Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Commission Resignation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grand County commissioners ask planning commissioner Laura Long to resign after debate over impartiality and online comments
Summary
After extended public comment and internal debate over conflicts and online remarks, the Grand County Commission voted to send an administration letter asking Planning Commissioner Laura Long to resign; the vote drew sharp disagreement from some commissioners and residents who had defended Long and criticized the agenda notice as lacking details.
The Grand County Commission voted to ask Planning Commissioner Laura Long to resign following a heated discussion on transparency, impartiality and online conduct. Commissioners said concerns about statements made at a municipal hearing and online created an appearance that could undermine the planning commission’s impartiality; opponents said the agenda lacked background and warned the step risked politicizing volunteer boards.
The vote came after nearly two hours of public comment in which multiple residents and planning commission supporters urged the county to withdraw the unnamed agenda item or provide more detail before taking action. Tony Mancuso, who identified himself as chair of the planning commission, testified that Long filed a conflict-of-interest disclosure on Sept. 6, 2024 (refiled Jan. 30, 2025) and recommended disclosure and recusals as typical administrative remedies. Several residents — including Bob O’Brien, Emily Campbell and others — said a request for resignation without added detail set a dangerous precedent that could chill speech by volunteers.
County staff described outreach and a legal review that led to the item appearing on the agenda. Commissioners who supported asking for Long’s resignation said the issue extended beyond ordinary criticism to alleged public statements and online posts that, in their view, created real doubts about the planning commissioner’s ability to remain impartial on matters tied to a local development. Some commissioners and members of the public countered that matters of personal character and competence are typically discussed in closed session and that the county should instead meet with the individual first and document any concerns.
The motion authorizing administration to send a resignation request passed with four votes in favor, two opposed and one abstention. The commission did not take disciplinary action; it authorized staff to send a letter requesting the resignation. Commissioners said the decision followed legal counsel’s direction about the county’s authority to seek resignations for volunteer boards when bylaws or impartiality rules are implicated.
The commission’s handling of the item prompted multiple calls from residents and planning commissioners asking for greater transparency in future agenda materials. Commissioners who opposed the request warned the move could set a precedent that future majorities might use to remove volunteer members with differing viewpoints. Supporters said the county must preserve public confidence in decision-making bodies and that volunteer service carries expectations of impartiality when acting in an official capacity.
Next steps: the administration will send the letter requesting resignation; commissioners signaled they would continue to discuss board conduct, conflict-of-interest training, and possible updates to bylaws or outreach to volunteers. The planning commission’s chair and vice chair were notified and outreach to the affected parties is ongoing.
