Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council to deny Stewart Adams development and CRA; supporters urge economic opportunity
Summary
Multiple residents spoke during public comment opposing a proposed development and a Community Reinvestment Area (CRA) tied to developer Stewart/Stuart Adams, raising concerns about affordability, infrastructure costs and inconsistent projections; other speakers defended the project as a rare economic opportunity.
Hooper — During public comment at the Hooper City Council meeting, several residents urged the council to deny a proposed development and related incentives that they said conflict with the city's land-use policy. Other residents urged the council to approve the project, calling it an economic opportunity.
The most detailed public comment came from Bruce Taylor, who referenced a June 5 meeting and raised several concerns he said residents had expressed during prior hearings. Taylor said the project's proposed homes would not be affordable and that the developer had not agreed to pay for a pump station: "The pump station should be paid for by the developer for over a year. And everyone has said that," he said. Taylor also disputed revenue projections the developer used, citing that a study's estimate was $172,000 per year over 25 years while the developer's earlier estimate had been higher.
Amy Christopherson told the council she opposed using tax money to support the developer and alleged a pattern of political connections and grant routing that she said would funnel taxpayer dollars to associated entities. She said she did not want "our tax money" used for the project and described an outline of how, in her view, state funds might be steered to related nonprofit groups.
Other commenters split on the project. One resident acknowledged skepticism about the developer but said his research suggested the developer would deliver on promises and called the project a "once in a lifetime opportunity" for economic development. Several speakers argued the project contradicts the city's general-plan land-use policy and urged the council to make a motion to deny the application; the council did not take a vote on the application during the meeting.
No formal council action on the development or CRA is recorded in the meeting minutes. Council members and staff did not make a decision about the project during the session; some residents asked the council to act before the November election to ensure the issue would be addressed while current members remain in office.
Ending: Council members acknowledged public concern and noted the item had been discussed previously; the record shows public comment, but no final council action was taken on the proposed development during this meeting.
