I have many concerns regarding the our county council’s desire to be part of the, Seven County Infrastructure Coalition. The coalition would include the following counties: Carbon, Daggett , Duchesne, Emery, San Juan, Uintah and Grand.

My concerns are that Grand County has very little in common with the six other counties in the coalition. It has a thriving tourist economy the others do not, its citizens are widely varied in their philosophies while the other counties’ citizens’ philosophies are more homogenous and the value of property in Grand County is high, while property values in the other counties are low.

Because of these differences, I see very little we could gain by joining a coalition with counties the do not share our diversity or needs.

Article 5.2.B of the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement states that Grand County can withdraw from the coalition, but county taxpayers will still be on the hook for debts incurred by the Coalition — even if Grand’s representative had opposed incurring the debts.

Article 5.2.C of the agreement states that Grand County can’t get out of the Coalition if the Coalition decides it will adversely affect the Coalition.

I have only brought up three of my many concerns about the Iinterlocal Cooperation Agreement or the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition that the Grand County Council is proposing. Myself, and others have concerns beyond the three I’ve mentioned. I encourage all to go the Grand County’s web page and go to the July 1, 2014 council agenda to read the proposal yourself.

Mary Mullen McGann