WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2025
Bitter to the End: Commissioner West’s Many Costly Mistakes Should Not Be Repeated
By: Jay Meredith, CPA
On Monday January 6th, just a few hours after being sworn in, the two new Josephine County Commissioners Ron Smith and Chris Barnett made no less than two illegal votes (in my opinion) at the request of outgoing Commissioner John West. West arranged votes on two items which appear to be illegal. The first was cancelling the library’s $1 per year lease on the Grants Pass library branch which is in opposition of the County Charter. And the second was a vote on suspending property management fees on County timber properties which wasn’t even on the meeting agenda and likely illegal.
West, in his final two days in office after being recalled by more than 62% of voters, sure went out with a bang in his final public meeting of the Board of Commissioners. And adding in two other Board-led actions led by West in the last two weeks and West may have made as many as four illegal actions just in his last 3 weeks as County Commissioner.
What is the best way to avoid the many costly mistakes made by Commissioner West which led to his recall from office by almost 2 to 1 by County voters? Don’t appoint one of West’s political buddies to fill the commissioner seat that will
be vacated on Wednesday, January 8th.
Unfortunately, rumor is the two new commissioners are about to do just that.
But let’s start with the first illegal vote made by the new Commissioners on Monday, January 6th. At West’s request, there was an item on the agenda to discuss the $1 per year lease the Josephine Community Library District has on the Grants Pass library branch, a building right next to the County Courthouse and owned by Josephine County. Commissioners, led by West, voted to give a 30-day lease cancellation notice to the library so they can renegotiate the lease rates to something closer to “market” value. The reason cited was the maintenance costs the County is incurring on maintaining this building. This would be illegal, in my opinion, according to the following language found in the County Charter:
Section 14.5. LIBRARY SUPPORT. The Board shall provide for the support and maintenance of the main library and library branches. [Amended November, 1992]
This action, should the new Josephine County Board follow through on this lease cancellation vote, goes directly against
the County Charter, especially considering maintenance costs were cited as the main reason to “increase the rent.” And what many may not remember is that back in the 1990’s the property tax rate for the County Library was absorbed into the County’s permanent property tax rate (this was after that Charter language was approved by voters). Had the library kept the property tax rate that was in place for the library back in the 1990s, Josephine County would have had millions per year of lower property tax revenues for other County services today.
Now they are arguing about building maintenance costs that they say average approximately $25,000 per year. Commissioners tried to wiggle out of their legal obligations by saying that the library district does not serve all of Josephine County. While technically the library district does not include all of Josephine County, the library’s website states: “Households that are not in the library district can get a card for $60 per year or $15 for three months. The cost is approximately equal to the amount that each in-district household pays through taxes.” Sorry commissioners, this weak excuse to once again attack the library district won’t likely pass legal muster.
• see COMMISSIONER, page 5
Farewell to Two Beloved Girl Scout Cookies
S’mores and Toast-Yay! Cookies Are Saying Goodbye
By: Leaf Barret
It’s that time of year again when Girl Scout Cookie season takes over the community, filling homes and offices with the sweet scent of nostalgia. But this year, there’s a bittersweet announcement for cookie lovers everywhere: two fan-favorite cookies will be discontinued after the 2025 season. So, before you stock up on boxes for next year, here’s what you need to know.
After much fanfare, the Girl Scout S’mores
and Toast-Yay! cookies will officially be retired from the lineup following the 2025 cookie season. For many, these two flavors have become beloved staples of the annual cookie sale, but all good things must come to an end.
Let’s start with the S’mores cookie, a camping classic that brought a taste of the outdoors right into your home. Inspired by the iconic treat made around the campfire, the S’mores cookie features a graham cracker-flavored cookie, sandwiched with a gooey marshmallow-chocolate filling, then drizzled with a sweet coating. It was the perfect treat for those who longed for that warm, campfire vibe without the need to leave their kitchens. Whether you were eating them by the boxful or savoring each bite,
these cookies quickly became a top contender among Girl Scout cookie fans.
Next up, Toast-Yay!, a cookie that captured the essence of a cozy breakfast moment. These adorable, French toast-shaped cookies were a hit for their delicious, buttery cinnamon flavor. Each bite offered the perfect mix of cinnamon and sweetness, and the delicate icing coating on top made it an irresistible treat. Many fans loved that they were like a tiny, indulgent breakfast in cookie form—crispy, warm flavors with a touch of nostalgia.
While both of these cookies will leave the Girl Scout roster, their fans won’t forget them easily. Whether you loved the gooey decadence
Transformation of Facebook
Mark Zuckerberg Announces Plan to Change Facebook into
Free Speech Platform
GPT News Desk
In a significant shift for Facebook, founder Mark Zuckerberg has revealed plans to transform the social media giant into a platform centered on free speech, following the lead of Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter). Zuckerberg’s announcement has sparked wide-ranging debate, with the potential to reshape the way information is shared and consumed on the platform.
In a recent statement, Zuckerberg outlined his vision for Facebook's future, emphasizing the removal of traditional fact-checkers. Instead, he plans to introduce a system akin to the “Community Notes” found on X, Musk’s rebranded social media platform. "We're going to get rid of fact-checkers and replace them with community notes, similar to X, starting in the U.S.," Zuckerberg said during the announcement.
Community Notes is a feature on X that allows users to provide context and fact-based corrections to posts they believe are misleading or false. While some see it as a more democratic way to handle misinformation, critics argue that this system can lead to the spread of unverified or biased content, particularly when users with differing ideologies engage in note-writing. With Facebook being one of the largest social media platforms in the world, Zuckerberg’s decision to adopt a similar model could have far-reaching implications for its billions of users.
Zuckerberg also indicated that the platform’s overall approach would align with a broader commitment to promoting free speech, a stance that Musk has championed since taking over Twitter in 2022. Musk’s rebranding of Twitter into X was a move aimed at fostering open dialogue without the constraints of content moderation policies that he deemed overly restrictive. Zuckerberg’s recent announcement suggests he is following a similar trajectory by prioritizing user-generated content moderation over traditional editorial oversight.
Facebook has long faced criticism for its content moderation policies, especially during the 2020 U.S. presidential election and the COVID-19 pandemic. The company has struggled to strike
• see PLAN, page 9
Josephine County Swears in New Elected Officials, Eyes on Promises and Challenges Ahead
By: John Oliver
On Monday, Josephine County ushered in a new era of governance as newly elected officials took the oath of office in a ceremony presided over by County Circuit Judge Robert S. Bain. Among those sworn in were Mark DeYoung, the county treasurer; Chris Parton, the county assessor; Peter Allen, the county surveyor; as well as Ron Smith and Chris Barnett, who were newly elected to their respective positions as county commissioners for Positions 3 and 2. Alongside these county officials, new members of the city council also assumed their roles, collectively bearing the responsibility of guiding both the county and city through a range of urgent challenges and multifaceted issues that will require careful deliberation and strategic leadership.
The ceremony marked a pivotal moment for both Josephine County and the city of Grants Pass, setting the stage for new leadership as these elected officials take office. With many running on promises to address homelessness, economic development, and public safety, the real test will be whether they can deliver on their commitments. The eyes of the community are now on them as they transition from campaign rhetoric to concrete actions.
One of the most significant issues at the forefront of the public’s mind is homelessness, a topic that dominated campaign speeches across the board. Many of the newly elected officials promised to tackle this complex issue head-on, but with the persistence of homelessness in Grants Pass and surrounding areas, the question remains: Can they make meaningful progress?
Grants Pass, like many communities in Oregon, has seen its homeless population grow in recent years, contributing to concerns about public safety, health, and the overall quality of life. In addition to homelessness, economic hardship remains a major challenge for the county. Rising costs for basic goods and services, coupled with a lack of affordable housing, have led to widespread frustration among residents. The new officials will need to carefully navigate these issues, balancing compassion and practical solutions in the face of limited resources.
While the challenges are formidable, the incoming leadership’s approach will be scrutinized in the coming months. As residents of Grants Pass and Josephine County await the new commissioners’ actions, there is a sense of cautious optimism, tempered
by skepticism. Many voters remain wary of promises made during election campaigns, as past administrations have struggled to effectively address long-standing issues. This time, however, the newly elected officials have an opportunity to set a new tone, proving that their campaign promises were more than just talking points.
In attendance at the ceremony, Ron Smith and Chris Barnett, both of whom were newly elected to represent the community in leadership within the county commissioners' office. They will need to work alongside old as well as newcomers to build consensus on key issues, including public safety, homelessness, and fiscal responsibility. Their ability to collaborate and push for practical solutions will be critical in determining the county’s direction over the next few years.
As Josephine County enters this new era of governance, the community will be closely watching to see if the elected officials can truly meet the moment. The challenges are significant, but so too is the potential for positive change. Time will tell if the promises made by these new leaders will be transformed into action, or if they will become just another round of empty rhetoric.
Congratulations to the newly sworn-in officials, and may they rise to the challenges ahead. The road will be tough, but with determination and focus, there is hope for progress in the months and years to come.
Speaking of Pettiness in Politics: Josephine County Faces a Critical Turning Point
By: John Oliver
The political stage in Josephine County continues to be a hotbed of controversy, fueled by former Commissioner John West and the actions of the newly seated Commissioners, Barnett and Smith. It seems the recall of West was a prudent decision, but his exit from office is anything but quiet. Like a bull in a china shop, West, in collaboration with his two recently installed allies, has left a trail of decisions that have ignited community concern and frustration.
In one of their first moves, the trio unanimously voted to terminate the current lease agreement for the Grants Pass Library. This decision, which effectively ends the library’s $1-per-year lease, forces the library district to renegotiate terms for a county asset, raising questions about the timing and intent of the action. Commissioner West stated, “It doesn’t mean they’re kicked out of the building, it just means this lease agreement…is no longer in effect.” However, critics argue that this abrupt decision undermines the library district, particularly since it had previously requested a postponement of the meeting, citing short notice and the absence of its legal counsel.
Adding fuel to the fire, the Commissioners also introduced and voted on a proposal to pause property management fees for all timber properties recently sold. The problem? This topic was not on the official meeting agenda. According to Oregon’s open meetings laws, public bodies must provide proper notice of all agenda items to ensure transparency. Sneaking in an unannounced vote could constitute a violation of both ethical and legal standards. For West and his allies, this blatant disregard for procedure has painted a clear picture of their governance style—a style many residents
hoped to leave behind with West’s recall.
The library roof was another topic of discussion, with implications that it requires urgent repairs. Yet, this issue seemingly came out of nowhere, raising questions about the validity of the claims and the motivations behind the sudden urgency. Community members have expressed skepticism, with some questioning whether this is another example of the new Commissioners acting on incomplete or misleading information.
The actions of West, Barnett, and Smith highlight a troubling disregard for the rule of law and the county charter. These decisions, made mere hours into their new term, have already drawn the ire of residents who voted for accountability and transparency. The people of Josephine County have demonstrated their willingness to hold politicians accountable, as evidenced by the recall process that removed West from office. If this week is any indication, Barnett and Smith may find themselves similarly scrutinized.
One of the most pressing concerns now is how the
Board of County Commissioners (BCC) plans to fill West’s vacated seat. According to the county charter, the process requires an official job posting, followed by interviews and a fair selection process. As of January 7th, no job postings have been made, raising doubts about whether the new commissioner can be sworn in by the proposed date of January 14th. If Barnett and Smith fail to adhere to these procedural requirements, they risk further erosion of public trust.
Several qualified candidates are expected to apply for the open seat, but the lack of transparency so far has left many questioning whether the process will be fair and impartial. The next few days will be critical for Barnett and Smith to prove they can uphold the principles of good governance. Will they follow the charter, or will they continue down the path of questionable decision-making set by their predecessor?
For the residents of Josephine County, the stakes are high. The recent actions of the Commissioners underscore the importance of vigilance and civic engagement. The recall of John West was a powerful reminder that voters have the final say in holding their leaders accountable. If Barnett and Smith fail to meet the community’s expectations, the people are prepared to act once again.
In these turbulent times, one thing is clear: the voters of Josephine County will not stand for politics as usual. They demand leaders who respect the laws, prioritize the community’s needs, and govern with integrity. The coming weeks will reveal whether Barnett and Smith are up to the task—or if the people will need to take matters into their own hands once more. For now, all eyes are on the new Commissioners as they navigate their first major test in office.
Photos from Josephine County Facebook
POLITICS
Commissioner West’s Many Costly Mistakes
The second vote made on Monday January 6th that is likely an illegal vote was a discussion and vote on an item that wasn’t even on the County’s agenda for the meeting. The basic rule is that local governments cannot discuss and vote on policy changes or other official non-emergency type decisions without giving at least 24 hours’ notice of that agenda item. At the end of Monday’s meeting, outgoing Commissioner John West made a motion to suspend property management fees on all timber properties recently sold. This was approved unanimously by all three commissioners. As you can see on the attached agenda, this item was nowhere to be found on the meeting agenda and so proper notice was not given to the public before discussing and voting on this item.
There are at least two other actions made by West in the last few weeks that are arguably illegal or at a minimum in opposition of the spirit of public meeting law and the Josephine County Charter. According to public local media reports and comments made by West himself when being interviewed by local media, Commissioner West arranged the whole process of appointing his replacement after voters recalled him from office. He arranged the whole commissioner appointment process including the days the Board would take applications from individuals applying to fill the commissioner vacancy, how many finalists would be selected for interviews, when interviews would happen, and even went as far as to schedule a swearing in ceremony for the newly appointed commissioner. This was all done without discussing any of this major decision-making process in a public meeting.
And as of the day that the County Board of Commissioners began taking commissioner applications to fill the vacancy (according to West’s comments to local media), the Board had not met the Charter provision that requires the Board to advertise this vacancy in local newspapers. The County Charter states as follows:
“Section 24. FILLING OF VACANCIES.
(1) The Board shall publish notice of a vacancy to be filled by appointment in newspapers of general circulation in the County. This notice shall request qualified individuals to apply to serve until the person elected at the next general election takes office by filing an application with the Board of Commissioners.”
As of Monday, this week when the County began taking applications, a notice of vacancy had not been published in any newspapers of general circulation in the County as of today.
The best way to help avoid the costly and corrupt behavior exhibited by two of the three Commissioners over the last two years is to avoid appointing a political buddy of Commissioner John West to fill the vacant commissioner seat. Given that the leadership individuals of the Josephine County Republican Party were indistinguishable from Commissioner John West himself during the recall campaign, the two new Commissioners should avoid appointing the
following political buddies of West: former Commissioner Herman Baertschiger, former Commissioner Simon Hare, anyone with an official title with the Josephine County Republican Party, and just about anyone with the last name Robinson. While there are others, these are the primary “pollical allies” of now former Commissioner John West.
Unfortunately, the loudest of the local rumor mill has former Commissioner Simon Hare as the frontrunner to be appointed to the vacant commissioner seat, followed by former Commissioner Herman Baertschiger
two years in office. Simon’s first term was also marked with having to lay off close to half of the professionals that used to work in the County Sheriff’s office and County Justice programs. Not surprisingly, Simon campaigned on cost cutting and ways to fund law enforcement without increasing tax rates and quickly found out after getting into office that these campaign promises were not realistic. And finally, both former commissioners Simon Hare and John West are facing a multi-million lawsuit dated December 5, 2024, from the owner of the Grants Pass Tribune for Defamation of Char-
who just ended his four-year term and announced his desire to “retire” from elected office. Perhaps not coincidentally, before vacating office Commissioner West mandated that there will be two finalists interviewed next week, one of which is to be appointed shortly after interviews are completed. West already had the County Clerk schedule the swearing in ceremony. Either one of these choices would be a slap in the face to Josephine County voters who just spoke loud and clear that they don’t want a repeat of West’s performance as commissioner.
Many locals may not realize that former Commissioner Simon Hare is good buddies with former Commissioner John West. In my last discussion with Simon Hare, which was just a few months ago, Simon confirmed that he was in touch with Commissioner West somewhat regularly during West’s short term of office. But this is no secret as public records requests and local media reports from both the Grants Pass Tribune and Grants Pass Daily Courier confirmed that Commissioner West put Simon Hare on a $20,000 County consulting contract in early 2024 and had the County start paying him before the Board even approved and signed the contract. Later in 2024 West attempted to use his influence to get Simon another publicly funded contract job.
Simon Hare’s own terms of office were marked by numerous controversial personal and professional decisions. In Simon’s first few years in office as County Commissioner, Simon acted illegally (in my opinion) in regard to a couple of mineral exploration permits just like West did during his first
acter, Libel, and Tortious Interference. Now is not the time to appoint Simon Hare back to a commissioner seat should you desire to avoid a repeat of West’s chaotic and costly two years in office.
Most individuals that I observed were strongly in favor of the recall of Josephine County Commissioner John West also felt like former Commissioner Herman Baertschiger was West’s partner in crime, figuratively speaking. And rightly so as every point on the 200-word legal petition for the recall of Commissioner West could also be applied to former Commissioner Herman Baertschiger with the exception of violation of campaign finance laws. Had Commissioner Baertschiger not announced his retirement from office at the end of 2024, he would have also been the subject of a recall effort with almost the exact same language that appeared on the recall petition for Commissioner West.
In my own observation, Commissioner Baertschiger seemed tired during his four years as County Commissioner. His fouryear term followed eight years serving as a State Senator, representing the party that has long been in the minority in the State Legislature. While I’m sure those eight years were exhausting, the duties of a County Commissioner vary greatly from the duties of a State Senator, and those differences were highlighted regularly during his four years as commissioner. Even towards the end of 2024 Commissioner Baertschiger erred in applying conflict of interest rules followed by the Senate to how Commissioners should act when they have an actual or potential conflict of interest with a pending
decision at the County level.
I even have several personal and business reasons why former Commissioner Herman Baertschiger should not be reappointed to the vacant commissioner seat. But here’s just one. Last fall when I was running for a seat on the Grants Pass City Council I mentioned my long history of advocacy for Police, Fire, Law Enforcement and drug treatment services. After the republican-organized public forum at the Anne Basker Auditorium when I mentioned my involvement with the local nonprofit that recruited the Grants Pass Treatment Center to open a location in Grants Pass (previously they only had one or two other locations in other parts of Oregon), Baertschiger stormed up to me and demanded a retraction. Baertschiger stated something along the lines of, “YOU NEED TO PUT OUT A RETRACTION…. I AM THE REASON the GP Treatment Center was built. I got the state money to make that happen.” I was confused by that comment because I didn’t think any state money was involved. But I just said, oh…how much money was that? “Millions,” he said. I didn’t want to pick a fight, so I just said thank you for doing that and walked away. Former Commissioner Andreas Blech and Richard Emmons of the Oregon Eagle witnessed this interaction. I later confirmed with one of the main owners of the Grants Pass Treatment Center that no state or public funds were used to open the Grants Pass Treatment Center.
Making matters worse, Herman Baertschiger then passed this fake news to his political buddies at the local republican office. Bill Kronert, Communications Webpage Assistant and Communications Research Committee Chair of the Josephine County republican party then posted this fake news on a local popular conservative Facebook page and accused me of lying at the public forum.
I later realized that Herman Baertschiger probably thought I was speaking about the Grants Pass Sobering Center, which is a great service that supports local public safety and local police officers when they encounter an individual under the influence. The sobering center did use state funds in its development and Baertschiger was likely involved in getting some of those state funds. But other than expressing vocal support for the sobering center, I was not involved in the development of the sobering center.
The next appointed Commissioner can’t be a John West or Herman Baertschiger political buddy. The last two years has been dominated with shooting from the hip, making rash uninformed decisions, attacking anyone that doesn’t share a certain special interest political agenda, and ignoring the will of the people.
We lost millions of potential County revenues that could have been partially used for law enforcement, the relationship between County staff members and the Commissioners’ office seems to be at an all-time low, and the loss of trust between the County and its citizens is a priceless loss. Let’s get on the road to recovery and appoint a commissioner with a fresh set of eyes and a passion for serving Josephine County.
SUPPORT FREE SPEECH
Advertise with The Grants Pass Tribune!
Stand with us in defending freedom of the press and the 1st Amendment! The Grants Pass Tribune is facing political persecution, with lawsuits aimed at silencing our bold investigative journalism. We remain committed to uncovering the truth and keeping our community informed like never before.
Show
NEWS DESK
Trump and Co-Defendants Seek to Block Release of Special Counsel’s Report Ahead of Inauguration
By: Leaf Barret
President-elect Donald Trump and his two co-defendants are taking legal action to prevent Special Counsel Jack Smith from releasing a comprehensive report detailing the investigation that led to criminal charges against the former president, charges which have since been dismissed. The move comes as Smith's office prepares to finalize the report, which is expected to provide an in-depth account of the investigation into Trump’s conduct, including allegations related to the 2020 presidential election and the handling of classified documents after he left office.
Trump, along with his co-defendants, is asking a federal court to block the publication of the report before Inauguration Day, arguing that the timing of its release would be politically charged and could unduly influence public perception of his actions during a critical period. The case has brought attention to the intersection of legal proceedings and the political calendar, as the new administration prepares for its first days in office.
Smith's investigation, which began in 2022, has been one of the most high-profile probes involving a former U.S. president in recent history. It led to two federal indictments against Trump. One indictment accused him of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, an effort that included attempting to interfere with the certification of the election results and pressuring officials to alter vote counts. The second indictment related to his alleged mishandling of classified documents after leaving the White House,
including storing sensitive materials at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.
These charges, however, were dismissed after legal proceedings, leading to further scrutiny over the potential public release of a report that would detail the investigation. The Justice Department’s desire to release the report before the transition of power could provide the public with a more comprehensive understanding of the scope and findings of the investigation. However, Trump’s legal team has raised concerns that such a release would be politically detrimental to his future prospects, potentially overshadowing the incoming administration's agenda.
The legal argument presented by Trump and his co-defendants centers on the timing of the release and its potential consequences on public perception. They argue that the report’s contents, which are expected to be the most
detailed account to date of Smith’s investigation, could unfairly influence political discourse at a time when Trump is preparing for his return to public office. The concern is that the timing of the report’s release could interfere with the new administration’s transition and inject partisan divisiveness into the early days of governance.
At the heart of the legal dispute is the question of whether a detailed report on an investigation that resulted in dismissed charges should be made public so close to a high-profile political event, such as an inauguration. The report, which is expected to provide a fuller explanation of the investigation’s findings and methods, could potentially offer a narrative that influences how the public views Trump’s actions during his presidency.
For his part, Jack Smith and the Justice Department have remained focused on completing the investigation and providing transparency about its findings. The potential release of the report is seen as a significant moment in the aftermath of the high-profile investigation, particularly since it could offer a thorough explanation of why charges were brought and later dismissed.
As the case unfolds, it is clear that the issue of transparency versus political sensitivity will continue to be a point of contention. Whether the report will be blocked from release or whether it will be made public in full remains to be seen, but its potential impact on both the legal landscape and the political environment will likely reverberate well beyond Inauguration Day.
TAKE A BREAK
NEWS DESK
Understanding SNAP Income Limits
A Key to Food Assistance for Millions of Americans
GPT News Desk
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) plays an essential role in providing food assistance to millions of low-income individuals and families across the United States. Administered by state agencies under guidelines set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service (USDA FNS), SNAP helps ensure that eligible households have access to the nutrition they need to maintain a healthy diet. One of the key factors in determining eligibility for SNAP benefits is household income, with specific limits set based on household size and location.
Each year, the USDA adjusts income limits to reflect changes in the cost of living, ensuring that those in need of assistance are able to access support. These limits are essential for ensuring that aid reaches the right individuals, targeting households that are struggling to make ends meet.
For a single-person household, the monthly net income limit is set at $1,255 for residents of the 48 contiguous states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. However, some states have higher income limits to account for the higher cost of living in certain regions. In Alaska, for example, the income limit for a single-person household is $1,568, while in Hawaii, it is set at $1,443. These regional differences in income limits en-
sure that the assistance provided by SNAP is reflective of local economic conditions and costs.
As the size of a household increases, so too do the income limits to reflect the additional financial needs of larger families. For example, a two-person household in the 48 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Islands, can qualify for SNAP with a monthly net income of up to $1,704. In Alaska, the limit is higher, set at $2,129, while in Hawaii, it stands at $1,959. These increases allow for more flexibility in helping households with more individuals, acknowledging that the financial strain of supporting multiple people is greater than that of a single individual.
For a three-person household, the limits increase further. In the 48 states and the District of Columbia, the
Plan to Transform Facebook into X-Style Free Speech Platform
a balance between removing harmful misinformation and ensuring that free speech is not stifled. Zuckerberg’s new approach could signal a shift toward more lenient content policies, potentially reducing the company’s liability in content disputes while allowing for a wider variety of voices to be heard.
The removal of fact-checkers could also signal a move away from Facebook’s previous reliance on third-party organizations like PolitiFact and the Associated Press to evaluate the veracity of content. These partnerships were initially designed to curb the spread of fake news, but they were often criticized for being inconsistent or politically biased. In place of these external fact-checkers, Zuckerberg’s proposal to rely on commu-
nity input could create a more decentralized model of content oversight, where users actively contribute to identifying and correcting misinformation.
However, this shift has raised concerns among experts who warn that it could lead to the proliferation of false information. Without the expertise and accountability that comes with professional fact-checking, the responsibility for verifying content would fall more heavily on users, some of whom may lack the resources or motivation to assess the accuracy of what they encounter.
As of now, Zuckerberg’s changes are expected to begin in the United States, with plans to expand the initiative to other regions depending on its success. The decision to
limit is set at $2,152, while in Alaska, it rises to $2,690, and in Hawaii, it is $2,475. The increases in income limits as household size grows reflect the higher food costs and other expenses associated with larger families, ensuring that these households have access to the resources they need to purchase nutritious food.
The process of determining eligibility for SNAP benefits involves more than just income limits. While the USDA guidelines set the framework for eligibility, state agencies are responsible for assessing each household’s financial situation and needs. Factors such as household composition, expenses, and other financial resources are considered in determining the amount of assistance a household can receive.
For many families, SNAP benefits are a lifeline, helping to ensure that they can put food on the table despite financial challenges. The program has been particularly crucial during times of economic hardship, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, when millions of Americans faced job losses and financial instability.
In conclusion, the income limits set for SNAP are a critical tool in ensuring that the program reaches those most in need. By adjusting these limits based on household size and regional cost differences, the USDA ensures that the benefits are distributed fairly, providing vital support to families and individuals working to meet their basic nutritional needs. As economic conditions continue to evolve, these income thresholds will remain a key element of how SNAP works to combat food insecurity across the nation.
adopt a more Musk-like free speech model reflects broader shifts in the tech world, where platforms are increasingly reexamining how to handle content moderation in an age of polarized discourse.
It remains to be seen how users, advertisers, and governments will respond to this new direction for Facebook. Some may embrace the move as a victory for freedom of expression, while others may worry about the impact on the spread of harmful misinformation. For now, Zuckerberg’s bold announcement is a clear indication that Facebook is moving in a new direction—one that could have profound implications for the future of online communication.
Beloved Girl Scout Cookies Saying Goodbye
of S’mores or the sweet, cinnamon-y goodness of Toast-Yay!, these cookies have earned a permanent place in the hearts (and snack cabinets) of those who indulged.
So, why are these two cookies being discontinued? According to the Girl Scouts, the decision is part of an ongoing effort to streamline the cookie menu and bring in new flavors and experiences for future generations of cookie lovers. Each season, the organization reviews its offerings, taking into account factors like customer demand and regional preferences. While it’s always hard to say
goodbye to old favorites, the Girl Scouts assure fans that their efforts are aimed at creating new, exciting options that will keep cookie season fresh and fun for years to come.
Fear not! While the S’mores and ToastYay! cookies may be leaving, the beloved classics will remain. Thin Mints, Samoas (also known as Caramel deLites), Trefoils, and Tagalongs will continue to be available, along with the seasonal options that pop up each year. And, as always, the Girl Scouts are known for surprising us with innovative, new cookies that excite fans each season. So while it’s sad to
say goodbye to these two, there’s no doubt that the future of Girl Scout cookies will continue to delight and bring communities together.
In the meantime, for fans of S’mores and Toast-Yay!, now’s the time to stock up. Get your hands on a box (or two, or three!) before the 2025 season ends, and savor the sweet memories of these cookies while they last. And of course, keep an eye out for the new cookie offerings in the seasons to come— who knows what exciting flavors might be just around the corner!
