Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cody council splits on notice rules; zone‑change notice expanded but special‑exemption change fails
Summary
After extensive public comment, the council approved signage and expanded notice rules for zone changes and conditional‑use permits but failed to adopt the amended rule for special exemptions on third reading; debate centered on whether longer notice and a larger radius helps transparency or delays housing projects.
Cody — The Cody City Council on Monday approved new public‑notice requirements for zone changes and conditional use permits but declined to adopt a parallel amendment for special exemptions after extended public comment and council debate.
Residents and business leaders lined up during the public hearing to offer opposing views on three proposed changes: expanding the radius of mailed notice, lengthening the minimum notice period, and requiring a sign posted on the affected property. Supporters including Dan Shine and Carla Egelhoff argued larger notice areas and earlier notices promote equity and public engagement. ‘‘It would let the neighbors know what’s happening and give people a chance to respond,’’ said Dan Shine, who told the council he had served on the subcommittee that proposed the changes.
Opponents warned longer notice periods can delay housing projects. Harold Messer, a local business owner, said ‘‘time is money,’’ urging council not to extend notice periods from 10 to 21 days. Jay Kogan, CEO of WorkCody, told the council a larger radius could create obstacles to local housing and job projects.
On ordinance outcomes: the council voted to add the requirement that a sign be posted for conditional use permits (ordinance 20‑26‑2), and approved amendments to zone‑change rules (ordinance 20‑26‑3) to require a posted sign, a 300‑foot notice radius and a 21‑day notice period. A separate item, ordinance 20‑26‑1 (special exemptions), which the council debated for amending notice distance and timing, failed on a roll call vote after an amendment to restore a 300‑foot radius passed but the final approval did not secure a majority.
Scott Kopicki, the staff member who presented the ordinance language, told the council that the changes were not decided in isolation and reflected task‑force work and comparisons with other communities. Council members who supported expanded notice said earlier work on conditional use permits implementing similar rules had produced few problems. Those opposing the changes cited local experience and concerns about adding new hurdles for housing and redevelopment.
What happens next: the code remains unchanged where the ordinances failed; the council’s approvals for zone changes and conditional use permits will take effect according to the usual ordinance‑adoption process. Council members said they will monitor the effect of the new rules and revisit them if unintended consequences emerge.
Votes at a glance: ordinance 20‑26‑2 (conditional use — add sign): approved; ordinance 20‑26‑3 (zone changes — 300‑foot radius, 21‑day notice, posted sign): approved; ordinance 20‑26‑1 (special exemptions — third reading as amended): failed on final roll call.
