The Humboldt County Fair Association Board of Directors will meet tomorrow facing a decision its members say may shape the very future of the iconic annual event.
At issue is whether the association should pursue holding a horse racing meet — a staple of the yearly event going back generations — even as the industry is in a state of collapse. Should the board choose to move forward, it will do so without the help of the California Association of Racing Fairs, which has historically provided much of the logistical and financial heavy lifting. That means the fair association would be solely responsible for borrowing or purchasing necessary equipment, securing and paying for federal and state licenses, gathering purse money, negotiating contracts with betting agencies and simulcast providers, and recruiting horses and trainers to fill the races.
As Board President Andy Titus explained it to the Journal some weeks ago, the board faces competing fears. On the one hand, it’s long been believed racing is the proverbial rising tide that lifts all ships and that while it in and of itself may not be profitable, it’s a huge draw to the fair, boosting attendance, parking, carnival, bar and concession revenue. (Titus also says last year’s race meet did turn a six-figure profit for the fair after factoring in a recent report from CARF that updated the total amount owed to the fair post-season.) On the other hand, Titus said there’s significant concern that putting on a meet this year would require a lot of out-of-pocket expense with no guarantee of return and the potential for significant losses. For an association that has long operated on slim margins — sometimes at a deficit — year-to-year to put on the fair, the stakes are high.
And the clock is ticking, as if the association chooses to move forward with racing, it would have to apply for a license from the California Horse Racing Board no later than June, and would need to request dates prior to that, likely next month. And every week that passes without a decision one week less the association has to plan the meet or pivot to a new strategy that might make a fair without racing a success.
The board has commissioned a $1,000 report on the viability of holding a meet in August from Stacey Lapham, the former program manager for CARF and the racing director for the Sonoma County Fair, which after decades of holding its own meets decided last month not to do so this year given the state of the industry.
Agendas for both the Racing Committee (meeting 8:30 a.m. Monday) and the board (meeting 5 p.m. Monday) have been released without supporting materials, although both mention Lapham’s report. Under California open meeting laws, materials provided to a public board or committee should be made available to the public upon request as soon as they are provided to a majority of the board or committee. The Journal reached out on Friday to request Lapham’s report and received a response on Sunday saying that it had not been provided to the board but leaving unclear whether it had been provided to members of the Racing Committee. The Enterprise, which has also been covering this story, filed a California Public Records Act request Feb. 18 requesting the information provided to Lapham by fair staff and was informed that request had gone to the association’s legal counsel.
It also appears the association ran afoul of the law, known as the Ralph M. Brown Act, in a special session held last week. The meeting’s agenda had only two items: a closed session employee evaluation to discuss the “performance, goals and objectives” of CEO Moira Kenny, and an open session CEO’s staff report from Kenny. But responding to an inquiry from the Journal about her report and whether anything was reported out of the closed session portion of the meeting, Kenny said she “ended up not presenting a CEO report” and the “only report out of closed session” was that the board directed her to include a seven-day fair calendar on the consent calendar of the board’s meeting Monday “for final approval.”
Staff, with direction from the board’s Executive Committee, had previously proposed holding a five-day fair — the idea being to reduce operating expenses while hopefully pulling similar attendance numbers in a shorter event — but some board members expressing unease at the idea and Director Clint Duey suggested a seven-day fair, with the board ultimately deciding to postpone a final decision to this month.
In response to a Journal inquiry, Kenny said she raised the issue in closed session hoping to get some direction.
“As part of my goals and objective discussion yesterday, I requested direction on the proposed dates for the purposes of meeting the expectations of the board regarding my goals and objectives timeline,” she said. “This calendar is the preferred option that will be on the Feb. 24 consent calendar agenda items. The official decision will be made at the Feb. 24 meeting assuming a motion to approve the consent calendar is made and passes.”
This appears a clear violation of the Brown Act. While the act allows certain items — like contracts or employee performance — to be discussed behind closed doors to protect an agency’s negotiating position or the privacy of an employee, it does not allow those conversations to veer into things that are not clearly listed on the agenda or have no legitimate reason to be shielded from public view. In this case, the board effectively took a conversation about a matter of clear public interest — fair dates — out of the public realm, depriving members of the public of the chance to have their comments heard or hear various directors’ input on the issue, and held it behind closed doors. And as Kenny said, when it comes back before the board tomorrow, it will be on the meeting’s consent calendar, which is designed for non-controversial, routine items that are generally approved without discussion in a single vote.
As questions swirl around racing and no other Northern California fair has committed to holding a meet this summer, Director Greg Gomes, who chairs the association’s Racing Committee, expressed optimism about the prospects of holding a meet in Ferndale this year during an Executive Committee meeting earlier this month.
“We got no problem feeling like we can put this together,” he said. “We got people jumping out of the weeds to help us.”
The Journal will update this post if more information becomes available. Find past Journal coverage of the issue here.
Freelance reporter Linda Stansberry contributed to this report.
This article appears in 2025 NCJ Pet Photo Contest Winners.
