We'll let this morning's Di Lewis story serve as a reminder of tomorrow's Weber County Commission public hearing, which could well turn out to be the most important County Commission session in the history of Ogden Valley. Here's Ms. Lewis's lede, which nicely frames the issues which have recently split the Ogden Valley citizenry down the middle:
OGDEN -- As a public hearing with the potential to resolve the incorporation issue and development of Powder Mountain approaches, opinions are divided about the proposal between the Weber County Commission and resort developers.Being privy to private communications, we are unhappy to observe that the formerly united Ogden Valley citizens, who've together fought a valiant fight over the past four years, are now literally at each others' throats, as the prospective "Powdervillians" look for a quick and relatively painless way out of the prospectively expensive Township mess, while the balance of Ogden Valley activists lobby the Commission to stick to the General Plan and preserve the Valley's rural atmosphere.
Although many residents are hopeful that the memorandum of understanding could take the town incorporation out of the running, others feel that does not outweigh concerns about traffic, pollution and resource allocation.
Sadly, it appears that the seeds of division which were planted in Ogden Valley by a rabidly real estate development-partisan Utah legislature will inevitably yield a decidedly sour fruit, which will no doubt continue to rot in Ogden Valley for many years, regardless of how the MOU issue finally shakes out.
Concerning tomorrow's Council hearing, we'll also note an important new development on the technical front. According to new information posted on the County website, the original proposed MOU has now been revised:
• Revised Memorandum of UnderstandingSignificantly, among other things, this revised document addresses the "impossiblity of performance" problem with the 1.5% transfer fee provision which we mentioned in our 5/24/10 article on the subject, and adds a provision establishing a "trust or other mechanism" in the event that the prohibitive terms of S.B. 161 cannot be avoided by corrective legislation.
Also, the revised document both strikes out references to the "Eden Heights" parcel and also removes an "escape clause" tied to the proposed inclusion of that parcel in the original MOU.
For those planning to attend tomorrow night's meeting, we urge you to download and carefully study the new proposed MOU. In many respects it drastically differs from the original.
And for those who'd like to fully "bone up" in advance of tomorrow's meeting, we've taken a little time this morning to assemble on our archives storage site a broad array of the most significant comments and documents which have been featured in various articles on the subject over the past few weeks:
• June 1, 1010 Weber County Commission Meeting CribsheetRead up, Gentle Readers! Tomorrow's Weber County Commission public hearing could well turn out to be the most important County Commission session in the history of Ogden Valley; and we trust that all meeting attendees will be well prepared.
And now... who will be the first to comment?
Update 5/31/10 10:54 a.m.: Our friends at Ogden Valley Forum have also opined on this latest Std-Ex story and issues related thereto:
• Divided opinions on plans for Powder MountainAnd while you're visting the OVF site, don't forget to vote in their new "straw poll," which is planted in their right sidebar.
