Wasatch school study session readies public hearing on boundary changes amid traffic and safety concerns

Superintendent Garrett Peterson and school‑district staff briefed the Wasatch County School Board on the process for a forthcoming public hearing on proposed attendance‑boundary changes and fielded questions about traffic, student safety and community outreach.

Peterson described the hearing as part of a legal, public process that follows neighborhood meetings and surveys. “This is the political process where, elected representatives study things,” he said, explaining that attendees would generally have two minutes each during the public‑comment portion and that the formal action — when the board may approve, table, or amend the boundary — would come later in the meeting agenda.

Board members urged staff to begin the public hearing with a concise preface summarizing prior steps (meetings, tours and outreach) and the options under consideration. Several members said that preface could reduce confusion from residents who may believe a plan is already final.

A central theme of the session was traffic safety. Board members and staff raised specific concerns about children crossing Highway 40 and Highway 189, left turns without protected signals (green arrows), and feeder‑pattern implications for families in neighborhoods such as Sawmill, Luther Park and areas near Heritage Parkway. One board member noted the district is not the traffic‑signal authority: “UDOT is a state organization,” staff said, and traffic signals and turn arrows are installed after data‑driven studies by UDOT or local jurisdictions.

Staff recommended steps the district can control: initiating internal traffic‑flow modeling and communicating anticipated routes after a boundary decision, coordinating with UDOT and local cities to request data studies, and running outreach such as route maps and a safe‑driving campaign for students and staff. Board members also discussed temporary measures (crossing guards coordinated by cities/counties) and messaging to teachers and coaches to reduce early‑morning rush behavior.

Members debated whether accident data on different corridors is materially different and emphasized the limits of controlling student route choice; one member observed that students rapidly exchange route information among peers and will gravitate toward fastest options. Board members asked staff to prepare anticipated traffic flows and suggested the district begin contact with UDOT and local agencies promptly if a boundary is approved.

The study session ended without a decision on boundaries; a motion to adjourn was made by Jake Collette, seconded and approved by voice vote.