Spring City residents press for pause, clarity as commission hears public on ordinance and referendum

Spring City — Dozens of residents who turned out for a May 27 Planning & Zoning public hearing urged commissioners to delay zoning changes tied to proposed Ordinance 2026-06, citing uncertainty over a filed referendum and the potential effect on prior ordinances.

Commission Chairperson Cami Christensen opened the hearing at 6 p.m. at the Spring City Community Center and said the commission would accept live and written public comments on the proposed code revisions. Commissioner Andrew Skousen read excerpts from a letter mailed to property owners before the commission opened public comment.

Why it matters: speakers said the stakes include the town’s historic character, the mix of lot sizes, the town’s ability to attract visitors and the financial consequences for residents. Several speakers urged a pause so planners can complete work — possibly including a paid general plan — before zoning changes allow lot splits to proceed.

Spring City Council member James Baker told the commission he had asked the mayor and city recorder for clarity on the legal and administrative status of what he called Ordinance 2025-05 and on how a filed referendum affects current policy. “Given the level of public attention and community concern surrounding this issue, I believe it is important that our residents and our elected officials receive clear guidance,” Baker said.

Several residents described competing priorities. Longtime resident Scott Newman highlighted recent events that drew roughly 1,200 visitors and said tourism helps local businesses, while Miss Redmond (as transcribed) urged a formal general plan so the city can estimate costs associated with growth, such as hookups and services. “We ought to pay the money and get a general plan and then abide by what the plan is,” the speaker said.

Others raised process and ethics concerns. Resident Brady McKay described an instance in which a petition circulator pressed an elderly neighbor and said he had been told that planning and zoning members had been involved in circulating petitions; he said such conduct would be “unethical and in many places the illegal.” That allegation — and related assertions that some circulators provided incomplete or misleading information about the effect of filing a referendum — went unaddressed in the hearing by a named official and remained unresolved in the record.

Different proposals emerged. Resident Randy Strate proposed an ordinance provision to preserve Spring City’s historical mix of lot sizes by limiting smaller parcels to no more than 50% of the town’s parcels, allowing choice while seeking to prevent wholesale conversion, and several speakers urged careful public outreach before any changes are finalized.

Commissioners and city staff did not adopt a formal motion on zoning at the hearing. The city recorder made herself available to clarify aspects of the referendum procedure during the meeting but did not announce a final procedural ruling. The meeting closed at 7:58 p.m.

The Planning & Zoning Commission accepted written comments, which the meeting minutes say will be filed with the record and posted on the Utah State Public Meeting Notice website and the city’s website. The commission did not vote on Ordinance 2026-06 at the hearing.