Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Park County commissioners plan public updates after disputed draft of development regulations draws criticism
Summary
Commissioners agreed to step up public information—radio, social media and regular updates—after residents circulated flyers and online comments that county leaders called misleading about ongoing updates to the county's Development Standards and Regulations (DSR).
Park County commissioners said they will step up public communications about an ongoing update to the county's Development Standards and Regulations after residents circulated flyers and social-media posts that commissioners and staff called inaccurate.
The board said the DSR work is still in progress, with DSR 1—process and definition updates—being finalized for a 45-day public review and DSR 2—zoning and uses—still under review after the first round of public work sessions. “Keeping in mind that DSR 1 does not deal with zoning or uses, this is basically what we've been working on in DSR 1,” a county staff member told the board. Commissioners said the consultant has finished formatting, the county attorney is reviewing wording, and staff will publish notice when documents are available.
Commissioners objected to a flyer circulating in Powell that described the draft with language such as “expect more red tape” and “less freedom, more government control.” “This flyer is from an anonymous source, and has a lot of what I would consider inaccurate information,” one commissioner said. The board directed staff to pursue multiple outreach channels: radio interviews in the Powell area, a factual social-media update from county staff or the chair, and clarifying materials so residents can distinguish the 2024 land-use plan from the DSR regulation updates now taking public comment.
The commissioners emphasized that public input is still being gathered and that nothing in the DSR has been formally adopted. Several commissioners urged residents who object to proposed language to submit specific, concrete examples and suggested fixes rather than generalized complaints. The board asked staff to coordinate a plan that will include frequently asked questions and a process timeline, and to report back with wording and distribution options.
The board did not vote on any regulatory changes at the meeting; the action requested was limited to a communications plan and more frequent public briefings.
