Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Mother says Casper denied her son access to city-run after-school ski training; asks council for accommodation
Loading...
Summary
A Ward 2 resident told Casper City Council her son, who has Down syndrome, was barred from after-school ski training at the city-owned hill and that city staff demanded a feasibility study before allowing a six-child adaptive team. She asked for reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act; council limited public-comment time and offered to follow up.
Kathy Narkonen, a Ward 2 resident, told the Casper City Council on Feb. 3 that her son — who has Down syndrome and has skied for years — was denied participation in a taxpayer-supported after-school ski-training slot at the city-owned hill.
Narkonen said the restricted time slot, roughly 4:30 to 6:30 p.m., is reserved for training and subsidized by grants and school-district programs. She said her son “is a competent skier and has been participating successfully,” but was removed in October 2024 and later told that no accommodation could be made for him without a feasibility study.
Why it matters: The speaker framed the issue as a civil-rights and access problem under the Americans with Disabilities Act, saying city staff, mountain operators and leaseholders repeatedly declined accommodation requests and offered only delay and requirements that she said amount to exclusion.
Narkonen described a year-plus process of dozens of communications, meetings and presentations to an advisory recreation board. She said staff directed her not to include faith-based curriculum for a proposed small unified after-school team and that, despite complying, she was told the city would require a feasibility study before allowing six children to participate. “If we make an exception for him, then we have to say yes to everyone,” she said the staff told her, a refrain she called avoidance rather than problem solving.
The speaker also said no elementary or middle-school–age children with disabilities appear to be permitted in the after-school slot, while a taxpayer-subsidized lodge operates a public bar during the same hours, which she argued reflects a mismatch of priorities.
Council response and next steps: The mayor cut off the public comment at the council’s five-minute limit. The chair invited follow-up and suggested the speaker remain for a possible response; no formal action or vote occurred during the meeting. The council did not record a staff report or a formal direction in the meeting minutes; any follow-up would be expected to come through staff or subsequent agenda items.
What wasn’t resolved: Narkonen asked for either permission to coach her son (she said she is a Level 2 certified ski coach) or for approval to run a six-member after-school unified team; the council meeting record contains no immediate accommodation or explicit staff commitment beyond the invitation to remain for follow-up.
Context: The issue concerns access to a city-owned recreation facility and whether the city’s stated processes (feasibility studies and leaseholder requirements) are being applied in a way that effectively excludes a child with disabilities. Narkonen asked the council to prioritize problem solving and to explain what a feasibility study would examine and how long it would take.
The council meeting adjourned to other business after public comment; the matter may reappear on future agendas if staff or members bring forward a formal report or recommendation.
