Bluff Town Council unanimously ratifies settlement to disconnect 5,314.8 acres after court‑ordered mediation

The Bluff Town Council voted unanimously on Oct. 21, 2025, to adopt Resolution No. 92, ratifying a settlement reached in court‑ordered mediation with the Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) and plaintiffs Kim and Ida Acton that will remove approximately 5,314.8 acres from the town's municipal boundaries.

Town Manager Erin Nelson read the terms of the settlement into the record, saying the agreement "provides for the municipal disconnection from the town of Bluff of certain lands on the Bluff Bench that are owned or managed by SITLA, the Actons, and the Bureau of Land Management," and that the consent judgment confirming the disconnection is attached as exhibit 1 to the resolution. Nelson told the council the original petition sought disconnection of about 9,514 acres; the mediated agreement reduced that figure to about 5,314.8 acres and leaves roughly 4,199.2 acres of petitioned lands within the town's boundaries.

The resolution and settlement note that different parcels were involved in the earlier lawsuit: the petition referenced SITLA lands, private lands owned by Kim and Ida Acton, BLM‑managed parcels and property held by Saint Christopher's Episcopal Mission of Navajo Land. Under the settlement, the parties agreed to a map and legal descriptions (Nelson offered to display the map during the meeting), and each party will pay its own costs and attorneys' fees.

Council members discussed specific draft language in the resolution, including whether to keep phrasing indicating the town "expresses the desire to reach a working relationship" with SITLA. After limited debate and a brief clarification about which lands remain inside town limits, a motion to adopt Resolution No. 92 passed on a roll‑call vote; the clerk called each member's name and recorded aye votes from the five members present.

A council member added that the settlement brings an end to a multi‑year dispute and praised staff and council for the effort, saying the outcome "was a lot of work" and noting the benefits of resolving extended litigation.

What it means: the settlement confirms the legal disconnection of the specified parcels and is embodied in a consent judgment; the town indicated it will update ordinances and its general plan documents to reflect the new boundaries and manage planning and development on retained lands. The resolution does not allocate attorney fees between the parties beyond each party paying its own costs.