Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Transportation Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montezuma County approves nondiscrimination, ADA and Title VI updates for public transportation
Summary
County commissioners approved three county transportation policies — a nondiscrimination public notice, an ADA demand‑response compliance plan (with complaint form), and an updated Title VI program — to meet CDOT and FTA requirements and for public posting and rider distribution.
Montezuma County commissioners approved updates to three policy documents for Montezuma County Public Transportation during their workshop, citing federal and state requirements and the need to update out‑of‑date forms.
Kelly (speaker 4), who presented the materials, said county postings were required by CDOT and the Federal Transit Administration and that older materials still listed outdated contacts. Steven (speaker 7) confirmed he had reviewed the nondiscrimination notice and the ADA demand‑response compliance plan and found them to meet current requirements. Commissioners moved and seconded motions to approve the nondiscrimination public notice, the ADA demand‑response compliance plan with its complaint form, and the Title VI program with attached complaint form; all motions passed by voice vote.
Why it matters: The three approvals bring county transit documents into compliance with current CDOT and FTA requirements, standardize complaint procedures, and require staff to post the policies in visible lobbies and distribute complaint forms to riders.
What the board approved: The nondiscrimination public notice to be posted in county facilities and lobbies; an updated ADA demand‑response compliance plan (including a revised limited‑English‑proficiency plan embedded in the document) and complaint form that will be available to riders and on the county website; and a revised Title VI program and complaint form specific to Montezuma County Public Transportation. Kelly said these changes address previous management‑evaluation findings and remove outdated contact information.
The board did not change program substance beyond updating contact information and posting procedures; commissioners asked only for confirmation that the documents meet federal and state posting and complaint requirements. Staff said the documents would be uploaded to the website after signatures and implementation steps.
The approvals were procedural votes; no ordinance or financial appropriation was required at the workshop.
