For most of American history, county commissioners have been elected by the people they serve — entrusted to oversee local government operations, budgets, and public policy. These officials make critical decisions that affect every corner of daily life, from law enforcement funding to infrastructure development. But in Josephine County, Oregon, this long-standing democratic principle is under threat as appointed commissioners consolidate power without direct voter consent.
County commissioners have traditionally been elected to ensure they remain accountable to the public. This electoral process has long been a bedrock of local democracy, where the people retain the ultimate authority to choose — and remove — those in charge. While appointed officials can fill temporary vacancies when necessary, they were never intended to wield unchecked and prolonged control over local government.
Yet that is precisely what is happening in Josephine County, where Commissioner Andreas Blech — a twice-appointed official who has never been elected — now chairs the Board of Commissioners. In this role, Blech has been granted sweeping, unilateral authority over all county departments for a 90-day period — without public oversight, without a vote, and without accountability to the residents of the county. And who gave him this power? His fellow commissioners, Chris Barnett and Ron Smith.
Among Blech’s first moves, carried out with no oversight, was the rehiring of former Commissioner Simon Hare, now serving as Budget Officer and placed in charge of the county’s finances. This hiring took place outside the standard public hiring process outlined in county and state guidelines. There was no public notice, no open application, and no transparent selection process — violating not only ethical standards but also legal requirements. This alone raises significant questions about the integrity of county governance.
Josephine County policy and Oregon law require that positions of such significance be publicly posted to ensure transparency and equal opportunity. Discussions and decisions around such appointments are required to comply with Oregon’s public meetings law, which mandates that deliberations and votes be conducted openly. Additionally, county Human Resources protocols require standardized hiring practices that ensure fairness and prevent discrimination. None of these processes were followed in Hare’s appointment.
Hare also remains under contract for an IT Broadband Grant project, though there is little to no visible progress on that effort. Public records requests to reveal Hare’s current invoices and scope of work have gone unanswered, fueling suspicions of cronyism and possible misuse of public resources.
Compounding the county’s troubles, Blech recently announced a delay to the 2025-26 fiscal year budget process by two weeks, without providing any explanation. This sudden shift leaves county departments scrambling to adjust to new deadlines, creating uncertainty around essential services that rely on timely budgeting. As county employees and residents alike question the leadership’s capacity to manage public funds, concerns over the county’s stability grow.
In an effort to “stabilize” county operations, Blech has appointed Ruth Nelson as Finance Manager — a role in which she now inherits a volatile financial situation within an already unstable leadership structure. Further compounding the dysfunction, Michael Sellers, who already oversees Information Technology (IT), Emergency Management (EM), and Board of County Commissioners (BCC) office administration — in addition to working half-time for Senator Robinson now been appointed as Interim Director of both Finance and Human Resources (HR). This creates an alarming concentration of power within a single individual. If Sellers is in control of Finance, HR, and IT, there are effectively no checks and balances to prevent fraud or abuse — a structure that may not be illegal but directly conflicts with accounting best practices.
Equally concerning is the fact that Sellers’ appointment only violates county hiring policies if he is classified as an employee. If he is being treated as an independent contractor, it would not necessarily violate policy — however, personal services contracts must be reviewed by both Legal and HR to ensure compliance. IRS regulations use a six-point test to determine if an individual qualifies as an independent contractor versus an employee. It is highly questionable whether such an analysis was ever conducted in Sellers’ case.
Finally, beyond structural and procedural concerns, this consolidation of roles creates serious operational risks. Should a major emergency arise — one demanding full-time leadership from Emergency Management and IT — how could one person effectively manage both critical functions simultaneously, along with overseeing Finance and HR? Additionally, if any county employee has a grievance involving Sellers, who would they report it to when he oversees Human Resources as well?
This excessive overlap of authority, lack of oversight, and absence of proper internal controls raise serious ethical and functional concerns about Blech’s ability to operate responsibly and effectively.
The broader issue facing Josephine County is not simply who holds these roles, but how they assumed power in the first place. When elected officials fail, voters can hold them accountable at the ballot box. But when appointed commissioners gain unprecedented authority without ever facing the electorate, the public’s voice is effectively silenced.
The elevation of Andreas Blech to commission chair, with total control over county departments and policies for 90 days, represents a profound breakdown in local democratic governance. Residents now face a scenario where a single unelected individual can shape the county’s future without answering to the people.
This situation is not unique to Josephine County. Across the United States, some local governments are quietly moving toward appointed commissions, enabled by “home rule” charters and other legal mechanisms. While technically lawful, such systems often violate the spirit of democracy, undermining the principle that public officials should derive their power from the consent of the governed.
At a time when trust in government is already fragile, the opaque way in which Josephine County’s leadership is operating continues to further erode public confidence. Behind closed doors, significant appointments are being made that will shape the county’s finances and operations for years to come — yet the public has been kept largely in the dark.
Citizens are left wondering why these appointments were made without any public input or transparent discussion, why the budget process is suddenly delayed, and what measures are in place to prevent abuse of this newfound concentration of power. Without clear answers, the county appears to be operating on shaky ground, leaving taxpayers and residents uncertain about the future of their government and its ability to deliver essential services.
Ultimately, the events unfolding in Josephine County highlight an urgent need for transparency, public involvement, and electoral accountability in local governance. If county commissioners are to hold such immense authority, they must be accountable to the voters — not merely to their political allies. Public engagement, transparent processes, and an insistence on elections over appointments are necessary to restore integrity to local government.
The people of Josephine County, and citizens across the nation, must see this as a call to action. County government is where democracy should be at its strongest — closest to the people. But when appointed officials hold absolute power, the will of the people is reduced to an afterthought. If this is not what democracy looks like, then residents must ask themselves what steps they are willing to take to reclaim their voice and restore the democratic process before it’s too late.
In the end, the real question remains: Did you vote for this? And if not, how long will you tolerate a system that denies you a say in who governs your community?
