A red-letter date in the long-running Treasure negotiations is fast approaching, giving negotiators from City Hall and the Sweeney family less than three weeks to reach an accord that could be brought to voters in November.
The two sides have spent more than a year in talks about some sort of conservation deal for the prized Treasure land overlooking Old Town along the route of the Town Lift. The Park City Council must decide by Aug. 25 whether to put a ballot measure before Park City voters on Election Day to finance a conservation deal. The ballot measure would ask voters to allow City Hall to sell bonds to raise the money needed.
The date is a Thursday, and the City Council is scheduled to hold a meeting that day. An early agenda for the Aug. 25 meeting does not list Treasure, but agendas frequently change significantly by the time they are finalized.
Mayor Dana Williams, one of City Hall’s negotiators, said this week his goal is to put a ballot measure to Parkites in November. The next chance after November for City Hall to put a ballot measure to the voters would be in June. City Hall cannot schedule a special election for a Treasure-related ballot measure.
City Hall and the Sweeney family in late July outlined two conservation options for the Treasure land. One, priced at $48 million, would involve City Hall purchasing all of the family’s longstanding development rights at the site. The other one, pegged at $15 million, would reduce the scope of the development at the site through a buyout of some of the rights and the transfer of other rights to a location uphill from the Park City Mountain Resort base area.
In either case, Parkites would be asked to support a ballot measure to pay for a deal. It is not clear how City Hall will proceed. A meeting between the negotiating teams for City Hall and the Sweeney family is scheduled on Monday. Both sides want significant progress to be made. The mayor wants a proposal to be crafted at the meeting that could be brought to the full City Council in a closed-door session as early as Thursday. Under that scenario, the Sweeney family could present the proposal to its partners as well, the mayor said.
It appears that the sides could be discussing whether to offer voters at least two options, but how that sort of ballot language could be written is not known. Williams said he prefers the voters be presented two options the one priced at $48 million and the one set at $15 million.
“Do we go? Do we go with two options? What happens if neither of them pass,” the mayor said.
He acknowledged the negotiators continue to research topics like the square footage required for the day-to-day operations of a hotel at Treasure, sometimes referred to as the ‘back of house,’ and what actions could be taken if voters reject a ballot measure. He also is anticipating the results of a Treasure survey that will likely be released shortly.
Mike Sweeney, one of the family’s negotiators, agrees with the mayor in wanting a ballot measure put to voters in November. He agreed with the mayor’s prediction that there could be more than one option on the ballot.
“Our team would like to see one or more bonds on the November election,” Sweeney said.
The Treasure development proposal spent years in front of the Park City Planning Commission with little progress before the talks were broken off in favor of the conservation negotiations that are ongoing. The proposal calls for 1 million square feet of development along the route of the Town Lift. Critics say the project will attract too much traffic and the Treasure buildings would loom over Old Town.
If a Treasure-related ballot measure is put to voters in November, it will likely attract widespread attention from Parkites, with some supporting a conservation deal and others leery of voting to raise property taxes to finance a deal. It could ultimately overshadow this year’s City Council election, which thus far has lacked attention-grabbing moments.