Current councilmembers criticized House Bill 356 during their housing policy discussion last Wednesday, March 12.
HB356, which passed the Utah Legislature with minutes to spare, will divide the all at-large council into five districts.
Some eastern Summit County residents and Republicans have praised the bill, saying it will increase ideological diversity on the council and give the rural side of the county a voice.
Now, some Democrats currently on the council are saying there could be problems down the road during land use discussions.
March 12, the council set a goal to build 1,500 affordable housing units over the next decade, but it didn’t decide where to put them.
“We've just been handed a flaming bag of excrement from the legislature by districting the county seats, and instead of having this discussion as an unaffiliated, at-large legislative body, it's now going to get divided into districts,” Councilmember Roger Armstrong said. “If you think that the ‘not in my backyard’ problem was problematic ... it's now going to be a much louder drum.”
Growth and development loom large in Wasatch Back politics.
Developers can reap large profits in Park City and the Snyderville Basin, but without rezoning, those regions are nearly maxed out. The next closest ski area real estate is in Wasatch County, which the U.S. Census Bureau says had more percent growth in new housing between July 2021 and July 2022 than any other U.S. county.
Then there’s rural eastern Summit County, where fifth-generation families haven’t had to contend with large-scale developments and gated resort communities until recently.
Eastside zoning restricts density more than Wasatch County’s, but that doesn’t mean projects aren’t coming.
A top-of-mind project for northern Summit County residents is Hoytsville’s Cedar Crest Village. The developer has asked Coalville for annexation but may still ask the county council for a rezone, too.
In South Summit, landowners are pushing for a new town called West Hills, west of Kamas, to encourage “modest new growth.” After a contentious series of public hearings, residents will vote on the new town this November.
After Summit County voted to transition to a five-person council in 2006, councilmembers voted to reduce how much density was allowed across the county. That way, larger developments would require negotiation.
“It’s going to get more interesting now,” Armstrong said about those negotiations March 12.
“It’s going to get ugly,” Council Vice Chair Canice Harte added.
Harte said he’s been supportive of plans for a public-private partnership on county-owned land in Jeremy Ranch, across the interstate from his neighborhood of Pinebrook.
“If in this theory, I'm the Pinebrook-Jeremy Ranch representative, and my people are vehemently opposed to this — as they will clearly articulate that they are — suddenly I have to change my whole position on this, because I represent, now, that group of people,” he said.
HB356 allows councilmembers to serve the rest of their current terms, but starting in 2026, which district they represent will be decided by a lottery.
The district lottery could leave some councilmembers representing areas they don’t live in. As a result, some may have to wait longer to run for reelection, because their neighborhood seat may have been taken by another candidate in the meantime.
And because four of the five on the council live in Park City or the Snyderville Basin, westsiders could represent eastsiders for the first two years of the new district format.
Gov. Spencer Cox hadn't signed HB356 as of March 18, but he hadn't vetoed any 2025 bills either.
Summit County is a financial supporter of KPCW. For a full list, click here.
