A feud between Langley and the county over a road for people who don’t live here yet. Angry residents. High-priced Seattle lawyers. A lawsuit in Superior Court, with taxpayers paying for both sides in the skirmish.

How did we get here?

Langley’s ongoing fight with Island County over a piece of the county fairgrounds has raged for more than a year.

What started out as a standard easement request to build a city road across the fairgrounds has grown into a feud that few could have anticipated. It has cost time, money and energy on all fronts. Recently, fair board member Buzz Strout resigned, stating health concerns because of the constant stress brought on by the controversy and the constant media coverage.

Some say the seemingly never-ending fight, however, may be due to reasons beyond the proposed city street itself. Instead, the extended battle may be due to a crucial strategic mistake made by both county officials and Langley leaders: The decision to ask the group that runs the county fair for permission to build Fairgrounds Road across the southern tip of the fairgrounds property in Langley.

Early signs of trouble

Langley’s push for the new road across the county fairgrounds began as the city gave the go-ahead for the Highlands, the largest housing project in the city’s history.

With just one way in and out of the new neighborhood, Langley officials began looking for land to build another access road to the Highlands — partly to limit traffic troubles caused by the 53-home subdivision, and partly to handle additional growth on the city’s southern end.

After eliminating three other alternative routes, Langley decided the best option was to build the needed city street across the south end of the fairgrounds.

But when the city asked the county commissioners for the easement, they were bounced back to the Island County Fair Association to ask for permission.

According to minutes of those early meetings, in October 2005, fair officials wondered what they could get in exchange for the easement. Fair board chairman Dan Ollis told his fellow fair officials to think about “perks” the fair could get from the city, such as an extension to the sewer lines on the property, or more parking.

Early talk of an agreement, though, was soon abandoned. And some said the heels-dug-in debate was inevitable.

Personalities clash

While two former fair volunteers are on the opposite sides of the road issue, they agree on one thing: Negotiations were bound to fail as egos got in the way of a sensible solution.

Linda Perkins opposes the road, while Duke LeBaron doesn’t. Both say they love the fair and volunteered for the four-day event off and on for more than a decade.

LeBaron once served as an association member and 4-H volunteer. He said the new road would not hurt the fair.

“It’s completely blown out of proportion,” he said.

The entire road would stretch approximately one-quarter mile between Al Anderson and Langley roads; about 400 feet of the road would cross the fairgrounds property, but only about 40 feet would cover usable land between the toe of the bluff and the gate. The road would be 22 feet wide, and the city has asked for a 60-foot-wide easement across the fairgrounds.

Once complete, Fairgrounds Road would cut off a small triangular piece of the fairgrounds that’s currently somewhat isolated by an existing gravel road that winds into the fairgrounds at the property’s southern gate.

And because the city offered to close down the street during the fair or other major events, the new road wouldn’t pose problems during the fair, LeBaron said.

Perkins, however, said the new road would hurt the fair. Cutting the pie-sliced piece off from the main grounds could hurt the value of the whole property.

Perkins also said it is difficult enough to maneuver horse trailers and big rigs on and off the property at fair time as it is. Building a city street, with fences and other features, would make the situation worse.

Perkins volunteered for 15 years in various capacities including work with 4-H and 1 1/2 years on the board. She was on the fair board when the easement request first came to fair officials more than two years ago.

She recalled when Langley City Administrator Walt Blackford first asked about the easement. Not everybody on the board was against the road, but for Perkins, it was partly about protecting the property from what may have been the first of a thousand cuts.

“The fairgrounds belong to the Island County residents. I don’t feel the city of Langley has priority over county residents,” she said.

Talk seen as fruitless

Even so, both LeBaron and Perkins say negotiations between the city and fair officials were doomed from the start.

LeBaron said there is a small group within the association that has major pull among the members and tends to control decisions.

LeBaron said Marilyn and Verlane Gabelein, along with fair administrator Sandey Brandon, have blocked change on more than one occasion. All three have long histories of involvement with the fair as volunteers and supporters. They are also among the donors footing the bill for the fair association’s legal battle against the road.

“It’s a control issue,” LeBaron said.

There have been a few flare-ups before within the group. During a well-publicized dispute in 2003, Democrats were lambasted for handing out political pamphlets from their food booth at the county fair. Marilyn Gabelein and Brandon played central roles in that dispute, which only faded away after Republicans said they, too, had been using their food booth to hand out campaign literature.

As the paid employees of the fair — and the ones often called on to enforce the fair’s rules for vendors and outside users of the fairground’s facilities — Brandon and Gabelein have earned their share of critics.

Last year, for example, officials from the Puget Sound Labrador Retriever Association threatened to find a new venue for their specialty show, which is held in early August at the fairgrounds.

Officials from the association sent a letter to the fair board complaining about how they were treated by Brandon.

Just as organizers were setting up for the banquet at the end of the dog show, Brandon showed up with a Ziploc bag of cigarette butts and accused the group of littering on the fairgrounds.

“The timing could have been better, but wasn’t surprising considering the previous behavior of your administrator toward members of our club and event attendees,” the association wrote in its letter to the fair board. “We received multiple complaints from our committee members and competitors about ‘the woman’ at the fairgrounds office.”

Brandon and Gabelein have their fans, as well. Brandon has received praise at times for her skills in the administrative work of the fair, while Gabelein’s involvement with the 4-H program for more than two decades provides critical institutional knowledge needed during fairtime each year.

LeBaron left the association after a failed attempt to revise the organizations bylaws.

“We didn’t try to change anything, just update it,” he said. A group of five volunteers worked for more than 100 hours on the changes. But at the meeting to adopt the update, the group was outmaneuerved by Brandon, who proceeded to move for amending everything that had been recommended. The membership voted down the changes, and LeBaron subsequently stepped down.

In the case of Fairgrounds Road, negotiations would have likely found the same fate as the bylaw changes.

“Diplomacy wouldn’t have worked,” he said.

Perkins blames the city for the problem. The fair board said no more than once.

“I don’t think diplomacy would have helped. The city refused to accept no for an answer,” she said.

Perkins said the city has been pro-development in recent years and it appears to her as if the city would rather see the fair leave town.

The city of Langley hasn’t made it easy for the fair, Perkins addedd.

“In my opinion the city threw monkey wrenches as far as requirements go,” she said. She said the city nearly prevented the parade from happening because concerns about the insurance for the event, and city officials have also been sticklers about building improvements meeting city requirements.

Perkins said she left the fair association because she had a lack of confidence in fair administrator Brandon.

“I resigned from the board due to my opinion that there is a conflict of interest with the fair administrator doing her paid job, and her volunteering for the association,” Perkins said. “There would be times where her acting as a volunteer conflicted with what the board said.”

Perkins said she struggled to do her job on the board, but Brandon undermined the board and caused tension within the group.

“I love the fair. But Sandey took all the fun out,” she said.

“It is also my opinion that numerous volunteers have left due to the treatment by her,” she said.

In fact, over the past few years a number of long-time supporters including xxxx resigned. Their resignation letters had one theme in common: internal power struggle or personal run-ins with Brandon.

Perkins stressed that her disagreement with some had nothing to do with how she feels about other volunteers.

“They are honest, caring, wonderful people who do that for the people of Island County,” she said.

The duos fight against the road

Gabelein and Brandon have also played a significant role in the drama over Fairgrounds Road.

They were against the easement early on, and led a petition drive during last year’s fair against the road collecting 600 signatures. They also helped raise money to fund the fair association’s involvement in the condemnation lawsuit. Brandon and Gabelein send out a mass e-mail lobbying for support in the community. And Brandon hired another Seattle attorney to keep fair records secret after they were sought by The Record earlier this year.

That move led to two more controversies: An extended debate over whether the fair association was required to follow public access laws because of its status as an extension of county government, and a questionable land sale conducted by fair officials that was later discovered after critics started asking where fair officials were getting the money to finance their legal battle against the road. The state Auditor’s Office has said it will review both the county oversight of the fair association and the land sale during the state’s audit later this year.

Community looks to county for guidance

To put a stop the the escalation, the county commissioners suggested an advisory vote on Fairgrounds Road four months after the city had filed a condemnation suit to gain access to strip of land and more than 18 months years after the city first asked for an easement.

By then, city officials said it was too late.

Langley city council said last week a vote was not necessary in this case and declined to abide to accepting the outcome of a county advisory vote on the easement, a requirement in the county proposal for a vote.

Mayor Neil Colburn said following the decision that the the city would aggressively pursue its law suit, unless the county is willing to negotiate.

Langley’s leaders read the county code differently; a vote is not needed because the sale is not public, city leaders say.

When the city asked the county commissioners in a letter to explain why they thought a vote is needed, Shelton dodged the question and said he couldn’t talk about it because of the current lawsuit.

Langley Mayor Neil Colburn said the road issue is in the best interest of Langley residents, and it’s a city issue that shouldn’t be decided by voters outside of town.

“How could we – with good conscience – put the health and safety of Langley into the hands of Island County voters?” Colburn asked.

If Langley can be faulted for including fair officials in the discussion over the new road, county officials can also be blamed for extending the controversy by including the fair board in the discussion over the new road.

Early on, county commissioners said they would only give the OK for the new road if the fair board blessed the idea. Later, Commissioner Mike Shelton proposed a public vote on the road — and commissioners were harshly criticized by some, who charged they were using the fair board as political cover and dodging a dicey political decision.

Many have pointed to the county code, and have said the commissioners didn’t need to defer to the fair board or hold a public vote on the easement issue.

LeBaron said the county doesn’t need a vote based on his interpretation of the code. The rules say a public vote is needed if the fairgrounds is sold to a private buyer.

“When Commissioner Shelton asks for a vote regarding the sale of fair property to the city of Langley, I feel he is spinning the issue to support his personal friend, Verlane Gabelein. I’m sure Mike knows the difference between ‘public’ and ‘private’ buyers,” he said.

Perkins, however, said the easement issue should have gone to a vote.

“If you’re gonna take something that belongs to all county residents, we have the right to vote,” she said. “What makes the city of Langley have greater rights than the residents of Island County?”

“I don’t think it should be allowed to go to court. It should go to a vote. That’s the grown-up thing to do,” Perkins added.

Fair board chairman Dan Ollis echoed her words.

“I find it very interesting that the city has turned their nose up at the suggestion of a vote. The way that I read the county code, this is the way it should have be handled from the beginning — thus saving our group money, time, and volunteers,” Ollis said.

What’s it all about

The controversy has been raging on for nearly two years.

The city of Langley wants to build a road to ease traffic from existing homes and future construction in the undeveloped area between Al Anderson Road, Sixth Street and Langley Road.

The county’s development regulations contain a provision requiring at least two ways in and out of new subdivisions with more than 39 lots, and that new streets should be integrated with existing roadways. The Highlands will have 53 homes when finished. Langley’s development rules do not set a specific threshold for when the requirement should be triggered, however. For all subdivisions, city staff reviews potential traffic impacts and also considers public safety and long-term transportation objectives. However, the city determined that a dual exit is needed.

The road is now part of its seven-year-transportantion plan. With the Highlands subdivision to be build off Al Anderson Road, the city required the developer to build a second exit road from the development. The route crossing the southernmost part of the fairgrounds, running up the slope, crossing property owned by the Anderson family was the preferred version of the road. Alternatives were studied but foregone due to engineering issues, easements across private property and cost.

The road is designed to relieve the traffic impact from the Highlands subdivision on Al Anderson Road and about 80 other homes in the area.

The county was on board at the beginning because it would help the city to meet its requirements under the Growth Management Act, but always said they needed the support of the fair board to avoid a pricey advisory vote by the South Whidbey School District.

Shelton was for the road and worked for months to get the city and the fair board to find a solution, but when it became clear that the parties wouldn’t find common ground, the commissioners decided to defend the fairgrounds from the condemnation suit.

Fairgrounds Road would connect Al Anderson Road with Langley Road, and will follow the existing access road from Anderson Road to the city’s water tank. It will connect to an easement across a portion of Linda Anderson’s property immediately south of the Highlands development to where her property meets the county’s fairgrounds property. The final section of the new connector road will intersect Langley Road at the same place where the current gated entry is located near the southern end of the fairgrounds.

The entire road would stretch approximately one-quarter mile between Al Anderson Road and Langley Road. A piece of the fair property shaped like a piece of pie would be disconnected from the greater portion of the property, as the street would cut across a sliver of property at the narrow end of the fairgrounds parcel.

According to the latest engineering drawing that was submitted to the city in mid-December, the new street would be built on an existing road on the fairgrounds before sweeping up the unused slope. The plans also show a retainer wall and an above-ground water run-off ditch that would covert into a underground pipe when crossing the flat portion of the fairgrounds and then emerge above ground along Langley Road. Final approval of the plans is pending by the city planning staff. The plans have been reviewed by Island County Public Works department and Commissioner Mike Shelton.

Shelton said in a recent Record interview that the plans given minor changes were acceptable.

Concerns by the fair board

City officials say they felt forced to file a condemnation suit last October against the county after their easement request was shot down twice by the fair board. The city attempted renewed negotiations in January, but were told “no” again.

However, the fair board was not always strictly against the road. The board discussed the possibility and even met in early 2006 with city officials, Commissioner Shelton and Verlane Gabelein on the fairgrounds. Some say the group reached an agreement, but others later said no agreement had been reached.

Still, the fair board said it had concerns over the road. Those included:

• Loss of property value and usability if the fairgrounds is cut in two parts by the road (the property would be separated into the main fairgrounds property and another portion, smaller than one acre, that currently houses the tent camping area);

• Fencing and security for the split property;

• That the resulting intersection would not accommodate the turning radius of large trucks and access to the property;

• Lighting and signage issues;

• The impact the new road would have on the existing bluff;

• How the proposed road may impede access and use of the campground, and the possible loss of revenue.

The city offered a number of suggestions and offered to provide fencing

City officials, also said much of the land they want isn’t needed for the fair, and that the road itself will not harm the annual event.

City Officials say they did all they could. Colburn said he is frustrated.

“Mike (Shelton) came to us with a laundry list of things the fair board wanted. We said yes to every one of them,” he said.

In March 2006, Langley offered the fair association improvements worth $138,000 in site improvements, including changes to stormwater drainage in the area, a sewer line extension along Langley Road, and the installation of a dump station for recreational vehicles, if the fair would agree to the road easement.

That offer had dropped to $72,000 worth of improvements by June. After the condemnation lawsuit was launched, the city offered $12,075 for the roughly half-acre of land needed for its road project.

The future of the fair

Lost amid the raging debate over Fairgrounds Road has been any extended, in-depth talk about the future of the fair.

If fair officials hope to expand the event beyond the status quo, such a discussion is surely needed. Total fair receipts have been stagnant in recent years — hovering between roughly $190,000 and $185,000 in the years between 2006 and 2001, according to figures from the state Department of Agriculture.

During that same time span, gate receipts have dropped from a high of $94,562 in 2001 to $83,642 last year. Gate receipts hit a seven-year low in 2004, when $76,464 was brought in, according to financial information submitted to the state by Island County fair officials.

Total attendance to the fair has stayed near the 23,000 mark. Attendance in 2006 was 22,593, down from 23,029 in 2005 and the seven-year high of 23,643 in 2003.

Many would agree the lifeblood of the county fair is the 4-H youth program. The numbers of 4-H youth who participate in the county fair has also remained stagnant.

A total of 232 kids from 4-H participated in the fair in 2006 and 2005; up from the 227 who participated in 2000 but down from the seven-year high of 262 in 2003.

Fair supporters have raised the possibility that loss of space in the campgrounds could cripple the 4-H program at the fair and loss of space for staging the fair is still a leading complaint among fair board members.

“I have not seen any information as to a 22 foot road, and have only seen plans for a 60 foot easement. I think it may be important that everyone understands the full impact, and not that of just 22 feet,” Ollis said.

Despite the distraction of the ongoing road dispute, fair officials have repeatedly turned to talk about the future of the fair over the past year.

Fair officials approached Langley with the idea of creating new zoning for the fairgrounds, a “fair zone” that would open up the use of the property to special events such as concerts, rodeos and motor sports racing.

The new zoning would also allow new development at the fairgrounds, including offices, hotels and racing facilities.

Fair officials received unanimous support from county commissioners for the zoning change in May 2006. Fair officials talk of creating a strategic plan for the future of the fair with the help of Norm Landerman-Moore, an Anacortes-based consultant who specializes in master planning for fairs and festivals, and Landerman-Moore warns county commissioners that the fair may only have 10 years left in Langley due to nearby development.

Landerman-Moore also told fair officials the fair needed to grow in order to survive, and operate on a year-round basis.

Fair officials also say commissioners should start looking for another piece of property so the fair can be move out of Langley, according to minutes of the association’s August 2006 meeting.

A month later, in September, fair officials looked at internal changes. Some suggest making Sunday a bigger draw, or doing away with Sunday altogether by closing early and starting the fair on Wednesday instead of Thursday.

The impending condemnation lawsuit soon overshadowed talk of a zoning switch or changes in the fair schedule, however. And the idea to hire Landerman-Moore to write a strategic plan is put on hold as the county and the fair association prepare to fight the city’s land grab in superior court.

In late December, Michael Charneski, Langley’s lawyer, questioned fair board chairman Ollis under oath as part of the city’s condemnation lawsuit.

Elaine Spencer, the fair association’s attorney, was also present, along with Island County Deputy Prosecutor David Jamieson Jr., Langley city administrator Walt Blackford and Marilyn Gabelein from the fair association.

Ollis’ testimony – and the line of questioning pursued by the city’s attorney – likely give a few hints into the core of each side’s case.

For the fair association: Without detailed drawings, it was impossible for them to decide how much the road would hurt the fair.

For the city: The new entryway will improve access at the south gate, and the campground will largely be unaffected by the new road. The fair will still be able to use the triangle area of property next to the south gate.

Once the battle actually begins in court, Langley’s lawyer may be able to use Ollis’ deposition to claim that 4-Hers will be camping closer to the fair’s manure disposal stations than the new road. And based on Ollis’ testimony, the city will be able to deflate the safety issue by pointing out that a heavily used road already surrounds the campgrounds.

Likewise, the city can highlight that with no on-site parking, most 4-H families and other fairgoers park just outside the fair gates along Langley Road, along with other cars and trucks that park door to door or bumper to bumper along Langley Road, which has a 50 mph speed limit.

In his December deposition, Ollis said the board’s first reason for opposing the road was that it didn’t have enough information about the road, and that it would hurt the operation of the fair.

The board wanted to see engineering plans “How wide, how big, how long, and what slopes, drainage, curbs, intersection design, fencing, what all that entailed,” Ollis said in his deposition.

Ollis was presented pictures that showed piles of manure near the campgrounds by Langley’s attorney.

Soon after, Ollis was also shown a photograph of gouges in the pavement leading up to the south gate; Ollis said they were probably from horse trailers or other large vehicles.

“Would it be any detriment at all to the fair or the fair association to have the apron up to the gate repaved and designed in such a way that the pavement would not be gouged or damaged by vehicles?” Charneski asked.

“That would depend on what it took to get that,” Ollis replied.

When Charneski tried to ask again if the fair association could get the entryway fixed for free, Spencer objected to the question three times before Ollis said he wanted to see engineering plans that would answer his questions.

In the coming court battle, Langley’s legal team will be able to claim the biggest reason for the fair association to oppose the road — that fair officials had not seen detailed drawings of the new street — has also been addressed by the city.

The city presented the fair board engineering drawings at its next meeting after Ollis’ deposition.

Time is ticking

The city had hoped to get the easement for Fairgrounds Road before construction on the Highlands began, to keep construction off Al Anderson Road, one of the city’s most heavily used pedestrian walkways.

While construction was tentatively scheduled to begin this spring, it has been delayed until all easements were in place and permits were ready.

The last easement needed to the proposed Fairgrounds Road is the easement across the fairgrounds itself.

Other easements uphill across private properties needed for the road were recorded two weeks ago.

“The easements have been recorded with Island County,” said Rick Almberg of RDA and Associates, project manager for the developer.

A date for the construction begin is not scheduled yet. The developer has not received approved plans from the city of Langley, Almberg said.

Locals are getting nervous as the construction begin comes closer.

Neighbors to the Highlands but also people living along Sixth Street are concerned about the construction traffic, and later, the traffic that will come from the 53 new homes nearby. Some of those residents have led an online campaign against the fair association, and have chastized commissioners for not granting the easement outright.

Craig Cyr lives on Sixth Street and is worried that traffic noise will disrupt his neighborhood. Cyr has led the online debate against the county and fair officials, at times taking on the role of cybersleuth/citizen journalist in examining the actions of county and fair officials.

“I realized the Island County Fair Association’s refusal to grant an easement across the southern end of the fairgrounds would have a profound and strikingly negative effect on the city and its pedestrian nature,” he said.

He began posting his concerns to the Langley Community Forum and was gratified that other Langley and South Whidbey citizens held similar concerns, he said.

“I believe that the fundamental problem is that the three Island County commissioners have completely abdicated their responsibility under the Island County code and [state law], to exercise control over the fair board. The fair board is completely out of control,” he said.

“The fair board and commissioners have refused to grant the easement, even when it is clear that it would enhance the public health and safety. In particular, Mike Shelton seems to want to only listen to his patrons and longtime supporters, even when it is clear that there is little impact to the operation of the fair or its other activities during the year,” he said.

Most recently, he has blasted county officials for using public money to help finance the fair association’s legal battle against the road.

“It is also particularly disappointing to me that the commissioners used public funds to pay a private non-profit’s legal expenses, including the fees of a $340 an hour Seattle lawyer. Not one commissioner has forcefully addressed these issues in a way that would lead the community to think that there is a conclusion near,” he said.

Some ask for an end

It may be concerns of traffic on small town streets, or a genuine concern about the future of the fair. It may be the desire on county, city and fair leadership to go back to “normal” and focus on business as usual. Whatever, the motivation may be, many hope a solution can be found fast.

A second wave of a letter writing campaign to the commissioners recently started. Many local families have participated, including community activist Lynn Hays and philanthropist Nancy Nordhoff.

“I am urging you to put an end to this fiasco and have the courage to simply make a decision. It seems quite clear that the fairgrounds road is needed and that an enormous amount of money, time and energy is being spent to avoid doing this. Now it is time to act, so even if you don’t like doing it, get off the dime, please,” they wrote.

With Langley officials refusing the county’s request for a public vote on the road, commissioners have not said what their next step will be.

To get the lawsuit back on track, city officials have to reschedule the “use and necessity” hearing and conclude the discovery phase. A deposition of Commissioner Mac McDowell also needs to be rescheduled; it had been canceled on Jan. 4 because the city hoped the fair board would agree to renewed negotiations.

The “use and necessity” hearing is important because if the judge decides a city street is more important that potential damage to the operation of the fair, the lawsuit could end or just begin.

After a court decision, the losing party could appeal the decision all the way the Supreme Court and that could take years.

Editor Brian Kelly contributed to this story.