A saga that has ignited local controversy has placed former county commissioner candidate Chris Barnett at the center of a web of deceit. Barnett has been accused of attempting to suppress a damaging real estate lawsuit that cost 71 elderly residents at least $500,000 in damages, bringing the total judgment against him to $3.2 million. The case, which also implicated Barnett in “elder abuse,” has resurfaced with a definitive ruling from the Oregon Supreme Court, exposing his denials as falsehoods and raising serious ethical concerns.
The story began during Barnett’s campaign for county commissioner, when rumors of the lawsuit first began to surface. Like many concerned citizens, I questioned his integrity on social media, citing the lawsuit as evidence of unethical behavior. Barnett’s response was swift and defensive. In a Facebook exchange, he wrote:
“Russell McAlmond, old news and not true. Apparently, you’re part of the lies and will be part of the Tribune suit possibly for libel? Are you also a contributor because your posts do point to that? Lies are not good and again you’re assuming things and making them look true when they are not.” (I have a screenshot of this quote)
Not only did Barnett dismiss the lawsuit as “not true,” but he also threatened to sue me for libel, accusing me of spreading lies. His attempt to silence critics and obscure the truth was bold and manipulative. But was I lying, as Barnett claimed? Absolutely not.
The truth, now revealed by the Oregon Supreme Court, is unequivocal. The court’s final ruling upheld that Barnett was liable for defrauding 71 elderly individuals by refusing to honor the memberships they had paid thousands of dollars for, financially harming all of them in the process. The court also affirmed the charge of “elder abuse,” a severe accusation that cuts to the heart of Barnett’s character. This was not simply a business misstep—it was a deliberate betrayal of vulnerable seniors.
For voters, this revelation should serve as a wake-up call. Ethics are foundational to public office. A county commissioner must be trustworthy, transparent, and accountable—qualities Barnett has clearly proven to lack. By denying the lawsuit and attacking those who spoke out, including myself and the Grants Pass Tribune, Barnett sought to mislead the public and protect his political ambitions. Had voters been aware of the full extent of his actions, they might have chosen a more principled candidate, like Colene Martin, instead.
The Grants Pass Tribune, which diligently reported on the lawsuit, faced similar accusations of “libel” from Barnett. Yet, like my own claims, the Tribune’s reporting has been vindicated by the court’s ruling. We were not spreading lies—we were exposing the truth.
In recent months, I have taken to calling Barnett “Unethical Chris Barnett” on social media, a nickname now corroborated by the state’s highest court. It’s unfortunate that many voters, swayed by his denials, may have dismissed the accusations as mere rumors. The reality is far more serious: Barnett’s actions harmed dozens of elderly residents, and his lies only served to compound the injustice.
As our community reflects on this case, one thing is abundantly clear: integrity matters. We deserve leaders who own their mistakes, not those who hide behind threats and falsehoods. The Oregon Supreme Court’s ruling is not just a legal victory—it is a powerful reminder to hold our elected officials accountable and demand the truth, no matter how hard some may try to bury it.
For more details on the case visit the Oregon Supreme Court’s public records. Let’s keep the conversation going—because in Grants Pass, the truth always finds a way.