DRAPER — A group of outspoken residents here scored a minor victory against city officials and the Utah Transit Authority last week when Utah's top court agreed to hear a lawsuit between the parties.

Citizens for Responsible Transportation has spent many months fighting Draper and UTA over light-rail lines. If the citizens group loses, a quiet, rural neighborhood on Draper's east side could be destroyed, they believe.

If the grassroots group wins, Draper residents could vote on a 2007 council resolution that directed UTA to build TRAX lines where Union Pacific trains once rode.

The case will be heard at 10:30 a.m. on May 6.

The group of residents brought the lawsuit against Draper in late 2007 after the city denied a referendum petition that would have allowed a public vote on the resolution.

The resolution's main effect was ensuring federal funding for the TRAX line.

The council decision cemented the route as the "locally preferred alternative." It was aligned with an interlocal agreement approved by Draper and several other Utah cities in 2004, according to briefs filed with the Supreme Court in the case.

After the resident group's attorney Robert Hughes was hired by UTA and the 1st District judge assigned to the case declared a conflict of interest, a second judge ruled that Draper was justified in denying the referendum petition. The resolution in question was "ministerial" rather than "legislative" and was therefore ineligible for referendum, he said.

The judge did not rule on whether the referendum was valid in regards to the number of signatures turned in though Draper denied the referendum based on an inadequate signature count.

CRT has called the district court ruling unconstitutional, and hopes the Supreme Court will remand the case to district court.

But having the case remanded would be only a dent in the group's larger goal of keeping TRAX out of their neighborhood.

According to documents made public by UTA in 2006, building a TRAX line through the east side of Draper would cost about $32 million less than building a line along State Street. The alignment would also outperform other options in encouraging compatible transportation and land use, promoting transit-oriented development, mitigating environmental impacts and maximizing community resources, according to the documents.