Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Election Integrity And Governance Trust topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public raises election-integrity concerns and calls for resignations; county officials urge due process and explain oath timing
Summary
Multiple public commenters alleged election irregularities and criticized a private swearing-in and a law-enforcement search; county officials and commissioners responded that investigations and sworn-oath requirements are handled by agencies and that the swearing-ins followed Oregon law.
Get email alerts on the Election Integrity And Governance Trust topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several attendees used the Jan. 9 public-comment period to raise concerns about election integrity, a law-enforcement search warrant executed before the election, and the private swearing-in of an elected commissioner; some callers urged resignation or recall if criminal charges result.
Speakers including Steven Hunter and Mark Reekssecker alleged failures in the election process and said they wanted records and transparency. Teresa Hamilton asked whether a commissioner would step down if convicted and asked Chair Craig Roberts whether he would demand a resignation. Others publicly criticized a private or “secret” swearing-in and asked who administered the oath.
County Administrator Gary Schmidt responded that, by Oregon law, county commissioners take office the first Monday in January and are required to be sworn in prior to taking office. He said Chair Roberts, Commissioner Schroeder and Commissioner Fireside each were formally sworn in at a private ceremony prior to Jan. 6 and that the swearing-ins were done in accordance with state law.
Chair Roberts and other commissioners urged the public to allow law-enforcement and relevant agencies to complete investigative processes before drawing conclusions. Several commissioners reiterated they are listening to constituent concerns and emphasized the importance of rebuilding trust. No formal board action or vote on the matters raised was taken during the meeting.
The meeting record shows public testimony and commissioners’ remarks; allegations made by members of the public were presented as testimony and were not adjudicated or substantiated at the Jan. 9 meeting.

