A strong RDA proposal

People ought to know how their taxes are being spent. That's an idea as American as the Boston Tea Party.

Unfortunately, people in Utah don't know the whole truth about their tax bills.

Redevelopment agencies cost people a whole lot more than they realize, and those costs cut across a wide swath of regions statewide. Indirectly, they lead to tax increases in places where even government leaders never suspect what is happening.

Salt Lake County Auditor Sean Thomas has a proposal that would add a new measure of accountability and clarity to redevelopment in the state. At the very least, his plan is worth a long, hard look.

Thomas would force each city in the state to take full ownership of its own redevelopment projects. As it now stands, cities can create redevelopment districts, then attract development through lucrative tax subsidies that later are repaid through the taxes the new development generates. It's a form of financing known as tax increment.

The problem is that the money tied up in these projects includes tax revenues that otherwise would go to school districts, the county, the state and many other local districts that fund everything from libraries to mosquito abatement. Often, a successful new development will lead to growth elsewhere in the city, and that puts a burden on each of those taxing entities, as well as on the city itself.

But the truly maddening thing is that this system results, in effect, in St. George residents paying a portion of their taxes to support projects along the Wasatch Front. And all of it is so hidden no one really knows enough to complain.

Under the plan Thomas is proposing, tax increment financing would be abolished. Cities would have the freedom to tax up to a state-set limit for redevelopment projects, and that levy would appear on tax notices just as anything else. But those projects would be financed by the city alone. School districts and everyone else would not be affected.

In exchange, cities would see a number of current restrictions on redevelopment disappear, and they wouldn't have to hold public hearings for these projects unless they were planning to exceed the state-certified tax rate.

If lawmakers ever passed this plan, it would create several immediate winners and losers. South Jordan, for example, has been perhaps the most egregious user of redevelopment agencies. People there would see taxes jump considerably. Folks in Midvale, on the other hand, would see taxes drop.

But then, why should everyone else have to suffer for South Jordan's grandiose plans? And why shouldn't South Jordan residents see up front what's going on? And why, for that matter, shouldn't city leaders have to justify their expenditures?

The plan isn't perfect, but at least it would be a huge step toward a more transparent tax system in Utah. And that just seems more in line with the American spirit.