SANDPOINT — The City Council discussed a cautious approach reviving the city administrator position at its meeting Wednesday.

The item was added to the agenda by Council President Deb Ruehle, who said she wanted to reopen discussion around the position because of a June 12 email sent by Mayor Jeremy Grimm. In the email, Grimm requested a pay increase to continue working three days a week or more as mayor. 

During the meeting, Grimm said he currently works around two and a half days a week as mayor after not receiving a pay increase during the budgeting process. Councilor Kyle Schreiber said he ran on a platform to get rid of the city administrator but was “dismayed” by the mayor’s June email, which left him feeling conflicted. 

"I was pretty hopeful that this strong department head model could work, which is why I was dismayed to see the letter this summer from the man that basically said it wasn’t tenable,” Schreiber said. “[The email] sort of forcing us to look for a solution to this problem.” 

Ruehle created a five-point explanation document with reasons the city should adopt a city administrator. Among the reasons was a concern around a future mayor lacking experience in running a government or city planning, which both councilor Justin Dick and Ruehle spoke on. 

The duo was the only dissenting voters against getting rid of the city administrator position in 2024 and said they were worried about elections becoming popularity contests, which could potentially leave the city without a qualified leader. Dick said he worried a mayor’s limited in-office time could lead to an inefficient and non-collaborative environment.  

"I’m not using [Grimm] as an example, but coming in for a leadership meeting once a week, twice a week and getting that to happen, what happens when you’re not here, the mentoring that goes on, the shoulder to cry on?” Dick said. “There’s a lot that goes into running an organization that doesn’t make the newspaper, doesn’t make these meetings as well.” 

Dick said the city has been lucky to have Grimm and his experience at the helm, but that won’t always be the case. Grimm said he appreciated the council considering the future and said he currently does not intend to run for reelection. 

Councilor Rick Howarth said he had conversations with every department head, who all acknowledged there would be benefits to having a city administrator. Howarth added the staff said the best timing to implement the change would be at the end of Grimm’s term in 2027. 

In her document on the agenda, Ruehle suggested appointing an interim city administrator in January as the council defined the role and its salary. 

"Trying to go push something in January 2026 seems unreasonable, a little bit of the cart before the horse,” Howarth said. “The first thing a good engineer does is define the problem we are trying to solve. I’ve never heard us talking about, what is the problem we are trying to solve?” 

Councilor Joel Aispuro said he didn’t feel as if Sandpoint was ready for a full-time mayor or council and that it would invite people running for the wrong reasons. He said he realized the city administrator was a hot topic and that there were still several questions he wanted to answer before the council moved forward. 

The most significant question that hovered over the council during the discussion was the cost of reimplementing a city administrator. Grimm said he saw benefits to having a city administrator and would appreciate help, but that the FY2027 budget was already looking tighter than this year’s. 

"It’s not going to be a pretty year in the state of Idaho,” Grimm said of the future budgets. “I think it would be hard for us to find the money in the budget. Like I said, I’d love two assistants and two administrators, but we just can’t afford it.” 

Councilor Pam Duquette said the potential salary of a city administrator bothered her and floated the idea of a part-time city administrator or sending the choice back to the voters by a referendum. Ruehle said the council sets the budget and could limit the salary to a number they were all comfortable with. 

While limited, there was public comment which stood opposed to the idea of reviving the position. No decision was made at the Dec. 3 meeting, and no further discussion was put forward. 

Ruehle’s outline and Grimm’s letter can be found in the agenda packet for the Dec. 3 meeting at sandpointidaho.gov/meetings. The council’s next scheduled meeting is Dec. 17 at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall.