To: Board of the Lincoln County Commissioners
From: The Toledo Tribune
Date: April 18, 2025
Subject: Request for Full Board Review of Complaint Concerning County Legal Counsel
Dear Commissioners,
I am writing to formally raise a concern regarding the alledged recent unilateral decision by an individual commissioner to decline further action on a complaint involving the conduct of employees of Lincoln County. This matter requires the attention and deliberation of the full board, not the discretionary closure by a single board member.
Procedural and Legal Concerns
1. Lack of Individual Authority – Board Action Required
Under Oregon law, a board of commissioners may only act as a collective body. No individual member holds independent authority to dismiss complaints or make legal determinations without board consensus.
• ORS 203.035(1): Grants legislative authority to the governing body of a county, not to individual commissioners.
• Stanson v. Mott, 17 Cal.3d 206 (1976): Public officials may not exercise powers not expressly delegated; unilateral action without board approval is ultra vires.
• Oregon Attorney General’s Public Records and Meetings Manual (2022): All substantive decisions must occur in properly noticed public meetings with quorum and recorded votes.
2. Conflict of Interest and Ethics Violations
A complaint against County Legal Counsel and Human Resources director raises inherent conflict concerns. Under Oregon law and the Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct, such matters must be handled without any appearance of bias or self-interest.
• ORPC 1.7(a)(2): Prohibits representation where there is a significant risk personal interest may materially limit professional judgment.
• ORPC 8.3: Mandates that attorneys who know of another lawyer’s misconduct report it to appropriate authorities.
• Oregon Government Ethics Law (ORS Chapter 244): Prohibits public officials from using their position to avoid oversight or accountability.
3. Duty of Oversight and Legal Risk
The Board has a fiduciary duty to provide checks and balances over appointed officials, including legal counsel. Improper handling of misconduct complaints can expose the county to:
• Claims of dereliction of duty (under tort or administrative law);
• Civil rights violations, if the misconduct in question affects due process or access to justice;
• Bar complaints, if county counsel’s conduct constitutes a violation under the Oregon State Bar’s disciplinary process.
Request for Immediate Board Action
In light of the above, I respectfully request that the Board:
1. Place the matter on a regular meeting agenda;
2. Review the original complaint and the decision process used to dismiss it;
3. Determine whether any ethics or procedural violations occurred;
4. Consider referring the matter to a neutral third-party investigator, the Oregon State Bar if appropriate, or mediation.
Failure to address this matter openly and in accordance with law and ethics guidelines risks undermining both public trust and legal accountability. This is not about assigning blame prematurely—it is about ensuring procedural fairness and compliance with Oregon’s standards for transparent governance.
Thank you for your attention and commitment to public accountability.
Sincerely,
Barry Bruster
Editor, Toledo Tribune
Leave a Reply