Wright County supervisors heard pleas from small-town residents seeking clearer, written agreements after winter storms left some streets difficult to navigate.

At the board’s meeting, staff explained the county’s legal constraints on performing maintenance inside municipal limits. A county staff member said state law limits when secondary roads crews can work inside cities and that, for towns under 2,500 people, the county may provide maintenance provided it is reimbursed at an actual rate. The staff member said they will ‘‘contact the Iowa DOT to clarify on the reimbursement rate and talk with the cities’’ and bring proposed agreements back to the board.

During public comment, resident Drew described repeated problems with getting gravel and snow-clearing equipment into a small town and urged the county to ‘‘bring the gravels all the way in town’’ and formalize what had been a long-standing handshake arrangement. He said heavy district trucks were damaging town streets and recounted a medical emergency in which a family member ‘‘nearly lost her that day’’ because access was limited.

Board members acknowledged the public safety concern but cautioned that the county may be restricted by statute. One staff speaker referenced a statute number cited in the meeting, noting, ‘‘the law states that we can only spend certain things on…we don’t allow us to spend money inside of city,’’ and that full reimbursement must accompany any maintenance the county performs in a town under the threshold.

Supervisors directed staff to work with the county attorney and the Iowa Department of Transportation to draft written agreements (described in the discussion as a ‘‘20/80’’-style arrangement or a 28E-type agreement) that spell out reimbursement terms and are acceptable to both towns and the county. Officials said they would return with specifics, including the actual reimbursement rates and any implications for farm‑to‑market funding on routes through towns.

The board did not take formal action to change policy at the meeting; members requested follow-up information so they could consider written agreements in a future session.