The speculation has ended—formal recall efforts are about to begin. On Monday, August 25, petitioners will take the long-anticipated step of filing official papers to recall County Commissioners Chris Barnett and Andreas Blech. A new recall committee, organized under the name Restore JoCo, has been formed to lead the campaign. The move follows months of public debate, mounting frustration, and pointed criticism over the commissioners’ actions in office. For many in Josephine County, the filing represents not only a decisive escalation but also an effort they believe should have come much earlier.
The dual recall petitions, prepared and confirmed for submission, accuse both commissioners of mismanagement, poor judgment, and actions that have eroded public trust in county government. Each petition outlines a series of specific decisions and behaviors that petitioners say have harmed Josephine County and justify immediate removal from office.
The recall petition targeting Commissioner Chris Barnett levels multiple charges of misconduct and questionable decision-making. Petitioners argue that Barnett, elected on a promise of fiscal responsibility and accountability, instead advanced actions that destabilized county operations.
One of the most serious claims is that Barnett voted to temporarily hand over voting power and personnel authority to a single unelected commissioner. Petitioners say this move led directly to a wave of lawsuits, unexplained layoffs, sudden department restructurings, and the dismissal of several respected department directors.
Another charge centers on Barnett’s approval of a voluntary employee resignation program. That program, according to the petition, drained more than $700,000 from county funds in severance and related payouts without clear justification. Residents argue it represented not a cost-saving measure but a mismanaged buyout scheme.
Adding to the controversy is Barnett’s private business history. The Oregon Supreme Court recently upheld a $3.2 million judgment against Barnett’s company for elder financial abuse and breach of contract in connection with the purchase of an RV resort. Petitioners contend that this judgment, while outside county government, raises serious questions about Barnett’s integrity and ability to serve in public office.
The petition also cites Barnett’s January 2025 vote to prematurely cancel the Grants Pass Library District lease agreement. Two months later, Barnett allegedly paid for Facebook advertising to promote an article advocating against the library’s interests—an action that petitioners argue reflects personal bias rather than public service.
Finally, the petition accuses Barnett of threatening citizens and members of the press, claiming he attempted to suppress First Amendment rights when confronted with criticism. For petitioners, these actions together illustrate a pattern of poor judgment and an erosion of the trust necessary for effective governance.
The companion petition to recall Commissioner Andreas Blech outlines a separate, but parallel, set of concerns. Petitioners argue that Blech’s time in office has been marked by poor management, disrespect for citizens, and a lack of transparency.
According to the petition, Blech attempted to promote the County’s IT/Emergency Management Director to a newly created position with a total compensation package nearing $388,000 per year—an unprecedented and controversial salary figure in county government. The plan was never fully enacted but has remained a point of contention.
Blech also accepted temporary sole personnel authority during a period of board restructuring. Petitioners argue that the decisions he made under that authority—including unexplained layoffs, reorganizations, and the firing of respected department directors—have destabilized county government and invited litigation.
The petition further criticizes Blech for supporting the same voluntary resignation program that cost the county more than $700,000, again without what petitioners see as adequate justification or oversight.
Beyond financial issues, Blech is accused of insulting county residents during weekly business sessions and refusing to answer citizen or media questions. Petitioners argue that such conduct demonstrates not just poor management, but open disregard for the community he was “appointed” to represent.
Both petitions emphasize that the outlined actions are “a sample” of broader patterns of behavior that have hurt Josephine County, reduced transparency, and undermined faith in local government. Petitioners insist that the cumulative effect of these actions warrants the immediate recall of both commissioners.
For many residents, the recall effort feels overdue. The decisions, controversies, and disputes that have unfolded over the past year—ranging from library lease battles to accusations of financial mismanagement—have left parts of the community disillusioned. The recall petitions aim to give voters a chance to decide whether Barnett and Blech should continue in their roles or be removed before the end of their terms.
Once filed on Monday, the petitions will undergo review before being approved for circulation. Petitioners will then face the challenge of gathering thousands of valid signatures within a limited timeframe to qualify the recalls for the ballot. Should the petitions succeed, voters could see recall elections later this year, setting up a pivotal moment in Josephine County politics.
For now, the filing marks a significant turning point. What has lingered as rumor and discussion for months will, by Monday morning, become a formal campaign. Petitioners argue that restoring accountability in Josephine County government requires nothing less.