Josephine County’s political landscape is heating up once again. Jim Goodwin, leader of the recall committee targeting Commissioners Chris Barnett and Andreas Blech, has issued a formal challenge to the commissioners to participate in a public, recorded debate during Thursday’s Weekly Business Session. Goodwin says the community deserves a transparent, face-to-face exchange on the facts—not filtered press releases, one-sided Facebook posts, or selective emails. The proposed debate would place both sides of the county’s escalating recall fight in full view of the public, allowing voters to make their own judgments based on what they see and hear directly. If the commissioners truly believe in transparency, Goodwin argues, then they should welcome this opportunity to stand behind their words in an open forum.
The Grants Pass Tribune strongly supports this idea. A structured, recorded debate would give residents the chance to see the commissioners defend their record in real time and allow petitioners to present their evidence side by side. In a season of dueling narratives and rising mistrust, it may be the clearest path to letting the public decide for themselves.
At the center of the current dispute is a three-page “whitepaper” authored and released last month by Commissioners Blech and Barnett as a rebuttal to the recall petitions filed against them. The document marked, “Prepared by Commissioners Andreas Blech and Chris Barnett, Josephine County, Oregon 9/14/25 v2.03,” was selectively emailed to recipients by Blech and later circulated online. The paper was intended as a point-by-point response to the recall effort, but the recall committee and local fact-checkers say it is riddled with falsehoods, exaggerations, and misleading calculations. Grants Pass Tribune journalist Jay Meredith dissected the document in the September 24th The BCC article titled “The Whitepaper That Wasn’t.” Among the most inflammatory claims is the allegation that the national progressive group Indivisible—and its local Rogue Valley affiliates—is behind the financing and organization of the recall petitions.
This theory was first aired publicly by “Olivia” Herrera on the Bill Meyer Radio Show, where she claimed to have spent years researching Indivisible. Days later, a YouTube video narrated by Jordan Mortenson—a recent ally of Commissioner Barnett and new contributor to Barnett’s various Facebook “news” pages—repeated the claim that “the new recall effort of our Josephine County Commissioners is paid for and organized by none other than Rogue Indivisible.” The statement quickly unraveled. Rogue Indivisible was recently reorganized and, according to its chair. Secretary of State business filings confirm the group has been inactive for several years. When these facts surfaced, Mortenson revised and partially deleted his online posts, though the original video remains online. Critics argue the commissioners and their supporters are deliberately circulating conspiracy theories to distract from legitimate governance issues at the heart of the recall.
The commissioners’ handling of a recent high-level personnel action has intensified accusations of secrecy. In late August, Michael Sellers, Director of Information Technology and Emergency Management, was quietly promoted to Chief of Staff for the Board of County Commissioners—a newly created executive role—with a 21.5 percent pay increase, raising his annual salary to approximately $174,000. The promotion was approved and signed by Commissioners Blech, Barnett, and Ron Smith without any public meeting, job posting, or competitive process, in apparent violation of Oregon’s public meetings law and standard county policy. Initially, Commissioner Blech denied the promotion on local radio and at a Weekly Business Session. But after a public records request by Restore Jo Co PAC, personnel documents confirmed the promotion had indeed been executed behind closed doors.
County Legal Counsel Wally Hicks issued a memo warning commissioners that such personnel actions without public notice carry legal risks, including violations of state transparency statutes. The promotion’s approval without finance department sign-off further raised red flags. Critics say the episode reveals a troubling pattern: major administrative decisions being made privately, followed by public denials, and later confirmed only through public records requests.
The recall campaign formally launched on August 26, 2025, when Jim Goodwin and the Restore Josephine County recall committee filed the necessary paperwork. Eve Arce was appointed to oversee financial reporting. Petitioners must collect over 7,500 valid signatures per commissioner to place the recalls on the ballot—a steep but not unprecedented target in Josephine County politics. Within days, signature-gathering tables appeared outside the Grants Pass Post Office and other public venues. Recall opponents quickly followed suit. In recent weeks, “Olivia” Herrera and Bryan Welden have been spotted at anti-recall tables placed adjacent to signature-gathering sites, leading to tense exchanges. One Facebook video recorded at the Post Office shows both groups presenting conflicting narratives to passers-by.
The petitions reflect months of growing discontent with county leadership. Critics cite Barnett’s support for shifting power temporarily to a single commissioner, triggering layoffs and lawsuits; his role in a costly resignation program that spent over $700,000 in severance; his involvement in canceling the Grants Pass Library District lease; and repeated threats directed toward journalists and citizens. Petitioners also point to his $4.8 million elder financial abuse judgment, upheld by the Oregon Supreme Court earlier this year, as evidence that he is unfit for public office. Blech’s petition emphasizes his alleged disrespect toward constituents and moves to centralize control over public records, which petitioners argue diminishes transparency.
Josephine County’s recall fight is unfolding against a broader backdrop of political tension in Oregon. While the state remains solidly Democratic at the statewide level, rural counties like Josephine are deeply conservative. Recalls have become one of the few mechanisms rural voters can use to challenge leadership between elections. If successful, the removal of two sitting commissioners would significantly reshape the Board of Commissioners and could set off a chain reaction in local governance. If unsuccessful, the effort could deepen existing political divisions and embolden the current board’s leadership style.
Thursday’s proposed debate may represent a pivotal moment. Rather than dueling Facebook posts, anonymous flyers, or selectively emailed “whitepapers,” a public debate would give both sides the chance to lay out their facts in full view. If Commissioners Barnett and Blech accept, they will have the opportunity to defend their record directly before the voters they serve. If they refuse, critics say it will reinforce perceptions that the board prefers to operate behind closed doors while publicly claiming to champion transparency.