Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners table amendment to heavy-vehicle policy after debate over who may designate restricted roads
Summary
The board discussed and then voted to table amendments to a heavy-vehicle policy (Resolution 36-25A) after commissioners requested clearer language on whether the Board of County Commissioners or a designee should make final determinations on road designations and permit appeals.
The Natrona County Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday discussed proposed amendments to Resolution 36-25A, which governs heavy-vehicle operations on designated residential roads, and voted to table the amendment so staff could draft clearer language.
County attorneys had proposed several consistency edits, including adding "or designee" in some permit definitions and renumbering sections. Several commissioners agreed with those technical edits but objected to language in section 2(a) that would allow a designee to make final determinations about which roads could be restricted. Commissioner Jim (last name not specified) and Commissioner Nick Layson (listed in the transcript as Nicklauson) pressed to keep the decision to identify restricted roads with the full board. They asked that phrasing be changed so that the Board of County Commissioners — not a designee — make the designation after notice and hearing.
Commissioner Nicholas (speaker name as recorded) also urged that the permit process include a right to appeal and a cap on temporary permits; commissioners discussed a 30-day limit with renewals and the ability to appeal a designee decision to the full board within 30 days. Road and Bridge staff said they needed some administrative flexibility to issue short-term permits quickly but accepted adding an appeal pathway so applicants could seek BOCC review.
County legal staff recommended the board defer final action to allow attorneys to redraft the section incorporating commissioners’ instructions; the board voted to table the amendment and told staff to return the revised text for consideration at the next meeting. The county attorney said she would prepare the revised language and bring it back to the board; no permits or operational changes were enacted at the meeting.
Motion to table the proposed amendment carried on a voice vote; the board will revisit the revised resolution after staff redrafts the language and circulates the proposal.
