranian men were beaten by police. But police and local representatives accuse the asylum seekers of “committing crimes and aggressively pursuing local women.”42

    ————————————————————-

    January 28, 2017

    U.S. President Donald Trump  seated at his desk speaks by phone with Australia’s Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, U.S.

    Turnbull, early in the call, pivots from introductory pleasantries to highlighting similarities in U.S. and Australian policies with regard to “national security and border protection.” Turnbull name-drops Jared Kushner, who he says he’d recently spoken to, and notes, “It is very interesting to know how you prioritize the minorities in your Executive Order.”

    AUSTRALIA’S  SMART  LINE ON IMMIGRATION

    January 28, 2017, Turnbull,  comments that 90 percent of the 12,000 Syrian refugees Australia has agreed to take in are Christian.

    it is a tragic fact of life that when the situation in the Middle East settles down the people that are going to be most unlikely to have a continuing home are those Christian minorities… It is not a sectarian thing. It is recognition of the practical political realities.”

    Data  obtained through Australia’s freedom of information law shows that 78 percent of the approximately 18,563 refugees from Syria and Iraq granted entry from July 1, 2015, to Jan. 6, 2017  of this year identified themselves as Christian.

     —————————————————————————————–

    JULY 2014 AUSTRALIA’S  HARD LINE ON IMMIGRATION

    Under Australia’s strict border policy, they are prevented from receiving asylum even if found to be refugees.

    The hardline policy adopted by Australia has resulted in there being no asylum seekers delivered to Australia by a boat smuggling operation since July 2014.

    Under the new legislation, even the thousands of asylum seekers who have returned home to the Middle East, Africa and Asia would be banned from ever traveling to Australia, even on a legitimate tourist or business visa, or as an Australian’s spouse.

    ————————————————————————————–

    MAR 23, 2017

    Australia rejects 500 Syrian and Iraqi refugees for security reasons – DW

    www.dw.com/en/australia-rejects-500-syrian-and…security-reasons/a-38082131

    Mar 23, 2017Australia has turned down more than 500 refugees from Syria and Iraq on security grounds, a minister says.

    The minister said the attack near Britain’s Parliament on Wednesday, in which an assailant with suspected links to Islamist terrorism killed three people and wounded dozens more using a car and a knife before being shot dead,

    justified the Australian government’s decision to be very selective about who it let into the country.

    “The tragic events in London and elsewhere demonstrate the government’s approach was prudent,

    THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WE’D EXCLUDED ON NATIONAL SECURITY GROUNDS

    AND PEOPLE THAT WE DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT WE HAVE NOT BROUGHT TO OUR COUNTRY

    AND WE NEVER WILL.

    ———————————————————————-

    Nov, 13, 2016  Under President Obama and his administrations brokered immigration deal with Australia……

    Refugees being held at controversial detention facilities (REFUSED ENTRY ON NATIONAL SECURITY GROUNDS BY AUSTRALIA)  will be resettled in the United States, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said Sunday.

    The group is the first of 1,250 refugees (REFUSED ENTRY ON NATIONAL SECURITY GROUNDS BY AUSTRALIA )

    That are ULTIMATELY expected to resettle in the United States, as part of an agreement with the Australian government, brokered by President Obama and his administrations.

    The refugees (REFUSED ENTRY ON NATIONAL SECURITY GROUNDS BY AUSTRALIA)  will soon arrive in the US are originally from Bangladesh, Iran, Sri Lanka, Somalia, and Myanmar, Australia’s Refugee Action Coalition said in a statement.

    They will be resettled across the US, in states including Arizona, Texas, California, Oregon, and New York.

    ——————————————————————–

    Jan 22, 2018 Update Australian refugees President Obama and his administrations “CLASSIFIED” brokered immigration deal with Australia……

    Second group of Manus Island refugees depart for US under resettlement deal

    Fifty-eight men leave ‘hell that the Australian government made for us’ months after first group of 54 refugees sent to US

  • Estate Death Tax Liens 5.5.8 – 5.5.8.1

    As promised, a brief posting on the complicated federal  IRS Estate Death Tax lien laws.

    It has taken nearly 10 years for me to find this 9000 word IRS Estate Death Lien Tax documentation on line.

    Below, is the link to the IRS Estate Death Tax Liens 5.5.8 – 5.5.8.1

    SHOCKING? WHO KNEW?

    An IRC § 6324(a) lien is automatically created when any resident of the United States dies. No recorded notice is required for it to become effective

    The IRC § 6324(a) estate tax lien attaches at the date of death to every part of the gross estate, even when the property has not yet been placed under the control of the fiduciary.

    It attaches to the extent of the estate tax shown due on the return, and of any deficiency in estate tax found due upon review and audit.

    ———————————————————————–

    Indeed, the IRS has gone to to great lengths (9000 words) to protect THEIR DEATH TAX LIEN INTEREST in your family’s Estate.

    OPEN AND TRANSPARENT? WHO KNEW?

    An IRC § 6324(a) lien is automatically created when any resident of the United States dies. No recorded notice is required for it to become effective

    Even though no notice is recorded, the lien has priority over all subsequent interests in the property.

    ——————————————————–

    Another 9000 word Chapter in the Book of Revelations by Pearl Revere.

    WHAT LENGTH, DOES A  SMALL BUSINESS OWNING AMERICAN CITIZENS HAVE TO GO TO, TO PROTECT HIS HEIRS FROM THE IRS ESTATE DEATH TAX?

    —————————————————-

    Oct 19, 2017 SARCASM FROM THE LEFT

    WASHINGTON ―  Whenever a small business owner dies, a cruel tax man swoops in on his mourning family with a hefty bill, forcing the children of farmers and mom-and-pop shops to sell off the family business to pay the government.

    ————————————————————

    Dec 22, 2017 PARTIAL RELIEF FROM THE RIGHT

    12/22/2017 Became Public Law No: 115-97.

    Tax Cuts and Jobs Act – HR1 – 115th Congress (2017-2018): An Act to …

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1

    Shown Here: Passed House amended (11/16/2017). (This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on November 13, 2017. The summary of that version is repeated here.) Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) to reduce tax rates and modify policies, credits, …

    Unfortunately, the complicated IRS Estate death tax liens are still alive online, just the exemptions have been  raised.

    TOO BAD THE IRS DEATH TAX CUTS ARE  NOT RETROACTIVE

    —————————————————————–

    Estate Tax Liens 5.5.8 –  5.5.8.1

    WARNING: An IRS  table briefly describing the characteristics of Federal tax liens associated with federal estate tax liabilities,

    IS MISLEADING.

    THE LINK BELOW IS ABOUT A 9000 WORD DOCUMENT

    ——————————————————–

    5.5.8 Estate Tax Liens | Internal Revenue Service – IRS.gov

    https://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-005-008

    The following table briefly describes the characteristics of Federal tax liens associated with federal estate tax liabilities. … Form 668 Notice of Federal Tax Lien ….. for preparation, selection of the appropriate optional paragraph, and issuance of a Letter 950-I – Preliminary Internal Revenue Code § 6166 Determination Letter.

    Chapter 5. Decedent Estates and Estate Taxes

    Section 8. Estate Tax Liens

    5.5.8 Estate Tax Liens

    5.5.8.1 (06-23-2005)

    Section Overview Characteristics of Estate Tax Liens

    1. This section covers estate tax liens. Before filing a lien on an estate tax case, give careful thought to the advantages and limitations of each type of estate tax lien.
    2. In many cases, the general IRC § 6324(a) lien is the best tool to protect the government’s interest. It is automatically created when any resident of the United States dies. No recorded notice is required for it to become effective. It attaches to all of the assets that are part of the decedent’s gross estate and are required to be reported on Form 706, U.S. Estate Tax Return, and is security for any estate taxes that may be determined to be due. If a probate asset (assets in the name of the decedent at time of death) is transferred or liquidated without payment of the tax, but for the exceptions detailed at IRM 5.5.8.2(2), the lien continues to attach to the asset. If a non-probate asset (property described under IRC § 2034 to § 2042) is transferred or liquidated without payment of the tax, a liability equal to the value of the asset at the time of the decedent’s death becomes due from the transferee. A separate assessment against the transferee is not needed. Assets of the gross estate can be sold or encumbered free of the IRC § 6324(a) lien if the proceeds from the sale or loan are used for the payment of charges against the estate or expenses of its administration that are allowed by any court having jurisdiction.
    3. A limitation of the general estate tax lien is that it has an absolute life of 10 years. It cannot be extended. Estate tax attributable to an estate’s interest in a closely held business may be paid over a 14-year period if an extension of time to pay under IRC § 6166 is in effect which could potentially leave the Service without lien protection for four years if a notice of lien is not recorded before the 10 years have elapsed.
    4. The filing of Form 668-J (the special IRC § 6423A lien for taxes deferred under IRC 6166) will secure the deferred taxes for the duration of the extension. The collection statute of limitations under IRC § 6502 is suspended during the period of the extension.
      1. The lien attaches only the property specified on the recorded lien and in the IRC § 6166 agreement. A lien on property with equivalent value can be substituted for the actual IRC § 6166 property upon agreement between the Service and all parties with an interest in the property.
      2. When estate property is listed on the recorded Form 668-J, it is automatically released from the effects of the general IRC § 6324(a) estate tax lien.
      3. The IRC § 6324A lien is a negotiated lien that is created only when both the Service and all persons and/or entities with an ownership interest in the property listed on the notice of lien agree to it’s recording.
    5. The filing of Form 668-H – the special IRC § 6324B lien for special use valuations under IRC § 2032A or qualified family owned business interest property under IRC § 2057 will secure the potential recapture tax during the required 10 year holding period. IRC § 2057 elections may be made only on estates of decedents dying before December 31, 2003.

    5.5.8.1.1 (06-23-2005)

    Comparison Chart Federal Estate Tax Liens

    1. The following table briefly describes the characteristics of Federal tax liens associated with federal estate tax liabilities.

    Code Section

    How Created

    Attributes

    Form Title

    6321

    assessment, balance owed, notice & demand

    ·         attaches to all right, title and interest of the decedent in any probate property undistributed at time lien arises

    ·         10 year life can be extended

    Form 668 Notice of Federal Tax Lien

    6324(a)

    at death

    ·         attaches to estate assets listed on the Form 706 the value of which are the basis of the tax liability

    no form

    ·         recording not required to be choate (their glitch)

    ·         absolute life of 10 years

    ·         follows the probate assets if transferred or liquidated, a lien of comparable value arises upon any property of the party who received proceeds from sale or encumbrance of non-probate property

    6324A

    Upon election by the estate and signed agreement by all parties with an interest in the property on the lien

    ·         attaches the specific property shown on the lien

    ·         must be recorded

    ·         recorded notice lists all parties of interest and the specific property that is subject to the lien

    Form 668J Notice of Estate Tax Lien under Internal Revenue Laws

    6324B

    Upon election by estate of the special use 2032A or qualified family owned business interest 2057

    ·         pertains to farm or business real estate only (2032A) or family owned business property

    ·         notice must be recorded

    ·         recorded notice lists all qualified heirs and has a complete legal description of the subject real property

    Form 668H Notice of Federal Estate Tax Lien Under Internal Revenue Laws

    5.5.8.2 (06-23-2005)

    General Estate Tax Lien under IRC § 6324(a)

    1. The estate tax lien provided for by IRC § 6324(a) is similar in character to the lien imposed by IRC § 6321. The general lien imposed by IRC § 6321 and the special lien for estate tax are not necessarily exclusive of each other, but can be cumulative. Whereas the IRC § 6324(a) lien arises upon death and attaches to all probate and non-probate assets comprising the gross estate, after the tax liability has been assessed, notice and demand is given, and there is a neglect or refusal to pay, the IRC § 6321 lien arises and also attaches to all as yet undistributed probate assets. Neglect and refusal to pay is generally inferred from notice and demand and an unpaid balance.
    2. Even though no notice is recorded, the lien has priority over all subsequent interests in the property.

    Except

    Unless

    purchaser of or holder of a security interest in probate property at the direction of a court having jurisdiction and proceeds are used to pay charges against the estate

    no exception

    purchaser or holder of a security interest in probate property after executor has been released from personal liability under IRC § 2204 if seller is an heir, legatee, devisee, or distributee

    no exception

    purchaser of or holder of a security interest in non-probate property

    no exception

    purchaser of or holder of a security interest in securities

    knowledge of lien exists

    purchaser of a motor vehicle

    knowledge of lien exists

    retail purchaser of tangible personal property

    purchaser buying with the intent to hinder, evade, or defeat collection

    purchaser of personal property (defined at IRC § 6334(a)) valued at less than $1,000 at a casual sale

    knowledge of lien exists or is one in a series intended to liquidate most of the assets

    local law lien securing the price of repairs or improvements

    lienor gives up possession of property after lien arises

    local real estate tax & special assessment

    local law does not give them priority over other liens that are filed first

    residential property subject to a lien for repairs & improvements

    the contract price is more than $5,000

    attorney’s liens

    fees are unreasonable, the lien is not valid under local law, or is subject to offset

    certain insurance contracts

    knowledge of lien exists

    deposit-secured loans

    knowledge of lien

    1. The IRC § 6324(a) estate tax lien attaches at the date of death to every part of the gross estate, even when the property has not yet been placed under the control of the fiduciary. It attaches to the extent of the estate tax shown due on the return, and of any deficiency in estate tax found due upon review and audit. The estate tax lien continues for a maximum period of ten years after the decedent’s death or until the tax is paid.
    2. IRC § 6324(a)(2) provides that when the estate tax is not paid when due, any spouse, transferee, trustee, surviving tenant, person in possession of the property by reason of the exercise, nonexercise, or release of a power of appointment, or beneficiary, is liable for the payment of the estate tax to the extent of the value of any non-probate estate assets held by, or passing to such person.
    3. There is no need to assess the liability against the person liable under IRC § 6324(a)(2). The collection statute under IRC § 6502 applies. IRC § 6324(a)(2) also makes all of the property of such person subject to a lien just like the estate tax lien if their transfer of estate assets divests the assets of the estate tax lien. This ″like-lien″ continues until the IRC § 6324(a) estate tax lien expires or the estate tax is paid.
      Example: A beneficiary of a decedent’s trust receives real property valued at $100,000 on the Form 706. The beneficiary sells the property for $125,000 and invests the proceeds. Because the property was non-probate property, the purchaser takes title free of the IRC § 6324(a) estate tax lien. However, a like-lien in the amount of $100,000 now attaches to all of the property of the beneficiary as long as the IRC § 6324(a) lien has not expired. A separate assessment against the beneficiary is not necessary.

    5.5.8.3 (06-23-2005)

    Processing Requests for Release, Discharge of Property From, or Subordination of Unrecorded IRC § 6324(a) Lien

    1. Release – Advisory occasionally receives requests for release of the unrecorded estate tax lien. However, just as there is no provision for recording a notice of the unrecorded estate tax lien, there is no provision for recording a release. Applicants should be instructed to provide documentation to potential purchasers of the decedent’s property that either there was no Form 706 filing requirement, or, if Form 706 was filed and a closing letter has been provided to the estate by Estate & Gift Tax (E&G), a copy of the return, the Estate Tax Closing Letter ( Letter 627, and verification of payment, are evidence that the IRC § 6324(a) lien has been satisfied.
    2. Discharge
      1. Applications for discharge under IRC § 6325(c) are usually submitted on Form 4422 , Application for Certificate Discharging Property Subject to Estate Tax Lien. These applications will be processed by E&G if Form 706 has not been filed or if a closing letter has not been issued. If Form 706 has been filed and a closing letter has been issued, applications for discharge under IRC § 6325(c) will be processed by Advisory. Form 792 , United States Certificate Discharging Property Subject to Estate Tax Lien, is used to discharge property under IRC § 6325(c).
        Example:An estate submits Form 4422 requesting a discharge under IRC § 6325(c). Form 706 has been filed and the reported estate tax has been paid, but a closing letter has not been issued. Because the final amount of estate tax that may be due has not yet been determined, E&G will process the application.
        Example: An estate submits Form 4422 requesting a discharge under IRC § 6325(c). Form 706 has been filed and reported estate tax has been paid, but a closing letter has not been issued. Because the estate representative believes she has paid the estate tax in full, she proposes to use the proceeds from the sale of the probate property to pay other creditors. Because the final amount of estate tax that may be due has not yet been determined, E&G will process the application.
        Example: An estate submits Form 4422 requesting a discharge under IRC § 6325(c). Form 706 has been filed and a closing letter has been issued, but a balance remains due for which a extension of time to pay has been granted. The estate is selling a parcel of probate real property but needs the proceeds to pay necessary administrative expenses. The estate has provided for the payment of the taxes by listing a second parcel of real property for sale. Because the final amount of the estate tax due is known, Advisory will process the application.
      2. Applications for discharge under IRC § 6325(b) will be processed by Advisory. If Form 706 has not been filed or if a closing letter has not been issued, Advisory will consult with E&G in order to determine the government’s lien interest.
    3. Subordination – Applications for subordination under IRC § 6325(d) will be processed by Advisory. If Form 706 has not been filed or if a closing letter has not been issued, Advisory will consult with E&G in order to determine the government’s lien interest.

    5.5.8.4 (06-23-2005)

    Special Valuation Estate Tax Lien Under IRC § 6324B

    1. IRM § 2032A provides for special valuation for certain farms and closely held family business real property if the qualified heirs decide to continue operating the farm or business for at least 10 years. Because the property is valued at less then its fair market value, less estate tax is due. IRM § 2057 provides for a special valuation for certain qualified family owned business interests and also results in less estate tax being due. If the criteria for the IRC § 2032A or IRC § 2057 valuations do not continue during the required holding period, the savings in tax attributable to the special valuation is “recaptured” and must be repaid by the heirs who inherited the property.
    2. IRC § 6324B imposes a lien attaching to the specific property valued under IRC § 2032A. IRC § 2057(h)(3)(p) imposes a lien identical to the IRC § 6324B lien to the specific property valued under IRC § 2057.

    5.5.8.4.1 (06-01-2010)

    IRC § 6324B Form 668-H (Advisory Actions)

    1. When the executor elects the special valuation under IRC § 2032A or IRC § 2057, and secures an agreement to the election signed by all parties having an interest in the specially valued property, Estate & Gift Exam (E&G) will complete and forward Form 6111, Notice of Election Under IRC § 2032A and/or IRC § 2057, to Advisory with copies of the following documents:
      1. First 3 pages of Form 706
      2. Schedule A-1 and/or Schedule T
      3. Agreement to special valuation signed by all parties with an interest in the property to be shown on the lien. Only the decedent’s interest in the property is shown on the lien. If the decedent co-owned the property, the co-owner’s interest is not shown on the lien and the co-owner is not required to sign the agreement.
      4. Complete legal descriptions of property to be shown on the lien
      5. Any power of attorney
    2. Verify that each Form 6111 includes a copy of the agreement signed by all ″qualified heirs″ and all other parties having an interest in the property covered by the election. The agreement must designate:
      1. an agent for dealings with the Internal Revenue Service, and
      2. a complete legal description of the property to be shown on the lien
    3. Contact the E&G group manager to resolve any inconsistencies.
    4. Prepare and file Form 668-H, Notice of Federal Estate Lien Under Internal Revenue Laws, (see Exhibit 5.5.8-1) in the name of the estate and all qualified heirs as shown on Form 6111. Only one Form 668-H will be used unless a local jurisdiction requires separate forms. Recording a copy of the agreement to Form 668-H is not necessary. If the qualifying property consists of the decedent’s interest in a closely held corporation, partnership, LLC, etc., consult with Area Counsel to determine if evidence of ownership, such as a stock certificate, must be held as collateral in order for the lien to be effective under local law.

    Note:

    When preparing estate tax liens, the SSN of the decedent and any qualified heirs whose names are shown on the lien will be redacted using the format XXX-XX-1234. Do not redact EINs.

    1. If elections were made under both IRC § 2032A and IRC § 2057, one Form 668-H reflecting the combined maximum tax subject to recapture may be used.
    2. Form 668-H must be prepared manually. However, a PDF version of the form is available on the intranet at http://publish.no.irs.gov/catlg.html
    3. Mail the completed Form 668-H to the Centralized Case Processing Lien Operation (CLU) for recording on a Form 3210.
    4. All documents sent with the lien to the recording office will be returned to CLU. The CLU will be responsible for inputting lien indicators; applicable lien fees and forwarding the recorded lien document back to the originating advisor on Form 3210, Document Transmittal, to maintain with the lien file. If a lien is returned to the Advisor due to insufficient funds, return it to the CLU for corrective action. All liens will be sent to:

    Internal Revenue Service
    Attn: Manager Team 208 – Stop 8420G
    P.O. Box 145595
    Cincinnati, OH 45250-5595

    1. This CLU FORT has responsibility for logging in receipt of the estate tax liens; monitoring the recording process and forwarding the recorded liens to the advisor on a Form 3210. CLU FORT will send acknowledgement of receipt of the lien by returning the Form 3210.
    2. Within 7 business days of receipt, the CLU FORT will mail the lien to the recording office for filing. See IRM 5.19.12.10.2 , for CLU FORT processing procedures and lost lien research procedures.
    3. Advisory is responsible for sending the lien to the lien unit on Form 3210, including the estate name, complete SSN, lien type and request for input of TC 582, TC 583 and TC 360 as applicable. Advisory is also responsible for determining if there is an open module on IDRS and will instruct CLU to input applicable lien indicator/fees. In the case of Form 668-H liens, if there is no open module on IDRS, do not request input of lien indicator/fees on the Form 3210.
    4. Advisors are responsible for ensuring receipt of the recorded lien from CLU and that lien fees have been input, if applicable.
    5. At local option, after coordinating payment of recording fees with the CLU, advisors may mail liens for recording directly to recording offices. However, except for exigent circumstances, advisors may not issue OI’s requesting that a revenue officer deliver an estate tax lien to a recording agency for filing.
    6. Advisory will maintain an ICS case in the name of the estate until the lien is released. Advisory will also maintain a file of retained lien copies with Form 6111 and associated documentation.

    5.5.8.4.2 (03-01-2006)

    Processing Requests for Release of IRC § 6324B Form 668-H

    1. Requests for release of Forms 668-H will be processed by Advisory.
    2. If the qualified heir(s) is requesting a release of lien because the 10 year special use period has elapsed, and assuming no recapture tax is due, instruct the designated agent to submit a written request that the lien be released, including a statement that during the 10 year period no events occurred that would cause recapture of any portion of the tax. The letter should be signed under penalty of perjury. Advisory will consult with the Estate & Gift Tax group manager to determine if any further verification should be secured prior to releasing the lien.
    3. The qualified heir(s) may also request a release of lien because all of the property described on the lien is being sold or removed from special use. In order to receive a release of the lien, the qualified heir(s) must report the recapture event by filing Form 706-A, United States Additional Estate Tax Return (if the section 2032A election was made), or Form 706-D, United States Estate Tax Return Under Code Section 2057, and all tax and interest due must be paid in full. Interest on the Form 706-A begins to accrue at the regular underpayment rate on the date the return is due. Interest on the Form 706-D at the regular underpayment rate is computed from the original due date of the Form 706, not taking into account any extensions of time to file that may have been granted, until the date the recapture tax is paid. Each qualified heir must file a Form 706-A or Form 706-D reporting and paying the tax and interest due that is attributable to their share of the inherited property.
    4. Secured Forms 706-A or 706-D, with any payments and or approved extensions, are forwarded via Form 3210 , overnight mail, to: IRS, Cincinnati Submission Processing Center, 201 W. Rivercenter Blvd., Covington, KY, 41011, Attn: Mail Stop 31. Preparation of a posting voucher is not necessary unless penalties are applicable and being paid. Ensure that the return and check are identified as belonging to the heir and indicate NMF by placing “N” behind the heir’s SSN on the return and the check. Enter the tax period in YYYYMM format at the top of the return. The period ended is the earliest date shown on schedule A, column C. For example, if the property disposition date is 3/10/2005, the tax period would be 200503.
    5. Releases of estate tax liens are prepared by advisors and the procedures for recording described in IRM 5.5.8.4.1. However, follow up to obtain a copy of a recorded release is not necessary.

    Note:

    Whenever contact is made with an estate representative who is requesting a release of an estate tax lien, the advisor should give the representative the option of recording the release, making the representative aware that if they choose to do so, it is their responsibility to pay the recording fees.

    5.5.8.4.3 (06-23-2005)

    Processing Requests for Discharge of Property from IRC § 6324B Lien, Form 668-H

    1. Requests for discharge of property described on Form 668-H will be processed by Advisory.
    2. A discharge is necessary if part of the property described on the lien is being sold or removed from special use.
    3. If issuance of a conditional commitment to discharge property from the effects of the lien is necessary, Advisory should request a draft of Form 706-A or Form 706-D from each heir who owns a share of the property being sold or removed from special use. Upon review and approval of the draft(s) by the Estate & Gift Tax (E&G) group manager, Advisory will conditionally commit to the discharge. Upon filing of the Form 706-A or Form 706-D, with full payment of any tax and interest due, the discharge certificate will be provided.
    4. See IRM 5.5.8.4.2(4) for instructions on processing the returns and payments.
      Example: A Form 668-H has been recorded in the names of an estate and 4 heirs. The property listed on the lien consists of 6 parcels of real property for which special valuation was elected under IRC § 2032A. The heirs want to convert 1 of the parcels to a non-qualified use and submit an application for discharge under IRC § 6325(b)(2)(A), along with draft copies of each of their required Forms 706-A showing the recapture tax that will be due. E&G reviews the returns and advises that they reflect the correct amount of recapture tax. Advisory issues a commitment to discharge conditioned upon the receipt of original Forms 706-A and payment of the tax and interest due.

    5.5.8.4.4 (03-01-2006)

    Processing Requests for Subordination of IRC § 6324B Lien, Form 668-H

    1. Requests for subordination of property described on Form 668-H will be processed by Advisory.
    2. Although it is possible that the qualified heir(s) may apply for a certificate of subordination under IRC § 6325(d)(2), almost all requests for subordination will be made under IRC § 6325(d)(3) which directly addresses IRC § 6324B, and provides for the issuance of a certificate of subordination if it is determined that the lien interest of the United States will continue to be adequately secured.
    3. Instructions for applying for a subordination under IRC § 6325(d)(3), are contained in Publication 1153, How to Apply for a Certificate of Subordination of Federal Estate Tax Lien Under Section 6325(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
    4. If it is determined that the lien interest of the United States will continue to be adequately secured, issue Form 669-F , Certificate of Subordination of Federal Estate Tax Lien.
      Example: A Form 668-H has been recorded in the names of an estate and 2 heirs securing potential recapture tax of $200,000. The property shown on the lien is an apartment building for which special valuation was elected under IRC § 2057. The fair market value of the property is $1.5 million, and it is unencumbered but for the Form 668-H. The heirs want to borrow $250,000 in order to make renovations to the building and use the property as security for the loan. They apply for a subordination under IRC § 6325(d)(3). Since the United States will be adequately secured after the subordination, Advisory may issue Form 669-F.

    5.5.8.5 (06-01-2010)

    Special Lien Under IRC § 6324A for Estate Tax Deferred Under IRC § 6166

    1. IRC § 6166 provides that the executor of an estate may make an election to pay in as many as 10 annual installments, that portion of the estate tax attributable to assets used in a qualifying closely held business. Estate & Gift (E&G) Exam personnel or E&G Campus personnel make the determination if the estate qualifies for this special election. If property qualifies for installments, only interest on the unpaid balance is due on the first four anniversary dates after the due date. The first tax payment along with interest is due on the fifth anniversary of the due date of the return. This election to pay in installments must be made at the time the Form 706 is filed. Late filing of the return invalidates the election. If the deferred tax due is the result of an examination deficiency, the estate must make the election within 60 days after issuance of notice and demand.
    2. Under IRC § 6503(d) the Collection Statute Expiration Date is suspended for the period during which payment of the tax is deferred. However, running of the IRC § 6324(a) estate tax lien is not suspended.
    3. Collection field function will utilize Form 668(Y) when recording liens on balance due accounts. Advisory has the responsibility of securing a lien using Form 668-J, which is typically secured during the installment period.
    4. Key elements of the lien include:
      1. A lien describing the agreed upon property is recorded using Form 668-J, Notice of Federal Estate Tax Lien Under Internal Revenue Laws (see Exhibit 5.5.8-2).
      2. An agreement to the lien under IRC § 6324A is filed with the Internal Revenue Service on Form 13925, IRC Section 6324A Lien Agreement Form. The agreement must be signed by all of the persons having an interest in the designated property (whether or not in possession) described on the lien.
      3. Although real property is preferred, any property, either real or personal, with equity equal to the deferred taxes plus interest, and that can be expected to survive the deferral period, may be designated in the agreement. Property, other than property that was part of the gross estate, may be used to secure the lien. If at any time the value of the property covered by the agreement becomes less than the deferred taxes plus interest, the IRS can require the addition of property to the agreement.

    Note:

    Even though the property offered by the estate as security for the lien may be, if necessary, difficult to enforce against (such as stock in a closely held corporation), distrainability is not a factor in determining the adequacy of the value of the property offered. As long as the requirements under IRC § 6166A(b) as to the value of the property are met, and there are no indications that the property will not survive the deferral period, whatever property the estate offers as security for the lien is acceptable.

      1. Any property that is part of the decedent’s gross estate that is part of the agreement and described on the recorded lien is no longer subject to the unrecorded IRC § 6324(a) estate tax lien.
      2. Recording of the lien acts as a discharge of the executor and/or or fiduciary under IRC § 2204. See Treas. Reg. 20.2204-3.

    5.5.8.5.1 (06-01-2010)

    Advisory Bond/Lien Determinations for Estate Tax Deferred Under IRC § 6166

    1. Advisory will receive a lien package, as described below, and set up an ICS case control.
      1. Pages 1, 2 and 3 of Form 706 and schedules A, B, F & G and any attachments thereto (but not appraisals unless specifically requested by an Advisor) including other pertinent schedules listing assets.
      2. Form 4349, Computation of Estate Tax Due With Return and Annual Installment.
      3. Form 1273, Report of Estate Tax Examination Changes, and Form 3228, Adjustments to Taxable Estate or Form 6180, Line Adjustments – Estate Tax. (These forms will not be provided if the case is surveyed or accepted as filed.)
      4. The examiner’s narrative report of examination changes. (e.g. Form 886A, Explanation of Items, or similar documentation.) (This form will not be provided if the case is surveyed or accepted as filed.)
      5. Any Form 2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative.
      6. IRC § 6166 election and attachments to the election.
      7. Listing of all businesses listed on the Estate tax return including name and EIN. This information may be listed separately or on the related schedule.
    2. The Estate & Gift (E&G) Exam group will be responsible for sending lien packages to Advisory when the case has been assigned to the group for examination. When returns are accepted as filed or surveyed during classification, Campus will be responsible for preparing and forwarding the lien package to Advisory. E&G Campus will hold the original tax return for 90 days once the lien package is sent to Advisory, in case additional information is needed.
    3. Advisory shall contact the estate’s executor or representative within 60 days of receipt of lien package and request the estate voluntarily provide a bond, or in the alternative an IRC § 6324A lien, to secure the deferred estate tax. If the executor or representative agrees to provide the bond or lien, proceed with processing procedures to get the bond or lien recorded. Send a copy of the lien agreement to E&G Campus for association with the IRC § 6166 file. Encumbrances must be checked to determine adequacy of collateral. The advisor may utilize sources such as Accurint, Secretary of State, UCC filings, etc. to verify encumbrances. It may be necessary to request the estate representative provide encumbrance information. Document the above action in the case history.
    4. If the estate declines to provide a bond or lien, Advisory shall review all information available to it before requesting any information from the taxpayer. Advisory shall review the following:
      1. The lien package provided by E&G Exam,
      2. Any information that the IRS may have such as extension requests (Form 4768), compliance with current installment/interest payments, tax returns or tax compliance information with respect to the decedent (1040), the estate or trust (1041) and closely held business (1040, 1041, 1120, 1120s, 1065, 941’s),
      3. Any information available by public record or on the Internet, such as filings with the Secretary of State.
    5. Advisory will determine what additional information is required to make a determination regarding whether security is required in that case.
    6. Advisory shall send a letter to request any additional information needed to determine whether security should be required. The deadline for additional document request shall be kept to 30 days. If within the 30 day period, the estate requests an extension of time, the Advisor may grant an extension for up to 30 days. Any additional extension must be approved by the Advisory Group Manager. Such approval and the reason for granting the additional extension must be documented in the case history.
    7. Advisory shall determine whether a bond or lien should be required in a case based on a review and analysis of applicable factors listed below and any other pertinent information. This is not an exclusive list and no single factor will be determinative of whether to require security in any particular case.
      1. Duration and stability of the business: This factor considers the nature of the closely held business and of the assets of that business, the relevant market factors that will impact the business’s future success, its recent financial history, and the experience of its management, in an effort to predict likelihood of its success and survival through the deferred payment period. This information may be found in the appraisal, financial statements, and SEC filings. Facts relevant to this factor are information regarding any outstanding liens, judgments, or pending or anticipated lawsuits or other claims against the business, if any; age of business; and continuity and stability of management. The estate may use a sworn affidavit or other probative documents to provide this information. When considering this factor, determine whether the decedent owned a majority interest in the business. If the decedent owned a minority interest, the financial information pertaining to the business may not be as relevant because the estate may not force distributions to pay the estate tax. In this case, consider whether other assets in the estate or other income are available to pay the estate tax.
      2. Ability to pay the installments of tax and interest timely: This factor considers how the estate expects to be able to make the annual payments of tax and interest as due, and the objective likelihood of realizing that expectation. Facts relevant to this factor may include the nature of the business’s significant assets and liabilities, type of debts (subordinated, related party, guaranteed, payment terms), and the business’s cash flow (both historical and anticipated). An appraisal, the business’ tax return, or SEC filings may provide this information.
      3. Compliance history: This factor addresses the business’s, estate’s and decedent’s history regarding compliance with all federal tax payment and tax filing requirements, in an effort to determine whether the business, its management and the executor respect and comply with all tax requirements on a regular basis. The relevance of the closely held business’s filing and payment compliance is proportional to the estate’s ownership interest and control of the business. This factor also addresses the estate’s compliance history with respect to federal tax payment and filing requirements. Review frequency of requests for extension of time to pay, amount, and ultimate payment.
    8. Advisory shall fully document in the case file history:
      1. The factors and information considered in making the determination,
      2. A brief history outlining taxpayer’s response to request for bond or lien, and;
      3. A detailed explanation regarding why a bond or a lien was required in this case in order to protect the government’s interest, and the amount of bond or lien required.
    9. After Advisory has made its determination, Advisory will send the estateLetter 4283, Notification Regarding Internal Revenue Code Section 6166 Security Requirement. When preparing the letter, select the optional paragraph (1) to notify the estate that no bond is required; optional paragraph (2) to notify the estate that a bond is required after reviewing the information provided by the estate; or optional paragraph (3) to notify the estate that a bond is required when the estate did not provide the requested information within 30 days. If option (2) or (3) is selected, include the IRC § 6324A Lien Agreement, Form 13925, and Form 8821. If the estate provides a lien form other than Form 13925, Advisory will consult Area Counsel for the state of the decedent’s domicile for approval of the lien form. If the designated agent on the Form 13295 or lien agreement is someone other than the executor, ensure Form 8821 is received. Fax a copy of the lien agreement and Form 8821, if applicable, to E&G Campus to associate with the file.
    10. Maintain a copy of the Letter 4283 in the case file and schedule a follow up date in ICS.
    11. In the case of any proposed bond, Advisory will consult with Area Counsel for drafting, if needed, and review of the bond agreement.
    12. Area Counsel will also be consulted when unusual assets are pledged on the lien agreement, such as art or collectibles.
    13. The Letter 4283 allows 30 days from the date of the letter to negotiate the bond or lien property. If the estate refuses to provide a bond or lien after Advisory sends Letter 4283 notifying the estate that a bond or lien is required, the Advisor will send the case to the Advisory Group Manager for preparation, selection of the appropriate optional paragraph, and issuance of a Letter 950-I – Preliminary Internal Revenue Code § 6166 Determination Letter. The Letter 950-I is the letter that notifies the estate of its right to appeal the preliminary determination. If the estate does not appeal within the time period, the IRC § 6166 election terminates. Send Letter 950-I by certified mail and maintain one copy in the case file, notating the date it is sent, also schedule a follow up date in ICS.
    14. If decedent died before August 6, 1997, the estate should not be sent the 950-I letter because the estate does not have the right to appeal or go to Tax Court. Provide a narrative to the E&G Campus stating the reason for proposed termination and request the Letter 6335-F be sent.
    15. Advisory will send a copy of the Letter 950-I to E&G Campus to associate with the file.
    16. After the Letter 950-I is issued, the case will be controlled and monitored for expiration of the 30-day period by the Advisory Group Manager.
    17. If within the 30 day period allowed in Letter 950-I the estate requests an extension of time to request Appeals consideration, the Advisory Group Manager may grant an extension for up to 30 days. In unusual cases if circumstances warrant, the Advisory Group Manager may grant an additional extension of time. Such approval and the reason for granting the additional extension must be documented in the case history.
    18. If the estate does not appeal the preliminary determination within the 30-day period allowed in Letter 950-I, or as extended, or if the estate sends an untimely post-marked protest, Advisory shall terminate the election 15 days (to allow for mail time) after the expiration of the 30-day period or the extended period. Advisory must send to the E&G Campus a narrative indicating that the time for appeal has expired and that the account should be accelerated. Advisory shall instruct E&G Campus to send Letter 6335-F to the estate, certified mail, return receipt requested. E&G Campus will compute interest on the Letter 6335-F, 30 days from the date of the Letter 950-I, and will prepare the Letter 6335-F showing the total balance on the account and all additional interest.
    19. If the estate requests Appeals consideration, Advisory will date stamp the protest and document in the case file history that the protest was received and forward the protest letter and the following to Appeals 30 days from the postmark date of the protest letter:
      1. Letter 4283,
      2. Documentation considered in analyzing whether the bond or lien was required,
      3. Letter 950-I,
      4. Case file history, and;
      5. Any pertinent correspondence with the Taxpayer.
    20. If the estate submits a protest containing new IRC § 6166 related issues with its request for Appeals consideration, Advisory shall determine the validity of the new issue. If Advisory disagrees with the estate on the new issue, it shall prepare a response to the protest which includes the determination reached on the new issue. Advisory shall send the response to the protest to the estate and include it in the package to be transmitted to Appeals.
    21. Prepare Form 3210 forwarding case to Appeals notating “Type of Case IRC § 6166 – Termination Case, Lien Determination – This is an emerging issue. Please check the Appeals Technical Guidance issue locator on the Appeals webpage for further information” . Advisory will route their protest cases based on the state in which the decedent was last domiciled using the case routing list on the Appeal’s website, http://appeals.web.irs.gov/APS/bystate2.htm, with the understanding the case may be transferred to another Appeals Officer based on inventory needs. Notify E&G Campus by secure e-mail that a protest has been forwarded to Appeals so that the Letter 6335-F is not sent prematurely.
    22. If no new issues are raised by the estate in its request for Appeals consideration, Advisory will not prepare a response to the protest. Appeals will consider the documentation in the case file history containing all prior analysis.
    23. The Appeals Office will send the case file with the Appeals Case Memorandum (ACM) to Advisory once a decision is final, so that Advisory can proceed. Advisory shall notify E&G Campus if the election under IRC § 6166 is terminated, and shall instruct E&G Campus to send Letter 6335-F certified mail, return receipt requested. If Appeals allows the election to continue, notify E&G Campus that Appeals has determined the estate is entitled to the election. If no response is received, Advisory will follow-up with Appeals in 90 days. Advisory may contact the Appeals’ Account Resolution Specialist at (559) 456-5931 to locate case or update status.

    5.5.8.5.2 (06-01-2010)

    Miscellaneous Documentation From Campus or Appeals

    1. Advisory will receive documentation from E&G Campus concerning IRC § 6166 payments or installment payments that have not been paid. E&G Campus is sending this information to be associated with the case file. E&G Campus will forward for informational purposes copies of billings and/or protest letters that are sent to Appeals. OI’s will be maintained in ICS on accounts where informational documents are sent to Advisory from the E&G Campus.
    2. This information should be used in considering creditworthiness of estate, necessity for a bond or lien, and/or necessary enforcement action.
    3. Advisory may receive a courtesy investigation from the E&G Campus to collect non-deferred tax, penalties and interest. The following actions should be taken:
      1. Contact the estate representative and demand payment of the non-deferred tax. Provide a deadline for payment and document the ICS history.
      2. If payment is not made send final demand letter (Letter 1058) for only the non-deferred portion of tax due plus penalties and interest.
      3. After expiration of the 30 day final demand letter the advisor will issue a courtesy investigation to initiate enforced collection (such as levy or suit referral) as necessary against assets or initiate such action themselves, as appropriate. The Advisor will coordinate collection action with the revenue officer involved.
      4. If full payment is still not made, the IRC § 6321 lien should be recorded by the field revenue officer to attach to the remaining undistributed probate property for the non-deferred portion of the estate tax due. Document the ICS history concerning your action to protect the Government’s interest. Revenue Officers must comply with collection due process rights in IRM 5.1.9.3 when utilizing the IRC § 6321 lien.
      5. If estate is unable to pay the non-deferred tax this is an indicator/factor that the estate may be financially unstable. At this time the advisor will conduct an evaluation of the current assets, review time remaining on the IRC § 6324(a) lien (or any other lien in effect such as the IRC § 6324A lien) and determine if the Government is adequately secured for the remaining tax due during the duration of the deferral period.
      6. If the advisor determines the Government is not adequately secured for the remaining portion of deferred estate tax, Letter 4283 will be sent to the executor/designated agent. Follow procedures in IRM 5.5.8.5.1(9).
      7. If estate still does not pay non-deferred portion of tax and refuses to provide a lien or bond on the IRC § 6166 portion, issue letter 950-I and proceed with acceleration of the deferred portion of tax.
      8. Revenue Officers may continue collection actions on the non-deferred portion of estate tax while the deferred portion is being accelerated.
    4. Advisory will also receive documentation (copies of Letter 6335 or 6335(T)) from the E&G Campus when estates are delinquent in paying installments timely, Advisory should review the account to determine if a lien or bond has been secured. If a lien or bond has not been secured a re-evaluation of collection risk is appropriate action to ensure the Government is adequately protected. This information and advisor actions must be documented in the ICS history because a pattern of delinquency is a factor in determining credit risk.
    5. Advisory will receive from the E&G Campus documentation (copies of Letter 6335(F)) indicating installment payments have not been made and the acceleration of the tax due is in process. Advisory must upon receipt review the account and determine if a lien or bond has been secured. Advisory should review, recommend and document the ICS history regarding the most appropriate collection action based on information in their lien file. Considerations to be addressed:
      1. what assets remain that are encumbered by the IRC § 6324(a) lien
      2. are there specific assets pledged on the IRC § 6324A lien,
      3. equity in assets
      4. is there a bond,
      5. does a seizure or levy need to be done on pledged assets, and
      6. should a suit referral be completed.
    6. Advisory shall take such action or coordinate enforced collection action.
    7. Advisory will receive from the E&G Campus documentation indicating the case is in litigation contesting the termination of the election. The collection statute is not suspended during the time the case is in litigation. Advisory should determine based on the facts and circumstances of the case whether collection should be pursued during litigation and handle the case accordingly. If Advisory determines collection should be pursued during litigation, before collecting Advisory must contact the Chief Counsel attorney assigned to the case.
    8. When Appeals makes a determination that an estate may continue to elect an IRC § 6166 installment election, the entire case file, including the original return shall be sent to Advisory to copy information necessary for bond or lien determination. This file should be copied within 30 days, and the return should be sent to E&G Campus to complete the installment account set-up.
    9. Advisory will be responsible to set follow-ups through ICS to check status of cases that were sent to Appeals for resolution either by utilizing the Appeals Account Specialist or contacting the E&G Campus to determine if they have received the Appeals Case Memorandum (ACM) from Appeals.

    5.5.8.5.3 (06-01-2010)

    Monitoring Accounts During The Deferral Period (Advisory)

    1. Informational documents received from the E&G Campus should be reviewed within 30 days of receipt. The advisor’s evaluation of impact or harm to the Government’s interest should be documented in the ICS history. This documentation may dictate frequency of monitoring an account.
    2. Notice of late installment payments, preliminary IRC § 6166 election terminations or extensions to pay on IRC § 6166 installment payments should be considered as a factor in lien determination and monitoring. Accounts should be re-evaluated if any of the above actions occur.
    3. Encumbrances must be checked to determine adequacy of collateral. The advisor may utilize sources such as Accurint, Secretary of State, UCC filings, etc. to verify encumbrances.
    4. (4) All IRC § 6166 accounts will be re-evaluated six years into the deferral period. Schedule a follow up through the ICS system. Advisors will consider the factors described in IRM 5.5.8.5.1(7) and should also look at subsequent actions below to determine if additional action should be taken to protect the Government’s interest:
      1. What assets have been distributed?
      2. Has the estate distributed, sold, exchanged, or otherwise disposed of 50 percent or more of the value of the estate’s interest in the closely held business?
      3. What assets have been discharged or subordinated?
      4. Has the estate made installment payments timely and in the full amount due?
      5. Has the estate requested extensions to pay installments?
      6. Has the estate defaulted on other financing?
      7. Has the estate made additional payments toward the tax liability?
      8. Does the closely held business appear to be financially stable and able to make future installment payments?
      9. Is the estate in compliance with filing and paying requirements?
    5. Annual monitoring, considering the above factors should be conducted as the Service nears expiration of the IRC § 6324(a) lien. Each year that Advisory conducts a review, the Advisor must document their analysis and recommendations to adequately protect the Government’s interest. As the Service gets closer to expiration of the IRC § 6324(a) lien, the advisor must consider securing a “replacement lien” (IRC § 6324A lien or bond) to cover the additional deferral period and the amount of deferred tax due in order to protect the Government’s interest.
    6. Advisory must be aware that if a determination is made that the Government is at risk of not collecting the remaining tax due, appropriate action (for example, a bond or lien or enforced collection action) must be taken and completed prior to expiration of the IRC § 6324(a) lien. Consideration must be given to allow time for the executor to exhaust any allowable appeals and potential litigation time if the estate petitions the Tax Court under IRC § 7479. If the account is accelerated, this process generally requires a minimum of six months to be completed. Timeframes of acceleration, appeals and litigation must be considered in order to complete collection actions prior to expiration of the IRC § 6324(a) lien.
    7. If the advisor determines that a lien is required the advisor will send the executor Letter 4283. Follow procedures in IRM 5.5.8.5.1(9) .
    8. In consideration of accounts where the estate has been in compliance with timely payment of installments, as the Service gets closer to expiration of the IRC § 6324(a) lien, the advisor must consider securing a “replacement lien” (IRC § 6324A lien or bond) to cover the additional deferral period and the amount of deferred tax due in order to protect the Government’s interest.
    9. Advisory must ensure annually that the value of the collateral securing the lien is equal to the outstanding IRC § 6166 balance on the account. In accordance with the Form 13925, the designated agent is required to send current valuation information annually with respect to the pledged property listed in the agreement. If the executor has provided an IRC § 6324A lien, Advisory must review the annual valuation information report from the designated agent to confirm that the value of the collateral securing the lien is equal to the outstanding IRC § 6166 balance on the account. If the financial information is not received from the designated agent, the Advisor may contact the designated agent to request that information.

    5.5.8.5.4 (06-01-2010)

    Processing of IRC § 6324A Form 668-J (Advisory Actions)

    1. Follow the procedures found at IRM 5.5.8.4.1 for recording of estate tax liens.
    2. When preparing estate tax liens, the SSN of the decedent and any qualified heirs whose names are shown on the lien will be redacted using the format XXX-XX-1234. Do not redact EINs.
    3. Actual lien fees will be manually posted by CLU FORT when the lien is received back from the recording office, see IRM 5.19.12.10.2 .
    4. Advisors are responsible for ensuring receipt of the recorded lien from CLU and that lien fees have been input, if applicable.
    5. Advisory will maintain an ICS case in the name of the estate for which the Form 668-J was recorded until such time as the lien is released. Advisory will also maintain a file of retained lien copies and associated documentation.
    6. The Cincinnati Campus Estate & Gift Tax Department, will, upon receipt of full payment of the liability secured by Form 668-J, coordinate with the Advisory Estate Tax Group to ensure that the 668-J lien is released in a timely manner. Campus will notify the Advisory, Estate Tax Group within 10 working days after receiving notification of payment, through secure e-mail, to release any Form 668-J that may have been recorded.
    7. Form 669-J must be prepared manually. However, a PDF version of the form is available on the intranet at http://publish.no.irs.gov/catlg.html.
    8. If the estate representative chooses to post a bond rather than consent to the recording of a lien, follow the procedures for processing bonds found at IRM 5.6.1.2.1, Bonds and IRM 5.6.1.2.3, Estate Tax Bonds and Other Collateral.
    9. If stock certificates are pledged as collateral, the advisor will secure the actual stock certificate. This would prevent the sale of such certificates to third parties.
    10. Prepare Form 2276, Collateral Deposit Record classifying the stock certificates as ″safekeeping″ and reflecting a zero value for revenue accounting system (RACS) purposes. The certificates must be stored in an approved safe. Follow procedures in IRM 5.6.1.8, Preparing Form 2276, Collateral Deposit Record.
    11. Stock, in most instances, will be considered personal property by most state law. With respect to personal property, a lien must be filed in the office designated by state law in which the property subject to the lien is situated.

    5.5.8.5.5 (03-01-2006)

    Processing Requests for Release, Discharge of Property From, or Subordination of IRC § 6324A Form 668-J

    1. Requests for release of Form 668-J, and discharge and subordination applications will be processed by Advisory.
    2. Releases– The criteria under IRC § 6325(a) for issuance of a certificate of lien release – liability satisfied or unenforceable or bond accepted – are applicable to Form 668-J. Follow the procedures found at IRM 5.5.8.4.2 for processing estate tax lien releases.
    3. Discharge – Requests for discharge will normally be made under IRC § 6325(c). Provided property equal to the amount of the remaining deferred balance of tax and interest will remain subject to the lien, a certificate may be issued discharging a portion of the property listed on Form 668-J from the lien. As an alternative, under IRC § 6324A(d)(5), the estate representatives may substitute other property in order to obtain a discharge of all or part of the property listed on the lien. If the disposition of property will result in accelerated payment of all or part of the deferred tax, or if the equity in the remaining property will not equal the remaining deferred balance of tax and interest, the application should be made under IRC § 6325(b)(2).
    4. Subordination – Requests for subordination will normally be made under IRC § 6325(d)(2). Provided it is determined that the amount realizable by the United States from the property will ultimately be increased, or that the ultimate collection of the tax liability will be facilitated by the subordination, a certificate may be issued.

    5.5.8.6 (06-23-2005)

    Gift Tax Lien Under IRC § 6324(b)

    1. The provisions of the gift tax lien are also delineated in IRC § 6324 and parallel those for the general estate tax lien.
    2. The special gift tax lien imposed by IRC § 6324(b) attaches to all gifts made during the calendar year for the amount of the gift tax imposed upon the gifts made during such year. If the gift tax is not paid by the donor when due, the donee of any gift becomes personally liable for the tax to the extent of the value of the gift. The gift tax lien extends for a period of ten years from the time the gifts were made or until or the tax is paid, whichever date is sooner.

    Exhibit 5.5.8-1

    Form 668-H, Notice of Federal Estate Tax Lien Under Internal Revenue Laws


  • The IRS Estate Death Tax 2008-2018

    How devastating was the IRS Estate Death Tax to our family?

    The death tax in 2008, the year my Dad died, the IRS demanded 1/2 of everything over two (2) million dollars. My father’s trust was Land rich and Cash poor. I did in fact, have to sell the FARM. Over 100 acres of a farm that had been in our family for over 60 years (they will take whatever you have).

    2009-2013 How complicated were the IRS estate death tax legal and federal financial lien laws?

    How devastating  was the IRS Estate Death Tax in 2008?

    Jan 29, 2013 Five years later, Why did I have my Grandson set up my blog/website behindmyback.org

    Three days later I posted…..

    My code name “Pearl Revere”

    Posted on February 1, 2013 9:37 am by Pearl Rains Hewett

    ————————————————

    Little did I know, about the IRS Estate Death tax on June 1, 2009, when I became the trustee/executor of my father’s Trust/Estate.

    What I did know, was it took Attorney’s and  an Accounting Firm from March 19, 2008 to June 1, 2009, to compile an 8 inch pile of legal documents for the IRS.

    The beneficiaries’ of the Estate were instructed to, and did  sign an agreement with and for the IRS.

    What did we sign?

    How complicated were the IRS estate death tax legal and federal financial lien laws? And, how many IRS  liens were filed against the estate, when were they filed  and what restrictions did the liens place on the estate property?

    2009-2012 How many  IRS estate death tax forms had to be filled out and signed?

    How long did it take the IRS to decide what estate options were allowed for payment of the estate death tax? A document from the IRS dated Feb 15, 2012

    March 13, 2012 IRS Letter three Years after my father’s death  Attached, IRS form 890, dated Feb 15, 2012 IRS Estate of George C. Rains page (2), SEC. 6166 Installment Option SELECTED?  the Rains Sr. Estate is a closely held business.

    ——————————————————-

    WHAT IS AN IRS CLOSELY HELD BUSINESS? 

    The estate tax generally is due within nine months of a decedent’s death.

    However, in recognition of the illiquid nature of most closely held businesses,

    ———————————————————————————

    What is the legal definition of illiguid?

    Illiquid refers to the state of a security or other asset that cannot easily be sold or exchanged for cash without a substantial loss in value.

    ———————————————————————–

    The Code  allows the executor of a deceased business owner’s estate to elect to pay the estate tax attributable to an interest in a closely held business in up to ten installments.

    An estate is eligible for payment of the estate tax in installments if the value of the decedent’s interest in a closely held business exceeds 35 percent of the decedent’s adjusted gross estate (i.e., the gross estate less certain deductions).

    ——————————————————–

    March 19, 2008  I know now, Jan 12, 2018, the closely held business Rains Sr. Estate illiguid was over 74%, more than double the 35 percent eligible amount.

    ——————————————————————————————

    If the election is made, the estate may defer payment of principal and pay only interest for the first five years[2], followed by up to 10 annual installments of principal and interest. This provision effectively extends the time for paying estate tax by 14 years from the original due date of the estate tax.

    ———————————————————————————-

    Five years paying interest only, followed by up to 10 annual installments of principal and interest financially  and effectively adds up to a whole bunch of money.

    ———————————————————————

    2008 How devastating  was the IRS Estate Death Tax?

    2009 How complicated were/are the IRS estate death tax legal and federal financial lien laws?

    2013  Why did I start my blog/website?

    2015 Why did I support Donald J. Trump? He had plans for taxes and jobs.

    2016  Why Campaign for Donald J. Trump? Agree to be the designated Trump Campaign Chairperson in Clallam County WA? He had plans for taxes and jobs.

    2017 Why Vote for Donald J. Trump? He had plans for taxes and jobs.

    President Trump had plans for jobs and taxes and gets results. period

    12/22/2017 Became Public Law No: 115-97.

    Tax Cuts and Jobs Act – HR1 – 115th Congress (2017-2018): An Act to …

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1

    Shown Here: Passed House amended (11/16/2017). (This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on November 13, 2017. The summary of that version is repeated here.) Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) to reduce tax rates and modify policies, credits, …

    —————————————————————————–

    Little did I know, about the IRS Estate Death tax on June 1, 2009, when I became the trustee/executor of my father’s Trust/Estate.

    Even less was known by the beneficiaries that were looking forward to a distribution of money.

    —————————————————————

    WOW, another discovery, I just found this today Jan 12, 2018

    Another Really long Chapter in the Book of Revelations by Pearl Revere

    WARNING: An IRS  table briefly describing the characteristics of Federal tax liens associated with federal estate tax liabilities…

    IS MISLEADING.

    THE LINK BELOW IS ABOUT A 9000 WORD DOCUMENT

    —————————————————–

    Just saying…

    No wonder, it took Attorney’s and an Accounting Firm from March 19, 2008 to June 1, 2009, to compile an 8 inch pile of legal documents for the IRS.

    ——————————————————

    5.5.8 Estate Tax Liens | Internal Revenue Service – IRS.gov

    https://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-005-008

    The following table briefly describes the characteristics of Federal tax liens associated with federal estate tax liabilities. … Form 668 Notice of Federal Tax Lien ….. for preparation, selection of the appropriate optional paragraph, and issuance of a Letter 950-I – Preliminary Internal Revenue Code § 6166 Determination Letter.

    ————————————————————————

    What’s new JAN 10, 2018?

    Tax Law for the Closely Held Business | Farrell Fritz, P.C. | State …

    https://www.taxlawforchb.com/

    2 days ago – The Tax Department of Farrell Fritz has created this blog to provide meaningful information and to elicit discussion regarding those Federal and New York tax issues which are of particular concern to closely-held business organizations and their owners.

    Implications (or Fact)

    As stated immediately above, the owners of many closely held businesses will not be subject to the federal estate tax – at least not through 2025[5] – thanks to the greatly increased exemption amount and to continued portability.

    Thus, a deceased owner’s taxable (not gross) estate in 2018 – even if we only account for conservative valuations of his business interests and for reasonable estate administration expenses – may be as great as $22.4 million (assuming portability) without incurring any federal estate tax.

    ————————————————————————–

    Same as above… The IRS Federal Estate Tax posted Jan 10, 2018

    The Federal Estate Tax Lives On, But “Where, O death, is your sting …

    https://www.taxlawforchb.com/…/the-federal-estate-tax-lives-on-but-where-o-death-is…

    2 days ago – January 10, 2018 To better understand the change wrought by the Act – and to appreciate what it left intact – we begin with an overview of the federal transfer taxes. The Estate and Gift Tax. The Code imposes a gift tax on certain lifetime transfers, an estate tax on certain transfers at death, and a generation-skipping transfer …

    Implications? or  FACTS

    As stated immediately above, the owners of many closely held businesses will not be subject to the federal estate tax – at least not through 2025[5] – thanks to the greatly increased exemption amount and to continued portability.

    Thus, a deceased owner’s taxable (not gross) estate in 2018 – even if we only account for conservative valuations of his business interests and for reasonable estate administration expenses – may be as great as $22.4 million (assuming portability) without incurring any federal estate tax.

    ———————————————————————————–

    To be continued…..

    a brief posting on

    5.5.8 Estate Tax Liens | Internal Revenue Service – IRS.gov

    https://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-005-008

    The following table briefly describes the characteristics of Federal tax liens associated with federal estate tax liabilities. … Form 668 Notice of Federal Tax Lien ….. for preparation, selection of the appropriate optional paragraph, and issuance of a Letter 950-I – Preliminary Internal Revenue Code § 6166 Determination Letter.

    ————————————————————————-

    The bottom line…

    With President Trump, the smaller estates of a  hard working American citizens, eligible as a closely held business,  those smaller family estates beneficiaries  will never become slaves to an IRS Estate Death Tax demanding 25% of the illiquid  assets of a tree farm, acquired by their father, with 60 years of hard labor.

    Unfortunately, the IRS death tax is still there, but the exemptions have been  raised.


  • 2017 SMP Exposing DOE’s Abuse of Citizenry

    INDEED, DISCOVERY, PUBLIC RECORDS, REDISCOVERY, DOCUMENTING AND EXPOSING

    Dec 5, 2009 to Nov 15, 2017 Exposing DOE’s Abuse of Citizenry on the 2012-2014- 2017 DCD SMP Update Drafts in Clallam County WA.

    2011- 2017 SMP Exposing DOE’s AND ESA ADOLFSON’s Abuse of Citizenry and the project manager.

    ——————————————————————————-

    State Senators Hold Hearing Exposing DOE’s Abuse of Citizenry …

    dev.myfreedomfoundation.com/…/state-senators-hold-hearing-exposing-doe’s-abuse-…

    SMP Messaging guide for bureaucrats and pro-SMP 2012 … Unfortunately, when it comes to the SMP updates, it is clear the Department of … Quinn lying down.

    Snippet…

    2014 Another sample DOE email shared by various DOE employees – citizens are at “homer simpson” level of intelligence: DOE employee Zink says citizens are like homer simpson level

    ————————————————————

    My quote,

    2017- Hello Country Bumpkins…

    ————————————————————

    ev.myfreedomfoundation.com/blogs/liberty-live/state-senators-hold-hearing-exposing-doe’s-abuse-citizenry-and-local-government

    Instead of these decisions being made by local elected officials, the Department of Ecology uses its position of authority to bully local jurisdictions and dominate the process — despite what Gordon White, Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program Manager for DOE (current salary $102,767) stated at the hearing (see 14:38).

    In my testimony (at 1:03:00), I highlighted examples (obtained through public records requests) of Ecology’s negative attitude towards citizens and the dismissive attitude they have towards those who disagree with them.  Here they are, as promised:

    1)  DOE Water Quality Program Manager Bill Moore (current salary $92,592referring to property owners who participated in the public process at a public hearing in Asotin County in 2011 with contempt, specifically calling them  “rable” (the misspelling is his). Citizens are rable according to DOE Bill Moore

    ————————————————————————

    2011- 2017 SMP Exposing DOE’s AND ESA ADOLFSON’s Abuse of Citizenry

    DOE MICHELLE McCONNELL AND  ESA MARGARET CLANCY

    My comment on a social media  post Posted on March 30, 2014 by Al B.

    AFTER EIGHT YEARS TOGETHER ON THE JEFFERSON COUNTY SMP UPDATE, ESA MARGARET CLANCY AND DOE MICHELLE McCONNELL ARE TOGETHER AGAIN, ANOTHER EXTREMELY HARD JOB, SHEPHERDING THE CLALLAM COUNTY PLANNING DEPT THRU THE CLALLAM COUNTY 2017 SMP UPDATE DRAFT.

    I’M A CONCERNED CITIZEN… JUST ASKING

    DOE ABUSE? COLLUSION?  OR JUST BEING GOOD SHEPHERDS?

    —————————————————————————

    IT ONLY TAKES TWO TO RAKE IN THE DOUGH

    DOE MICHELLE McCONNELL AND  ESA MARGARET CLANCY

    2011 THE TIP OF THE ESA ADOLFSON COOKIE CUTTING IN WA STATE SMP UPDATES. YOU WILL FIND THEM  ASSOCIATED WITH  24 COOKIE CUTTING SMP UPDATES IN WA STATE.  

    INCLUDING  PIERCE COUNTY,

    CITY OF TACOMA, CLALLAM COUNTY, CITY OF SAMMISH, KENMORE, ISSAQUAH, WOODWAY, MASON COUNTY, ISLAND COUNTY,CITY OF SHORELINE, WHATCOM COUNTY, VANCOUVER, TUKWILLA, DUVALL, CLARK COUNTY, LACEY, GIG HARBOR, MULKITO, RENTON, JEFFERSON COUNTY, CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, EATONVILLE, PUYALLUP, CITY OF UNIVERSITY PLACE AND THE CITY OF LOWELL IN OREGON. 

    What the ELECTED WA State Senators did in Pierce County about the Pierce County  SMP Update, should be happening on the DCD 2017 Clallam County SMP Update Draft.

    Well, except for the fact that Clallam County only has three elected representatives and they are all UNRESPONSIVE DEMOCRATS.

    —————————————————————————–

     REDISCOVERING, DOCUMENTING, EXPOSING AND DISSEMINATING

    Full unedited text

    State Senators Hold Hearing Exposing DOE’s Abuse of Citizenry …

    dev.myfreedomfoundation.com/…/state-senators-hold-hearing-exposing-doe’s-abuse-…

    SMP Messaging guide for bureaucrats and pro-SMP 2012 … Unfortunately, when it comes to the SMP updates, it is clear the Department of … Quinn lying down.

    April 21, 2014

    Glen Morgan
    Adjunct Fellow

    Last Thursday, members of the Washington State Senate convened in Sumner to discuss the damaging effects of the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) on property rights.  We referenced this hearing here. Of particular interest in this discussion was the role the Department of Ecology plays in the SMP update process.

    Legislators in attendance were Sen. Pam Roach (R-31st), Sen. Bruce Dammeir (R-25th), Sen. Jan Angel (R-26th), Sen. Doug Ericksen (R-42nd), Sen. Bob Hasegawa (D-11th), and Rep. Graham Hunt (R-2nd).

    Pierce County Councilmembers Dan Roach, Jim McCune and Joyce McDonald also came to ask questions and listen to public comment.

    Fortunately, for all those unable to attend, you can see the complete TVW coverage of this hearing here, and I would strongly recommend anyone who cares about property rights, or who wants to see citizens point out the many problems with the Department of Ecology, to watch and share this video.

    Approximately 150 residents attended the hearing.  Many of them also testified.

    The meeting was initiated due to the concerns raised by many residents of Pierce County about the Department of Ecology imposing significant changes to the current Pierce County Shoreline Master Plan that are not supported by the public.

    The required seven-year update is taking place right now in Pierce County, and the façade of the SMP update being a “locally driven process” is quickly fading away. Nobody really believes there is much local control over the process. The public had a big laugh at the Department of Ecology during the hearing when its representatives made this claim.

    Instead of these decisions being made by local elected officials, the Department of Ecology uses its position of authority to bully local jurisdictions and dominate the process — despite what Gordon White, Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program Manager for DOE (current salary $102,767) stated at the hearing (see 14:38).

    In my testimony (at 1:03:00), I highlighted examples (obtained through public records requests) of Ecology’s negative attitude towards citizens and the dismissive attitude they have towards those who disagree with them.  Here they are, as promised:

    1)  DOE Water Quality Program Manager Bill Moore (current salary $92,592)  referring to property owners who participated in the public process at a public hearing in Asotin County in 2011 with contempt, specifically calling them  “rable” (the misspelling is his). Citizens are rable according to DOE Bill Moore

    2)  DOE Supervisor Erik Stockdale (current salary $69,588) refusing to recognize scientific studies that disprove long-held Ecology dogma and suggesting other Ecology employees hide e-mail records from the public by deleting them. See this classic Youtube video from the San Juans.  It is unknown how successful Stockdale and other DOE employees have been at violating state law by deleting other public records. DOE Erik Stockdale lets delete these public records

    3) Creating “messaging-guides” that recommend government officials avoid talking about the impacts the SMP has on property values, property rights and personal freedom. Instead, the guide says, they should appeal to fear. The guide goes on to recommend local government officials create a “compelling SMP story,” which includes “villains” (we can safely assume this means shoreline property owners).  “Opponents” are defined as people who support “freedom and prosperity” (page 4) and the Freedom Foundation as an example of an opponent (page 5).  Our tax dollars funded this.  SMP Messaging guide for bureaucrats and pro-SMP 2012

    4)  Ecology Director Ted Sturdevant (salary was $138,523 before he went to work in Gov. Jay Inslee’s administration as executive director of the Legislative and Policy Office) referring to arguments against proposed Ecology rules as “right-wing propaganda b******t,” and calling Republican politicians who disagree with his agency’s position: “f******s.”  DOE director Sturdevant calls Republicans fkrs DOE director Sturdevant calls WPC rwbullsht DOE director Sturdevant oddly attacks tea party

    Of the various attendees from all over Washington state who attended and testified at this hearing, nobody wants to see the health of the shorelines be degraded. However, there was clearly no confidence that DOE is an honest player in this process.

    This was certainly the case for residents of Lake Tapps, where Ecology is trying to force Pierce County to apply a 50-foot buffer around the shoreline of this manmade lake.

    Unfortunately, when it comes to the SMP updates, it is clear the Department of Ecology is not an honest participant in the process. Unfortunately, the evidence shows the Department of Ecology doesn’t regulate the environment, but it clearly does attempt to regulate people, dissenters and the message.

    We are thankful that some of our elected officials are starting to look into this situation, and last Thursday’s hearing was a great start towards exposing the truth about the abuse by state government agencies.

    “Rabble”

    Another sample DOE email shared by various DOE employees – citizens are at “homer simpson” level of intelligence: DOE employee Zink says citizens are like homer simpson level

    Still a little confused about how the Dept. of Ecology is organized at the top level?  That’s okay, most of these state agencies are set up to be a little confusing.  Here is a brief upper management org chart.  A more detailed and complete org chart can be obtained directly from the DOE via an information request.  The 1500+ emloyee positions are pretty well connected on that chart, but it will take you some time to sort it out.

    Update:  Here is a podcast from Seattle’s KTTH David Boze’s show.

    Liberty Live SEIU Up To Its Old ‘Tricks,’ Trying To Suppress The Truth Predictably, SEIU 775 isn’t taking the Freedom Foundation’s efforts to expose its reluctance to comply with Harris v. Quinn lying down.

    ———————————————————————————

    THE DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE DCD 2017 SMP DRAFT UPDATE  IS DEC 12, 2017….

    Email your comments to:  SMP@co.clallam.wa.us  Clallam County Board of Commissioners

    What will happen who knows?

    Meanwhile this Tenacious Clallam County Country Bumpkin  is doing the usual….

    I’ll just keep making more 2017 SMP Update Draft Public comments,  posting them on my website, and sending them around in cyberspace.

    THE BOTTOM LINE  ON THE 2017 CLALLAM COUNTY SMP UPDATE ……

    MUST NOT BE…..

    P.S.  I EXPECT TO HAVE SOME MORON TRY TO MAKE US MOVE OUR HOUSE BACK ANOTHER 500 FEET FROM THE BEACH.


  • 2017 SMP Draft New Black Lines and Purple

    THE NEW CLALLAM COUNTY  DCD SMP Update 273 Page Draft  is a very expensive, very complicated  environmental designation, a Color Book coded with black lines and  purple, and every other color of the rainbow to rule, regulate and restrict every  vested private shoreline property owner in Clallam County WA.

    SO WHAT’S NEW ABOUT THAT?

    DISCOVERY, NOV 9, 2017  I RECEIVED A WARNING “IF THE CITIZENS OF CLALLAM COUNTY ONLY KNEW THE EVIL OF THE BLACK LINE, THE DISCRIMINATION OF THE PURPLE COLOR”

    Question: “Why use Color Book?”

    Answer:  “Color Books have been in the news  a lot since Nov 8, 2016”

     Hello Clallam County Country Bumpkins et al. Who knew what on Jan 26, 2011?

    And, what have we discovered …. Nov 10, 2017?

    The Clallam County DCD SMP Update Draft is a 273 page color book, It  cost American taxpayers $1,329,915.00 dollars. A US Environmental  Protection  Assistance Grant  to Clallam County WA  for Project No  PO-00J08801-1-2- 3.

    Total Project cost, one million three hundred twenty nine thousand nine hundred and fifteen dollars.

    WHO’S ACCOUNTING FOR THE MONEY?

    I’m requesting an answer from  Jim Jones, Jr.  the Clallam County Administrator..

    ——————————————————–

    NOV 3, 2017 TO NOV 8, 2017 all links are below.

    DISCOVERY  From: Clallam County Public Records Center

    To: phew@wavecable.com

    What started as a $599,000.00 pass through grant from the EPA to Clallam County  for ESA Adolfson  facilitators/ consultants/ compliance experts, Margaret Clancy and Jim Kramer, we were told,  to regulate 3300 vested  private shoreline turned into $1,329,915.00 dollar project.

    DISCOVERY  Jan 26, 2011 to Nov 10, 2017 continued….

    WHO KNEW, A PERSON THAT WE HAVE NEVER SEE, IN OR AT, OR QUESTIONED AT ANY PUBLIC 2017 DCD SMP UPDATE DISCUSSIONS, IS CLALLAM COUNTY EMPLOYEE CATHY LEAR THE PROJECT MANAGER.

    ———————————————————————————

    December 6, 2011 Cathy Lear comments on the SMP Update

    HELLO COUNTRY BUMPKINS…

    Doubtless, everyone with an advanced degree in forestry would understand these references.

    This way of writing is distracting, however, for those who do not customarily speak in these terms. I think it should be made more “speaks for itself to anyone” wherever possible. A shoreline inventory should be a tool useful to anyone interested, but especially to land use planners and citizens with property they want to develop.

    We cannot assume everyone speaks the language of academic society.  

    ———————————————————————–

    NOV 9, 2017   MORE DISCOVERY  on the 2017 DCD SMP Draft Update 273 PAGE COLOR BOOK . People send me stuff, people tell me stuff, I have a researched and documented history of the Clallam County SMP Update stuff.

    NOV 9, 2017  A WARNING “IF THE CITIZENS OF CLALLAM COUNTY ONLY KNEW THE EVIL OF THE BLACK LINE, THE DISCRIMINATION OF THE PURPLE COLOR”

    ——————————————————–

    I am very familiar with the color purple on maps used for the SMP Update. I did attended the 2012 SMP Update Forks Public Forum.

    WHO KNEW ABOUT THE “NEW”  EVIL BLACK LINES ON THE DCD 2017 SMP UPDATE DRAFT MAPS COLOR BOOK?  NOT ONLY DID THEY COLOR  OUR PRIVATE SHORELINE PROPERTY PURPLE,

    WHO KNEW?  AND, WHO KNOWS THAT THEY DREW “NEW” EVIL  BLACK LINES ON OUR PRIVATE SHORELINE PROPERTY?

    NOV 9, 2017 3:30PM I COULD DOCUMENT ON MAP #41 IN THE COLOR BOOK,  THE “NEW” EVIL BLACK LINES ON THE 2017 DCD SMP UPDATE DRAFT MAPS, THE BLACK LINES “TOOK”  20 ACRES OF A GEORGE C. RAINS SR TRUST PROPERTY FROM  A 40 ACRE PARCEL ON THE SOL DUC RIVER.

    I WAS ABSOLUTELY FURIOUS, I IMMEDIATELY WENT TO THE CLALLAM COUNTY COURT HOUSE.

    Nov 9, 2017 I met with DCD Director Mary Ellen Winborn

    We spoke for about an hour…

    RE: THE EVIL OF THE BLACK LINE AND THE DISCRIMINATION OF THE PURPLE COLOR.

    The bottom line… pretty much went like this.

    Mary Ellen said, “We have to leave this to the professionals”…..

    WHY WOULD ANYONE BELIEVE YOU?

    —————————————————————————

    DISCOVERY CONTINUED….

    After a seven years fight.. The nine unpaid volunteer members of the Clallam County Planning Commission, finally gave up..

    “WE HAVE TO LEAVE THIS TO THE PAID PROFESSIONALS”…..

    THE PAID PROFESSIONALS? THAT WROTE THE DCD 2017 CLALLAM COUNTY SMP UPDATE DRAFT AND PROVIDED THE NEW 273 PAGE COLOR BOOK…….

    DCD DIRECTOR MARY ELLEN WINBORN AND SR. PLANNER STEVE GRAY, IN COLLABORATION WITH ECOLOGY’S LOCAL COORDINATOR DOE MICHELLE MCCONNEL AND ESA ADOLFSON OVERPAID FACILITATOR MARGARET CLANCY (THAT INCLUDING JIM KRAMER)

    —————————————————————————-

    BACK TO THE 2017 DCD SMP DRAFT 273 PAGE $1,329,915.00 DOLLAR COLOR BOOK. As the concerned trustee for over 800 acres of designated forest land, seriously affected by the DCD 2017 SMP Update Draft…. I requested a paper copy of their color book .

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Mary Ellen Winborn

    Cc: Bill Peach ; mark mozias ; Randy Johnson

    Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 8:35 AM

    Subject: Requesting a copy of the 2017 SMP Update Draft

    ——————————————————————————–

    WE THE CITIZENS OF CLALLAM COUNTY CAN LEAVE THE 2017 DCD SMP DRAFT UPDATE UP TO THE PAID PROFESSIONALS AND ECOLOGY OR WE CAN CHALLENGE IT….

    Email your comments to:  SMP@co.clallam.wa.us  Clallam County Board of Commissioners

    LINKS TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE DOCUMENTS….

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Clallam County Public Records Center

    To: phew@wavecable.com

    Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 2:18 PM

    Subject: Public Records Request :: P004353-102417
    Attachments:
    Hewett_doc_pdf.pdf

    Friday, November 03, 2017 9:09 AM

    Subject: Public Records Request :: P004384-103017

     

    Attachments:
    signed_ESA_full_contract-22_pgs.pdf
    SMA_Grant_Agr_G1000062.pdf

    From: Clallam County Public Records Center

    To: phew@wavecable.com

    Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2017 4:21 PM

    Subject: Public Records Request :: P004411-110317

    Attachments:
    PO-00J08801-1_Add_$499957__Signed_10-5-10.pdf
    PO-00J08801-2_Rebudget__Extend_to_12-31-14__Signed_10-16-12.pdf
    PO-00J08801-3_Rebudget__Extend_to_12-31-16__Signed_12-15-14_.pdf
    PO-00J08801-0_$1329915_Exp__12-31-12__Signed_8-3-10.pdf

    ——————————————————————————–

    IT APPEARS ABOVE, THAT THE PO-JOO8801  #3  REBUDGET  WAS ONLY EXTENDED TO DEC 31, 2016?

    HAS IT BEEN EXTENDED IN AND FOR  2017?

    —————————————————————————-

    BACK TO THE 2017 DCD SMP UPDATED DRAFT …

    What have I done about it?

    DISCOVERY PLUS… a huge number of SMP Public Comments

    PLUS…..

    I met with Commissioner Bill Peach for an hour on Oct 20, 2017

    I met with Prosecuting Attorney Mark Nicholas for one hour (follow the law)

    I met with Commissioner Mark Ozias on Nov 3, 2017

    I met  with my elected Commissioner Randy Johnson Nov 8, 2017

    I met with DCD Director Mary Ellen Winborn Nov 9, 2017

    PLUS…..

     I AM POSTING AND EMAILING THIS SMP PUBLIC COMMENT

    —————————————————————–

    WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

    Email your comments to:  SMP@co.clallam.wa.us  Clallam County Board of Commissioners

    THE DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE DCD 2017 SMP DRAFT UPDATE  IS DEC 12, 2017….

    What will happen in eight months? who knows?

    Meanwhile this Tenacious Clallam County Country Bumpkin  is doing the usual….

    I’ll just keep making more 2017 SMP Update Draft Public comments,  posting them on my website, and sending around in cyberspace.

    DISCOVERY to be continued….

    ———————————————————————————–

    RE-DISCOVERY MY SMP PUBLIC COMMENT APRIL 18, 2012

    GIVE THEM AN INCH AND THEY’LL TAKE A MILE

    Seller disclosure as required by Clallam County 2012 SMP Update and WA State law

    But the best news of all is the assurance by the Planning Dept. that your private property will not have any loss of value due to Clallam County’s 2012 SMP Draft restrictions and regulations.

    BUT? What has Clallam County got to lose?

    RCW 90.58.290

    Restrictions as affecting fair market value of property. The restrictions imposed by this chapter shall be considered by the county assessor in establishing the fair market value of the property.

    [1971 ex.s. c 286 § 29.]

    INDEED, ONE MUST CONSIDER  ALL OF THE  RESTRICTIVE SMP  “SHALLS” ON PRIVATE VESTED SHORELINE PROPERTY OWNERS, AND IN PARTICULAR… THE UNDEVELOPED PRIVATE INVESTMENT SHORELINE PROPERTIES, VIEW, ETC?

    ———————————————————————
    RE-DISCOVERY MY SMP PUBLIC COMMENT APRIL 18, 2012
    www.clallam.net/LandUse/documents/247_SMP041812.pdf

    Merrill, Hannah From: pearl hewett … Subject: SMP GIVE THEM AN INCH AND THEY’LL TAKE A MILEhave any loss of value due to Clallam County’s 2012 SMP Draft …

    I submit this as my SMP comment

    Pearl Rains Hewett Trustee

    George C. Rains Sr. Estate

    Member SMP Advisory Committee

    TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

    Grandfathered is non-conforming.

    The statistics introduced at the last SMP Advisory meeting, on how many private property owners, property and single family dwellings will become non-conforming by the SMP Draft marine 175′, 150′ plus 10′ setbacks, has not been posted on the SMP web site. (the number was staggering)

    PER CATHY LEAR, they are waiting to compile the historic statistics to show the number of how many private property owners, property and single family dwellings were non-conforming on the old SMP marine setbacks. (hindsight is 20/20)

    How have the DOE restrictions, regulations and definitions on/of non-conforming property changed since 1976?

    I wrote the following as a tongue in cheek comment on the 2012 SMP Update.

    After seeing the statistics on non-conforming private marine property at the last SMP meeting, it is not funny, it is frightening.

    2013 OLYMPIC PENINSULA CLASSIFIED AD

    FOR SALE VIEW   LOT ON THE BEAUTIFUL STRAITS OF JUAN DE FUCA

    100FEET X400FEET

    Seller disclosure as required by Clallam County 2012 SMP Update and WA State law

    This is a 100% non-conforming lot

    There is a 175 foot setback from the HWL

    The is a 150 setback from the feeder bluff

    There is a 65 foot wetland setback

    There is a 50 foot buffer zone

    There is a 10 foot setback from buildings

    THE GOOD NEWS

    The buyer is left with 25% of his private property purchase, a 100X100 foot piece of private property (with a 75% loss of his usable private land where the buyer is free to put his 1700 sq foot home, his drain field, his parking and his deck and his garden.

    The buyer will be allowed a 20 foot view corridor (20’X300′) through the 300 feet of restricted use area of his private property. (leaving 80% of his view blocked)

    The buyer will be allowed to limb up and remove 30% of the vegetation blocking his view every 10 years on the 100 X 300 foot restricted use area of his private property.

    The buyer will be allowed a 6 foot wide foot path through the 300 foot restricted use area (in the view corridor) of his private property and home to the beach. (a full city block from beach)

    Using a variance and a geological study you may be able to reduce the setbacks and buffer zones.

    But the best news of all is the assurance by the Planning Dept. that your private property will not have any loss of value due to Clallam County’s 2012 SMP Draft restrictions and regulations.


  • Discovery Clallam Co SMP Update 2009-2017

    Discovery on the Clallam County SMP Update 2009-2017

    My DISCOVERY on the 2017 DCD SMP Update Draft  IS NOT IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, It is the cumulative documents I have uncovered  and DISCOVERED over an eight year period of time. And includes recent public information requests.

    My first public meeting on the SMP Update, Jan 26, 2011 went something like this.

    Hello Country Bumpkins,  my name is Margaret Clancy, this is Jim Kramer, we are from ESA Adolfson, and we’re here to help you.

    UNFORTUNATELY, none of THE 2017 BOCC were in office in 2011, and the ones that were  in office BOCC did not attend that meeting.

    Lois, Sue and Prosecuting Attorney Mark Nichols did attend that Jan 26, 2011  meeting.

    Feb 1, 2011 my PDN published opinion “If the Clallam County SMP Update is anything like the one in Port Townsend, anybody that lives within 150 feet of a mud puddle should be concerned”

    ESA Adolfson Margaret Clancy did the SMP Update for Jefferson County.

    That was my published opinion in Feb 1, 2011  and I’m sticking with it Nov 4, 2017

    City Slickers should never underestimate the intelligence and tenacity of  Clallam County  Country Bumpkins et al.

    I researched ESA Adolfson Margaret Clancy and Jim Kramer, online,  prior to the Jan 26, 2011 meeting

    My trail of DISCOVERY on Nov 5, 2017, extends back to Dec 5, of 2009 and is documented.

    My DISCOVERY on the 2017 DCD SMP Update Draft  IS NOT IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, It is the cumulative documents I have uncovered  and DISCOVERED over an eight year period of time. And includes recent public information requests.

    Attachments:
    Hewett_doc_pdf.pdf

    Attachments:
    signed_ESA_full_contract-22_pgs.pdf
    SMA_Grant_Agr_G1000062.pdf

    The Clallam County 2017 SMP Update has reached a critical point, the Planning Dept under the direction of elected DCD Director Mary Ellen Winborn, in collaboration with Ecology’s local coordinator DOE Michelle McConnel, ESA paid Facilitator Margaret Clancy and Steve Gray have approved “THEIR” 2017 SMP  Update Draft.

    The SMP Update Draft is now being examined by our ELECTED Board of Commissioners, Bill Peach (R), Randy Johnson (I) and Mark Ozias (D).

    ———————————————————————————————

    October 21, 2017 A Concerned member of the planning commission sent me the following

    Re: The DCD 2017 SMP Draft Update

    —– Original Message —–

    Fromxxxx

    To: pearl hewett

    Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2017 5:12 PM

    I made as many changes as I could to the SMP, insisting that “grandfathering” stay in (it kept disappearing), not developing in tsunami zones be completely removed,  and a hundred other things.  Couldn’t make any progress on buffers, setbacks, and floodplain.  After 7 years it was time to move it off our table and let the county commissioners weigh in.  Bill Peach and I have had many conversations about SMP.

    It’s good to hear from you Pearl

    ———————————————————————————-

    Re: The DCD 2017 SMP Draft Update

    April 12, 2011 DISCOVERY on Nov 2, 2017

    April 12, 2011 The Adolfson woman told the group they are going to completely rewrite our SMP and we won’t even recognize it when they are done?

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 7:57 AM

    Subject: Re: Clallam County Shoreline Master Program

    I did go to the Public Meeting at the Senior Center last night (April 11, 2011) 5:30 to 8:30. It was where people where broken into groups based on their interest.

    Private property owner’s on the Elwha are being washed out and very concerned.

    Lakes were not on Adolfson’s /Jim Kramer’s agenda, but due to popular demand, Lake Sutherland people finally got a chance to be heard. 

    I sat in on their lake meeting. It was run by an Adolfson woman and documented by Jim from the Planning Dept. They came to a consensus regarding the 35 foot setback, repairing existing structures and public access.

    They want clarification and specific requirements on the revised SMP.

    The Adolfson woman told the group they are going to completely rewrite our SMP and we won’t even recognize it when they are done?

    FYI

    Pearl

    —————————————————————————

    Re: Nov 5, 2017 for my DISCOVERY on the DCD 2017 SMP Draft Update

    As a responsible member of the so called SMP Update Advisory Committee, to verify that the 2017 SMP UPDATE DRAFT  has indeed, been completely rewritten by ESA Adolfson, and we (I)  won’t even recognize it when they are done.

    I am requesting a paper copy of the DCD 2017 SMP Update Draft.

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Mary Ellen Winborn

    Cc: Bill Peach ; mark mozias ; Randy Johnson

    Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 8:35 AM

    Subject: Requesting a copy of the 2017 SMP Update Draft

    To DCD Director Mary Ellen Winbourn

     I am requesting a paper copy of the DCD 2017 SMP Update Draft.

    I can pick it up at the court house when it’s ready.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    RE: SMP Update Advisory Committee

    (360) 417-9452

    235 W 5th St

    Port Angeles WA 98362

    ———————————————————————

    I requested a paper copy of the 2012 SMP Draft Update, received it and read the whole thing.

    —————————————————————-

    DISCOVERY April 17, 2011

    ESA ADOLFSON WA STATE SMP COOKIE CUTTERS

    SMP COOKIE CUTTING April 17, 2011

     Interestingly enough the name Kramer and co. (Adolfson?) was mentioned.

    ESA Margaret Clancy and Kramer  did Jefferson County and Port Townsend? SMP

    Someone said that Jefferson County just let a cookie cutter SMP be done?

     April 17, 2011

    THE TIP OF THE ESA ADOLFSON COOKIE CUTTING IN WA STATE SMP UPDATES

     IF YOU LOOK ON LINE FOR ESA ADOLFSON CONSULTANTS MARGARET CLANCY AND JIM KRAMER YOU WON’T FIND THEM UNDER COOKIE CUTTERS,

    HOWEVER YOU WILL FIND THEM  ASSOCIATED WITH  24 COOKIE CUTTING SMP UPDATES IN WA STATE.  

     CITY OF TACOMA, CLALLAM COUNTY, CITY OF SAMMISH, KENMORE, ISSAQUAH, WOODWAY, PIERCE COUNTY, MASON COUNTY, ISLAND COUNTY,CITY OF SHORELINE, WHATCOM COUNTY, VANCOUVER, TUKWILLA, DUVALL, CLARK COUNTY, LACEY, GIG HARBOR, MULKITO, RENTON, JEFFERSON COUNTY, CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, EATONVILLE, PUYALLUP, CITY OF UNIVERSITY PLACE AND THE CITY OF LOWELL IN OREGON. 

    WHATCOM COUNTY WA PLANNERS AND ESA ADOLFSON PAID  CONSULTANTS/ FACILITATORS  MADE UP THEIR OWN RULES ON THE WHATCOM COUNTY SMP UPDATE? AND THEIR COMMISSIONERS LEGISLATED THOSE RULES INTO LAW?

    AND THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED …..

    THE CASE IS LUHRS V. WHATCOM COUNTY,  A 10 YEAR LEGAL BATTLE, , WITH WHATCOM COUNTY TAXPAYERS PAYING TO FIGHT AGAINST A SHORELINE PROPERTY OWNER  LEGAL RIGHT, WA STATE LAW ( RCW 90.58.100 ) THAT SPECIFICALLY GIVES COASTAL LANDOWNERS THE RIGHT TO PROTECT THEIR HOMES FROM EROSION.

    WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN CLALLAM COUNTY NOW THAT THE  DCD PLANNERS AND ESA ADOLFSON  FACITITATORS MADE UP THEIR OWN RULES ON CLALLAM COUNTY 2017 SMP UPDATE?

    ——-

    DISCOVERY  Jefferson County – Michelle McConnell leaves for Ecology

    Posted on March 30, 2014 by Al B.

    AFTER EIGHT YEARS TOGETHER ON THE JEFFERSON COUNTY SMP UPDATE, ESA MARGARET CLANCY AND DOE MICHELLE McCONNELL ARE TOGETHER AGAIN, ANOTHER EXTREMELY HARD JOB, SHEPHERDING THE CLALLAM COUNTY PLANNING DEPT THRU THE CLALLAM COUNTY 2017 SMP UPDATE DRAFT.

    Michelle McConnell, who has been a stalwart at the Jefferson County Dept. of Community Development for many years, has chosen to leave and work for the Department of Ecology.

    Michelle has had the extremely hard job of shepherding the Shoreline Master Program through over the last 8 years.

    She has always been a steady hand and been a sea of calm in the midst of turbulent public meetings over the SMP. We will miss her guidance on these issues. No word on a replacement yet. Best of luck to Michelle in future endeavors.

    I’m pleased to announce I have accepted a new job and will be leaving DCD the week of April 7, 2014  my new position will be as a Shoreline Planner with WA Department of Ecology.

    —————————————————————————

    DISCOVERY  By May 5, 2011, I was an angry, concerned vested stakeholder of private shoreline property and a member of the appointed Citizens Advisory Committee

    050511 – PHewett – G

    • #70 We, as a Citizens Advisory Committee, are not there to give input, constructive comment, or recommendation, we are there to be indoctrinated on compliance, based on misleading pie charts and statistics compiled and presented by ESA Adolfson. “Reading out loud” by Pearl Hewett of WAC 173-26-191 illegal or unconstitutional.

    ——————————————————————-

    MY DISCOVERY on the DCD SMP Draft Update

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Jim Kramer

    Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 12:35 PM

    Subject: Re: Taking of Private Property for Public Access

    Jim,

    Eight months ago, I knew nothing about the DOE, EPA, MAB, the UN, ICLEI, HB 1478, Agenda 21, Dept. of the Interior, Water Rights, Federal Reserved water rights, SMP, WAC’s, RCW’s, Unresponsive Elected Officials, ESA Adolfson, World Historic Site, DNR, WFDW, WRIA’s 18,19,20, Wetlands, endangered species, wetland habitats, three RCW’s that protect private property owners, noxious weeds, shall I go on?

    Did you know that of 1700 acres of land on three Dungeness River reaches are over 700 acres are wetland habitat?

    Eight months ago, I had no voice.

    Read my Dad’s “Conspiracy Exposed” and the “Rest of the story.” Goggle “George C. Rains Sr.”

    My documented comments on the internet are well received and distributed.

    What will happen in eight months?  Do you read the SMP Public Comments?

    I’ll just keep sending my SMP Public Comments around and who knows?

    Pearl

    ————————————————————————————

    Hmmm… What will happen in THE NEXT EIGHT YEARS?  Do you read the SMP Public Comments? I’ll just keep sending my SMP Public Comments around and who knows?

    EIGHT YEARS  ago, I had no voice.

    Jan 29, 2013 my website/blog behindmyback.org went online

    WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LAST  EIGHT YEARS? 

    DISCOVERY AND MORE DISCOVERY AND MORE….

    Behind My Back | SMP Update-Six Years of Frustration

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/08/19/smpupdate-six-years-of-frustration

    SMP UPDATE – SIX YEARS OF FRUSTRATION I submit this as a Clallam County SMP Update Public Comment August 18, 2014 Pearl Rains Hewett Member of the Clallam County SMP …

    SMP Update Eight Years of Frustration

    Posted on November 2, 2017 5:40 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    SMP UPDATE – EIGHT YEARS OF FRUSTRATION I submit this as a Clallam County 2017 SMP Update Public Comment Nov 2, 2017  Pearl Rains Hewett, previous member of the 2011 so called Clallam County Advisory Committee, still a Concerned Citizen of Clallam County WA…

    ————————————————————

    What will happen in eight months? 

    November 03, 2017 8:02 AM

    Subject: Educate the BOCC

    I met with Commissioner Bill Peach for an hour on Oct 20, 2017

    I met with Prosecuting Attorney Mark Nicholas for one hour (follow the law)

    I met with Commissioner Mark Ozias on Nov 3, 2017

    I have a meeting with my elected Commissioner Randy Johnson Nov 8, 2017

    Does the BOCC have enough to make a good decision about the 2017 SMP Update?  Oct 30th, 2017 was their first worksession to figure it out.  The presentation by the DCD staff is posted to the SMP website and the worksession video can be viewed at the BOCC web page.

    Great question, Will the BOCC have enough to make a good decision about the 2017 SMP Update based on presentations provided by the DCD staff? 

     I THINK NOT!

    It is my intention to provide the BOCC with enough document information on the DCD 2017 SMP Update Draft to make an informed decision for, and in the best of  all citizens of Clallam County.

    What was I doing on October 30, 2017 Re: the DCD 2017 SMP Update Draft?

    A Public Records Request  ESA  full contract – 22 pgs.pdf

    What am I doing on Nov 3, 2017?

    Sending these documents to the  BOCC 

    And, meeting with Commissioner Mark Ozias, Re: the DCD 2017 SMP Update Draft.

    —————————————————————

    What will happen in eight months? who knows?

    Meanwhile this tenacious Clallam County Country Bumpkin  is doing the usual….

    I’ll just keep making more 2017 SMP Update Draft Public comments,  posting them on my website, and sending around in cyberspace.

    DISCOVERY to be continued….

    The nine unpaid volunteer members of the Clallam County Planning Commission V the paid Professionals,  DCD Director Mary Ellen Winborn and Sr. Planner Steve Gray, in collaboration with Ecology’s local coordinator DOE Michelle McConnel and ESA Adolfson overpaid Facilitator Margaret Clancy

     


  • SMP Update Concerns to Commissioners

    Oct 13, 2017 You, the elected Commissioners are now, at this late date, concerned about the Public Participation Strategy for the 2017 Clallam County SMP Update.

    You are planning open meetings, asking for public comments, and yes, you are planning the date for a public forum.

    ————————————————————————

    Just noting, 2010: The Clallam County Board of Commissioner’s expects to adopt a final SMP-Update Public Participation Strategy extended to March 16, 2010 @ 10 a.m. at the Board of Clallam County Commissioners Regular Meeting, 223 East 4th Street, Room 160, Port Angeles, Washington.

    ———————————————————————-

    Part one: Oct 13, 2017 , The history of us, the collective 3000 private shoreline property vested stakeholders? What happened to us between Dec 5, 2009 and Jan 26, 2011?

    Dec 5, 2009. the FIRST  public comment on the SMP Update was submitted and posted.

    Jan 26, 2011  The  SMP  Public participation strategy? The first, by invitation only SMP Update meeting was held  by  ESA Adolfson’s  paid, facilitators Margaret Clancy and Jim Kramer.

    Not one of  Clallam County’s elected representatives bothered to attended this meeting. Not, Commissioners’, Tharanger, Chapman, Doherty or DCD director Miller. It was a bureaucrats meeting.

    What you, the elected, don’t know, have been denied access to by bureaucrats,  about SMP Update  600 plus public comments can hurt all Clallam County citizens.

    ——————————————————————————-

    2009: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION STRATEGY

    ·         120509 – DemComm – G  #1  CLALLAM COUNTY DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE

    Resolution regarding County Shoreline Management Plan

     WHEREAS the nature of amendments to the plan as might be adopted by the Clallam County Board of Commissioners mayor may not adequately protect the quality of local waters from harmful development; and

    WHEREAS participation in the Shoreline Management Plan review process will be open to the public in a series of meetings over the next two years or more;

    THEREFORE be it resolved that the Clallam County Democratic Central Committee appoint a subcommittee of interested members to monitor the progress of the Shoreline Management Plan review, to suggest to the Central Committee communications to the county of the concerns or interests of Democrats in the elements of the plans and any proposed amendments, and to issue quarterly reports on the review process to the Central Committee.

    ·         December 5, 2009

    ————————————————————————-

    Bureaucrats created the final Clallam County Shoreline 2017 SMP Draft Update.

    Oct 13, 2017 I am just one concerned vested stakeholder of private shoreline property in Clallam County WA.

    However, what happens to one of us, on the Clallam County Shoreline Update (SMP) collectively happens to all 3000 of us.

    The SMP ball is now in your court. and just asking?  have you, the elected collectively, or as  an individual elected official, taken the time (due diligence) to visit and read the SMP public court of opinion,600 plus comments on the Clallam County WA SMP Update?

    What happened to the online 600 plus SMP Update Public Comments? You, the elected, are the now, the ultimate decision maker. Have the SMP Public comments of private property owners been taken into consideration by you as a Clallam County Commissioners in the final stages of SMP Update?

     —————————————————————–

    Part one: The history of us, the collective 3000? What happened to us?

    Jan 26, 2011, I was a concerned vested stakeholder of private shoreline property.

    I was one of  thirty (30) selected individuals, to be invited to attend the first Clallam County Shoreline Management Plan Update  (SMP) meeting.

    The meeting was presented by  ESA Adolfson’s  paid facilitators , Margaret Clancy and Jim Kramer.

    In spite of the fact that it was a  private public  meeting, by invitation only, sixty (60) concerned citizens showed up and packed the room.

    Not one of  Clallam County’s elected representatives bothered to attended this meeting.

    Not, Commissioners’, Tharanger, Chapman, Doherty or DCD director Miller. It was a bureaucrats meeting.

    When I complained about it at a commissioners public meeting, after the meeting Commissioner Chapman insulted me, and said if I didn’t like the way things were going I should sign up for the SMP Update Citizens Advisory Committee.

    I did, I was appointed by DCD Miller.

    Cathy Lear said I must read everything. I did and that was when I started making Public SMP Update Comments.

    —————————————————–

    By May 5, 2011,

    I was an angry, concerned vested stakeholder of private shoreline property and a member of the appointed Citizens Advisory Committee

    050511 – PHewett – G

      #70 We, as a Citizens Advisory Committee, are not there to give input, constructive comment, or recommendation, we are there to be indoctrinated on compliance, based on misleading pie charts and statistics compiled and presented by ESA Adolfson. “Reading out loud” by Pearl Hewett of WAC 173-26-191 illegal or unconstitutional.

    —————————————————————————-

    By July 07, 2012, I  was a very frustrated, angry, concerned vested stakeholder of private shoreline property and  a member of the Citizens Advisory Committee

    July 7, 2012 I was so concerned about the SMP Update I compiled the

    COMPLETE LIST OF CLALLAM COUNTY DOE SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS 2009-2012

    I am concerned with, the comment numbers with no comments? The fact that it took me 12 hours to compile the following information?

    Unfortunately the links 2009-2012 SMP public comments  are not  linked to the SMP Update

    Not one of Clallam County elected representative from 2011 is still in office.

    Please note, there is only one county employee, Steve Gray, still employed by Clallam County that is still rewriting and revising the SMP Update. Unless? County employee Cathy Lear is representing someone?

    And, Steve is still being directed  by the ESA Adolfson  paid consultant, facilitator  Margret Clancy.

    Just saying, Margaret Clancy is not legally responsible for whatever content she and Steve decide to put into the SMP Update.

    Just asking? Have Clallam County elected representatives sought or received any legal counsel?

    Am I concerned? YOU BET…

    ARE YOU CONCERNED? Read the 2009-2012 comments, go find and read the 600 plus SMP public comments,. You, the elected, not bureaucrats, are responsible for the fate of Clallam County, you are the ultimate and final SMP Update decision makers.

    SHOULD YOU, THE ELECTED BE CONCERNED?  You decide.

    A concerned vested stakeholder of private shoreline property in Clallam County WA.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Trustee George C.Rains Sr. Estate

    —————————————————————

    July 07, 2012 COMPLETE LIST OF CLALLAM COUNTY DOE SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS 2009-2012

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: undisclosed concerned citizens and elected officials

    Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2012 10:02 AM

    THE SHORT FORM IS AN EMAIL

    CLICK ON THE TOP LINK TO READ THE FULL 6300 WORD DOCUMENT

    Subject: COMPLETE LIST OF CLALLAM COUNTY DOE SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS 2009-2012

     

    • TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
    • If you want to read the  full SMP comment? Go to the Clallam County SMP website. Click on Public comments. Identify the comment by using the name and the date (no comment #  is displayed).
    • I am concerned with, the comment numbers with no comments? The fact that it took me 12 hours to compile the following information? If the online Public Comments will be compiled? Read by the decision makers? And if the comments of private property owners will be taken into considereration by the Planning Dept. and the Clallam County Commissioners in the final SMP Update? Public Forums are being scheduled and the private property owners of Clallam County need to be advised.
    • Pearl Rains Hewett concerned member of the DOE SMP Advisory Committee
    • 050511 – PHewett – G
    • #70 We, as a Citizens Advisory Committee, are not there to give input, constructive comment, or recommendation, we are there to be indoctrinated on compliance, based on misleading pie charts and statistics compiled and presented by ESA Adolfson. “Reading out loud” by Pearl Hewett of WAC 173-26-191 illegal or unconstitutional.
    •  

    COMPLETE LIST OF CLALLAM COUNTY DOE SMP COMMENTS 2009-2012

    July:

    ·         070212 – RKonopaski – G

    ·         #284 clarifying the setbacks on marine shorelines?

    June:

    ·         062312 – ESpees – G

    ·         #283 excessive 175-150 + 10 foot setbacks

    ·         061712 – PHewett – G

    ·         #282 DOE private meeting

    ·         061412 – PHewett – G

    ·         #281 150′ wetland setbacks Futurewise and Grays Harbor

    ·         061412 – PHewett – SED

    ·         #280 WHAT IS THE ECONOMIC FUTURE OF CLALLAM COUNTY?

    ·         061112 – PHewett – G

    ·         # 279 See Nollan, 483 U.S. 825, 837 (1987). precautionary setbacks

    ·         060912 – PHewett – G

    ·         #278 25  No setback increases See Nollan, 483 U.S. 825, 837 (1987).

    ·         060712 – PHewett – G

    ·         #277 Citizens’ Alliance for Property Rights v. Sims. 65% taking violates law

    ·         060312 – ESpees – G

    ·         #276 No taking of private property for public access

    May:

    ·         053012 – PHewett – SED

    ·         #275 RE-DESIGNATE TO FRESHWATER RURAL

    ·         052912 – PHewett – G

    ·         #274 fight back COORDINATION PROCESS 43 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1712

    ·         052412 – RCahill – SMPdraft

    ·         #273 the spirit and intent of the Department of Ecology’s Shore land’s and Environmental Assistance, publication number 09-06-029, shall and should, be changed to may.

    ·         052212 – JBlazer – SED

    ·         #272 The problem… my parcel and the 2 parcels to the south would be hard pressed to build residences that take advantage of the marine view using the 175 ft setback in the proposed designation of Freshwater Conservancy.

    ·         052112 – MBlack – SMPdraft

    ·         #271 The overall concern I have is that you are in fact taking future uses away from private land holders without clearly acknowledging doing so.

    ·         051712 – PHewett – G

    ·         #270 problem SELLING AND BUYING DOE SMP NON-CONFORMING PROPERTY

    ·         051612 – PHewett – PPS

    ·         #269 SMP Public Forum participation

    ·         051512 – ASoule – SMPdraft

    ·         #268 SMP references to sea level rise

    ·         051212 – PHewett – G

    ·         #267 FORKS SMP PUBLIC FORUM problems  MAY 10, 2012

    ·         051212 – KNorman – SED

    ·         #266 I hope that you will reconsider the classification of these lots based on this information as to do otherwise would be a severe hardship on the owners of the lots and would constitute a “taking” of the land.

    ·         051112 – FutureWise-PPS – SMPdraft

    ·         #265 Clallam County v. Futurewise 7 years + lawsuit Carlsborg. The current SMP updates are an opportunity to significantly improve protection for the straits and the county’s other shorelines.

    ·         050812 – EBowen – G20

    ·         #264  S. Gray to Ed Bowen long overdue Final Draft WRIA 20 Preliminary SMP Elements Report

    ·         050812 – WFlint – SED

    ·         #263  redesignateThe Lower Lyre River should be designated as Freshwater Residential (FRSD), and not Freshwater Conservancy (FC) as it is now proposed.

    ·         050812 – PHewett – G

    ·         #262 SCIENTIFIC PAPERS AND THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW DOE has consistently ignored questions asked on SMP comments, posted on the Clallam County SMP Update website, and at SMP Advisory meetings. I am requesting answers to the following questions to comply with the core principles of Due Process and the DOE SMP taking of private property in Clallam County.

    ·         050712 – USFWS – SMPdraft

    ·         #261  The Service strongly supports maintaining the feeder bluffs in their natural functioning condition.

    ·         050612 – PHewett – G

    ·         #260 If it is not recorded with the Clallam County Auditor’s Office it is not on the Property Title. What should be recorded with the Auditor’ s office for Public Record?

    ·         050512 – ESpees – G

    ·         #259 The premise of the SMA/SMP Undate ‘that there is and environmental crisis’ that requires a draconian governmental intervention is bogus.

    ·         050412 – LMuench – G

    ·         #258 I think you would best be served by showing shrubs as well as trees. Since the graphics are done, what about a red arrow pointing to the trees saying “may be limbed for views.” This is a major issue with shoreline land owners.

    ·         050412 – ESpees – G

    ·         #257 The negative ECONOMIC IMPACT of the DoE imposed SMA/SMP Update for 2012 will be staggering!!!

    ·         050412 – PHewett – G

    ·         #256 Clallam County DOE SMP update, written text, uses our safety and protection as an excuse to take, restrict and control the use/development of our private property.

    ·         050312 – JBettcher – G

    ·         #255 I appreciate the public benefit of a healthy ecosystem but oppose the taking of private property by prohibiting private landowners from applying the best engineering practices to resist natural whims.

    ·         050212 – PHewett – G

    ·         #254 REAL ESTATE LOW MARKET VALUE OF NON-CONFORMING PROPERTY

    April:

    ·         042812 – PHewett – G

    ·         #253 Increased Ins.FEMA AND OTHER POLICY SPECIFIC INSURANCE COVERAGE

    ·         042812 – PHewett – G

    ·         #252 House Bill 2671  If a county appeals the (DOE) Department of Ecology’s final action on their local shoreline master program and  the appeal is given to the Growth Management Hearings Board?

    ·         042812 – PHewett – G

    ·         #251 No. 87053-5 lawsuit against GMA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

    ·         042612 – PHewett -G

    ·         #250 CLALLAM COUNTY- County NEGLECT OF WIRA 20 SMP PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS

    ·         042112 – Spees – G

    ·         #249 this insane outrageous governmental over reach under the thinly veiled cover of saving the environment. The problem now is not the environment.

    ·         042112 – PHewett – G

    ·         #248 PARTIAL DISCLOSURE OF negative SMP IMPACT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS

    ·         041812 – PHewett – G

    ·         #247 The statistics introduced 474 at the last SMP Advisory meeting, on how many private property owners, property and single family dwellings will become non-conforming by the SMP Draft marine 175′, 150′ plus 10′ setbacks, has not been posted on the SMP web site.

    ·         041712 – Port of PA – G

    ·         #246 Excessive buffers Table 4.1 the proposed draft buffer in row “a” should be modified from 100’ to 50’

    March:

    ·         032912 – PHewett – G

    ·         #245 THE MOST UNSCIENTIFIC PARTS OF THE DOE CLALLAM COUNTY SMP ARE, that even with DOE’S 1616 employees and a billion dollar budget.DOE doesn’t have a single analyst capable of compiling and reporting the most important documented/published scientific statistics provided by The Clallam County Inventory and Characteristic reports.

    ·         032612 – PHewett – G

    ·         #244 ESA Adolfson’s consultant’s failure to comply with WA State Law RCW 90.58.100 Each master program shall contain standards governing the protection of single family residences and appurtenant structures against damage or loss due to shoreline erosion.

    ·         032512 – PHewett – G20

    ·         #243 WIRA 20 Sol Duc River Reach 80 needs to be re-designated on proposed draft to 3.1.1.4 Freshwater Conservancy (FC)

    ·         032312 – RCrittenden – SMPdraft

    ·         #242 Thus, all regulation is evil by its nature and it is repressive. The best regulations are those that are the least that is necessary to accomplish their intended legitimate purpose. And “legitimate” is not to be broadly construed.

    ·         032212 – PHewett/RCrittenden – G

    ·         #241 Dr. Robert N. Crittenden SMP critical comments, testimony, tables and reviews

    ·         032112 – OEC – SMPdraft

    ·         #240  Change “should” to “shall” ,,,,culverts, and bridges shall be conducted using best practices….

    ·         031712 – PHewett – G

    ·         #239 Who controls PATENT LAND GRANTS ISSUED PRIOR TO STATEHOOD

    ·         031412 – MBarry – G

    ·         #238 These shorelines are critical for wildlife and natural ecological functions. I favor large setbacks. I favor development restrictions

    ·         030912 – PHewett – G/NNL

    ·         #237 Mitigation is for the rich Building Permit 2012-00014 issued to owners, David and Maria Tebow, Battle Creek MI. Two story 4 bedroom house 4770 sq feet, garage 927 sq feet, covered deck 173 sq feet with 19 plumbing drains (Number of Bathrooms?) Setbacks 60/25/25 Project value $486,781.18. the written guarantee bythe Clallam County DCD of no net loss to ecological functions (documented on building permit)

    ·         030512 – ESpees – SMPdraft

    ·         #236 There is no way that these voluminous shoreline land use policies can be understood. It takes no imagination to understand that this process is not ‘due process’ in the taking of beneficial use of our Private Property

    ·         030412 – PHewett – SMPdraft

    ·         #235 DOE Public Trust Doctrine web site (88 pages) has gone missing, creating law by rule

    ·         030312 – KAhlburg – SMPdraft

    ·         #234 The last sentence runs directly counter to this assurance and needs to be modified or deleted. It otherwise will constitute yet another unfunded mandate burdening the County and “other entities” (which ones?).

    ·         030212 – PHewett – NNL/SMPdraft

    ·         #233 Lake Sutherland is a perfect example of Ecology’s NO NET LOSS.

    ·         With a 35 foot setback since 1976 there is no net loss of ecological function in Lake Sutherland.

    ·         030112 – MarineResourcesCouncil – SMPdraft

    ·         #232 It may also be possible that under certain development conditions, if done to minimize impervious surface and maximize water infiltration, could enhance the function of the buffer and perhaps allow for a narrower buffer.

    February:

    ·         022812 – FutureWise – SMPdraft

    ·         #231 The first half establishes the expected character of shoreline buffers, and is well stated. But the second half goes on to state that only 80% of the buffer vegetation is protected, and that 20% can be used for lawns and other use areas.

    ·         022812 – PHewett – NNL

    ·         #230 NO NET LOSS MENTIONED In law RCW 36.70A.480 but has never been defined (4) Shoreline master programs shall provide a level of protection to critical areas located within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources as defined by department of ecology guidelines adopted pursuant to RCW 90.58.060.

    ·         022812 – PHewett – NNL

    ·         #229 The policies, goals, and provisions of chapter 90.58 RCW and applicable guidelines shall be the sole basis for determining compliance of a shoreline master program

    ·         022712 – WDOE- SMP Statue

    ·         #228 Gordon White letter dated Feb. 27,2012 page 4, disclaimer of creating enforceable state LAW by rule on Page 88 of the WA State Public Trust Doctrine.

    ·         022412 – QuileuteNation – SMPdraft

    ·         #227 TRIBAL comment

    January:

    ·         010312 – LowerElwhaKlalllamTribe – SED

    ·         #226 TRIBAL comment

     

     

    WHATEVER? Error! Filename not specified.

    SMP Comments 2011:

    December:

    ·         120811 – PHewett – G

    ·         #225 PROBLE  WETLANDS NOT ON SMP MAPS Attachments: Lowell OREGON Local Wetland Inventory Report DRAFT.docx

    ·         120811 – PHewett – G

    ·         #224 Perkins and Coie  Your Request on Tacoma SMP Attachments: 12-13-10 letter to Gary Brackett.pdf; SMA and Public Access.pdf legal paper against SMP taking

    ·         120711 –OlympicEnvironmentalCouncil (OEC) – G

    ·         #223 Sea level  rise and climate change

    ·         120611 – WDOE- ICR20

    ·         #222  Draft WRIA 20 Inventory and Characterization

    November:

    ·         113011 – ESpees – G

    ·         #221 In the WRIA Process and the SMA/SMP Update Process the concept of State regulation of land use based on Feeder Bluffs and Littoral Drift Cells is a False Construct.

    ·         112511 – ESpees – G

    ·         #220 The DoE’s current cram-down of NNL and increased set-backs based on precautionary principle and ‘new understandings of science’ (non-science/non-sense/pseudo-science) should be rejected.

    ·         112411 – ESpees – G

    ·         #219 Impact on all stakeholders It’s content is extremely pertinent to the work we are doing in Clallam County’s SMA/SMP Update.

    ·         111611 – MPfaff-Pierce – SED

    ·         #218 Specifically, I am requesting that you reclassify the entire Whiskey Creek Beach Resort area as Modified Lowland. Right now you are proposing that a short area west of the creek be designated as Modified Lowland and the rest as High Bank.

    ·         111111 – JPetersen – SED

    ·         #217 Many activities would be prohibited without really looking at the specifics.

    ·         111011 – PHewett – G

    ·         #216 This is on the DOE Public Trust Doctrine web site (88 pages)”Finally, SMP’S, unlike other comprehensive plans, are adopted as WAC’S and become part of the state’s Shoreline Master Program. As such, all local SMP rules, regulations, designations and guidelines BECOME STATE LAW AND ARE ENFORCEABLE. in this manner, protection of public trust resources and uses becomes binding.”

    ·         110711 – PHewett – G

    ·         #215 SMP FOLLOW THE LETTER OF THE LAW not the WAC’S

    ·         110711 – PHewett – G

    ·         #214 Court: Washington Supreme Court Docket: 84675-8 Opinion Date: August 18, 2011 Judge: Johnson Areas of Law: Environmental Law, Government & Administrative Law, Zoning, Planning & Land Use Applicable Law and Analysis. In affirming the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court explained that even though there is significant local government involvement in the creation of SMPs, the process is done in the shadow of the Department of Ecology’s (DOE) control.

    ·         110711 – PHewett – G

    ·         #213 the Shoreline Management Act dictates that the Department of Ecology retains control over the final contents and approval of SMPs. Therefore, SMP regulations are the product of state action and are not subject to RCW 82.02.020.”

    ·         110611 – PHewett – G

    ·         #212 EXCLUDED SMP DOE WAC’S DO NOT BECOME LAW

    ·         110511 – ESpees – NNL

    ·         #211 In keeping with regard to no net loss was unclear and without any foundation.

    ·         110511 – ESpees – G

    ·         #210 The law has recently been perverted by State Agencies to usurp private property rights, an uncompensated State taking by regulation.

    ·         110511 – PHewett – G

    ·         #209 There is no WA State law requiring any taking of private property for public access on the Clallam County SMP Update.

    ·         110411 – PHewett – G

    ·         #208 WHO CAN STOP DOE WAC’S FROM BECOMING STATE LAWS?

    ·         110411 – PHewett – G

    ·         #207 Victory for PLF Whatcom County’s shoreline management rules conflict with state law, which mandates that counties “shall provide for methods which achieve effective and timely protection against loss or damage to single family residences and appurtenant structures due to shoreline erosion.” RCW 90.58.100.

    ·         110411 – PHewett – G

    ·         #206 BY Law there is NO mention of the words “imminent or danger or soft armoring” IF THIS WORDING IS USED ON THE CLALLAM COUNTY SMP, IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT IT CONTRADICTS WA STATE LAW RCW 90.58.100 Protection of single family residences IT WILL BECOME CLALLAM COUNTY LAW.

    ·         110311 – WDFW – ICR

    ·         #205 A useful tool may be to describe, in general, the range of possible existing conditions within any portion of the shoreline.

    ·

    October:

    ·         103111 – WDOE – ICR

    ·         #204  Not a copy format

    ·         103111 – JLarson – ICR

    ·         #203 I made at last SMP-WG meeting be incorporated into record

    ·         102011 – PHewett – SED

    ·         # 202 Who’s toes will you be stepping on by using this? Will you be able to notify the private property owners that are inadvertently compromised? Are there any single family residences, in any areas, where you have not specifically provided comment on protection by Law?

    ·         102011 – PHewett – SED

    ·         #201 Is this another WAC overstepping it’s authority and the LAW?

    ·         101911 – PHewett – NNL

    ·         #200 The concept of no net loss in this State originated with earlier efforts to protect wetlands. In 1989, Governor Booth Gardner signed an Executive Order establishing a statewide goal regarding wetlands protection.

    ·         101811 – JEstes – G

    ·         #199 There are 3,289 shoreline property owners in Clallam County about to be subject to further regulation and restriction on the use of their land.

    ·         101711 – PHewett – G

    ·          #198 Unconstitutional Conditions of  WAC 173-26-191 Some master program policies may not be fully attainable by regulatory means due to the constitutional and other legal limitations on the regulation of private property.

    ·         101711 – WSP – ICR20

    ·         #197 Any additional comments on the two Clallam County SMP Inventory and Characterizations Reports are due by October 31, 2011

    ·         101111 – PHewett – G

    ·         #196 WAC’S ARE NOT LAW’S? Guidelines Are Not Law’s? Rules Are Not Law’s?

    ·         100811 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #195 WAC 365-195-905 Criteria for determining which information is the best available science

    ·         100611 – PHewett – G

    ·         #194 REMOTE VIEWING AND SPACIAL DATA I did not find a State- of- the art- GSI and remote sensing facility for WA State?

    No b comment for #193?

    ·         100411 – PHewett – G/ICR

    ·         #192 Please bring the SMP Public Comments up to date.

    ·         100311 – JTatom – G

    ·         #191 As a property owner in Clallam County, I cannot imagine that you, as servants of the county, would even consider placing additional restrictions on residents who live near shorelines (marine, rivers, streams and lakes). Already we find ourselves so restricted that we are unable to use large portions

    ·         of our “privately” owned property.

    ·         100111 – PHewett – G

    ·         #190 Is it the intent, of two Elected County Commissioners, that total control of all private property in Clallam County, be given to the Federal Government and the WA State DOE, one way or the other?

    September:

    ·         092611 – PHewett – G/ICR

    ·         #189 Taking of Private Property for Public Access I insist that ESA Adolfson give us the total land acreage of private property that is affected by the SMP Update subject to NO NET LOSS and taking for Public Access.

    ·         092511 – PHewett – G

    ·         #188 private property owners pay for Noxious Weed Control ‐ LMD#2 Lake Sutherland

    There is no #187  public comment?

    ·         092211 – PHewett – G

    ·         #186 SHORELINE RESIDENTS SWAMPED BY REGULATIONS

    ·         092211 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #185 I tried to stress the fact that it is not lack of public land, it is the lack of public access to that publically owned land,that is the problem.

    ·         092211 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #184 CLALLAM COUNTY SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERISTIC REPORT Based on the “Best Available Science?”

    ·         092211 – JamestownSKlallamTribe – ICR

    ·         #183 Tribal comment

    ·         091311 – LowerElwhaKlallamTribe – ICR

    ·         #182 Tribal comment

    ·         091011 – PHewett – G

    ·         #181 CLALLAM COUNTY SECTION 35.01.150 Real property assessments. PROTECTION FOR LOSS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY VALUE?  The restrictions imposed by the Shoreline Master Program shall be considered by the County Assessor in establishing the fair market value of the property.

    ·         091011 – PHewett – G

    ·         #180 PUBLIC COMMENT REPORT ON SMP Public Forum July 14, 2011 every public comment and question asked.

    ·         090411 – JLewis – CR/ICR

    ·         #179 Public access across our property through our wetlands and over our berm to our private beach would be of great concern to us. Here are some questions and concerns we’d like addressed and you consider amending the provisions for providing public shoreline access:

    ·         090311 – ESpees – G

    ·         #178 The Drift Cells, Littoral Drift, and

    ·         Feeder Bluffs Construct are so much BS/Smoke and Mirrors.

    ·         090311 – ESpees – G

    ·         #177 The Shoreline Master Program Update is rigged. NNL & larger setbacks do not represent the ‘will of the people’. It does not protect the rights of the Citizens.

    ·         090211 – ESpees – G

    ·         #176 I gave my opinion about ‘locking up’ shorelines property based on salmon and endangered species as a pretext

    August:

    ·         083111 – WDNR – ICR

    ·         #175 THREAT? Incidentally, many of the docks and other development may

    ·         encroach onto State owned aquatic lands without proper DNR authorization.

    ·         083111 – MarineResourcesCouncil – ICR

    ·         #174 There is obviously no “ground truthing” of the information in this report.

    ·         083111 – JLWisecup – G

    ·         #173 It lists it as a slide area although for the past 32 years we have had no indication of any land movement or building shift.

    ·         083111 – ESpees – G

    ·         #172 It is more loony insanity being foisted on the Citizens of the State of Washington by a Government and their agents that are out of control.

    ·         083111 – ESpees -G

    ·         171 The SMA/SMP and the WRIA processes are a means of locking up, transferring ownership to the State, and regulating the use of these areas/preventing private economic and other beneficial use of these prime areas.

    ·         082811 – PHewett – G

    ·         #170 SILT DAMAGE FROM ELWHA TO DUNGENESS SPIT?

    ·         082511 – ElwhaMorseMgmtTeam – ICRMaps

    ·         #169  Chris Byrnes commented on the yellow dots off shore (indicating “no appreciable drift”), argued that if it was so small, there wouldn’t be drifting anyway.

    ·         082511 – CoastalWatershedInstitute – ICR

    ·         #168 The characterization needs to be revised to include existing CLALLAM specific information and appropriate relevant recommendations that are in this existing information.

    ·         082511 – DAbbott – G

    ·         #167 I would like to see every effort made to ensure the constitutional rights of private property ownership made by those who have influence in our lawmaking process. These rights have been encroached upon over the years and there is a renewed concern today by many private citizens.

    ·         082411 – PHewett – G

    ·         #166 WA State SMP is requiring Public access on private property at the expense of the property owner.

    There is no comment#164

    There is no comment #163

    ·         081011 – MarineResourcesCouncil – ICR

    ·         #162 I urge you to look at the reach/s or resource issues within all reaches for accuracy, omissions, and errors.

    ·         There is no comment #161

    ·

    ·         081011 – WSP – ICR

    ·         #160 not able to copy

    ·          

    ·         There is no comment #159

    ·          

    ·         There is no comment #158

    ·          

    ·         080511 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #157 A huge treat to Private Property owners.Wetlands are not included on SMP Update maps showing the areas that are a threat and risk of development.

    ·

    ·         There is no comment #156

    ·

    ·         There is no comment #155

    ·

    ·         080111 – FutureWise – ICR

    ·         #154 The Sierra Club

    July:

    ·         072611 – WASeaGrant – ICR

    ·         #153 Coastal Hazards Specialist

    There is not comment #152

    ·         072211 – PHewett – G

    ·         #151 Fact or Fiction, It is illegal to collect water in a rain barrel?

    ·         The State owns all rainwater?

    ·         072011 – CCPlCom – ICR

    ·         #150 The July Forum attendance was low and those that attended appeared to be struggling with the information presented and the questions to ask.

    There is no comment #149

    ·         072011 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #148 Marine and Fresh water reach’s impaired by water temperature for fish recovery

    ·         072011 – PHewett – G

    ·         #147 Freshwater reaches impaired by water temperature (32) Marine reaches impaired by water temperature (6) Contaminated Marine Reaches (5)

    ·         Contaminated Freshwater Reaches (2) plus several

    ·         072011 – ESpees – G

    ·         #146 What the hell does NNL (No Net Loss of ecological function) mean? What is the plan for the amount of setbacks? What is the basis of this vague indefinable policy?

    ·         072011 – PHewett – ICR20

    ·         #145 On page 5-14 HOKO_RV_05 is not listed. Shore line length 3.8 miles and Reach area 246.40 acres 100% timber

    ·         071711 – PHewett – G

    ·         #144 TOP TEN PUBLIC SMP UPDATE CONCERNS

    ·         071711 – ESpees – G

    ·         #143 Tribes not affected by Shoreline Mgmt. Plan Updates

    ·         071611 – ESpees – G

    ·         #142 the DoE/EPA attempt to strip the Citizens of their private property rights.

    ·         071611 – ESpees – G

    ·         #141 It uses Drift Cells and Littoral Drift as excuses to take away private use and protections of private property. This has to do with ‘feeder bluffs’

    ·         071211 – TSimpson – ICR

    ·         #140 Page 6-12 Needs Correction :Lines 19-22

    ·         071211 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #139 COLD ENOUGH? For Salmon Recovery?

    ·         Based on their own reports and data, the amount of tree canopy, logging, development and public access are NOT factors in the impaired water temperature? Perhaps 50 years ago the water WAS cold enough?

    ·         071211 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #138 Why is Green Crow the only contaminator mentioned by name? We should be given the exact location of every specific contaminated site and the full identity of EVERY contaminator.

    ·         071111 – ESpees – G

    ·         #137 Conspicuously absent from the report of the first meeting is an accounting of the economical impact.

    ·         070811 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #136 If more public access is needed, it is not the responsibility of Private Property Owner’s to provide it.

    ·         070811 – PHewett – ICR

    ·         #135 The Clallam County SMP update requires private property owners to give public access to their privately owned marine shorelines, prior to permitting development.

    ·

    ·         No comment # 134

    ·         No comment #133

    ·         No Comment #132

     

     

    .

    WHATEVER? Error! Filename not specified.

     

    SMP Comments 2011 cont.

    June:

    ·         062811 – JLMcClanahan – G20

    ·          #131 She was very concerned about any potential regulatory changes that would result in the loss of options for using their two parcels in the future.

    ·         062411 – RTMcAvoy – G20

    ·         #130 they are against any such change for the reasons stated herein.

    ·         062411 – DMansfield – G20

    ·         #129 Adamant about no further restrictions on property

    ·         062411 – PCWidden – G20

    ·         #128 Concerns about changing the current SMP status from Rural to Conservancy.

    No comment #127

    ·         062011 – JEstes – G

    ·         #126  detail on how members of the public and affected property owners are being notified

    No Comment # 125

    ·         060611 – WDOE – CR

    ·         #124 local DOE

    ·         060611 – PortofPA – CR

    ·         #123 LIMIT NOT PROHIBIT

    ·         060411 – ESpees – CR

    ·         #122 The salmonid stocks in Clallam County are not limited by freshwater habitat

    ·         060311 – JamestownSKlallamTribe – CR

    ·         #121 Tribal Comment

    ·         060311 – HBell – CR

    ·         #120 This is not required by the RCW nor the WAC. WAC 173-26-241

    ·         060311 – WSP – CR

    ·         #119 State Park comment

    ·         060311 – WDOE – CR

    ·         #118 Local DOE

    ·         060311 – ESpees – CR

    ·         #117 By Dr. Robert N. Crittenden

    ·         060211 – RCrittenden – CR

    ·         #116 the low abundance of these stocks is also being used, to perpetrate the deception that it is caused by habitat loss.

    ·         060211 – JEstes – CR

    ·         #115 the CR is one of several steps the County will take to consider if any existing “policies or regulations need to change.” There must be demonstrated

    ·         need for any changes and all affected landowners should be invited to consider any changes.

    ·         060211 – SForde – G

    ·         #114 Which one of my individual rights are you protecting with the Shoreline Master Plan and/or any updates to it? The answer: Nonein fact, you are violating them.

    ·         060211 – QuileuteNation – CR

    ·         #113 Tribal comment

    ·         060211 – CRogers – CR

    ·         #112 -Page 4 typo error

    ·         060211  –  QuileuteNation – CR

    ·         #111 Tribal comment

    ·         060111 – AStevenson – CR

    ·         #110 a marked up PDF of the Consistency Review

    ·         060111 – ESpees – G

    ·         #109 SMP Update – SMP Update Rigged Process

    No comment #108

    ·         060111 – PHewett – G #107

    ·         TOTALITARIAN: by definition(concerned with) arrogating (to the state and the ruling party) all rights and liberty of every choice, including those normally belonging to individuals, etc.

    ·         060111 – MTWalker – G

    ·         #106 The SMP should be rejected in all it’s forms. It erodes our rights and freedoms, does not comply with and is in fact contrary to the Constitution, is poorly written, poorly organized, vague, and its objectives are ambiguous/obscure.

    ·         060111 – ESpees – G

    ·         #105 Tribes Not Affected

    May:

    ·         053111 – ESpees – G

    ·         #104 The SMP erodes our rights and freedoms

    ·         053111 – ESpees – G

    ·         #103 The NNL Policy, larger setbacks and buffers, and new forced public access to private property will further erode our freedoms.

    ·         053111 – MGentry – G

    ·         #102 Green Point, group. 35 were invited and 17 showed up plus Dave Hannah was there to answer questions on bluff stability. Of the 17 only one was aware of SMP or said they had been contacted about forums.

    ·         053111 – PHewett – G / CR

    ·         #101 Pacific Legal Foundation If government blocks access to your land, it has committed a taking Dunlap v. City of Nooksack

    ·         052911 – ESpees – G

    ·         #100 Adopting the NNL Policy and enlargement of current buffers is making bad policy worse.

    ·         052911 – PHewett – G

    ·         #99 SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE Many of the problems that were the REASON that the public voted for the original Shore Line Management Act have already been corrected.

    ·         052811 – ESpees – G

    ·         #98 The DoE, an unelected State agency, is making radical policy based on the new State religion of earth worship.

    ·         052811 – RHale – G

    ·         #97 SMP’S are nothing more than a new version of a death panel and a method for which to take property rights of state Registered/ Deeded and “taxed” owners.

    ·         052711 – ESpees – G

    #96 Article 1. Section 1. Of the Washington State Constitution

    Political Power: All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.

    052711 – PHewett – G

    #95 WA State DOE Budget is A THOUSAND MILLION IS A BILLION written AS $1,034.0 Million (the Doe can’t even write it as a BILLION)

    ·         052611 – MGentry – G

    ·         #94 I reported to Steve and Sheila only one of the group of 20 we met with had received notices like this. Can you determine why?

    No comment #93

    ·         052111 – PHewett – G

    ·         #92 Directing and identifying how our Clallam County Officials can withhold permits to private property owner’s because the State can’t legally or constitutionally regulate our private property at a state level.

    No comment #91

    ·         051811 – JPetersen – CR

    ·         #90 One of the items that should be addressed in the new shoreline program is the relative inaccuracy of the Critical Areas maps in regards to Meander Hazard Zones.

    ·         051811 – NOTAC – CR

    ·         #89 MANY comments on the Consistency Review

    No comment #88

    No comment #87

    No comment #86

    No comment #85

    No comment #84

    No comment #83

    ·         051311 – PHewett – G

    ·         #82 WA The Supreme Court has granted review in several additional cases against the SMP this month.Citizens for Rational Shoreline Planning, et al. v. Whatcom County, et al., No. 84675-8.

    ·         051311 – PHewett – G

    ·         #81 United States Supreme Court RULES An environmental restriction on property development that serves no environmental purpose is unjustifiable.

    ·         051311 – PHewett – G

    ·         #80 Pacific Legal Foundation If government blocks access to your land, it has committed a taking Dunlap v. City of Nooksack

    No comment #79

    No comment #78

    ·         051011 – TSummer – G

    ·         #77 No privacy on private beach I have met some extremely rude people who confront me and won’t leave my backyard because they believe the beach SHOULD BE public.

    ·         050611 – PHewett – G

    ·         #76 Clallam County SMP has/will taken the value of private property located in critical areas, setbacks, buffer zones and shorelines and is legally controlling and regulating the removal of all vegetation on all private property located in critical areas, setbacks, buffer zones.

    ·         050611 – PHewett – CR

    ·         #75 TAKING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC SHORELINE ACCESS Statistics taken from Clallam County future land use map 79.2 % of Clallam County is PUBLIC LAND 17.1% or less of Clallam County is PRIVATE PROPERTY 3.7% other

    No comment #74

    No comment #73

    ·         050511 – PHewett – CR

    ·         #72 LAKE SUTHERLAND RCW 90.24.010 Petition to regulate flow

    ·         050511 – PHewett – CR

    ·         #71 Oregon Voters May Require Compensation for Damage to Land Value Due to Regulations

    ·         050511 – PHewett – G

    ·         #70 We, as a committee are not there to give input, constructive comment, or recommendation, we are there to be indoctrinated on compliance, based on misleading pie charts and statistics compiled and presented by ESA Adolfson. “Reading out loud” by Pearl Hewett of WAC 173-26-191 illegal or unconstitutional.

    ·

    April:

    ·         042611 – ESpees – G

    ·         #69 Since, all of the SMP public comments are being held private?

    I guess we will have to find a way to make our privatized, public

    comments PUBLIC?

    ·         042311 – MBlack – G

    ·         #68 This is crazy-making and counterproductive. Please pick one that can be defined.

    ·         042011 – KAhlburg – G

    ·         #67 Public comments

    ·         041811 – QuileuteNation – G

    ·         #66 Tribal Comment

    ·         041411 – RColby – G

    No comment #65

    No comment #64

    No comment #63

    ·         #62 We are still suffering under the Good Ole Boys mentality out here because in Clallam bay one property owner is using his lands for staging a scrap metal yard right next to Charlie creek.

    ·         041411 – TSimpson – G

    ·         #61  To mandate setbacks is arbitrary. Each site is different.

    ·         041211 – BBrennan – G

    ·         #60  We are in the process of evaluating the existing well and have had utilities reconnected to the property. Over the next few years we hope to see these projects come to fruition, but are concerned that shoreline setback changes could impede our progress.

    ·         041111 – NN – G

    ·         #59 hand written

    ·         041111 – MGentry – G

    ·         #58 hand written

    ·         041111 – NN – G

    ·         #57 Hand written

    ·         041111 – RMorris – G

    ·         #56 same as #57 hand written

    ·         041111 – NMessmer – G

    ·         #55, 56 and 57 are identical

    ·         041011 – RMorris – G

    ·         #54 I would really like to see a ban on the use of yard-related herbicides and pesticides within buffer zones near aquatic areas.

    No comment #53

    No comment #52

    ·         04 –11- RMorris – G

    ·         #51 #55, 56 and 57 are identical

    ·

    March:

    ·         031511- PHewett – G

    ·         #50  Summary  was not representative of the meeting I attended on Jan. 26, 2011. There was no mention of Lake Sutherland and the outpour of concern by the private property owners.

    ·         031511 – RMorris – G

    ·         #49 My first look at the report is that is looks good.

    ·         031511 – RMorris – G

    ·         #48 Is the Clallam County MRC research and data bases being used in this work?

    No comment #47

    ·         031411 – MGentry – G

    ·         #46 I would be really interested in knowing what portion of the population actually has even an elementary understanding of what’s going on with this planning process, the decisions being made and how those will affect the common citizen.

    ·         031111- JWare – G

    ·         #45 Thank you for providing the opportunity to participate and learn more about the Clallam County Shoreline Master Plan.

    No comment #44

    ·         030211 – PHewett – G

    ·         #43 Indian Tribes Role in Local Watershed Planning (ESHB 2514)

    ·         030211 – PHewett – G

    ·         #42 INVITATION TO ALL PERSONS RCW 90.58.130

    No comment #41

    February:

    ·         021711 – MLangley – G

    ·         #40 PRO SMP but Too often shoreline owners bear the burden of inconsiderate visitors.

    ·         021511 – PHewett – G

    ·         #39  My son listened to me complain for days about the SMP and illegal trespass by DFW on our land, then he gave me some invaluable advise. If you have a complaint? CLIMB THE LADDER!

    ·         020211 – RBrown – G

    ·         #38 Sorry I couldn’t make it to the latest SMP focus group

    January:

    ·         012611 – MBoutelle – G

    ·         #36 hand written erosion problem

    No comment #35

    No comment #34

    No comment #33

    No comment #32

    ·         012111 – CAbrass – G

    ·         #31 One of our concerns is the lack of guidelines and drainage requirements for new housing development above the level of waterfront property.

    ·         011811 – DJones – G

    ·         #30 I received a phone call today reporting that a man is going around Lake Sutherland taking photos of the docks. His response was that it is for the Shoreline Master Program (SMP)Update.

    2010:

    The Clallam County Board of Commissioner’s expects to adopt a final SMP-Update Public Participation Strategy extended to March 16, 2010 @ 10 a.m. at the Board of Clallam County Commissioners Regular Meeting, 223 East 4th Street, Room 160, Port Angeles, Washington.

    No comment #29

    No comment #28

    No comment #27

    No comment #26

    ·         110810 – WDNR – G

    ·         #25 Please include myself and Hugo Flores as contacts for the WA DNR and

    ·         include us in any mailings regarding your future planning efforts.

    No comment #24

    ·         080510 – PSP – G

    ·         #23 PSP

    No comment #22

    No comment #21

    No comment #20

    No comment #19

    No comment #18

    No comment #17

    ·         031010 – WDOE – PPS

    ·         #16  SMP Update Public Participation Strategy

    ·         030910 – WDOE – PPS

    ·         #15 We talked about how to include the transient or tourist public in the outreach strategy

     

    No comment #14

    No comment #13

     

    ·         030810 – LMuench – PPS

    ·         #12 SMP Update Public Participation Strategy

    ·         030410 – QuileuteNation – PPS

    ·         #11 Tribal comment, I am thinking the person who drafted it just

    ·         looked at state requirements and did not go beyond that

    No comment #10

    No comment #9

    No comment #8

    No comment #7

    No comment #6

    No comment #5

    ·         022410 – FutureWise – PPS

    ·         #4 The very nature of this product is about public participation. Some

    ·         description of it is needed, including how it is intended to be used in the SMP.

    No comment #3

    ·         020910 – JMarrs – PPS

    ·         #2 I am pleased with the emphasis I see on making the process open and transparent.

    2009: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION STRATEGY

    ·         120509 – DemComm – G  #1  CLALLAM COUNTY DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE

    Resolution regarding County Shoreline Management Plan

     WHEREAS the nature of amendments to the plan as might be adopted by the Clallam County Board of Commissioners mayor may not adequately protect the quality of local waters from harmful development; and

    WHEREAS participation in the Shoreline Management Plan review process will be open to the public in a series of meetings over the next two years or more;

    THEREFORE be it resolved that the Clallam County Democratic Central Committee appoint a subcommittee of interested members to monitor the progress of the Shoreline Management Plan review, to suggest to the Central Committee communications to the county of the concerns or interests of Democrats in the elements of the plans and any proposed amendments, and to issue quarterly reports on the review process to the Central Committee.

    ·         December 5, 2009

     REMEMBER… This is just 

    Part one: The history of us, the collective 3000? What happened to us?

    To be Continued….

    Behind My Back | SMP Public Comment # 160

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/11/smp-public-comment-160/

    SMP Public Comment # 160 Posted on February 11, 2015 1:01 pm by … … No Clallam County elected representatives attended this meeting. Thirty (30) people …

    ——————————————————————————

    Behind My Back | SMP and other Matrix Mumbo Jumbo

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/03/23/smp-and-other-matrix-mumbo-jumbo/

    (OF THE 617 WRITTEN SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS POSTED ON THE SMP WEBSITE?) … OR ORAL COMMENT INCLUDED IN THE “NEW SMP 160+ MATRIX”? … There is no accountability as to what Clallam County government agency or other …. UNDER AN EXPEDITED RULE- MAKING … full text on behindmyback.org.

    ———————————————————————-

    19 Unresolved SMP Issues AN SMP Public … – Clallam County

    www.clallam.net/LandUse/documents/635_PHewett.pdf

    Jul 4, 2015 – On 19 unresolved SMP issues that went to the Planning … The 19 unresolved SMP issues on July 10, 2012 ….. Of …www.behindmyback.org.

    The bottom line…..

     REMEMBER… This is just 

    Part one: The history of us, the collective 3000?

    You the elected are responsible for what happens to all of us.


  • The Cross President Trump and the Swastika

    As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don’t know we don’t know. 

    I don’t remember when I first heard that quote?  In fact, I didn’t even know who said it.

    My  known on Jan 26, 2011, was, my Christian heritage, singing the Old Rugged Cross,  the Lincoln Memorial,  American Revolution, Paul Revere, Arlington Cemetery,  the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  

    And, I knew on Jan 26, 2011 that when American Citizens  fear their what their own government is going to do to them on WA State Shoreline Update (SMP) in Port Angeles, Clallam County WA, U.S.A., it was unacceptable to me.

    And, I thought… Somebody should do something about that.  Then I realized I was somebody and I could do something about that.

    And, of course everybody always said “Contact your elected representatives”

    My shocking, wakeup  call was on Jan 27, 2011, it was the unknown  ” I could care less attitude of elected representation”,  not one of the  three  elected Clallam County representatives  in Olympia WA bothered to respond to my American, voting, taxpaying citizens  phone calls of concern.

    So after being snubbed, pandered to, ignored, scoffed at and insulted by my county and state elected representative on every concern I had.

    I DID SOMETHING ABOUT THAT. Researching and documenting  and disseminating all levels and all things Government from Jan 27, 2011. I submitted over 150 public comments on the Clallam County SMP Update, as  an appointed volunteer  member of the SMP Citizens Committee.

    My website behindmyback.org went on line on Jan 29, 2013,  after I had documented for two years, that most of my business was being done by the government, behind my back, behind closed doors.

    I identified my mission, using the image of Abram Lincoln’s statue in WA DC, and the words of Abram Lincoln. That a Government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth.

    I identified myself three days later.

     Behind My Back | My code name “Pearl Revere”

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/02/01/my-code-name-pearl-revere/

    Feb 1, 2013 – My code name is “Pearl Revere” This blog is all about US, “We the People”. I had hoped that setting up a blog would give “We the people” a …

    ———————————————————————————–

    I doubled down on Mar 28, 2014

    Behind My Back | Paul and Pearl Revere

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/03/28/paul-and-pearl-revere/

    Mar 28, 2014 – PAUL REVERE WAS NOT SILENT OR FEARFUL On the night of … read more at: http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/15640#sthash.

    So long, as my name is Pearl Rains Hewett (AKA Pearl Revere) I shall continue running through cyber space with red flag warnings, asking questions and disseminating documented facts.

    So, ask yourself, what’s the big deal? They are not taking our lives. They are just destroying our lives.

    They are just controlling our lives, they are just taking our freedom,  they are just taking our liberty, our pursuit of happiness and they are just taking control of our private property and denying us our Constitutional rights.

    —————————————————————————————-

    This is Post #984 on behindmyback.org  Jan 29, 2013 to Aug 30, 2017.

    I could write a documented  book on the government , things we know we know, also know, the known unknowns;  even after all of my research and documentation, we know there are some things we do not know. But alas, there are also unknown unknowns—Indeed, the ones we still don’t know we don’t know. 

    ——————————————————

    April 30, 2016,  I received a phone call from Senator Benton the WA State Chairman for Trump. He is looking for a TRUMP CAMPAIGN CHAIR PERSON FOR CLALLAM COUNTY WA. (I said I was too old)

     —————————————————————–

    Friday, May 13, 2016 I have been designated.. by Senator Benton as the TRUMP CAMPAIGN CHAIR PERSON FOR CLALLAM COUNTY WA. 

     ———————————————————————-

    Last Year on Aug 30, 2016, I attended the Trump Rally in Everett WA. TO CELEBRATE MY 75TH BIRTHDAY.

    Senator Benton introduced Donald J. Trump

    Full Event: Donald Trump Rally in Everett, Washington (August 30 …

    ▶ 1:21:58

    Aug 30, 2016 – Uploaded by TRUMP TV NETWORK

    Watch Live: Donald Trump Rally in Everett, Washington at Xfinity Arena of Everett (August 30, 2016) Full …

    ————————————————————————————

    By the Grace of God, President Donald J. Trump was ELECTED (AND HILLARY WAS NOT SELECTED) as President of the United States Of America On Nov 8, 2017.

    So today, Aug 30, 2017, is my 76th birthday, And, I am celebrating the election of my President Trump.

    In, Port Angeles,  Clallam County, WA U.S.A. by popular vote Donald J. Trump is the ELECTED President of the United States of America.

    So long, as my name is Pearl Rains Hewett (AKA Pearl Revere) I shall continue running through cyber space with red flag warnings, asking questions and disseminating documented facts.

    ——————————————————————

    The Cross – President Trump and the Swastika

    THE SWASTIKA

    My Trump sign was sprayed with silver spray paint, Impeach and a Swastika, during the night of Aug 18, 2017. I reported it to the Port Angeles Police Dept Aug 19, 2017. 

    Incident #2017-17112.

    For the time being, I am leaving my Impeach Swastika Trump hate sign, up on my fence.

    In an email to my family and friends I called the PAPD Incident #2017-17112.

    FEELING THE LOVE….

    ————————————————————–

    My Trump signs have been stolen, and, I have been threatened, they will break out my window, they will burn my house down (reported by my neighbor). And, in person, three thugs of dark complexion, in an older silver vehicle, cruising very slowly by my house, giving me the evil eye while I was standing on my own front porch, with their boom box blaring “Fuck Trump” over and over and over and over again.

    FOR THE RECORD

    Behind My Back | Trump Signs Theft, Vandalism and Threats

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/06/26/trump-signs-theft-vandalism-and-threats/

    Jun 26, 2016 – Theft! Vandalism! written threats (Tacoma WA “I will Kill your Family” a … The rash of vandalized, destroyed and ripped down Trump signs all …

    Posted on June 26, 2016 1:13 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    The GOOD, the BAD and the UGLY

    ———————————————————————————–

    December 1770 Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. John Adams

      Behind My Back | 1781 The First American Bible

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/09/18/1781-the-first-american-bible

    1781 THE FIRST AMERICAN BIBLE “The truth is incontrovertible, manic may resent it, ignorance may deride it, malice may distort it, but here it is.” January 21, 1781 …

    “The only foundation for . . . a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.”

    Benjamin Rush United States Congress 1782

     “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable.”
    George Washington


  • Ironically Sen. Chappelle-Nadal (D)

    Ironically Sen. Chappelle-Nadal (D)

    OF YOUR UNSPOKEN WORD YOU ARE THE MASTER, OF YOUR SPOKEN WORD THE SERVANT, AND OF YOUR WRITTEN WORD THE SLAVE. …

    ‘I hope Trump is assassinated,’ Missouri lawmaker writes | The Kansas …

    www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article167755572.html

    3 days ago – … on Facebook saying she hoped President Donald Trump would be assassinated. … ‘I am not resigning,’ Missouri Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal says, defying …. “A whole bunch of people responded to that. …. Chappelle-Nadal should be ashamed of herself for adding her voice to this toxic environment.

    ——————————————————————————————-

    Words are like eggs dropped from great heights; you can no more call them back than ignore the mess they leave when they fall.

    In response for writing she hopes President Donald Trump will be assassinated on Facebook, Sen. Chappelle-Nadal (D)  took down her post?

    Sen. Chappelle-Nadal (D)   quickly deleted the post.

    Gov. Eric Greitens, a Republican, issued the first warning just before noon in a series of tweets blasting Chappelle-Nadal, a Democrat, for a comment Thursday on Facebook in which she said “I hope Trump is assassinated!”

    —————————————————————————

    Threatening the President of the United States is a felony under United States Code Title 18,

    Missouri Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal (D) a  woman of color and a member of congress… on Facebook wrote, she hoped President Donald Trump would be assassinated.,  she wrote her “hope threat” on public media. Was she hoping that she could put somebody else up to it? …. or hoping that the act of killing the President will be committed by someone else?

    Accessory before (or after) the fact, a person who incites……..

    ————————————————————————

    Jan 6, 2015 – Senator Chappelle-Nadal (D)  is no stranger to controversy.

    Chappelle-Nadal Sparks Controversy Over Her Tweets On Ferguson …

    news.stlpublicradio.org/…/chappelle-nadal-sparks-controversy-over-her-tweets-fergus…

    Jan 6, 2015 – Maria Chappelle-Nadal, D-University City, wants to make one point clear: … not a legislator representing #Ferguson & you have not communicated w me, … The senator said her recent controversial comments on Twitter were …

    She attracted attention early on for her active participation in the Ferguson protests and her outspoken criticism — including expletive-laden Tweets and disparaging signs — of  Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon.

    State Sen. Jamilah Nasheed, D-St. Louis, said that some see Chappelle-Nadal’s public comments – especially on Twitter – as igniting controversy instead of fostering reconciliation.

    But Nasheed added,“She has a right to speak her mind. She says what she means, and she means what she says.”

    ———————————————————————-

    Missouri state senator says she hopes Donald Trump is assassinated …

    www.independent.co.uk › News › World › Americas

    2 days ago – … Secret Service for saying she hopes President Donald Trump will be assassinated. ... The politician said “I hope Trump is assassinated! … When people of colour are respected by this White House and they are willing to do …

    ———————————————————————–

    WORST COMMENT ON RECENT CONFEDERATE STATUES REACTION

    ‘I hope Trump is assassinated,’ Missouri lawmaker writes | The Kansas …

    —————————————————————

    Best comment regarding recent Confederate statues reactions…

    Missouri governor joins call for expulsion of senator who hoped for …

    THE BEST COMMENT EVER regarding recent Confederate statues reactions…

    Blacks who were never slaves are fighting whites who were never Nazis over a Confederate statue erected by southern Democrats because now Democrats can’t stand their own history anymore……yet somehow it’s Trumps fault!

    ———————————————————————-

    Secret Service investigating Maria Chappelle-Nadal – CNNPolitics

    www.cnn.com/2017/08/17/politics/missouri-state-senator-donald…/index.html

    2 days ago – … said she hoped President Donald Trump would be assassinated. … see anyone assassinated, but he should not be president, he should be …

    —————————————————————-

    Words are like eggs dropped from great heights; you can no more call them back than ignore the mess they leave when they fall.

    Missouri governor joins call for expulsion of senator who hoped for …

    www.stltoday.com/…/missouri…call…senator…/article_0064e426-b5c1-5a61-960b-00…

    2 days ago – Maria Chappelle-Nadal: Resign or be removed from office. … in my position as president of the Missouri Senate, immediately seek the expulsion … “The process of expulsion is a significant, rarely used step that should not be …

    “I’m calling on Sen. Chappelle-Nadal to do the right thing and resign from her office,” Parson said. “However, if she does not do so by veto session, I will, in my position as president of the Missouri Senate, immediately seek the expulsion pursuant to Article III Section 18 of the Missouri Constitution.”

    —————————————————————————-

    WORTH REPEATING

    WORST COMMENT ON RECENT CONFEDERATE STATUES REACTION

    ‘I hope Trump is assassinated,’ Missouri lawmaker writes | The Kansas …

    Best comment regarding recent Confederate statues reactions…

    Missouri governor joins call for expulsion of senator who hoped for …

    Best  comment EVER regarding recent Confederate statues reactions…

    INDEED, Blacks who were never slaves are fighting whites who were never Nazis over a Confederate statue erected by southern Democrats because now Democrats can’t stand their own history anymore……yet somehow it’s Trumps fault!

    —————————————————–

    Ironically Sen. Chappelle-Nadal (D)

    OF YOUR UNSPOKEN WORD YOU ARE THE MASTER, OF YOUR SPOKEN WORD THE SERVANT, AND OF YOUR WRITTEN WORD THE SLAVE. …


  • Renaming and Rebranding the ONP Wilderness

    Renaming and Re-branding the ONP Wilderness

    Sponsored In 2016, by the Wild, Wilderness, WA DC Democrats,.  Senator Maria Cantwell, (D) Mountlake Terrace, and U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, (D) Seattle, introduced S. 3028, while H.R. 5397 was sponsored by members of the Washington delegation in the House, including Derek Kilmer (D) Born: Port Angeles, WA (DWA 6th District)

     SO, After President Trump was Elected President Nov 8, 2016, And before President Trump was sworn into office on Jan 20, 2017.

    The bill was signed into law Dec. 14, 2016, by President Barack Obama.

    AUG 18TH, 2017 Ceremony marks change of name  of to Daniel J. Evans Wilderness

    ————————————————————–

    CHANGING THE NAME DOES NOT CHANGE THE GAME. period

    Trump’s DOI and EPA Pick?

    WELL, IF WA STATE  SENATOR PATTY MURRAY (D) WANTED ALL OF THE PEOPLE OUT OF THE OLYMPIC PENINSULA IN WA STATE, WHAT WOULD SHE DO?

    SENATOR MURRAY MADE HER CHOICE, OVER SIX (6) YEARS AGO…. WILD OLYMPICS  WAS FIRST INTRODUCED IN 2010, IN 2012, CONGRESS NORM DICKS AND SENATOR PATTY MURRAY(D) INTRODUCED IDENTICAL BILLS IN … WILD OLYMPICS WILDERNESS AND WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT OF 2012

    APR 11, 2013 – WA STATE  SENATOR PATTY MURRAY’S (D) PROPOSAL IS CALLED WILD OLYMPICS.

    REINTRODUCING 2013-2014 and REINTRODUCING 2015-2016

    Stop Wild Olympics Update 2016
    if you have already read to the bottom, here is page 2  

    The Wild Olympics Scam
    From The Beginning: 

     

    bldg

    WA STATE SENATOR MARIA CANTWELL was busy having roads decommissioned while MURRAY (D) AND KILMER (D)  waited in the wings with their phones and their pens.

    In the meantime Kilmer(D) took on Dicks (D) roll, with Murray(D) to re-introduce the unwanted, unnecessary and wasteful Wild Olympics Wild & Scenic Act TWICE!

    —————————————————————————————–

    The Long Range Plan ONP 1944-2017?

    Ceremony marks change of name to Daniel J. Evans Wilderness …

    www.peninsuladailynews.com/…/ceremony-marks-change-of-name-to-daniel-j-evans-…

    1 day ago – OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK — Dignitaries will gather at Hurricane Ridge today to celebrate the dedication of the Daniel J. Evans Wilderness.

    Ceremony marks change of name to Daniel J. Evans Wilderness

    FRI AUG 18TH, 2017 THE OLYMPIC WILDERNESS, WHICH COVERS 95 PERCENT OF THE OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK, HAS BEEN RENAMED AND RE-BRANDED.

    RE-BRANDING IS A MARKETING STRATEGY IN WHICH A NEW NAME, term, symbol, design, or combination thereof is created for an established brand with the intention of developing a new, differentiated identity in the minds of consumers, investors, competitors, and other stakeholders.

    ——————————————————————

    ONP SPOKESWOMAN PENNY WAGNER SAID, “IT’S NOT CHANGING THE WILDERNESS,” WAGNER ADDED. “IT’S NOT ADDING OR SUBTRACTING LAND. IT’S JUST A “RENAMING” OF THE EXISTING WILDERNESS.”

    FRI AUG 18TH, 2017 Ceremony marks change of name  of to Daniel J. Evans Wilderness

    CHANGING THE NAME DOES NOT CHANGE THE GAME. period

    Invited speakers are,  the usual liberal suspects, U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell D, U.S. Rep. Derek Kilmer D, former U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks D, AND A NEW (January 9, 2017) REPUBLICAN STATE SEN. HANS ZEIGER?  Olympic National Park ACTING Superintendent Lee Taylor.

    THE OLYMPIC WILDERNESS, WHICH COVERS 95 PERCENT OF THE PARK, HAS BEEN RENAMED to honor Evans for his contributions to wilderness preservation, park spokeswoman Penny Wagner said.

    FRI AUG 18TH, 2017 “IT’S NOT CHANGING THE WILDERNESS,” WAGNER ADDED. “IT’S NOT ADDING OR SUBTRACTING LAND. IT’S JUST A RENAMING OF THE EXISTING WILDERNESS.”

    ——————————————————————–

    CHANGING THE NAME DOES NOT CHANGE THE GAME. period

    ——————————————————————————

    1938 THE OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK WAS OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED BY US PRESIDENT FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT

    ————————————————————-

    1944 six years later In a conversation at Sol Duc Hot Springs between the acting Olympic National Park Superintendent Preston Macy and my father George C. Rains Sr.

    “George, I should not tell you this, but the long range plan of the National Park Service is to take the whole Olympic Peninsula over and put it in the Olympic National Park and move everyone off the Olympic Peninsula.”

    ————————————————————————————-

    1964 PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON SIGNED THE WILDERNESS ACT INTO LAW

    1981 OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK WAS DESIGNATED BY UNESCO AS NATURAL UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK IN 1981 ALSO RECOGNIZED BY UNESCO AS AN INTERNATIONAL BIOSPHERE RESERVE.

    1988 SEVEN YEARS LATER IN NOVEMBER 1988. AFTER BECOMING A UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE, AFTER BECOMING AN  INTERNATIONAL BIOSPHERE RESERVE IN 1981?

    1988, EVANS INTRODUCED THE WASHINGTON PARK WILDERNESS ACT

    1988  THE BILL PROPOSED MORE THAN 1.7 MILLION ACRES OF WILDERNESS WITHIN OLYMPIC, MOUNT RAINIER AND NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARKS. IT WAS SIGNED INTO LAW BY PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN.

    1988,  THE ACT DESIGNATED 877,000 ACRES IN OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK AS THE OLYMPIC WILDERNESS.

    ——————————————————————

    1992 George C Rains Sr., my Dad had an 48 year inholder  history (1944-1992) with the Olympic National Park and he wrote a notarized 28 page warning on the National Park Service, Oct 8, 1992.

    Snippets: Most people have no knowledge of these vast encroachments to take our property and property rights on the Olympic Peninsula, and it is time that the truth be known.

    Land and Power Grab Are the removal of the Lake Mills Dam and Aldwell Lake Dam part of the National Park Service conspiracy to later demand a wide corridor down each side of the Elwha River to the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and ultimately split Clallam County?

    George C. Rains Sr.

    ————————————————————————-

    U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt originally created Mount Olympus National Monument on 2 March 1909. It was designated a national park by President Franklin Roosevelt on June 29, 1938. In 1976, Olympic National Park was designated by UNESCO as an International Biosphere Reserve, and in 1981 as a World Heritage Site.

    ———————————————————————————–   

    AND AUG 18, 2017,  THE OLYMPIC WILDERNESS HAS BEEN RENAMED AND RE-BRANDED BY WA STATE DEMOCRATS, IN A CEREMONY  ON  HURRICANE RIDGE AS THE  DANIEL J. EVANS WILDERNESS

    CHANGING THE NAME DOES NOT CHANGE THE GAME. period

    ————————————————————————

    OCT. 8, 1992- 2013-2017

    Behind My Back | “Conspiracy Exposed”

    www.behindmyback.org/conspiracy-exposed/

    CONSPIRACY EXPOSED” The notarized document “Conspiracy Exposed” was written on OCT. 8, 1992 by George C. Rains Sr. when he was 77 years old.

    The proof of this conspiracy has and is being proven in the step by step acquisition of private and DNR land by the National Park Service, as this is being written and during the last 21 years from 1992 to 2013.

    The nine page summary includes some of the 48 year history of Clallam County from 1944 to 1992 and is his proof of the conspiracy.

    It’s a good read from a historical standpoint and a cautionary statement to the citizens of Clallam County. Could this happen to Clallam Country by imminent domain, isolation, regulation, restriction and/or economic starvation?

    ———————————————————————–

    JAN 27, 2014

    Behind My Back | Part 1 (WOW) a War on Wild?

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/01/27/part-1-wow-a-war-on-wild/

    JAN 27, 2014 – Why would anyone use the word “War” against the federal governments “Wild” Agendas that historically, have had the FEDERAL power, past, …

    Editorital: A War on Wild | Citizen Review Online

    citizenreviewonline.org/editorital-a-war-on-wild/

    JAN 31, 2014 – www.behindmyback.org … Now is the time for many of us to speak of a War On Wild and keep our … (WOW) A War on Wild and Scenic Rivers?

    ———————————————————————————

    JUL 31, 2016

    Behind My Back | The Long Range Plan of NPS 1944-2016

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/07/31/the-long-range-plan-of-nps-1944-2016/

    JUL 31, 2016 – www.behindmyback.org/2016/04/26/let–me–ask-america-a-question/ … The notarized document “Conspiracy Exposed” was written on Oct. 8 …

    ————————————————————————————–

    RE-BRANDING  AND CHANGING THE NAME DOES NOT CHANGE THE GAME. period

    Ceremony marks change of name to Daniel J. Evans Wilderness …

    www.peninsuladailynews.com/…/ceremony-marks-change-of-name-to-daniel-j-evans-…

    1 day ago – OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK — Dignitaries will gather at Hurricane Ridge today to celebrate the dedication of the Daniel J. Evans Wilderness.

    Ceremony marks change of name to Daniel J. Evans Wilderness

    OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK — Dignitaries will gather at Hurricane Ridge today to celebrate the dedication of the Daniel J. Evans Wilderness.

    Daniel Evans is a former U.S. senator and Washington governor whose efforts played a key role in the preservation of more than 1.7 million acres of wilderness in the state, Olympic National Park officials said.

    The Olympic Wilderness, which covers 95 percent of the park, has been renamed to honor Evans for his contributions to wilderness preservation, park spokeswoman Penny Wagner said.

    “It’s not changing the wilderness,” Wagner added. “It’s not adding or subtracting land. It’s just a renaming of the existing wilderness.”

    The public is invited to the dedication ceremony.

    The event will be from 10:45 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. at the west end of the Hurricane Ridge Visitor Center parking lot.

    Parking will be available on a first-come, first served basis.

    Invited speakers are Evans, U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, U.S. Rep. Derek Kilmer, former U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, state Sen. Hans Zeiger, Olympic National Park Acting Superintendent Lee Taylor and Sequim author Tim McNulty.

    In 2016, Cantwell, D-Mountlake Terrace, and U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Seattle, introduced S. 3028, while H.R. 5397 was sponsored by members of the Washington delegation in the House, including Derek Kilmer.

    Kilmer, D-Gig Harbor, represents the 6th Congressional District, which includes the North Olympic Peninsula.

    The bill was signed into law Dec. 14, 2016, by President Barack Obama.

    President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Wilderness Act into law in 1964 “to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness,” Olympic National Park officials said in a news release.

    The idea was to preserve a remnant of the country’s untamed, wild places as wilderness for the permanent good of the people.

    Wilderness areas help protect complex ecosystems, natural processes and habitat for threatened and endangered species, park officials said.

    In March 1988, Evans introduced the Washington Park Wilderness Act with former Sen. Brock Adams.

    The bill proposed more than 1.7 million acres of wilderness within Olympic, Mount Rainier and North Cascades national parks. It was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan in November 1988.

    The act designated 877,000 acres in Olympic National Park as the Olympic Wilderness.

    Evans served three terms as Washington governor from 1965 to 1977. He was a senator from 1983 to 1989.

    Evans and his wife, Nancy Evans, live in Seattle’s Laurelhurst neighborhood.

    Reporter Rob Ollikainen can be reached at 360-452-2345, ext. 56450, or at rollikainen@peninsula dailynews.com.