To the editor:
To paint those people in favor of recalling Lincoln County Commissioner Claire Hall with the broad brush of transphobia is lazy, irresponsible, and also insulting. Many of us are interested in transparency, the facts and are in active pursuit of them.
Such as, why are we paying for a separate office for Commissioner Casey Miller? Why has true mediation not yet happened? Why do Hall and county counsel Kristin Yuille have so little to say?
Many of us have spent hours truly trying to understand the rift occurring between commissioner Miller and the team of commissioner Hall and counsel Yuille.
Don’t be a low-information voter, swayed this way and that by public opinion. At a minimum, go to the Lincoln Chronicle and type Lincoln County commissioners in the search bar and read the numerous articles, watch the Sept. 18, 2024 commission meeting comments by Casey Miller, and read the Casey Miller investigation available at co.lincoln.or.us which concluded “Commissioner Miller did not engage in prohibited bullying or disrespectful conduct.”
You might even consider attending some board of commission, either in person or online.
Now that you are armed with some information, go ahead and use your brain to formulate an opinion and perhaps you will conclude, as I have, that more questions must be answered.
If you’re too lazy to do the work, then continue to spout nasty vitriol on the commissioners’ Facebook pages.
Not everything is a culture war.
— Rebecca Baker/South Beach
From NPR for Oregonians/KLCC.org
The attorneys interviewed 15 people and concluded that Miller:
*Violated county personnel rules Sept. 18 by disclosing confidential information about Johnson and again on Oct. 2 by trying to discuss employee complaints against him;
*Did not engage in prohibited bullying or disrespectful conduct;
*“Likely” violated personnel rules against discrediting the county and acting against its best interests.
While the county said attorneys interviewed 15 people, it is not clear if all of them were participants in the Sept. 18 or Oct. 2 meetings, if they were in the audience those days, or had simply gone online to see a recording of the meetings – as some indicated. The report quoted witness’ comments 46 times to bolster its three findings and overall conclusion, but did not indicate which ones were from the same 15 people they interviewed.
This does not sound completely trustworthy to me.
I had the same thought about the comments: no transparency, no clarification regarding these people who were quoted. I even had to go back and re-watch the meetings referenced to see if I would experience the same over-the-top reactions to what Miller said. I did not. Not after the first viewing, nor after the second viewing. Who are these pearl clutchers? We may never know. And yes, Miller was cleared of the charge of creating a toxic work environment , and yet he is still banned from his office while we pay for his office in exile. Something stinks here, but neither Counsel Yuille nor Commissioner Hall has anything to add.
I am guessing the reason Commissioner Miller continues to be “exiled” as you say is confidential and has to do with personnel matters which is what the problem was before. Perhaps, the employees he has harmed still have a sense of unease around him. This is what makes sense to me. The Board of Commissioners and county counsel are not at liberty to discuss such things.