SUQUAMISH — Parties interested in the future ownership of Old Man House Park came together July 1 to hear what a Seattle radio show host had to say about the issue — but many gave him an earful as well.

Station KTTH 770 AM talk show host Mike Siegel visited the state park and met with about 70 residents Thursday afternoon. Siegel has been discussing Old Man House State Park on his show recently and is in favor of the park remaining in public ownership.

The Suquamish Tribe has formally requested that the state transfer ownership of the park to the tribe, but a group of neighbors, Friends of Old Man House Park, opposes this action. The discussion re-exposed a cultural rift in the community that members began to bridge last weekend during “Imagine Suquamish Day.”

Siegel discussed the legal issues at hand as well as claimed that the issue was an example of how tribes are one of the biggest lobbying groups in Washington state.

“Why am I here? Because the legislature pulled a backroom deal to do this transfer,” he said, noting the process needs to be more open to the public.

While Siegel said he understood that past treaties with tribes had been broken and Native Americans were mistreated, this was a different issue.

“Breaking treaties was dead wrong but the fact is, there are laws,” he said. “This land was not confiscated, it was sold.”

But tribal members didn’t see any of that money, yelled out several members of the crowd.

Talk between Siegel and the crowd of residents ranged from federal treaty rights to how tribes influence the legislature not only on property issues but in terms of gambling and casinos as well.

“We have to do that to survive,” said tribal spokesperson Leonard Forsman. “Everyone needs to lobby.”

“Why are you singling us out?” Tribal Executive director Wayne George asked Siegel.

“You don’t pay attention to my show,” Siegel replied. “This is an issue that caught my attention because of duplicitous interests of tribal interests and non-tribal interests.”

While everyone agreed that the tribe and the Friends should be working together, it’s just a matter of how. Both groups have claimed they have invited everyone to participate in creating management plans for the park, but the two parties disagree on how each other’s plans should be implemented.

“The tribe is willing to work with folks,” George said, referring to the fact that residents can advise Tribal Council of their concerns. “We just want to work with people.”

“I agree,” said resident Steve Ramsay. “The point is, I don’t like the idea of non-tribal members who can’t participate in the decision making.”

“They can,” George responded.

“There is no democracy when one group makes a decision,” Ramsay quipped.

Friends group leader Matthew Cleverley said he wanted to know why the community couldn’t work together, use the tribe’s management plan, yet keep it in state ownership.

“You guys are so afraid of the tribe owning a little piece of waterfront,” Forsman said, noting that the tribe was seeking the land for cultural reasons.

“You want it to own on a title,” Siegel said. “That’s not cultural, that’s legal.”

“They don’t mind the county owning it, (or) the state to own it, they just don’t want Indians to own it,” Forsman said.