Park County commissioners weigh pathway for growth policy; residents urge targeted amendments and local permitting

Park County commissioners met Dec. 16 to discuss next steps on the county's 2017 growth policy, weighing a comprehensive rewrite funded by a planning grant against smaller, targeted amendments and local permitting tools.

Residents and local organizations urged the commission to focus limited resources on implementing existing policy goals and creating local guardrails instead of starting from scratch. "We urge the commission to consider creating the local guardrails and public review processes necessary to address current unchecked development," said Carrie Kale of the Park County Environmental Council, who urged using Community Development Block Grant planning funds to develop regulatory tools such as a conditional-use permitting process with mandatory public notice.

Several members of the public said an amendment-first approach would better serve rural residents and reduce costs and delay. "I don't think we need to throw out the old growth policy and put a new one," said Edwin Johnson of Cortland Springs, urging outreach to ranchers and outfitters outside Livingston. Other commenters suggested geographically representative committees or monthly topic-by-topic reviews to make the process more manageable.

County staff described the history and scope of the effort and the resource demands of a full rewrite. Mike (county staff) recounted that the planning board recommended a comprehensive update in 2018, the commission agreed but paused for legislative developments and grant cycles, and a later referendum kept the existing policy. He warned that a full update typically requires consultants, extensive data work and a multi-year public process. Staff estimated consultant and data work would likely fall in the "roughly $50,000 to $80,000" range and said the planning department could manage public engagement and contract oversight if the county obtained grant funding.

Commissioners discussed three main options: direct the planning board to perform the statutorily required five-year review and recommend priorities; appoint a diverse citizens' committee to review and propose amendments; or pursue a hybrid approach that applies for grant funding to pay for technical data mining while using the planning board or a committee for outreach and prioritization. Commissioner Walls said she was "really leaning towards leaving it alone" because a poorly run public engagement process could lead to a rewrite being voted down; other commissioners emphasized the need for broad public involvement if any substantial update is attempted.

The meeting did not produce a formal decision on the growth policy. Commissioners agreed to place an item on the Dec. 23 agenda to consider directing the planning board to begin a review and to discuss applying for grant funds to support data and technical work. The meeting adjourned after a brief motion and unanimous "Aye" vote.

What happens next: The commission will consider on Dec. 23 whether to formally direct the planning board to start the review and whether to authorize staff to pursue CDBG planning grant funding for data mining and consultant work.