Less than a month before the Nov. 4 election, a 3rd District judge has stopped a vote on what would have been Summit County’s newest town.
Judge Matthew Bates’ Oct. 14 ruling sides with nearby landowners who opposed incorporating “West Hills” between Kamas and Hideout.
The decision is a reversal for Bates, who previously said he wouldn’t act until after the election, and then only if voters chose to incorporate.
It follows an Oct. 1 final plea from the 10 landowners who sued to stop the election, citing a court’s duty to settle election-related issues before a vote. They also said overturning a successful incorporation after an election would cause practical questions for all involved.
Ballots have already been printed — and mailed — but what the estimated 47 voters within the 3,600-acre proposed boundaries select may no longer matter.
Summit County Clerk Eve Furse told KPCW, based on Bates' ruling and order, her office doesn't plan to report any votes they receive on West Hills, “barring further court action.”
Town sponsor and Salt Lake-based attorney Derek Anderson says the town’s proponents “have followed Utah law and statutes and will most likely appeal this decision.”
“Proponents have merely asked for flexibility on their land only to be chastised and slandered by outsiders with an agenda to stifle property rights,” Anderson said in a statement.
While town boosters have hoped for “modest new growth,” the opponents question the feasibility of a new town and claim it will take away from the Kamas Valley’s rural character.
The plaintiffs who sued to stop West Hills are a mix of primary and part-time residents. One is Virginian Jenn McCaffrey, a former resident whose property is on the northern tip of West Hills.
“We are very pleased with the judge's ruling,” she said. “It's protecting our constitutional rights of not only the plaintiffs, but others, and so we are very pleased with that, and we'll want to see what will happen next.”
The opponents had argued that parts of Utah incorporation law were unconstitutional because they were treated differently from their neighbors.
Bates agreed; however, he also noted those portions of the law have changed.
One of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, Michael Judd, is a shareholder at Parsons, Behle & Lattimer, which is a financial supporter of KPCW.
