governments just to combine jurisdictions. He said the problem still remains of how to provide
services that cross county lines. He suggested the committee study several states such as Oregon that
have used limited regional government to provide such boundary -crossing services. Regional
government would give direct citizen control over inter-county matters. It would also be possible to
place inter-county special services under the state of Utah's governmental authority.
Mr. Wilson discussed the problem of governments not directly accountable to elected officials.
He sited examples such as the Sugar House Park Authority and the Utah Transit Authority. He pointed
out that Utah's method of water governance is one that will ultimately frustrate the citizens. Citizens
want and expect accountable government which, in their view, is government they elect. A good deal
of frustration in the governance system can be avoided by a careful recodification that eventually shifts
all special service governments to be accountable to existing local government or to elected officials as
with school boards. Utah would be a most progressive state by systematically turning all governance
over to elected officials.
Mr. Rees distributed a summary of statutory provisions relating to the creation of independent
special districts and to their governing body. There are 16 types of independent special districts.
Independent special districts mainly have separate political corporate status separate and apart from
any other political subdivision of the state. Dependent special districts are essentially subunits of a
county or city. He reviewed each of the 16 independent special districts and discussed their governing
body and creation provisions.
Rep. Dillree said it should be made clear which of the independent special districts has the
ability to levy taxes. Mr. Rees noted the code, in some instances, specifically gives taxing authority.
He said he could obtain that information for the next meeting.
Rep. Dillree stated it is also important to clarify what services fall under which districts so that
there is no overlap.
Rep. Swallow said it would be helpful to have a list of possible services that are included in the
statutes for special districts.
Ms. Renee Tanner, Salt Lake City, said the Airport Authority is not organized under the section
referenced on the handout. It was organized as a separate advisory board. She indicated she would
provide the committee with a written explanation of where it was established.
Sen. Evans requested staff to draft recommendations to simplify and bring consistency to the
requirements of special districts.
MOTION: Rep. Gladwell moved to request permission from the Legislative Management Committee to create a subcommittee regarding special districts. The motion passed with Sen. Mantes,
and Reps. Arrington, Chard, and Gowans voting in opposition. Sen. Blackham and Rep. Curtis were
absent during the vote.
Sen. Evans and Reps. Gladwell, Swallow Dillree, and Ure expressed interest in participating on
the subcommittee.
3. Draft legislation Regarding Incorporation, Annexation, and Townships - Mr. Rees explained that in the 1996 general session a bill was passed allowing the creation of townships. The
main power a township had was to prevent incorporations and annexations within an unincorporated
area. In 1997, H.B. 363 passed which substantially revised the law. It allowed townships that met
certain threshold criteria to be reconstituted as a township planning district. Certain other townships
that did not meet the threshold were dissolved entirely and the township provisions enacted in 1996
were repealed. Mr. Rees stated the proposed legislation provides that signatures on certain petitions
that were modified can also be used to satisfy the signature requirements of the modified petition. The
legislation also proposes to modify the feasibility study criteria and the percentage of property owners
required to petition for incorporation. The bill provides for the township planning commission's
recommendation on a proposed incorporation or annexation of an area within the township. The
legislation would reinstate dissolved townships and continue the previously established planning
districts and township planning districts as townships. The township planning commission election
and appointment procedures and responsibilities have also been modified.
Ms. Liane Stillman, Holladay resident, said she has been active in the efforts to try to
incorporate Holladay and Cottonwood. There have been three petitions and many court procedures
which have cost thousands of dollars. She said they are asking for some protection. They want to
make sure the signatures roll over. During the voting process, the nonproperty owners have a say in
the incorporation which much pass with a majority. Ms. Stillman encouraged the committee to support
the proposed legislation.
Ms. Karen Crompton, Utah Township Coalition, pointed out that the coalition began meeting
with Speaker Mel Brown in early May to talk about possible changes to H.B. 363. The proposed bill
cleans up the technical problems and offers a reasonable compromise. The amendment recognizes the
integrity of the vote of the people. A clear definition of a township is also outlined in the bill. She
urged the committee to support the proposed legislation.
Ms. Deyonne Walker, Utah Township Coalition, stated the bill puts the elections back on the
same even year as the county elections. The threshold standard for townships should not have to be as
high as for incorporated areas.
Mr. George Whitney, College Young Township, indicated that there has been lack of unified
direction by different government groups. He said that governments' actions too often countervene the
underlying basis of Mr. Wilson's presentation. He also encouraged the committee to support the bill
and to stand behind it when passed.
Mr. Brent Gardner, Utah Association of Counties, stated that since they did not receive the bill
early enough for them to carefully review it, the best the association can do at this point is oppose the
legislation. He said that a combined committee of city and county officials that have been meeting will
be discussing the annexation process in the future.
4. City Zoning Powers - Rep. Gladwell said he had recommended as a study item that the legislature review the group home legislation in light of the Utah Fair Housing Act and a decision
recently rendered by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. When he made that recommendation he did
not realize it had been resolved by the passage of S.B. 217 during the most recent session. Under S.B.
217, group homes with disabled individuals must be permitted in any zone where residential dwellings
are allowed, even single-family residential zones. He suggested that the bill be modified to require that
these group homes abide by all the zoning requirements that would not otherwise be discriminatory.
Mr. Blaine Gehring, Planning Director for Bountiful City, stated they were in the process of
going through a group home of approval when the legislation was passed. The legislation has
essentially taken the issue out of their hands. The applicant has now applied for a license with the
Department of Human Resources and will be able to place the group home without any further
approval by the city. He said there was a tremendous outcry from the neighborhood. A very large
petition was received from the residents that the city cannot take into consideration. Those group
homes can be allowed up to 16 residents. The law severely limits the city's zoning capabilities. A
group home of rehabilitating alcoholics or drug addicts could be brought into a neighborhood. He
stated the committee should also consider what is happening nationally.
Mr. David Peterson, Farmington City, said they had a situation in Farmington similar to the one
described in Bountiful. Many protests were raised wherever it was proposed to establish the group
home. He said they were counseled that because of the Fair Housing Act, they could not prevent
someone from establishing a residential health care facility in a residential neighborhood. He has
interviewed property owners in areas where group homes are located and was informed that they have
not experienced the negative impacts they anticipated.
Mr. Jay Sorenson, Rocky Mountain Youth Services, said they are currently petitioning for a
group home in Draper. He said the problems these youth are experiencing is a community problem.
He said his organization is trying to do everything legally possible to provide a home for the youth to
live in. He stated a solution may be to give them some type of tax credit or incentive to go outside of
the residential areas.
Mr. Paul Johnson, Orem City Attorney, indicated the legislation has some problems that need
to be corrected. He stated the Fair Housing Act does not require that housing be provided to those who
pose a threat.
Sen. Evans requested the item be placed on the agenda in the future.
MOTION: Rep. Dillree moved to adjourn the meeting. At 12:10 p.m., chair Ure adjourned the meeting.