Thanks again to Fox 47 for covering and documenting this as it unfolds.
A Civic Report on Sheriff Hodshire’s Intimidation, Secret Meetings, and the Unlawful Exclusion of Hillsdale County Residents.
For the first time in 175 years, Hillsdale County residents arrived at their own county fair, not to ride the Ferris wheel or eat elephant ears, but to attend the Agricultural Society’s monthly meeting and, once again, try to become members—only to find the gates locked.
The Hillsdale County Agricultural Society, led by President Nathan Lambright, who also serves as Undersheriff of Hillsdale County, held what can only be described as a secret meeting at the County Jail.
Fortunately, not all Fair Board members agreed with these actions.
Several quietly informed residents of the abnormal venue change, confirming that the meeting had been moved.
Heavy-handed? Absolutely.
Unlawful? Beyond question.
Membership Is a Right, Not a Favor
Under Michigan law, the fair isn’t a private club, it’s a state-chartered agricultural society organized under the Agricultural Society Act of 1855.
MCL 453.233 (Act 80 of 1855)
“Any person who has attained the age of 18 years and shall pay into the treasury of the society … shall be a stockholder or member therein and entitled to all the privileges and immunities thereof.”
Translation: Pay the fee, become a member.
No screening, no board approval, no politics.
For generations, the Hillsdale County Fair begged for volunteers.
Now, with the help of the Sheriff’s Department, and even the use of the county jail, its officers are breaking that very statute to keep residents out.
A Familiar Script
If this sounds familiar, it’s because Hillsdale has seen this play before: secret meetings, selective enforcement, and intimidation.
It happened during the delegate-election disputes, when local government representatives violated the election law to hold on to the local Republican Party.
It surfaced again when the County Clerk admitted under oath to destroying election materials.
Same faces. Same tactics.
Different stage.
The Private-Property Defense & Why It Fails
After first promoting the Fair as a “community event,” President Lambright now claims the Hillsdale County Agricultural Society is a private organization on private property, free to exclude whomever it wishes.
That claim has been used to:
- Expel a political group for distributing factual literature, he did not like.
- Refuse lawful membership payments from residents, and
- Conduct “closed” meetings not at the fairgrounds, but inside the Hillsdale County Sheriff’s Department, a public facility funded by taxpayers.
What the Law Actually Says
On paper, the Society is a private nonprofit under Act 80 of 1855.
Michigan’s Attorney General confirmed in Opinion No. 6983 (1998) that such societies are private corporations and not automatically “public bodies” under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or Open Meetings Act (OMA).
However, “private” is not a magic word.
That classification does not excuse violations of Act 80, the Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act (MNCA), or the Society’s own Articles of Association.
Even as a private corporation, the Society must:
- Admit members who meet statutory requirements and tender dues,
- Hold annual elections and meetings open to those members, and
- Provide fair notice and procedure for amendments or discipline.
Refusing to accept payment, locking out qualified members, and hiding behind “private property” converts a lawful corporation into an unaccountable clique, something Michigan law expressly forbids.
The Attorney General’s own guidance draws the line clearly:
Agricultural societies may be private for FOIA and OMA purposes,
but they remain bound by state law and their governing documents for membership, elections, and access.
The Hillsdale Fair Board has crossed that line, twisting private status into a weapon of exclusion while conducting its “private” meetings in a public jail under armed guard.
Public Officials Turn a Blind Eye
Among those sitting silently on the Fair Board are Bruce Caswell, former state legislator and county commissioner, and Mike Nye, retired Hillsdale County judge.
Both men spent decades interpreting and enforcing Michigan law, yet neither has objected publicly as their own board disregards it.
Their silence isn’t neutrality. It’s complicity.
Even more troubling is the behavior of Sheriff Scott Hodshire.
After the closed meeting, held inside the county jail, the Sheriff issued a message threatening residents with trespassing prosecution for attempting to attend.
Deputies on scene acknowledged the jail is public property, but the Sheriff claimed the area was “restricted” and “unsafe.”
Apparently it was safe enough for Fair Board members who said they “didn’t feel safe” around citizens bringing ten-dollar bills.
New members—those who lawfully tendered payment, were thus barred from a meeting of a society created by state statute, held in a public facility, under the orders of sworn officers whose duty is to uphold that law.
It sounds like satire.
It isn’t.
It’s Hillsdale County, 2025.
Misinformation, Manipulation, and the Abuse of Public Trust
The crisis surrounding the Hillsdale County Fair is not an isolated administrative dispute, it is part of a broader pattern of misinformation and abuse of authority by individuals who have held or still hold positions in local government.
Many of these figures have used their official titles and influence to manipulate public perception, blur the lines between lawful authority and personal control, and silence those who question their actions.
A Pattern of Deception
Residents were first told the Fair was a “community event” open to all.
When that became inconvenient, it suddenly became “private property.”
When confronted with state law guaranteeing membership, the board shifted again, claiming “safety concerns.”
Each excuse contradicted the last, yet each was delivered with the confidence of authority designed to make people doubt their own understanding of the law.
This isn’t confusion, it’s strategy: a calculated pattern of mixed messaging and emotional manipulation aimed at exhausting citizens and protecting power.
Abuse of Office
- Law enforcement authority was used to enforce a political exclusion, not to maintain peace.
- Elected and retired officials lent credibility to unlawful actions through silence.
- The Sheriff’s Office issued threats of prosecution against citizens who lawfully tried to attend a meeting of a society organized under a public statute.
- Public resources—the County Jail, deputies, and vehicles—were used to shield a private group from lawful scrutiny.
Each of these acts represents a breach of public trust and a misuse of office under color of authority.
Those who swore an oath to uphold state law instead used their positions to circumvent it.
The Damage Done
These actions have eroded faith in local government and deepened division within the community.
A tradition built on agriculture, fairness, and fellowship has been turned into a fortress of secrecy and fear.
Through lies, omission, and intimidation, public servants have convinced citizens that questioning them is disloyal.
That is not leadership — it is the corruption of civic trust.
And it can only be repaired through exposure, accountability, and truth.
Legal Breakdown: Violations of Charter, State, and Federal Law
1 — Violations of the Society’s Own Articles
- Membership Rights (Art. 4 & By-Laws §§1-3): Membership is automatic upon payment. The board’s “approval” rule unlawfully amends those rights without the required 30-day notice and two-thirds vote (Arts. 33–34).
- Board Authority (Arts. 26–34): Changes made without a member vote are void.
- Misuse of Code of Conduct (§§25–26): The Code governs event behavior, not political speech; using it to silence groups is viewpoint discrimination.
Relevant Law: MCL 450.2304-.2305; Levandusky v One Fifth Ave., 553 N.E.2d 1317 (1990).
2 — Violations of Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Law
- MCL 450.2303: Refusing dues violates procedures for member admission.
- MCL 450.2304: Blocking qualified members from elections disenfranchises them.
3 — Federal and Constitutional Violations
- 501(c)(3) Compliance: IRS rules require equal public access; viewpoint discrimination threatens exemption.
- First Amendment & State Action: Because the Fair relies on public funds, deputies, and city services, it operates as a limited public forum (Rosenberger v UVA, 515 U.S. 819 (1995)). Exclusion for speech is content-based discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 18 U.S.C. § 242.
4 — Summary of Violations
| Article / Section | What It Says | How It Was Violated |
|---|---|---|
| Art. 4 / By-Laws §§1-3 | Membership automatic upon payment | Board refused payments |
| Arts. 33–34 | Amendments require notice + 2/3 vote | “Approval” rule imposed unilaterally |
| Code §§25–26 | Applies to behavior, not speech | Used to expel or silence groups |
| Art. 6 / MCL 450.2541 | Duty of good faith & loyalty | Board acted in bad faith |
Tendered Payments Still Create Membership
The Society’s own posted rule states:
“A person becomes a member of this society by paying the sum of ten ($10.00) dollars… Those members eligible to vote must have paid thirty (30) days prior to that meeting.”
That rule is self-executing. Once a qualified person tenders payment, membership legally attaches—even if the board refuses to accept or record it.
Under MCL 453.234, anyone “enrolled and recorded at least 30 days prior” may vote.
The Nonprofit Corporation Act likewise requires annual meetings and protects members from “willfully unfair and oppressive conduct.” (MCL 450.2489.)
A court can order recognition of those memberships nunc pro tunc (retroactively) and compel a lawful members’ meeting.
In short: the board can exclude non-members, but it cannot manufacture non-membership by refusing payment.
Why It Matters
The fairgrounds have always been more than midway lights and livestock.
They’re where Hillsdale shows what it grows, where the county’s pride meets its people.
When those in uniform or office use that power to silence neighbors and decide who may participate, they aren’t protecting tradition; they’re dismantling it.
But power only works when people stop showing up.
The next Fair Board election meeting, traditionally held the second Monday in December at 7 p.m. in the 4-H Dining Hall, is when members elect those who govern the Hillsdale County Fair.
Those who have tendered payment are members by law.
Those intimidated by the Sheriff and Undersheriff are free to attend and vote.
There is still time to attempt membership. You may be unlawfully denied, but every attempt documents the pattern, and every witness matters.
Ask questions. Be seen.
Restoring Integrity in Hillsdale County
The events described in this report have revealed more than a broken process, they have exposed a systemic breach of public trust by those who were sworn to protect it.
When law enforcement officers use their badges to shield political allies, when public officials rewrite the law to serve convenience, and when citizens are punished for participation, the rule of law itself is under assault.
Outside Authorities Are Being Notified
Because Hillsdale County’s own leadership has shown itself unwilling or unable to correct these violations, the proper authorities beyond the county are now being notified.
This includes documentation and sworn statements being prepared for review by:
The Michigan Attorney General’s Office,
The Michigan State Police Professional Standards Section,
The U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, and
Other oversight bodies responsible for enforcing nonprofit, civil-rights, and public-integrity laws.
These notifications are being submitted not only by members of the Hillsdale Conservatives, but by numerous residents who have been unlawfully denied membership and restricted from attending Agricultural Society meetings that were secretly relocated to the County Sheriff’s Department as a means of intimidation.
Evidence shows that the County Sheriff himself has used his position to issue threats of prosecution against citizens who simply sought to observe or attend a meeting guaranteed to them by statute.
Such conduct—by any public officer—constitutes a misuse of authority under color of law and may violate both state misconduct statutes and federal civil-rights protections (42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 18 U.S.C. § 242).
Immediate Corrective Actions Recommended
Recognition of All Tendered Memberships
Every resident who timely offered the $10 fee must be recognized as a lawful member, regardless of the board’s refusal to accept payment.
Independent Oversight of the December Election
The next annual meeting should be supervised by a neutral authority, such as the Michigan Department of Agriculture & Rural Development or a court-appointed inspector—to ensure fairness and compliance with Act 80 of 1855 and the MNCA.
Public Disclosure and Transparency
The Society must make its Articles, bylaws, membership rolls, and meeting minutes available for inspection, as required by state nonprofit law.
Accountability for Misconduct
Any public officer who participated in unlawful exclusion, intimidation, or misuse of public facilities should be referred for investigation under MCL 750.505 (common-law misconduct in office) and MCL 15.272 (Open Meetings Act violation – misdemeanor).
Restoration of Public Confidence
Reforms should include open access to meetings, clear financial reporting, and removal of any official found to have acted in bad faith or outside their authority.
The Broader Principle
This issue transcends the Fair itself.
It is about whether law still means the same thing for the powerful as it does for everyone else.
When ordinary residents must appeal to state and federal authorities just to exercise rights plainly written in Michigan statute, the problem is no longer procedural, it is moral.
Yet out of this corruption has come clarity.
A community once divided by fear is now united by truth.
The people of Hillsdale County are standing up, not for politics, but for the principle that no one is above the law, and no citizen should need permission to participate in their own county fair.
Citations
MCL 453.233 (Act 80 of 1855) • MCL 453.234 • MCL 453.101–103 • MCL 450.2303–.2305 • MCL 450.2489
Michigan AG Opinion No. 6983 (1998) • Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act • IRS 501(c)(3) Regulations
42 U.S.C. § 1983 • 18 U.S.C. § 242 • Rosenberger v UVA, 515 U.S. 819 (1995)
MDARD Grant Records (2018 & 2023) • City of Hillsdale Council Packet (2023) • MSU Extension 4-H Budget Records
in liberty,
The Hillsdale Conservatives
A final misconception to clear up.
When cornered, the Fair Board insists it can bar residents because the Fair “doesn’t take taxpayer money.”
That would be a cute story—if it weren’t provably false.
State Grants:
The Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) has funneled tens of thousands in state dollars into the Hillsdale County Fair:
• 2018 – $40,000 Grandstand Rainwater & Handicapped Plaza Project
• 2023 – $63,916 Technology Upgrade
(MDARD County Fairs Grants)
County Tax Authority:
Michigan law explicitly allows counties to levy taxes for the benefit of agricultural societies.
(MCL 453.101–103)
City Support:
Every year, the City of Hillsdale closes streets, assigns police, and manages traffic for the Fair Parade—public manpower and money at work.
(City Council Packet 2023 PDF)
County-Funded 4-H Programs:
MSU Extension’s 4-H and FFA programs—supported by county tax dollars—run straight through the Fairgrounds.
(MSU Extension Hillsdale 4-H Info)
Between the grants, the taxes, the city crews, and the county programs, the Hillsdale County Agricultural Society is about as “private” as a courthouse on parade day.
When an organization built by law and funded by taxpayers hides behind badges and locks the doors, it isn’t protecting privacy—it’s violating civil rights.
Leave a Reply to hard8635b5da264 Cancel reply