Issuu

FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY26, 2025

GRANTSPASSTRIBUNE.COM | $0.00

Concerns Over Shadow Governance in Josephine County

However, questions have arisen about the Simon Hare and John 26th. legitimacy of these meetings and the accuracy West Both Influence of the billing, particularly with reference to the “BAT,” which may have been a mix-up Commissioner Barnett acronym with the Broadband Technical Assistance ProBy: John Oliver Recent developments in Josephine County have sparked questions about the influence of former County Commissioner Simon Hare on current Commissioner Chris Barnett. Despite not holding office, Hare has reportedly been playing an influential role behind the scenes, calling into question who is truly in charge of county decisions. Barnett, who has acknowledged Hare as his personal mentor, seems to be heavily guided by Hare’s advice, which raises concerns given the former commissioner’s controversial history. The situation came back to light through public records requests regarding Hare’s frequent appearances at the county commissioner's office. These records suggest that Hare has been more involved in county affairs than the public might realize, despite not holding an official position. In one recent discovery, it was revealed that on January 31st, 2024, Hare was paid $3,200 for his services, though there is no approved contract or clear scope of work attached to this payment. The invoice states that Hare attended several meetings, including a "BAT" meeting on January 9th, 2024, followed by "Leadership" meetings on January 16th and

gram (BTAP). If Hare was indeed attending the wrong meetings, questions about his qualifications for the role he was paid for only deepen. Adding to the controversy, Barnett has publicly stated that Hare serves as his personal mentor in his role as commissioner. This relationship has raised eyebrows, especially considering Barnett's early election, which many viewed as the result of a lack of experience for such a crucial leadership position. Barnett's admission of relying on a former commissioner with a controversial past only intensifies concerns about his independence in office. Hare’s history is riddled with scandals, including ethical violations, allegations of misconduct, and a DUI incident that involved a strip club in 2018. He also faced accusations of attempting to leverage his position for personal gain, including reporting his car as stolen after allegedly being too intoxicated to remember where he parked. These issues led to his ousting from office in 2018, yet now, with Barnett at the helm, Hare seems to have found a way to continue influencing county politics without facing voters. Sources also suggest that Hare has been involved in writing grant requests for certain

businesses in Josephine County, which raises further questions about who authorized this role and whether it constitutes a conflict of interest. Given his tarnished reputation, some worry that his influence may be benefiting select individuals rather than serving the broader needs of the county. Furthermore, Hare’s close ties to former Commissioner John West only add fuel to the fire. The connections between Hare, Barnett, and West have led some observers to question whether the county’s leadership is being manipulated by figures who were rejected by voters in the past. Given Hare’s past unethical behavior, his continued involvement in county affairs raises serious concerns about the integrity of local governance. With Barnett’s alignment with Hare, the key question is whether he is an independent leader or simply a puppet for figures who lost the public's trust long ago. The people of Josephine

County deserve leadership that is both competent and accountable, not one influenced by individuals with questionable pasts. This situation underscores the urgent need for greater transparency and accountability within Josephine County’s government. If a former commissioner with such a controversial history continues to exert influence over policy decisions, it calls into question the integrity of the county's leadership. Residents deserve leadership that prioritizes their best interests, not the agendas of individuals who were previously rejected by voters. With growing concerns about the influence of past officials, it's time for the community to demand a government that is both transparent and accountable. As this investigation progresses and more records are uncovered, the truth behind these actions will continue to emerge, and the people of Josephine County deserve to know the full extent of what is happening behind the scenes.

Oregon Lawmakers Evaluate $217.9 Million Shelter Funding Proposal GPT News Desk Oregon lawmakers are currently deliberating a significant funding proposal aimed at addressing homelessness in the state. The legislation, which has garnered attention in both local and state-level discussions, calls for the allocation of $217.9 million from the general fund over the next biennium to support shelter programs across Oregon. The funding is part of Governor Tina Kotek’s 2025 biennium budget and is seen as a critical step in combating homelessness while ensuring shelter systems are more accessible and effective. A key component of the bill mandates that at least 70% of the funds be directed to low-barrier shelters. These shelters are designed to serve individuals who face multiple barriers to housing, such as those with criminal records, substance abuse issues, or mental health conditions. The goal is to provide immediate, safe shelter to people in need, without the stringent entry requirements that can often exclude some of the most vulnerable individuals. The remaining portion of the funding, approximately 30%, would be dedicated to recovery-based shelters. These facilities are tailored to individuals who are working toward recovery from addiction, offering a more supportive environment that focuses on long-term well-being. Recovery-based shelters provide not only housing but also resources and programs aimed at

helping individuals stabilize their lives and transition toward self-sufficiency. In addition to the funding breakdown, the bill includes provisions for transparency and accountability. The Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) agency would be responsible for reporting annually to the state legislature on the outcomes of the program. This annual reporting requirement aims to ensure that the funding is used effectively and that progress is tracked, allowing lawmakers to assess the impact of the initiative and make adjustments as necessary. The proposal is part of a broader effort by the state to address the growing homelessness crisis, which has become an increasing concern in Oregon in recent years. With housing shortages, rising rent prices, and economic challenges exacerbated by the pandemic, the state has seen a significant rise in homelessness. The $217.9 million appropriation is viewed as a much-needed

investment to bolster the existing infrastructure of shelters and provide immediate relief to those most in need. Supporters of the bill argue that the initiative is a crucial step toward ensuring that all Oregonians have access to safe and supportive shelter, regardless of their personal circumstances. They emphasize that low-barrier shelters are essential for meeting the needs of individuals who are often excluded from other programs due to past experiences or current challenges. Recovery-based shelters are also seen as a necessary addition, offering individuals the opportunity to rebuild their lives with the support of a community-focused, long-term approach. Critics of the proposal, however, have raised concerns about the effectiveness of the approach and whether it will result in long-term solutions to homelessness. Some argue that simply providing temporary shelter may not be enough to address

the root causes of homelessness, such as the lack of affordable housing or access to mental health services. Others have questioned whether the program’s funding will be sufficient to meet the growing demand for shelter and support services. As lawmakers continue to review the proposal, they will weigh the benefits of investing in shelter infrastructure against the broader challenges of addressing homelessness in Oregon. The outcome of this debate will have significant implications for the future of homelessness policy in the state, as well as for the many individuals who are currently living without stable housing. With the increasing urgency of the homelessness crisis, this funding proposal represents a pivotal moment in Oregon’s efforts to tackle one of the state’s most pressing issues. The discussions surrounding this bill will likely continue in the coming months, as lawmakers consider the best path forward to support those in need and create a more sustainable solution for the future.