At the county council meeting on June 21, Wasatch County Deputy Attorney Jon Woodard presented a draft of the proposed legislative development agreement. But Woodard said the presentation’s purpose wasn’t just a status update.
"What we're doing is seeking input from the council on the development agreement for the temple project," he told the council.
But the council didn’t have much to offer in that regard. County manager Dustin Grabau said as much towards the end of the presentation — which lasted almost 2 hours.
"So far, you haven't suggested any major changes," he said.
Notably, the council didn’t have much to say on the proposed height of the temple. The proposal calls for two spires, one of which would top 200 feet, while the main body of the temple would be 100 feet high.
That’s been one of the main sticking points with community members who object to the current temple proposal.
"If you're saying, 'No way, am I going to approve a temple with 200-foot height,' we'd like to hear that now," Woodard told the council.
The council said nothing in response. Woodard then thanked the council and concluded his presentation.
Councilmember Mark Nelson voiced his general support for the agreement, notwithstanding a few concerns like the church’s desire to restrict access to public trails by the property. Kendall Crittenden echoed that sentiment.
A few days later, Grabau gave his impression to KPCW that the council was generally supportive of the draft presented at the council meeting.
"I won't be surprised that as it goes through the process, there will be further questions or scrutiny or proposed changes to it," he said. "But I would suspect that those won't be major adjustments."
KPCW reached out to each member of the county council on July 11 to see if Grabau's assessment was correct. Councilmembers Mark Nelson, Steve Farrell, and Erik Rowland did not respond to a request for interviews. Council Chair Spencer Park declined to comment, saying he would need to see an updated version as presented to the planning commission before offering any comments.
Councilmember Karl McMillan said he would be willing to talk, though his comments would be "quite reserved" for the time being. But after a week of trying, KPCW was unable to reach him for comment.
But councilmembers Luke Searle and Kendall Crittenden did share their thoughts on the topic.
Crittenden said he was "fairly satisfied" with the proposal the way it was presented at that meeting, and that included the building’s proposed height.
While the council could "maybe look at" lowering the height, "I don't have any real heartburn with it the way it is," he said.
Searle had a slightly different take. He did make clear he did not intend to "downsize" the temple.
"I don't think that it's our place to say to a religious institution that we think it needs to be a certain size," he said.
But Searle also suggested the temple should have the same spire-to-main building ratio of the old Wasatch Stake Tabernacle. The historical building is on Main Street and now houses Heber City offices. According to historical documents, the main portion of that building is 65 feet high, and the tower extends another 25 feet, for a total of 90 feet.
"I do think that a mirrored image temple with the tabernacle is a good homage to our history in the valley," he said.
The proposal is currently before the county’s Development Review Committee, a consortium of county officials who check the proposal for compliance with various building, engineering and infrastructure codes. It will then be presented to the planning commission for a public hearing. The planning commission will then give its recommendation to the county council.
At the June 21 meeting, Councilmember Steve Farrell indicated the council may not know what the "hot button" issues are before they hold a public hearing, which is one avenue county residents have to make their voices heard on the issue.
Searle said public input would play a role in his decision, and he invited all residents interested in the issue to either send an email to the council at Council@wasatch.utah.gov, or call the county’s comment and suggestion line at (435) 657-3275.
"Every time that I've gotten a voicemail, most of the time, I'll give that person a call back if it's not just a decorated statement," he said.
Crittenden said he would take public input into consideration, but will also use his own judgment.
"Generally, I don't know that I make my decisions based on public clamor, whether it's in favor or opposed," he said. "I evaluate it on its merits."
Some community members who object to the current proposal have expressed concern about how the council’s personal religious beliefs will impact their votes on the project.
"I'm not sure which of the county officials may or may not be members of the LDS church," said Lisa Bahash, co-founder of Save Wasatch Back Dark Skies. "I think it's a fair concern that if they are, should they be recusing themselves? Or how will they set their requirements to the church or obligation to the church apart from their obligations to the county and its residents?"
Crittenden said he doesn’t lay aside his religious beliefs on any decision he makes on the council, just as he doesn’t set aside his political preferences.
"I guess there's always gonna be accusations of bias," he said. "But it's not like I've been called in by my religious leaders who say, 'You got to vote for this.' I've got my own free will to look at it and evaluate it."
Crittenden said he was personally looking forward to having a temple in the valley. But he also felt he was "fairly evaluating" the proposal.
"We still gotta look at it, make sure it's a project that works for the county and works for the citizens," he said.
The proposal will go before the county planning commission for public review — at the earliest — at its next meeting on Aug. 10.
