Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Fair Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners split over outreach to fair manager after meeting with attorneys; public raises cost concerns
Summary
A meeting involving a commissioner, three attorneys and the fair manager prompted concerns among other commissioners about process and the use of legal counsel; the board agreed to discuss the matter further in executive session and to coordinate when legal advice is sought.
A meeting last Friday involving a county commissioner, multiple attorneys and the fair manager prompted several commissioners on April 1 to question whether proper board direction and liaison protocols were followed, and whether the presence of lawyers created an unnecessarily intimidating atmosphere for the fair manager.
One commissioner said they had been called into a meeting with “Duncan and 3 attorneys” and reported that fair-board members were told operating the fairgrounds year-round was illegal, that events outside the fair would need Board of County Commissioners approval, and that funds generated should be deposited to the county for later dispersal. The email the board received expressed concern that the fair manager could be driven away by the “toxic atmosphere.”
Commissioner Duncan defended holding the meeting, saying its purpose was limited to ‘‘entity use’’ and that no decisions were made. He said attorneys present included the county lawyer assigned to the matter and that the meeting resolved an issue more quickly than weeks of email exchange would have.
Other commissioners raised process questions: county in‑house legal staff had previously advised that legal requests require approval from at least two commissioners because in‑house attorneys represent the board and not individual commissioners. Commissioners asked that legal involvement follow the county’s standing policy and that future outreach be coordinated with liaisons to avoid the appearance of acting unilaterally.
The board scheduled a follow-up discussion in executive session later the same day to review the matter and to clarify liaison and legal‑request procedures. A member of the public later asked whether the county would be charged for outside attorneys and requested transparency about the source of funds used to pay legal counsel.
No formal action resolving the underlying fair-board issue was recorded in the public session; commissioners emphasized that the board must act together when taking positions that involve legal advice or enforcement.
