EDITORIAL: Fairgrounds future is boosted, not guaranteed

Kootenai County Commissioner Leslie Duncan voted against a memo of understanding last week regarding the future of the fairgrounds location.

Her point that the agreement “does not keep (the fairgrounds) here for 20 years without any recourse” is correct. Her description of the agreement as a "feel-good" exercise might be politically perilous but it's also right on the mark.

Commissioners Bill Brooks and Bruce Mattare can't be blamed for supporting the memo of understanding. Many fair lovers are adamant that the fairgrounds should remain in its current location. They're happy that the memo calls for final approval through an advisory or binding vote of county residents before the fairgrounds could be relocated in the next 20 years.

Brooks, who organized a town hall on the fairgrounds issue in July, cautioned that any future county commissioner who tried to move it would likely be ousted in the next election, if not recalled by angry voters.

What he did not say also spoke volumes: The agreement approved by that 2-1 vote will go only so far as successful lawyers might someday take it.

So with another spectacular fair in everyone’s rear-view mirror and the holidays looming just ahead — the fairgrounds’ future isn’t on many residents’ front burner at the moment — where does this leave us? 

Pretty much where we were before the MOU was signed, with one key difference.

While residents still have no guarantee that the fairgrounds is tied inextricably to its current location, they do have something in writing expressing the intention to keep it in its home well into the future. 

But even that encouragement should be tempered. The MOU notes that if it is eventually moved, the county should make its “best effort” to relocate the fairgrounds somewhere as good as or better than its current location. Good luck finding any sort of agreement on what would meet that requirement.

And yet, the MOU does accomplish at least one key goal. After the commissioners’ vote of approval, four fair board members got up during public comment and thanked the decision-makers for that approval.

An important issue in this ongoing controversy, spurred periodically by rumors that people in positions of power want to move the fairgrounds because the land it sits on is too valuable for such an endeavor, is that worries over its future stymie potential investment from gracious donors. 

If the fair board is happy, chances are pretty good that the folks who love the fair right where it is will be happy, too.