Editorial:

Merits of a ‘slippery slope’ argument?

Posted 4/25/23

How slippery can a slippery slope really be?

The phrase has been used for decades, generally as a way to express the fear that one relatively minor action may open the door to a bigger action …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in
Editorial:

Merits of a ‘slippery slope’ argument?

Posted

How slippery can a slippery slope really be?

The phrase has been used for decades, generally as a way to express the fear that one relatively minor action may open the door to a bigger action later one.

People have worried about Red Flag laws or banning bump stocks leading to banning many semiautomatic rifles. Or approving medical marijuana leading to approving recreational marijuana.

It’s not a bad argument in a lot of respects, but it has its limits.

Last week, three of five Park County Commissioners voted against a request for a sign variance for a property owner just outside Ralston to add a back side to a billboard that already has two signs on one side.

The vote went along with a recommendation from the planning department to deny the variance.

The property owner said he didn’t understand why the back of a billboard would be better than simply another side to the billboard, especially after WYDOT had given approval for it, but that wasn’t the main reason two of the three commissioners who sank the request gave for voting in opposition.

As both initial commissioners who spoke against approval noted, (Chair Dossie Overfield made the rare tie breaking no vote) the main issue was that the applicant had already requested and been approved for a variance to build a billboard with total sign size over regulations for the zoning area the year before.

“What’s the next variance, another sign?” Commissioner Scott Steward said. “It is a slippery slope.”

Commissioner Lee Livingston agreed and the specter of more Powell Highway property owners asking for variances was raised — the slope getting more slippery.

While it’s true some property owners could see a second variance approval as a sign it’s open season on hunting sign variances on the Powell Highway, I hope the decision to deny the variance was more than just concerns of that slippery slope. These are, after all, smart commissioners who have done a very good job leading the county through lean and now fatter times financially (or in Steward’s case, led the sheriff’s office very well until recently).

Billboard signs can, after all, be distracting and they don’t exactly match a bucolic landscape, although Commissioner Lloyd Thiel (who voted yes along with Commissioner Scott Mangold) has a point in saying this land right outside town doesn’t have a whole lot of other uses.

And, as the property owner was already approved for a second billboard sign on this land last year, is this closing the barn doors after the cows have already left?

After writing this editorial late last week, I weighed the slippery slope argument myself in a work issue, so I can certainly sympathize with the merits of the argument. However, I think most people would have seen this approval as a valid exception.

As Thiel said during the deliberation, isn’t that why the commissioners are there, to make decisions on variances? The commissioners always have the power to halt a slippery slope, although its understandable they might not want it to get too slippery. 

Comments