From Larry Van Elsberg responding to an editorial in The World

Editor:

As Chief Petitioner to Recall Commissioner Stufflebean, I am responding to an editorial published in The World newspaper titled “Think Twice before Signing Recall”.
A recall is only held when a substantial number of voters are dissatisfied with an office holder. To qualify for the ballot a recall petition must have registered voters signatures equal to at least 15% of the total vote for Governor in the last election. Initiatives only require 6%. An Oregon Constitutional Initiative Amendment requires only 8%.
The Recall Initiative and Referendum provisions were added to the Oregon Constitution at the turn of the 20th Century. Together they are called the “Oregon System”. They were adopted when much of state and local governments had become corrupt and unresponsive to the people. The Oregon System was a great achievement of the Progressive Era.
Recalls can be misused but remain a cornerstone of Oregon Democracy. Without the “Oregon System” we would return to the days when citizens could not take back their government from politicians abusing the public trust.
The two issues of our campaign are:
1. Unnecessary public safety cuts to both Law Enforcement and the Road Department.
2. The manner in which Mr. Stufflebean conducts public business.
I reviewed hours of recorded Commissioners meetings concerning the Road Departments budget. Commissioner Stufflebean never mentioned a reorganization plan or how it will affect the citizens of Coos County. However he now claims this reorganization will make the department more efficient and will maintain the same level of service.
I dispute this! Drive by the County Road Department and look at all the equipment sitting idle. In my 33 years with that department the equipment lot was almost always empty during normal work days. This equipment was out working on your county roads. There are only so many hours per year, per employee to accomplish assigned tasks. Do the math; there will be less maintenance on our county roads, regardless of what Mr. Kevin Stufflebean tells you.
The editorial states “Stufflebean’s adversaries have not offered a concrete alternative” to his plan. Despite numerous requests from employees and the public, Commissioners Whitty & Stufflebean refused to open this public safety issue for discussion. At two meetings, they both failed to second a motion made by newly elected Commissioner Bob Main to review this decision. How can citizens offer alternatives when elected officials refuse to discuss it?
This process was deceptive at best. An audio tape of a budget work session, dated December 16, 2009 confirms this for me. During this session, a number of departments appeared before the Board of Commissioners, the last being the Road Department. Commissioner Stufflebean briefs the two other Commissioners on the Road Departments budget, loss of revenue and projected loss of revenue. Not once does he mention reorganization or pending layoffs during the public meeting. At the end of the work session, the last minute of the recording, Commissioners along with county counsel and Road Department managerial staff go into executive session. Commissioner Griffith then reads the law pertaining to executive session. He gives instructions to road department managers when Commissioner Stufflebean interrupts making the statement that it would be his preference that the meeting be taken in hand written notes and not taped, the recording abruptly ends.
Only Commissioner Stufflebean knows why he wanted only written notes and not taped. While Roadmaster, I sat through numerous executive sessions and never witnessed a Commissioner requesting the meeting be recorded by written notes only.
Two years is a long time for an elected official to remain in office who’s shown he’s not open to public input. There will be other important public issues during this time. Can you trust Mr. Stufflebean to make the right decision? His conduct in public office should concern you regardless of how you feel about road department layoffs.
Regarding the cost of the recall election when we turn in the recall signatures the law allows Mr. Stufflebean to resign without cost to tax payers. If the election is held, that is the price of democracy.

Larry R. Van Elsberg

In response to Den’s comment below I have included the organizational chart referred to during the December 16, 2008 budget meeting. Road Department Organization Chart