Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Greenbelt Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hardman family asks for Greenbelt relief; commission splits on denial, continues to craft covenant
Summary
After oral testimony that two parcels have been used historically for grazing, the Hardman family asked Utah County commissioners for probation or a restrictive covenant to preserve Greenbelt tax status. Staff said state code requires parcel-level production; the board voted split on a denial and agreed to continue the item for one week to draft covenant language.
Paul Hardman, a long-time local farmer, and a family representative told the Utah County Commission that two parcels recently withdrawn from Greenbelt assessment are grazing ground rather than cropland and should be treated as part of the broader farm unit. "Those two pieces of ground are grazing ground," Paul Hardman said, describing drought conditions and generational farming practices as reasons he lacks parcel-level production paperwork.
Diane (county staff) explained state code requires each parcel to meet agricultural production requirements and that aerial photos and on-site inspections showed no crop production on the two parcels. "State code states that each parcel must meet the agricultural production requirements," Diane said, explaining the assessor's review and prior Board of Equalization decision to affirm withdrawal.
Commissioners debated alternatives after staff recommended denial. One motion to deny the Hardman parcels, read with findings that no legal or factual basis justified reinstating Greenbelt status, produced a split vote and failed. Commissioners then discussed options including recording a restrictive covenant requiring the family to demonstrate production by a reasonable date, capturing potential rollbacks if development occurs, and whether drought years or management plans could be accommodated. One commissioner asked whether a covenant could include a deadline to re-establish Greenbelt status and a five-year rollback capture if the property subsequently develops.
The commission agreed to continue the item for one week to allow staff and the Hardmans to draft covenant language and to get further legal advice on rollback capture and equivalent fines or penalties. The motion to continue carried unanimously.
The next step is a one-week continuance to produce covenant language and legal guidance; no final tax-status change was made at this meeting.
