OCR Text |
Show April 15 03.qxd 12/7/2021 Page 10 3:55 PM Page 10 THE OGDEN VALLEY NEWS Volume VIII Issue I April 15, 2003 Questions and Answers – Public Dialogue on Incorporation Note: This section of the paper is dedicated as a forum for public dialogue on the issue of whether Eden should incorporate. Questions and answers, and comments regarding such, are encouraged from the community. Information may be submitted anonymously. 1. Has the issue of changing the three acre minimum to one acre, or less, been a motivating factor in the desire to incorporate? Despite rhetoric, the issue of changing the 3-acre minimum to 1-acre, or less is central to the desire to incorporate. Further, it is part of virtually every conversation regarding reasons to incorporate. Approximately 50 people were present at Kimber Academy for the first meeting to consider incorporation. At that meeting, it was stated that “some individuals” had approached the Eden Planning Committee with concerns about Weber County Commissioners decisions regarding the Valley. Who were these individuals or at least, what were their concerns? Since the impetus for incorporation is based on these issues; and since County Commissioners can only vote on what is presented to them; and since issues concern development and are presented by individuals in the Valley, this question is paramount. Did those concerns come from individuals frustrated by development that appears to counter the Ogden Valley General Plan, or those who believe the Plan stands in the way of their goals for residential and commercial land development? The 3-acre zoning requirement is a crucial element of the General Plan. It is necessary to protect our water purity, air quality, traffic issues, and rural and scenic environment. The 3-acre minimum zoning does not require each home be placed on a 3-acre parcel of land. In fact, cluster zoning is encouraged with contiguous open space to promote the vision of the General Plan. Incorporation would immediately render the Ogden Valley General Plan and the ordinances that support it nonexistent. The 3-acre vs. 1-acre zoning is not narrower than the scope of the volunteer committees. Once again, it is central. It is one of the primary reasons some “volunteers” became involved. Some support, some are opposed. At each point on the continuum are long-time, and more recent residents. The question of 3-acre zoning, or less (no mention has ever been made about increasing the minimum), continues to be raised as a critical question, and continues to be publicly skirted by the core of the incorporation movement. 1(a). A change to allow more density would likely mean the state and “feds” would force us to go to sewer—a multi million dollar burden. Currently our water has the health department’s highest rating for purity that can be issued. The 3-acre zoning protects that water purity and alleviates the need for a sewer system. Our interest in our water purity is not ours alone. The Ogden Valley watershed provides the water source for Ogden City. Ogden City has a vested interest in maintaining the purity of the aquifers beneath the Valley floor. Ogden City continues to put pressure on Weber County Commissioners to put a sewer system in, in Ogden Valley. Weber County is currently the only county in the state operating under a balanced budget. The Commissioners are able to stave off Ogden City’s pressure to expend millions of dollars on a sewer system because of the protective 3-acre zoning. Are we willing to take the risk of losing the zoning and being faced with lawsuits from Ogden City to force the sewer? These possibilities will not be considered in an incorporation feasibility study. 1(b). A sewer system would put unbearable pressure on us to have quarter acre lots, just as it has in other areas of the County. Is this something the residents would like to see? Unlike Eden, rural areas of the County like Hooper and Marriott-Slaterville pursued incorporation as an attempt to prevent annexation into more dense areas like Roy and Ogden City. Unfortunately, their efforts are proving futile in the face of federal regulations requiring incorporated cities to provide for higher density housing and low income housing, among others. The slippery slope of density forces the sewer, and in turn, the sewer facilitates the ability for dense development. Urban sprawl has diminished the rural nature of the majority of the Wasatch Front. Residents with horses or other livestock are forced out of their communities when zoning prohibits them from keeping such animals on their property. A sewer system opens the floodgate for high-density development. 2. Isn’t it likely that the county would vacate all county roads once we are incorporated? Can we afford to maintain county roads? The feasibility study will define the current costs of road maintenance within the incorporated area. However, the study will only calculate those expenses at their current costs. The problem is, Ogden Valley road maintenance, and all services in general, are proportionately more expensive than elsewhere in Weber County. The cost of those services is spread equally throughout the county despite the discrepancies. There is no guarantee whether Weber County will agree to contract to provide services at the current cost or at all. 3. Will incorporation put pressure on Eden to create more commercial and manufacturing zones in order to help finance our proposed city? Is this our vision of a rural atmosphere? The feasibility study, if conducted, will only spell out the expected expenditures and income of the new city with the variables as they currently exist. Property tax will continue to go to the county and will not be available for the new city unless a new “city” property tax is imposed. A portion of sales tax from the businesses currently existing within the proposed boundaries will be the main source of revenue. Research clearly shows that residential development does not sustain a government entity (city) due to the cost of infrastructure such as water, sewer, other utilities, road maintenance, etc. Further, research and conversation with government leaders has shown that it is commercial development that sustains government entities. The steering committee will complete a prefeasibility study to insure a successful “official” feasibility study. Some recently incorporated areas or “towns” like Huntsville have operated primarily with volunteer efforts. How long will a volunteer government continue, and at what level of quality will it operate as growth occurs and financial demands increase? No feasibility study will project the need for future revenue. 4. The Utah Code of Incorporation seems to imply that if you sign a petition for an incorporation FEASIBILITY study, your name will remain on the official petition to incorporate, even if you have changed your mind; and that the only way to remove your name would be to go to the county clerk’s office. Is this true? The default procedure is that a name on the petition for a feasibility study will remain on the petition to incorporation unless a written request is submitted to the county clerk’s office. Unless the language on the feasibility study petition clearly states that names will not be included on the incorporation petition, the default procedure will govern. 5. Why are we not also pursuing questions about what is involved in becoming a township? This would give us a planning commission composed entirely of Eden residents, unlike the four to three split now. At the first Kimber Academy meeting, discussion ensued and three options were presented. 1) Remain the same. 2) Consider a township. 3) Incorporation. A show of hands for each was requested. The majority of those voting voted to study the possibility of incorporation. However, between 1/2 and 2/3 of those in attendance abstained from voting. Possibly, they felt they lacked the information necessary to make an informed choice. After the vote, one gentleman voiced his concerns that people had voted without a thorough understanding of the possibilities of a township, and what it had to offer. The presenters paid him no mind. Volunteers signed up to assist the six committees with research to determine whether the idea of incorporation was in Eden’s best interest. At least some of those volunteers believed that they were on a fact finding mission, not a mission of incorporation. Initially, potential boundaries included the unincorporated area of Weber County not included within the boundaries of the currently existing townships or incorporated Huntsville Town. An idea easily feasible for a township, and at no cost. An individual, invited to a steering committee meeting, stated that incorporation of the entire Valley was the only way to go. This individual suggested that the existing townships and Huntsville town should disband and be included in the proposed incorporated area. Subsequent meetings with Powder Mountain and Snow Basin revealed that they had no desire to be part of this plan. Huntsville Town also expressed no interest in leaving their status as a Town and becoming part of a larger city. East Huntsville and Nordic/Liberty Townships also stated that they were very satisfied with their township status, and were not interested in joining an incorporation effort. Some members of those township committees are appointed and some are elected. As information gathering continued, some volunteers began to have grave concerns about whether incorporation was the best way to proceed, concerns such as cost, potential tax increases, and what would happen to Eden if incorporation came to fruition. Those individuals believe that all possibilities should be considered, especially the viability of a township. A township council provides direct representation with the County Commissioners. An Eden Q & A cont. on page 11 |