Hayden talks next steps for levy

HAYDEN — In the aftermath of Hayden’s leaders first putting an override levy on the Nov. 6 ballot, then recommending voters nix the proposition, City Council chair Roger Saterfiel suggested Tuesday night that the city form a committee to look into the issue more closely. Saterfiel told his fellow council members and local residents that the public had gotten incorrect information on the ballot proposal, and said clearing up misconceptions would be vital to any future action the city takes to increase its base budget.

“The truth didn’t get out to the public,” said Saterfiel. “We need to do a better job of that, to make clearer what we are requesting.”

Saterfiel suggested a committee consisting of council members Richard Panabaker and Matt Roetter, plus members of the public, take up that challenge.

Panabaker told a group of Boy Scouts in attendance that unlike many governmental organizations, the city of Hayden had never wasted taxpayer funds. Instead, the city was operating on a shoestring with staff members who have “busted their tail to be responsible with your money.” Mayor Steve Griffitts said that action might be taken on the proposal at the Dec. 11 City Council meeting.

The $1,633,000 levy rate override would have been divided into $980,000 of dedicated funds for roads, and $653,000 for additional law enforcement coverage within city limits. The override would have increased the levy rate from $1.23 per $1,000 of assessed value to around $2.50 per $1,000, according to city administrator Brett Boyer.

An Oct. 24 editorial in The Press noted Griffitts’ opposition to the measure in his capacity as a Hayden resident.

“Though law enforcement and road maintenance are important issues that need to be addressed, based upon my review of all available data, I feel that we can address these issues in a better, more responsible way. I have also had the opportunity to talk individually with each member of the City Council (away from City Hall and in accordance with all laws). Each unanimously has agreed with me that the base budget request should be tabled,” Griffitts said.

In his explanation, Griffitts suggested that funds for law enforcement and funds for roads could be put on a future ballot as separate proposals. He also suggested that limited time frames could be attached to each.

On Tuesday, Griffitts said that the council would hear more specifics on law enforcement at its Dec. 11 meeting.

In order to pass, the levy rate override would have needed 60 percent approval. The final vote was 70 percent against and 30 percent in favor.