Ethics commission finds sufficient evidence Smith in violation of statutes, move to next steps
By Griffin Beach on Friday, December 12th, 2025 in Columbia Basin News More Top Stories
SALEM – The Oregon Ethics Commission has found sufficient evidence that CDA Executive Director Greg Smith was in violation of two statutes, moving the investigation to either a contested case proceeding or a negotiated settlement.
The commission’s decision, reached Friday, followed an investigation that found a “preponderance” of evidence that Smith failed to properly disclose a conflict of interest and engaged in a prohibited use of his position.
The investigation largely centered on a grant application submitted to the Office of Local Defense and Community Cooperation (OLDCC) seeking funding for the CDA. The application included language for a “board-approved” salary raise for Smith and the Assistant to the Executive Director, despite the investigation finding that the raises had never been officially presented to the CDA board for approval.
Smith claimed he was unaware the salary increase language was in the grant application and stated he reached out to the OLDCC to correct the error in the fall of 2024. He asserted he was not responsible for compiling the application and that the numbers originated from the Port of Morrow and the OLDCC, not the CDA.
The commission held a special meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 10, to review the investigators’ findings. The commission initially voted to extend the investigation by 30 days to allow interviews with Smith and CDA Board Member JD Tovey, conducted on Dec. 8, to be added to the report. The final case was then added to Friday’s agenda for a vote.
Board Member JD Tovey, who joined the CDA board in December 2023, recalled being informed by his predecessor about the request for a salary increase.
Tovey recalled receiving an email from Smith requesting a vote on salaries at a Jan. 26, 2024, CDA board meeting, but that meeting was canceled due to weather.
The investigation found no reference to a salary increase for Smith in the minutes or recordings of subsequent board meetings in March and April 2024. Tovey recalled no other conversations about salary other than “off-handed comments” from CDA Board Chair Kim Puzey that Smith deserved the raise.
Before the June 2024 CDA meeting, where the budget was approved, Tovey recalled receiving the grant material about a week prior. He asked if there was anything “new or unusual” in the budget and was told by both Smith and Puzey that it was pro forma (standard procedure).
Smith advised investigators that conversations regarding a salary increase began in November 2023. He recalled being told in a December 2023 executive session that he should collect information on comparable salaries and discuss the matter with the OLDCC, and that he should seek the highest salary the OLDCC would approve.
Smith stated that he let the subject of a salary increase “drop” because “the politics were so ugly” in late 2023 and early 2024.
He claimed he was unaware a pay raise was in the budget until the June 2024 board meeting, and that when it came to the agenda item during the meeting he “skimmed through to see what his pay was going to be.” Adding he didn’t ask any questions about it at that time stating, “I wasn’t going there.”
Smith also stated he never reviewed the grant application before it was completed. He also claimed that the first time he reached out to the OLDCC was in the fall of 2024 to correct the “board-approved” language. He said he “owned” the mistake at the September 2024 board meeting to protect CDA staff.
Next Steps
Following Friday’s vote, commission staff will prepare the required documents, including a notice of violation and a proposed stipulated final order.
Smith will have 21 days from receipt of the documents to request a contested case hearing. If requested, the commission will contact the Office of Administrative Hearings to schedule the hearing. Alternatively, Smith can choose to negotiate the terms of the proposed stipulated final order.
