The race for Josephine County Commissioner is heating up with growing concerns surrounding candidate Chris Barnett’s financial and business ties to sitting Commissioner John West, currently under investigation for ethical violations. At the center of the controversy is Barnett’s long-standing relationship with West, whose real estate dealings appear closely intertwined with Barnett’s campaign and business activities.
For over 15 years, Barnett and West have worked together on real estate deals, raising questions about their financial entanglement. Barnett has an exclusive listing agreement for a significant 39-acre parcel Russell Road Estates subdivision that had previously been restricted from residential zoning. Remarkably, after West’s acquisition of the property, the zoning changed, allowing the subdivision to be listed by Barnett’s agency. This has led to concerns over potential backroom deals and conflicts of interest.
Barnett has publicly claimed that he has “no business relationship” with West beyond professional dealings. While it is true that the two have no joint business entities on record, Barnett’s role as West’s exclusive real estate agent is well-documented on more than several properties owned by West, a fact that is easily verified through public records. These ties suggest that Barnett’s denial of any deeper involvement is at best misleading.
Barnett’s financial connection to West has come under further scrutiny following revelations about his campaign spending. According to local reports, Barnett has spent over $12,000 on campaign signs alone, sparking criticism that his campaign is more focused on marketing than policy. Critics argue that Barnett is banking on name recognition rather than engaging with the public or presenting a clear political platform. Despite numerous community forums, Barnett has largely remained absent, fueling speculation that he is avoiding public scrutiny.
As the election approaches, voters in Josephine County are being urged to closely examine the candidates’ actions and affiliations. The intricate relationship between Barnett and West, combined with Barnett’s extravagant campaign spending, raises legitimate concerns about transparency and accountability. Voters deserve clarity on the policies and ethical standards of those seeking to lead their community, and Barnett has yet to provide that.
Ultimately, the question remains: Will voters prioritize name recognition or demand real answers on policy and ethics from their candidates? As Barnett continues his bid for County Commissioner, the public will be watching closely to see whether he can overcome the growing doubts surrounding his campaign.
