Hayden mayor resigns

HAYDEN — Hayden Mayor Steve Griffitts will step down next week, citing the actions of two new City Council members.

Griffitts, who was elected to a second term in 2019, is resigning effective March 1.

“It’s a step I don’t take lightly and I didn’t anticipate taking,” he told The Press on Wednesday.

He announced his resignation after a City Council meeting Tuesday night, where he said new council members Ed DePriest and Sandra White are exposing the city to unnecessary litigation by refusing to accept legal advice.

DePriest and White were elected last November, defeating longtime council members Dick Panabaker and Jeri DeLange. White and DePriest began their four-year terms last month.

Griffitts described the meeting as “the straw that broke the camel’s back.”

Resigning is a drastic step, he said, but one he believes is necessary.

“To disregard numerous legal directions, knowing it would put the city at legal risk, was something I didn’t see getting fixed through normal mentoring channels,” Griffitts said. “I’m terrified for the citizens of Hayden over the legal exposure we now have.”

Councilman Roger Saterfiel said he’s disappointed by Griffitts’ decision to resign, though he understands the reasoning.

“I don’t know if people realize how thankful they should be that (Griffitts has) been mayor for the last six years,” he said. “The thing I always admired about him was that he had the city’s best interest at heart at all times.”

Hayden City Administrator Brett Boyer said the council can hold a special meeting to appoint an interim mayor at any time after March 1.

The appointee will hold the office until the next election. The council could appoint one of their own or someone else entirely.

DePriest said he objects to how Griffitts framed Tuesday’s events, as well as some events that preceded the City Council meeting.

“(Griffitts) is putting the message out to the people of Hayden that their newly-elected councilpersons have put them at risk of a lawsuit,” DePriest said. “That is at the very least misleading and, to some degree, incendiary.”

The conflict stemmed from a zone map amendment request from Aspen Homes, a custom-home builder based in Coeur d’Alene.

The request is for the parcel at 9519 N. Ramsey Road to change from commercial to mixed use. The city’s Future Land Use Map already designates the parcel as mixed use.

The City Council previously denied the request.

Aspen Homes then submitted a request for another public hearing, which the City Council considered at Tuesday’s meeting.

City attorneys previously advised DePriest to recuse himself from the matter on the grounds that there is legal basis for conflict of interest.

In October 2021, before the Aspen Homes request went out for public comment, DePriest said the Hayden Planning Department indicated that no such requests were in the pipeline.

Two days later, DePriest said, he noticed an upcoming hearing for the Aspen Homes request.

DePriest sent what he described as a “sarcastic” email on Oct. 16 to the City Council, mayor and the Planning Department, with the subject line “Mixed Use Zone Change Request.”

The email reads, in part: “What an amazing coincidence!?? Last Tuesday the zone text is approved, and the city has been emphasizing that not one property is Mixed Use, and Shazam!!! just coincidently,,, a zone change request to Mixed Use!!! All ready to go, with the t’s crossed and the i’s dotted.”

DePriest did not refer to any specific applicant by name, though the email reportedly contained attachments showing images related to the Aspen Homes application.

“I didn’t care who it was about,” DePriest said. “I felt we were being misled.”

Because the Aspen Homes request was the only zone change application out for public comment at that time, the commission attached it to the application.

White also reportedly submitted comments related to the Aspen Homes application prior to her election. She did not respond to requests for comment.

City attorney Fonda Jovick noted that White and DePriest were well within their rights as private citizens to submit comments on the application.

Now they’re acting in a quasi judicial role, which Jovick said requires a heightened scrutiny for potential bias.

“We happen to have two new council members who previously commented on this exact application,” Jovick said.

She said applicants have two options when a governing body’s decision doesn’t go their way.

They can ask the district court to conduct a takings analysis. A regulatory taking occurs when governmental regulation is so burdensome and restrictive that it reduces the use or value of a property.

Applicants can also petition for judicial review. If granted, a court would evaluate whether there were any procedural deficiencies in the process.

Neither action is technically a lawsuit, Jovick said.

“Those types of matters are not covered by insurance,” she said.

Saterfiel told The Press that he disapproved of DePriest’s and White’s initial decision not to recuse themselves, despite advice from the city attorneys to do so.

“I think it opens the city up to a lawsuit,” he said.

DePriest said Wednesday that he doesn’t believe his actions so far could expose the city to litigation, though he acknowledged the October email appeared biased.

“If it comes to a hearing, I will recuse myself,” DePriest said, emphasizing that Tuesday’s discussion was not a hearing.

Rather, the council considered a request from Aspen Homes for another public hearing.

DePriest moved to approve the request. Council President Matthew Roetter seconded the motion. It passed unanimously.

This story has been updated for clarity.