Utah County work session outlines proposed Alpine School District maps, public comment period opens

Mac, the committee chair appointed by the Utah County Commission, presented draft boundary maps on March 12 for three new Alpine School District districts and described the legal and technical constraints that guided the committee's work.

Mac said the committee used 2023 population estimates from the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute and the U.S. census block as the smallest unit for assigning population when drawing lines, because census blocks are the basis for population counts used in districting. He told commissioners the committee tried to follow city and precinct lines, keep neighborhoods together, respect natural and structural boundaries, and account for forecasted growth.

The committee, Mac said, consisted of a county clerk’s office GIS representative, members of the existing Alpine School District board, two city representatives from each area and two citizens. He said each committee met three to four times—about five to eight hours of total meeting time—and that all of the maps submitted to the commission were unanimously approved by their committees.

Mac outlined how the draft maps divide the county into West, Central and South districts. For the West, he said Eagle Mountain and Saratoga Springs carry the bulk of current population, with Eagle Mountain slightly larger and a shared “split” seat combining parts of both cities. In Central, Mac said Lehi (transcript: “Lehigh”) holds a majority of the district’s population and the committee tried to avoid dividing Highland across seats; in South, he said Orem will hold four seats and Lindon (transcript: “Linden”) and Pleasant Grove were left intact even if slightly overpopulated to keep communities whole.

Mac acknowledged data limitations: the committee relied on 2023 Kem C. Gardner estimates rather than more recent counts and could not split 2020 census blocks even when growth since 2020 left some blocks much larger in population than they were at the last census. He said those practical constraints drove some choices where the committee intentionally under- or over-allocated certain seats to accommodate forecasted growth.

Mac also described public engagement: the South committee posted maps and ran a survey that received more than 1,000 responses; committee members reported ongoing conversations with local elected officials and residents between meetings.

The commission was told a public feedback link would be published the same day; the county will accept public comment for two weeks and intends to adopt final maps on March 26. The March 26 meeting will also include the statutorily required random draw to assign initial term lengths (Mac said there will be three seats with three-year terms and four seats with five-year terms; after those initial terms the seats will revert to four-year cycles). Mac said county staff and county counsel (referred to in the meeting as Paul) had confirmed the random-draw requirement.

No formal vote on the maps occurred at the March 12 meeting; commissioners asked questions and praised the committees’ outreach and consensus-building.