On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote:
> But, basically, what it boils down to, effectively, for us, is that tribal > nations, as far as the current supreme court is concerned, views such areas > as being much more analogous to Puerto Rico and Guam than as states, cities > or counties. PR and Guam are subservient territories of the US, but aren't > states. What's the tagging for them relative to the rest of the US? > 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]. Regards, Greg 1 http://www.azmag.gov/archive/AZ-COGs/index.asp 2 https://gist.github.com/pnorman/30244b2984216285735d#file-arizona-geojson 3 http://www.tonation-nsn.gov/school-bus-routes.aspx 4 https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/07/25/tohono-oodham-closer-glendale-casino-tribes-continue-fight-ruling-156037 5 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/33.5171/-111.8703 6 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/33.2636/-112.0111
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
