Why is the Eugene Chamber trying to delegitimize Jennifer Smith’s election to City Council?

In mid-July, the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce published an article about the 2026 primary election titled “Election Lessons.” In that article the chamber states blatantly inaccurate information to delegitimize the primary win of Ward 3 candidate Jennifer Smith over the chamber-backed candidate, John Barofsky.

Specifically, the author states, “In Ward 3, the immediate past Chamber Board President, John Barofsky ran for the open seat and lost by 463 votes in an unfortunately low-turnout race.”

Under the heading “The Election Also Revealed Where the Chamber Can Improve,” the author also doubled down and claimed the reason Smith won was because of low turnout.

A month later, on Aug. 20, the chamber reiterated this on their Facebook page with a graphic highlighting there were only 463 votes that decided the margin of the Ward 3 race. But that doesn’t tell the whole story.

As I am sure the chamber knows, information is readily available that shows the 2026 primary election had a similar number of voters when compared to recent Ward 3 contested races — 3,058 people voted in the May primary, compared with 2,947 people in the last contested Ward 3 race in 2018 — and a higher rate when compared to uncontested races (just 1,655 votes were cast in 2022, when current city Councilor Alan Zelenka ran unopposed).

For the chamber to allude to the 2026 primary as a low-turnout race, and therefore the reason why their endorsed candidate lost, is either purposeful misinformation, or lack of research and thought. 

Each Eugene city councilor represents about 20,000 residents. It is important to understand that Ward 3 covers areas around the University of Oregon. In my neighborhood association, more than half of the residents counted are students who live in apartments. Neighborhoods surrounding the UO also count many students who reside in rental housing further within neighborhoods, as well as the city’s concentration of short-term rentals and Airbnbs. This is not the same demographic as other wards that have a higher total vote count.

The Chamber of Commerce knows these statistics, but still decided to dabble in misinformation by alluding to delegitimizing of the results of an election. Eugene’s business leaders should be concerned. Integrity matters, and this is especially true in the context of national political climate.

I would hope the chamber’s political playbook does not mimic what we are seeing nationally. Unfortunately, the chamber’s political rhetoric in this matter should be called out for what it is: dog whistling to delegitimize the primary victory of another candidate over their endorsed candidate.

Everyone, including the chamber’s author, is entitled to their own opinion, but as a highly influential voice of Eugene business intricately weaving themselves in local politics and with local politicians, we should expect a more honest analysis that doesn’t purposefully and continuously try to delegitimize the win of a candidate by casting misinformation.