Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Crawford County commissioners hear proposal for targeted zoning survey; some residents oppose another mailer
Summary
A consultant proposed a one-question, targeted postcard survey on zoning to produce clearer resident input; cost estimated $3,200–$4,500 with a proposed mail-and-return timeline through Memorial Day. Some residents, represented by Becky Willard, said 'nobody wants to do this additional survey' and urged clear assurances for agricultural land.
On April 28, 2026, the Crawford County Board of Commissioners heard a presentation from Joshua Albin proposing a short, targeted survey to gauge public opinion about zoning in specific areas of the county. Albin told the board he planned a single-question postcard mailed to selected parcels, estimated the cost between $3,200 and $4,500 depending on whether a business return stamp was included, and said he hoped to mail the postcards the following Monday and report results to the commissioners at their first June meeting.
Albin said the targeted approach would avoid neutral-option responses that appeared in the county's earlier Comprehensive Plan survey and produce clearer yes-or-no feedback from affected residents. Commissioners asked practical questions about mailing to parcels held in trust and how results from a targeted mailer would be compared with prior, broader surveys.
During public comment, Ms. Becky Willard said her group had already conducted a straw poll and opposed another mailed survey, arguing residents felt their views from the previous survey had not mattered. She told the board, "nobody wants to do this additional survey," and suggested that any postcard make clear whether agricultural land would be exempt from zoning regulations or otherwise protected.
Commissioner Carl Wood and Commissioner Bruce Blair raised concerns about downstream effects: Wood asked how a negative result in a targeted area might affect permitting for future projects, and Blair queried whether projects sited near non-zoned areas could make it easier for additional projects to follow. County Counselor Jim Emerson weighed in on what permitting would or would not require under existing law. Commissioner Tom Moody described seeing both sides, noting that landowners who oppose restrictions also pay county taxes.
The board did not vote on zoning policy at the meeting. Commissioners asked Albin to consult with GIS Director Kyle Nelson and return with a proposed mailing plan and map; the transcript records the board expected Albin to provide results or an update at the first meeting in June. No formal zoning ordinance or moratorium was proposed or adopted during the session.
Next steps: Albin will refine the mailing list with county GIS and present more-detailed timing and wording to the commissioners; the board scheduled follow-up discussion pending that report.
