Perhaps one possible configuration.. Formation of the steering committee, then executive steering committee.

Mayoral level 25
1- Every mayor who has disclosed their associations with Snowbird financially or socially before the AFCVision committee was in full motion should have a vote. If there are past conflicts of interest, which were not disclosed during the AFCVision process then by majority vote the elected official may be an on call advisor but not a voting member. The city council of that individual would in city meetings elect a city representative.

Business Community level 25
2- The mayoral steering committee would then nominate equal representation from the business community for balance.

Citizen level 25
3- Citizens and or service groups could nominate a representative ie. 4 x 4 club, horsemen, cyclists, etc, in addition to watermasters, farmer, housewife, students.

Conflict of Interest Declarations
All would have to fill out a conflict of interest declaration and vetted by the State Auditor. A thorough review of who is in a position to influence the outcome.

Formation of Executive Committee 10-12
Once that is in place. The executive steering committee will be formed and might include a mother seated next to a CEO seated next to a farmer or watermaster, next to a college kid, next to a horseman, next to a single mother…etc.

Formation of Charter and rules
Then a charter and organizational rules would be put in place, funding resources sought and survey data and citizen input would be included in a process to help determine private land ownership issues engaged, cost / benefit / concerns to the canyon.

Look at Cost / Benefits
Experts that have been vetted would be engaged to get to inform others on the steering committees the facts, the details of possible impacts to watershed, downstream users, to the wildlife. Once this information is known, then proposals / solutions could be considered including re-engaging with Mountain Accord.

Internal / External proposals
The steering committee might decide to try and buy the land and retire the land. All solutions on the table, not just the Snowbird deal that presently stands alone. At some juncture Snowbird could make a presentation as to the benefits they would bring to the table and the executive team could determine the costs to the community- beginning a basis of negotiations or no negotiations.

We suggest that Snowbird may be a participant but not a voting member. If SB approaches and does any favors for those on the steering committee, they would lose their option to be involved in any discussions forward. The vetting process holding the committee members to dynamically disclose engagement with SB on a financial or social level.

Other outside groups
Other outside groups might be called upon in an advisory mode. Those who have been on the Mountain Accord side with a vote would not have voting rights on this side of the mountain, but could be on call advisors for context for the team.

Mark Allen
Co-Founder Protect and Preserve American Fork Canyon