Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Council debates changing ULDC amendment threshold and schedules sign-code review; members call for committee vetting
Loading...
Summary
Council members discussed a proposal to lower the supermajority requirement for amendments to the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) from four votes to a simple majority, and scheduled further review of a new sign code draft by the ULDC advisory committee.
The Town Council reviewed proposed changes to the Town’s Unified Land Development Code and discussed whether amendments to the code should require the current supermajority of four votes or be adoptable by a simple majority.
The draft provided to council proposed that passage of amendments to the ULDC require approval by three council members (a simple majority) rather than the current four-vote supermajority. Some council members and residents urged retaining the higher threshold. “I would like to keep it at four,” Councilmember Lisa Alremi said in discussion. Multiple residents also urged the council to retain the supermajority because, they said, the higher bar helps preserve the town’s rural character and protects against rapid zoning changes.
Town Attorney (see record) and staff described the legal distinction between amending the ULDC and making land-use or rezoning decisions, which remain subject to charter requirements. Council and the town attorney discussed ambiguous language in the draft that referenced “amend zoning regulations” and whether that wording could be construed to affect charter-protected rezoning votes; staff clarified that the charter’s four-vote requirement for rezonings and land-use changes remains in force, while the code-amendment threshold would apply to changes to the text of the ULDC itself.
Members expressed differing views: one councilor urged keeping the four-vote rule to protect against unexpected changes; another argued that requiring a supermajority for even minor housekeeping updates has prevented necessary fixes. Council agreed not to adopt a change at the meeting and instead to send the draft ULDC amendments, including the sign-code material, to the town’s ULDC advisory committee for review. Staff said the committee already has sign-code and agritourism items queued and that the earliest the committee could return a consolidated recommendation is in August unless the council prioritizes the items.
Ending: Council agreed to ask the ULDC advisory committee to review the sign-code draft and the proposed ULDC edits and to return recommendations; the council scheduled an April 15 workshop to compile members’ priorities for what should be forwarded to the committee for review.
