Friends of Virgin, Inc.
P.O. Box 790005
Virgin, Utah 84779-0005
www.friendsofvirgin.com
If you wish to be removed from our email list please send a message to .
Our Purpose:
To promote the continued health, safety, security, beauty, and viability of the town of Virgin, Utah, through the combined efforts and talents of the individuals and entities herein known as the Friends of Virgin.  Though the Friends of Virgin differ dramatically in viewpoint and political affiliation, they unite here to assist in informing and educating local residents and decision-makers; promoting openness in town government and free access to its records; and encouraging public input as well as its serious consideration by officials.
Board of Directors:
Lee Ballard, president
Adele Pincock, secretary
Sandra Grow, treasurer
Linda Collet, director
Nancy Isom, director
DRD Properties South, director
MEETING WATCH
Planning & Zoning 
	Here are highlights, in no particular order, from February and March doings of the Virgin Planning & Zoning Commission.  Home occupation permits were granted to Darren Cope, a general building contractor, for Kingpin Construction, and to Bryanna Shepherd, a financial advisor, for Primerica Financial.  Councilman John Grow suggested future subdivisions be required to pre-plumb for sewer lines so roads will not have to be destroyed after the town acquires them in order to install the lines; resident Jay Lee responded that a wastewater study does exist showing pre-mapped sewer lines.  Commissioner Allen Lee reported that the fish and game department would like to put up a sign providing bait, limit, and other essential information for fishermen using Kolob Reservoir.  Some suggested installing the sign near the BMX track or Kolob dumpsters so people have a safe place to pull over and read it.
	Brian Carver from the Governor’s Office of Planning & Budget traveled from SLC to let the town know about the variety of services his department can offer to rural towns, and to talk about the visual preference survey he and his colleagues have created for gathering input on Virgin’s general plan update.  He gave a slide presentation and talked about the importance of public input in the general plan process:  the citizens must provide a vision, so that our planners may create a plan to achieve that vision.  Effective planning is vital, as the latest statistics show that Washington County’s population will double by the year 2020.    When requested, Carver’s office and the Quality Growth Commission can provide various kinds of assistance to small towns on general plan creation, mapping, infrastructure, and the preservation of “critical” lands.  Financial and technical help is available to certified Quality Growth Communities: those that make the effort to plan for appropriate economic development, infrastructure, housing, and conservation.  Returning to a progress report on the visual preference survey, Carver said he would welcome resident’s photos of Virgin or other towns which illustrate planning choices. [photos may be submitted to Town Hall or to Lee Ballard at Virgin Goods] 	Stewart Ferber discussed his plans for 16 acres he owns between Zion River Resort and Liahona Academy.  His proposal includes three hotels, a restaurant, and a gas station with convenience store, fast food and a car wash for RVs.  A 70-room Econo Lodge would be the first building constructed.  Ferber did not have a formal concept plan for commissioners to review but did provide pictures of the proposed Econo Lodge.  Planning Commissioners and others in attendance worried its appearance was “institutional” and felt the box-style design was inappropriate for the area.  Some suggested incorporating pioneer or western style architecture and Ferber said he would have new drawings made.  Some worried the project might require a sewer system sooner than later and could take water hookups away from residential development.  A new drawing has now been given to planners, and Ferber will present a formal concept plan in the near future.
	A discussion on a possible re-zoning for Patsy Hosey’s property was tabled.  John and Sandra Grow asked for approval for a second access to their property off Sheep Bridge Road but Planning Commission approval is not required. Jayson Lee reported on the Trails Committee progress on drafting an ordinance for off-highway vehicles.  A draft will be discussed during the council’s work meeting on March 23.
	Resident Ray Golata inquired about subdividing the Bull Cinch property he owns.  Commissioner Marcia Rasmussen had asked Golata to come before the commission to make sure a subdivision would be legal.  Golata wondered about splitting the property to accommodate both a house and a business he described only as one permissible in the zoning ordinance.
	Commissioner Bill Adams reported on his revisions to the General Plan (GP).  Adams has been meeting with the Five County Association of Governments to update demographic and other data in the current plan.  Residents wondered if an official emergency response plan should be included in the GP and if more specific goals such as trail easements are necessary before the engineers can use the GP as they work on the Capital Facilities Plan.
	Commissioner M. Rasmussen led a brief discussion on developing a flood plain ordinance.  She reported an ordinance of this type would protect the town from liability if a flood damaged or destroyed property constructed in a flood plain.  Rasmussen explained that FEMA requires municipalities to have standards in place for building in a flood plain in order to be eligible for federal funds in the event of a flood and could further protect the town from flood-related liability.  During a work meeting on the topic Rasmussen reported on a FEMA-sponsored meeting she attended. FEMA recommends municipalities manage flood plains via ordinance and with the help of flood plain managers.  Risk zones have been designated in Washington County to help cities and towns in this process.  Establishing standards to mitigate risks associated with floods will improve insurability of local residents through the National Flood Insurance Plan.  The adoption of an ordinance would not prohibit building in a flood plain.  The commission agreed to place the item on its regular meeting agenda in April.
==========================
A RAMBLING RETRACTION:  On page 2 of our December newsletter, we reported on a Planning and Zoning discussion of a model highway design overlay zone presented by Lee Ballard.  After checking our notes and confirming what we thought were the facts with various people from the audience, we reported that a resident quoted “very restrictive standards from long document”.  That resident, Jay Lee, has informed a board member that he quoted only from Ballard’s draft.  According to the minutes of that meeting, which have now been approved, he is correct.  Although he refers in his comments to a proposal made by the Grand Canyon Trust many years ago, Lee did not, in fact, give direct quotes from any document other than the model offered by Ballard.  We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.   
    The above may seem a minor point, but we are inclined to err on the side of literal truth.  Although we have not until now had occasion to print a retraction in our pages, it has always been the policy of our board to maintain the strictest accuracy in this newsletter, which means any error we find must be corrected.  Our wish to be fair and truthful is reason enough to maintain a high standard, but there are other reasons as well.  Actions for libel or slander may be brought for certain kinds of inaccuracies which are not publicly corrected. 							On the other hand, truthful reporting of events to the public does not constitute libel.  We know this, because we recently paid our lawyer to tell us so.  Our members and supporters should be aware that the Friends of Virgin received a letter late last month from the attorneys of a development company often  present in town meetings over the last couple of years.  The letter accuses the “so called Friends of Virgin” of calculating conduct to interfere with the business of Blackmore Construction, and advises us that slanderous or libelous statements will be met with “appropriate legal action”.  Since the letter mentioned no specific statement or act, we wondered what we might have done to spur such action, and got to work reading through records.  So far, we can find nothing which goes beyond straight reporting. Nonetheless, we are grateful to have been given the nudge to learn more about the legal rights of citizens to participate in government, something we have always simply relied upon as our birthright.  You may read more of what we learned below, in our COMMENT section.  
==========================
Town Council
Here are highlights, in no particular order, from January and February doings of the Town Council. The County Commission has presented Virgin with a plaque memorializing its historic oil fields, which were the first to be developed in the state; Mayor Darwin Hall has completed the flood proclamation required by FEMA for flood damage aid; officials are working to simplify Virgin’s confusing street address system; Dustin Spadaro received permission to add a third touring vehicle to his fleet; the Cactus Room Restaurant now has license to serve beer and wine; Bob Kelly volunteered to complete the last of the requirements for the town’s emergency response program, to which Cecil Lee previously contributed much time and effort; Mayor Hall thanks residents who donated time or money to repairs of the old church; Mayor Hall suggested a long term native resident could fill a request to be a Washington County Fair Grand Marshall; and Shirlene Hall and Darcey Spendlove agreed to work on the Virgin Fourth of July affair. 
The application for a large fire department grant completed by Acting Fire Chief Sandra Grow, Adele Pincock, and Sandi Trindel was successful, and the department has begun to purchase needed turn-out gear for the volunteers and other equipment.  Procedures for purchasing and accounting by the fire department were discussed by the council; they asked Grow to get three bids on all items.  
After members of the public expressed concerns to the council about neighbors with problem animals, the requirements for licensed kennels, and excavation activities and machinery noise on a residential hillside, the council discussed its policy regarding complaints in general.  In order for action to be taken by the town, a complaint must be made in writing or at an official meeting for which minutes will be recorded.  Neighbors officially complained about activities on a hillside property near the old Virgin water tank, a large number of dogs and excessive barking at one home on the Kolob Road, and the loud braying of donkeys at another.  One citation was issued and delivered by the police, and one warning letter will be sent by the Town Council.
After an uneventful public hearing, the council adopted a new purchasing policy.  Town Clerk Wilcox may sign purchase orders up to $1000.  Mayor Hall may sign for up to $5000.  Larger purchases must have the approval of Town Council.
The council approved the sale of an easement through town property on Coal Pits mesa.  Landowners building an access road will be allowed to install a lockable gate, but it may not be located where it would block public access to the town’s eighty-acre parcel.
Washington County Sheriff Kirk Smith discussed county-wide problems with animal control and drug abuse during his annual visit to the Town Council. [to report suspicious activities, call 634-5000] In response to a question from Chief Grow, the sheriff assured her that the town would not be charged for sandbagging help provided to threatened private properties by prisoners during the floods last month.  Councilman Bruce Densley asked if Smith knew any way the town could keep more of the money generated in fines for police citations, but the sheriff said these percentages are determined by state policy.  At one council meeting Densley reported that Virgin’s police force had issued over 150 tickets, including 122 for speeding, 2 for driving under the influence, 2 for possession of illegal substances, and 2 for existing warrants.  The purchase of new tires for the Virgin police car was approved.
The council unanimously approved the mayor’s appointment of Dan Kroff to fill the vacancy on the Board of Adjustments.
Progress on the completion of Virgin Acres subdivision was addressed both as an agenda item and during the public forum.  Residents of the main road through the subdivision expressed concern about the standards to which the road is being built, road elevations at driveways, and conditions in existence during construction.  Some residents said they have sustained property damage due to recent alterations in the road’s drainage system, that phone lines had been cut, and that some have gone without propane delivery or garbage pickup because road conditions made their home inaccessible.  Some who have built homes since the approval of the subdivision presented the town with bills for the extension of telephone and power lines to their lot boundaries, for which they had to pay, out of pocket, in order to complete construction. Council and residents debated the question of responsibility for these costs;  it was stated that this is a civil issue which should be taken up with the original developer of the subdivision.  Some residents felt the town had taken responsibility when it voted to approve the final subdivision plat.    It was decided that Councilman Bill Johnson would contact the engineers and monitor further progress of the road.  Johnson will also contact the representative of the subdivider, to let him know a set of construction plans has been found.  Council agreed that only enough further work should be done on the road to provide safe access to existing homes, until engineered drawings or a satisfactory report from Johnson has been received.
A representative from Kemp, Burdick, Hinton and Hall presented the annual budget review.  Town assets have appreciated and we are in “good financial condition”.  The general fund is at about the proper level; this account and certain others have balance limits set by law. Excess cash from the general fund can be used to pay for capital projects, such as a fire truck or new town hall, but the town must have specific plans and estimates in place in order to transfer funds for use.  On the other hand, Virgin’s water fund, which should be allowed to accumulate money for emergencies, has a balance of $5,800, rather than an ideal balance of $50,000 to $100,000 according to the auditor.  This may be due to the previous town policy of forgiving water overages caused by leaks.  The firm recommends the town write off bad debt as expense, and consider raising rates.  With Councilman John Grow abstaining due to personal dealings with the company, the council voted to accept a three year audit contract with Kemp, Burdick, Hinton, and Hall.
COMMENT
public projects & the general plan
One of the most exciting aspects of updating our general plan is the opportunity it gives the people and their government to state intentions to acquire or improve public facilities.  Maybe this doesn’t sound so thrilling, until you consider what sorts of things constitute ‘public facilities’.   This term could cover a new town office, recreation hall, senior center, town park or garden, more comfortable sidewalks or streets; improved horse, bicycle, or 4-wheeler trails; it could even mean acquisition by the town of unused land on which it may encourage just the sort of development it wants. It almost certainly will mean a bigger and more financially stable fire department, police force, administration, or sewer system.  Someday it could mean a library, a promenade along the river, or a Virgin museum.  If these things seem to belong to a dim future, remember that the general plan being updated right now by our planning commission is supposed to look 20 years into the future.  The town has approved the subdivision of approximately 100 lots just over the last few months, and we can only assume more developers will be knocking at the door.  A large motel is being considered.  Growth is not just inevitable:  it is happening now.
An updated general plan which includes, not only specific future needs to be funded by impact fees and tax dollars, but also a ‘wish list’ of public amenities that reflects the desires of residents, can be a very powerful tool for the government as it considers private projects and organizes land use.  Also, when a town ends the year with too much money in its general fund (yes, there is an upper limit, set by state law) it may consider diverting money to fund a capital project. As mentioned during the annual budget review last month, the town must plan ahead in order to comply with legal requirements:  the plan should say exactly what is to be funded and how much it will cost. Naturally, needed projects take precedence over those we only wish for, but there very well could come a time when our council must decide to spend money on something unnecessary that would add an agreeable dimension to living here.  Another reason to think about public projects now is to ensure the town does not miss unique opportunities.  Donations and exchanges between municipalities and private property owners do happen.  For instance, imagine that one afternoon while reading through the town’s new general plan, the developer of a proposed project realizes that he is in possession of the very parcel of land the people wish some day to acquire for a park.  Depending on the situation, he or she may decide to offer that parcel to the town in exchange for part of his impact fee, or even as a donation to improve the town in which his project is located.   Without the list, the developer would never have known the town’s desires, nor made the offer.  Okay, this probably won’t happen every day, but why not make that prioritized list and keep the door open to opportunity?
Citizen Participation in Government
Although it may not always seem to be the case in daily life, the influence of the people on government in this country is valued and weighty.  Most citizens take their freedom to speak for granted, because they recognize it as a defining principle of their lives in the USA.  Our recent lesson on the subject, however, has taught us that different kinds of speech are treated differently by the courts.  The First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees not only our right to speak out, but also our right to petition the government for a “redress of grievances”.  The courts support these principles of our system by giving citizens special privileges to express themselves in and regarding governmental proceedings.  The power of a citizen to affect a governmental decision is so considerable that many have sought to thwart it by filing or threatening groundless legal action.  Many state laws deter such action; various provisions of Utah state code echo the protection given by the Constitution, and new Utah statute addresses the problem by allowing for easy dismissal of frivolous defamation lawsuits.  Laws and courts overwhelmingly recognize that the exchange of opinions on public issues, free of the fear of litigation, is essential to the preservation of the open forum upon which our system of government is based.
In a famous defamation decision (New York Times Co. v Sullivan), the Supreme Court noted the commitment of our nation to the “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open” debate of public issues, and the First Amendment’s intended protection of open political discussion as a means to ensure the responsiveness of government to the people.  The courts give vigorous protection to statements made in public hearings, and for publications reporting truthfully on the events of a governmental proceeding.  Case law supports the right of each interested citizen to try to persuade the government over to his or her side of an issue.  Decisions also suggest that the best remedy for dissatisfaction with the statements of another, rather than to take him to court, is to speak out in public forum to correct him.  Complaints against citizens for communicating with branches of government are usually dismissed when defended under the First Amendment right to petition the government for redress.
Public participation must be a powerful force in our government, or proponents of controversial projects would not go to the expense of filing lawsuits or threatening legal action against citizens who speak out.  Frivolous lawsuits filed by those expecting to gain from governmental decisions, called SLAPPs, or Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, have in times past threatened to stifle free communication between the public and the government on issues.  In 2001, Utah followed the lead of many states across the nation by enacting the Citizen Participation in Government Act.  This and similar statutes attempt to deter plaintiffs from filing SLAPPs to prevent or retaliate against the influence of citizen input on governmental decisions.  Last spring, in one of the first cases to employ Utah’s new statute, a Fourth District judge dismissed a defamation case brought against a small-town newspaper in American Fork, based on his ruling that the suit was filed “for the purpose of chilling [the newspaper’s] proper participation in the process of government”.  Employing another point of the new statute, the court awarded attorney fees to the defendant.
Does this mean we can stand up and say whatever we want?  There are rules, but they are the ones most people follow as a matter of plain decency.  Some specific definitions of lawful and unlawful speech can be found in Utah Code.   Context is very important.  For instance, a statement is not considered libel or slander if it is made in a “fair and true report, without malice, of the proceedings of a public meeting, if such meeting was lawfully convened for a lawful purpose and open to the public, or the publication or broadcast of the matter complained of was for the public benefit.”  The language of the statute granting this privilege also reveals important points in any action against an entity for speaking out:  truth, fairness, presence of malice, and public benefit.  It goes almost without saying that when one makes a statement that is factual, meaning it can be clearly proved or disproved, it had better be true.  Opinions should be well thought out and never designed for retaliation or to cause personal damage.  And, of course, mistakes should be admitted and apologized for at the first opportunity.  Then, opine away!
FOVI Board Announcements
Sometime this June, the FOVI Board of Directors will hold its annual meeting.  For the first time since incorporation, elections will be held for the various director positions.  We may or may not find ourselves with a new treasurer or secretary.  We do know, however, that we will have a new president.  Lee Ballard has announced her intention to step down from the board of directors as soon as the newly elected president takes over.  Ballard says she supports us in all of our efforts and will continue to do what she can to promote the purpose of FOV, but that it is time for her to turn a bigger share of her attention to her business, family, and other volunteer work.