Concerns with American Fork's Environmental Stewardship Resolution

Last night (June 23, 2015) the American Fork City Council passed an "Environmental Stewardship Resolution".  Below are some concerns I have with the resolution:

1.  The title "Environmental Stewardship Resolution". Is this an environmental regulation resolution as it purports to be, or a public transparency and input resolution?  If it's an environmental regulation resolution, I oppose it.  If it's a public transparency and public input resolution, I support that.

2.  Item 3 of the resolution which states, "Fostering outreach education efforts in American Fork schools to encourage land preservation, environmental responsibility and civic consciousness."  Don't be fooled by these generic terms; definitions vary widely and most people would not support what hard core environmentalist mean by these terms.  These are political issues and I disagree with the notion that our schools should be indoctrinating our students with a pro-environmentalist slant.  

3.  Item 2 of the resolution, which states "Promoting and fostering environmental awareness and stewardship opportunities for citizens to help the Forest Service in maintaining and protecting resources."  I find it odd that the resolution singles out the Forest Service.

 4.  Item 4 of the resolution originally read "Fostering awareness among residents, businesses, and business partners through public education and participation as to the economic value that "wilderness areas" provide.  The City Council was correct to change this wording by striking "wilderness areas", but the original language is telling about some of the forces and intent behind this resolution.

5.  Item 7 of the resolution states "promoting discussion of options that may include..."conservation easements, ..."  I oppose the government purchasing land (or an interest in land) to then tell people they can't access or use it --that's what a "conservation easement" often means.

6.  Jurisdiction.  The resolution states "The City of American Fork has therefore developed an Environmental Stewardship Policy".  This resolution is aimed at American Fork Canyon, which isn't within American Fork City boundaries.  The canyon shares the "American Fork" name with the City and the City does have water rights in the canyon, but the jurisdiction of the canyon is largely County, not City.  I wasn't able to raise this last concern before debate on the resolution ended, but I state it here because I believe it is relevant.

These concerns are why I didn't vote for the resolution.  You may be wondering though, why I didn't vote against the resolution either, and "abstained" instead.  The reason why is because I believe part of the motivation behind the resolution is legitimate.  I think there are valid concerns about lack of transparency, lack of public input and lack of involvement by Utah County so far in the process.  I just wish the resolution had been straightforward about that instead of being wrapped up in this misguided environmentalist messaging.

I think there does need to be public input and discussion, public policy discussions and decisions, before or if Snowbird expands into Utah County and American Fork Canyon.