Supreme Court finds Griswold due process rights violated

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to include a comment from Frank Griswold sent in an email that he clarified he had intended for publication. The story also has been changed to clarify that the Griswold v. Wrede decision was a partial victory for both sides.

The Alaska Supreme Court on Friday found the Kenai Superior Court violated the due process rights of citizen activist Frank Griswold in his appeal of a Homer Advisory Planning Commission decision to the Homer City Council.

The Supreme Court said the Superior Court dismissed Griswold’s appeal for lack of standing, even though neither party raised the issue. Griswold had challenged a conditional use permit the HAPC approved in January 2014 for a downtown development off Heath Street by landowner Jose Ramos.

“Because Griswold did not have notice that his standing was at issue, his due process rights were violated,” Supreme Court Justice Craig Stowers wrote in his decision for Frank Griswold v. Homer Board of Adjustment et al.

The Supreme Court reversed a Kenai Superior Court affirming the conditional use permit and remanded the case to the superior court to decide Griswold’s appeal on its merits.

In reaction to the court rulings, Homer City Manager Katie Koester wrote in an email that “Griswold v. Homer board of Adjustment et al. was a bit of an oddity for the city, as the Superior Court judge dismissed this case on his own, finding that Mr. Griswold did not have standing to appeal the conditional use permit despite the fact that neither party argued this point. … The City is looking forward to the court’s decision on the substantive issues of the case, which will provide the city important guidance regarding municipal land use and administrative proceeding matters.”

Griswold filed the cases pro se, or without the assistance of an attorney, as he has done in several Supreme Court cases challenging city actions.

“The City is content with the Supreme Court’s actions and does not anticipate significant additional legal expenses in either case,” Koester wrote.

In response to the decisions, in an email Griswold wrote, “Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while. The City is paying good coin for bad legal advice. Heads should roll.”

The decision released Sept. 14 was part of two Griswold cases the Supreme Court ruled on. In a related case where Griswold sought public records, including invoices for attorney fees, for the appeal of the Ramos CUP, the Supreme Court delivered a partial victory for the city and for Griswold.

In Griswold v. Homer City Council and Walt Wrede (the former city manager), the Supreme Court affirmed a superior court order that communications related to a June 2014 decision were privileged and thus exempt from the Alaska Public Records Act. It also affirmed that the city did not commit contempt of court when it failed to respond to a superior court order in a timely manner.

However, the Supreme Court vacated a Superior Court decision that said attorney invoices Griswold requested were exempt from the Public Records Act. It also vacated a Superior Court decision that the city was the prevailing party and could be awarded attorney fees.

The court remanded to the superior court consideration of attorney invoices “in light of our discussion of this opinion.” The Supreme Court directed the superior court to review the invoices and “redact the attorneys’ mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories.” The Supreme Court thus allowed for the possibility of some invoices to be released as Griswold had argued.

Koester said the city “expects to remain the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees in this case. The Supreme Court generally vacates the lower court’s attorney’s fee award when they send a case back down for more findings. The Superior Court will then reissue an attorney’s fee award after issuing its new judgment.”

In the records request case, the Supreme Court noted that the Superior Court applied a pre-2003 public interest litigant analysis and concluded Griswold was not a public interest litigant. Griswold argued the Superior Court erred because he, not the city, had been the prevailing party on appeal.

“Because we vacate part of the superior court’s decision, we also vacate its prevailing party decision and its attorney’s fees award,” Stowers wrote. “We remind the superior court that the Alaska Legislature abrogated and replaced the common law public interest litigant doctrine with a constitutional claimant provision.”

That statute redefined a public interest litigant as “claims concerning rights under the United States Constitution or the Constitution of the State of Alaska upon which the claimant ultimately prevailed.”

Reach Michael Armstrong at marmstrong@homernews.com.

More in News

Teaser
Then Now: Looking back on pandemic response

Comparing messaging from 1918 to 2021

Golden-yellow birch trees and spruce frame a view of Aurora Lagoon and Portlock Glacier from a trail in the Cottonwood-Eastland Unit of Kachemak Bay State Park off East End Road on Sunday, Oct. 3, 2021, near Homer, Alaska. (Photo by Michael Armstrong)
State Parks to hold meeting on Eastland Cottonwood unit

Meeting will include update on Tutka Bay Hatchery bill

Rachel and Vernon Scott Miller celebrate the birth of their son Tripp Woodruff Miller, who was born on Sept. 19, 2021. Tripp Miller is the first baby born from IVF treatments in Homer. (Photo provided by Miller family)
‘Just keep going’

Miller family celebrates birth of son by IVF

(Black Press stock photo)
Homer man dies of COVID-19

Homer man’s death announced as part of reporting backlog.

Michael S. Lockett / Juneau Empire
A Juneau resident receives a flu shot while getting a booster shot for the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine at Centennial Hall on Oct. 2, 2021. More than 1,300 Juneau residents received booster shots at the clinic, and about half of those people also received a flu shot.
Experts urge flu shots ASAP

Jabs keep infections down and free up health care resources

AP Photo / Becky Bohrer
The Alaska Capitol is shown on Wednesday, Oct. 13, 2021, in Juneau, Alaska. There is interest among lawmakers and Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy in settling a dispute over the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend program, but no consensus on what the program should look like going forward.
Alaskans get annual boost of free money from PFD

Checks of $1,114 are expected to be paid to about 643,000 Alaskans, beginning this week.

Michael Penn / Juneau Empire File
This 2011 photo shows the Taku and Malaspina ferries at the Auke Bay Terminal.
Costs add up as ferry idled nearly 2 years

Associated Press The cost to the state for docking an Alaska ferry… Continue reading

The Federal Aviation Administration released an initiative to improve flight safety in Alaska for all aviation on Oct. 14, 2021. (Peter Segall / Juneau Empire File)
FAA releases Alaska aviation safety initiatives

The recommendations, covering five areas, range from improvements in hardware to data-gathering.

Most Read