Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Intergovernmental Agreement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Intergovernmental agreement on Laramie Growth Area tabled for extensive review after divided commission reactions
Summary
County and City planning staff framed an intergovernmental agreement to implement the Laramie Growth Area Plan; the City’s planning manager urged adoption, but commissioners voiced substantive reservations and tabled the agreement for further negotiation and review by planning staff, attorney and commissioners.
The Albany County commissioners on Feb. 4 discussed an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) proposed between the city of Laramie and Albany County to implement the Laramie Growth Area Plan and tabled the document for extended review.
City presentation: Philip Gavit (Laramie planning manager) urged the county to sign the IGA, noting extensive public engagement over two years, professional planning work funded in part by the county and recognition by the American Planning Association. Gavit said the plan and proposed agreement aim to channel growth responsibly, avoid fragmented development and make infrastructure choices more cost-effective for taxpayers.
County concerns: Commissioners raised multiple objections, including whether the city would be contractually bound to extend water and sewer services, the degree to which annexation would be required for larger development, and how the agreement would affect county residents who move outside city limits to avoid additional regulations. Several commissioners said the current draft gives insufficient protections or guarantees for county property owners and could raise development costs outside the city.
Statutory references: Planning staff noted the IGA references statutory standards (Wyoming statutes title 41, chapter 10) and DEQ rules for water/sewer extension criteria; commissioners asked for more clarity about who would pay for or create water and sewer districts.
Commission action: After a lengthy discussion, Commissioner Gosar moved and the commission voted to table the IGA to allow county planning staff, the county attorney and political leadership to work with city counterparts on revisions. Commissioners indicated they wanted a clearer statement of obligations, protections for county residents and involvement by county planning bodies before any final action.
Ending: Planning staff and commissioners agreed to an extended review timeline; the board directed staff to coordinate with the city and return a revised draft for further consideration.
