It's not always true that the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Just ask a group of angry parents in West Valley City, where they sought to prevent the construction of a residential drug treatment center adjacent to an elementary school.
Despite mass attendance at public meetings, organized protests featuring candlelight vigils and the city's own efforts to stop the development, the center will be built because of a judge's order.
As more and more Utah land is developed, land-use issues have become a pressure point for public outcry and a headache for those in charge of planning.
When does noisy sentiment count? And should it?
A Utah appellate court ruling in 1988 said "public clamor" was not a legal basis for a city to deny a conditional-use permit.
At issue was Davis County's desire to open a mental-health treatment center in Clearfield. In the wake of public protests, Davis County was turned down and, in turn, sued Clearfield and won.
Gene Carr, with the University of Utah's Center for Public Policy and Administration, said to give in to the biased desires of a vocal few thwarts the city's obligation to the community as a whole.
"Everyone has the opportunity to establish the rules and then stick to them, or it is chaos," says Carr, a specialist in land-use planning and zoning.
Public clamor, however, has worked with some success recently in Riverton and West Jordan, where organized and vocal opposition has influenced the possible outcome of developments in those cities.
In Riverton, Anderson Development is proposing to turn an alfalfa field into a mixture of multifamily housing, light industry and office complexes. The property is across the street from Rose Creek Elementary School.
Don Adams, Riverton's economic development director, said Anderson's proposal was a good one.
"The planning staff is recommending approval. It is in substantial compliance with the adopted general plan for the area."
Neighbors, the PTA, and Jordan Board of Education believe otherwise, saying the development will increase traffic and compromise children's safety.
Fliers have gone out, the school board put its concerns down in a few letters, and residents attended the planning commission when the proposal was discussed.
Planning Commission members voted against recommending the development, and their opinion now goes to the Riverton City Council for consideration in a public hearing scheduled for Jan. 2.
Anderson Development officials were dismayed, retorting the public body crumpled under pressure from angry opponents.
Carr agrees.
"If the proposal fits well with the general plan, that suggests very strongly that the Planning Commission strengthen their spine," Carr said. "If they feel the general plan is incorrect, then they should go through the whole public hearing process again and change it."
Riverton city adopted its master plan in early 1997.
It was in the revision process in 1996 and subject to debate then.
Carr says the time for public input was when city officials were crafting the master plan, envisioning the future of Riverton.
"They had the opportunity to yell when it was passed. If the plan is in place, and it's been adopted, the public has spoken."
Steve Mascaro would like to think that is the case, but an experience last week in West Jordan has taught him otherwise.
Mascaro was part of a yearlong public planning effort that drew on the participation of 400 West Jordan residents and more than 1,000 hours of volunteer time.
The intent was to come up with a 20-year plan to revitalize West Jordan's downtown area.
Some of the study's recommendations, which the West Jordan City Council adopted as a "guiding document," included a proposal for the vacant sugar-factory property adjacent to the city's main park.
The study concluded if there was a desire to increase retail development at Redwood Road and 7800 South, pedestrian-friendly shops needed to come in. For the shops to come in, there needed to be additional residential rooftops. Accompanying those sentiments was the strong desire by seniors for housing near the downtown area, Mascaro said.
All that combined to recommend increasing the city's main park space from 15 to more than 50 acres and converting some of that sugar-factory property into shops, senior citizen housing and to set aside space for a planned light-rail station.
City Council member Natalie Argyle was opposed to the plan. She issued press releases and a letter, urging residents to attend the next West Jordan City Council meeting if they were concerned about open space.
"We do not want our park surrounded by high residential housing," her release stated.
About 90 people packed City Hall at a meeting to consider having the property appraised. In the end, the West Jordan City Council postponed any action until February.
"I was embarrassed for the 400 people who spent more than 1,000 hours having their entire work slammed by 90 people whipped up into a frenzy," Mascaro said. "This was not a consultant's dream, not a developer's dream; this is what the residents of West Jordan wanted done."
Mascaro said the plan was put together after a year of public input and it's now being attacked through scare tactics.
He admits he could call on his own noisy supporters of seniors who asked for more housing downtown, but he doesn't want to.
"I am hoping we don't have to go to that level of decisionmaking in the city," he said. "I am hoping the City Council has the fortitude to make decisions on what is best for the citizens at large, rather than who can bring in the most people who can scream the loudest."
Carr said city councils have wider latitude when it comes to making decisions after gathering information — information that can include public opposition.
Still, he said leaders need to be cognizant of how much legal weight can be given to protests, and mindful of following plans where public input has already been received.
"You have to move ahead, you have to pass laws. If it is just done off the top of the head at every meeting, it becomes arbitrary and capricious."
E-MAIL: amyjoi@desnews.com