ELK MEADOWS

Moguls for moguls? Resort wins OK with ski runs for the rich
By Mark Havnes
The Salt Lake Tribune
04/16/2007

BEAVER - A defunct southern Utah resort may again see skiers schussing down its slopes - but the thrill seekers may have to live in a ritzy new resort to reach the runs.

The Beaver County Commission approved a development agreement for the proposed $3.5 billion Mount Holly Club.

The exclusive resort - at the site of the now-closed Elk Meadows ski area - plans to plop hundreds of multimillion-dollar homes and town houses, along with an 18-hole golf course, on thousands of acres at the now-closed Elk Meadows ski area about 20 miles east of Beaver.

Commissioners had considered requiring the developers to provide some skiing access to current residents. But they ended up abandoning that tack and leaving the decision to the developers, who appear eager to market the 36 ski runs as an exclusive playground for their rich clients.

The prospect of losing that access has angered current residents as the proposed resort winds its way through the approval process.

Many also fear the project will drain resources and ruin the rural atmosphere.

But others back the proposal and point to the revenue it would bring to private businesses and public coffers.

The developers still must obtain preliminary and final plat approvals before construction can begin.





__________________________________________________ __


Exclusive club moves toward public hearing
County approves development agreement for old Elk Meadows
By Mark Havnes
The Salt Lake Tribune
04/16/2007

BEAVER - Plans for what could become Utah's first private ski resort for the rich scored a major victory Monday, leaving those who once enjoyed schussing down the Tushar Mountain slopes out in the cold.

In the face of mounting opposition, the Beaver County Commission approved a development agreement for the proposed $3.5 billion Mount Holly Club.

The exclusive resort plans to plop hundreds of multimillion-dollar homes and town houses, along with an 18-hole golf course, on thousands of acres at the now-closed Elk Meadows ski resort and popular Puffer Lake, about 20 miles east of Beaver.

The county's Planning and Zoning Commission, which recommended approval of the agreement, had considered requiring the developers to provide some skiing access at Mount Holly to current Elk Meadows residents.

But commissioners ended up abandoning that tack and leaving the decision to the developers, who appear eager to market the 36 ski runs as an exclusive playground for their wealthy residents.

County resident Margaret Wellman, who has been fighting the project, said she was disappointed but not surprised by Monday's vote.

"I expected a rubber stamp," she said.

Wellman and her allies already have started contacting hundreds of residents, urging them to attend a public hearing Wednesday, when plat approvals for the project will be addressed.

"This is our last chance to speak out," she said. "From here, we'll take it to court."

Like Wellman, many Beaver County residents fear losing access to ski runs and other recreation areas if Mount Holly is built. They also worry that the project would drain water resources and ruin the area's rural atmosphere.

Others back the massive development and point to the revenue it would bring to private businesses and public coffers.

Craig Burton president of CPB, which is developing the project on private land, told commissioners Monday that earlier discussions about possibly accommodating Elk Meadows homeowners and providing access to ski runs started as a good-neighbor gesture last fall.

But, he said, the issue became too complicated and threatened to undermine one of the resort's major selling points: its exclusivity.

Burton said lenders and investors got jittery when they saw news accounts of the developer and county officials working on a plan to possibly let nonmembers ski on the swanky slopes.

"It's yes or no," said Burton of the club's exclusivity. "There's no middle road."

Burton said the developers are ready to go to court if necessary to protect their right to decide who skis at the club, which sits on private land surrounded by Fishlake National Forest.

"We need to put our private property rights to work," Burton said.

After Monday's meeting, Commissioner Chad Johnson said the panel's authority is limited to ensuring the proposed development follows ordinances for planned-unit developments, and not to deciding who should be allowed on Mount Holly's property.

Johnson noted the proposed Mount Holly Club has generated more documents, taken more time and stirred up more residents than Circle Four Farms, the huge pig farming operation that began production nearly 20 years ago after much controversy.

"[Circle Four] wasn't as comprehensively looked at as this project," Johnson said. "Circle Four didn't even have a development agreement."






__________________________________________________ __



Mount Holly ski resort plan on hold
By Mark Havnes
The Salt Lake Tribune
04/20/2007

BEAVER - Developers eager to build a posh, private ski resort in southwestern Utah will have to wait before they start turning any dirt.

The Beaver County Planning Commission has some questions - about water (will there be enough?), about financing (will there be enough of that, as well?) and about the proposed golf course (will the 10,000-foot-or-so elevation pose any problems?).

Until they have satisfied those questions - and more - the planning commissioners aren't about to approve preliminary plats for the proposed $3.5 billion Mount Holly Club.

Mount Holly Partners LLC hopes to build 1,200 upscale homes and town homes on 2,000 acres of private land - surrounded by Fishlake National Forest - in the Tushar Mountains, nearly 20 miles east of Beaver.

Club members would have exclusive access to an 18-hole golf course and runs at the now-closed Elk Meadows ski resort.

Many county residents oppose the club. They worry about dwindling resources, an invasion of rich outsiders and lost access to the ski runs and other recreational areas.

During a public hearing at Wednesday night's planning meeting, residents also expressed concerns about possible pollution to streams and whether the developers are following county ordinances concerning planned-unit developments.

Others in the county of 6,400 residents back the project. They see it as a way to bolster business and beef up tax coffers.

In the face of this community split, the Beaver County Commission approved a development agreement for the project earlier this week.

Construction can't begin, however, until the development wins preliminary and final plat approvals. And planning commissioners want proof that the developers have adequate water before they sign off on the 45 housing units planned for 572 acres in the project's first phase.

"Until the state proves they have the 'wet' water and not just the rights, it [development] isn't going to happen," vowed commission member Dennis Miller.

Commission members also want assurance that the project has enough financing, and they delayed a request for a conditional-use permit to begin construction of the golf course. The panel plans to investigate if other courses built at high elevations faced any problems.

Bill Quick, a spokesman for Mount Holly Partners, conceded that the Planning Commission's lack of action was disappointing.

"Sure, we're anxious to get started and would have loved to have been approved, but we also understand the process and are committed to providing information necessary to get approved," Quick said.

Will plans for private ski area fly this time?
By Ray Grass
Deseret Morning News

The move to make Elk Meadows Utah's first private ski area has turned into a real battle between developers and residents not happy with the idea of being locked out.

Proposed is a $3.5 billion Mount Holly Club.

The concept is that the rich and famous will buy very expensive property and more expensive homes, which will come with an exclusive ski pass good for any of the three chair lifts, poma lift and the state's only T-bar, which are currently in place, and any future lifts and tows.

Residents are worried about losing access to the ski runs, which is a little puzzling since lifts haven't run since March of 2002.

This is not Utah's first attempt at introducing a private ski area.

Back in the early 1970s there was talk of making Solitude private. Most of the land the resort sits on is privately owned, which made it a likely candidate for a private resort.

This came after different managers came and went and left the resort in shambles and closed, which is pretty much the history of Elk Meadows. Solitude closed in the winter of 1974-75. Elk Meadows, formerly Mount Holley, formerly Elk Meadows/Mount Holley, opened in 1971 as a local ski hill. It closed at the end of the 2002 season,

When Solitude closed, owners, tired of what they called "poor boy" outfits trying to run the resort, offered to sell it to Salt Lake County. The asking price was $1.5 million for 526 acres of private land, lifts and lodges.

A few years before one of the "poor boy" groups presented an impressive master plan, complete with model, of new lifts and lodges and runs. Shortly after the resort closed that winter, they left in the dead of night, taking with them everything that wasn't welded down, including lift chairs, silverware and cafeteria tables and chairs.

Solitude was sold in 1968 and again in 1976 to Dick Houlihan and Hal Louchheim, who built new lifts and new runs and started it on its way to where it is today, a first-class resort.

The Elk Meadows/Mount Holley Club situation is a little different in that it sits on 1,400 acres and therefore has lots of land to sell. Solitude's land was limited to its ski runs.

Beaver residents are also worried about water. The previous owner claimed water and water quality are what stopped him from spending $150 million in improvements.

That owner claimed he spent $500,000 to improve the water system but admitted that more water sources were required.

Whether or not Elk Meadows becomes a ski resort or not will have little impact on Utah's ski market. Few Utahns skied there when it was open and far fewer will ski there if and when it becomes a private ski area.

Jumping to another subject, I read an interview a couple of weeks ago where Bode Miller said if he's still with the U.S. Team when the 2010 Olympics roll around, he won't complete.

He said there was too much emphasis on winning.

OK, but isn't that what ski racing is all about

[quote=stefan]
Jumping to another subject, I read an interview a couple of weeks ago where Bode Miller said if he's still with the U.S. Team when the 2010 Olympics roll around, he won't complete.

He said there was too much emphasis on winning.

OK, but isn't that what ski racing is all about

If this resort is built, will there still be access to the backcountry there? Mt. Holly and City Creek Peak have some awesome lines!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Powderfinder540

If this resort is built, will there still be access to the backcountry there? Mt. Holly and City Creek Peak have some awesome lines!

---

i imagine it would seriously be compromised. i have inquired via email with the national forest service (as the mt. holly club has yet to return my phone call). still waiting.

it really would be a shame to deny such access. there are other roads in the vicinity (likely closed in winter) and the main highway from the east which is closed in winter.

Proposed Mount Holly Resort draws ire from neighbors
By Mark Havnes
The Salt Lake Tribune


BEAVER - Jammed streets, packed classrooms, dwindling water supplies and vanishing recreation access.

Those were some of the concerns voiced in court Thursday about a posh resort proposed for a canyon east of Beaver in southwestern Utah.

Residents fighting the exclusive Mount Holly Club - planned at the now-closed Elk Meadows ski area - are arguing in 5th District Court here that the development agreement reached between CPB, LC, and Beaver County is illegal and that county residents should be able to vote on the accord in a referendum.

Carol McCully testified today that she, like many residents, fears the multibillion-dollar project will threaten long-established access to area trails and popular Puffer Lake.

"I'm also afraid they will use the airport to shuttle Mount Holly people to the club [by] going over my house [in helicopters]," she told Judge John Walton on the first day of what it is expected to be a two-day trial. "It's an immense problem. The county sees it as tax-revenue gold. But this is a big problem."

McCully said residents have gathered 845 signatures - hundreds more than the 505 needed - to put the issue before county voters. She noted the county clerk has disqualified 40 signatures and still is reviewing the rest.

Salt Lake City attorney Jay Peck, representing the developer, said his client plans to show that the proposed referendum fails to meet the standards set in a Utah Supreme Court case.

The proposed Mount Holly Club would include 1,200 houses and town houses on 2,000 acres. It also would boast a private ski resort and an 18-hole private golf course. The baseline price for a house and lot is pegged at $4 million.

The two-phase project would take about 10 years to complete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stefan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Powderfinder540

If this resort is built, will there still be access to the backcountry there? Mt. Holly and City Creek Peak have some awesome lines!

---

i imagine it would seriously be compromised. i have inquired via email with the national forest service (as the mt. holly club has yet to return my phone call). still waiting.

it really would be a shame to deny such access. there are other roads in the vicinity (likely closed in winter) and the main highway from the east which is closed in winter.

---

thats true. the only real access to get there is Highway 153. If the Mt. Holly club does somehow receive permision to build, can they take over the State Highway?

you gotta love some of the mentality in america :haha:

Developers with plans to build an exclusive resort east of Beaver are threatening to sue residents for "millions" for opposing their multibillion-dollar dream.
By Mark Havnes
The Salt Lake Tribune


In an Aug. 7 letter, Stephen R. Jenson, chief executive officer of Mount Holly Partners, warns Elk Meadows residents that they risk being dragged into court personally after their homeowners association filed a lawsuit against Beaver County in hopes of stopping the Mount Holly Club project. The letter labels the association's lawsuit "wrongful litigation" and claims it "has caused Mount Holly millions of dollars in damages as the result of unlawful delays and related costs and expenses." It further says that the developers are preparing to pursue legal action, "including a lawsuit against [association members] for millions of dollars in damages, to recover these wrongful losses."

Victoria Spicer, who owns a condominium in the Snowflake complex, considers the letter a joke. "They are like the new Nazi Gestapo on the mountain," she said. "This is consistent with how they work. We have rights, too, and feel those rights are being violated."

Spicer vows to hold on to her condo no matter what. "My [condo] is priceless to me," she said. "Even if they offer me a million dollars, I won't sell. It's a matter of principle. I don't like bullies."

Alan Bradshaw, the attorney who filed the lawsuit against Beaver County for approving a development agreement for the Mount Holly Club project, called the threatening letter to homeowners "inappropriate." "They [homeowners] exercised their constitutional rights to redress their grievances," he said. Bradshaw said the latest threat smacks of a SLAPP - a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation - designed to silence opposition.

The Utah Legislature passed an anti-SLAPP measure in 2001. But a representative of Mount Holly Club denies the letter amounts to a SLAPP. Spokesman Bill Quick said it was sent because the homeowners' suit had no merit. "The letter states clearly we want damages as a result of what we believe is a frivolous lawsuit," Quick said. "There are significant allegations that Bradshaw and those he represents have made that we believe are false."

Quick said no legal action has been taken and that the trial judge must grant permission before Mount Holly can proceed with litigation. In their suit, the homeowners association alleged the development agreement was flawed. A group of county residents also wanted the court to order the deal be put to a public referendum. But in late July, 5th District Judge John J. Walton ruled in favor of the county and the developers, who were allowed to intervene in the suit. Walton also refused to put the development deal on the ballot. The August letter is the latest salvo in an ongoing battle that started last fall when CPB Development proposed building posh homes and a lodge in a gated community that includes the defunct Elk Meadows Ski Resort, which would be used exclusively by club members along with a proposed 18-hole golf course.

This development would be nestled in the Tushar Mountains about 20 miles east of Beaver on 1,800 private acres surrounded by Fishlake National Forest. Elk Meadows residents want to stop the project. They fear they will lose access to ski runs and hiking trails, and they worry about overloaded infrastructure and possible water contamination. Joe Ban, an attorney for the residents group, has appealed Walton's decision to the Utah Supreme Court in another push to get the development agreement on the ballot.

Dow Jones sues Utah developer
By Nate Carlisle
The Salt Lake Tribune

One of America's most famous news outlets is suing a Utah real estate development over what is alleged to be an unpaid bill.

Dow Jones & Co., whose holdings include The Wall Street Journal, says the Mount Holly Club resort owes more than $586,000 for advertisements it bought in March 2007. Dow Jones submitted an invoice in July but has not received payment, the company says in a lawsuit filed Feb. 1 in federal court in New York. Dow Jones seeks the sum plus interest.

Mount Holly Club ads in The Wall Street Journal already have been a point of contention. On Dec. 1, 2006, the newspaper published a full-page ad in which it was claimed that the resort could run ski lifts and snow cats up to 12,000-foot-high Mount Holly in the Tushar Mountains of Beaver County.

However, the peak is on national forest land where motorized equipment is restricted, and the Forest Service asked the club to stop the advertisements.

Also, in March 2007, an investigator from U.S. Housing and Urban Development was in Beaver County investigating whether Mount Holly Club broke laws related to advertising and land sales. A HUD spokesman declined Monday to discuss the status of the case with the club, which would feature posh homes and a lodge in a gated community that would be used exclusively by club members.

Representatives of Mount Holly Club, which has been opposed by some residents because of fears that it would overload the area's infrastructure, said Monday in a written statement that claims such as the one by Dow Jones often occur on large development projects.

"Mount Holly Club has an excellent relationship with Dow Jones and fully expects this to be resolved quickly," the statement said.

The Dow Jones lawsuit does not specify whether the disputed payment is for The Wall Street Journal advertisement or for promotions purchased later. Besides The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones owns dozens of publications and media outlets, including Barron's. A Dow Jones spokesman on Monday could not immediately locate information about the lawsuit.

The Beaver County Commission in February approved preliminary proposals for Mount Holly Club, but large-scale construction has not begun.

Mount HollyLawyer urges project to go to referendum
Developers, on their part, say the appeal should be dismissed
By Cathy McKitrick
The Salt Lake Tribune
05/22/2008

A developer's legal battle to block a public vote on its plans for a pricey ski-and-golf resort in Beaver County took a circuitous and "desperate" detour through the state Legislature, charges an attorney for resort opponents. "In what can only be described as a series of desperate acts, [developers] have taken extraordinary measures to try and avoid a legal review of the trial court's conclusions," Joel Ban, attorney for a grass roots group trying to put the Mount Holly project to a vote, wrote in appeal briefs filed Wednesday. "[Developers] hired a lobbyist, pursued an amendment to the referendum statute and then filed a request to extend the briefing schedule. Knowing that SB53 had been signed by the governor and would become effective May 5, they nonetheless waited until the last day to act," Ban wrote.

Sen. Brent Goodfellow's SB53 - a new law confusing to the point state lawyers say it could be unconstitutional - took effect May 5. A day later, CPB Development LC and Mount Holly Partners LLC used it as the basis to ask that a resident group's appeal get tossed out of court. Ban wants the Utah Court of Appeals to allow the Mount Holly project to go to a referendum vote. A lower court, in a complex decision, ruled it could not. Ban claims the issue is subject to referendum because the county decision constituted legislative action the enacting of an ordinance establishing the details of the Mount Holly Club development agreement. Developers say the appeal should be dismissed, arguing that SB53 bans referendums on all local land-use issues. It also claims the state Supreme Court is the proper forum for an elections dispute. In late April the state Attorney General's Office questioned SB53's constitutionality in a letter sent to Sevier County Attorney Dale Eyre - concerning another right-to-vote effort, this one over a controversial coal-fired power plant. Assistant Attorney General Thom Roberts cited Article 6 of the state Constitution, which provides for the people's fundamental right to legislate through initiative and referenda.

That right - viewed as sacrosanct - bucks up against individual property rights, said Dan McDonald, an attorney with Smith Hartvigsen, the firm representing CPB and Mount Holly. "More and more, citizen groups who dislike a landowner or development organize themselves to challenge land-use decisions," McDonald said. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that individual property rights are important as well as deference to local land-use authority." McDonald intends to file a quick answer to Ban's brief today - although the court could rule without it. The weighty issues of SB53's constitutionality - and application to this case - cannot be ignored, McDonald said. "This has statewide impact and is important enough that we think it will percolate to the Supreme Court, no matter who loses in the Court of Appeals."

05/22/2008
Mount HollyLawyer urges project to go to referendum
Developers, on their part, say the appeal should be dismissed
By Cathy McKitrick
The Salt Lake Tribune

A developer's legal battle to block a public vote on its plans for a pricey ski-and-golf resort in Beaver County took a circuitous and "desperate" detour through the state Legislature, charges an attorney for resort opponents. "In what can only be described as a series of desperate acts, [developers] have taken extraordinary measures to try and avoid a legal review of the trial court's conclusions," Joel Ban, attorney for a grass roots group trying to put the Mount Holly project to a vote, wrote in appeal briefs filed Wednesday. "[Developers] hired a lobbyist, pursued an amendment to the referendum statute and then filed a request to extend the briefing schedule. Knowing that SB53 had been signed by the governor and would become effective May 5, they nonetheless waited until the last day to act," Ban wrote.

Sen. Brent Goodfellow's SB53 - a new law confusing to the point state lawyers say it could be unconstitutional - took effect May 5. A day later, CPB Development LC and Mount Holly Partners LLC used it as the basis to ask that a resident group's appeal get tossed out of court. Ban wants the Utah Court of Appeals to allow the Mount Holly project to go to a referendum vote. A lower court, in a complex decision, ruled it could not. Ban claims the issue is subject to referendum because the county decision constituted legislative action the enacting of an ordinance establishing the details of the Mount Holly Club development agreement. Developers say the appeal should be dismissed, arguing that SB53 bans referendums on all local land-use issues. It also claims the state Supreme Court is the proper forum for an elections dispute. In late April the state Attorney General's Office questioned SB53's constitutionality in a letter sent to Sevier County Attorney Dale Eyre - concerning another right-to-vote effort, this one over a controversial coal-fired power plant. Assistant Attorney General Thom Roberts cited Article 6 of the state Constitution, which provides for the people's fundamental right to legislate through initiative and referenda.

That right - viewed as sacrosanct - bucks up against individual property rights, said Dan McDonald, an attorney with Smith Hartvigsen, the firm representing CPB and Mount Holly. "More and more, citizen groups who dislike a landowner or development organize themselves to challenge land-use decisions," McDonald said. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that individual property rights are important as well as deference to local land-use authority." McDonald intends to file a quick answer to Ban's brief today - although the court could rule without it. The weighty issues of SB53's constitutionality - and application to this case - cannot be ignored, McDonald said. "This has statewide impact and is important enough that we think it will percolate to the Supreme Court, no matter who loses in the Court of Appeals."


06/11/2008
Constitutional challenge Referendum limits law sent to Utah high court
By Cathy McKitrick
The Salt Lake Tribune

A new law that limits local initiative and referendum powers could soon undergo constitutional scrutiny by the state's Supreme Court.

The Utah Court of Appeals has decided to send the case of BRAVE v. Beaver County back to Utah's highest court.

There, justices could rule on the constitutionality of SB53 and whether it renders moot a citizen-led effort to place a referendum on November's ballot over the planned $3.5 billion Mount Holly Club development proposed for land currently occupied by the Elk Meadows Resort. "It's a positive thing that this went back to the Supreme Court," said Joel Ban, attorney for the residents group called BRAVE. "They're more experienced in these matters and their decision will be the final say."

Dan McDonald, an attorney with Smith Hartvigsen, represents CPB Development LC and Mount Holly Partners LLC. "The Utah Court of Appeals was perfectly capable of making a fair and just decision," McDonald said. "But with the stakes being as high as they are in this case, either side would have appealed to the Supreme Court."

Margaret Wellman, treasurer for BRAVE, has battled Mount Holly's resort plan for more than two years. "It will take very crucial water away from our ranchers and farmers," Wellman said. "We're very hopeful that we'll win but nothing is a slam dunk."

In late April, Assistant Attorney General Thom Roberts wrote an opinion that courts would likely strike down SB53 as conflicting with Utahns' constitutional right to initiate local legislation or require a local ordinance to be submitted to a public vote.

and a little bit on Marc Jensen, Holladay resident and key figure in the Mount Holly Club



05/27/2008
Agreement may end fraud case
Utah attorney general has accused Holladay businessman of engaging in securities fraud and racketeering
By Mike Gorrell
The Salt Lake Tribune

A plea agreement is being negotiated that on Thursday could end a 2005 fraud and racketeering case brought by the Utah attorney general's office against a Holladay businessman.

<snip>

The A.G.'s office contended, in a lawsuit filed Aug. 10, 2005,
Advertisement

that Jenson engaged in securities fraud and racketeering, both second-degree felonies, in business deals in 2000 and 2001.

Jenson allegedly convinced three Salt Lake County men - Michael Bodell, Morty Ebeling and Ricke White - to give him money that would be used in one case to purchase a bicycle company and in others to serve as short-term loans to businesses until they acquired long-term financing.

Assistant Attorney General Charlene Barlow's complaint alleged that the lenders were promised significant returns on their investments, but instead lost several million dollars. The state also alleged that Jenson failed to disclose to investors, as required, that he had been sentenced to federal prison in 1991 for failing to file a federal tax return and had gone through bankruptcy.

<snip>

05/30/2008
Fraud victims to get $4.1M
Holladay businessman to pay restitution in plea deal OK'd by judge
By Mike Gorrell
The Salt Lake Tribune

After rejecting an earlier plea agreement, 3rd District Judge Robin Reese approved a negotiated settlement Thursday that provides almost $4.1 million in restitution to victims of busted business deals that formed the basis of a 3-year-old criminal fraud case.

Reese accepted an agreement in which Marc Sessions Jenson, 48, of Holladay, entered a no contest plea in abeyance to a reduced charge of three counts of offering the sale of an unregistered security. Those are third-degree felonies.

He originally was charged by the Utah Attorney General's Office in 2005 with five second-degree felony counts of securities fraud and racketeering stemming from "hard money loans" he received in 2000 and allegedly failed to repay.

The plea in abeyance means the charges will be wiped from Jenson's record if he fulfills terms of the settlement within the next three years - and allows him to clear the slate even earlier if he pays a $15,000 fine to the state's Division of Securities and makes restitution to Salt Lake County residents Michael Bodell and Morris Ebeling.

Ebeling is entitled to $2.5 million and Bodell to $1.6 million, according to the agreement, which also allows both men to negotiate different amounts with Jenson.

While Jenson's no contest plea also included one count involving a failed business transaction with Salt Lake County businessman Ricke White, the settlement did not include compensation for White. His losses were dealt with separately in civil litigation.

In April, the Attorney General's Office and Jenson's attorneys told Reese they had negotiated a settlement that did not include any restitution. When Jenson's alleged victims objected, the judge rejected the agreement.

Further negotiations produced the compensation clause the victims and Reese wanted. In addition, the settlement prohibits Jenson from being involved in hard money loans - high interest, short-term loans used by companies until longer-term financing is secured - and allows the Division of Securities and the Attorney General's Office to track his federal tax records for the period in which the no contest plea is in place.

The agreement also specifies that Jenson can participate in the ownership, financing and management of the Mount Holly Club. Jenson is a key figure in efforts to turn the closed Elk Meadows ski area outside of Beaver into an exclusive private resort with its own ski hills and a Jack Nicklaus-designed golf course.

<snip>

"It's been almost 34 months since I was charged. That's a long time. I'll take that energy and put it into the Mount Holly Club," Jenson added.

Building of large resort near Beaver is at a virtual standstill
By Mark Havnes
The Salt Lake Tribune


BEAVER - All's quiet on the mountaintop.

Instead of an exclusive ski area with jet-setters visiting their multimillion-dollar homes, locals here have seen no changes at the Mount Holly Club atop the Tushar Mountains.

There's no Jack Nicklaus-designed golf course being built, or water projects, or anything else at what was supposed to be, by now, a world-class ski resort, 18 miles east of Beaver.

"I thought [the development] was a bit grandiose," said Beaver County Commissioner Chad Johnson, who supported a 2007 agreement that allowed developers to proceed, even though he had reservations about the project. "I thought it was quite a bit to bite off."

Johnson hasn't been in contact with Mount Holly officials and knows nothing of their future plans. But when no applications were filed last spring with the Beaver County planning commission, he could tell little would be done this construction season - a limited one because the resort is at 10,000 feet, where snow can fly as early as September and linger until June.

What's more, he added, "I know [the developers] have a ton of things filed against them."

Those include a lawsuit headed to the Utah Supreme Court that challenges a law passed by the Utah Legislature limiting local rights to pursue land-use initiatives and referendums.

The BRAVE vs. Beaver County suit was filed by Mount Holly Club opponents who collected 845 signatures on a petition calling for the county's approval of the project to be put to a public vote. BRAVE stands for Save Beaver County, the Beaver River, and varied estates, according to court documents.

There is also a notification of default that Beaver County filed against the project's main developer, Mount Holly Partners LLC. Beaver County Deputy Attorney Leo Kanell said developers owe nearly $69,000 in fees for improvements made by a special service district at the development from when it was known as Elk Meadows.

And there's a lawsuit that one contractor, Murray-based engineer Bill Risen, filed against Mount Holly's partner company, CPB Development, that seeks $644,000 for work on a wastewater treatment plant.

While hesitant to discuss his claims because of the suit, Risen acknowledged, "I did some engineering work for Mount Holly in 2007 and waited more than a year to get paid . . . I've paid off my subcontractors and have waited more than a year to get some funds [from Mount Holly]. I just want to get paid and move on."

Developers blame a national economic slowdown for their setbacks. They remain determined to move forward after reorganizing some of the project's design and financing elements. The project, they now say, will bloom come springtime.

Company spokesman Bill Quick said developers have taken a new financial direction because of the economic slowdown, attempting to raise capital internally and by partnering with club members. "We don't want to incur a significant debt to get the ball rolling. "It will take some time to flush out."

He would not divulge the current number of club members, citing a desire to protect the group's privacy. "Let's just say there are multiple investors."

Quick said delays are problems common to many developments and predicted the disputes will be settled soon.

"The membership is not nervous about the timeline. It's not so much a problem as it might be perceived," he added.

The development started in the 1970s as a public ski resort, known as Mount Holly and later Elk Meadows.

Over the years, it grew into several condominium projects, on private and state trust lands, organized into homeowners associations.

Many residents in those associations have had a contentious relationship with the Mount Holly Club since the fall of 2006, when developers arrived on the scene, hoping to buy property to secure their project.

Its first phase is envisioned to scatter multimillion dollar homes over 1,800 acres within a fenced perimeter. Ski lifts that have been idle for years will be restarted for club members whose summer recreation would revolve around the Nicklaus-designed golf course. When completed in a decade, developers projected their finished club to be worth $3.5 billion, boosting Beaver County's tax base and providing jobs for locals. But the golf course remains a distant promise and prospects for skiing this winter appear slim.

If nothing gets built, it wouldn't disappoint Brent Stapley, a Beaver business owner who opposed the project from the outset.

"My concerns were if they [developers] were financially capable of really doing it," Stapley said.

Stapley added that in tough economic times, those who can afford to build at Mount Holly are more likely to pick places in Colorado like Vail or Steamboat Springs. Some resorts there are slicing off chunks of their property for private clubs like Mount Holly.

"Their timing is wrong," Stapley said. "Their plan [Mount Holly Club] may have worked 10 years ago. Now the big boys are jumping into the private club business. If you have $50 billion, you're still going to look for the best deal."

Quick expressed confidence that competition from other private resorts will not divert potential customers away from the Mount Holly Club.

"It's a proven deal," Quick said. "We take potential members there and it's an easy decision to make simply because of the shear beauty of the location."

So if its not going to happen who's up for a trip to the Tushars this winter?!

It's too bad that Elk Meadows may become a private retreat. I took a couple of Christmas vacations there with my family when I was a teenager, and I loved the fact that there were miles of wide open runs and NOBODY in line to ride the lifts. :hail2thechief: One of Utah's best kept secrets, IMHO. :2thumbs:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooseman70

It's too bad that Elk Meadows may become a private retreat. I took a couple of Christmas vacations there with my family when I was a teenager, and I loved the fact that there were miles of wide open runs and NOBODY in line to ride the lifts. :hail2thechief: One of Utah's best kept secrets, IMHO. :2thumbs:

---

AGREED! How long ago did you take those vacations?

I think the last one was in 1994. We did a couple of them prior to them to '94, but I still cannot believe to this day that the place was relatively unknown. We'd show up early AM and have the entire moutain to ourselves ALL DAY, day after day. It was great. We bought group lift passes with the number of us vacationing in our family, so the actual per-lift-pass cost averaged out to be $17.00 apiece. :2thumbs:

Man... what Utah is going to lose if they privatize Elk Meadows. Would be a real shame.

for your FYI, mooseman, offpiste helped build the ski area ... check out the beginning of the thread

http://bogley.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=44404#44404

Very cool! :2thumbs: Nice to know someone on here was involved in building the place.

Yep - good memories of Elk Meadows. I'll have to see if I can go find my photo album w/ all my pics in them from those vacations. We drove all the way from So Cal & back several times just to be able to enjoy the mountain. Nothing I've been to before or since can even compare - Elk Meadows was a great secret! :2thumbs:

true, too bad they want to ruin it.