Measure takes aim at property-tax hikes

If taxing entities want more revenue for their budgets, they may have to ask permission first.

SB29, sponsored by Utah Sen. Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, takes aim at large property-tax increases by requiring taxing entities to hold an election if the increase is above the rate of inflation.

Currently, Utah's truth-in-taxation law allows taxing entities to get the same amount of property-tax revenue as the previous year, plus new revenue from new properties.

If an entity wants more money, it first has to hold a public hearing.

But Niederhauser said it's rare for a significant number of residents to show up to public hearings to make the voice of the people heard.

Many times, people may not see public hearing notices in the newspaper or understand what they are for and, therefore, not bother to attend.

In late 2006, no one from the public attended a public hearing in which the Davis Mosquito Abatement District's board voted in a small property-tax increase. It was the same story with the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District's board, which held a public hearing in June 2007 to decide on a 35.6 percent tax increase.

One person showed up, but it turned out he was at the wrong meeting, said Jordan Valley general manager Richard Bay.

The board then debated the matter for two hours before deciding to increase the property tax rate, an increase that never caused much of a stir.

Niederhauser said residents don't get bent out of shape by smaller and more regular tax increases that follow inflation because most people understand that the cost of services increases each year.

Residents do get upset with the larger and more rare tax increases that take a sudden, sizable bite out of their wallets.

About 80 residents showed up to a public hearing in December 2006 when Davis County commissioners were deciding on a 37 percent tax increase on the average home. Most of those who addressed commissioners voiced disapproval of the tax increase, but a week later, commissioners approved the increase because services that the increase funded — jail operations, flood control upgrades and Aging Services upgrades — were at a critical juncture.