The article is correct; there is a lot of controversy surrounding the incorporation of Aspen, UT.  Mr. Sellers has been quoted in numerous articles as saying he has the support of the majority of the community. Fact is 95% of the residents within the proposed boundary have signed petitions against the incorporation. The petition is on file with the state.   Mr. Sellers has been quoted as owning ~8700 acres of the proposed town.  The entire town is ~8700 acres of which he owns roughly 4700 to 5700 acres depending on when you ask him.  Mr. Sellers has been quoted as calling Aspen, UT "His town" but he doesn't live within the proposed boundary.

Mr. Sellers has told the media that he is planning a high end ski and golf resort on his property. He has told numerous residents within the boundary he would like to see commercial and industrial complexes built.  He has stated to me, less then a month ago, he did not want to build a ski resort.

The concern within the community is not one against development, which some media outlet have alluded to.  The majority of the community is supportive of planned, controlled and regulated growth.  The community does not wish to grant "supreme powers" to a single individual who will be free to develop his city without county or state over site.  The community does not wish to grant a developer the ability to tax the existing residents with few if any controls.  The community does not want to allow a developer the right to condemn resident's homes and property, with minimal compensation, if it's in the best interest of the city (Dean Sellers).  Last time I check the Constitution of the United States includes the phrase "{Government} for the people, by the people."  This proposed incorporation is in direct contrast to the best interest of the proposed residents.  For the first 2 years the governing body of the town, if the incorporation papers are successful, will be appointed by Mr. Sellers. Not the people he has included in the Aspen City boundaries.

A law that allows 5 individuals to incorporate a town boundary of up to 1000 people regardless of the residents desires. Impose taxes on the residents, condemn private lands forcefully water rights from individuals, and allows a developer to set his own building standards and zoning criteria is inconsistent with the foundation his country was founded on over 200 years ago. The legislature that wrote, sponsored and approved this law clearly do not have the best interest of the local people in mind.

To the people that have read the articles supporting the incorporation, please get the rest of the story.  I would gladly support development that would be good for the local and state communities. I have personally met with Mr. Seller, I've read the articles and watched the news clips. Mr. Sellers is a very clever individual who does not have the best interest of the state or local residents at heart.

Heber Resident: Thank you for that information.  That certainly brings new light to the proposed plan.  I appreciate you clarifying what this incorporation will mean for the people who will be affected the most by it. 

Nathan -

Any updates on Aspen City?

The last I read about it was late last month in the Salt Lake Tribune.  It appears that it's dead for the time being, but Sellers seems pretty persistent.  Here's the link.