Pauls Valley, Oklahoma — An already hotly contested liquor by the drink issue will be decided just a bit sooner than expected after all three Garvin County commissioners voted Monday to turn down an offer by supporters to pay for the costs of an election.

The action means a vote set by the group last week for Dec. 14 will instead come during November’s general election as a way of keeping the county from having to burden the entire cost of the vote.

The decision comes in response to last week’s implications from measure opponent Kive Kerr, who used such words as bribery to describe the act of supporters giving the money to pay for the costs of holding a special county election.

Commissioners have said for the past two weeks they were not for or against the measure but chose to place it on the ballot as a way of saving the county some money since it couldn’t afford to pay for that election.

Supporters had offered to pay for the election’s costs if the liquor measure was placed on the ballot for a vote without an initiative petition. Those same supporters have said their group could not afford to pay for both a petition drive and an election.

Their offer attacked by Kerr last week included a $10,000 cashier’s check already submitted to county officials.

During their regular weekly meeting Monday the county trio said no to the outside funds as all three commissioners voted to return the check submitted by the Garvin County Citizens for Economic Development.

They also approved in a split vote to move up the election to early November.

“I make a motion to return that check to the people that issued it to us,” District 3 Commissioner Johnny Mann said as all three agreed.

The commissioners’ decision came after George Burnett, assistant district attorney here in Garvin County, read an opinion from Assistant District Attorney David Batton of Norman advising them to refuse the offer from supporters to pay for the costs of the election even though he believes it’s legal.

“The only legal issue is whether or not Garvin County can accept the offer of payment. Unfortunately there is not any case law or attorney general’s opinion that is on point or closely analogous,” Batton stated in the letter.

Batton added he didn’t believe there is a problem with an outside group paying for the costs of a special county election since property statutes now allow for the regular donations of roads and easements to the county.

Much like commissioners last week, Batton also responded to Kerr’s strong implications of possible wrongdoing with the outside funds being accepted.

“With baseless, unsupported and inappropriate claims and accusations of fraud and/or bribery, there also appears to be a segment of Garvin County willing to make whatever fervent accusation, however false or misleading they may be, to contest the election regardless of any factual competence to the claims,” Batton advised in the letter.

“To avoid the possibility these fervent, false and baseless claims of improper conduct of ever being an issue, it may be appropriate that the citizen’s wishing to go forward with the ballot measure for ‘liquor by the drink’ go forward with collecting those signatures.

“It clearly appears that the fervent opponents of the ballot measure are simply costing the citizens of Garvin County the costs of the election.”

Representing the group supporting the measure, Jeff Shultz accepted  the returned the check and said yes when asked if supporters still wanted the measure on the ballot.

Shultz said the group was confident it could repeat the initiative petition drive from four years ago and again collect the required number of signatures to get the issue on the ballot. The petition was successful in 2006, but voters narrowly turned down the issue.

With the prospect of the county having to pay for the election, District 1 Commissioner Kenneth Holden moved to limit the costs by putting the liquor by the drink measure on the November ballot.

“I think we should put it on the November election and save the county some money,” Holden said

“We’re doing this to save the county the cost of the election,” Mann said.

District 2 Commissioner Shon Richardson cast the lone no vote to the idea of moving the election up to November.

“I’m not saying I’m for it or against it. I’m just looking at it as a controversial issue,” Richardson said.

The decision came three days before the deadline to get a measure on the ballot for the November election.

Election Board Secretary Cathy Brinley said the deadline is Thursday, Sept. 2 for her office to receive an election resolution. She said the county is now looking at a cost of around $2,400 to pay for the printing of ballots. She estimates the full cost of the election is between $8,000 and $10,000.