This story by Tim Camerato was published by the Valley News on March 21, 2018.
[M]ONTPELIER — The crusade to stop a Utah engineer’s proposal to develop a huge planned community in four towns in the White River Valley has moved to the Legislature, where a bipartisan group of Upper Valley lawmakers has introduced a resolution in the Vermont House opposing the NewVistas project.
The resolution calls on engineer and developer David Hall, who has purchased at least 2,000 acres in Sharon, Strafford, Royalton and Tunbridge, to “abandon” his plans for a self-sustaining community of 20,000 residents. Hall said he plans to eventually acquire 5,000 acres for the purpose of developing an environmentally sustainable, high-density rural community.
Instead of proceeding with his visionary development, the resolution says, Hall should conserve the land he’s purchased around the birthplace of Joseph Smith, the founding prophet of the Mormon Church whose plans inspired Hall.
State Rep. Tim Briglin, D-Thetford, said the nonbinding measure will bolster the work of residents in the four towns who voted overwhelmingly to put forward their own resolutions at Town Meeting last year.
“This resolution is essentially another step up the ladder of expressing opposition to this type of development locally and in Vermont generally,” said Briglin, the resolution’s primary sponsor.
It has received the support of 12 other legislators, including Reps. David Ainsworth, R-South Royalton; Susan Buckholz, D-White River Junction; Kevin Christie, D-Hartford; Charles Conquest, D-Wells River; Sarah Copeland-Hanzas, D-Bradford; Robert Frenier, R-Chelsea; Rodney Graham, R-Williamstown; Sandy Haas, P-Rochester; Philip Jay Hooper, D-Randolph; Gabrielle Lucke, D-Hartford; Benjamin Jickling, I-Randolph; and James Masland, D-Thetford Center.
“There is a real concern what effect (NewVistas) would have upon the area and so I’m just trying to bring that to the forefront,” Ainsworth said on Wednesday, adding the area wouldn’t be able to sustain a large population influx.
Opponents organizing against the project also applauded lawmakers’ efforts.
“It’s a very positive resolution to put out to the state of Vermont,” said Michael Sacca, a Tunbridge resident and president of the Alliance for Vermont Communities.
In December, the alliance announced that it was working with the Upper Valley Land Trust to acquire a 382-acre farm in Strafford that abuts land acquired by Hall. Alliance members expressed hopes that the conservation of the land would both keep the land in agriculture and serve to thwart Hall’s plans.
If the resolution is passed, the measure would send a signal to developers statewide that they cannot push projects against the will of neighbors, Sacca said, adding the threat of NewVistas continues to loom over his community.
But Hall on Thursday said he doesn’t plan to stand in the way of the resolution, and that his ideas are years — maybe even decades — from coming to fruition.
“I’m trying to purchase land to conserve it so that it doesn’t continue to be broken up,” he said in a phone interview. “I’m simply conserving land at this point.”
Any current opposition to the project is “fine with me,” Hall said, adding he’s up to the task of eventually proving his ideas can work in the Green Mountain State.
“Vermont won’t adopt (NewVistas) until realizing it has met its goals of being environmentally friendly,” he said. “They’ll need to see it in other places before Vermont will ever adopt it.”
In fact, Hall is pursuing development plans for smaller prototype communities in Provo, Utah, the state’s third largest city and his hometown.
The resolution also calls upon the state to “ensure that the NewVistas Foundation operates in accordance with the laws of this state.”
It further calls for copies of the resolution to be sent to the governors and attorneys general of both Vermont and Utah.
The resolution isn’t meant to challenge the legality of Hall’s proposal, according to Briglin. It’s instead a call for oversight and environmental protection of the land, he said, should the developer abandon or change his plans.
Sending copies of the resolution to both Utah and Vermont’s attorneys general is intended as a sign of solidarity to those opposing NewVistas elsewhere, Briglin said.
“We want people in Utah to know in a very public way we are trying to stand up and express public opposition to this,” he said.
Last year, Hall transferred about 1,500 acres of land in Vermont from his NewVistas Foundation to a newly formed private company, Windsorange LLC. The move was needed to “rebrand” the project and ease community fears that construction could begin in the near future, he said at the time.
Hall reiterated that stance on Wednesday, saying plans for the White River Valley required a separate entity to differentiate them from NewVistas’ ongoing efforts elsewhere.
“The foundation is much broader. It’s doing things worldwide,” Hall said. “People were getting upset over things that were not happening at all.”
While NewVistas’ opponents in Vermont aren’t openly questioning the motives behind the property transfer, their counterparts in Utah are.
In pursuing the development of two prototype communities in Provo, Hall has made several internal transfers, said Paul Evans, chairman of the city’s Pleasant View Neighborhood and a vocal critic of NewVistas.
Evans said it is disingenuous for Hall to make purchases using a nonprofit entity that promotes sustainability before turning those properties over to entities set up as businesses.
“It appears he’s using those for his personal interests and not for the public good,” Evans said in a phone interview, adding he’s unaware of any legal challenges to the transfers.
However, Hall contends the practice is legal and was approved by his Vermont attorneys.
“That’s just a normal property transfer from one entity to another,” he said. “That’s pretty common.”
The resolution has been referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources, Fish, and Wildlife. Briglin said a hearing likely will be scheduled for 9 a.m. on Wednesday in Montpelier.
