With the failing of the Ranches HOA in Eagle Mountain, there has been a lot of confusion and speculation over what the future of the City will look like. On April 25th the Planning Commission looked at codifying, or changing the city laws, to enforce a subset of the Ranches HOAs rules on all Eagle Mountain residents. (This change will now be forwarded to the City Council Agenda for their discussion and vote.) After a “sensational” post I did on the subject there was a flurry of discussion on Facebook about the proposed changes. The Eagle Mountain Mayor did a blog post about the intent of the changes. During the discussion, there were two themes that I found running through that discussion. The two themes that were brought up the most was that of individualism and that of conformity.
The HOA residents were concerned that not having conformity would lower their property values, while the residents outside of the HOA were concerned about the regulations removing their individualism. While pondering this conundrum, I came up with three questions that I would like to weigh in on. First, is it the responsibility of government to insure and protect the property values of its residents? Second, is it the responsibility of city government to force conformity within the city? And third, why are people willing to discuss things on Facebook, but then not willing to actually attend the City Meetings and voice their input during the legislative process?
First, is the city responsible for keeping a residents property value at it’s current level or working on increasing it? There were several people on Facebook that voiced this concern, as well as a resident making public comment during the Planning Commission discussion about them wanting the city to protect their property values. My answer to that question is NO! But this topic could be a post in itself. It think it is not the cities responsibility, but the responsibility of the resident to protect their property value. I don’t think it is possible for a city to protect your property value, unless every little aspect of your life is regulated. I would like to see a study, that shows a correlation of property value to city or HOA regulations. I know of a lot of areas in Utah that are not under HOA, have no HOA type regulations, but their property value is above average, and the housing market in those areas could be considered booming. Regulations don’t protect your property value, what you do and how you maintain your property does.
Second, government is not supposed to be used as a mechanism for conformity. Its main goal should be to provide things that a resident cannot provide for themselves, as well as protect the rights of that resident from others infringing, or removing the individuals rights. The topic of government conformity is, in my opinion, a very interesting topic. If you look at the HOA rules, you will see that the fencing all has to be the same, the colors of houses have to be in conformity, you have to have a similar looking landscaping, and you can’t leave your garbage can out over night (none of these items are in the proposed code changes). But then the codes try to protect individualism by enforcing regulations that make it so that your neighbor can’t have the same color house as you, they can’t have the same floor plan as you, they can’t have their house the same number of feet from the property line as you (all of these are in the proposed code changes). So on one hand the codes are forcing conformity, but then on the other hand they are forcing individualism, within that conformity. Should the code even be forcing conformity, or individualism? Who is the one that decides what conformity should be applied to everyone? The members of the HOA agreed to that conformity when they signed the CC&Rs that the HOA was then legally able to enforce. But more than 50% of the population in Eagle Mountain did not agree to those CC&Rs, and do not want to have them enforced on them. Is it really the responsibility of the City to now find the discrepancies between City Code and HOA rules and enforce the HOA rules on those who did not agree to them. Who is to say that the HOA codes are superior to current City code? Why do those discrepancies need to be proactively identified, and eliminated? According to the Mayors Blog post, this is the intent.
“Upon learning of the HOA’s intent to disband, staff and I discussed the impacts of this decision on the City. We quickly identified several areas where a discrepancy between City code and the Ranches HOA standard will have an impact. I did not weigh in on the proposed changes, but I did ask staff to bring changes forward for consideration. In this case, it was far more important that the areas of potential conflict had a proposed change brought forward so that we could discuss it and take action as opposed to leaving the conflict until a later day.”
Is there really going to be a conflict, or are you creating the conflict by trying to stop an imaginary conflict? You have a group of people that wanted the restrictions of the HOA, and another group of people that did not want the restrictions of an HOA. Who is to say that the group who no longer can enforce those restrictions have the higher moral ground, and that those restrictions should now be imposed on the ones who did not want those restrictions? Which conflict are we trying to resolve, if the HOA home owners were so willing to abide by the rules, then why do we even need to have enforcement?
Third, the topic of Facebook quarterbacks. All I can say is shame on the residents of Eagle Mountain. You are willing to let your opinions be known, and bash your neighbors on social media, but you are not willing to put the screen behind, and attend the meetings where the policies are being discussed, and eventually made into law. Real life is where things happen, not in the digital social media world. The discussion of Facebook was active, but then only 5 people attended with only two of them making public comment at the Planning Commission meeting. I should note, that I was there, but was one of those not making comment. I do commend the two individuals that did submit their input to the city prior to the meeting. Out of a population of 20,000+ only 7 people showed the City that they were watching what was happening, and officially voiced their opinion. I had several people tell me that they were glad that I brought this information into the spotlight, one even commented that I was the Forth Branch of the Eagle Mountain Government. I am flattered by those comments, but they can be applied towards my point. I am not the Forth Branch of government, but YOU are. We The People are the fourth branch of government, and it is our responsibility to police the policies and actions of the other three branches. I have heard numerous times from different Elected Officials, that they value our input, that they want to hear from us. And I have no reason to believe that this is political speak, but that they really do want our input. Remember, our elected officials live in a bubble. They only know what they experience, or what they are told. If you do not tell them, then their decisions and actions are limited to that bubble. You are the only way that their bubble can be expanded. If you don’t give them your input, then they have no idea what your thought, trials, philosophies are.
If the City Council passes the new codes, you have lost the right to use 4X4 posts for your deck you now have to use 6X6 posts, prefabricated metal carports are prohibited in front yards, your garage doors need to be non-white and a specific design, and your house can’t have the same floor plan, color scheme, or elevation as the three houses next to you on either side, or the houses across the street. These regulations were all imposed by the now defunct Ranches HOA, but are now going to be imposed on all residents in Eagle Mountain. Does the benefit of conformity out weight the benefit of individualism in regards to these code changes? What other changes will be proposed to avoid conflict?
Mike Kieffer – Editor-in-Chief, Cedar Valley Sentinel
Mike Kieffer is a dynamic leader and community advocate based in Eagle Mountain, Utah. He serves as the Editor-in-Chief of the Cedar Valley Sentinel, a local publication dedicated to informing, inspiring, and elevating the Cedar Valley community through honest and accurate journalism. With a passion for fostering connections, Kieffer has made it his mission to highlight local businesses, provide reliable news, and support community development.
Beyond his editorial role, Kieffer is the owner of Lake Mountain Media, LLC, a company specializing in media and communications, and the co-owner of Quail Run Farms, which focuses on sustainable farming and community engagement. He also actively contributes to the local economy and culture as a member of the Eagle Mountain Chamber of Commerce.
Kieffer’s dedication extends to preserving and promoting the history and heritage of the Cedar Valley area. He often participates in community-centered events and media, including podcasts that explore the unique aspects of life in the region. Through his varied endeavors, he remains a steadfast advocate for the growth and enrichment of the local community.
