The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed a lower court ruling in favor of the City of Homer in a zoning dispute, rejecting all challenges brought by resident Frank Griswold who represented himself in the case.
In *Frank Griswold v. City of Homer*, decided Nov. 28, 2025, the court addressed Griswold's appeal of a superior court decision that granted summary judgment to the city and awarded attorney's fees. Griswold had sued the city seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming the municipality failed to follow proper procedures when amending its zoning code.
The case originated when Homer, which operates under 14 zoning districts, passed an ordinance amending its zoning code. Griswold challenged the ordinance on multiple grounds, alleging that the city violated procedural rules and statutory notice requirements during the amendment process. He also argued that the ordinance was substantively flawed.
The superior court, presided over by Judge Lance Joanis in the Third Judicial District, granted summary judgment in favor of the city. The trial court found that Griswold's claims lacked merit and awarded attorney's fees to Homer.
On appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court, Griswold maintained his challenges to the zoning ordinance on both procedural and substantive grounds. He also argued that the superior court abused its discretion in awarding attorney's fees to the city.
Justice Henderson, writing for the court, rejected all of Griswold's arguments. The court found no error in the superior court's decision on the merits of the case. The justices also determined that the attorney's fee award was not an abuse of discretion.
"Seeing no error or abuse of discretion, we affirm the superior court's decision on the merits, as well as its award of attorney's fees," Justice Henderson wrote in the opinion.
The case was heard by Justices Carney, Borghesan, Henderson, and Pate. Chief Justice Maassen did not participate in the decision.
Griswold represented himself throughout the proceedings, appearing pro se at both the trial and appellate levels. The City of Homer was represented by attorneys Michael Gatti and Max D. Holmquist from the Anchorage firm Jermain Dunnagan & Owens, P.C.
The decision reinforces municipalities' authority to amend zoning codes when proper procedures are followed. Alaska's zoning laws require cities to follow specific procedural requirements and provide adequate notice when making changes to zoning ordinances. The court's affirmation suggests that Homer satisfied these requirements in this case.
Zoning disputes are common in Alaska communities as they balance development pressures with community planning goals. Cities must navigate complex procedural requirements while ensuring that zoning changes serve legitimate municipal purposes and comply with state law.
The attorney's fee award reflects Alaska's approach to litigation costs in municipal law cases. Courts may award fees to prevailing parties when certain criteria are met, including cases where claims are found to lack merit.
For municipalities, the decision provides guidance on defending zoning decisions against legal challenges. The court's analysis of both procedural and substantive claims offers a framework for evaluating the strength of zoning ordinances when faced with resident opposition.
The case also illustrates the challenges faced by pro se litigants in complex municipal law matters. While individuals have the right to represent themselves, zoning law involves intricate procedural requirements and legal standards that can be difficult to navigate without legal counsel.
Homer's zoning code governs land use across the city's 14 districts, with different rules for permitted uses, conditional uses, and prohibited activities in each zone. The specific nature of the amendment challenged by Griswold was not detailed in the available portion of the court's opinion.
The superior court case was filed in 2022 and assigned case number 3HO-22-00278 CI. The appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court was docketed as case number S-18939.
This decision joins a body of Alaska case law addressing municipal zoning authority and the procedural requirements cities must follow when amending their codes. The court's affirmation of the city's position strengthens the legal foundation for municipal zoning decisions that follow proper procedures.
The opinion is subject to correction before publication in the Pacific Reporter, Alaska's official legal publication. The Alaska Court of Appeals encourages readers to report any errors to assist in producing accurate final versions of court opinions.