In a surprising move that has raised eyebrows among local officials, Summit County is facing potential new regulations concerning land purchases in other counties. This development follows the county's recent acquisition of the expansive 8,500-acre 910 Cattle Ranch property, prompting the introduction of House Bill 445 by Salt Lake County Representative Mark Strong. The bill's implications could significantly alter how counties across Utah engage in land transactions, especially in light of Summit County's recent activities. During a meeting of the Summit County Council on Wednesday, Deputy County Manager Janna Young detailed the contents and potential impacts of the bill. She indicated that HB 445 appears to be a direct response to the county’s recent closure on the open space property, which straddles the northern boundary of Summit County and extends into Morgan County. "This appears to follow an interlocal agreement we’re already working on with Morgan County," Young explained. "It is something we’ve been working very closely with Morgan County on for a while now. We don’t understand why there is legislation about it, but it does have broad impacts to counties throughout the state." The proposed legislation mandates that any county wishing to purchase land within the jurisdiction of another county must first obtain explicit permission from that jurisdiction. Furthermore, it requires the drafting and signing of an interlocal agreement to facilitate such transactions. In a significant twist, the purchasing county would also be required to pay full property taxes on the land, regardless of its tax-exempt status. Young expressed concern over this stipulation, stating, "There are myriad reasons why a county might purchase land in another county. For instance, we’ve done that when we’ve needed to have telecommunications towers or what have you, so we’re concerned about our property rights regarding this requirement." Moreover, Young raised logistical concerns regarding the new process, emphasizing that land purchases in neighboring counties often serve as critical tools for counties to protect their watersheds and mitigate wildfire risks. "What happens if that county does not give that permission or if they demand something in the interlocal agreement that we cannot provide?" she questioned, highlighting the uncertainties the bill could introduce. The Summit County government is also keeping a close eye on various other legislative proposals during the current session, all of which could have profound implications for local governance and community services. One such bill, HB 88, sponsored by Davis County Representative Trevor Lee, would require individuals seeking public assistance benefits to prove U.S. citizenship or legal residency before receiving aid. Young voiced strong opposition to this bill, especially as it pertains to ensuring that vulnerable populations, such as homeless children or those in crisis, receive the support they need without bureaucratic barriers. Additionally, Young mentioned HB 184, a piece of legislation concerning land use decisions, which she argued bypassed the established vetting process of the state’s Land Use Task Force. This task force, consisting of representatives from various stakeholders, is intended to ensure that land use bills are thoroughly reviewed before they reach the legislature. "Unfortunately, this one did not go through that process," Young noted, expressing frustration over the lack of transparency and collaboration. The proposed legislation aims to facilitate the construction of 35,000 starter homes in Utah by 2028, a key initiative of Governor Spencer Cox to address the state’s housing shortage. However, Young criticized the definition of “starter homes,” noting that the average purchase price in Summit County exceeds one million dollars, which she argued does not align with the concept of affordable housing. The county is also monitoring HB 231, which seeks to repeal the restaurant tax that funds a significant grant program. Young indicated that while the bill allows counties to impose new sales taxes to recover lost revenue, it fundamentally alters the funding structure, shifting the tax burden from restaurant patrons to all sales tax payers. "I don’t believe that’s something we’re interested in," she stated. Furthermore, Rep. Tiara Auxier, who represents parts of Summit County, has sponsored HB 449, which aims to eliminate the Truth in Taxation process for property tax increases. This bill would require voter approval for any tax revenue increases, fundamentally reshaping how local governments manage their budgets. Young expressed concern over the potential fiscal impact, stating, "This would have a huge impact on the county’s funds, so we’re watching that closely." As the legislative session progresses, Young presents updates on proposed legislation and its implications for Summit County during weekly County Council meetings, with the session set to conclude on March 6. The outcome of these bills will not only influence local governance but may also redefine how counties interact with one another in terms of land acquisition and public services, warranting close attention from both policymakers and residents alike.