The Wasatch County Council, which is also the fire board, “continued” the April 7 public meeting on raising fire fees in the Jordanelle area to allow more input through May 12.

One of many complaints raised by residents surrounding the reservoir was that the process was moving too quickly.

That was not the intent of the council, said member Mike Kohler, so the meeting was continued to the later date.

After Thursday’s meeting, which resident Pam Ford called “pretty lively” with about 100 people in attendance, Kohler said the council would likely reconsider its earlier stance.

The discussion is over how the Jordanelle Fire Station should be funded. Under the current system, owners pay a fee per lot they own; this benefits residents. A new proposal would assess the amount of the fee based on an owner’s fair market property value; this would benefit developers holding empty lots.

The problem, he explained, is that developers are influential as the largest landowners in the area. No matter which funding method is used, a 50-percent protest of property owners could defeat it.

That means owners of $750 million-worth of property must sign a petition opposing a fee hike by May 12, Ford said.

On the other hand, the same number of developers could sign a petition preventing the status quo from being re-implemented, Kohler said.

Many homeowners have inaccurate information as to what is driving the discussion, Kohler said Monday. A judge recently sided with developers refusing to pay the assessment, so residents believe the council is trying to make residents make up for that lost revenue.

In fact, that legal decision was over semantics and the court case is not over, he said.

Park City attorney Joe Tesch is representing Wasatch County in that case. He said that when the ordinance was written in 2009, the word “service charge” was used instead of the word “assessment.” The recent ruling required the county to prove “additional value” was given to property in exchange for the “service charge.” The county may still do this, but it is currently asking the judge to reconsider based on the fact that the wrong word was used to describe the fee.

“The lawsuit brought it to our attention, but whether we won or lost we’d have to do it anyway. If we’d won (the motion) we’d be doing this anyway,” Kohler said.

Ford said developers should be required to stick with the current system since it was developers that established it.

Kohler said the council is looking to do the fairest thing for the most people.