City will restart lawsuit
Published 9:00 am Saturday, January 27, 2007
It’s back to court for the parties involved in the battle over Fairgrounds Road.
The city of Langley will resume court proceedings to get a strip of the fairgrounds property for the new road, said Langley Mayor Neil Colburn. The county fair board again rejected the city’s request for an easement Monday.
Langley’s dispute with the fair board and the county over a slice of the fairgrounds property stretches back for more than a year. The city says it needs a new road to handle traffic from the Highlands, the largest housing project in the city’s history, and from future development on the south edge of town.
The board held on to its “no road” position after a special fair board meeting Monday.
Colburn said the fair board’s message at the meeting had been “loud and clear.”
Earlier, on Jan. 18, the city had sent the fair board a letter asking fair officials to name a representative to negotiate a solution to the easement request as an alternative to a court battle.
In the letter, released by the city on Thursday, the city also asked for once-a-week meetings until a draft agreement could be reached, with a final agreement being completed within 60 days.
The letter also set a deadline for the fair board to respond to the letter; 5 p.m. Wednesday.
The city did not receive a response, Colburn said.
“It’s a shame. I personally think there was never a true attempt to negotiate,” Colburn said.
“We would love — and we said it time and time again — we would love to pursue a negotiated settlement,” Colburn added. “But apparently they are not willing to.”
Fair board president Dan Ollis did not return a reporter’s call for comment.
The city will now proceed with its lawsuit to condemn a piece of the fairgrounds, Colburn said.
The next step is to reschedule a deposition with Commissioner Mac McDowell. That was originally set for Jan. 4 but was cancelled when it appeared the fair board might be willing to enter into talks with the city.
Also, a “use and necessity” hearing that was set for Jan. 17 will be put back on the court schedule. The city had postponed the hearing in hopes that talks between the fair board and the city would resume after city officials provided the board with engineering drawings of the new road in late December.
The “use and necessity” hearing could be a turning point in the case.
If the judge determines that Langley’s proposed use of the fairgrounds property does not meet the required standards for condemnation, the condemnation action will be dismissed by the court, explained David Jamieson, the chief civil deputy prosecuting attorney who represents the county in the case.
“If the judge determines that Langley’s proposed use does meet the required standards, then the case will proceed to the next phase; a trial … to determine the amount of just compensation that must be paid to the county by Langley for the property being acquired,” he explained.
While the city had originally offered more than $130,000 in improvements to the fairgrounds as part of the road package, Langley offered to buy the strip of land for the new road for roughly $12,000 last year once the court fight began.
Fair officials say the new road will hurt the fair and will make a portion of the tent camping area unusable.
Fairgrounds Road would stretch approximately one-quarter mile between Al Anderson Road and Langley Road; about 400 feet of the road would cross the fairgrounds.
