Renewal deadline is Sept. 30
Supervisors want solution that continues contact
A couple of things were clear after the Alameda County Board of Supervisors discussed its contract with the nonprofit fair association at its regular meeting Sept. 22.
- There’s no stomach on the board to terminate the contract that was signed in 2017 and still has 21 years to run. The board has the authority to do that because it renews at five-year intervals.
- There’s plenty of talking to be done at the staff level to hammer out agreement on issues of permitting, transparency and communication.
The contract is set to renew Sept. 30 and it’s up to the supervisors to decide whether they want to modify the contract as part of the five-year extension. A county lawyer told them it was their option to tie the renewal and contract changes together, but they could proceed with changes apart from the renewal.
Supervisor David Haubert, the driving force in the discussions and board president, seemed to want to tie them together. It adds both clout to the county’s side as well as urgency to finish things up if they are joined. He also floated the idea of extending the Sept. 30 deadline, but the fair board wanted no part of that. He said he will be closely monitoring progress before the next board meeting Sept. 29 and would have the option of calling a special meeting Sept. 30 if necessary. Negotiators are set to meet again this week.
Supervisor Nate Miley, whose district included Pleasanton and the fairgrounds in its prior iteration, said he agreed with his three colleagues that the county had plenty on its plate with its current responsibilities and taking on a county fair was beyond anything in its wheelhouse. He did emphasize that he wanted an amendment that would ensure that the supervisors considered and approved any major capital improvements planned by the fair board for the county-owned 267 acres.
Miley was concerned about the newly opened Futsol facility as well as the potential for a pickle ball facility. The agreement for Futsol extends beyond the contract expiration between the fair and the association. Miley is the only supervisor who was serving in 2017.
The transparency concern ties to easy availability to the public of fair board minutes or meetings. As a private non-profit, the board is not governed by any state open meeting or open records law and can go into closed session any time it chooses.
The fair board, through a separate non-profit foundation it formed, is seeking to raise $10 million for its educational agricultural farm on the grounds.
Fair board president John Smith pointed out Tuesday that the association, with the exception of the pandemic years, has been re-investing about $3 million in surplus operating cash annually to improve the grounds. He told the supervisors that their revenues were about $28 million with about half coming from the 18-day fair.
When racing horses were stabled at the fair, it ran into sewage disposal issues by mixing horse waste water with storm water that drew the attention of the city and regional regulators. When all the horses were removed after all racing in Northern California ceased, that issue was alleviated. The main water well on site is contaminated with dry cleaning solvents from a former dry cleaner’s site in downtown Pleasanton, but water is treated before it is used on site. The issue dates back to 2001.
During the public comment portion of Tuesday’s meeting, speakers raised issues related to how the board and its staff was dealing with youth livestock exhibitors as well as how the board itself was operating. Two speakers described the fair board as dysfunctional and urged putting the contract out to bid.
Haubert like his predecessor, the late Scott Haggerty, wants to reduce the board from 21 members to 15. Supervisors each appoint two members to 4-year terms and the board itself elects the other 11 members.
Traditionally, the board elected its own members similar to most nonprofit organizations and did so for decades. It was a good ole boys club where members served without compensation. The current arrangement was negotiated more than 20 years ago with supervisor-appointed members gradually replacing long-time members with the term limits.
Haubert’s comments indicated the urgency he feels to either extend the renewal date or finish negotiations. Stay tuned.
'My actions were the ultimate hypocrisy': Danville financial adviser gets 9-year prison term for decades-long Ponzi schemeSeptember 22, 2026 9:08 am
Newcomer Woods campaigning for 'students first' in SRVUSD Area 5 board bidSeptember 23, 2026 6:11 am
