The Summit County Council plans to ask the state Legislature to repeal the law that created the preliminary municipality pilot program, which allows developers of privately owned land to incorporate as a town and oversee land use decisions. A preliminary municipality can transition to, and incor porate as, a town under a state law that took effect in 2024. The law amended the Utah Municipal Code to provide for a pilot program for the incorporation of a preliminary municipality, giving “all the powers and duties” of a town, including zoning and land use decisions. The law applies to land privately owned by three or fewer people who intend to develop it with at least 100 people while meeting certain affordable housing benchmarks in the first five years of the preliminary municipality’s existence. Multiple developers have already attempted to form a preliminary municipality in Summit County. Six Ridge Partners, formerly known as Dakota Pacific Real Estate, filed for a preliminary municipality last year as a safeguard for its planned development in Kimball Junction. Ivory Homes similarly submitted a request in January to explore a preliminary municipality in Browns Canyon, but the Lieutenant Governor’s Office, which oversees the process, ultimately declined to move forward with the proposal. Communities across the Wasatch Back have opposed the pilot program, asserting it removes land use control from the hands of local officials who are more familiar with the area and residents’ needs. County Manager Shayne Scott in response to growing concerns presented the County Council with a drafted resolution officially opposing the pilot program and asking the state Legislature to repeal the law. The resolution stated the county is in the process of updating its two general plans — one for the Snyderville Basin and one for the East Side — and that “community values … may come in conflict with future preliminary municipalities.” Councilors unanimously expressed their support for the resolution, but they postponed its passage on Wednesday after County Council Vice Chair Roger Armstrong said he wanted to strengthen the language in the resolution and take a firmer stance. “We have the ability to be thoughtful about this and to present something to the state Legislature that puts a little bit more meat on the bone here,” he said. “The practical matter of allowing a developer to come in and create impacts that we have no control over in terms of how it relates to water, infrastructure, utilities, transportation, everything else that can create problems and not solutions for various parts of the county, is careless, and I think it’s potentially a little bit dangerous.” Armstrong said he wanted to include more details on how the county creates its general plans. To update the general plan, which is a process the county undertakes every 10 years, the county’s two planning commissions review the previous document and begin to make changes in collaboration with the Planning Department. Commissioners then forward their recommendations to the County Council, and the local government undergoes an extensive public comment period to gather community input before councilors finalize the documents. Armstrong, who has served on the County Council since 2013, said the process has historically taken one to two years to complete. He said preliminary municipalities disrupt the vision created for the community in the general plans and that it’s important for state lawmakers to understand how Summit County residents and officials approach land use issues. “We could say a lot more about where Summit County is committed to smart planning and affordable housing and development,” added Summit County Councilor Megan McKenna. “Across the state, rural and urban counties are really not supportive of this, and it doesn’t mean they’re not supportive of housing. It means that this preliminary municipality legislation doesn’t support affordable housing in a meaningful way that I think every county is trying to address.” County Councilor Tonja Hanson said she also wants to include “stronger language” in the resolution, but County Councilor Chris Robinson urged against taking a stance that’s too harsh. “The objective is not to make a statement that doesn’t go anywhere,” Robinson said. “The objective is to change policy or to change the attitude. This resolution may be a means to that or it may be counterproductive to that depending on how it’s done.” The County Council did not specify when it plans to next discuss or vote on the resolution, but Hanson requested it appear before councilors sooner rather than later to capitalize on the momentum created when Wasatch County passed its own resolution earlier this month. The post Summit County Council to ask state Legislature to repeal preliminary municipality pilot program appeared first on Park Record. ...read more read less