As the disgusting Dakota Pacific saga grinds to a close, the residents of Summit County should be wondering why our once-courageous representatives have abandoned us. The county was willing to sue the state over Senate Bill 84 to retain local control over land use just a few years ago.
Where did this bravado go? S.B. 84 was a last-minute legislative amendment that required the county to approve Dakota Pacific’s earlier proposal despite overwhelming public opposition. At the time, county officials denounced S.B. 84 as a “state-mandated rezone” and argued it violated the Utah Constitution by infringing on local zoning authority and the separation of powers.
In June 2023, Third District Judge Richard Mrazik ruled that S.B. 84 did not apply to the Dakota Pacific property at Kimball Junction. Mrazik found the legislation did not meet the statutory definition of a “land use application” required to trigger the bill. As a result, Summit County’s core argument, that S.B. 84 unlawfully superseded local land-use authority stood, and the court’s ruling effectively blocked the legislative override.
Unfortunately, instead of justifiably rejecting Dakota Pacific’s application once and for all, the County Council continued to “negotiate” even though the developer had clearly showed they were completely untrustworthy. In another attempt to circumvent local land use control, the Utah Legislature passed Senate Bill 26, an extensively revised version of the earlier bill.
In December 2024, the council basically admitted they were folding under threats from the Legislature, and they voted 4-1 to approve Dakota Pacific’s latest proposal. Despite this strong-armed “victory,” Dakota Pacific never signed the agreement and eventually invoked S.B. 26 instead.
This bill forced County Manager Shayne Scott and the Planning Commission to abide by the parameters of Senate Bill 26, essentially shifting the process from a legislative one to administrative, mandating the approval of the state-imposed entitlement and prohibiting the county from creating any impediments to the development.
On July 28, Scott approved the administrative development agreement. In a statement, Scott said: “Summit County will not sue the Legislature on a regular basis as it passes laws that affect the county, especially when the law passed looks to uphold decisions made by local officials.”
According to Scott’s words, the County Council is truly hoisted by their own petard. He implies the county could perhaps seek legal remedy if they had not already approved the development agreement. This observation is undoubtedly true and underscores what a disastrous, foolish and cowardly decision it was for the County Council to essentially roll over for Dakota Pacific.
Now, unless a citizens group challenges the constitutionality of S.B. 26, the residents of Summit County, particularly those of us who reside in the Snyderville Basin, are truly doomed to deal with all the consequences of overdevelopment.
Let’s not kid ourselves that proposed improvements to S.R. 224 will alleviate the addition of thousands of new residents and their vehicles. The current UDOT plan, which probably won’t be completed for many years, calls for additional lanes at Kimball Junction and more lanes to access S.R. 224 from both eastbound and westbound Interstate 80. As many have observed, this will only move the S.R. 224 traffic jam two miles south.
The County Council has thus forced us to accept one of two alternatives. We can either live with the fact our town and the basin are changed forever and not for the better, or we can leave our beloved community where most of us thought we’d live the rest of our lives.
Such ineffectiveness and lack of representation of public opinion should never be forgotten or forgiven.
Vincent A. “Van” Novack
Snyderville Basin