TULALIP—The Tulalip Tribes are urging the public to vote “no” on the Port of Everett’s Proposition 1 Boundary Enlargement measure this August 6 fearing how the Port’s expansion, if passed, would adversely affect development and taxation on tribal lands and waters.
Teri Gobin, Chair for Tulalip Tribes, wrote a letter on Monday, June 22, accusing the Port of being a “for-profit corporation masquerading as a government” who is “trying to assert jurisdiction over Tulalip territory.” Gobin further called the Port’s attempt to annex as being “disappointing and misguided.”
“Tulalip sovereignty and treaty rights are firmly established. Our people were here before glaciers retreated from the land, leaving behind the rivers and watersheds that shape the State today,” Chairwoman Gobin wrote. “The Federal Government recognized our sovereignty before Washington was a state. Both the State and the Federal Government have a responsibility to condemn and fight the Port of Everett’s attempt to greedily snap up lands and waters where the Tulalip Tribes have treaty-guaranteed rights.”
Gobin continued that the Port’s attempt to “tax and regulate” the Tulalip people is an “affront to Washington’s well-established respect for the territorial integrity of tribes.”
The Tulalip Tribes also said the Port’s whole process leading up into getting the measure on the August 6 ballot was flawed.
Back in January the Port held an informational meeting with Tulalip Tribes leaders on their reservation. Not too long after, the Port informed the Snohomish County Council that the Tribes were in support of the annexation which the tribes said was not the case.
The Snohomish County Council unanimously voted to support the measure being placed on the ballot on March 12, 2024.
County Councilwoman Megan Dunn, who voted in favor of placing Proposition 1 on the ballot and whose district falls on Tulalip land, informed the Lynnwood Times that she confirmed the Port had reached out to and was in communication with the Tulalip tribes, and also suggested they reach out to the Sauk-Suiattle tribe and Stillaguamish tribe.
“In my discussions with port leadership, the Port discussed a possible MOU and clarified that there would be no changes in justification and no authority over any tribe as a sovereign nation,” Councilwoman Dunn told the Lynnwood Times. “The county council’s role as the legislative body for the county is to allow ballot measures to go before the voters, we had no role in crafting the measure. We voted unanimously to allow this issue to go to voters for consideration.”
Since opening its gaming venues, Tulalip has donated over $69.5 million to over 245 charitable organizations and gives more each year to new organizations, according to the Tribes. Marysville School District also receives millions of Tulalip dollars annually to provide learning for all local children.
Gobin noted that the Tribes are tired of being the only government asked to sacrifice stating that government-to-government relationships require all parties to have mutual respect and to be good neighbors.
“We’ve been encouraged to compromise on everything from treaty rights to collecting taxes in our own federally recognized city, built and maintained entirely with tribal dollars. At What point will the governments around us start being good neighbors instead of tax-seeking mechanisms of extraction? At what point will meaningful consultation with tribal governments be more than a check-off box on a to-do list?,” Gobin wrote.
Gobin concluded her letter by stating the Port’s annexation is not about good governance nor preserving shared natural resources but a “taxation strategy to provide the Port with additional revenue for development.”
While the Port of Everett is one of the lowest taxing districts in the state, Gobin continued that they are ambitious and taxation can change rapidly when corporations need more revenue.
The Tulalip Tribes are the successors in interest to the Snohomish, Snoqualmie, Skykomish, and allied tribes and bands who signed the Treaty of Point Elliot and moved to the Tulalip Reservation. The Snohomish River, where Legion Park now sits, was a principal village for the Tribes ancestors and a central meeting hub.
“The Port of Everett is asking to expand their boundaries. Tulalip is asking the Port to respect ours. Vote No on Port of Everett Proposition No. 1,” wrote Gobin.
In a letter by the Port dated Thursday, August 1, CEO Lisa Lefeber explained that the Proposition 1 ballot measure would not change any land ownership, nor does it infringe on tribal sovereignty and treaty rights. The Port is not a regulatory agency and has no authority over sovereign nations, Lefeber explained.
The Port informed the Lynnwood Times that Lefeber’s letter was not a response of any kind, but more so an opportunity to address questions the Port has been recently receiving from its constituents.
“This ballot measure does not change any land ownership or land rights,” Lefeber wrote. “It is a tool that enlarges the Port’s service area to allow the Port to invest in other parts of Snohomish County to strengthen and enhance community priorities.”
Lefeber began her letter by expressing that the Port of Everett values its long-standing relationships with the Tulalip Tribes and has always held the rights, lands and interests of Tulalip Tribes, and all federally recognized tribes, in the “highest regard.”
As pointed out in this letter, portions of the Tulalip Tribes lands have been in the Port’s boundaries for 106 years with many tribal lands across Washington State also residing within port districts.
Additionally, throughout the lengthy and robust outreach process, the Port met with Tulalip Tribes leadership in advance of any legislative action to gain their feedback as well as present a draft Letter of Understanding memorializing that no tribal rights would change with boundary enlargement.
After the County Council approved the measure to be on the August 6 primary election ballot, the Tulalip Tribes requested to be exempted from the boundary enlargement or enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The Port offered to discuss an MOU with the Tribes in advance of the public vote but received no response from the Tribe regarding this conversation.
Lefeber still stands by her offer to meet to this day.
“The Port of Everett respects tribal sovereignty and the cultural heritage of the Tulalip Tribes and all federally recognized tribes. We believe that a strong partnership with the Tulalip Tribes is essential for the continued prosperity of our region as it is critical to the work we do,” concluded Lefeber in her letter.
Chair Gobin informed the Lynnwood Times that she and her fellow tribal leaders viewed their meeting with the Port back in January as strictly informational but even then, they were not in support of the idea – contradictory to what the Port informed the County Council.
While the Port does not have legal basis to tax the Tulalip Tribes, as mentioned in Lefeber’s response email, Gobin shared that the Port expansion would still create a tax on members with certain land statuses and non-Tulalips who live on the Reservation.
The boundary expansion would also give the Port “the illusion of respectability” when it comes to development on the reservation, Gobin told the Lynnwood Times.
“The existing Port boundaries are in the heart of our territory, and we already fight development that impacts our environment and treaty-protected way of life. While any proposed development on the Reservation would be strongly opposed and fought in court, if necessary, the Tribes shouldn’t have to shoulder this responsibility,” said Gobin. “We are asking the Port to simply respect our existing jurisdiction and sovereignty by excluding the Tulalip Reservation.”
Gobin further mentioned that the Port has not replied to several letters requesting a formal MOU of how tax revenues generated from the Reservation would be treated.
“The Port is not treating us like the sovereign nation that we are. They have not invited us to the table to make decisions about our shared lands and waters. Nor have they outlined a clear way forward for Tulalip to be represented or included in future Port development, expansion, or management despite our clear legal rights in Port-occupied waterways,” Gobin told the Lynnwood Times.
When Congress designated the Tulalip Reservation as a homeland for local tribal people, they intended for the tribe to govern and regulate their people and their own reservation lands, Gobin explained.
“Legislation like the Dawes Act created the checkerboard reservation that you see today, with mixed native and non-native ownership of land on the reservation. Although this has created a jurisdictional mess that we are still fighting to clean up, we contend that Tulalip still has primary jurisdiction over reservation lands and waters,” said Gobin.
According to Kate Anderson, Media and Marketing Coordinator for the Port of Everett, there were a total of six separate times when the Port either had a meeting with Tulalip Tribes leaders or attempted to reach out regarding any concerns the Tribe may have, or to discuss the MOU:
- On September 13, 2023, the Port had its first formal meeting with the Tulalip Tribes, prior to the public survey being launched.
- In October 2023, the Port sent an email with follow-up from the September meeting requesting feedback from the Tulalip Tribes.
- On November 17, 2023, the Port held an update with Marysville and Tulalip Chamber. The following month the Port Commission approved sending the enlargement to the County Council.
- In January 2024, the Port presented a draft Letter of Understanding for consideration to Tribal leadership.
- On April 26, 2024, the Port received a letter from the Tulalip Tribes requesting to be exempted from the boundary enlargement measure or enter into an MOU. In June 2024, the Port sent a follow up request for a meeting on that MOU.
In addition to these events, Anderson told the Lynnwood Times the Port has Tribal partners on Port communications throughout the year and those communications include updates on general Port news, which in the last two years has included information on the Port’s boundary enlargement ballot measure.
The Port also reached out to the Sauk-Suiattle and Stillaguamish tribes, per Councilwoman Dunn’s request, but said they did not hear back.
About the Port Boundary Enlargement
While many large port districts in Washington state are county-wide — including all other ports in the state that operate international seaports — the Port of Everett is not. Currently, Port boundaries cover most of Everett, portions of Mukilteo, and small parts of Marysville and unincorporated Snohomish County — a total of about 110,000 residents. To put this into perspective, with nearly 830,000 residents and growing, only about 15% of the County has access to certain port tools and investments. This significantly restricts how the Port of Everett can help advance economic and community priorities across Snohomish County, which is one of the fastest growing counties in the state.
The topic of Everett Port boundary expansion is not a new one. It has come up many times over the course of the Port’s nearly 106 years of service, as the current Port District and greater Snohomish County area have experienced significant growth and evolving economic needs over the past century. However, this is the first time it is coming up for a vote.
During the Port of Everett’s Strategic Plan outreach in 2018/2019, the Port sought public feedback to help set a roadmap for the next decade of Port initiatives (2020-2030). During public engagement intended to inform the Port’s 2020 Strategic Plan, the Port heard general interest in expanding Port District boundaries, linked to a desire to see the Port’s strategic investments and infrastructure improvements stretch into other parts of Snohomish County.
Given the Port’s current limitations to support economic and community priorities outside of its current boundary line, combined with the significant economic challenges and opportunities facing the County today and initial community interest, the Port Commission tasked staff with formally exploring potential boundary expansion. It became a Strategic Action Item of the Port’s 2020 Strategic Plan, which was adopted by the Commission in December 2019.
A completed exploratory effort on Port boundaries included conducting a formal assessment of the economic value and legal implications of expanding Port District boundaries, and a formal call for input by community leaders, residents and businesses in the area to gauge interest in Port tools and resources being offered to more areas of the County where they are not currently accessible.
Given the Port’s geographic and financial limitations, the challenges and opportunities before it, and the general interest heard during recent outreach on the topic, the Port Commission believed it was time to send it to the ballot.
In a historic action on Dec. 19, 2023, the Port of Everett Commission unanimously passed Resolution No. 1220, directing Port staff to submit a proposition to enlarge the limits of the existing Port District to the Snohomish County Council for voter consideration — a first since the citizens voted to create the Port back in 1918.
On March 12, 2024, the Snohomish County Council unanimously approved a motion to place the petition by the Port of Everett for boundary enlargement on the August 2024 primary ballot.
The measure will consider enlarging the Port District to include most of Snohomish County, excluding Edmonds. The decision follows years of discussion on the topic and a recent exploratory effort by the Port to conduct an economic value study and legal assessment of expanding boundaries beyond its current footprint to be better positioned to bring value and economic opportunities to more of the County.
Author: Kienan Briscoe
One Response
I voted “No”, unbeknownst of the tribal opposition, as a sdu’hubs Honorary Tulalip tribal member. We honor Father Sky who gives direction to water spirit that we may use respectfully….through all that attempts to gain grounds our families fished and harvested foods provided, never forgetting to leave a basket of our foods and goods for a love offering…There are many rivers and tributaries this land sought by the Port of Everett will hurt the many humans living off our lands. Please re-consider…
Respectfully,
KuuleiMi’
aka: Gloria D Sohappy Jones