Simon Hare is campaigning to become Josephine County Treasurer with an unresolved $25,000 county payment still attached to his brief tenure as budget officer, a financial dispute that has persisted since he resigned before completing the county’s budget assignment in 2025.
No repayment of the disputed money has been publicly documented. No repayment agreement has been disclosed. Questions submitted to Hare and Josephine County officials concerning the status of the money have yet to produce a definitive public accounting of what was returned, what remains outstanding or what action the county intends to pursue.
The Grants Pass Tribune again contacted Commissioners Ron Smith, Colene Martin and Gary Richardson, county legal counsel and Hare last week seeking documentation and answers concerning the $25,000. The newspaper asked whether the county has formally determined that Hare owes money for contractual services that were not completed, whether any portion has been repaid, whether a repayment arrangement has been proposed and whether the county has issued a demand, considered collection or contemplated litigation.
The questions have acquired greater consequence now that Hare is seeking election as county treasurer, an office built around the custody, administration and accounting of public money.
The dispute dates to 2025, when Josephine County hired Hare, a former county commissioner, to serve as budget officer during a period of considerable upheaval inside county government. Hare was selected through a contractual arrangement carrying a $25,000 payment, which county discussions and records previously reviewed by the Tribune indicate was paid upfront.
Hare resigned in April 2025 before completing the county budget.
His departure came amid an acrimonious confrontation with then commissioners Andreas Blech, Chris Barnett and Ron Smith. Hare accused the board of failing in its responsibilities and publicly called for the commissioners to resign. The political conflict surrounding his departure, however, left a separate financial matter unresolved: Josephine County had paid $25,000 for an assignment Hare did not finish.
County officials subsequently confronted the question of recovering the payment. Public discussions established that the budget work remained incomplete, but the available record has not established that the $25,000 was returned. More than a year later, the county has not publicly produced documentation showing the matter has been financially settled.
That unresolved accounting now accompanies Hare into another campaign for county office.
Hare has previously addressed the controversy and offered his version of the circumstances surrounding his departure as budget officer. His explanation of the political conflict does not resolve the underlying accounting question. The county either received contractual work sufficient to justify the entire $25,000 payment, or some portion of that money remains subject to recovery. County records should be capable of establishing which is true.
The Tribune has requested invoices, payment records, correspondence, contract amendments, legal notices and repayment communications that could establish precisely what work was performed, what the county paid for and whether officials believe taxpayers are entitled to reimbursement.
Until those records demonstrate otherwise, the documented sequence remains unchanged: Josephine County entered into a $25,000 arrangement with Hare to perform budget work, Hare resigned before completing the assignment, county officials subsequently addressed recovery of the money, and no public documentation reviewed by the Tribune establishes that the disputed payment has been returned.
The controversy is not Hare’s first collision with public accountability during his years in Josephine County politics.
While serving as a county commissioner in December 2015, Hare was arrested in Eugene on suspicion of driving under the influence of intoxicants and reckless driving. Police reported that Hare drove his Toyota Tundra into the path of an officer, forcing the officer to brake to avoid a collision.
Hare later announced that he would enter an outpatient treatment and diversion program. In a public statement following the arrest, Hare acknowledged that alcohol had contributed to poor decisions.
That episode followed another controversy involving suggestive text messages sent from another person’s telephone while Hare was at a Grants Pass establishment. Hare publicly apologized for the incident and described it as a prank that had gone wrong.
His earlier record also included a 2013 investigation after Hare reported his Jeep stolen. A Medford police detective investigating the report concluded that Hare had made a false report, according to contemporaneous reporting. The Oregon Department of Justice ultimately determined there was insufficient evidence to pursue criminal charges, and no prosecution resulted.
Those episodes are part of Hare’s documented history in public office. They do not establish a present alcohol problem, nor does the Tribune have evidence sufficient to make such a claim. They do establish that Hare’s years in Josephine County government have included controversies involving personal judgment, public conduct and, more recently, an unresolved financial dispute involving taxpayer money.
The Tribune has also obtained firsthand information offering possible explanations for why certain matters involving Hare and other former county officials have remained unresolved. That information is not being published because the newspaper has not obtained sufficient independent evidence to substantiate those assertions. Speculation cannot substitute for documentation, regardless of how compelling an allegation may appear.
The $25,000 payment requires no speculation.
The contract existed. Josephine County made the payment. Hare accepted the budget assignment. He resigned before finishing it. County officials later confronted the question of recovering the money. The public record reviewed by the Tribune contains no documentation establishing that the disputed $25,000 has been repaid.
Josephine County also carries responsibility for explaining how the arrangement was handled. County officials approved the contract and authorized public money for the assignment. If the entire payment was earned despite Hare’s departure before completion of the budget, the county can document that conclusion. If all or part of the money remains owed, officials can identify the amount and disclose what has been done to recover it.
Hare can provide the same clarity from the other side of the transaction. Contract records, completed work, invoices, correspondence or evidence of repayment could establish his position without political argument or competing interpretations.
Instead, a county financial transaction that should be traceable through ordinary government records remains unsettled in the public record while the person who received the money campaigns for an office responsible for county finances.
Hare’s candidacy consequently brings his tenure as budget officer back before Josephine County residents not as a piece of forgotten political history, but as unfinished county business.
The $25,000 controversy has now survived Hare’s resignation, more than a year of county government and another election season. The central question has never required political theater or speculation. Josephine County paid Hare $25,000 for a budget assignment he did not complete, and the public record available to the Tribune still does not document the return of that money.
For a candidate seeking the office of Josephine County Treasurer, that is a financial record voters are entitled to examine before November.