Secretary of State Shemia Fagan’s resignation, effective tomorrow, should mark the end of her political career in Oregon. Her apparent willingness to compromise the integrity of her office to please a donor deeply betrayed both her employees and Oregonians. Despite the promise she once showed, Fagan’s tenure in public service must be over.
But that does not mean the end of this scandal’s fallout. Fagan was one of several top Democrats who received big donations from La Mota cannabis company owners Rosa Cazares and Aaron Mitchell as Willamette Week’s Sophie Peel first reported – even as the couple faced government liens for millions in back taxes and lawsuits from vendors alleging unpaid bills. Since 2020, the couple gave more than $68,000 to Gov. Tina Kotek, $12,500 to Senate President Rob Wagner, $30,000 to the fundraising arms for the House and Senate Democrats, $15,000 to the Democratic Party of Oregon and thousands more to other candidates. And just one year ago, they hosted a fundraiser for Kotek’s gubernatorial campaign, Peel reported.
Oregonians legitimately may wonder whether anyone else felt pressured or made decisions to accommodate the couple, as Fagan appears to have done. Emails show that Fagan in 2021 sought Cazares’ input on a planned audit of the state’s marijuana regulations and appears to have revised the initial audit framework based on her suggestions. And Fagan, who signed a $10,000-a-month consulting contract with the couple last February, admitted seeking information on cannabis business licenses by calling the lieutenant governor for Connecticut, with whom she networked as secretary of state.
Kotek’s credibility and Oregonians’ collective trust in government hinge on how our top leaders proceed in these coming weeks. Kotek and Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum both must take certain steps to help untangle this mess:
First, Kotek should confront head-on the questions swirling around her own connections with Cazares and Mitchell and whether they had anything to do with her Feb. 1 decision to request OLCC executive director Steve Marks’ resignation. Kotek, who sought Marks’ resignation just three weeks after she took office, has not disclosed her reasons. But she later said she made the decision prior to learning about revelations reported on Feb. 8 by The Oregonian/OregonLive’s Noelle Crombie that he and other top managers diverted high-priced bourbon for their own personal use.
It’s not uncommon for governors to replace agency heads who don’t align with their vision. But Cazares made no secret of her contempt for OLCC’s leaders and operations in her interview with auditors. Kotek should spell out her reasons for replacing Marks and should do so with transparency, providing emails or other records that help show her decision-making.
Second, Kotek should appoint someone to the secretary of state’s office who can instill confidence and trust among Oregonians across the political spectrum. By law, she must appoint someone from the same party as Fagan, who is a Democrat. On the top of her list of candidates should be former state senator Mark Hass, who narrowly lost to Fagan in the 2020 primary for secretary of state. Hass, 66, won our endorsement for his integrity, record of public service and vision for involving Oregonians, regardless of political party, in our democracy. During his run, he developed a thoughtful strategy for how the office can meaningfully improve state government for Oregonians.
Regardless of whomever Kotek picks, she should request that her appointee not run for election in 2024, as former Gov. Kate Brown insisted both times she filled the secretary of state position. The agency needs someone in charge whose sole focus is on stabilizing the agency and ensuring that its many crucial functions are operating with the fairness and independence that they should. The secretary of state’s office not only oversees elections, but also enforces campaign finance laws, conducts audits into government programs, administers the business registry, maintains state archives and handles other core services upon which Oregonians need to trust. The office does not need someone who will be dialing for campaign dollars from the second they walk through the door in anticipation of the 2024 election.
Third, Kotek and Attorney General Rosenblum must ensure that Fagan’s contract, the OLCC audit and the OLCC’s diversion of bourbon are fully investigated with clear authority to pursue leads wherever the evidence directs them. That should include bringing on independent investigators, considering that Democrats hold all five statewide elected offices and the La Mota owners donated to many Democrats and Democratic organizations.
Legislators also must play a part in sorting out this mess. They should appoint a work group to examine the Oregon Government Ethics Commission and whether regulatory or cultural issues exist within the agency that hamper its ability to ensure ethical behavior by elected officials. Similarly, state, local and industry representatives should seek to improve OLCC regulations to ensure that cannabis companies accused of skirting their tax obligations are not able to expand. Lawmakers should explore increasing pay levels for statewide elected officials to ensure they are appropriately compensated for the work they are expected to do. And they should seek to tighten campaign finance laws to bar the kind of excessive donations that the La Mota owners were able to make to individuals and PACs.
One prominent Democrat has lost her elected position for good reason. Our elected officials should not treat that as the only outcome Oregonians will see.
-The Oregonian/OregonLive Editorial Board
Oregonian editorials
Editorials reflect the collective opinion of The Oregonian/OregonLive editorial board, which operates independently of the newsroom. Members of the editorial board are Therese Bottomly, Laura Gunderson, Helen Jung and John Maher.
Members of the board meet regularly to determine our institutional stance on issues of the day. We publish editorials when we believe our unique perspective can lend clarity and influence an upcoming decision of great public interest. Editorials are opinion pieces and therefore different from news articles.