Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Transportation Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Gilpin County adopts ordinance banning depositing snow and ice in certain roadways

5599696 · August 13, 2025
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

After a public hearing and second reading, commissioners approved Ordinance 25-01, prohibiting the depositing of snow and ice in specified county roadways; the board fixed a typographical error and included an emergency clause for immediate effect.

The Gilpin County Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance 25-01 on Aug. 12, 2025, a second-reading ordinance that prohibits depositing snow and ice in certain county roadways. The ordinance was published after its first reading and a public hearing; no public comment was received during the hearing.

County legal staff said the ordinance was published in the Mountaineer (July 24 notice) and that the board included an emergency clause so the ordinance could take effect immediately if approved. County counsel and staff briefed commissioners on likely minor fiscal impacts for notices and signage; they said Public Works and the sheriff’s office expect to cover printing and signage within existing budgets but would return to the board if costs exceeded current appropriations.

Commissioners asked about signage and whether the county should reuse electronic highway message boards and consolidate messages to save cost; staff said signage locations and exact language would be determined later. A typographical error (a misspelling of “sheriff” in section 3.3) was found and the county attorney recommended republishing section 3.3 to correct it; commissioners agreed to correct the text before final publication. The board then moved and approved Ordinance 25-01 with the typo corrected; the motion carried 3-0.

Staff and the county attorney said penalties and enforcement are clarified in the ordinance, and that habitual offender language was amended during the first reading to improve clarity.

The ordinance includes a provision allowing the board to decide whether signage is required, and staff said they plan to coordinate signage across related road ordinances to minimize costs.

No change to county staffing or a new budget appropriation was adopted as part of the ordinance.