Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Daggett County considers who should maintain 911 street signs placed on private roads
Summary
Commissioners discussed responsibility for replacing street signs installed with a past 911 addressing grant, whether private subdivisions should pay for replacements, and a possible small annual budget for sign maintenance. County staff agreed to prepare cost estimates.
At its April 15 meeting, the Daggett County Commission discussed who should maintain and replace street signs that were originally installed with a 911 addressing grant, and whether the county should budget annually to cover sign replacement on private roads.
The topic arose after county road staff reported several street signs, including one on Rainbow Lane, had been knocked down. County Road Department supervisor Sean Hughes said the signs were originally purchased with the 911 grant to support emergency addressing but that many sit on private roads or federal land. "We had to put signs on every bit, every lot...for 9 1 0," a participant said when summarizing the original grant requirement; Hughes said maintenance responsibility now is unclear for private roads and subdivisions.
Commissioners noted the public‑safety rationale for the signs and said that, while many were installed countywide, private subdivisions do not always have an organized taxing entity to buy replacements. One commissioner called it "a public safety issue potentially" and suggested the county may need to step in if private parties do not maintain signs.
County staff described options: the county could absorb replacement costs for signs that serve emergency services, require private property owners or subdivisions to buy replacement signs, or set a small annual line item to cover a limited number of sign replacements. Hughes said he will order two test signs for a specific road (Linwood Lane) and then provide a cost estimate. He also offered a draft approach such as budgeting for "10 signs a year" to gauge likely annual costs.
The discussion also touched on roads that are maintained in coordination with federal agencies. Commissioners noted a separate Forest Service Fund the county maintains for paved Forest Service roads and that the county and federal partners sometimes pool funds when larger road projects occur; Red Canyon Road was mentioned as a future candidate for a funding request from that pot.
No formal vote or ordinance resulted from the discussion; commissioners asked staff to return with cost estimates and a proposal for how to handle replacements on private roads going forward.
