WASATCH COUNTY — The roller-coaster debate about when Wasatch County will implement a new form of government has taken a rancorous turn.
The three county commissioners have voted to drop out of a joint petition for extraordinary relief before the Utah Supreme Court, renewing their battle with parties who supported a successful Nov. 7 ballot initiative switching to a seven-member county council with an appointed county manager. The joint petition, ditched Monday, was an attempt at cooperation between the two sides.
"It seems a strange way for the commissioners to do county business, but now they've forced us back to suing them to ensure the voice of the voters is carried out," said Bob Wren, co-leader of Voters for a Representative Government, sponsor of the ballot initiative.
The initiative, approved by 57 percent of the voters, indicated the new council should be formed in a special February election. Initiative opponents, including current commissioners, have argued state law requires voting on the new council in the next general election, November 2002.
Initially, after the Nov. 7 vote, the commissioners instructed County Attorney Derek Pullan to seek a declaratory judgment in 4th District court forcing election of the new council two years from now.
However, just before filing in the 4th District, in a rare spirit of cooperation, commissioners authorized Pullan to draft a petition for extraordinary relief before the state's high court. This was done with the understanding Voters for a Representative Government would jointly sign the petition. Both parties said this afforded a speedy, definitive answer to the question, devoid of political maneuvering.
Politics seized the day again Monday.
Both sides were discussing the matter at a commission meeting when suddenly it became clear the county was prepared to draft a new resolution dropping out of the joint high-court appeal.
Commissioner Ralph Duke said commissioners were willing to talk things out with initiative supporters but advocated first passing the resolution.
Wren said his group would still petition the Utah Supreme Court — on its own this time.
"It's a shame, really," Wren added. "The plan approved by the voters said the commission must help create this new government in as fair and expeditious a manner as possible. For a while, we thought they'd live up to that, but I guess not."
Pullan, commissioners' legal adviser, favored the compromise. He read a prepared statement after the meeting, saying he preferred a joint petition with sponsors of the ballot initiative as a "swift, final and nonpolitical forum to determine what state law requires."
He added, "However, the next regular general election in November 2002 is the date that would most likely be approved by the court."
That's the hope and belief the commissioners apparently clung to as they passed the Monday resolution, flinging the question back to the battleground.
E-MAIL: gtwyman@desnews.com