A 2024 law lets a handful of landowners turn their land into a new town with no county say-so. A bill to fix that failed by one vote — and four of the no votes went to senators who'd taken checks from a homebuilder using the law right now.
A 2024 Utah law lets as few as one landowner turn their own land into a brand-new town — no county approval required. In 2026, four separate landowners in Wasatch and Summit counties tried to use it. A bill to give counties any real say in the process needed one more "yes" in the Senate to pass. It didn't get one — and four of the senators who voted no had each taken a campaign check from a homebuilder with a direct stake in the outcome.
Senate Bill 258, passed in 2024, created a fast-track path to incorporation known as a "preliminary municipality." Under the law, up to three landowners who together control a piece of land can petition the state directly to turn it into a new town — bypassing the county the land currently sits in entirely. The state caps acceptance at two applications per year, statewide.
Supporters have framed it as a tool for rural landowners to control their own development future. Critics — including the counties where it's actually being used — say it hands a handful of large landowners a way around the ordinary zoning and rezone process, with no seat at the table for the county government whose infrastructure, roads, and services the new town will eventually need.
In 2026, four preliminary municipality applications came out of Wasatch and Summit counties alone — twice the statewide annual cap.
2,700 acres east of Heber, adjacent to Red Ledges. ~700 homes, hotel, glamping, retail. Sponsored by Philo Ventures after the same project failed twice at the city/county level.
~2,300 acres near Sundance. Initially accepted, then rejected — boundaries didn't meet contiguity requirements. Second rejection after an earlier version had too many landowners.
490 acres, Browns Canyon, Summit County. Rejected — filed after the annual cap was reached. Owner tied to the Garff-Rogers Ranch family; will pursue a standard county rezone instead.
Wasatch County, south of Wallsburg. Also rejected for filing after the cap was reached.
Two rejections, two acceptances, and a persistent problem regardless of outcome: with four applications and a two-per-year statewide cap, half the projects that show up in any given year are guaranteed to be turned away — not on the merits, but on timing.
In 2026, Rep. Tiara Auxier (R-Morgan) introduced HB 510, which would have given counties a real role before an application is filed: the right to commission a traffic study, to hire their own consultant and dispute a feasibility study, and to pause the incorporation process pending independent review.
The bill passed the House 68-0. By the time it reached the Senate floor, it had already been substituted down — the traffic study authority gone, the audit and dispute mechanism gone, "consultation" loosened into an 18-month "good faith coordination" standard that doesn't require county sign-off.
Even that watered-down version failed on the Senate floor, 14-12, three senators absent. In a chamber Republicans control 22-6-1, the bill needed one more "yes" to pass.
Ivory Homes — the state's largest homebuilder, and the company behind the Lost Creek application — had made direct campaign contributions to five sitting senators before the vote. All five were part of the HB 510 decision:
| Senator | Ivory Homes contribution | HB 510 vote |
|---|---|---|
| Ann Millner | $1,000 (2024) + $500 x2 (2022) | NO |
| Jerry Stevenson | $1,000 (2022) | NO |
| Evan Vickers | $1,000 (2022) | NO |
| Brady Brammer | $500 (2024) | NO |
| Lincoln Fillmore | $500 (2023) | ABSENT |
| Kirk Cullimore | $1,000 (2023) | YES (Senate sponsor) |
Any single one of those five voting yes — or simply showing up — would have passed the bill.
One senator breaks the clean pattern and deserves to be named for it: Kirk Cullimore, who also received an Ivory Homes contribution, was the bill's own Senate sponsor. He carried the reform, not opposed it, and voted yes.
Auxier has said publicly she intends to reintroduce the bill in the 2027 session. Until then, the law works exactly as it did in 2026: up to three landowners, a state-level application, a two-per-year cap, and no formal county role in between.