Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trail Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Willard Canyon Access Coalition urges city to reject trail agreement, threatens legal action
Summary
A citizen coalition sent a written letter to the Willard City Council saying the county’s proposed Willard Canyon Trail agreement would undermine a public, legally dedicated thoroughfare and urging the city to refuse the agreement unless it includes guaranteed uninterrupted access, public input, a 5‑foot minimum width and stricter oversight.
Rex read a written comment from Mark Murphy, co‑chair of the Willard Canyon Access Coalition, urging Willard City to reject the county’s proposed agreement to preserve the Willard Canyon Trail in its current form. The letter argues the agreement would allow county officials or a private gravel‑pit operator to vacate portions of the historic trail and replace it with temporary, relocated segments, undermining what the coalition described as a public dedication under Utah Code 72‑5‑104.
The letter asks the city to refuse the agreement as written and to demand changes including mandatory public consultation, a guarantee of uninterrupted access during any relocations, a minimum five‑foot trail width and clearer oversight that limits private discretion. Mark Murphy’s letter states: “If Willard City moves forth forward with this agreement without addressing these flaws, we are prepared to file a lawsuit.” The comment was read into the record and appended to the meeting materials.
Council members acknowledged receipt of the written comment and discussed next steps. Staff reported that Box Elder County has already signed the agreement; council members said they would circulate the county‑signed draft, review it and consider a closed‑session legal review at the next meeting to discuss outstanding concerns and counsel’s advice. No formal action was taken on the agreement during the April 24 meeting.
Why it matters: The coalition frames the dispute as one over a legal public dedication and public access. If the agreement permits repeated relocations subject to private operational needs at a gravel pit, trail users and preservation advocates warn the route’s character and continuous access could be diminished. City officials asked staff to provide the full agreement and anticipated dedicating time at a future meeting to review legal risks and potential edits.
What’s next: Council asked staff to circulate the county‑signed agreement to councilmembers and to place the item on the next meeting’s docket for closed‑session legal review and public follow‑up if warranted.
