A fundamental question we face\u00a0as a community\u00a0is how much growth we want. We know that more growth is coming, not only from our own existing entitlements, but from Wasatch County. Now, it seems we have another question to answer:<\/p>\n
Do we want to accelerate growth?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n This Wednesday the Summit County Council will discuss creating a special services district at the Canyons. TCFC<\/a>, the primary property owner at Canyons Village (Canyons), is\u00a0requesting\u00a0that Summit County create a $21 million bond to help pay for their infrastructure. Individual property owners at the Canyons Village would then pay higher property taxes to pay off the bond.<\/p>\n In\u00a0a presentation created by TCFC for the Summit County Council, TCFC says it’s an “Opportune Timing to Accelerate Development and Tax Generation” for Summit County.\u00a0TCFC wants to add infrastructure to the Canyons, including a new Main Street, a high mountain road, and an $11.7 million parking garage (among other smaller projects). TCFC’s arguments are:<\/p>\n So, TCFC\u00a0Is asking Summit County to issue a $20+ million bond, assess Canyon’s property owners via taxes, so that TCFC can expand the Canyons more quickly than they otherwise might. It also means that anything built via these bonds is owned by the County. So, Summit County would own part of a resort and could then pay TCFC\u00a0to manage this infrastructure!\u00a0In return for this, Summit County would benefit from increased tax revenue (according to TCFC’s presentation).<\/p>\n It’s almost so ludicrous sounding that we wonder what the real play is. Is TCFC\u00a0asking for the special assessment, in order to later give that up, in order to get something they really want? Is TCFC\u00a0finding it difficult to get workable financing? Or does TCFC just want to take advantage of a good economy and expand while they can?<\/p>\n We’re not sure. But we appreciate the Summit County Attorney’s Office drafting a legal memorandum outlining questions about this “offer.” Some of the questions that Chief Civil Deputy Dave Thomas brings up include:<\/p>\n We would add one more question to that list:<\/p>\n Does the county really want to help build a 700 car parking garage at the base of the Canyons\u00a0while they are preaching “take the bus”? It just wouldn’t\u00a0make a lot of sense.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n It should be interesting to watch on Wednesday as the council listens to TCFC’s arguments and debates the issues. It will also be an initial litmus test on where our two new county council members Glenn Wright and Doug Clyde really stand on these types of issues.<\/p>\n If you’d like more information, the TCFC presentation is here<\/a>. The Summit County Legal Memorandum is here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\nthe assessments? What are the legal ramifications of such nonpayment? Would the County have to wait 5 years to collect on any delinquency via tax sale? Would the County have to subsidize bond payments while collecting delinquent assessments? How will this impact the County\u2019s bond rating? Why should the County take these financial risks?<\/li>\n
\nhousing, roads and transit. Does an assessment area constitute a bail-out of those
\nexisting obligations?<\/li>\n