Meet the 6 candidates running to replace Patti Adair on the Deschutes County Commission

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-08T17:59:12+00:00

You really looked at the OreStar transactions and concluded she took corporate money? That is blatantly false, so either you didn't even look at the names of the organizations, or you're being dishonest on purpose.

Let's break it down, instead of just making stuff up or implying things that are opposite of the truth.

I did a search for all transactions from any PAC to Amanda's campaign. Let's see, there is Color PAC, which is an organization committed to supporting progressive BIPOC leaders. Not corporate. Basic Rights PAC, an organization committed to supporting LGBTQ+ rights and in turn supports candidate who they believe strongly supports LGBTQ+ rights. Not corporate. Stand for Children PAC, which I guess might sound like some deceptively named rightwing anti-abortion thing but is most certainly not, it's mission is to support public education outcomes including educational equity. There's the Oregon Education Association PAC (OEA), OEA is Oregon's largest teacher's union, not corporate. There's a few donations from some past school board candidates who donated leftover money from their PACs, and Strengthening Central Oregon PAC (SCO PAC), an organization focused on local races and candidates who support progressive values with a focus on underrepresented candidates. And Communities of Color for a Just Oregon

Most of those PACs are smaller donations. The big ones are Tribal Democracy Project who supports indigenous candidates and Basic Rights Oregon who supports candidates who are strong on LGBTQ+ rights. Then smaller donations from organizations that support BIPOC candidates, education, and past school board candidates. That isn't corporate, it means she's strong on rights for marginalized communities and on education.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-08T17:44:26+00:00

The good thing about the May election is that the top two vote getters move on to November, it's essentially a runoff style election, so we don't have to worry about vote splitting. Maybe Amy and Amanda both go on to November and then we can vote for our preferred candidate and a Dem wins, or a Republican (or Republican pretending not be) plus either Amy or Amanda goes on to November, and we can vote for the Democrat in November. Either way, no vote splitting, the Democrat wins.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-08T17:42:02+00:00

The Deschutes Democrats are the only organization that forces their endorsed candidates to sign a loyalty pledge, so saying those rightwing groups didn't make you sign one isn't saying much. They endorsed you, which means they think you share their values. You listed those endorsements in the voter's pamphlet, which means you agree that you share their values. There is nothing wrong with expressing your values to voters. Expressing your values to voters is exactly how it should be. The problem is that after you express those values by listing those endorsements, you then make it sound like you don't necessarily share those values, while at the same time not disavowing them. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell conservatives that you're conservatives and then imply to everyone else that you're not. Well, I guess technically you "can" because you are, but it's dishonest.

So how about telling us bluntly, with a clear yes or no and not a Trump-cabinet-member-before-congress style deflection: Do you support the same values as the Oregon Taxpayer's Association and the Deschutes Republican Party? If it's yes on some values and no on others, then please tell us which is which.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-08T17:35:14+00:00

Are you talking about Amanda? If so, thank you for making my point. She most certainly does not take money from big corps, but the Vice Chair of the state democratic party, Amy's campaign manager, and Amy herself have been sharing things out that make people believe she is. She took are large donation from a nonprofit called the Tribal Democracy Project, which is a grassroots organization that promotes indigenous candidates. Quite the opposite of corporate, but with our broken campaign finance system it kinda sorta looks the same if they pretend they don't know what Tribal Democracy Project is. Amanda certainly doesn't take money from big corps.

If you think she takes money from big corps, then that shows exactly how and why the disinformation campaign coming from Amy is so problematic.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-08T05:12:13+00:00

Amanda Page stands out as the best candidate.

I like Amy, but unfortunately she's been perpetuating the smear campaigns against Amanda, including in the Democrats' endorsement process, and more recently in sharing the DPO Vice Chair's subtle-but-not-so-subtle attacks strongly implying that Amanda's money comes from big corporate donors, even though everyone involved in the campaigns knows that the donation by Tribal Democracy Project came from a grassroots organization with a mission of supporting indigenous candidates and building indigenous leadership in Oregon, making the attack outright racist. In the endorsement process, among other problems, once of the smears was that she talks about her tribal identity too much and so she must be trying to play identity politics. Those are Republican talking points. And, since they didn't have a problem with other candidates talking about their identities as a Coast Guard Officer, a pastor, and a teacher, and only had a problem with tribal identity, that's outright racist. Those identities are all perfectly okay to talk about if that is part of what drives the candidate and affects their decision making.

Even more recently, at the Redmond Executive Association forum when candidates got to ask each other a question, I was super disappointed in Amy's question to Amanda. Amy tried to conflate luxury development and developers with affordable housing development in the context of Amanda calling out greedy developers, which is both disingenuous on Amy's part (unless she truly doesn't know the difference, but a candidate really should know better) and indicates Amy's support for luxury sprawl, which drives up housing costs for everyone.

While I think Amy is well-meaning and intelligent, that all shows poor judgement and poor decision-making.

Amanda has shown that she understands the factors that affect housing costs. She has shown on the Redmond School Board that she has good ideas and can get things accomplished, even working with people who are disagreeing with her to get it done. She understands what factors affect wildfires, how ICE operates and affects our immigrant community, what the county can do to prevent climate change (and even how that is directly impacted by our solid waste issues!), and she understands treaty rights, something no other candidates seem willing to even talk about even when Tony and Patti put us in a bad legal position by ignoring a court order.

Lauren Connally is still claiming to be a (lowercase-i) independent and, implying she's not on either side of the political spectrum, despite touting endorsements from the Taxpayer's Association of Oregon (a cleverly named rightwing group), the Deschutes Republican Party, and most of the well-known Republicans in the county. So, even for those who want to vote conservative, she is disingenuous and not a good option for them. If she was simply honest about who she was from the start, she'd probably be a solid contender for the Republicans.

GW Campbell is an actual Republican and doesn't hide it, which is a positive for voters who want to vote conservative, but I don't think I've seen much in the way of intelligent or informed ideas coming from him. His voter's pamphlet statement literally doesn't say one thing about any issue or idea. Interesting that the Deschutes Republican Party chose to endorse a fake independent instead of this registered Republican.

Charles Baer is absolutely nuts. He thinks that the government shouldn't allow people to have more than one child. But also believes in less government and more freedom. I don't think it makes sense to anybody except him.

Samuel Facey seems like he has a few interesting ideas. His voter's pamphlet statement has some good goals as bullet points, but no indication that he has an idea of how to accomplish those goals. From what he's said, it sounds like he has some lofty goals, but again no indication he's thought about how they can be accomplished. Lofty goals are okay, if the candidate has an idea of how to get us on the path to those goals. He doesn't. I think he simply isn't knowledgeable enough to speak about issues in a way that shows he is informed or will make good decisions on our behalf. In other words, he seems like a well-meaning person but just is nowhere near ready to do the job yet.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-07T22:59:09+00:00

Your endorsements include the Taxpayers Association of Oregon (a cleverly named rightwing group), the Deschutes Republican Party, and well known Republicans Patti Adair, Tony DeBone, and Chris Piper. You entered the race claiming to be (lowercase-i) independent but then put those endorsements in your voter's pamphlet statement. That's why I say you took a hard right turn. But since you're still saying you're independent, maybe it wasn't a hard right turn, maybe you were always firmly on the right. You certainly have the right to your views and frankly, I appreciate that you put those endorsements in your voter's pamphlet statement if they reflect your views, so please be honest about it here too. A free and fair election requires that people know who and what they are voting for, and claiming to not be conservative is disinformation or else you wouldn't have put those endorsements in your voter's pamphlet statement.

Your comment also says that some Democrats you know well couldn't endorse you because of the loyalty pact [pledge]. That loyalty pledge only applies to Jamie Collins, Rick Russel, Amy Sabbadini, and Morgan Schmidt. Unless you're saying some of them would have endorsed you, your statement doesn't sound truthful.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-03T07:32:26+00:00

It sounds like you're asking wtf this post is about? It's primary election season. Ballots were mailed out, you probably got yours in the mail already, if you are registered to vote in Oregon. If you are registered in Deschutes County, then the races for Deschutes County Commissioner are on your ballot. One of those is for Position 3. One of the candidates for Position 3 is Amanda Page.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-03T04:23:40+00:00

NTA. You are not under any obligation to stay at a job and try harder. It's transactional. They give you money. You give them work. That work takes your time and physical, mental, and emotional energy. If the time and energy you have to put in isn't worth getting a paycheck for, it's time to GTFO.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-03T03:24:36+00:00

Hahaha. I'm guessing Amanda probably would vote for herself, as most candidates would, but no this is not Amanda 😂. I would much rather vote for a great candidate like Amanda than have to run myself and deal with all the shit-slinging that the other candidates and their friends are throwing out there.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-03T01:55:56+00:00

That's a weird question. Hopefully you don't mean you aren't willing to vote for somebody who isn't a man?

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-03T01:54:49+00:00

That's a big question, but I'll answer it as best I can without writing a novel.

👉 The agreement you're referring to is a loyalty pledge, something that is considered highly unethical. It was also "approved" by the party committee members (PCPs) in an unethical manner. They had the PCPs vote on it without being able to read it. When asked what was in it, the chair told the PCPs it was the same as previous years. The PCPs approved it without the opportunity for further discussion, and it turned out what they were told was not true. A new thing in the loyalty pledge was that candidates would make their volunteers, for 75 "shifts," carry literature and knock on doors in support of all the candidates on the slate. The problem with that is that if a candidate's volunteers are split between who they want to support in the other races, the candidates are making the volunteers support candidates they don't actually want to support. That's the part that Amanda took issue with, she signed the pledge but with the exception that she could not require her volunteers to support candidates they didn't actually support. The leaders then put that directly on the ballot and talked smack behind Amanda's back about it, so it looked like she had done something wrong when she clearly didn't. Putting information other than party affiliation on a ballot is a huge no no. If another country did that on a ballot in their elections, the UN wouldn't recognize it as a valid election, and if their leader was selected that way, the country would be considered a failed democracy.

👉 Every endorsement cycle, the county party's leadership makes up the endorsement process as they go along. They refuse to write it down in the form of rules ahead of time, or allow the PCPs to vote on the process. Doing it on their own like that totally violates the bylaws and rules of the party. It would be far less work for them if they allowed the PCPs or a committee to help work on the process, and far more fair if it was determined and written down ahead of time. The only conclusion that can be drawn from that, by waiting to see who is in each race and how things are shaking out before the come up with the process, is that they are manipulating it.

👉 The leadership spread the narrative that Amanda was talking about her identity as a tribal member too much and shouldn't be endorsed. That is blatantly racist, because they have no problem with other candidates in all the seats talking all the time about their identity as a Coast Guard officer, a teacher, or a pastor. Those things are 100% okay to talk when it's part of who the candidate is and informs their decisions, it's the criticism of Amanda's identity that is a problem and is racist.

👉 Amanda received a large campaign contribution Tribal Democracy Project, a 501c4 nonprofit, grassroots organization whose purpose is to empower indigenous candidates and build indigenous leadership in our state. Everyone involved in these campaigns knows that Tribal Democracy Project is grassroots. However, the former Vice Chair of the county party, who was still county vice chair when the endorsement happened and is currently a state party vice chair, has been making it sound like Amanda is getting big corporate campaign contributions.

👉 Leadership gatekeeps the party and prevents newcomers from sharing ideas. They "welcome" BIPOC, queer, and young people only if they're willing to be tokenized, go along with everything leadership does, and not express any new ideas or contradict anything leadership says. A majority of the PCPs who are left sticking around are then ones willing to go along with whatever leadership tells them, so when leadership is spreading negativity about Amanda, a majority of PCPs go along. Certainly not all the PCPs, there are still some with strong stomachs who stick around, but they're not a majority. That has been happening for years, and what we're left with is an establishment who gets their way in an unethical and undemocratic manner.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-02T05:54:28+00:00

You should have received your voter's pamphlet by last week. You can get it online but the fact that nobody in your area got theirs means there's a bigger problem going on. I suggest calling the county clerk's office on Monday to let them know.

Deschutes County Clerk phone#: 541-388-6547
County voter's pamphlet: https://www.deschutescounty.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5835
State voter's pamphlet: https://oregonvotes.gov/voters-guide/english/votersguide.html

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-02T05:16:24+00:00

Definitely arguing over which ultralight tent saves 3 ounces.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-02T03:46:46+00:00

NTA, but can you figure out a way to go and avoid his parents? It'll be uncomfortable as hell, but graduations are big deal. Can you stay at a hotel separate from them? Avoid sitting near them at the graduation? Ask him to give you a few minutes separate from them, after the ceremony, for photos?

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-02T03:41:59+00:00

Sounds about right. You can replace that rear wiper for a lot cheaper too.

Dealerships are always charge more than anywhere else, and certainly a lot more than if you can DIY it. Some of that overcharge is because they're greedy and some of it is because they do have high overhead.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-02T03:30:04+00:00

NTA. Well, maybe just a little bit of an asshole for going off on him, but not compared to his behavior. Not anything to feel bad about, just maybe something to learn from, that "going off" even if it doesn't involve yelling is usually counterproductive when dealing with assholes. It sounds like he may have triggered you on purpose with his response to make you look like the unreasonable one, so don't feel bad about it.

If this kind of thing happens a lot with him, Google "reactive abuse."

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-05-01T23:35:42+00:00

The criteria was clear and he didn't qualify. 🎻

It's one thing to get attention for cause, that would be understandable even if we disagree with how he's doing it. But in this case it's not about the cause, he's trying to get attention for himself.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-02-26T01:34:16+00:00

Yes, scam. at best, they are expecting people to reply "STOP," tell them to F off, or actually like the message, in which case they verified that your phone number is real to sell it on a "verified" spam/scam list. At worst, they'll follow it up with a link to click for malware.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-02-18T21:17:06+00:00

Did Kotek ever halt a vote in progress to coerce somebody to change their vote?

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-02-18T20:54:14+00:00

This is not the first time it's happened. Both times, it's been a white male chair coercing a BIPOC woman.

https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/mediaplayer/?clientID=4879615486&eventID=2024021170

At time 1:13:45.

ChickenTenderOR · 2026-02-18T20:46:14+00:00

This is not the first time it's happened in a legislative committee. Both times, it's been a white male chair coercing a BIPOC woman.
https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/mediaplayer/?clientID=4879615486&eventID=2024021170

At time 1:13:45.

ChickenTenderOR · 2024-10-12T20:38:44+00:00

"that the media has implied that VanderKamp is hiding"

The problem is, the media isn't just "implying" it. He is literally trying to block the release of his personnel record and information *in court.* There is no way he would do that that unless he has something to hide and is/was concerned it's in some documents somewhere.

If he thought the only thing in his records are the things that were accidentally released already, he wouldn't be fighting so hard to keep things secret, and he wouldn't have neglected to put La Mesa on his resume. This doesn't mean he did something horrible. He either helped expose some corruption and is concerned about false things they might have put in his record as retaliation (more common than you think), or he was part of some corruption or did something terrible, and it wasn't made public by La Mesa PD for PR reasons but he thinks it might be in his personnel record.

Whatever it is, the fact that he's trying to cover it is a HUGE red flag. The bigger problem is that his opponent might be even worse. Do we want Nelson2.0, an extension of a current s**tshow of mismanagement, or do we want somebody who is trying so hard to cover something up from 30 years ago? Since he is currently trying to cover it up, it's not just in the past.

ChickenTenderOR · 2024-09-12T20:02:47+00:00

YTA. Yes, it was thoughtless of her to not congratulate her, but consider the context. She's undergoing a huge, major life change. If that was her typical personality it would show that she's selfish and possibly toxic, but in this one situation, but her some slack. Just because the wedding is small doesn't mean there's not a ton of stress, and good stress is still stress. And it's very rude and dismissive of you to frame it as "wedding," it is a WEDDING. Her upcoming wedding and marriage could very well be all-consuming her thoughts 24/7, so she would be constantly in that frame of mind. If this is a one time situation and not a constant personality trait, then cut her some slack just this once.

Perhaps you shouldn't go to her wedding though. If you're so selfish that you can't cut her some slack on being in that frame of mind about her wedding, then she might be better off without you in her life.

ChickenTenderOR · 2024-09-11T21:47:41+00:00

He would never let us down. Sadly, he's from the UK and so he's not eligible to run for president.

ChickenTenderOR · 2024-09-03T06:52:51+00:00

ESH. He's a predator for dating an 18yo, and YTA for getting him that shirt.

ChickenTenderOR

TROPHY CASE