After a crowd of residents expressed staunch and at-times heated opposition to proposed changes to Park County’s planning and zoning regulations, county commissioners unanimously voted to table …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
The Powell Tribune has expanded its online content. To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free web account by clicking here.
If you already have a web account, but need to reset it, you can do so by clicking here.
If you would like to purchase a subscription click here.
Please log in to continue |
|
After a crowd of residents expressed staunch and at-times heated opposition to proposed changes to Park County’s planning and zoning regulations, county commissioners unanimously voted to table the amendments for now.
The update to the county’s development standards and regulations is an effect of the county’s new land use plan, which was certified in March 2024, after two years of work. The plan included many public input meetings and even a vote to certify the plan in the fall of 2023, a vote which was tabled due to opposition.
Starting in March 2024 county officials started working with a new consulting firm, Logan Simpson, on the first phase of updates to the regulations, which were referred to as “housekeeping” and administrative changes, while the second phase will include more specific changes, such as minimum lot sizes in certain areas.
The more than 100 people who packed into the Cody Library’s Grizzly Hall on Monday opposed even the first phase of rule changes for a variety of reasons — from general concerns about more regulations and a dislike of the county’s use of out-of-state consultants to frustration over a section that explicitly defines adult businesses.
Following nearly two hours of public comments, Commission Chair Dossie Overfield told the crowd that the county would continue to gather input as the process moves forward.
“We're going to have to sit back, take a look at what all we need to change or can change and go through that process,” Overfield said. “Somehow we missed a whole lot of people in this first round, because the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on this had about 20 people at it. And so when we kind of got this direction, we weren't quite ready to know what all we needed to do or change, because it didn't come up at the planning and zoning meeting.”
Unexpected turnout
County officials and their consultants have been expecting big turnouts in the second and more in-depth phase of the regulations revisions, but they hadn’t really expected Monday’s crowd.
The first phase of amendments to the county’s development standards and regulations have been billed as largely administrative changes, changes to language to comply with state and federal law, and other “low-hanging fruit.”
Park County Planning Director Joy Hill said it’s not an attempt to necessarily add a lot of new regulations, but to amend ones currently on the books to align with federal and state regulations, as well as the county’s new land use plan. Hill noted that the county’s current regulations are about the same size as the proposed set.
“There’s a lot of concern that we are creating new rules or changing things drastically,” she said. “I would encourage you to look back in time, and you will see that we’ve had pretty significant rules in place for decades. And again, those rules were born from the people. They came from the input of the people.”
However, some of the new semantics have led to concerns — including from Commissioner Lloyd Thiel. Earlier this month, Thiel wrote a letter calling for more public involvement in the process, after the draft regulations approved by planning and zoning drew comments from only 13 people. The plan has also been a hot topic in local Facebook groups, leading to such a large crowd that not everyone could fit in the room.
Outspoken opposition
When the county held hearings on its land use plan in 2023 and 2024, a number of participants called for additional regulations, such as to protect big game animals and larger lot sizes. Even a similarly packed meeting in the fall of 2023 — where dozens of people charged that the plan was too restrictive and spurred commissioners to make changes — featured a sizeable minority arguing in favor of the plan as it was then constructed.
But that wasn’t the case on Monday.
Virtually all of the more than 30 people who spoke shared a similar theme of less, not more regulations, and received a round of applause from the audience.
“When I was listening to the comments of the board and everything before we were allowed to speak, I was told we’d be hearing all kinds of opinions across the board from both sides of the fence,” said Clark resident Doug Dutcher. “I’ve only heard one side of the fence here today. Are you guys listening? I beg you, listen. I don’t hear anybody on the other side of the fence.”
A handful of people allowed that some regulations were necessary. But South Fork resident Rene Alphin was favorably received when saying she wants no new regulations except for adult entertainment businesses, where, if they have to be allowed, she wants max regulations.
Adult entertainment has become a flashpoint because the draft would allow the businesses in industrial zones and includes new, very graphic definitions spelling out what they entail.
“By putting that language in this document, we would be in violation of Wyoming State statute,” said Robin Berry of Cody, adding, “I wouldn't want my children reading the DSR. I wouldn't be able to read that in front of my grandmother, or my mother for that matter.”
Specific critiques and general distrust
Other more specific points of criticism and concern came from some of the professionals who frequently work with the planning and zoning department. For example, Cody attorney Colin Simpson said more work was needed on variances, and a pair of surveyors said the revised regulations simply weren’t ready.
One of them, Ed Reed, offered help in making the regulations work better for those who will use them the most.
“... we feel at this time that we need to slow down and have some more discussions and get it right,” Reed said.
However, others in the audience called for the whole process to be scrapped.
“If we learned anything in the last election, it was that more regulation is not something overall that this country is very fond of. It stifles business. It stifles growth. It stifles the economy,” said Cody resident Tim Lasseter, who asked the commissioners to vote against the regulation changes, adding, “The last thing we need is more regulation.”
Lasseter said the regulations would represent another way for planning and zoning to “pick winners and losers.”
Karen Richard, a Cody business owner and South Fork resident who made an unsuccessful run for the commission last year, said the public doesn’t understand the land use plan and isn’t ready for the revised regulations; she likened the document to “a freight train speeding down the tracks.”
“I do not live in Wyoming so a handful of entitled bureaucrats can tell me how to live my life and what I can and cannot do with the property that I paid for,” said Richard, who drew some of the loudest applause. “I did not move to Park County so I can be managed and micromanaged by county employees who are supposed to work for me. I do not live in Park County, so power hungry government employees can force me to jump through hoops like some kind of trained seal.”
A number of speakers expressed distrust of the process, the county’s consultants from Logan Simpson — which has offices in Utah, Colorado, Arizona and Nevada — the planning department and the commissioners.
At times, Overfield had to ask people to address her as the chair and not planning staff or the consultants present; Thiel at one point admonished people for blasting the consultants, saying, “It’s not their fault they’re here.”
Concerns from ag
Several speakers said they moved to Wyoming from a more liberal state and that the proposed regulations reminded them of what it was like in places like Colorado or California.
Others noted their status as multi-generation Wyomingites, with one speaker saying they felt the 1990s regulations went against what people had asked for.
Many opponents said they’re in agriculture, from small farms to larger ranches, and feel their industry is being targeted — though Hill said that’s not the intent.
“The county seems to now want a regulation or restriction or more difficult process for absolutely everything, and I feel like you guys are taking this whole process way too far,” said Heart Mountain farmer Carrie Peters.
She raised specific concerns about a feedlot being described as a place where more than one animal is confined and fed for the purpose of slaughter, suggesting that would include 4-H animals.
“I’m tired of hearing that clarity is why we need more regulations and rules. More rules just mean more rules,” Peters said, adding, “do you guys fully understand the implications of what you're voting on today?”
Overfield said she’d look at that feedlot language in the second phase. She also told attendees to remember that the commissioners all live in Park County, too. The commissioners don’t intend to make it onerous for people to keep animals, Overfield said, noting she owns horses herself.
Next steps
Overfield said commissioners will discuss the issues raised and suggested more public input could be requested when the initial round of regulation amendments is brought back for a vote. She also noted that the first phase is intended to lay the groundwork for the second, more detailed phase of regulations.
“So why would you move forward with round two? Well, one thing in particular, and I can tell you that this contract [with Logan Simpson] is a little bit time sensitive,” she said, adding, “We can still gather information, which is only that. That's all we're doing for round two right now is gathering public information.”
Overfield urged people to be on the lookout for continuing opportunities for public input. Public meetings related to phase two took place all day Tuesday in Cody and all day Wednesday in Powell — and the county’s online questionnaire is still live.
There are also planning area input sessions scheduled in March regarding the second phase, which is where the county expects a lot more public input.
Overfield also asked people to think of the position they are in before asking for no new regulations, noting that a recent campground in Wapiti was met with frustration from many area residents for wanting to put up buildings all along the highway frontage. But, Overfield said, the campground plan generally met regulations and thus the huts are now there, lined up just south of U.S. Highway 14/16/20W.
“And I can't tell you how many phone calls I have gotten about the North Fork RV park, which is new, which everybody can't stand, as far as the phone calls I'm getting, but yet that's property rights,” she said. “He had the right to do what he wanted. What is it that you wanted us to do? It's conflicting at times on some of these major things.”
It’s not the only development that many people have objected to in the last few years. People opposed a wellness retreat in Clark which was not able to move forward, as well as a large subdivision between Powell and Cody and a cell tower in Wapiti that did go forward.
While not in the county, the proposal for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints temple in Cody led to a series of meetings and then legal fights as a host of people came out in opposition to the development, many questioning why there weren’t more effective regulations in place to stymie its construction.
At the end of the meeting, Commissioner Scott Steward indicated that the county will eventually pass phase one, even as he voted to have it indefinitely tabled.
“Round one is going to pass at some point, maybe not in this form, but it's going to pass, plain and simple, because we've got to update what we have,” he said, adding “Looking at subdivisions, our rules right now are a major problem, especially with the development coming in. So you're going to see some more rules pop up on subdivisions, but hopefully we're going to use some to clarify the mistakes we have in our system right now. But round one is going to pass. It's just a matter of when.”