Measures could halt incorporation rush

New legislation could stop developers from rushing to incorporate new towns.

But the two bills will do little to quell the concerns of residents of the proposed town of Powder Mountain and won't stop the efforts of three would-be town incorporators in Wasatch County.

HB164 and SB25 will not retroactively fix the problems created by the Legislature last year, despite pleas from concerned residents to a House committee on Thursday.

"It's created a race for incorporation," said Carl Fisher, of the Citizens' Committee to Save Our Canyons. "We'd like to see some of that retroactive language put in as a compromise for the people here."

A law approved last year allows developers to try to incorporate a town if there are at least 100 residents and there is support from landowners possessing more than 50 percent of the property's market value and more than 50 percent of the land within the area proposed.

In the case of Powder Mountain, the developers filed a petition in January, but didn't have enough residents in the ski resort, so the developer expanded the town boundary to about 60 homes in the Eden area.

"You are putting us in a jurisdiction in which we have no vote," said Darla Longhurst-Van Zeben, who lives in the Eden area set to be part of the new town. "That is absolutely wrong."

The owner of Wolf Creek Resort, near Powder Mountain, filed a petition with Weber County earlier this week to have his property excluded from the incorporation. The exclusion of those 160 acres could form islands, which the incorporation law does not allow.

Weber County is currently reviewing how Wolf Creek's request may affect the incorporation process.

House Speaker Greg Curtis, R-Sandy, told the Deseret Morning News, "As a matter of policy I don't feel that the government should change statutes for something that's in the process. Any petitions that are filed as of today should be treated under the law that was existing at the time they were filed, and the legislation going forward will deal with the new petitions."

HB164 and SB25 are very similar.

The House Political Subdivisions Committee approved HB164 on Thursday, but put off a vote on the other bill. Instead, committee members urged the two bill sponsors to work to fold the two bills together.

"I see no reason that they couldn't be rolled together," said Sen. Dennis Stowell, R-Parowan, the sponsor of SB45. "I would be willing to work with him to try and sort out the differences."