FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE.
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2024
GRANTSPASSTRIBUNE.COM | $0.00
Controversial figure simon hare nominated for government role amidst doubts By: John Oliver The Grants Pass Board of County Commissioners is stirring up controversy once again as they unilaterally appoint Simon Hare to a position for which he lacks qualifications, earning a meager $1,600 per month. Questions arise about the motives behind this decision and whether it could potentially open the door for misuse of power. Hare, previously embroiled in personal controversies during his tenure as commissioner from 2010 to 2018, is now proposed for the role of Broadband Coordinator, a move met with skepticism from the local community. Despite a history marked by a DUI arrest, inappropriate communication with minors, and legal disputes, Hare finds himself recommended for a position that seems incongru-
ent with his past. Residents are questioning the rationale behind Hare’s nomination, especially considering the stark mismatch between the responsibilities of the Broadband Coordinator role and his qualifications. The position, seemingly beneath Hare’s true capabilities, raises concerns about potential ulterior motives. Critics argue that the Board of County Commissioners must justify their decision to place Hare in a position for which he seems unqualified, particularly given his contentious history. The move has sparked speculation about whether this appointment is a strategic career advancement for Hare, utilizing the access granted by the position for potentially nefarious purposes.
Hare’s past is fraught with personal and legal challenges, including recent allegations of dishonesty on court documents, attempted defamation, squatting, fraud, extortion, and dumping trash on a local schoolteacher’s property. Residents in the know question whether an individual with a history of personal controversies can effectively perform duties in a role requiring competence and professionalism. As the controversy unfolds, it serves as a stern warning to the Board of County Commissioners. Residents express concern that if their apprehensions prove accurate, and improprieties occur as a result of Hare’s appointment, the responsibility squarely rests on the commissioners’ shoulders. Power corruption, lies, and drama may once again be-
come prevalent in Grants Pass if the Board does not thoroughly reconsider the decision to reinstate Hare into a position of government influence. As a community it is the advice of this journalist to stop the corruption before it begins.
United Against Public Safety Tax Proposal
Wildfire concerns among reasons for rate increases
Oregon electric utilities seeking approval for rate hike
By: Jackson Johnson Pacific Power, one of Oregon’s major electric utility providers, is seeking approval from the Oregon Public Utility Commission for a substantial residential rate hike of 16.9%, slated to take effect in the coming year. The proposed increase, estimated to raise the average monthly bill for residential customers by around $30, is intended to generate funds for various purposes, including investments in renewable power sources, grid upgrades, and addressing costs associated with wildfires. The company has outlined its need to secure $304 million to finance initiatives focused on renewable energy and grid enhancements. A significant portion of this funding is earmarked for addressing wildfire-related expenses, encompassing measures such as vegetation management around power lines, increased wildfire insurance premiums, and the creation of a “catastrophic fire fund.” Pacific Power’s parent company, PacifiCorp, currently faces multiple lawsuits related to its role in Southern Oregon wildfires that led to the destruction of 170 homes in 2020. To settle some of these
legal challenges, PacifiCorp has already committed to paying hundreds of millions of dollars. In regulatory filings, PacifiCorp has projected potential wildfire-related losses amounting to $2.4 billion, highlighting the financial impact and challenges faced by electric utility companies in managing and mitigating the consequences of wildfires. Pacific Power serves approximately 574,000 customers across various communities, including parts of North and Northeast Portland, substantial regions of Southern Oregon, segments of the Willamette Valley, the coast, and Central and northeastern Oregon. This rate increase proposal by Pacific Power follows a similar move by Portland General Electric (PGE), the state’s largest electric utility, which implemented an 18% rate hike at the beginning of 2024. The utility landscape in Oregon is witnessing ongoing adjustments, prompting discussions about the balance between necessary rate increases for infrastructure improvements and the financial burden on residential consumers. As these rate hike proposals progress through regulatory channels, stakeholders and customers will closely monitor developments to ensure a fair and transparent process.
Source: Josie Malloy In a unified front, the Grants Pass & Josephine County Chamber of Commerce, alongside other city members, has formed the Oregon Residents for Local Alternatives (ORLA) to voice their strong opposition to the proposed Public Safety Tax in Grants Pass, Oregon. While emphasizing their commitment to supporting public safety, the Chamber acknowledges the critical role adequate public safety funding plays in the growth of the local economy and the prosperity of businesses. However, the proposed solution, a 1.5% sales tax coupled with a $12 monthly utility fee, has sparked significant concern among Chamber members. Expressing their disapproval, the Chamber staunchly opposes the suggested food and beverage tax, a general sales tax, and any form of payroll tax. As advocates for the local business community, they argue that these proposed taxes would have a detrimental impact on businesses already grappling with the challenges of increasing inflation and the looming possibility of an economic downturn. A recent survey conducted by the Grants Pass & Josephine County Chamber of Commerce among its membership revealed that over 80% of respondents are against the proposed funding mechanism. The survey participants were adamant that they want the decision to be taken to
•
see GRANTS, page 5