Island County commissioners are now considering sending the controversial Fairgrounds Road issue to voters.

Earlier this week, commissioners said they were talking about putting an advisory measure on the ballot to ask voters in the South Whidbey School District if the county should grant the city of Langley an easement for a new city street called Fairgrounds Road.

Commissioners also released a statement to quell the controversy surrounding the county fair association that has been prompted by the Waterman land sale and the association’s refusal to release public records related to the sale.

The dispute over the proposed connector street has been simmering for more than 18 months now. Langley had asked for an easement across the fairgrounds to build the new street, but the dispute has since gone to court after the fair board repeatedly blocked the city’s request for an easement across the southern tip of the county fairgrounds.

Fair officials fear they will lose space for the fair if the road is built, while the city says the street is needed to handle traffic as more homes are built on the south end of town.

After months of failed negotiations, the city filed a condemnation suit against the county in October to get the strip of land needed for the road.

According to county code, the county must ask voters in the South Whidbey School District to convey or sell fair land to a private party. County rules don’t say that a public vote is required, however, if fairgrounds property is used for a public purpose, such as a new street.

Commissioners didn’t suggest a public vote earlier because they felt the easement issue could be resolved faster by simply gaining the agreement of the fair board, Commissioner Mike Shelton said.

The county didn’t get that approval, though, and the city has since taken steps to get the corridor needed for the road through its condemnation lawsuit in Island County Superior Court. The fair association later joined the court case as an intervener.

Some hope a vote would lead to an amicable end to the court battle.

Before the county commits to moving forward on a ballot measure, however, commissioners want the fair board and the city of Langley to agree to accept the outcome of the vote regardless of how it comes out, Shelton said.

“If Langley wouldn’t abide, Langley could go right back to the condemnation,” Shelton said.

Shelton added that he has approached Mayor Neil Colburn and fair association chairman Dan Ollis with the idea.

Ollis said as a individual member of the board he would support the vote as a “means to the end of the conflict.”

He said he hasn’t discussed the idea with his fellow board members.

However, a vote would only have value with a commitment from the city, Ollis added.

“It doesn’t make to sense to have a vote and a condemnation hearing,” he said. The fair board will discuss the issue at their next meeting March 13.

Colburn said he has no problem with a vote, but currently wouldn’t support abandoning the lawsuit.

“Right now, I don’t support it. But before

we make a decision, I want to talk it over with city council,” he said.

The city council may discuss the issue in an executive session at its next meeting March 7. Or, Colburn said, he may simply take an informal poll instead.

City officials said they need the road not just to ease traffic coming from the future Highlands development — the largest housing project in city history — but also to build infrastructure for future growth. The state’s growth management law requires Langley to take its fair share of growth.

“Both Mac McDowell and Mike [Shelton] have complained bitterly to the city about fulfilling our responsibilities under the Growth Management Act. Now we have this opportunity. First they supported it and now they are fighting. I’m puzzled,” Colburn said.

The potential advisory vote is the first public step taken by county commissioners since a growing chorus of South Enders has called for the county to take action to resolve the road dispute between the city and the fair association.

Commissioners have born the brunt of repeated criticism for a lack of oversight of the activities of the fair association since news surfaced of a recent land sale by the association, and the group refused to release public records related to the sale and the road issue.

Commissioner John Dean said during the meeting he wanted to make sure the relationship between the fair association and the county is clarified, and that the county’s review of the financial management of the fair is adequate.

“We need to all be comfortable that this is being run professionally, and run according to the law,” he said.

“We as a board should have intervened earlier,” Dean added.

“It’s gone on way too long. I’m convinced this board wants to get this resolved. I’m here to try to help to do that.”

Commissioners also discussed the public disclosure of fair records Monday. Commissioners released a public statement defending the land sale, but also said they would ask the association to release some of its records.

Dean said he wanted the fair association to turn over records of meetings, financial transactions and more.

“What I’m after is total transparency. And as especially as a newcomer, I’d like to look at everything; meeting minutes, financial records…People repeatedly say there’s nothing to hide. Let’s put it all on the table. If there’s nothing to hide, show me.”

In a joint statement released Monday afternoon, the county commissioners said they will ask the fair association to provide all records regarding the operation of the Island County Fair for the last seven years.

Shelton said this includes any document related to planning and operation of the fair, including meeting minutes and financial records such as donations to both the fair board and fair association, but wouldn’t include accounting for association activities such as scholarships or the annual Christmas party.

The records, once they are in county hands, are subject to public disclosure and can be reviewed by everyone, he said.

Shelton added the county code clearly outlines how far the fair has to publicly disclose as an agent of the county.

“It clearly says, don’t operate in a vacuum, but it doesn’t mean they can’t have a private meeting,” he said.

In their joint statement, the commissioners also said only donations resulting from the production of the fair have to be deposited in the Island County Fair Fund. The fair fund is an account in the county budget that includes all gate receipts, fees and other revenues from the county fair.

Shelton said he doesn’t consider the assets of the fair fund to be public money.

“The fair board has generated those funds from the fair – gate receipts, vendor fees,” he said. “The county has no right, title or interest in that money.”

Shelton added the county does not give county tax revenues to the fair. The county spends between $15,000 to $30,000 annually to improve the fairgrounds, he said.

According to county budget documents and other public records, however, county support of the fair goes much further than what county commissioners outlined in their statement.

Each year, the county loans the fair $80,000 as seed money for the annual event. The $80,000 comes from the county current expense fund, an account largely comprised of property taxes, sales tax revenues and other revenue sources.

“If they receive a loan from the county, then it’s public money,” said Riffe, the county treasurer.

“The point is, the county does advance them some money to get the fair going,” she said.

Additionally, taxpayers fund the salaries of county employees who oversee the Island County Fair Fund.

It’s a complex and work-intensive task. The budget ledger for the Island County Fair Fund in 2006, for example, takes up 37 pages that contains hundreds of transactions of money received and money spent; the 2005 budget ledger for the Island County Fair Fund runs 36 pages.

The county also issues hundreds of warrants — basically, government checks that pay for supplies, services and payroll — each year to pay fair-related costs.

Last year, Island County issued at least 536 warrant checks to pay for supplies, services and other fair-related items, according to the 2006 budget ledger for the fair fund.

In 2005, the county issued at least 442 warrant checks to cover fair-related costs. And in 2004, the county issued at least 523 warrant checks to pay for fair-related items.

According to a random check of county-issued warrant checks from 2006 and 2005 conducted by The Record this week, county warrants paid for a wide variety of items, the cost of water utilities for two months to the city of Langley ($1,395); and the cost for fair officials to attend the state fairs convention in Yakima ($1,640).

Shelton said he doesn’t know why the county commissioners in the past required the fair to use the county as their “banker,” but said the money is generated by the fair and therefore not county money.

That view is new, however, and conflicts with the opinion of state officials and the prior actions of Island County commissioners.

The state Auditor’s Office has considered ticket receipts and other revenue from the county fair as public money that must be properly tracked and safeguarded.

In the past, county officials have also regarded gate receipts and other proceeds from the county fair as public money, according to documents obtained by The Record.

Island County intensified its oversight of ticket sales and procedures based on recommendations from the state Auditor’s Office in recent years, according to an Aug. 11, 2004 memo from former board of commissioners chairman Bill Byrd.

In the memo, the board of commissioners directed the county’s General Services Administration to review ticket sales and gate receipts annually.

Ticket audits in 2005 and 2006 revealed minor discrepancies; in 2006, for example, ticket sales were reported as $76,370 but should have been $76,465, according to the audit conducted by the county’s Risk Management Division.