EUGENE – After weaving in and out of public and closed-door meetings, the Lane County Board of Commissioners on Feb. 18 publicly addressed the investigation into allegations of harassment and discrimination, with Commissioner David Loveall at its center.
After approximately three hours of discussion, the board directed staff and attorneys to prepare a “statement of unity” for adoption in support of those who filed complaints. They also called on Loveall to issue an apology before the March 3 board meeting.
On Feb. 10, Lane County released a summary of an investigation into several claims that Loveall – who represents Springfield on the board – retaliated against staff members. Loveall and his attorney, Jill Gibson, rejected the findings and argued that the Lane County Administrative Procedures Manual, which served as the basis for the investigation, applies only to employees and not to elected officials. They contended that using these policies to discipline a commissioner conflicts with Oregon case law and constitutional principles, and they were explicit about their intentions to file a lawsuit as a result.
Investigation at a glance
Mountain Lakes Employment Investigations, LLC (MLEI) released a report on Feb. 1 detailing allegations of retaliation by Loveall against county employees. The investigation included interviews with 15 employees and a review of documents related to incidents from June to December 2025.
In summary from that 12-page report, which can be read in full online at Chronicle1909.com:
- Loveall was found to have threatened Lane County Administrator Steve Mokrohisky’s job, assigned an unjustified performance rating of 1 out of 5, and made disparaging public remarks.
- In May 2025, one employee reported that Loveall commented on a community partner involved with the County’s grant, likening them to a “stripper on a pole.”
- A second employee reported Loveall for his frequent use of religious language, reporting “religious trauma” and requesting not to discuss religion at work. After filing the complaint, the employee claimed retaliation from Loveall. Loveall contended that the complaint was a “direct attack” on his right to free speech.
- Mokrohisky, who has been the administrator since 2014, was allegedly retaliated against for addressing employee complaints and informing them of Loveall’s directive to halt those complaints. The investigation revealed that Loveall directed Mokrohisky to tell employees to “stop (the complaints). There’s nothing they can do to stop commissioners from saying and doing whatever they want … and if you don’t fix this, then you and I have a problem, and I am going to do everything I can to get rid of these people.”
Last week’s meeting
In the last open meeting of the morning, Loveall maintained that elected officials are accountable to voters, not staff-written personnel policies, and reiterated that he is entitled to free speech and religious expression even if others are offended.
He asserted there was no crime, no actual damages, and multiple “factual errors” in the investigative record and summary. Among other points, he disputed a characterization that he had personally used the term “stripper on a strip pole,” stating it arose from community discussion rather than his own words; denied knowing about a complainant’s family religious trauma before signing a birthday card with religious language; and argued that the issues were being used against him.
Loveall further contested how his prior performance scores for Mokrohisky had been documented, asserting the official record misrepresented his consistently low ratings, and argued that his email criticizing the release of privileged and executive-session material was being wrongly characterized as retaliation.
Gibson also argued that all of the violations identified in the investigation were based on Loveall’s speech – such as religious comments and public statements about Mokrohisky – and that disciplining him for such speech violated his First Amendment and due process rights.
Gibson criticized the investigative report as legally and factually flawed. Gibson said Loveall has strong legal claims and that she had advised him to consider filing a lawsuit.
Loveall and his attorney also pointed out that the board has been able to respond only to a 12-page summary, not the complete records, which they argued violated due process. Counsel confirmed that the commissioners lacked the complete report but could provide it if directed to do so.
The board entered an executive session for legal advice and, upon reconvening, requested the “statement of unity” and requested Loveall issue an apology before the March 3 meeting. The apology must address both the harms suffered by affected individuals and the sustained allegations in the report.
The motion passed 3-2, with Loveall and Ceniga opposing the apology.
Loveall, who has served as Lane County Commissioner for Springfield since 2023, did not respond to a request for comment from The Chronicle.
