Oregon is facing some of the most pressing challenges in the nation, ranking near the bottom in areas such as drug addiction, homelessness, education, and taxation. These issues have reached a level where residents and businesses are leaving the state. I’ve written extensively about this before. These are state-level problems, caused by decisions made in Salem, and only state-level leadership can resolve them. No local government, no matter how competent, can single-handedly fix the consequences of years of failed policy decisions made by Oregon’s supermajority Democratic leadership.
I’m proud to have met and support our leaders like Representative Dwayne Yunker and Senator Noah Robinson. I’ve stood behind their legislative efforts and appreciate their work. Unfortunately, they are outnumbered in Salem, and unless we shift the balance at the state level, meaningful change will remain out of reach. That’s where our resources and energy should be focused: electing leaders who will fix the root causes of Oregon’s decline. Just as I am proud to have met many of our local leaders, commissioners, many city council members and mayor.
Yet, instead of tackling those broader systemic issues, I’m seeing an astonishing amount of time, energy, and resources being spent attacking our local county commissioners. These attacks are largely centered around issues far less consequential than the state-level problems we’re facing. That’s not to say local governance is perfect or beyond scrutiny, there are certainly matters that require clarification and are serious (I have listed them below) but to treat them as grounds for recall is, in my opinion, misguided.
Consider the following examples:
- The county library was never evicted. Despite the noise, no eviction ever occurred or was going to occur. The commissioners were simply fulfilling their duty of overseeing taxpayer funds.
- Criticism has also been leveled over minor administrative decisions, such as disabling comments on social media or purchasing morale-boosting coins for $2,500. That’s a negligible cost compared to the estimated $60,000 a recall effort would impose on taxpayers.
- We’ve heard grievances from a few laid-off employees. While any job loss is difficult, managing staff and budgets is part of the commissioners’ responsibility. Using layoffs as recall justification sets a dangerous precedent. Are we supposed to recall a commissioner every time an employee is laid off and publicly disagrees with the decision.
That said, I do believe there are two serious matters that warrant public explanation and potential correction:
1. Department Cuts and Code Enforcement:
What departments were cut so deeply they are no longer functional? I’m especially concerned about the status of the Code Enforcement Department. This department plays a vital role in public safety and should be treated as critical infrastructure, alongside law enforcement and fire services. If it is not currently operational, the public deserves to know why and when it will be restored. These are questions that must be answered publicly, not behind closed doors or through private phone calls.
Note: It is also worth noting that when elected officials temporarily hand authority to non-elected individuals, who then delegate it to another non-elected bureaucrat, this risks removing accountability from the democratic process. That practice must be avoided in the future. That was wrong.
2. Emergency Management Oversight:
There have been some concerns raised about Emergency Management (EM). While I have not personally experienced failures in EM, the concerns may deserve an objective review by people who are actually experienced in the service. An independent assessment should be conducted to ensure our community is adequately prepared for emergencies, and any deficiencies must be addressed. After all it is extremely critical that our EM services are 100% up to speed.
To be clear, I do not believe these concerns rise to the level of a recall, provided they are addressed transparently and corrected. But they are serious enough to warrant full public disclosure.
Unfortunately, it appears that the usual groups pushing for a recall include a mix of the progressive base and certain so-called pseud republicans (I refer to them as closet democrats). Their goal seems to be replacing conservative commissioners with candidates who would support policies similar to those that have contributed to Oregon’s current problems. We saw these same types of candidates in the last commissioners election, some of whom openly supported raising taxes.
Conclusion:
In closing, while I believe there are serious issues to fix, the smarter, more productive path is not tearing the community apart with yet another recall. Let’s work with the commissioners, demand transparency where it’s needed, and correct what must be corrected, without undermining the officials elected to lead. Let’s reserve our energy for real change at the state level, where the decisions that shape Oregon’s future are truly being made.
