By Myrna Trauntvein
Times-News Correspondent
There is no legal reason to prohibit the Riley Park Annexation.
That annexation petition proposes to bring property that will be the home of a service station/convenience store inside Mona City limits.
Another public hearing on the annexation will be held on April 22 at 7 p.m. at city hall.
After some discussion at a recent council meeting where the annexation petition submitted by Riley Park to bring his proposed service station/convenience store inside Mona City limits was accepted by the city council, there was some concern and questioning from Greg Newton, mayor, about its legality.
At that meeting, the council unanimously accepted the petition but requested that Jodi Hoffman, a Park City Attorney, Brian Platt, and Eric Johnson, attorneys at law with Blaisdell & Church, P.C,, meet with the council.
That meeting took place on Tuesday, but only Platt was in attendance. He represented the city's law firm and Hoffman, who would have represented herself, was not present.
Platt said he was representing Johnson and Church at the meeting.
"I just wanted to report on my meeting with Jodi Hoffman and some of the issues that I know have been expressed as far as concerns regarding the annexation," said Platt.
"As you know, Jodi is a land use lawyer in Park City who has had some interaction with the League and at the request of some members of the city here she had looked at the annexation and expressed concerns," said Platt. "That was a little surprising to me. I also heard that she had said that David Church had indicated he had some concerns, which is a bigger surprise to me because David is my partner and he is the next office over and I've had a long talk with him about this."
As a result, Platt said he sat down with Jodi Hoffman yesterday (Monday) for an hour and went over her concerns. Platt said she agreed with him that, under the statutes and the case law, there was absolutely nothing stopping the city from moving forward with annexing the piece of property known as the Riley Park Annexation.
"She also indicated she had some concerns about the policy implications of doing this," Platt said. "She expressed that, specifically, she is concerned about Sandy (City) doing something similar and reaching out and grabbing Snowbird because nothing is between it and Snowbird but state and federal lands. She expressed that there could be some abuse of that process."
Platt said that he and Hoffman went over the statutes together and Hoffman agreed, without reservation, that there just isn't anything in the statute to prevent the annexation.
"And what she is talking about, really, is how she would like the statute to work," he said.
Hoffman indicated to Platt, that were the city to move forward with the annexation, there would likely be legislation in the next session but for the interim period there would not be.
"And so, if the city intends to move forward on this, I would recommend that we move quickly," said Platt.
Platt said that, one other aspect was that Hoffman indicated to him that, or rather, she intimated, that the League of the Utah Cities and Towns might ask the city to hold off. Platt said that gave him some pause because his firm is the general counsel for the Utah League of Cities and Towns.
After his meeting with Hoffman, Platt had some talk with David Church, and Church, once again, reiterated that nothing in the statutes or the case law prevented the city from doing the annexation.
He said that Church said that Hoffman was acting on her own behalf and that Kenneth Bullock, executive director and the leader of the League of Cities and Towns, had agreed with David Church that the League will have no opinion on this matter and will not be asking the city to hold off on doing the annexation.
"Frankly, in my interaction with David (Church), he was in favor of this and agreed that there was no policy concern in his mind about what the city was doing," said Platt.
"This is what the Legislature has indicated to us and, while some in the community may want the statute to read otherwise, it doesn't read that way and the way it reads is entirely in line with the proposition in favor of the Riley Park annexation."
"You answered the questions I had," said Greg Newton, Mona mayor.
Molli Graham, council member, said she was confident in the information she had received from the city's attorneys all along.
"I appreciate all the hard work you have put into it." she said. "At this point, we can just move forward?"
"I don't think there is any reason why you wouldn't and I wouldn't recommend that you do anything else," said Platt.
Lyla Spencer, city clerk/recorder, said she had done all that she was supposed to do to move the annexation petition forward.
She had consulted with the county assessor, the county clerk, the county surveyor and recorder all the records necessary to determine, with the assistance of the city attorney, which were necessary," Spencer said.
However, there was a letter that she needed to read to the council prior to their setting a hearing which she did.
"I do have to read to the council and the mayor, with permission from the mayor, the notes of certification and then we move on to noticing," said Spencer.
Platt said he had circulated an outline of the steps that are involved in the annexation process and a flow chart of processes to Spencer which she is to distribute to the council.
The only entities that would be affected would be the county itself and any public bodies, special services, special districts, or school districts that would overlap.
Platt said he did not believe there were any school districts involved, so the only affected entity would be the county in this case.
A protest period will follow the next public hearing.
"In order to protest, the protester must be an affected entity," said Platt.
