Josephine County residents are raising concerns about County Commissioners John West, Andreas Blech, and Herman Baertschiger, accusing them of holding private meetings outside of public sessions, thus undermining transparency, ethics, and accountability in local governance. In a November 6, 2024, Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting, a motion was passed under unusual circumstances that has added fuel to these concerns.
At approximately the two-hour mark (1:59:00) of the meeting, a motion identified as Resolution 2024-4045 was approved without any public discussion. This resolution granted Commissioner Baertschiger special access, although the specifics of the code or the resolution’s purpose were not explained on record. During the meeting, Commissioner Andreas Blech can be heard saying, “I have none, we talked about it earlier,” acknowledging that there had been a prior, off-the-record discussion about this decision, effectively shutting out public awareness and input.
For several years, Commissioner John West has faced criticisms for what residents see as a lack of understanding of his duties and the rules governing his role. Josephine County’s charter explicitly prohibits commissioners from discussing county business privately before BCC meetings, a rule meant to prevent backdoor deals and ensure decisions are made transparently, with full public knowledge and participation. Blech’s on-record admission during the meeting suggests that commissioners discussed and reached a consensus on Resolution 2024-4045 behind closed doors, violating the spirit, if not the letter, of the county’s transparency requirements.
These private meetings and unannounced decisions have prompted multiple ethics complaints against Commissioners West, Blech, and Baertschiger. Complaints submitted to authorities in Salem argue that these commissioners may be prioritizing personal or private interests over their duties to the people. Yet, residents say there has been little response from state authorities, leading to concerns about potential corruption within Oregon’s governance.
Community frustration with Commissioner West’s actions recently led to a formal recall campaign. Recall proponents argue that West’s repeated disregard for transparency and the public trust ultimately undermines the role of a county commissioner. They see the recall as an essential step toward restoring accountability and responsiveness in the office.
In addition, Commissioner Baertschiger’s push to secure special treasury oversight privileges, despite his pending retirement at year’s end, has raised further suspicion. Many residents question the necessity of this move and suspect it could be part of a longer-term plan to maintain influence over county finances even after his departure. This request, coupled with the commissioners’ conduct in private meetings, has amplified fears that they may be acting to further their interests rather than the public good.
Community advocates argue that these actions do not just breach the county charter but also undermine democratic governance. They emphasize that commissioners are duty-bound to engage openly with the public, maintain transparency, and uphold the statutes of their office. They argue that secret decision-making violates the trust placed in these officials by Josephine County residents.
As the recall effort against Commissioner West gathers momentum, residents hope to restore transparency and accountability to their local government. However, unless state authorities or county leadership act on the ethics complaints, the future of Josephine County’s governance remains uncertain.
