The Summit County Council is one step closer to acting on the $50 million bond voters authorized for open space preservation following Wednesday’s meeting.
Councilors met with county staffers to discuss how the bond would be implemented, when to pull the money for projects and how to prioritize which properties to target with the funds. If the council wants to issue a portion of the bond money this year, the elected officials must adopt a parameters resolution by April to meet state deadlines.
Although voters approved the $50 million bond last fall, the entire amount does not have to be issued all at once. Matt Leavitt, the county’s financial officer, said it may come as a shock to property owners if the entire bond is issued in full right away. He said that would triple the county’s portion of property tax bills. .
The bond can be issued as a series over a three- to five-year timeframe. However, the council must consider the issuance cost of multiple bonds as well as changing interest rates. Leavitt estimates the county could incur up to $70,000 in fees for three series depending on the amount of each.
County Manager Tom Fisher said during the meeting that the county wants to better understand the council’s philosophy toward the bond, which was proposed as money to be focused on the East Side, but that the county wants to convene the debt committee as soon as possible to bring back recommendations to the elected officials.
“We could begin as quickly as this month to get out on a roadshow to start helping our citizens, helping city councils, mayors, other groups that we want to talk to, understand what the conservation landscape is out there today,” Fisher said. “I think that’s a piece of information that we don’t hold in common in the county. I think we know our areas, I think we know rumors and we know that we have a transient community in parts of our county already — bringing ourselves to some common understanding might be a good step in public education.”
Jessica Kirby, the county’s public lands manager, estimated that there are at least 10,000 acres of land in Summit County that already have conservation easements or are otherwise protected. The figure is low because some property owners asked for their acreage to be withheld from a public discussion, Kirby said. The county is not yet actively pursuing properties where money from the bond can be utilized.
Projects that are the highest priority should receive the money first, elected officials said. Bond proceeds will likely be used for properties that address growth management, watershed, habitat and landscape scale, entry/corridor preservation, agriculture and heritage preservation, recreation, trails, and trailheads as well as wetlands, water quality and river access.
However, the council isn’t sure how it will rank those priorities or if there should be a requirement that money only go to lands where public access will be available because the bond comes from public funds.
Council members said they’re looking to meet with stakeholders including representatives from two open space groups, the Eastern Summit County Agriculture Preservation and Open Space Advisory Committee (ESAP) and the Snyderville Basin Open Space Advisory Committee (BOSAC), and engage the public, particularly those from the East Side, to determine priorities.
Councilor Doug Clyde said he thinks they need to move quickly on issuing the bond, especially if they want to protect properties connected to the watershed.
“We do have to acknowledge and understand, very closely, that this was a countywide bond. We made representations to the East Side of the county that they were going to get treated fairly,” he said, adding that there should be more representation from that area as decisions regarding the funding are made.
Councilor Malena Stevens clarified that the East Side hasn’t received any money in the past because all previous bonds were passed by West Side voters. Therefore, the council doesn’t have a “template” on what citizens are hoping for.
The County Council was supportive of convening the debt committee to provide advice to officials, and county staffers plan to take what they learned from Wednesday’s meeting to develop a recommended bonding structure.
Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that 10,000 acres of land had been identified for future conservation, not that the land had already been protected.