COEUR d’ALENE — What’s the latest on the dust up between City Attorney Mike Gridley and Councilman Steve Adams following Tuesday’s public disagreement?

A letter, no reply, and the Councilman still considering filing a complaint or two.

Adams said this week he still hasn’t retained an attorney as he continues to consider filing a complaint against the city and Gridley stemming from when the City Council voted to remove Adams from legal discussions surrounding the judicial confirmation the city is seeking — a legal stance Adams opposes.

“I’m being blackballed,” Adams said this week.

He sent a two page letter to Gridley Friday asking Gridley to explain why HE considered Adams “an adverse party” and where in the rules it says the councilman should be excluded from the legal discussions.

“What Idaho Supreme Court decision(s) support your opinion,” the letter asks, before asking for a written response from the attorney no later than 4 p.m. Friday.

That deadline passed, and Gridley told The Press he’s not going to respond.

Gridley said his department takes direction from the City Council on a whole, which in this case voted in support of seeking a judicial confirmation to pay for $33 million in upgrades to the wastewater treatment plant.

Since Adams opposed it, Gridley can’t represent both sides of the legal issue, so Adams can’t be privy to the legal talk, he said, a point he brought up last week.

A judicial confirmation is when a judge rules the expense is ordinary and necessary, and therefore the city can pay for a project without first getting voter approval. Adams originally supported the confirmation with the rest of council, then changed his mind and spoke out against it in front of a judge.

Gridley said it’s “ridiculous” that Adams doesn’t consider himself an adverse party despite going to court to declare his non-support of the cause, as well as the councilman stating he would appeal the judge’s decision should the judge rule in favor of the city.

He said he won’t issue a written reply on the matter that caused a dust up and solicited a swear word at last week’s meeting.

“He has a fundamental misunderstanding of what I do,” the attorney said this week, explaining again that he takes direction from the entire council, not individual members. “He doesn’t have the right to come in and demand anything from me.”

Adams said this week he’s still considering filing complaints with the Idaho Bar and Kootenai County.

He asked Ron Edinger if Edinger — who voted in favor of the motion to recuse adverse parties from those legal discussions after much thought — would publicly support Adams’ stance, but the veteran councilman and former mayor said he’d have to consider it before switching his opinion.

“I’m not too excited about the city having to pay fines,” he said, adding that he’d think about it more.