Council accepts 'Rescue' funds

COEUR d’ALENE — One by one, people took turns addressing the City Council Tuesday. They shared a common theme: Reject American Rescue Plan Act funds.

Over the course of about an hour and 15 minutes in the Library Community Room, about 20 expressed fears about the loss of civil rights and freedoms. They talked passionately of socialism, tyranny and communism. They brought up concerns of federal government mandates the city would be forced to carry out regarding vaccines and masks. They said the money would lead to inflation, creation of a welfare state and breed division.

Most said there were too many strings attached to take it, and called on the city to turn it down.

“I don’t want to be under the chains of the federal government. Nobody does,” said Mark Salazar.

Tom Shafer of Hayden called for a show of hands of the crowd of about 75 people for those against accepting the $8.6 million.

Almost all went up.

He said the money the city was about to accept was “Monopoly money” hot off the presses.

“It’s such a little bit of money. Why do you want to take it and give up our rights?” Shafer asked as the crowd applauded.

He also asked the council to “Forgive me. I’m a little stirred up.”

One woman, Tamara, said to the council: “Idaho is free. We want you and expect you to keep it free.”

The City Council, though, stuck to its guns and didn’t waiver from its vote at a workshop last week. It again voted 5-1 to accept it, with Councilman Dan Gookin saying no.

Council Dan English said he didn’t hear anything to change his mind.

“I’m good with it,” he said.

English said there were calls at the meeting to do what the people wanted.

“That’s exactly what I believe I am doing and going to do,” he said, adding that his seat comes up for election next year, he will probably run again, and people were welcome to run against him.

One man shouted “recall” in response.

The ARPA was the subject of a City Council workshop that turned testy last Monday, Jan. 4. About 20 people showed up and called on the council to reject the funds, saying it came with obligations to the federal government.

Several council members later said the group was loud and disrupted the workshop.

The city received $4.3 million on May 19, 2021, from the U.S. Treasury under the American Rescue Plan Act and is scheduled to receive the same amount for COVID-19 relief in May

The city plans to use $4.5 million for police station expansion. It is considering several other options for using the remainder of the funds.

Tuesday, there was a strong police presence, with about six officers seated around the room.

For the most part, the meeting was civil, with the crowd occasionally shouting out words like “fascists” and “treason” and accusation of a corrupt federal government.

One woman angrily told the council people were tired of the government telling them what to do.

It got most heated when English said he believed the council should take the money and explained why. He was cut off by the crowd.

“Are you kidding?” someone shouted.

“You are so wrong, that is outrageous,” a woman said.

Mayor Jim Hammond regained control.

“We did not interrupt you when you spoke. You need to let the council express their thoughts as well without interrupting them,” he said. “There is some common courtesy expected here. We afforded you that courtesy. We please ask you do the same for us.”

Gookin opposed accepting the money.

“It’s inflationary this is printed money. It doesn’t have anything behind it, which causes inflation,” he said.

Gookin said, “We are in the most over-leveraged economy” in history and said there could be a massive recession and layoffs.

“This only makes it worse. By accepting the money we have a small amount of culpability toward that,” he said. “I don’t want to be a part of it."

He said he wasn’t too concerned about the city having to carry out such federal directives because it could and would refuse to do so.

“My bigger concern is economics. Inflation is a tax on the poor and benefits the rich,” he said.

Councilwoman Christie Wood said the city has done a good job balancing the budget and has avoided raising property taxes. But last year it had to dip into its fund balance for $1 million and it has positions that have gone unfilled.

The police station expansion is needed, she said

While she appreciated people sharing their opinions, she disagreed on this issue.

“I haven’t changed my mind today,” she said.

Those who spoke were mostly adamant the city reject the money and said the city hadn’t looked at they fine print close enough.


“There is nothing to gain here and everything to lose,” said Lynda Putz, urging the council to delay its decision so it could consider more information.

A man named Don, of Post Falls, said he moved to North Idaho from Oregon to get away from liberal policies.

He asked the council not to “sell sovereignty” for dump trucks and trinkets.

“We don’t need the feds coming in here and telling us how to run Idaho,” he said.

Diane Sheridan, a businesswoman, said she never signed a contract without knowing everything in it.

“I’m asking you to take this contract and refuse it,” she said.

A woman named Kathleen thanked the council for its service and said they faced a difficult decision.

“I really resent the breakdown in decorum this evening,” she said.

The ARPA funds can be used on eligible projects and purchases made within the period of March 3, 2021, to Dec. 31, 2024, according to the city agenda.

City Administrator Troy Tymesen said because the city was receiving less than $10 million, it did not have to follow the requirements brought up by some at the meeting. The funds would be considered “loss of revenue” due to COVID-19 and certainly not subject to new mandates or unexpected repayment demands.

City Attorney Mike Gridley agreed. He said the requirements regarding the ARPA money were standard of any grant money distributed by the federal government.

He said he was not aware of any federal mandate that would force the city to require people to wear masks or be vaccinated.

As well, he said the city had a lot of flexibility to challenge “a future executive order you don’t agree with.”