The referendum petition seeking to overturn the approval of Dakota Pacific Real Estate’s mixed-use project still needs more than 1,000 signatures verified for the issue to make it onto the November ballot.
A total of 3,201 signers, or just more than 70% of the minimum collection requirement, had been verified by the Summit County Clerk’s Office as of 9 a.m. on Tuesday, according to the Lieutenant Governor’s website.
If 1,353 more signatures are verified by the Clerk’s Office, Summit County voters will have the opportunity to vote on whether they want to overturn Ordinance No. 987, which would repeal the amended development agreement at the Park City Tech Center.
Staff has until Monday to finish counting and verifying the signatures submitted by Protect Summit County, the movement started by the seven referendum sponsors.
Summit County residents Scott Greenberg, Joe Urankar, Ruby Diaz, Robert Lattanzi, Shawn Stinson, Brendan Weinstein and Jennifer Sexsmith filed the petition seeking to overturn the Summit County Council’s 4 to 1 vote approving the 725-unit project and public-private partnership on Dec. 1.
Deputy County Attorney Helen Strachan informed the group the proposed referendum was legally referable to voters in January. Utah Code states that a land use law, like the County Council decision approving the mixed-use development, was eligible for a referendum because it was a legislative decision on land use regulation.
Protect Summit County was then launched to help the sponsors gather as many signatures as possible before the 45-day collection period was over. They had until March 3 to submit a total of 4,554 verified signatures from 16% of voters countywide and at least 16% in three of the four districts to make it onto the ballot.
Although Clerk Eve Furse disqualified several of the signature packets submitted by Protect Summit County in February for “improper circulation,” the sponsors are confident they collected more than the minimum requirement.
State code dictates how petition packets must be printed, bound, circulated and numbered. Statutory requirements say the packets must contain a cover page, a copy of the law subject to the referendum, one to 50 signature sheets, and a circulator verification sheet. Packets must be properly bound before they’re circulated, and cannot be taken apart or rearranged once attached.
Furse has until Monday to finish counting dozens of submitted packets. She’ll know by then whether the petition meets the total verified number to qualify, and staff will then confirm whether the percentage requirements are met. Unlike when casting a ballot, voters will not have the opportunity to correct a mismatched signature.
The sponsors would be notified if the petition is sufficient or insufficient, but that decision might not come until late June because of the 45-day withdrawal period.
The Clerk’s Office staff is required to post the name and voter identification number of each signer on the Lieutenant Governor’s Office website after counting the signature, which remains online for 45 days. During that time, voters can also request their names be removed from the petition.
Wasatch Back Future, a Political Issues Committee formed by Dakota Pacific executives in response to Protect Summit County, has encouraged signers to submit an application to take their name off. Summit County has received several requests.
The countermovement is focused on touting how the Dakota Pacific project has evolved based on community feedback as well as the positive impacts it could have on affordable housing and traffic.
Protect Summit County argues the development would exacerbate issues that already exist in Kimball Junction.
Summit County Chief Finance Officer Matt Leavitt estimated repealing Ordinance No. 987 could result in a loss of $266,800 in annual taxes; $4 million in rental income; $4 million in developer contributions; community amenities including an amphitheater, Kimball Junction interchange improvements, an S.R. 224 pedestrian safety crossing, and property donated to Summit County by Dakota Pacific.
Leavitt was also worried about whether the county would be eligible to receive Transportation Investment Fund (TIF) and Transit Transportation Investment Fund (TTIF) money from the Utah Department of Transportation as well as state and federal grants related to the bus rapid transit project on S.R. 224.
Officials expressed concerns about the Utah Legislature targeting Summit County if the Dakota Pacific project was not approved or if the referendum succeeded. Legislators ultimately approved Senate Bill 26 before the end of the general session, which ultimately codifies the amended Tech Center development agreement.
Even if the referendum petition is declared sufficient, and Ordinance No. 987 is annulled by voters, Dakota Pacific could still move forward with its development.
Since the referendum was announced, Dakota Pacific also filed a petition to incorporate its land as a preliminary municipality. If deemed feasible by the Utah Lieutenant Governor’s Office, the development firm would have the right to make land use and zoning decisions regardless of whether the ordinance is repealed.
Protect Summit County said it plans to pursue legal action if the referendum effort fails.