Scarfo says Union County should keep building on progress

Matt Scarfo is asking Union County voters to judge his bid for a third term on what the county can point to now: a $70.3 million budget, 650 miles of county road, 89 bridges and a board he says has kept government moving without drama. With the May 19 primary approaching, Scarfo’s case is that Union County should keep building on the same kind of day-to-day management already underway under commissioners Paul Anderes, Matt Scarfo and Jake Seavert.

The pitch fits the county’s own priorities. Union County says the board’s mission is to provide cost-effective, professional and courteous service within budgeted funds while maximizing state and federal dollars. That mission matters in a county that spans 2,038 square miles and depends on the Public Works Department to keep roads passable across a vast rural landscape. Public Works funding comes exclusively from timber receipts and gasoline taxes, a narrow revenue base that puts pressure on commissioners to protect basic services.

That is why the budget adopted June 25 carries so much weight. The Union County Board of Commissioners approved a 2025-26 budget of $70.3 million, about 9% larger than the prior year. Budget committee minutes said the proposed spending plan totaled $70,365,199 and was split across 48 balanced funds. During budget adoption, Scarfo said the process was “so clean” and there were no issues, a line that underscored his message that county government is working as it should.

Scarfo announced Sept. 11, 2025, that he would seek a third term, saying it had been a privilege to serve the community and that he wanted to keep working for businesses, organizations and residents. For voters weighing that appeal, the practical test is whether the county keeps maintaining roads and bridges, staying inside budget and delivering services without interruption.

But one unresolved issue hangs over the race. Reports in March 2026 said the Oregon Government Ethics Commission moved forward with an investigation involving Scarfo. One account said the case centered on whether he failed to disclose income on a statement from the prior year. Another said it involved whether he violated ethics laws when voting to bring a term-limit constitutionality question before a Union County judge. In a county where commissioners are responsible for the basics of public works, budgeting and public trust, that question is now part of the record voters will weigh before they decide whether Scarfo’s momentum is enough to merit another term.