DECEMBER 15,
Chronicles of False Statements By Josephine County Commissioner John West, Part Two
By: Jay Meredith, CPA
As mentioned in Part One of this series, immediately upon filing the recall petition in early August 2024, Commissioner West began personal attacks on a few of us who were helping to lead the recall effort. West falsely claimed this effort was from the “other” political party, inaccurately asserted without any research that the recall petition points were not true and began personal attacks against the recall’s chief petitioner and others.
Then came the lawsuits. One was a $500,000 lawsuit against the founder and owner of the Grants Pass Tribune for articles supporting the recall points. Another lawsuit was filed against the County Clerk over the method of verifying recall petition signatures. Finally, a last-minute lawsuit was filed against the chief petitioner over the recall points and language.
The timing of the most recent lawsuit against the recall’s chief petitioner is highly suspect, given that it was filed a week after ballots were mailed out. If Commissioner West had that much of a problem with the petition language, he should have filed this lawsuit four months ago when the recall petition signature-gathering effort began. Filing the case four months later and after ballots were sent out appears to be a political stunt at best.
On December 17th, this case will be tried in the court of public opinion. Then, much later, the case will be tried in a court of law. Personally, I look forward to both because I know all factbased points in the recall petition are true.
The recall petition was allotted 200 words in the legal petition to explain the reasons for the recall. We spent considerable time crafting the language to ensure we could back up any fact-based points. After signature verification, Commissioner West was also given 200 words to fill out a Statement of Justification for the ballot. West didn’t argue against any of the specific points in the recall petition in his Statement of Justification.
However, when it comes to the campaign material developed and distributed by Commissioner West and the Central Committee of the Josephine County Republican Party, false statements in campaign materials are almost too numerous to count. West has been observed making false statements against many other candidates and measures in the past, and West’s recall campaign is quite the work of fiction. Unfortunately for Commissioner West, “ORS 260.532 False publication relating to candidate or measure” covers both printed and digital campaign materials.
Let’s dive into a recall-related brochure prominently featured on the home page of the Josephine County Republican Party (worthy again to note that the founders of this recall movement were all Republicans seeking to hold one of our own accountable). The brochure contains seven “They Lied…” statements referring to the recall petition. Those are as follows:
They Lied, saying John West engaged in “Bad faith negotiations in the Pipe Fork property sale…”
West’s claim: He merely states he did not, citing public records, and claims he’s just one of three on the board.
Truth: After agreeing on a higher revised property sale price after West took office, he insisted at the very last minute on a deed restriction that he knew the BLM would never accept, effectively torpedoing the deal. This was a bad decision, contrary to previous promises, and the County lost a sale of the property for $2.3 million—well above the property’s official appraised value. They Lied, saying John West “Ignored the will of the voters by eliminating funding for community programs including OSU Extension and Law Enforcement…”
West’s claim: He didn’t even argue this one, stating only that there are three commissioners on the board.
Truth: The OSU Extension was a voter-approved service district, and West was the tie-breaking vote when the board elimi-
nated its funding. West was also the tie-breaking vote in a budget approval decision that diverted a significant amount of General Fund revenue from the County Sheriff only six months after voters approved a new Law Enforcement Service District to provide additional revenue for the Sheriff. One County Budget Committee member called this a bait-and-switch, and many in the community are unhappy with West’s budget decisions made right after County voters had approved otherwise.
They Lied, saying “West has shown a pattern of violating state laws, including campaign finance regulations and public meeting laws, and is currently facing several pending ethics and labor law violations.”
West’s claim: He stated he has not been found to have violated any regulations or laws and has been cleared of all investigated claims.
Truth: The Recall Committee has documentation of dozens of campaign finance reporting violations, and Commissioner West even admitted at least twice in video interviews that he spent thousands of dollars of his personal money campaigning on certain ballot issues without reporting the campaign spending. State law requires campaign spending to be reported when it exceeds $250 for the year if you’re campaigning for or against a measure or individual on the ballot. West also admitted to having 13 ethics violation claims filed against him. The Oregon Government Ethics Commission only reports case dispositions online, and only three West case dispositions have been reported. There are also some pending BOLI complaints, and the Recall Committee has documented at least one major incident where West broke County law. See the fact sheet posted at www.RecallJohnWest.com for many of these details.
They Lied, alleging John West “Unlawfully approved a Library
Residents Demand Transparency Over Fairgrounds Roof Repair Funds in Josephine County
By: John Oliver
Frustrations are mounting among Josephine County residents as questions swirl around the handling of funds allocated for roof repairs at the county fairgrounds. Despite an apparent need for only $33,000 to complete the repairs, over $370,000 was drawn from the Extension Building Reserve Funds following claims of an "emergency" by Finance Director Sandy Novak.
Local resident, Deb Berg, has been leading the charge for answers, filing a public records request over a month ago seeking documentation to substantiate the "emergency" claim. To date, no supporting evidence, such as a building inspection report, has been provided. Novak’s claim, made on October 17, allowed county commissioners to justify the withdrawal of the reserve funds. However, residents have raised concerns over the lack of transparency and the discrepancy between the allocated funds and the actual repair costs.
"I've received no proof of what triggered this 'emergency' declaration," Berg said. "There have been no building inspections conducted since the tenant vacated the premises on August 31, ac-
cording to county emails."
The legal resolution authorizing the use of funds, signed by all three county commissioners, was formalized on October 30. However, while Berg has obtained a signed copy of Order No. 2024-065, a signed version of Order No. 2024-066 remains outstanding, despite repeated requests.
The controversy stems from a November 13 bid from Rhoads Roofing for $33,000, which appears to cover the repair work. Photographic evidence confirms Rhoads Roofing was active on the auditorium roof that same day. However, the county’s initial request for hundreds of thousands of dollars raises questions about how the additional funds were intended to be used—or if they were needed at all.
Berg only received partial bid documents on December 4, following intervention by County Legal Counsel Wally Hicks. "It's ridiculous that I had to remind Josephine County officials about Oregon’s Public Records Law (ORS 192.314) to get even this partial information," Berg stated.
The lack of communication and transparency has deepened public distrust. Berg emphasized the importance of account-
ability in government spending, particularly when reserve funds intended for other purposes are repurposed without adequate justification.
"This isn’t just about the fairgrounds roof," Berg added. "It’s about ensuring that public funds are used responsibly and that citizens can trust their government to operate with honesty and transparency."
As of now, no documentation has been provided to substantiate Novak’s claim of an emergency, and questions remain about how the $370,000 was calculated. Residents are now calling on Josephine County officials to provide a full accounting of the funds, as well as documentation supporting the decision to declare an emergency.
The issue has sparked broader con-
cerns over governance in Josephine County. Transparency advocates argue that this incident highlights the need for stronger checks and balances on local government financial decisions.
Josephine County officials, including Novak and the commissioners, have not yet responded to requests for comment.
Oregon Cities Seek Greater Authority to Address Homeless Camps Amid Housing Crisis
GPT News Desk
City officials across Oregon are calling for expanded authority to address homeless encampments, arguing that current state laws hinder their ability to manage public spaces effectively. As the state continues to face a persistent housing crisis, the debate over how to address unsheltered homelessness is intensifying.
The League of Oregon Cities, representing municipal governments statewide, has announced that one of its top legislative priorities for 2025 will be revising a 2021 state law that restricts how cities enforce camping policies. The law, originally championed by Governor Tina Kotek during her time as a state legislator, requires that local regulations on camping be “objectively reasonable,” a standard that city leaders argue is too restrictive.
Under the current law, cities are limited in their ability to clear encampments unless adequate shelter options are available. Advocates say this approach protects the rights of unsheltered individuals and ensures that homeless sweeps do not violate constitutional protections. However, city officials contend that the law complicates their efforts to address what they see as unsafe or unsanitary conditions in public spaces.
“This isn’t about being punitive; it’s about balancing the needs of everyone in the community,” said a representative from the League of Oregon Cities. “We need more flexibility to manage encampments that pose public health or safety concerns while still working toward long-term solutions to homelessness.”
Advocates for the homeless, however, view the push
to revise the law as a diversion from addressing the root causes of homelessness. They argue that the focus should be on expanding affordable housing, increasing shelter capacity, and providing mental health and addiction services, rather than prioritizing the removal of encampments.
“This is a distraction from real solutions,” said a spokesperson for a leading homeless advocacy organization. “Sweeping camps might move the problem out of sight, but it doesn’t solve the underlying issues. People experiencing homelessness need homes, not displacement.”
The debate over encampments has become increasingly contentious as homelessness becomes more visible in urban and rural areas alike. In some cities, residents and business owners have voiced concerns about the impact of encampments on public safety and local economies. City officials say their ability to respond is hamstrung by the current legal framework.
Homelessness experts warn that simply giving cities more authority to remove camps could lead to unintended consequences. Displacement without adequate alternatives often pushes unhoused individuals into more precarious situations and can disrupt access to services. Critics of camp sweeps also point out that such measures can be costly, requiring significant resources for enforcement and cleanup.
The League of Oregon Cities has not yet detailed its proposed changes to the law, but the group’s announcement signals a growing frustration among local govern-
ments. As the legislative session approaches, the issue is expected to spark a broader debate about how to balance individual rights, community concerns, and the urgent need for housing solutions.
For now, the conflict reflects a deeper divide in Oregon’s approach to tackling homelessness. While cities push for more immediate tools to address visible encampments, advocates emphasize the need for systemic changes to reduce homelessness altogether.
NEWS DESK
Jackson County to Explore Support for Josephine County 4-H Amid OSU Extension Crisis
By: Leaf Barret
The Oregon State University (OSU) Extension Service is grappling with how to support displaced 4-H members from Josephine County after funding cuts left key programs in jeopardy. Discussions on Tuesday between OSU officials and the Jackson County Board of Commissioners revealed tensions and potential opportunities as the two counties navigate this funding crisis.
At the heart of the matter are longstanding 4-H programs—part of OSU’s broader community outreach—that serve young people in agricultural and leadership development. In June, Josephine County commissioners voted to withdraw approximately $400,000 in funding for the OSU Extension Service, citing concerns about what they labeled a "woke" agenda within the program. The decision has left Josephine County residents without critical services, including 4-H clubs, agricultural education, and emergency preparedness support.
During the meeting, OSU representatives proposed incorporating displaced Josephine County 4-H members into Jackson County’s programs as a temporary measure. Sky Loos, Jackson County’s 4-H Coordinator, highlighted two members who grew up in Jackson County’s program but moved across the county line. These individuals, along with others from Josephine County, could enrich Jackson County's program through their experience and continued participation.
However, Jackson County commissioners expressed reservations. Their primary concern is ensuring that Jack-
son County taxpayers do not shoulder the burden for services benefiting residents of another county, especially one that voluntarily cut its funding. "We understand the unfortunate situation Josephine County is in, but we have to prioritize programs that Jackson County residents are paying for," one commissioner remarked.
The decision to defund the OSU Extension Service in Josephine County has drawn criticism from many who see it as politically motivated. Opponents argue that framing the defunding as opposition to a "woke" agenda ignores the tangible benefits the Extension Service provides to local communities. These programs are cornerstones for agricultural development, youth leadership, and disaster response training—areas critical to Southern Oregon’s rural landscape.
While Josephine County leaders defend their stance as a reflection of constituent values, critics point out the potential long-term consequences. The absence of 4-H and other OSU programs could create a gap in youth development opportunities, strain regional agricultural resources, and hinder coordinated emergency planning. In the wake of this decision, OSU Extension officials are
working to find solutions that preserve essential services. Jackson County’s potential role in accommodating displaced 4-H members is just one of many options being explored. The OSU Southern Oregon Research and Extension Center has also initiated discussions with neighboring counties and private entities to secure interim funding and support.
Meanwhile, Josephine County residents and volunteers remain in limbo, uncertain about the future of their programs. Some have expressed frustration at being caught in what they see as a politically charged battle that overlooks the community's needs.
As negotiations continue, both counties face a pivotal decision. For Jackson County, the challenge lies in balancing compassion with fiscal responsibility. For Josephine County, the question is whether political principles should outweigh the practical benefits these programs provide to residents.
The outcome of these discussions could set a precedent for how rural communities in Oregon handle funding disputes and prioritize shared resources in times of crisis.
False Statements By Josephine County Commissioner John West
District withdrawal leading to costly litigation.”
West’s claim: He acted lawfully with the other commissioners and worked to rectify an error when discovered.
claims. The settlement of the lawsuit reversed the illegal withdrawal.
They Lied, alleging “West has shown a pattern of threatening community safety by reducing the Firewise program, reducing the Emergency Management program, and eliminating the property development fire standards.”
West’s claim: He extended the Firewise Program and denied cutting Emergency Management programs.
program in half based on not understanding allowable Title III grant expenditures, despite there being ample funds to sustain it..
Management.
They Lied, alleging John West “Hired unqualified political allies for key County employee and contract positions.”
West’s claim: He deflects, saying he can’t hire on his own and that the board votes on hires.
Truth: West and his allies had been attacking the Library District in several ways, and his tie-breaking vote to approve an illegal withdrawal was just one example. West’s political allies (those he often works with on campaigns) were working hard to get elected to seats on the Library District board, worked to prevent the Library from receiving a $200,000 grant, and quickly added several political allies to the agenda for district withdrawal. A lawsuit was necessary to stop them. West also personally called people interested in annexing into the District to dissuade them, using misleading financial
Truth: Poor decisions, including appointing an underqualified ally to head both Emergency Management and IT, led to mismanagement. This individual cut the Firewise
Truth: West ignored highly qualified candidates to appoint unqualified allies to key positions, including Michael Sellers, who worked multiple jobs while serving as Director of both County IT and Emergency
They Lied, alleging “During Commissioner John West’s first 19 months in office, he has cost the County at least an estimated $6,424,000 in lost revenues, increased costs, and reductions in voter-approved and valued County programs.”
West’s claim: He claims cost-cutting measures saved money.
Truth: Combined IT and Emergency Management budgets increased by 35%, undermining any savings. Numerous other financial losses and program reductions are well-documented.
For further details, visit www.RecallJohnWest.com. All claims are fully supported by evidence and public records. Let us know if you have any questions. From page 1
LETTER
The Double-Edged Sword of Unity: Hypocrisy Among Public Figures
By: John Oliver
Unity is often hailed as the solution to societal divisions. Leaders, politicians, and public figures frequently rally behind the call for collective harmony, preaching messages of togetherness and cooperation. However, beneath the polished rhetoric, a darker narrative often emerges—one of hypocrisy and duplicity. Many of those who champion unity publicly often engage in actions that fracture trust, deepen divisions, and undermine the very ideals they claim to uphold.
At its core, unity demands authenticity and a commitment to bridging divides through honest dialogue and inclusive actions. Yet, in today’s political and social climate, the call for unity is often wielded as a political tool rather than a genuine effort to bring people together. Politicians and influencers who brand themselves as "unifiers" frequently contradict their own messaging through divisive actions, exclusionary policies, or inflammatory rhetoric. Take, for instance, public officials who plead for bipartisanship while lambasting their opponents in speeches or on social media. Their words may seem conciliatory, but their actions tell a different story: passing legislation without
cross-party input, attacking dissenters, or engaging in blame games. The hypocrisy is glaring, yet many fail to notice, blinded by the charisma of the so-called unity advocates.
This hypocrisy is not accidental—it’s strategic. For those seeking power, the promise of unity is a seductive narrative. It appeals to the masses yearning for stability in times of uncertainty. Yet, for some, it’s little more than a facade, a means to an end. By presenting themselves as arbiters of peace and cooperation, these figures secure trust and support from a public eager to believe in a brighter future.
The real actions of these "unity providers," however, often reveal their true motives. Whether it’s enacting policies that disproportionately benefit their allies, spreading misinformation to maintain loyalty, or weaponizing unity to silence dissent, the pattern is consistent: unity becomes a shield for manipulation, not a tool for progress.
The effectiveness of these double-dealers relies on one critical factor: public complacency. When voters and supporters fail to scrutinize the actions of their leaders, they enable this cycle of deceit. Many people accept rhetoric at face value, overlooking the contra-
dictions in behavior. Unity, when sold as an illusion, becomes a dangerous tool of control, fostering division under the guise of togetherness.
For instance, during election campaigns, candidates often emphasize shared values, speaking to unity across social, economic, and cultural divides. Yet once in office, some pivot sharply, favoring policies that alienate large segments of the population. These actions create deeper rifts, all while the rhetoric of unity remains in play.
Human nature craves authenticity. True unity can only come from leaders who embody integrity, whose words and actions align consistently. While the world is full of those who perform unity for applause, there are few who truly practice it. For the public, the challenge lies in distinguishing the genuine from the pretender, the uniter from the divider.
The question remains: How long will society tolerate the hypocrisy of those who promise unity while sowing discord? The answer lies in our collective ability to hold leaders accountable, demand transparency, and prioritize actions over empty words. Only then can the promise of unity transcend rhetoric and become a reality.
GRANTS PASS WEATHER
5 DAY OUTLOOK
SOURCE: WEATHER.COM
SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY
THURSDAY Rain 45/41 Mostly cloudy 50/37 Mostly cloudy 51/36
WEDNESDAY
TAKE A BREAK
December 9, 2024
Posting Date
December 9, 2024
December 9, 2024
HEALTH
The Atkins Diet: Origins, Evolution, Benefits, and Challenges
By: Ellen Ward
The Atkins Diet, one of the most popular low-carbohydrate eating plans in modern history, has experienced significant evolution since its inception in the early 1970s. Promising rapid weight loss and better health through carbohydrate restriction, the diet has gained millions of followers worldwide. However, it has also faced controversy and criticism over the years. This comprehensive look examines where the Atkins Diet began, where it stands today, and its benefits and challenges for those who follow it.
The Atkins Diet was created by Dr. Robert C. Atkins, a cardiologist, who introduced it in his 1972 book, Dr. Atkins' Diet Revolution. Influenced by research on low-carbohydrate diets, Dr. Atkins argued that reducing carb intake while emphasizing protein and fat could promote weight loss and improve overall health. At its core, the diet focused on ketosis, a metabolic state in which the body burns fat for energy instead of carbohydrates.
Initially, the Atkins Diet was met with skepticism from the medical community, which was firmly entrenched in low-fat dietary recommendations. Despite this, the diet gained popularity due to its rapid weight-loss results and the relative freedom it allowed in consuming satisfying, high-fat foods like cheese, meat, and butter.
Over the decades, the Atkins Diet has undergone revisions to address criticism and adapt to new nutritional research. In its original form, the diet was strict, encouraging followers to eliminate most carbohydrates entirely during its initial phase. However, subsequent versions, such as Atkins for Life and The New Atkins for a New You, introduced a more flexible approach. These updates emphasized the importance of vegetables, lean proteins, and healthy fats, while still limiting refined carbs and sugar.
Today, the Atkins Diet offers three primary variations tailored to individual goals and lifestyles: Atkins 20 (for those with significant weight-loss goals), Atkins 40 (a more moderate approach), and Atkins 100 (a maintenance plan). Each plan allows for a progressive increase in daily carb intake, starting as low as 20 grams per day.
The Atkins Diet offers several benefits, particularly for those looking to lose weight or manage certain health conditions:
Weight Loss: Numerous studies have shown that low-carb diets like Atkins can lead to significant weight loss, especially in the short term. The initial phase of carb restriction often results in rapid water weight loss, which can be motivating for dieters.
Improved Blood Sugar Control: For individuals with type 2 diabetes or insulin resistance, the Atkins Diet can help stabilize blood sugar levels and reduce the need for medication. Reduced Appetite: High-protein, high-fat diets tend to be more satiating, which can help reduce overall calorie intake without feelings of deprivation.
Improved Lipid Profiles: While controversial, some studies suggest that the Atkins Diet can improve "good" HDL cholesterol levels and lower triglycerides, reducing cardiovascular risk factors.
Flexibility in Food Choices: Compared to other diets, Atkins offers more variety and satisfaction, allowing for indulgences like bacon, eggs, and cream while still promoting weight loss. Despite its benefits, the Atkins Diet is not without its challenges and potential downsides:
Nutrient Deficiencies: The early phases of the diet restrict many fruits, grains, and legumes, potentially leading to deficiencies in fiber, vitamins, and minerals if not carefully planned.
Keto Flu: As the body transitions into ketosis, some dieters
experience flu-like symptoms, including fatigue, headaches, and irritability, which can be discouraging.
Sustainability: The restrictive nature of the Atkins Diet can make it difficult for some people to maintain long-term, leading to weight regain once carbs are reintroduced.
Heart Health Concerns: While some research suggests improved lipid profiles, critics argue that the high intake of saturated fats may pose risks for heart health, especially if unhealthy fats are consumed in excess.
Individual Variation: The diet's effectiveness varies widely among individuals. Some people thrive on low-carb diets, while others struggle with energy levels, digestive issues, or cravings.
The Atkins Diet remains a popular choice for those seeking weight loss and improved metabolic health. Its principles have influenced the rise of other low-carb diets, including the ketogenic diet and paleo diet. However, its modern iterations emphasize a balanced approach, encouraging the inclusion of nutrient-dense carbs like leafy greens, berries, and whole grains in moderation.
As with any diet, the Atkins approach is not a one-size-fits-all solution. While it offers compelling benefits for many, particularly those with weight or blood sugar concerns, it requires careful planning and monitoring to avoid potential pitfalls. Consulting with a healthcare provider or dietitian before embarking on the Atkins Diet is advisable, particularly for those with underlying health conditions.
The Atkins Diet has evolved from a polarizing weight-loss method to a more nuanced and adaptable eating plan. Its legacy lies in sparking a broader conversation about the role of carbohydrates, fats, and proteins in achieving optimal health—a conversation that continues to shape modern nutrition science.
