Park City voters need to answer the question whether they’re willing to bond for $48 million to protect the Treasure Hill property as open space and prevent the nearly million square foot development that could impact the community with construction for a decade. If voters approve, the bond would also contribute to placing a conservation easement on the Snow Ranch pastures. While no one is publicaly disputing that - one Main St. business owner and Old Town resident is asking the community to vote against the bond. A former Park City Planning Commission Chair says that’s a bad idea. Melissa Allison has more:
The Treasure Hill development goes back more than 30 years and city staff alone has logged thousands of hours on the development which sits on the west side of Park City.
Both the owners and the city have tried to negotiate a deal several times to no avail.
However just before the planning commission was scheduled to make a decision on the development last December, then-Mayor Jack Thomas announced the city had reached an agreement with the property owners to buy them out – if citizens agreed.
The Sweeney’s offered the city a one-time opportunity to purchase the entire development for $64-million.
Following the announcement, residents urged council to keep the deal simple and not allow any density on the property , even if it meant a lower bond amount. The city complied.
The result – a $48 million bond to be paid down over 15 years.
While Old Town resident and business owner Mark Stemler says he doesn’t want Treasure Hill to be developed, he’s urging people to vote against the bond. He says voting for the bond puts other needs in Park City at risk.
“I do not agree with spending $64 million on this project,” Stemler said. “When we could sell a small amount of acreage up there for light duty residential, maybe 8 acres would leave us 115 acres of open space and it would greatly reduce the $64 million dollars. By spending $64 million, we are high jacking the school bond that’s going to be coming forward. We have other vital needs in this town, its just excessive and indulgent.”
Former Planning Commission Chair and practicing Attorney Adam Strachan said, not only is Stemler’s idea shortsighted, he’s not even sure it’s possible - it’s not part of the agreement the city has with the Treasure landowners.
Strachan should know since he has written a law review article on the Fifth Amendment takings clause.
“You have to qualify under the Utah States statute,” Strachan said. “Now it’s unclear whether this property could be taken either for a commercial venture that the city would put its fingers in, and it’s also unclear whether it could be taken for open space alone. So, in a pro-property rights state, where the legislature looks at us and the courts are somewhat skeptical of taking private property for public use, I don’t know that we would survive that legal battle. Secondly, you’ve got to pose an occupancy deposit which is a bond. So, if you decide to take the property, you better be ready to pay up several million dollars, right up front, immediately.”
The only way the city could do that would be to raise taxes immediately which he says is not a well thought out process.
Eminent domain decisions he adds are made by a jury which could decide the property is worth a lot more than the $64 million that has been agreed upon.
The city has considered eminent domain and decided against it because it’s too risky.
Regardless of Strachan’s experience and knowledge, Stemler insists that voting no is the better option.
"Eminent domain works here,” Stemler said. “But if it doesn’t work here, there’s other options. It’s still a better vote to vote “no” here and hit the reset button.”
Stemler also said he called the Ombudsman’s office and spoke to Attorney Jordan Cullimore. Cullimore told him they prefer people first try to buy conventionally and if that doesn’t work – use eminent domain.
KPCW called Cullimore who said he couldn’t comment to the media on any topic but referred us to the Director of the Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman Brent Bateman.
Bateman said Cullimore’s conversation with Stemler was broad in context as well as brief.
While a government always has the option of eminent domain - Bateman said they would have to pay full market value without any discounts or deals to be had.
“No one is recommending that this is the way that this particular situation should go, we don’t know that,” Bateman said. “We don’t know all the facts to tell you that this particular situation should be done by eminent domain.”
Only registered voters living in the Park City limits can vote on the bond question. For the first time in Utah history, people will be able to register to vote on the same day as the election.
I’m Melissa Allison, KPCW News.