Reader comments
Township status suits us fine, residents say

Becoming a part of cities by annexation is never a good thing. Annexation is the act of land grabbing and how much large cities can profit from developement. These cities wanting to annex undeveloped land are in it for the money, not providing services to new areas. Annexation means increased indiscriminate taxation and having to put up with services designed purely for the business districts. As cities become larger so do the irresponsible acts of its government leaders. Residents and citizens rights are of little concern to large incorporated cities. Citizens Rights can't be taxed but where they are located can be. Small undeveloped areas have their use and act as buffer zones with green spaces with places where residents can enjoy some solitude. Incorporation and annexation are guarantees of increased taxes, increased noise, increased pollution, and over developement. People have a right to thier own space and choice of government and the city they want to live in. People choosing to live in unincorporated areas do so as a choice to get away from city bueratic governments that choke the life out of its citizens.

Leave Township's alone. Legislators: Do not disolve their borders - do away with the Township sunset law.

The whole concept of "townships" was ill-advised from the start. The townships are just glorified planning commissions, and are not conducive to intelligent planning.

I think the legislature should add a provision that allows a residential area (such as the townships) to vote on whether or not to annex into a municipal government. Currently, the law provides elections to incorporate or disincorporate municipalities, and to merge two municipalities. However, there is no provision that allows a residential area a vote to annex into a muncipality.

The legislature should also authorize cities to implement "regional" or neighborhood planning commissions to make local zoning decisions. These local commissions will be more responsive to local residents. The present municipal law does not allow for neighborhood commissions.

The legislature--and all citizens--need to focus on how to best make the planning and development decisions that face the Wasatch Front. Increasing the number of townships leads to further balkanization of the Salt Lake Valley, and results in a "race to the bottom," in which developers take advantage of the competition between local governments. The SL Valley needs fewer local governments, not more.

This is good news for the cities. Most of the township areas have deteriorating infrastructure which would cost cities millions to repair and upgrade. Now all that is on the County. Expect the Legislature to make sure the County doesn't bill the cities for those costs. The County recently promised to spend $200k on new sidewalks in White City. Turns out it is for sidewalks on 1300 East. Not exactly what residents were hoping for.

Sandy must love its nearby townships (White City & Granite). With no retail base to speak of, those residents shop largely in Sandy, leaving their tax dollars behind. Their community council leaders can boast about how they are not part of Sandy, then wonder why they can't get sidewalks and street lights.

Leave the townships in the County. When their property taxes start to go up, buyers remorse may set in. By then, it will be too late to do anything about it.

Now if we can just get the Sheriff to work on the crime situation in the townships instead of offloading it on the surrounding cities.

Bob G, you must not realize that the LARGEST governmental agency in Utah providing municipal [city] services is SALT LAKE COUNTY. That very LACK of local control is what most incorporations are about.
Is the county somehow immune as they "become larger so do the irresponsible acts of its government leaders"? Are citizens in the county's "small undeveloped areas" somehow magically more important to the County Council than similar areas are to their much more locally focused city councils?
Cities shouldn't be allowed to "cherry-pick" onlo certain areas to annex - that's true - AND THE LAW is currently set up that way. A City can not solicit an annexation. Only the landowners/citizens of an area can ask to be annexed into a city and, under certain conditions, the city can't refuse (i.e. if the city's taxes are lower). This does mean that because it's easier, oft times only businesses (under a single or very few owners) actually go through the annexation process. Getting hundreds/thousands of homeowners to do it take a lot of work - and most aren't willint to undertake the job.

I live in the Millcreek Township and am concerned about the lack of representation I have on the county level. Of the 9 county council members only 1 is a dedicated representative of the Millcreek area. 5 other council members represents other areas of the county. The three at-large members of the council are Salt Lake City residents. These 9 members must weigh the interests of the entire county (over 1 million residents)when faced with issues. In addition, Mayor Corroon is a Salt Lake City resident. So why in the world would 8 out of 9 council members and the county mayor be interested in what happens in the Millcreek area? When issues such as land use, county services, tax rates, etc. are discussed only 1 council member out of 9 are concerned for the Millcreek area. I would prefer a city council, with members living closer to the situation, making important decisions regarding my neighborhood.

As a resident of Millcreek Township, I'm very pleased to hear the wishes of staying as a township. I am however, very nervous this will not be carried through the legislature. Yes, they are supposed to listen to the people...do they? No, not really. I wouldn't be suprised if Millcreek ended up being anything but a township in the end. I for one, will be lobbying the legislature. I'll have my fingers crossed.

Cities are designed to provide urban services. Counties are desinged to provide rural and regional serives. In most counties if an area wishes to develop, they are told to find a city and annex or incorporate to be responsible for their own services. Salt Lake City made a horrible decision in the 1940's and refused to annex developing areas, which forced Salt Lake County into the urban services business; leaving a disfunctional system of government ever since. The County uses County-wide taxes (levied in both incorported and unicorporated areas) to pay for services in unincorporated areas. Those of us living in cities are subsidizing unincorporated areas. But worse, the County is diverted from it's real job of providing regional coordination. Townships institutionalize a horrible system. It is time for unincoproated urban areas to either incorporate and be responsible for their own issues or annex to another city. The current mess must stop.

Sandy City is all around me and I shop in all their stores - my money goes to Sandy City but I don't get any of the benefits of Sandy City. Our neighborhood has had a few break-ins the last couple weeks but when a call goes out to report this crime it isn't Sandy's police department that responds, it is a SLCO sheriff that is stationed at the Millcreek station (3900 S.) that responds. Want to guess how long of a response time that is? I could have Sandy police that is blocks away come and investigate and possibly catch a criminal but instead we wait 20+ minutes for a response from SLCO. What a great idea it is to stay a township. I love the benefits...not to mention the property taxes are cheaper in Sandy. Really, it's just a conspiracy, Sandy City wants control of White City Water. Let them have it if we can have the protection and benefits Sandy City can offer.

If Tom Dolan can find a way to steal a soccer stadium and filch a theater, you can bet he'll figure out how to 86 the township designation so he can get his grubby little paws on White City. I don't plan to still be here when that happens.

You bring up a good point. Why would anyone one the county council care about what happens in Millcreek? Aside from your representative. The reason is that what is happening in Millcreek is going to happen elsewhere in the valley. West Valley, West Jordan, and Taylorsville would each love to get a piece of Kearns and the sports complex there.

It would be in everyone's best interest to join sides and Not let this happen. If all five townships unite and vote against desolving their townships it will win. 5-4 is still a winning vote.

If you want to go to Sandy City, GO!
A point a clarification though, the deputies that responded to your area are located in White City and the Granite West area. You have a Sheriff's sub-station in White City. And Sandy Police officers do respond if the deputies need extra officers.

Townships a bad idea? Your premise is incorrect. The county does not use countywide taxes to provide services to the unincorporated area. The Municipal Services Fund provides city-type services to the unincorporated area; it is collected from unincorporated residents. Countywide funds are used for Parks and Recreation, Flood Control, general government services, the jail, District Attorney, health department, human services, Salt Palace, South Towne Exposition Center, mental health and substance abuse programs, youth shelters, group homes, arts programs, senior centers, meals on wheels, etc.

Milcreek you don't want to join South Salt Lake? Why not? Oh ya, lazy police , high crime rate, whats not to love?

sodiedog your premise is incorrect. Special Improvement Districts largely came about as a response from repeated complaints and lawsuits regarding double taxation. Besides; every time the county focuses on unincorporated areas - it does so at the expense of the county as a whole. The County should focus on regional issues - not garbage collection in Kearns. If East Millreek wants to be East Millcreek - fine. Incorporate and control your own destiny; but dont continue the current charade.

Ah poor Millcreek, just years ago they battled off the annexation of becoming part of Holladay, and now this. It seems if the majority of the citizens do not desire annexation, then they should not be bullied into it. Those citizens desiring annexation in the areas always have the option of moving away, its not that convoluted of a solution.

New cities just add another layer of taxes and no new services. And they are no more responsive to their citizens than the county. Cottonwood Heights replaced the Sheriff patrolling our city with a pretend police force that will cost us millions of dollars. Next they are going to allow a new commercial development on Wasatch Blvd that none of the residents want.
Cities DO NOT subsidise unincorporated areas. The taxes paid to the county are separated to General or Municipal funds and spent in the areas paying them. However, unincorporated county is sure subsidizing the soccer stadium in Sandy- who will benefit from the taxes paid on every dollar spent in the business it attracts.

To Jesse Harris: Why would Sandy want White City? White City is a blight on the County.

Dear Joe---Must be nice to have ones nose so high in the air. Are you wearing blinders when you drive around Sandy? Have you driven towards Alta,west of 700 East, North of 9400 South, and even East of 1300 East. Do you treat your own residendents with such disdain? Every City and community is struggling with how they are going to make ends meet. Life is not getting any easier for the good citizens that have to suffer your arrogance, viciousness and vitriolic nature. Maybe you should help some of your own citizens instead of standing in judgement of others. Have a nice day.