I have friends on both sides of this issue, yet in my opinion the county commission's decision not to pay the district attorney's salary stipend did not appear to be a rational decision. A rational decision would have manifested itself as a focused unified opinion.
When this issue was revealed to the public, I heard at least three very different reasons (state responsibility, etc.) to explain why they had taken this action.
Now, as time has passed, new reasons have surfaced. One commissioner has hinted that the district attorney should pursue more felony convictions. Is this to be a new method of generating revenue for the county?
I believe the lines of responsibility between our elected district attorney and our elected county commission have become blurred, if not completely breached.
The district attorney's office is staffed by 17 county employees who are hired, trained and managed by our district attorney. After serving two terms on the grand jury, I had ample opportunity to see how professional and organized the performance of the district attorney's deputies and staff was, and I cannot help but believe that this is a strong reflection of the quality level of management our district attorney has provided for these county employees.
Josh Marquis inherited a county department that had been devastated by scandal and mismanagement, and turned it into one of the best in the state of Oregon. How soon we forget.
Well, I did not forget. I feel his salary and stipend were well earned and deserved. Please vote "yes" on Measure 4-123.
Lawrence A. Pfund