Canyon County Prosecutor’s Office Reviewing Complaint Against Caldwell Mayor

By Greg Pruett • June 3, 2025

The Canyon County Prosecutor’s Office is reviewing a complaint against Caldwell Mayor Jarom Wagoner.

Idaho Dispatch requested the complaint from the prosecutor’s office. However, we were denied the public records request because, according to the response,

“This letter acknowledges receipt of your records request dated and received by this office on May 29, 2025, requesting ‘… the complaint and any subsequent documentation by Jim Hollis who has alleged that Caldwell Mayor Jarom Wagoner violated state law regarding the use of public funds and the recall effort against him.’ See attached request.

Advertisement

Due to the fact that the adjudication of this matter is pending, your request for information must be denied at this time. Your request is denied at this time under the Idaho Public Records Act, specifically, Idaho Code §§ 74-105(1) and 74-124(1). Those sections allow the County to withhold production of investigatory records if such disclosure would do any of the following:

Interfere with enforcement proceedings;

Deprive a person, including a victim or the prosecution in a criminal matter, of a right
to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication;

Constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;

Disclose the identity of a confidential source and, in the case of a record compiled by a criminal law enforcement agency in the course of a criminal investigation,

confidential information furnished only by the confidential source;

Disclose investigative techniques and procedures; or

Endanger the life or physical safety of law enforcement personnel.

The purpose of this denial is not to inconvenience you, but to preserve the integrity of the criminal
case proceedings. If you submit another request after adjudication of the criminal case, you may
receive more information.”

Idaho Dispatch contacted Wagoner’s office to see if they were aware of the complaint. Wagoner replied with the following statement:

“I have not been informed by the Canyon County Prosecutors’ Office of any investigation regarding my statement urging voters to be fully informed before forming opinions; therefore, I cannot confirm that there is even a complaint, let alone provide a specific comment. I do want to make clear that I believe it is both appropriate and necessary for an elected mayor to communicate with the public, especially when misinformation is circulating. My statement did not advocate for or against any ballot measure; it encouraged the citizens of Caldwell to make informed decisions as voters. I firmly believe that this is part of my duty to the residents I am elected to serve as Mayor.”

The complaint with the prosecutor’s office alleges that Wagoner used public funds improperly by interfering with the recall process. The statement in question is from April, in response to what Wagoner said were false statements being spread by Hollis during the recall effort.

Here is the full statement from Wagoner:

“Over the past weeks Mr. Jim Hollis in his efforts to recall myself and several city council members, has shared excessive amounts of false and inaccurate information and it is time that people hear the facts. Mr. Hollis claims that his petition is in large part due to the support given to our current police chief by myself and the four council members listed on his recall. I will not address details regarding our police chief as those are personnel matters and he deserves the respect for those to not be discussed. However, I can state that the facts are that every allegation made was investigated and there were no findings of any illegal activities that took place. This has also been verified by a separate investigation done by the Idaho State Police. Another fact is that EVERY council member stood up and supported our Chief at a press conference that was held when these allegations became public, and not just the four that are on the recall petition.

In a recent article, Mr. Kent Marmon is quoted as saying “They (the city) lost over $1.2 million in a developer scheme”, referencing an increase to impact fees that had not been accounted for. Mr. Marmon’s accusation that this was a ‘scheme’ is completely and utterly false and shows a blatant disregard for the truth from an elected official. The facts are that this oversight was over several years and became noticeable when Impact Fees were recently increased. That oversight was investigated and found to be human error with the new fees not being accurately reflected. Since then, safeguards were put in place to ensure this does not happen again in the future.

Mr. Hollis also cites disagreement with council/mayor decisions regarding land use proposals. While it is true that development requests Mr. Hollis is opposed to have been approved, the facts are that elected officials must make decisions they feel are in the best interest of their community. Not everyone agrees with those decisions, and that is understandable and expected. However, if every citizen asked for a recall of an elected official that made a decision they disagreed with, every elected official would be up for a recall at some point in their term. That is why elections exist, so that if citizens are not pleased with their elected officers, they have the opportunity to either run for office themselves or vote for someone they feel better represents them. Mr. Hollis also states that his recall includes individuals he finds to not be responsive. However, the facts are that my office reached out to Mr. Hollis several months ago to discuss his concerns, he however refused to meet.

While Mr. Hollis states that he ‘is ashamed of Caldwell’, I am not. I grew up in Caldwell, I’ve seen Caldwell at its very worst and now I get to experience Caldwell at its very best. Caldwell has never thrived more than it is today. At the heart of our success is the development within our community. The new shopping centers, industrial lands, and the thousands of new jobs is due to the growth we are experiencing. Those of us that have lived here over 30 years know what Caldwell was like when there was no growth and we do not want to go back to those times. We continue to implement smart growth strategies to retain the special charm and feel that makes Caldwell so special.

In regards to issues about the new hotel and loss of parking, I have been working actively with Canyon County, the County Fair, the College of Idaho, and the Caldwell Night Rodeo to provide even more parking for their fans than ever before. The city has already begun making preparations for those new parking areas for those events.

In conclusion, I would encourage anyone to take the time to learn about the issues and gather the facts rather than listening to the voice that is simply yelling the loudest. God gave us twice as many ears as mouths for a reason, we need to start listening instead of just yelling.”

Idaho Code (74-604) prohibits the use of public funds by a public entity or its employees to advocate for or against a candidate or ballot measure.

Specifically, the code states, in part,

“74-604. PUBLIC FUNDS PROHIBITED. Unless specifically required by law, and except as provided in this chapter:

(1) Neither a public entity nor its employees shall make, nor shall a public official make or authorize, an expenditure from public funds to advocate for or against a candidate or a ballot measure.

(2) Neither a public entity nor any of its employees shall use, nor shall a public official authorize or use, public property or resources to advocate for or against a candidate or a ballot measure. There shall be an exception to the provisions of this subsection for any elected and currently serving Idaho legislator personally making use of public property or resources for the sole purpose of advocating for or against an initiative or referendum. This exemption shall apply only to the legislator’s use of public property or resources for communication with the public using electronic or traditional physical correspondence or the use of any portion of any media initially produced using public property or resources from recordings of the legislature or any legislative committees. This exception shall not apply to any travel-related expenses or any advocacy for or against a candidate.”

A recall is not explicitly mentioned in the code, and Wagoner’s statement does not contain direct advocacy for or against the recall.

When the prosecutor’s office releases its findings, Idaho Dispatch will publish a new article with the results.