Check Out November’s Town Newsletter

I always read the monthly Town Newsletter and always appreciate the information in it and always have a link to it in The Springdale Sun, often in the “Never Bored in Springdale” column. The town newsletter for November I found more newsworthy than most, while still having all the local activities listed. I am so grateful for that as it spared me writing an article about WUI and HB 48. I strongly urge you to read the information about that in the Town Newsletter. It has been referenced at least twice in TSS with the promise of more information as it became available.

Utah is trying to be proactive about fire prevention, especially as it pertains to homes. This will affect our pocketbooks, as home owners will be assessed a fee depending upon square footage, and fire mitigation strategies both in construction materials used and landscaping strategies.

Springdale will probably have to change some ordinances so residents can have better fire mitigation as well as be in accordance with town codes. For instance, currently in Springdale, when a house is built, every tree taken down has to be replaced by 2 new trees but that is potentially in conflict with having trees away from the home to have a fire buffer zone. Planning Commission is hard at work learning and preparing, thinking and rethinking.

The Mayor’s article about Springdale Town taxes peaked my curiosity. It almost felt like writing on the wall that Springdale Town taxes might be increasing. I would ask Mayor Bruno directly but she never responds to me. Perhaps you could read her article and see what you think. In any case, I agree with the Mayor that Springdale Town taxes are a pretty good bang for the buck. I also agree with probably every tax payer in the world that whenever possible, the lower the taxes, the better.

I was grateful for the update about the Barker River Park project to expand the park and make it fancier. I remain annoyed that everyone in local governance seems tone-deaf to the general sense among nearly every citizen to whom I’ve spoken that it isn’t wanted, since it will likely diminish the park’s most important benefit — its value as a local amenity. It was nice to learn that, so far, other funds have been found to pay for it. Well, in a sense the “expansion” is wanted. The town owns that land by the Park so, obviously, make it usable, expand Barker park to include that parcel. Just don’t fanci-fy it. Don’t put a sign on it saying, “Check me out.”

“IF YOU BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME.” (AND THE FANCIER IT IS, THE LONGER THEY WILL STAY.)