Amending Speed Limits for Unpaved Roads
In one sentence
Plain language
Official record
Bill Summary - 25LSO-0256 Bill No.: SF0032 Effective: 7/1/2025 LSO No.: 25LSO-0256 Enrolled Act No.: SEA No. 0081 Chapter No.: 158 Prime Sponsor: Joint Transportation, Highways & Military Affairs Interim Committee Catch Title: Unpaved roads speed limits-amendments. Has Report: No Subject: Local authorities establishing speed limits on unpaved roadways. Summary/Major Elements: This act authorizes local authorities to decrease a maximum speed limit to not less than thirty-five (35) miles per hour for unpaved roadways without first conducting a speed study. This act authorizes local authorities to establish a temporary speed limit of less than thirty-five (35) miles per hour without conducting a speed study and for a period not exceeding one (1) year for purposes, including but not limited to, construction, maintenance, special events, emergency situations, and changes in use. This act requires that a local authority consult with the local authority's engineer or road and bridge superintendent and law enforcement with jurisdiction over the road before establishing a temporary speed limit of less than thirty-five (35) miles per hour. The above summary is not an official publication of the Wyoming Legislature and is not an official statement of legislative intent. While the Legislative Service Office endeavored to provide accurate information in this summary, it should not be relied upon as a comprehensive abstract of the bill.
Public statements
Last checked Aug 5, 8:21 AM
R · H42
Why they voted this way
The speaker explains that after negotiations, they reached an acceptable resolution by lowering the speed limit to 35 and allowing local authorities to set temporary limits for studies or specific conditions.
R · S07
Why they voted this way
The speaker supports the bill because it allows speed limit reductions to 35 mph without a study and permits temporary lower limits for up to one year, which balances local control with oversight.
R · S07
Why they voted this way
The speaker opposes the current compromise because it prevents local officials from setting speed limits below 35 mph without conducting a mandatory speed study, which he views as unnecessary overkill for common safety adjustments.
R · S01
Why they voted this way
The speaker supports voting for concurrence because, although not perfect, the compromise is an improvement over current rules by allowing local authorities to lower speed limits without a study.
R · S05
Why they voted this way
The speaker supports concurrence because the bill addresses desires from associations representing county engineers and road superintendents, granting them authority to reduce speed limits without a full study.
R · S11
Why they voted this way
The speaker opposes concurrence because the bill reintroduces bureaucratic requirements for speed studies, which contradicts the common-sense approach of allowing local officials to make determinations.
D · S09
Why they voted this way
The speaker opposes concurrence because the bill is too restrictive, only allowing speed limit reductions from 55 to 45 and failing to address other necessary adjustments.
R · S20
Why they voted this way
The speaker opposes concurrence because the bill fails to address the original issue of lowering speed limits without a study and does not provide sufficient authority to those who know the roads best.
R · S07
Why they voted this way
The speaker supports concurrence because two associations representing county engineers and commissioners worked on the amendment and are asking for support.
R · H42
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the current form of the bill because it relies on public comment rather than data-driven engineering studies, which could lead to arbitrary speed limit changes based on temporary traffic conditions or vocal complaints.
R · H41
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes an amendment excluding private roads because the bill is specifically intended for county roads, and adding language about private roads would confuse the statute since speed limits are not enforced on private property anyway.
R · S29
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the bill because removing the requirement for a speed study on dirt roads could create liability risks and allow local authorities to set high speeds without proper evaluation.
D · S09
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the bill because removing the requirement for speed studies could create liability risks and dangers if local authorities set high speeds on dirt roads without proper evaluation.
R · S18
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the bill because they do not support giving unilateral authority to set speed limits on dirt roads without requiring a study.
R · S07
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill to give local communities control over speed limits, arguing that liability concerns are not a significant issue and counties will make the right decisions.
R · S01
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill because requiring speed studies imposes unnecessary costs on businesses and adds an extra layer of government burden.
R · S11
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill to allow local road and bridge experts to set appropriate speed limits without waiting years for costly state transportation studies.
R · S20
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill because their constituents prioritize local control, which this legislation provides.
If a lawmaker is not listed, we couldn't find a published reason.
Wyoming roll calls
10 roll calls
Official activity
Changes
7 stored
The amendment removes specific language about setting maximum speed limits on unpaved roads, allowing local authorities more flexibility in determining these limits.
The amendment adds an exception to the bill's rule about speed limits on unpaved roads by excluding privately owned roadways from its provisions.
The amendment adds a new rule that says local authorities cannot set speed limits on unpaved roads unless the roads are publicly owned.
The amendment allows local authorities to decrease speed limits on unpaved roads without conducting a study, with certain conditions and limitations.
The amendment changes parts of the bill to allow local authorities more flexibility in setting speed limits on unpaved roads without needing a prior study or justification.
The amendment removes specific limits and requirements for setting speed limits on unpaved roads, allowing local authorities to decrease these limits without needing a study or justification.
The amendment changes how local authorities can set speed limits on unpaved roads by allowing them to decrease existing limits and establish temporary lower limits without a study.