This story was originally published on LincolnChronicle.org and is used with permission.
Lincoln County commissioners may have broken several public meeting laws when deciding what positions to exempt from their budget-triggered hiring freeze, according to a review by Oregon Government Ethics Commission staff.
In June, commissioners approved a $207 million budget but had to balance a $4 million shortfall with a hiring freeze. At the time, a little over 20 vacant positions were impacted. Department heads could apply for exceptions, which had to be approved by county commissioners.
But rather than explaining the hiring exemption requests and then voting to approve or deny them in a public meeting, commissioners were asked by human resources director David Collier to privately cast their votes electronically – a move that may have broken half a dozen Oregon public meeting laws.
Commissioner Casey Miller alerted the ethics commission to the issue in July, prompting a review that “found substantial objective basis” that the three commissioners violated public meetings law.
On Friday, the ethics commission is scheduled to hear its staff report and decide whether to proceed with a full investigation.
Although the ethics commission staff completed their review Sept. 19 and notified the county of the possible meetings law violations, commissioners have continued to electronically vote in private to approve hiring freeze exceptions.
The review follows a year of turmoil in Lincoln County, including an investigation of Miller for violating personnel rules and then asking him not to work in the courthouse, the resignation of commissioner Katey Jacobson, the sudden departure of administrator Tim Johnson, and a recall signature-gathering effort still underway to remove commission chair Claire Hall from office.
The past year has also sown deep divisions between commissioners, county counsel Kristin Yuille and District Attorney Jenna Wallace as she and other county staff used public comment periods during board meetings to air grievances.
In the weeks leading up to Friday’s ethics commission’s review, Wallace sought to place continual public pressure on commissioners to approve exceptions to some of the nine positions in her department impacted by the hiring freeze.
Violating public meeting law?
According to the ethics commission staff report, Collier initiated the individual commissioners’ vote in May by sending an email one-by-one. Commissioners were prompted to review hiring freeze exemption requests by responding “yes, no or abstain,” according to emails between Collier and Miller.
When Miller expressed concern over following Oregon’s public meetings law, Collier responded that the process did not include a quorum because emails were sent individually and were not shared with other commissioners.
Subsequently, when Miller filed a grievance June 10, Yuille also contended that the process did not result in a quorum because emails went to individual commissioners and couldn’t be considered serial communications, which are prohibited, because commissioners did not see each other’s responses.
Miller filed a complaint with the ethics commission July 22 to see if that was true.
That prompted an investigator’s review of the email exchanges, a phone call with Collier and communication with commissioners to review potential public meeting law violations between May and June.
Collier told the ethics investigator that at first the process went through regular emails before switching to an online system called NeoGov that didn’t allow commissioners to see responses from others.
Hall told the investigator that the process was used several times to consider exceptions to jobs paid for out of the county’s general fund and that she did not believe her actions violated the law or the law’s intent. Commissioner Walter Chuck said that the county had also used the process when approving job descriptions, according to a Sept. 19 ethics board investigator’s report.
Investigator’s review
Despite denials from Yuille, Collier and Hall that their vote did not break public meeting law, the investigator’s review found “substantial objective basis” that public meetings laws were violated.
The review determined that commissioners had met in a quorum since each commissioner was involved in the decision-making process and convened electronically to have their votes recorded tallied and used to make a decision.
The investigator wrote that several public meetings laws may have been broken regarding:
- Reaching board decisions openly;
- Keeping meetings open to the public unless falling under an exception of a closed session;
- Taking a public vote;
- Giving proper notice to the public and media of the meetings; and
- Keeping sound, video or written meeting minutes.
“Based on the information reviewed during this preliminary review, there appears to be substantial objective basis to believe that Casey Miller and the other members of the Lincoln County board of commissioners may have violated provisions of Oregon public meetings law,” the review stated.
The ethics commission is scheduled to hold an executive (closed) session Friday on the investigator’s report and decide afterwards if it should proceed with a full probe of possible violations of public meeting laws. If the commission follows through with that recommendation, the investigation period will open for 180 days to collect evidence, Casey Fenstermaker, the commission’s compliance and enforcement coordinator, told the Lincoln Chronicle.
Fenstermaker couldn’t give specific details about Lincoln County’s case, but the investigation’s findings could result in a letter of education or penalty. The commission usually focuses on education rather than financial penalties, she said.
Yuille, who along with Hall has assumed much of the county administrator’s duties, would not comment to the Chronicle on the ethics investigation other than to say it was commissioners – not the county – who were the focus of the ethics inquiry.
“An individual elected official is responsible for adhering to public meetings rules …” Yuille said in an email.
Yuille regularly provides commissioners with legal advice before, during and after meetings, including agenda-setting, procedures, ordinances, and on laws regarding public records and meetings.
Miller told the Chronicle that by filing a complaint with the ethics commission he felt he was implicating himself since he had taken part in the meetings. But he also saw the review as a way to get an independent judgement from an outside third party that could give the county and himself guidance to improve their processes, he told the Chronicle.
“My hope is that this review will help level the playing field for elected officials, staff, and most importantly, the residents of Lincoln County, so that we can all see how decisions are being made on their behalf,” Miller said.
Hiring freeze issues
The hiring freeze has been a contentious issue for months. When the Lincoln Chronicle first reported on the topic, Yuille’s office would not disclose the number of positions affected or the departments they belonged to, instructing the Chronicle to instead file a public records request. It is still unknown exactly how many positions are affected by the freeze and how many exceptions have been granted.
Questions directed to Yuille and Collier on the numbers went unanswered.
For weeks, Wallace has sounded an alarm on the hiring freeze’s impact on the district attorney’s office, sending multiple news releases and even calling for the public to show up at commission meetings to demand some of her positions be unfrozen.
The latest was during the public comment period at the commission’s meeting last week, with Wallace even drafting an ordinance for commissioners to read that would unfreeze five of her department’s nine frozen positions.
“My request for five exceptions for key public safety positions leaves four remaining frozen positions in the district attorney’s office to help resolve the county created budget deficit,” Wallace said. “This seems to be a reasonable compromise to promote public safety while also balancing the budget”
Her comment produced mixed reactions from the audience. Some sympathized with Wallace while others felt she had used the public comment period to grandstand.
“I hope our citizens do not get suckered into believing that exaggerated selfish efforts of our DA seeking a larger budget during a period our county is suffering the loss of federally pledged funds for programs serving our less fortunate,” said Newport resident Debbie Kozar Duus. “Let’s tell her to act more responsibly with her finances and be an asset to our county, instead of a drama queen.”
According to emails between Collier and Wallace, the hiring freeze initially started to affect two positions in the district attorney’s office – a victim’s assistant position and a detective position in the weeks before the county finalized its 2025-26 budget. Weeks later, two deputy district attorney positions were added to the freeze while Wallace was conducting interviews with prospective candidates, according to email exchanges between the district attorney and human resources. Wallace began advocating for exceptions in May for all four positions, according to email exchanges.
At the time, Collier told Wallace that uncertainty over collective bargaining agreements might make it too costly to hire the two deputy district attorneys.
“The county does not want to be in the position of hiring employees and then having to lay them off after we get the ruling, which is not fair to the individuals,” he said in a June email.
Wallace hoped to compromise by hiring one deputy district attorney instead of two, but Collier said both positions would have to be vacant, according to an email exchange between the two.
Wallace also attempted to hire for her vacant executive chief position but then learned it may be subject to the hiring freeze, so she put in another exception request. Shortly after, her administrative chief’s position also became vacant and Wallace was told that position would merge duties with the executive position, which would then be eliminated, according to a July email thread.
The number of frozen positions in the district attorney’s office grew to nine, as more positions became vacant after the hiring freeze was enacted. The positions are a senior legal secretary, a digital analyst, detective, executive chief, two part-time victim advocates and three deputy district attorneys.
The district attorney’s office has 33 staff when at full capacity – so the nine frozen positions shrink the department by 27 percent.
“At first I was given the original list of positions subject to the hiring freeze, then they added two more positions and as positions become vacant they are also subject to the hiring freeze,” Wallace told the Chronicle this week. “That wasn’t communicated to me and I was never told what the criteria are for granting an exception.”
Some of Wallace’s requests – including pleas to fill positions that became vacant after the hiring freeze – have been sitting in a queue pending action for more than a month, according to screenshots she shared with the Chronicle.
Many of the new deputy district attorneys in the office are filled with lawyers in their first two years out of law school. Because of this, Wallace says she has been taking on a larger case load of sex crimes because they are highly specialized, complex cases that she believes need to be handled by someone with more experience.
Wallace has also complained publicly how the vacancies, including an open detective position, impact local police agencies. But agencies contacted by the Chronicle said it wasn’t a big issue with them.
A hiring event
Wallace says it’s also difficult to watch the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office host a hiring event during the freeze.
But the sheriff’s office isn’t exempt from the hiring freeze, said Sheriff Adam Shanks.
Initially, there were six positions affected, Shanks said, but the department was granted exceptions for a corrections deputy and a corrections technician since the jail is at minimum staffing. There are also three nurse positions open, he said, but they are not subject to the hiring freeze because they are essential for the medical responsibilities of the jail.
A sheriff’s hiring event Saturday is mostly to build a pool of applicants for the positions that are becoming vacant over the next few months as people retire, Shanks said. He has been able to fill positions that became vacant after the county’s hiring freeze, although they still have to go through the exemption request process.
Commissioners have approved hiring freeze exemptions as early as Oct. 6, according to emails from the NeoGov portal. Despite the report from the ethics commission investigator, commissioners have continued to vote electronically to approve the requests as they come, Miller said.
It is unclear to Miller, Wallace and others what criteria is used to determine an exemption before it is considered for action by the board or why exemptions for positions left open after the hiring freeze may vary across departments. Collier and Yuille did not respond to the Chronicle’s questions about the criteria.
Wallace feels that she has tried to seek answers internally but to no avail.
“The problem is there isn’t a lot of communication or guidance, and it feels like doors are closed,” Wallace said. “I don’t know what else to do. I’m faced with two options – sit in my office and try to continue doing this work with limited resources or bring it up publicly.”
- Shayla Escudero covers Lincoln County government, education, Newport, housing and social services for Lincoln Chronicle and can be reached at Shayla@LincolnChronicle.org
To read the Oregon Ethics Commission’s preliminary report, go here