The Park City Follies got the spotlight in The Wall Street Journal over the weekend, as part of a report on the feud stemming from Matthew Prince’s home plans.
Most of the attention has focused on Sasha and Mocha, two Bernese Mountain dogs owned by Eric Hermann and Susan Fredston-Hermann, Prince’s nextdoor neighbors. The couple filed an appeal with Park City in March to block the Cloudflare CEO’s home, which was approved by a split planning commission.
Prince has filed two separate lawsuits against the Hermanns since the appeal. One lawsuit claims the two dogs “have aggressively approached, chased and harassed” people on the Prince property.
Hermann told KPCW he felt the WSJ story missed the point, which is the “intimidation of a city by a billionaire.”
“Since we became the face of the community trying to preserve Old Town’s unique character by preventing construction of a monster mansion the size of our city hall, we have been brutally harassed,” Hermann said.
Prince said the lawsuit against the dogs is necessary to protect his family. “I get that we’re rich assholes, but at some level I’m also a father and I have to protect my daughter,” Prince told the Journal.
Eric Hermann said he received a call from Summit County Animal Control last week saying they had received a complaint from a neighbor about Sasha and Mocha. Summit County Animal Control would not confirm if a complaint was filed. The couple said they’ve never heard concerns about the dogs prior to the lawsuit.
Prince’s attorney, Bruce Baird, said the other lawsuit filed against the Hermanns over a protruding rock wall is nothing more than a “simple property dispute.”
The fight between the neighbors was also recently covered in Bloomberg. That story took aim at Prince’s purchase of The Park Record in 2023, which followed his attempt to push a bill that would benefit his home plans through the Utah Legislature.
A new chapter in the conflict could begin Tuesday, when Park City’s newly formed appeal panel may decide if Prince’s 11,000-square-foot home can be built.
The Hermanns, along with eight other co-appellants, claim the Park City Planning Commission failed to properly apply the land management code when voting on Prince’s proposal.
Appellants have the burden of proof under the city’s review process.
Prince’s attorneys and a staff report compiled by the planning department contends the commission acted appropriately, and the appeal should be rejected, allowing Prince to break ground.
Tuesday the panel could affirm the commission’s decision, reverse it, or continue the vote to a later meeting.
The meeting starts at 5 p.m. in council chambers at City Hall. A public hearing is scheduled.
