<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra">I don't mean to offend any one in the tribal nations but I don't really care about voting aspects of the admin levels in the discussion. This is a mechanical geometry placement issue in my view. The Tohono-Oodham and Glendale Arizona case show just how messed this issue can be in making the right choice[1]. A tribe near the Mexican border has "annexed" an area in the middle of Arizona in a savvy business move. The only voting that will be going on in this part of the Tohono-Oodham nation[2] is which slot machine that a person is going to use. What's even more interesting is that the Tohono-Oodham Nation already owns the four geometries: parcels 142-56-018K, 142-56-018L, 142-56-018M, and 142-56-018N as recorded by Maricopa County.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">If boundary=aboriginal_lands is just an _alias_ for a numerical representation of a geometry at the same city admin geometry levels in the OSM scheme of levels that works for me. _Analogously_ the Tohono-Oodam geometry is like a city geometry crossing two county geometries. That analogy does not mean to take away their voting rights or anything else. However, cutting the Indian nation geometries at the state level [3] or at county level so that the outer state and county geometries of Arizona and Maricopa county are "deformed" is just plain wrong. It looks like none of these nation areas are marked in Arizona. For that matter, most of the city boundaries in several Arizona counties need to be deleted and redrawn because they are no longer correct.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Regards,</div><div class="gmail_extra">Greg</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">1 </span><a href="https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/07/25/tohono-oodham-closer-glendale-casino-tribes-continue-fight-ruling-156037">https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/07/25/tohono-oodham-closer-glendale-casino-tribes-continue-fight-ruling-156037</a></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">2 </span><font face="arial, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.54954/-112.25915">http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.54954/-112.25915</a></font></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">3 </span><a href="https://gist.github.com/pnorman/30244b2984216285735d#file-arizona-geojson">https://gist.github.com/pnorman/30244b2984216285735d#file-arizona-geojson</a><br>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Clifford Snow <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:clifford@snowandsnow.us" target="_blank">clifford@snowandsnow.us</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class=""><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Greg Morgan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dr.kludge.gm@gmail.com" target="_blank">dr.kludge.gm@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div><br></div></div><div>I'd say make the changes at the city admin level for these reasons. The tribal nations are viewed by the courts as territories but they tend to act more at the city[4] to county[3] COG [1] level. The squabbles feel more like cities fighting over annexation issues or building alliances for or against economic development[4]. Based on Paul Norman's nice visualization [2] a city boundary feels like the correct admin level verses cutting areas out of county or state levels. Scottsdale cannot grow to the east[5] and Phoenix cannot grow to the south[6] as if the tribal nations are cities. The tribal nations still have to act at or below the county level to get things done[1][3].</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>Tribal lands are not cities. Well some are, but only because they are a city. But most cover large geographical territories. Categorizing tribal lands as city or county, IMHO, is wrong. The reservations are not State (US State) controlled lands. However they do work in partnership with the states and counties on many fronts. Native American people have dual citizenship. Where they live determines who they can vote for in US elections. So where the people reside determines where they vote. </div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">The problem is the admin level boundary doesn't work for tribal lands. From previous discussions I understood that we agreed that boundary=aboriginal_lands was probably the most suitable compromise. The boundary shows tribal lands and the states and county boundaries show where people vote. </div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Paul Johnson, I emphasize with you, but I don't see how we can accommodate Domestic Dependant States in the current admin hierarchy. boundary=aboriginal_lands. </div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I just fixed a boundary for the Swinomish Tribe nearby. The previous boundary cut right through their casino property. Plus the old boundary did not include their water rights. I'd like to do an import of Washington Tribal lands in the near future. Only a small number are in OSM. It would be great if we could agree on a tagging structure. </div>
<span class=""><font color="#888888">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Clifford<br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div>@osm_seattle<br></div><div><a href="http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us" target="_blank">osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us</a></div>
<div>OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch</div></div>
</div></font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>