The Standard-Examiner reports this morning that the Powderville dispute has now landed in a venue in which everyone following this story knew it would eventually wind up: a court of law. We incorporate below the lead paragraphs of this morning's Di Lewis story:
OGDEN — Powder Mountain is determined to get a town council and mayor.Those readers who haven't already seen this morning's Std-Ex hard-copy edition can read the full story here:
The Powder Mountain petition sponsors filed litigation Aug. 26 against Weber County in the 2nd District Court aimed at getting the county to approve a list of appointees for Powder Mountain government, according to a news release issued Wednesday.
Powder Mountain spokeswoman Maura Carabello said, “We’re asking the judge to order the county to follow the law.”
"Powder Mountain town issue heading to court"
From our point of view this development presents a golden opportunity for the County Commission and Powderville citizens (if any of them decide to file "amicus briefs" and/or "join" as parties to this lawsuit) to press for a statutory interpretation of the now grandfathered SB-466, which is really quite vague as to the prescribed process for appointing a mayor and town council. Moreover, it presents the first opportunity to test the constitutionality of this ill-designed statute itself-- something we've all been waiting for.
Our compliments to the Weber County Commission for sticking to their guns, and refusing to rubber stamp the developer's hand-picked list of developer sycophants and stooges. As this morning's article reports, the Commission knew full well this matter would wind up in court; and we'll go on to speculate that the 2d District Court ought to provide the defendant, Weber County, a fair and friendly judicial venue.
And what say our gentle readers about this latest development?
