Laramie council identifies seven top goals at Jan. 18 retreat; staff asked to prioritize
January 18, 2025 | Laramie City Council, Laramie City, Albany County, Wyoming
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Laramie City Council met in retreat Jan. 18, 2025, and agreed on seven top‑line priorities that will guide the council’s work and budget planning in the coming years: housing; communication and transparency; infrastructure (including streets and stormwater); transportation and multimodal access; public safety and well‑being; environment and sustainability; and economic development. Council members directed city staff to return with a prioritized (tier 1/tier 2) list of implementable actions, cost estimates and timelines.
Why it matters: the council and staff said several of the council’s ambitions depend on capital funding and intergovernmental coordination, including a likely renewal of the city’s specific purpose tax (SPT) in 2026. Staff warned the council that the SPT renewal will require roughly 12 months of preparation and negotiation with other local governments if the council wants projects on a shared ballot.
Council members described broad outcomes they want under each priority. On housing, councilors discussed continuing code review efforts and exploring incentives to lower infrastructure and development costs, including sliding‑scale fee structures for developers. On communication and transparency, the council asked staff to develop better outward‑facing materials and consider converting existing monthly written reports into simple graphics or short videos; staff said the city’s new Tyler implementation will provide a financial transparency dashboard but not a goal‑tracking dashboard.
Infrastructure discussions highlighted street paving priorities and stormwater work. Council members suggested setting a target year for extensive street paving and asked staff to return with options based on the city’s pavement condition data; one target year mentioned in the retreat was 2035 as a planning benchmark. Staff reminded the council of limited annual discretionary funds (staff estimated substantially less than $2,000,000 in recurring discretionary dollars) and urged prioritization tied to funding availability.
Transportation and recreation: councilors raised public transit options, trail and bike network expansion, and new or improved youth sports facilities as both community‑service and economic development objectives. Council members also discussed downtown parking strategies and possible partnerships to repurpose underused sites.
Public safety and well‑being: staff described two programs the council should consider making permanent — a crisis intervention field assessment program that uses tablets and on‑scene assessment to divert mental‑health crises away from detention, and an intervention/diversion program that is currently grant‑funded. The city is moving forward on a public‑safety facilities procurement process; staff said a request for proposals will be issued in partnership with Albany County.
Environment and sustainability: the council discussed incorporating objectives from the city’s sustainability planning into the council’s goals and asked staff to note dependencies on pending policy or legal developments before finalizing language.
Economic development and code changes: councilors reiterated a need to reduce costs that affect small businesses and housing developers, including possible revisions to landscaping requirements in the unified development code (UDC) and other development standards. Brandon (council member) specifically proposed reviewing landscaping requirements and exploring phased compliance options.
Staff guidance and next steps: city staff asked the council for clearer, prioritized direction. Todd (staff) and Janine and Jen (city staff) advised the council to (1) identify a short list of tier‑1 priorities, (2) authorize staff to produce feasibility analyses and cost estimates, and (3) begin intergovernmental conversations about SPT renewal and capital project lists. Jen, a city staff member, said the Tyler tool the city is deploying is primarily a financial transparency dashboard and “is not going to connect to goals” unless the city undertakes additional, more technical dashboard work. Staff offered an initial, lower‑cost approach: convert existing monthly narrative reports into graphical infographics and publish those alongside the financial dashboard as a first step.
No formal motions or votes were taken during the retreat session that produced these priorities; councilors instead provided direction and asked staff to return with concrete proposals, timelines and budget implications for formal consideration at future meetings.
The council scheduled follow‑up work sessions and asked staff to provide a recommended tiering and implementation timeline that accounts for capacity, budget constraints and dependencies on external approvals (including the county and neighboring jurisdictions for SPT planning).
Why it matters: the council and staff said several of the council’s ambitions depend on capital funding and intergovernmental coordination, including a likely renewal of the city’s specific purpose tax (SPT) in 2026. Staff warned the council that the SPT renewal will require roughly 12 months of preparation and negotiation with other local governments if the council wants projects on a shared ballot.
Council members described broad outcomes they want under each priority. On housing, councilors discussed continuing code review efforts and exploring incentives to lower infrastructure and development costs, including sliding‑scale fee structures for developers. On communication and transparency, the council asked staff to develop better outward‑facing materials and consider converting existing monthly written reports into simple graphics or short videos; staff said the city’s new Tyler implementation will provide a financial transparency dashboard but not a goal‑tracking dashboard.
Infrastructure discussions highlighted street paving priorities and stormwater work. Council members suggested setting a target year for extensive street paving and asked staff to return with options based on the city’s pavement condition data; one target year mentioned in the retreat was 2035 as a planning benchmark. Staff reminded the council of limited annual discretionary funds (staff estimated substantially less than $2,000,000 in recurring discretionary dollars) and urged prioritization tied to funding availability.
Transportation and recreation: councilors raised public transit options, trail and bike network expansion, and new or improved youth sports facilities as both community‑service and economic development objectives. Council members also discussed downtown parking strategies and possible partnerships to repurpose underused sites.
Public safety and well‑being: staff described two programs the council should consider making permanent — a crisis intervention field assessment program that uses tablets and on‑scene assessment to divert mental‑health crises away from detention, and an intervention/diversion program that is currently grant‑funded. The city is moving forward on a public‑safety facilities procurement process; staff said a request for proposals will be issued in partnership with Albany County.
Environment and sustainability: the council discussed incorporating objectives from the city’s sustainability planning into the council’s goals and asked staff to note dependencies on pending policy or legal developments before finalizing language.
Economic development and code changes: councilors reiterated a need to reduce costs that affect small businesses and housing developers, including possible revisions to landscaping requirements in the unified development code (UDC) and other development standards. Brandon (council member) specifically proposed reviewing landscaping requirements and exploring phased compliance options.
Staff guidance and next steps: city staff asked the council for clearer, prioritized direction. Todd (staff) and Janine and Jen (city staff) advised the council to (1) identify a short list of tier‑1 priorities, (2) authorize staff to produce feasibility analyses and cost estimates, and (3) begin intergovernmental conversations about SPT renewal and capital project lists. Jen, a city staff member, said the Tyler tool the city is deploying is primarily a financial transparency dashboard and “is not going to connect to goals” unless the city undertakes additional, more technical dashboard work. Staff offered an initial, lower‑cost approach: convert existing monthly narrative reports into graphical infographics and publish those alongside the financial dashboard as a first step.
No formal motions or votes were taken during the retreat session that produced these priorities; councilors instead provided direction and asked staff to return with concrete proposals, timelines and budget implications for formal consideration at future meetings.
The council scheduled follow‑up work sessions and asked staff to provide a recommended tiering and implementation timeline that accounts for capacity, budget constraints and dependencies on external approvals (including the county and neighboring jurisdictions for SPT planning).
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting