Residents raise concerns at Lincoln County meeting about commissioner conduct, office access and responsiveness
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
At the June 4 meeting residents delivered multiple public comments alleging unprofessional conduct by county officials, criticized the decision to rent an off‑site office for a commissioner, and asked for follow‑up responses to written inquiries; speakers requested apologies and better communication from the Board.
Several Lincoln County residents used the June 4 public‑comment period to raise complaints about commissioner conduct, office access and the county’s responsiveness to constituent inquiries.
Cindy Chufo of Depoe Bay said she was “appalled” by what she described as abrupt and threatening behavior during a prior public hearing and requested an apology: “I was very offended by that. I was appalled, really.” Patty Green raised a property access dispute on the Siletz River and said she had not received a county response; she asked the county to review a public‑access right‑of‑way that she said is blocked by a privately installed dock.
Several speakers focused on administration and the county’s treatment of Commissioner Casey Miller. Barbara Davis told the board she had written questions that had not received a response and challenged the legal basis for renting an off‑site office for a commissioner; she quoted the Oregon Constitution in urging transparency. Christine Hutchins asked why taxpayer funds were used to rent a separate office and said she saw “a level of arrogance” in county leadership. Michael Morse and others said they and other residents had not received replies to messages and encouraged the board to improve communication.
Speakers attributed and cited different sources: one commenter referenced the FBI definition of domestic terrorism in a broader complaint about limiting public testimony; another asked whether mediation would be preferable to paying for an off‑site office. Commissioners did not take formal action on these public comments during the meeting; Chair Claire Hall and staff indicated they would follow up with sign‑in individuals after the meeting. The board adjourned with the next regular meeting scheduled for June 18.
Context and limits: These statements were made during public comment and reflect the views and allegations of the speakers. The board did not issue a public determination on the allegations at the meeting, and the article does not make factual claims beyond the speakers’ statements.