Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Landuse topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Longmont council for faster action on registered‑offender setbacks and single‑family zoning concerns
Summary
Multiple Longmont residents urged immediate council action to enforce or amend R‑1 zoning and limit concentration of registered sex offenders in single‑family neighborhoods; speakers requested ordinance changes and quicker timelines than those previously discussed by council.
At the public‑comment portion of the Longmont City Council meeting, several residents urged the council to move quickly to address an operational facility in a single‑family R‑1 zone that neighbors say houses multiple registered sex offenders.
Speakers including Bobette Berger, Connie Hamming and Anna Graves described the facility as operating since February and said it was not transparent with neighbors before opening. They urged council to enforce current R‑1 rules or adopt ordinance changes that would set setbacks or residency limits for registered sex offenders from schools, parks and day‑care facilities. Anna Graves said parents across multiple wards were “anxiously awaiting” an ordinance and asked the council to prioritize passage during April, noting the month had been proclaimed Sexual Assault Awareness Month.
Council discussion earlier in the meeting and the staff responses at the study session (noted in public comments) indicated the council has been reviewing setback options and R‑1 zoning implications. Residents asked the council to use expedited procedures rather than waiting for a future agenda item; one speaker noted the council could move items forward quickly in certain circumstances. No ordinance amendments or votes were recorded during the meeting on this topic; the matter remained in the public‑policy review process.
Why it matters: Residents described an existing house in a single‑family zone that they say functions as a high‑concentration facility and asked the council to either enforce existing zoning or amend the code to prevent similar occurrences. The issue touches on public safety, land‑use enforcement and the balance between state requirements for registration and local land‑use authority.
What remains unresolved: Council did not adopt new code language at the meeting. Public speakers asked for a clear timeline for ordinance drafting and adoption; the transcript records requests for expedited action but no formal direction or vote to draft an ordinance during this session.
