While the January snows might have postponed any hopes of an early spring, something else will bloom unseasonably early on front yards in Coeur d’Alene this winter: lawn signs.

Expect to see political signs pop up in front of houses, along major roads and across billboards this next week and into the foreseeable future. A grievance brought forth by a sheriff’s candidate has led Coeur d’Alene to suspend enforcement of its signage ordinances, including the 60-day window in which candidates can place signs promoting their issue or political race.

Friday’s decision comes on the heels of the Jan. 21 Council meeting in which John Grimm, candidate for Kootenai County Sheriff, led off the evening with a call for the city to end its 60-day window.

“I’ve attempted to resolve this discreetly,” Grimm said at the meeting, “...and we seem to be at some sort of impasse, I think.”

That impasse stems from City Ordinance 15.24.270-C, which states that “political signs may be erected for sixty (60) days prior to the decision in which such candidates or issues are to be decided upon. Such signs shall be removed not later than the fourth day following such election. Any such signs which have not been removed by the fifth day following such decision may be removed by the city’s building official.”

That rule would put Grimm’s start time for nailing down a yard sign within Coeur d’Alene’s city limits at March 20, not Jan. 24. But Friday, nailing down a sign urging voters to choose him for the May 19 primary election is exactly what he did, thanks to the constitutional argument he made to the council earlier in the week.

“I can’t stand idly by as the First Amendment rights of the citizens of this county are being violated,” he told the council.

Grimm cited a case that made its way through the courts before the Supreme Court eventually decided in a candidate’s favor. The ruling in Reed v. Gilbert declared that putting a limitation on a sign based on its content — in both Reed’s and Grimm’s cases, political campaigns — infringed on the property owner’s freedom of expression. The ruling tightened government’s ability to scrutinize signage, including when the sign could be erected in the first place.

“In a nutshell, if your code enforcement officer needs to read the face of the sign to determine if a specific section of code applies to it, it is illegal,” Grimm said. “And it will not pass constitutional muster.”

Grimm further threatened legal action unless the city relented.

Mayor Steve Widmyer told Grimm this was the first time council had heard of the staredown, and that he would have an answer for the candidate by week’s end.

Fast-forward to Friday, when the city — which has already been in the midst of adjusting its ordinances, according to city administrator Troy Tymesen — sent word to Grimm that it was still evaluating the situation, but that it had a temporary remedy. City attorney Michael Gridley sent Grimm an email:

“I’m writing to inform you that we are suspending enforcement of the time limits for the placement of political signs on private property pending further legal review and discussion with City Council,” Gridley wrote. “We have been working on a revision of our Sign Code for some time and will look at this and other issues that may need updating.”

Widmyer told The Press that the council would brainstorm further during the next City Council meeting on Feb. 4.

Because the issue deals with a legal response as much as a legislative response, Tymesen said that brainstorming will likely occur in executive session.

Grimm, a former reserve deputy in Bonner County, was satisfied.

“I’m pleased,” he said. “I’m very pleased. Like I said at the meeting, I was pleasantly surprised they said they would get back to me within that timeframe. They were true to their word.”

But politics seldom leaves time to celebrate. Shortly after 3:30 p.m. Friday, Grimm was out on the corner of Lincoln and U.S. 95, along with hammer, nail and his trusty German shepherd, Kaiser, making a political statement.