Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel And Public Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Public speakers urge commission to retain interim planning administrator and question $1,000 public-lands contract

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Citizens urged the Grand County Commission on Sept. 2 not to replace interim planning and zoning administrator Kristen Hockheim, criticized treatment of county staff, and asked why the county proposes a $1,000 expenditure for a Public Lands Council subscription.

Multiple citizens addressed the commission during citizens-to-be-heard on Sept. 2 to protest a proposed short-term replacement of the interim planning and zoning administrator and to question a proposed $1,000 expenditure for the Public Lands Council.

One speaker, identified as Mr. Burrows, asked two questions: why the county is proposing to spend $1,000 on the Public Lands Council — which he characterized as favoring private use of public lands — and why the commission proposes to replace or remove the interim planning and zoning administrator, whom the speaker described as performing “an outstanding job.” Another speaker, Michael Wolf, criticized recent actions by the commission toward county employees and citizen volunteers and said no reason had been given for removing the acting zoning administrator. He said the administrator had not been given professional courtesy or notice of actions to replace her and said he perceived a pattern of mistreatment of employees.

A separate resident urged the commission to retain “Kristen Hockheim” in the acting planning and zoning administrator role until a permanent hire is completed, saying she has the experience and institutional knowledge to ensure compliance with state and county land-use code, and specifically cited the county’s Section 9 procedural requirements for conditional-use permits and distribution of applications. That speaker framed the upcoming Moab City water-tank conditional-use item as an example of a matter where the acting administrator’s expertise will be needed.

Commissioners did not take formal action during public comment. No staff-replacement motion or $1,000 expenditure vote was recorded during the citizens-to-be-heard segment.