Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vendor Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Complaint prompts county review after offensive political apparel, alleged harassment at fair
Summary
Multiple vendors and fair attendees complained about political apparel and alleged harassment at a vendor booth during the county fair; the fair director said the county administrator and civil prosecutor are reviewing subsequent actions by those involved.
Several fair vendors and visitors told the County Fair Board they were disturbed by political apparel and alleged harassment at vendor booths during the fair, and the board was told county legal staff are reviewing follow‑up actions.
Why it matters: Complaints allege that apparel and conduct at vendor booths crossed the fair’s exhibitor rules, which restrict vulgar or offensive displays and give fair management discretion to remove items or vendors. The episode prompted a number of public emails and phone calls to fair leadership, and county officials said they are investigating whether actions beyond protected speech occurred.
Public commenters Gail Baker and Michael Williams described incidents in which two individuals wearing politically explicit hats reportedly directed harassing behavior toward another vendor’s booth and customers. Baker read an email response she had received from Fair Director Donald Crawford stating, in part, “the fair staff understands your concern” and invoking First Amendment protections; she told the board she believed the conduct and apparel violated the fair’s exhibitor rules. Baker also read language from the fair’s exhibitor concession agreement and the fair rules and regulations policy, citing sections that bar “vulgar, offensive, or obscene material” and give fair management authority to require removal of offensive items.
Fair Director Donald Crawford told the board he had received multiple complaints and had consulted the county administrator and the deputy civil prosecutor. He said the county is investigating follow‑up actions taken by the individuals who were wearing the apparel and that the county will determine whether those actions exceeded protected speech and require additional steps.
Several commenters urged strict application of vendor contracts. Retired law enforcement speaker Bob Schilling (identified himself as a retired state patrol investigator) cited a state statute—read during public comment as "RCW 9 58 0 1 0"—and argued that malicious published falsehoods can be unlawful and that vendor privileges can be revoked under the exhibitor agreement.
Board action and next steps: The board did not take an enforcement action during the meeting; Crawford said county counsel and the administrator are handling the investigation. Board members asked staff to keep the board updated.
Distinguishing fact and allegation: Public speakers described what they said they observed and provided copies of emails and photographs to fair staff; county officials said they are reviewing the materials to determine whether the conduct rose above protected speech and whether contract or criminal remedies apply.
