Cheyenne City Council Meeting – April 14, 2026

Note: The transcript repeatedly refers to this as the "April 13th meeting," but the official meeting date provided for this summary is April 14, 2026. This discrepancy is noted here.

The Cheyenne City Council convened on April 14, 2026, for a regularly scheduled meeting. The agenda included a public hearing on a major landowner‑petitioned annexation of roughly 1,259.91 acres west of Roundtop Road and adjacent to Happy Jack Road, third‑reading votes on several zoning changes, second‑reading approval of $5 million for the Reed Avenue corridor project (contingent on a final agreement with BNSF Railway), adoption of new crosswalk criteria, and other routine business. Public comment was heard on multiple items, with residents expressing concerns about the annexation’s impact on neighborhood character, wildlife, traffic, and the lack of future public review for permitted uses. The council voted on numerous items, with most passing on bipartisan or unanimous votes.

Consent Calendar

• The consent agenda was approved with three items removed (items 21, 22, and 31C) at the request of council members. After removal, the remaining consent items were passed unanimously.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Annexation Public Hearing (Item 7): Several residents spoke both in favor of and in opposition to the proposed annexation of 1,259.91 acres west of Roundtop Road. Key speakers included:

  • Michael White (resident) questioned the benefit to the city, noted that the parcel for the city water treatment plant should have been brought separately, and raised questions about fire service response times.
  • Sam Galeotis (8827 Shellback Road) criticized the erroneous name on early documents and questioned the compatibility of a business park with the residential and ranch character north of Happy Jack Road. He asked why the statutory criteria of “logical and feasible addition” and “natural, geographical, economical and social part of the city” were satisfied when the area has no current residents.
  • Barry Meyer (7713 Barrington Road) expressed concern about taxes, traffic, and the potential for future annexation of his own property.
  • Carmen Cook (3221 McKinney Drive) asked about the types of businesses allowed in a business park (e.g., data centers, solar farms) and worried about noise and light pollution, citing a previous Bitcoin mining operation.
  • Paul Cremples (2606 McKinney Drive) argued the business park would create a pocket of county land surrounded by city land and that it is a “bad fit” for the area.
  • Rick Kessler (3605 Burke Drive) asked how the development constitutes a natural geographical, economical, and social part of the city when most surrounding land is ranchland.
  • Minda Blevins (7814 Cox Road) spoke about the peace, quiet, and wildlife of the area, and worries about traffic and future development if the annexation goes through.
  • Gay Woodhouse (on behalf of Cox Ranches LLC) noted that a family mausoleum sits on property that would be annexed and expressed fear that a data center could disturb it or block access.
  • Charles Miller (remote) argued the annexation fails state law because there are no existing residents to protect, and claimed approving it would permanently silence public oversight of future development.
  • Mandy Shaddock (7505 Barrington Road) raised concerns about well water impacts, the pocket effect, and accused the city of prioritizing appearance over people.

• Other Business – Public Comment:

  • Noel Letter (Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters) spoke about construction tax fraud, alleging cash pay and undocumented workers on local projects.
  • Charles Miller (remote) delivered a “systemic audit” of the agenda, criticizing $5.6 million in discretionary spending for Reed Avenue and building renovations while the city has 28,000 service lines of unknown material and lead action‑level exceedances. He also referenced the use of ARPA funds for Flock cameras and the relaxation of lead limits in wastewater.

Discussion Items

• Annexation Public Hearing (Item 7):

  • Staff Report: Connor White (Planning) explained the annexation is landowner‑petitioned (petition filed Feb. 17, 2026), the land is 5.26% contiguous to city limits, no residents currently live there, and the proposed zoning change to Business Park (BP) would run concurrently with annexation. A future land use map amendment will be introduced in two weeks.
  • Council Questions:
    • Dr. Aldridge asked about residents (none). Council Member Moody asked about residents within half a mile (a couple) and whether there are plans to annex other areas (no). Council Member Wolf asked about the benefit to the city and the public’s future opportunity to comment on development (staff said once zoned BP, site plan review is administrative with no public hearing).
    • Council Member White (Michael) and others raised concerns about fire service, traffic, and the mausoleum.
  • Mayor’s Clarification: The public hearing was for input only; the next steps will occur at Public Services Committee (next Monday) and then through three readings of the annexation and zoning ordinances.

• Reed Avenue Corridor Funding (Item 15 – Ordinance Second Reading):

  • The ordinance appropriates $5 million from the general fund reserves for the Reed Avenue corridor project, contingent on a final written agreement with BNSF Railway.
  • Proponents (Council Members White, Wolf, Escobel, Labourne, Dr. Aldrich, Dr. Emmons) argued the project was approved by voters in 2017, that private investment has been made in the area, and that the funding is a commitment to move a long‑stalled project forward.
  • Opponents (Council Members Moody and Dr. Rainey) cited fiscal prudence concerns, timing, and the need to reserve funds for emergencies. Dr. Rainey noted she has supported the project for nearly a decade but opposed the timing of the ordinance.
  • Public Comment: Charles Miller opposed the funding, arguing the $5 million should be used for lead pipe replacement instead.
  • Vote: Approved on second reading with a majority vote (two “no” votes: Moody and Dr. Rainey).

• Crosswalk Criteria Resolution (Item 22):

  • The resolution adopts updated crosswalk guidelines and confirms the city engineer’s authority to implement crosswalk treatments.
  • Public Comment: Carol Davenroy and Bonnie Joe Cruz thanked the council for their persistence, referencing the long‑standing need for a crosswalk on Gardenia, which is now expected to be installed by late summer.
  • Council Discussion: Council Member Labourne praised the effort to move beyond strict MUTCD standards. Council Member White credited residents for driving the change. Council Member Moody requested that thermoplastic be used for durability; City Engineer Cobb responded that they use it where feasible but noted some projects (e.g., Yellowstone) will wait for a major maintenance project.
  • Vote: Unanimously adopted.

• Zoning Changes (Items 8-12 – Third Readings):

  • Item 8: 6.5‑acre zone change from PUD to NR3 (neighborhood residential high density) for apartments – Approved unanimously.
  • Item 9: 25.17‑acre zone change from PUD to NR3 – Approved unanimously.
  • Item 10: 14.47‑acre zone change from AG to NR3 – Approved unanimously.
  • Item 11: 0.5‑acre zone change from MR to NR2 (neighborhood residential medium density) – Approved unanimously.
  • Item 12: Vacation of Frank Court and a segment of alley – Approved unanimously.

• Wastewater Ordinance (Item 13 – Second Reading):

  • Updates local discharge limits to comply with NPDES/WPDES permits. Staff from BOPU explained it as limiting contributions to protect the treatment plants, workers, and downstream users. Approved unanimously.

• DDA District Expansion (Item 14 – Second Reading):

  • Expands the downtown development district to include 2100 Snyder Avenue (Snyder Food). The property owner voluntarily agrees to pay the additional 20‑mill tax. Approved unanimously.

• Other Items – First Readings (Items 16-20):

  • Items 16 (zone change south of I‑80) and 17 (Sweet Grass PUD modification) referred to Public Services Committee.
  • Items 18 (annexation ordinance first reading), 19 (assigned zoning AG/Public for annexed land), and 20 (zone change to BP) all referred to Public Services Committee.

• Final Plat (Item 21):

  • Final plat for 2900 Central Avenue Townhomes adopted unanimously.

• Professional Services Agreement (Item 31C):

  • Contract with MHP Assurance Services for audited financial statements (not to exceed $148,600 over three years) approved. Council Member Labourne emphasized that the audit ensures full accountability of city funds.

• Contract Modification (Item 32A):

  • Modification to street overlay project (Knife River) for Cheshire Drive ($217,150.20) approved. Dr. Aldridge expressed concern about repeated change orders; staff explained improved coordination to prevent future gaps.

• Other Business – Governing Body:

  • Council Member Dr. Aldridge reminded of the Ward 3 Council and Coffee on Saturday.
  • Council Member Escobel praised the water treatment plant as state‑of‑the‑art.
  • Council Member Moody noted he would be absent from the coffee event.
  • Council Member Seagrave moved to enter executive session (Wyoming statute 16‑4‑405(a)(vii)), which was seconded and carried by voice vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Key Outcomes

• Annexation Public Hearing: Completed; no vote taken. The item will proceed to Public Services Committee on April 21, 2026, with a first reading vote expected on April 28, and final reading on May 12 (along with associated zoning and future land use map amendments).
• Reed Avenue Corridor Funding (Item 15): Approved on second reading (vote: ayes majority, with Council Members Moody and Dr. Rainey voting no). The $5 million appropriation is contingent on a final written agreement with BNSF Railway.
• Crosswalk Criteria (Item 22): Adopted unanimously, enabling more flexible crosswalk placement.
• Zoning Changes (Items 8-12): All approved on third reading unanimously.
• Wastewater Ordinance (Item 13): Approved on second reading.
• DDA District Expansion (Item 14): Approved on second reading.
• Professional Services Agreement (Item 31C): Approved unanimously.
• Contract Modification (Item 32A): Approved unanimously.
• Executive Session: Approved by voice vote to discuss confidential information; meeting then adjourned.