Excuse me, since when is an Indian tribe a public agency of the state? All of the "agencies" so defined in this bill spring from the U.S. and from the state constitutions. Tribes do not! Try a few history, civic, and legal lessons, and then try to tell me that an Indian tribe is commensurate with all the forms of government that spring from the U.S.'s republican form of government.
This is an affront to the people that are being governed by legislators such as Rep. Fromhold. To promote such irresponsible, and really, ill-informed legislation is beyond what the citizens of the state should have to put up with.
This is another one of those laws that plays upon the baseless myth that Indians and tribes are the great environmental stewards of the universe!
Anyone that follows historical or current affairs knows that throughout time, tribes and bands of Indians laid waste to just as much of the environment in America, and the United States as the next non-Indian person. To this day, tribes across the U.S., including in Western Washington and Eastern Washington, lay waste to their reservation property, cause millions of dollars in damage to their local environments, and the taxpayers always end up having to come in, pay to have these messes cleaned up. They also have become some of the most profligate, over-consumers of natural resources, water in particular being the resource of choice that they like to waste. On balance tribes are now rivaling the greatest water wasters, the developers of the misplaced mega-resorts of Las Vegas!
Furthermore, at a very elementary level, like Civics 101, the State cannot farm out its obligation to manage the citizens' property to an entity over which there is no accountability or control. Let me see, what happens when a tribe mismanages a DNR property (which check out the imbroglio over a tribe's management of a bison range in Montana for a good example)? The tribe will be the first to claim its sovereignty and a concomitant bar against being sued. It will claim that it cannot be forced to perform under any contract (due to its "sovereignty"), and it will trot out at the first sign of any disagreement the long and maudlin history that it claims has occurred, and which by extension entitles it to sympathy and exemption from any criticism, and/or obligation to do anything which benefits the non-tribal government that may seek its cooperation. Translation - a bad attitude will settle in once all the happy feet dancing over getting the contract is over.
If that is too stark, and seems just a bit cynical, you bet! Why should any of us feel good about an attempt by a government official to subject the citizens that they have taken an oath to protect, to another political entity which has no right to govern us, and/or have authority over our property!