[{"_1":2,"_84":-5,"_85":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6626953,"mediaKeyId","2733264-e58a62311699f6d9b4fdd7a7940204ea","parentId",2733264,"title","Orangeville neighbors ask Emery County to curb wedding events at LaSalle Stables, citing noise, trespass and public-safety concerns","audioSeconds",2185,"startMs",583000,"endMs",2768000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2733264-e58a62311699f6d9b4fdd7a7940204ea&start=583&end=2768","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6626953/Utah/Orangeville-neighbors-ask-Emery-County-to-curb-wedding-events-at-LaSalle-Stables-citing-noise-trespass-and-public-safety-concerns","mediaUrl","author","Emery County Commission","date","2025-03-18T15:00:00Z","article","Neighbors of LaSalle Stables told the Emery County Commission on March 18 that wedding events and related activity at 340 E. State Road 29 in Orangeville are causing repeated noise, trespass and privacy impacts to homes across the street.

The complaints came from Stephanie Brotherson, who said events held on both city and county parcels — including music, laser lighting and groups of guests — have led to trespass, public urination near her child’s play area, and repeated late-night disturbances. Brotherson said the couple who own the venue operate under Rook and Red Properties, registered to Courtney and Casey Ainsworth, and that Orangeville’s conditional-use permit covers only a short-term rental, not a wedding venue.

Brotherson urged the county to require mitigation measures on county land, including a privacy fence funded by the business, decibel meters, limits on lighting and laser shows, porta‑toilet placement away from residents’ gardens, limits on crowding and parking, a 20‑foot no‑gathering buffer at property lines, and advance scheduling notice to neighbors. “We are not looking to revoke the current Airbnb rental… We’re simply looking to find a way to have our peace and privacy restored,” Brotherson said.

Why it matters: Brotherson said many of the loudest impacts occur on county property immediately adjacent to her yard, and that Orangeville officials have told her they can only enforce the city permit on city-owned land. The county’s general plan language about preserving rural character and protecting agricultural and recreational uses was cited by Brotherson as a reason for county action.

Officials’ responses and enforcement status
- Orangeville representatives told the commission they had reviewed city code and met with city counsel and the county attorney and had been advised that aspects of the problem are a civil matter when the events occur on county land. A city representative said Orangeville officials will share records and meet with county staff as needed but that the city’s authority is limited to its parcels.

- Sheriff Tyson Huntington said deputies responded to several disturbance-of-the-peace calls related to the property in 2024 (dates cited in meeting: July 31; Aug. 17; Sept. 21) and that deputies made contact or used on-site measures to quiet events when possible. “So there’s definitely been calls there,” Huntington said.

- Orangeville zoning administrator Steph Manning said the property owner has been responsive to city staff. Manning told the commission that the owner has revised contracts to fine guests for prohibited conduct, is planning to install a decibel meter and cameras tied to staff phones, and indicated a willingness to provide local contact information for on-call management. Manning said the owner also offered to split the cost of a privacy fence.

What residents say they documented
Brotherson presented photographs, videos and text messages between her family and the property owner showing events on both the city and county parcels, decibel and lighting impacts, parked vehicles and the placement of portable toilets near her garden. She told commissioners that short‑term rental rules cited by Orangeville (sections of Chapter 11 referenced at the meeting) restrict occupancy to 10 people for a vacation rental and impose hours and noise limits that, in her view, are being exceeded by wedding‑style events with as many as 50 to 200 guests.

County reaction and next steps
Commissioners said the county will review whether regulatory language or a conditional‑use framework for event centers on county land is needed. One commissioner noted that much of the disturbance appears to occur on county property and urged county staff to consider developing rules, conditions or mitigation measures that would address large events that affect neighboring residences. No formal enforcement action or new permitting decision was taken at the March 18 meeting.

The county and the city each said they were willing to share records and continue discussing possible mitigation; county staff and Orangeville officials also encouraged neighbors and the property owner to meet and document concerns in writing so enforcement or civil remedies can be pursued where applicable.

What remained unresolved
Neighbors requested clarity on: which agency has jurisdiction for events that begin on city land and spill onto county land; an identifiable “responsible party” and local contact for each event; the status and timing of promised decibel meters and cameras; the location and funding of a privacy fence; and whether limits on the number and frequency of events could be imposed. Commissioners did not set a formal timeline for follow-up at the meeting.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","Emery County Commission Meeting - Commission031825","oneSentenceSummary","Neighbors of LaSalle Stables told the Emery County Commission on March 18 that wedding events and related activity at 340 E. State Road 29 in Orangeville are causing repeated noise, trespass and privacy impacts to homes across the street.","taxTitle","Emery County Commission, Emery County Boards and Commissions, Emery County, Utah","taxId",67550,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":50,"_51":81,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":82,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":83,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6626950,"Emery County Commission approves $1.64M bond, tax‑deferral, LATCF allocations and several resolutions in March 18 meeting",0,3606000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2733264-e58a62311699f6d9b4fdd7a7940204ea&start=3606&end=3606","/articles/6626950/Utah/Emery-County-Commission-approves-164M-bond-taxdeferral-LATCF-allocations-and-several-resolutions-in-March-18-meeting","Emery County commissioners on March 18 approved a series of motions including authorization of a $1,640,000 general‑obligation bond for the Castle Valley Special Service District, a tax‑deferral agreement for a resident with five years of unpaid property taxes, allocations of LATCF (COVID-era) funds to cities and county projects, and several administrative resolutions.

The most significant financial action was the approval of a final bond resolution authorizing up to $1,640,000 in general obligation bonds (Series 2025) for the Castle Valley Special Service District to support water, sewer and street infrastructure projects. Bond counsel participated remotely during the public hearing and commissioners recorded their approval by voice vote.

Nut graf: The bond continues a multi‑year voter‑approved financing program for infrastructure projects in the district; commissioners also used the meeting to allocate one‑time LATCF funds to local projects and to adopt policy positions on federal land‑management topics.

Key votes and outcomes (summary)
- Tax‑deferral agreement for Jenica Dykes (Parcel 01‑0129‑0042): Motion to approve a deferral that would give Dykes until Nov. 30, 2025, to pay five years of back taxes plus 2025 taxes. Motion passed by recorded voice vote (Warwood: Aye; Leonard: Aye; Jensen: Aye).

- Castle Valley Special Service District, GO bond Series 2025 (maximum $1,640,000): Commissioners opened a public hearing, heard from bond counsel and district staff about planned culinary water and street projects, and then voted to authorize issuance of the bond. Motion to approve final bond resolution passed (Warwood: Aye; Leonard: Aye; Jensen: Aye).

- LATCF allocations: Commissioners approved a package of allocations from county-held LATCF funds, including (as presented at the meeting): $62,500 to Orangeville for pickleball courts; $200,000 to Castle Dale for an all-abilities playground; $400,000 to the County Road Department for landfill building remodel and a snowplow; $146,000 to the Emery County Local Building Authority (split as $46,000 for the Emery Dam feasibility portion and $100,000 for an industrial park study); $330,000 to the Sheriff’s Office for up to eight patrol vehicles and one administrative vehicle plus SAR room remodeling; $100,000 to Ferron (Fair) for show ring and livestock panels; $100,000 to the Emery County Recreation District for bathroom remodel at the Huntington Complex; and $100,863.27 to be held temporarily for future city project requests. Motion passed by voice vote.

- Girls State donations: The commission approved monetary donations of $250 each for four participants to attend American Legion Girls State in June 2025 (total $1,000). Motion passed by voice vote.

- Resolution opposing abuse of the Antiquities Act: The commission voted to adopt a resolution opposing what it described as overbroad use of the Antiquities Act and calling on Congress to review or limit unilateral presidential designations; motion passed by voice vote.

- Resolution opposing solar technology on state and federal lands in Emery County: Commissioners discussed a draft resolution opposing utility‑scale solar on state and federal lands in the county and moved to table the item for redrafting.

- Bids and procurement items: The commission accepted a bid from Arrowhead Construction for the assessor’s office remodel at $21,600 (low bid). The commission also approved advertising for bids to sell the landfill scrap‑metal pile and planned to open offers on April 15.

- Loss prevention committee bylaws: Commissioners approved amendments adding four at‑large members to the county’s Loss Prevention Accident Review Committee and approved a related county resolution amending prior bylaws.

Vote pattern: For recorded roll‑call style confirmations included in the minutes, the board’s three members indicated unanimous ‘Aye’ votes (Warwood; Leonard; Jensen) on the motions shown as recorded. Several routine motions were adopted by voice vote with no dissents recorded in the minutes.

What the bond and LATCF money will fund
District and county staff said the bond proceeds and awarded LATCF funds will primarily support culinary water replacement and extension projects, sewer and street maintenance, landfill office remodel and equipment purchases, an industrial‑park feasibility study, vehicle procurement for law enforcement, and recreational facility improvements in county cities.

Next steps and administrative notes
- The bond issuance will proceed per the adopted final resolution and publication/contest periods described in the public‑hearing materials.
- City governments were invited to submit projects to access the portion of LATCF funds held temporarily by the county. Commissioners asked for projects that can be started promptly.

The full meeting minutes include the motion texts, the narrow vote records where recorded, and supporting staff presentations.","At its March 18 meeting the commission authorized a $1.64 million general obligation bond for the Castle Valley Special Service District, approved a tax‑deferral agreement, allocated LATCF funds across cities and county projects, and passed resolutions including opposing abuse of the Antiquities Act.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Orangeville neighbors ask Emery County to curb wedding events at LaSalle Stables, citing noise, trespass and public-safety concerns

Emery County Commission approves $1.64M bond, tax‑deferral, LATCF allocations and several resolutions in March 18 meeting