Mapleton zoning trial winds up

PROVO — After wading through complex zoning issues over seven long trial dates, stretched over several months, attorneys returned to an underlying question Friday in closing arguments:

Do Mapleton residents have the right to determine the future of a parcel of Maple Mountain property in a referendum?

"All we want is (the zoning issue) be brought to a vote," said Jim Lundberg, a member of Friends of Maple Mountain Inc., who filed lawsuit against Mapleton in October over their decision to rezone land owned by Dr. Wendell Gibby.

The trial that will determine whether local residents will have a say in the land's fate finally reached closing arguments Friday morning, after facing several setbacks and long days of witness testimony.

Lundberg filed lawsuit against Mapleton when the city was poised to rezone Gibby's land — located at 2000 E. Dogwood Drive — from a critical environmental zone to a planned development on which Gibby could build 47 single-family residential units on his 118-acre property.

Lundberg and other Mapleton residents opposed the city's actions and circulated a petition that gathered 864 signatures requesting a referendum on the issue. City officials said the rezone was not referable. In response, Lundberg obtained a temporary restraining order, barring City Council from taking action on the rezone until the case was decided in court.

Anthony Schofield, attorney for Friends of Maple Mountain, said Friday the right to a referendum is sacrosanct and a citizen's fundamental right.

"In this case, the rights of the citizens have been abused and trampled on by Mapleton," he said.

Daniel McDonald, attorney for Mapleton, countered Schofield's assertion, saying a voter referendum is an important right, but not a boundless right.

"It's not an absolute, unconditional right," he said. "It has some serious checks and balances."

Dayle Jeffs, attorney for Wendell Gibby who intervened in the court case, said voters have already participated in the decision, in a roundabout way, because they elected the city officials who spend hundreds of hours studying reports before making these decisions.

If the rezone goes to a referendum, Jeffs said, voters will not have adequate opportunity to study all the geological and engineering reports city officials reviewed before they were about to vote on the issue.

"We're not talking about mental capacity," he said, "From a practical reality, will the voters take the time, or have the time, to study all the issues?"

Scofield called the issue question of voter participation a "red herring."

"It's not beyond the comprehension of citizens of Mapleton," he said. "It's not difficult to understand."

The attorneys also debated three prongs of Citizen's Awareness Now v. Marakis — a past court ruling — applied to the Gibby land dispute.

After hearing arguments and posing questions to each side, 4th. District Judge Darold McDade said he will reach a ruling on the case by Feb. 1 at the earliest.

---

E-mail: jdana@desnews.com