The Summit County Council is offering residents a second chance to voice their opinions on a proposed map outlining five new electoral districts to be used in future elections.
The County Courthouse held a brief public hearing on Wednesday, during which a handful of speakers expressed their support for the map and thanked the County Council and the Summit County Districting Commission for their work to seemingly bolster representation among rural and conservative-leaning voters on the East Side.
However, County Council Chair Tonja Hanson said councilors would prefer to continue the hearing to the following week rather than closing public comment and voting on whether to accept the proposal.
The next meeting is scheduled for Oct. 8, but a specific time for the public hearing on the districting map has not been set.
The Utah Legislature passed House Bill 356 in March, which forced Summit County to create districts for County Council seats instead of having five at-large representatives. It also required the creation of a commission of municipal mayors within the county — Park City, Henefer, Coalville, Oakley, Kamas, Francis and Hideout, which is included because part of the Wasatch County town crosses the border — and one representative from unincorporated Summit County.
The population of Summit County, divided into five pieces, approximately equates to 8,500 people per district based on the latest census information. State law requires the districts to have roughly the same population, with only a 10% deviation between the largest and smallest districts. For example, if the largest district has 9,000 people, then the smallest district can’t dip lower than 8,100 people.
The Districting Commission started dividing the map using the boundaries of the county’s three school districts. Ultimately, one precinct outside of Park City’s municipal boundaries was added to the Park City district, one Pinebrook precinct was absorbed into the general Snyderville Basin district and one North Summit precinct was moved into the South Summit district.
The state Legislature is expected to meet in special session on Monday to discuss potential changes to H.B. 356 after what Gov. Spencer Cox called “unintended consequences” resulting from the bill’s language. Specifically, Wasatch County has both at-large seats and councilors elected in districts, but the law hypothetically forces Wasatch County to eliminate its at-large positions, too.
Wasatch County officials refused to comply with the legislation and did not create a districting commission over the summer, betting on being excluded from the districting requirements once changes are made.