| OCR Text |
Show i &0" 'i : ! . J.. i-,v .... , " V 7 !rivv , 1 . - nil 1 i rIX N v : j v A. - - 1 . - t . ? kL.wi; , -" - SLOW GOING By MARK FOTHERINGHAM CLEARFIELD -- There may yet be hope that the construction con-struction of the proposed Davis County Waste Disposal Plant will come to a city-wide vote. An initiative petition circulated cir-culated by a group opposed to the burn plant is now being reviewed re-viewed by the Clearfield City Council. CITY OFFICIALS had earlier ear-lier refused to accept the petition peti-tion on the advice of City Attorney Alf Van Waggonen that the petition didn't deal with a valid referendum issue. " The opposition group then brought their petition directly to the council last week asking that the petition at least be read and reviewed before the question ques-tion of its validity is decided. "WE FEEL the petition is in line with what a valid petition should be," said opposition spokesman Jim Hurst. "The petition hadn't been seen by the council but the decision seems to have been made that it dealt with an 'administrative action'." "We are actually acting against the construction of the plant, not an administrative decision," said Shirley Reed, Katy-Seghers, developers of the proposed Davis County Resource Recovery Plant, had hoped to have ground broken by now in their original time schedule. Though the project is still alive, it has been slowed considerably by a group opposed to the plant who is trying to put the issue on the November ballot. another opposition member. "Acts of the city council that change the character of residential re-sidential property are considered consi-dered legislative acts and a referendum re-ferendum is guaranteed by the Utah constitution. CITY ATTORNEY Van Waggonen, after looking over the petition, agreed that citizens have the right to participate parti-cipate in local government. He added, however, that he couldn't see what legislation was sought by the petition. The next hurdle for the proposed garbage disposal plant will be at a public hearing on July 26. There the Clear field City Council will consider an appeal of the conditional use permit which the city's planning commission approved for the plant last month. OPPONENTS to the burn plant asked for more time to prepare for the appeal hearing but the city council denied that request stating that the date and time for the hearing had already been officially posted. Opposition member Hal Hallett expressed his concern that all opinions should have equal time in the hearing and suggested that a night other than a regular council meeting night would be better for the hearing. "There is a tendency in these meetings to cut the discussions dis-cussions short before everyone every-one is heard," he said. MAYOR Pro-Tern Kay Chandler assured him however, howev-er, that if more time was needed, an extra night would be scheduled to continue the hearing. Mr. Hallett then requested re-quested that the different city departments assess the effect of the burn plant on the city (i.e. the city's fire insurance rating), and present their findings find-ings at the hearing. |
