Longmont council refers citizen-led prairie dog code changes to staff after months of public advocacy

Longmont City Council voted unanimously Oct. 14 to refer a citizen-initiated code text amendment package for Chapter 7.06 — the city’s prairie dog code — to staff for formal processing, Planning & Zoning review and eventual ordinance drafting.

The referral follows months of public advocacy from residents, prairie dog relocators and local conservation groups urging the city to close what they described as loopholes that allow large-scale habitat loss without restoration funding or required relocation attempts. Speakers at council described cases where property owners received expedited minor permits or classified large areas as "existing urban level development," allowing extermination without relocation or habitat-restoration fees.

Zach Blazic, senior environmental planner, told the council the referral request contained nine proposed changes covering permit processing, site posting, measurement of active habitat, time limits for follow-up on permits, and fee revisions. Staff advised support for two procedural items (requests 1 and 2), had no recommendation on three fee-related items (requests 6–8), and did not support requests 3, 4, 5 and 9 as presented.

Applicants and advocates asked the council to direct staff to process the full package. They proposed a series of specific edits, including: a 10-day waiting period and required online posting for extermination applications (to give relocators time to respond); allowing staff inspection upon application and limiting an applicant’s time to act on a permit to 90 days; adopting a minimum-convex-hull rule for calculating active prairie-dog habitat to prevent manipulated polygons that shrink reported acres; and applying the 1.5‑acre threshold to sites currently labeled "existing urban level development" so that small-extermination loopholes are not available on large parcels with partial development.

Advocates also proposed fee changes: a major permit fee increase (proposed from $500 to $1,000), a minor permit fee (proposed $2.50 where no minor fee currently exists), and a habitat-restoration fee applied to all extermination permits (advocates suggested per-acre fees and cited Fort Collins’ higher per‑acre charge as precedent). Staff did not take a recommendation on those fee changes at referral.

Council members who spoke were generally supportive of referring the full citizen-initiated package so Planning & Zoning can vet the details and produce record and recommendation for a future council — noting that any resulting ordinance would return to council for final action. Several councilors also urged staff and applicants to refine fee numbers during the review process.

Councilor Rodriguez moved and council members unanimously supported the referral motion. The referral does not itself change the code; it places the proposed amendments into the formal review path.