Chambers of commerce come in many configurations, but traditionally their role is to support their membership — the businesses that are the lifeblood of their respective communities.

Where chambers tend to run off the rails is when they go beyond supporting the needs of members and veer into political wrangling.

Island County Commissioner Jill Johnson undoubtedly rattled cages when she revealed during Thursday’s candidate forum that the Oak Harbor Chamber of Commerce canceled her planned State of the County address in what she felt was retaliation for her questioning the amount of lodging tax funding recommended by an advisory board.

During the board of commissioners deliberations to determine which entities should receive the tourism-enhancing dollars, Johnson and the other commissioners ended up reducing the advisory committee’s recommended grant to the chamber from $31,000 to $25,000. Johnson was steadfast in her belief that the Oak Harbor chamber would be just fine if a small part of the grant was directed instead to the PBY Museum in Oak Harbor.

The advisory board, comprised of island chamber directors and tourism-related business leaders, were equally adamant that their recommendations be adhered to. The commissioners sought clarification from the state Attorney General’s office, which opined that statutes didn’t preclude the commissioners from revising the advisory board’s proposed amounts.

It’s a determination with statewide impacts on how tourism dollars will be allocated in the future.

While the matter was under AG review, the Oak Harbor chamber took an all-or-nothing position, which Johnson advised against. Ultimately, by the time the AG’s opinion was released in the commissioners’ favor, the next round of grant applications was underway.

Johnson, herself a former director of the Oak Harbor chamber, has unparalleled knowledge of the players and how the chamber functions. Though never one to mince words, it could not have been easy for Johnson to call out what she sees as a punitive act by the chamber.

It’s one thing for a nonprofit agency to argue a position and lobby elected decision-makers, but it’s something else entirely to employ heavy-handed tactics to try to get your way.

If Johnson is right that the chamber board acted in retaliation, it’s a case of bullying.

This should be alarming to not only the chamber membership, but for the community as a whole.

It speaks to the kind of backroom political jockeying that breeds suspicion and fuels the perception that the “good-ol’-boy” network is alive and well and pulling strings behind the scenes.