Utah Supreme Court
When are city land use decisions subject to referendum? Baker v. Carlson Explained
Summary
Citizens sought to subject two Holladay City resolutions to referendum – one approving a site development master plan for redevelopment of the former Cottonwood Mall site, and another approving an amended development agreement. The district court held the master plan resolution was legislative and referable, while the development agreement resolution was administrative and not referable.
Practice Areas & Topics
Analysis
The Utah Supreme Court’s decision in Baker v. Carlson provides crucial guidance for practitioners challenging land use decisions through the referendum process. The case involved two Holladay City resolutions related to redevelopment of the former Cottonwood Mall site, highlighting the distinction between legislative and administrative municipal actions.
Background and Facts
After the Cottonwood Mall closed, Holladay City sought to redevelop the property through its Regional/Mixed-Use zoning district framework. In May 2018, the City Council passed two resolutions: Resolution 2018-16 approving a site development master plan (SDMP) and Resolution 2018-17 approving an amended agreement for development of land (ADL). Citizens petitioned to subject both resolutions to referendum, but the City refused to place them on the ballot, claiming they were administrative rather than legislative acts.
Key Legal Issues
The central question was whether each resolution satisfied the two-part test from Carter v. Lehi City for legislative power: (1) general applicability and (2) weighing of broad, competing policy considerations. Under Utah law, only legislative acts are subject to referendum.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Court affirmed the district court’s split decision. Resolution 2018-16 was legislative because the SDMP applied to all present and future developers of the site and required the City to weigh broad policy considerations including traffic impacts, economic stability, and community character—similar to adopting a general plan. Conversely, Resolution 2018-17 was administrative because the development agreement created obligations only between specific contracting parties and involved applying existing law to particular circumstances rather than making broad policy.
Practice Implications
This decision clarifies that the “runs with the land” factor alone does not determine referability—both legislative and administrative land use decisions may run with the land. Instead, practitioners should focus on whether the municipal decision involved open-ended discretion without fixed criteria or application of specific legal standards to individual facts. The Court also cautioned that not every site development plan approval will be legislative, emphasizing that the analysis depends on the specific framework and decision-making process employed by each municipality.
Case Details
Case Name
Baker v. Carlson
Citation
2018 UT 59
Court
Utah Supreme Court
Case Number
No. 20180717
Date Decided
November 28, 2018
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
A city resolution approving a site development master plan that serves as a general plan for a zoning district and promulgates generally applicable laws is legislative and subject to referendum, while a resolution approving a development agreement that applies only to specific contracting parties is administrative and not referable.
Standard of Review
Correctness for questions of law
Practice Tip
When challenging land use decisions as referable, focus on whether the decision involves open-ended policy weighing without fixed criteria rather than simply whether the decision runs with the land.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.