Rio Blanco commissioners seek state extension, cite mapping, cost and property-rights concerns over proposed WUI code

The Rio Blanco County Board of County Commissioners voted to ask the Colorado Division of Fire Prevention and Control for more time and written clarification before deciding whether to adopt the state's proposed wildland-urban interface (WUI) or Colorado wildfire resiliency code.

Chair opened the special session and, after staff read five written comments from residents and the town of Rangely opposing adoption, Commissioner Jennifer moved to approve a county letter requesting an extension to Oct. 31, 2026, and written guidance about whether adopting the WUI code would directly or indirectly trigger additional implementation requirements. Commissioner 2 seconded the motion and the board approved it by roll call.

The letters read into the record argued the proposed code would create an onerous permitting regime and raise building costs without clear, enforceable state funding or penalties. One Meeker resident, Ben Brown, told the board in a written comment read aloud by staff that he had no objection to the hazard-map designations but opposed adopting the code because "the document spends 9 pages in chapter 1 explaining the new bureaucracy and an additional 10 pages in appendices . . . explaining the permitting process and associated requirements" while only a few pages address practical hardening measures.

Another letter from Barney LeBlanc, a local general contractor, said the code represented government overreach and would increase costs for homeowners and builders. The Rangely town council's letter, adopted unanimously on March 3, 2026, urged the county to reject the mandate as an unfunded state requirement that adds complexity and could chill development, and asked the county to pursue locally tailored solutions.

Commissioners framed the decision as a balance between wildfire mitigation and protection of private property rights. Commissioner 2 said the county has long opposed unfunded mandates and voiced concern that, if a major fire occurred later, state officials could question the county's choices and that the county could face financial exposure. "It is an unfunded mandate that we've been fighting," the commissioner said, urging extension so the county can continue to oppose or negotiate terms.

Commissioner Jennifer expressed similar worries about map accuracy and the cost of bringing county codes up to the newer statewide standards (noting the county's building and energy codes were last updated in 2008). "Nobody can tell us who created the map, how the map was created. Was it scientifically proven? It's very, very concerning to me," she said, asking that the county be allowed to amend the map before considering code adoption.

The chair acknowledged the county's vulnerability to wildfire and said the board supports measures that reduce risk, but stressed that any approach must be tailored to local conditions and realistically implementable. The chair also raised concerns about potential impacts on insurance and housing affordability if adoption required broad updates to multiple codes.

The approved letter asks for additional time to review mapping and capacity, engage stakeholders, and receive written clarification from the Division about implementation implications. Chair said staff would transmit the letter that day to meet the state deadline.

The board did not adopt the WUI code at the meeting; the action was limited to requesting an extension and clarification from the state. The board also invited residents to stay engaged and encouraged calls to legislators as discussions with the state continue.